The ICC case against Deputy President
William Ruto and radio journalist Joshua arap Sang resumes on an
uncertain note today after a one-month break. Here is a recap of the
witnesses who have featured in the case so far.
By a Nairobi-based reporter for The Hague Trials Kenya
The session - expected to run until 4 October – will feature nine
uncooperative prosecution witnesses who are expected to testify from
Kenya via video-link. Although the government confirmed that it served
all the witnesses with summonses as required by the ICC, it is not clear
whether the witnesses have all confirmed that they will indeed testify.
On April 17,
trial judges Chile Eboe-Osuji and Robert Fremr ordered
that Witness 15, 16, 336, 397, 516, 524, 495 and 323 should appear
before the court. According to this decision - in which Judge Olga
Herrera Carbuccia dissented – Kenya had the obligation to facilitate
(“by way of a compulsory measure”) their appearance and security
throughout the preparation and duration of their testimonies. Witness
15, who was left out of the list, is also expected to testify at this
session.
The eight summoned witnesses had previously provided the ICC
prosecution with statements which allegedly contained “highly relevant
potential evidence” for the Ruto and Sang trial. However, according to
the prosecution, in spite of various protective measures, the eight had
turned hostile and were no longer willing to cooperate.
For instance, Witness 15 had told the prosecution that he
participated in 11 planning meetings - attended by Ruto - in which
procurement of arms, selection of field commanders and other logistics
were discussed. This witness allegedly participated in attacks on
Yamumbi, Eldoret and could describe Sang’s involvement in the
commissioning of those crimes.
Witness 16 allegedly attended two planning meetings with Ruto: one on
15 October 2007 in Kaptabee and the other on 14 December 2007 in Ruto’s
Sugoi home. The witness reportedly also gave a first-hand account of
his participation in the attack on Turbo town.
While confirming the charges against Ruto in early 2012, the ICC
judges said that given the evidence, Ruto hosted a series of meetings,
some at his Sugoi house where violence was planned. That in fact,
the meetings covered the hierarchy of commanders, identification of
targets, purchase of weapons, transport arrangements and reward systems
to pay off the youth. It also confirmed that Ruto was the defacto leader
of the Kalenjin community and that he appeared to have been the leader
of the network which coordinated the violence in the Rift Valley region.
With regards to Sang’s involvement in the PEV, the judges stated
that, given the evidence, he placed his radio show at the disposal of
the organizers of the violence. In particular, it indicated that Sang
advertised their meetings and that he himself fanned violence by
spreading “hate messages explicitly revealing [the] desire to expel
Kikuyus.”
In spite of the efforts by Ruto and Sang’s defence teams and the
Kenyan government to opposed the subpoena ruling, on June 17, a
presiding judge in the appeal, Akua Kuenyehia, refused to suspend the
April decision to subpoena the eight witnesses. The appellate decision
is still pending.
The ICC trial of Ruto and Sang has faced a number of challenges since
its commencement last year, most notably being, the persistent breaks,
initially caused by time constraints because of Ruto’s "extraordinary"
duties in Kenya. This problem has since been solved through the
amendment of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence to accommodate his
circumstances.
Another serious challenge has been the withdrawal of witnesses.
Although Bensouda had initially planned to call 40 witnesses, she had
only called 21 when the case took a break in July.
When the case started, the first witness to take the stand was
Witness 536.
She testified about the arson attack on Kiambaa church and provided
evidence on the organization of the attacks. Various other witnesses who
talked about the Kiambaa arson also testified about the organized
attackers who donned distinct attire and painted faces.
The second witness -
Witness 326
- placed Ruto at the apex of the opposition leadership in the Rift
Valley region. He said Ruto was the ODM pentagon member representing the
Rift Valley area, and this placed him in an unparalleled power
position. In essence, the witness linked Ruto’s ODM party to the
violence by testifying about how the violence was funded.
The fourth witness’s -
Witness 376
- testimony concerned Ruto’s alleged use of the term “madoadoa” which,
allegedly, incited the Kalenjin youth against the Kikuyu community in
the Rift Valley region.
The twelfth witness also corroborated the “madoadoa” claims by
testifying that he attended an ODM rally at the Nandi Hills Stadium in
Kapchorua around October 2007, where Ruto allegedly asked the Kalenjin
people present to uproot the “trees” planted in their midst by departing
colonialists.
[A summary the twelfth witness' testimony: Witness says Ruto and Kosgey repeated calls to evict non-Kalenjins from the Rift Valley]
Various other witnesses linked Ruto’s associates to the violence. The fifteenth
witness said that Councillor Sammy Ruto
- who had won the Kimumu ward electoral seat in Eldoret on an ODM
ticket - moved around the area in a celebratory convoy asking Kikuyus to
leave for Othaya, the birthplace of former President Mwai Kibaki.
Another witness -
Witness 613
- named Ruto’s personal assistant, Farouk Kibet, as one of the people
who attended a political meeting held at Ruto’s Sugoi home. This meeting
features prominently in the prosecution claims against Ruto.
During the previous session, the last witness to take the stand was
former Commission of Inquiry into Post-Election Violence (CIPEV) Commissioner Gavin Alistair McFadyen. Through him, the court introduced the CIPEV report, popularly known as Waki Report, as evidence.
The report is reputed to have been a sincere and honest interrogation
of Kenya’s collective conscience following the post-election violence
of 2007/8. Before the commission was formed, there was a broad consensus
among the warring political sides and the strong support continued
until the report came out.
The report’s supporting evidence and a secret envelope containing
lists of the key perpetrators of the violence were handed over to former
ICC Prosecutor Luis Moreno Ocampo who commenced the Kenya ICC cases.
According to McFyden,
Ruto's name was in the secret envelope.Through McFadyen, the prosecution also introduced other related documents received as exhibits during the Waki inquiry.
Other than the nine witnesses scheduled to testify in this session,
it is unlikely that ICC prosecutor Bensouda has other witnesses in her
cards. Once she wraps up her presentation of the evidence, the defence
will get a chance to give their side of the story.
But as the judges have ruled before, the defence can opt to move a
no-case to answer motion before the court. Recently, the judges informed
the defence about the criteria for such an application.
Lead image: A photo motage of ICC prosecutor Fatou Bensouda (L)
(photo: Robin van Lonkhuijsen/Pool), Deputy President William Ruto (R
above) (photo: Sophie van Leeuwen/The Hague Trials Kenya) and Joshua
Sang (R below) (photo: Sophie van Leeuwen/The Hague Trials Kenya)
[This article was modified on 3 September 2014 to correct the
identity of one of the witnesses. The earlier version indicated that one
of the witnesses, "423", was among those summoned to appear before the
Trial Chamber. The identity of this witness has been corrected to
"323".]
