The cases against President Uhuru Kenyatta, Deputy President Ruto and Journalist Joshua Sang has reached a stage where it should be discontinued.
The cases against 6 Kenyan suspects and withered to 3 accused should not continue owing to reasons well-known to the prosecution. Those in the know have already alerted the prosecution on the reasons that should cause the prosecution to discontinue the cases instead of merely allowing it to continue for the sake of face-saving.
The evidence as known to the prosecution was cooked and witnesses couched on what to say. Some witnesses were offered money and houses of the highest standard before they accepted to testify against the accused persons.
In all these, there is only one person to blame: Mr Ocampo, the man who when he discovered there was no genuine witnesses forthcoming initiated a campaign in his own office, as has been revealed by one of his own prosecutors, to go ahead to prosecute for the sake of saving the court’s name.
Money changed hands and promises of promotions were set in motion. Some were threatened that should they not cooperate, they will be left out of participation to prosecute high level cases in the future. There was also the issue of supporting or not supporting who was to take over as the next Chief Prosecutor after him – Mr Ocampo.
The International Criminal Court‘s Trial Chamber V(b) has set the trial’s commencement in the case against President Uhuru Kenyatta to February 5th, 2014. The case was to start on the 12th November 2013.
The trial judges noted that the Defence and the Prosecutor were in agreement on postponing the date.
Mr Kenyatta’s defence team had, on 24th October 2013 requested the Chamber to vacate the initial date which was the 12th November 2013. The Prosecution accepted the date saying that certain factual matters that the defence has raised makes sense and merited further investigation.
While postponing the date, the court expressed deep regret that repeated adjournments of the trial delays justice for all parties involved. The court has urged the parties to speed preparations so that no further postponement are necessitated.
The Trial Chamber had granted Mr Ruto excusal from attending all sessions of his trial but the prosecution led by Bensouda appealed against it.
The appeal court will now rule on Thursday in an open court if Ruto should be granted excusal. The ruling will be delivered livestreamed in an open court.
If the court rules in favour of the Deputy President he is expected to fly to Kenya the same day in order to attend to his constitutional duties.
President Uhuru Kenyatta was granted excusal recently. It is not known, as we go to press, if Chief Prosecutor – Bensouda will appeal and demand that President Kenyatta should be present in the court at all times.
Friday
25 October 2013
Ruto and Sang
09:00 – 10:00
Appeals Chamber judgment on William Samoei Ruto’s presence at trial
The trial in the case The Prosecutor v. William Samoei Ruto and Joshua Arap Sang continued on Thursday, 17 October 2013, with the continuation of the testimony of the 4th Prosecution witness, with the pseudonym ‘P-0376’. The witness testified under the protective measures of facial pixilation and voice distortion; parts of the testimony was given in private session, in order to preserve the confidentiality of the identity of the witness.
The trial of William Samoei Ruto and Joshua Arap Sang opened on 10 September 2013, in the presence of the accused. Mr Ruto and Mr Sang are accused of crimes against humanity (murder, deportation or forcible transfer of population and persecution) allegedly committed in Kenya in the context of the 2007-2008 post-election violence in Kenya. The trial is being heard by Trial Chamber V(a), which is composed of Judges Chile Eboe-Osuji (presiding), Olga Herrera Carbuccia and Robert Fremr.
President Uhuru Kenyatta‘s case seems to be falling apart even before it starts.
Kenyatta: Prosecution Presiding Over An Utterly Corrupt, Dishonest Case:
The defence says they have discovered fault in prosecution witnesses. The witnesses, according to the defence, have colluded and manufactured lies to destroy the image of Mr Kenyatta. They have now asked the court to drop the case altogether.
It now remains to be seen as to what step the court will take before the scheduled date – the 12th November, when Mr Kenyatta’s case is expected to start.
There is no question that the president has the right to request that his trial be put to a stop.
This is happening due to the fact that there are so many witnesses lying under oath, just for the sake of money or promises of a better life in Western capitals. The promises reportedly has been given to some of the witnesses by the NGOs serving foreign powers because that is where they get their income.
This is not a good thing to do because it causes harm to families who are innocent. It has been reported by the Kenyan Standard that “President Uhuru Kenyatta Thursday requested a permanent stay of his trial at the International Criminal Court (ICC) citing abuse of the legal justice process ahead of trial commencement.”
It now remains to be seen if the court will be serious enough to see the problem arising from bribed witnesses and cause the events to be re-examined.
President Kenyatta is scheduled, according to court records, to appear in court on the 12th November this year to answer charges preferred against him following the 2007/2008 election violence in Kenya. President Uhuru Kenyatta has denied the charges.
According to the defence lawyers Steven Kay QC and Gillian Higgins, evidence has been tempered with. They have come out strongly; saying “The Defence is in possession of substantial evidence of a serious, sustained and wide-ranging abuse on the process of the Court carried out by ( i) Prosecution witness OTP-118 and Prosecution intermediary , and ( ii ) Prosecution witnesses O TP-11 and O TP-12.”
The team – defence, – has now requested the court to stop the proceedings or alternatively, that an order is issued giving direction to have “evidential hearing before the start of the trial to determine the issue of abuse of process. ”
The Government of Kenya has received a warrant for the immediate arrest and transfer of Walter Barasa to the International Criminal Court (ICC) to face criminal charges. There is evidence to suggest that Walter Barasa tried to bribe someone he thought was a Prosecution witness in the case against Mr. Ruto.
The Office of the Prosecutor is taking action against those who are alleged to be corruptly influencing Prosecution witnesses.
The Prosecution has conducted a comprehensive investigation on the basis of documented allegations of witness interference, which continues to date. The evidence collected so far indicates that there is a network of people who are trying to sabotage the case against Mr. Ruto et al. by interfering with Prosecution witnesses. Walter Barasa, against whom compelling evidence has been collected, has been part of this network, and his actions fit into this wider scheme that the Office continues to investigate.
Under Article 70 of the Rome Statute, using bribes or threats to influence witnesses to change or recant their testimony is a crime. If found guilty, Walter Barasa faces up to five years in prison, a fine, or both.
We expect Kenyan authorities to arrest Walter Barasa and hand him over to the Court. He will appear before ICC judges on charges of corruptly influencing and attempting to corruptly influence a person he believed to be a Prosecution witnesses.
The warrant was issued by the Single Judge of the Pre-Trial Chamber after he determined, on the basis of the evidence, that there are reasonable grounds to believe that Walter Barasa corruptly influenced or attempted to influence a person he thought was a Prosecution witness.
During an initial hearing before ICC Judges, Walter Barasa will be informed of the crimes which he is alleged to have committed and of his rights under the Rome Statute. His plea will be entered and the Judges will then set a date for a hearing on the charges. At this subsequent hearing, the Judges will hear submissions from both the Prosecution and Walter Barasa’s Defence on whether his case should go to trial. If the charges are confirmed, the judges will set a trial date. These are the next steps in the case against Walter Barasa.
In the meantime, we continue to monitor and investigate all incidents of witness interference.
The issuance of an arrest warrant in this case should be a warning to others who may be involved in obstructing the course of justice through intimidating, harassing, bribing or attempting to bribe ICC witnesses. My Office will continue to do everything it can to ensure that witnesses are able to present their evidence before the Court without fear. Witnesses who have courage to come forward to testify deserve no less.
The ability of the Court to determine the truth in the Kenyan cases depends on the willingness of witnesses to come forward and present their evidence in the courtroom. I admire and am grateful for the moral courage displayed by the witnesses involved in these cases.
Through my Office, I will do all within my power to protect the integrity of our cases and ensure that justice is allowed to run its course unobstructed.
Today, 2 October 2013, Pre-Trial Chamber II of the International Criminal Court (ICC) unsealed an arrest warrant against Walter Osapiri Barasa, Kenyan citizen, born in 1972. He is charged with several offences against the administration of justice including corruptly influencing or attempting to corruptly influence ICC witnesses. An under seal warrant of arrest was issued against him on 2 August 2013. This is the first case before the ICC where a suspect is charged with an offence against the administration of justice, in accordance with article 70 of the Rome Statute.
Judge Cuno Tarfusser, Single Judge of Pre-Trial Chamber II, considered that the evidence presented by the Prosecutor established reasonable grounds to believe that Walter Barasa is criminally responsible as direct perpetrator for the crime of corruptly influencing or, alternatively, attempting to corruptly influence witnesses by offering to pay them to withdraw as ICC Prosecution witnesses in the context of the Kenyan cases before the ICC. Allegedly, he has been and is still acting in furtherance of a criminal scheme devised by a circle of officials within the Kenyan administration.
Based on the Prosecutor’s evidence, Judge Tarfusser also found that it is necessary to arrest Walter Osapiri Barasa to ensure his appearance at trial, to ensure that he does not obstruct or endanger the investigation or the proceedings, and to prevent him from continuing with the commission of the crime.
The International Criminal Court is an independent, permanent court that tries persons accused of the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole, namely the crime of genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and the crime of aggression.
Parliamentary elections will be held in Guinea today 28 September 2013. This da y also marks the fourth anniversary of the tragic events that took place on 28 September 2009 at the Conakry national stadium, during which serious crimes under the International Criminal Court‘s jurisdiction were allegedly committed against the civilian population. Since then, my Office has been conducting a preliminary examination of the situation in Guinea.
In accordance with my Office’s policy of encouraging national proceedings, my Office has been engaging with the Guinean authorities on an ongoing basis. As a result, a national investigation into the events of 28 September 2009 is underway and already several persons who may be amongst those most responsible for the crimes committed have been charged. I encourage the authorities to continue their efforts and to ensure that justice is done for the victims as soon as possible. I also urge the international community to support Guinea’s efforts in this regard.
At the same time, it is my Office’s sincere hope that the unfortunate events= of September 2009 will not be repeated. On the eve of the long awaited elec tions, tension is palpable in the streets of Conakry and the rest of the cou= ntry. In these circumstances, appeals for calm and restraint by the political leaders of all parties are particularly welcome. Let me again stress that anyone who seeks to incite violence, to order, request, encourage or cont= ribute in any other way to the commission of crimes falling within the ambit= of the Court’s subject matter jurisdiction is liable to be prosecuted befor e the International Criminal Court. There will be no impunity for international crimes committed in Guinea.
The adjournment was due to the request by the defence in order to allow the accused Deputy President to travel back to Kenya and assist President Uhuru Kenyatta in dealing with the crisis brought about by Al Shabaab terrorists now holding hostages inside Westgate Mall in Nairobi for the third day.
Reports coming out frm the government confirm 62 deaths and 175 injured.
Today, 23 September 2013, Trial Chamber V (a) of the International Criminal Court consisting of judge Chile Eboe – Osuji (presiding judge), Judge Olga Herrera Carbuccia and Judge Robert Fremr held a hearing on the request made by the Defence of Mr Ruto to adjourn the trial and excuse the accused from his presence at trial for a limited period of time.
In light of the circumstances in Kenya and the views heard during the hearing, the Chamber excused Mr Ruto from the proceedings. For the moment the excusal is permitted for one week only, subject to any further requests that Defence counsel may make if need be to extend it.
Trial Chamber V (a) has also decided to temporarily adjourn hearings in the Ruto and Sang trial, not continuing to hear the testimony of 536 in the absence of Mr Ruto.
The Defence for Mr Ruto filed a request to the Appeals Chamber for reconsideration of its decision on suspensive effect regarding the Prosecutor’s appeal of the decision excusing Mr Ruto from continuous presence at trial.
The trial is adjourned pending either the Appeals Chamber’s decision on the Defence’s urgent request or the expiration of the one-week excusal period, whichever comes earlier.
On 18 June 2013, Trial Chamber V(a) had issued a decision excusing Mr Ruto from being continuously physically present at trial, except for specified hearings. However the Prosecutor appealed this decision and the Appeals Chamber gave the Prosecutor’s request suspensive effect until a final decision on this appeal is made. Mr Ruto was requested to be present during all trial hearings pending the final determination on the Prosecutor’s appeal.
The Kenya case by ICCprosecutor against Mr Ruto and Mr sang will soon collapse if the prosecution does not change tact and be serious with whatever evidence they have.
Deputy President William Ruto‘s and Joshua Sang‘s case adjourned today due to lack of witnesses. The court was not happy but took the decision because there was no other way.
This sends a message that the prosecution has witnesses that they do not rely on. This may soon give the defence ammunition to puncture the prosecution’s case. Hon Ruto was expected to travel back to Kenya and will avail himself next Tuesday the 17 September to the court.
DRAMA AT THE ICC, as the case against Deputy President of Kenya William Ruto and Joshua Sang: Fatou Bensouda seeks adjournment for a week due to lack of witnesses:
Today the 10th of September, the case against Deputy President William Ruto opened in the Hague.
Failure by prosecution witnesses lined up for this week to turn up forces the chest-thumbing prosecutor to request the court for one week adjournment.
After opening statements by the prosecution, the Victim’s lawyer and the Defence, the prosecutor asked the court for adjournment until next Tuesday the 17th September because she lacks witnesses. Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda told the court that she was not able to proceed due to lack of witnesses for now. She told the court that she hopes by next Tuesday she will be able to get some witnesses.
This is very surprising and a shock to many observers who say the prosecution is playing a loosing game. How can they not have even one witness to start with and they have known all along that the case was to start today?.
The Defence lawyer for Ruto, Mr Karim Khan hammered the prosecution accusing the office of laxity during the investigation, saying they only relied on NGOs and their manufactured reports instead of doing their own investigation..
Kenyans who gave a warm sent off to Ruto yesterday Monday at the Jomo Kenyatta International Airport in Nairobi when he flew to the Hague where he was expected to stay for 3 weeks will be shocked to see him back home after only two nights in the Hague.
The prosecution had better accept that the case is very weak, collapsing and do the honourable thing – to withdraw the charges against the Kenyans.
Tomorrow Wednesday, the case will resume at 09.30 am European Time and will adjourn at 14.00, until Tuesday next week, to give time to the prosecutor to look for witnesses.
In this edition of “Ask the Court”: Fadi El Abdallah, Spokesperson of the International Criminal Court (ICC), answers questions concerning the situation in Kenya, cooperation, proceedings and witnesses in the Kenya cases.
African Press International (API) 