|
|
Post by subsaharanite on Sept 26, 2011 17:29:31 GMT 3
Just read this from the DN, Whats up with Opanga, has he been paid again? Everyone has vilified him in their commentaries. I cant seem to make out what he is up. Again just like the OC6, he is kin to draw in PM in the frying pan that they are in. Opanga has been bribed before, I think he just been bribed again. His article displays raw arrogance and veiled anger akin to what Muthaura and UK's lawyers have been doing at the ICC.
International Criminal Court (ICC) Chief Prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo has serious challenges with the evidence he has presented against the sextet suspected of masterminding Kenya’s post-election violence of late 2007 and early 2008.
For a man who promised to make Kenya an example; for a man in whom many Kenyans invested hope for justice; and for a man who never saw a media camera he did not like, the on-going confirmation hearings are a massive anti-climax.
The credibility of Mr Moren-Ocampo as an international prosecutor and of ICC as a global court of justice are at stake.
While previous criticisms of ICC as targeting Africans remain ill-informed, the court now faces the patently damning tag of an incompetent investigator.
That is pretty perturbing. Every lawyer, veteran or greenhorn, criminal or constitutional, will tell you that a prosecution is sustained or not, or that a case stands or falls, on the basis and credibility of the evidence presented and or adduced in court.
Again the lawyers will tell you that credible evidence is gathered from painstaking investigations.
Where investigators do a shoddy job that is sure to cost them a case. Indeed, the surest way to sabotage a prosecution is to carry out shoddy investigations.
Conversely, lawyers build their reputations from the way they gather evidence and interrogate and corroborate, and sieve and sift it.
Again, how lawyers assemble and interrogate witnesses builds or destroys their reputations as courtroom performers.
Notice that lawyers for Finance minister Uhuru Kenyatta, postmaster-general Hussein Ali and Public Service head Francis Muthaura repeatedly taunted Mr Moreno-Ocampo, and boasted that they had, unlike the prosecution, carried out investigations.
What investigations did Mr Moreno-Ocampo carry out? He did not interview any of these three suspects and yet he knew pretty well that the Rome Statute demands he gathers and inquires into both incriminating and ameliorating evidence.
The prosecutor did not produce phone records to back up claims that the suspects made telephone calls, yet these are readily available from the mobile phone providers.
I am dumbstruck
All along I expected, nay, knew, Mr Moreno-Ocampo had these records! Alas, I am dumbstruck!
The prosecution has alleged the military ferried fighters to theatres of combat but produced no records to back up this.
In government and military no vehicle leaves its parking lot, fuels and exits without the written say-so, complete with itinerary, from the bosses.
It is why I cannot believe Mr Moreno-Ocampo has not made these records available and, worse, appears not to have them. But remember he confidently dragged that most secretive of establishments into the murder of those it is supposed to protect.
Second, Mr Moreno-Ocampo made good use of the report of the Justice Philip Waki-led inquiry into the post-election violence.
In this report, Justice Waki, at every turn, recommended further investigations, but, it appears, Mr Moreno-Ocampo’s team had no stomach for such work.
And we were told the prosecution carried out investigations in Kenya. I am yet to see and hear their evidence.
I see neither smoking gun nor bombshell. Mr Moreno-Ocampo does not have the sextet over a barrel; he appears to be scrapping the barrel for evidence.
On Wednesday, as lawyer Steven Kay QC (Queen’s Counsel) graphically defended Mr Kenyatta as a preacher of peace and demonised Prime Minister Raila Odinga as a war monger, he sarcastically mocked the failure of the prosecution to investigate its own case.
How about Mr Moreno-Ocampo’s witnesses? When lenient the defence has derided them as anonymous. Otherwise, they have been depicted as hunting with the hounds and running with the hare, drunkards, nomadic fortune seekers and — wait for it — career witnesses.
I am not saying that the cases will not be confirmed. What I am saying is that it appears at this stage that Mr Moreno-Ocampo & Co have not amassed the kind of evidence to nail the suspects or, going forward, accused.
What would be the implications of Mr Moreno-Ocampo’s failure to nail the sextet? Whether this happens at this stage or the next, the reputation of the ICC, its prosecutor and evidence gathering processes would take a mighty — but richly deserved — hammering.
However, going forward, ICC would learn, improve and mitigate the damage. What it would never mitigate would be the dashed hopes invested in ICC justice by those who lost property and loved ones.
Politically, as I say, Kenya’s next General Election will be about the last General Election, which is what ICC is about.
Kwendo Opanga is a media consultant opanga@diplomateastafrica.com
|
|
|
|
Post by adongo23456 on Sept 26, 2011 18:41:30 GMT 3
The fallacies from the Opangas of Kenya need to be addressed and exposed as the total rubbish that they are:
Let's go step by step.
1. Here is Opanga's opening salvo.
"What investigations did Mr Moreno-Ocampo carry out? He did not interview any of these three suspects and yet he knew pretty well that the Rome Statute demands he gathers and inquires into both incriminating and ameliorating evidence."
Opanga is lying by claiming that the Rome Statute requires the OTP to interview the suspects. Where the heck did he get that information? The Rome Statute requires the OTP to investigate any exonorating evidence and that does not mean interviewing the suspects. That is an option for the OTP to take or not.
So what is exonorating evidence. Lets say a suspect is accused of having attended a meeting in Nairobi on a certain date to prep Mungiki for attacks and it turns out the suspect was say in a hospital in South Africa at that time. If that were the case, the OTP would be obliged to investigate that info and if true provide that evidence to the PTC judges as exonorating evidence. So the idea that the OTP has an obligation to interview suspects under the Rome Statute if pure fiction from Opanga.
In any event where was Opanga when Ocampo begged, cajoled and bent backwards pleading with the PCs, PPOs and such characters to be interviewed by the OTP with all sorts of protection for them?
Where was Opanga when Ocampo begged for months to be provided with minutes and other info on Security Meetings at State House and Harambee House? Wasn't it the state that contemptously rejected to provide any such information claiming it could compromise state security?
Where else do the Opangas want Ocampo to get the so called exonorating evidence when the suspects themslves very actively blocked state officers from talking to the OTP? Let's get serious. We can all be bleating hearts for the Uhurus and co but goodness sakes lets not lie for them.
2. Then this other bizzare load from Opanga:
"All along I expected, nay, knew, Mr Moreno-Ocampo had these records! Alas, I am dumbstruck!
The prosecution has alleged the military ferried fighters to theatres of combat but produced no records to back up this.
In government and military no vehicle leaves its parking lot, fuels and exits without the written say-so, complete with itinerary, from the bosses.
It is why I cannot believe Mr Moreno-Ocampo has not made these records available and, worse, appears not to have them. But remember he confidently dragged that most secretive of establishments into the murder of those it is supposed to protect."
Opanga must think we are all idiots. This man expects the Kenyan government using state resources to cause mayhem using civilian militias to actually keep meticulous records of which vehicles and/or other resouces were asigned to militias and other elements whose mission was to go out there and essentially commit crimes. Opanga expects such lists to be kept and promptly handed over to Ocampo upon request! Really. Which country is Opanga talking about? And these supposed to be part of Ocampo's huge failures. Just rubbish.
3. Then Opanga talks about how the lawyers for Uhuru, Muthaura and Ali have all boasted of having carried out investigations. Great. Now why can't they iuse the evidence of their investigations and convince the PTC II judges that they are innocent? Isn't that their job despcription? What is the fuss if they have all the evidence to prove they are innocent. Let them go ahead and provide. So far it doesn't look that good. But heck they still have a week or two to go. Marinate us with the evidence. Pour it in the court and walk free!
4.Then Opanga of course joins the chorus of questioning the logic of having "anonymous" winesses. Godamn it go read the ICC statutes and the rulings from Judge Trendifilova. She has ruled a dozen times that the OTP is allowed to provide witness testmonies is they so wish. That is exactly what Ocampo has done. People can pontificate all their want about not having live witnesses but the law is the law. In any event the live witnesses so far provided by the defense seem to have done more damage to them than the other way round. So much for the much talked about value of live witnesses.
5. Last but not least, let me say what I find quite typical of the apologists of the Ocampo six. They often conclude their biased assessments with how much they love the victims and how terrible they think the victims will nto get justice. I do not question that Mr. Kwendo Opanga, a veteral journalist has as much love and concern for the victims of the PEV just like all of us. What I don't accept is people like Opanga distorting reality and claiming to do so in the name of the victims.
|
|
|
|
Post by b6k on Sept 26, 2011 19:49:55 GMT 3
Deja vu. This article has already been dissected on the ICC thread...
|
|
|
|
Post by roughrider on Sept 26, 2011 19:55:05 GMT 3
An interesting angle is that while Opanga has written on the ICC and the Kenyan cases before, this article is quite different in tone and conclusions from previous articles. It is entirely possible that he has recently secured a lucrative contract running towards the next elections. However, like before his achilles is that he does not understand subtlety when doing paid propaganda.
|
|
|
|
Post by kamalet on Sept 26, 2011 20:39:43 GMT 3
An interesting angle is that while Opanga has written on the ICC and the Kenyan cases before, this article is quite different in tone and conclusions from previous articles. It is entirely possible that he has recently secured a lucrative contract running towards the next elections. However, like before his achilles is that he does not understand subtlety when doing paid propaganda. Bottomline.....Opanga has no mind of his own and he has to be bought to come up with such a story! |
|
|
|
Post by adongo23456 on Sept 26, 2011 20:53:10 GMT 3
An interesting angle is that while Opanga has written on the ICC and the Kenyan cases before, this article is quite different in tone and conclusions from previous articles. It is entirely possible that he has recently secured a lucrative contract running towards the next elections. However, like before his achilles is that he does not understand subtlety when doing paid propaganda. Bottomline.....Opanga has no mind of his own and he has to be bought to come up with such a story! , you can't deny that Opanga is making things up. Half truths are often more dangerous than outright lies. As they will tell you little knowledge is very harmful. If you are having surgery the worst possible thing is to get an expert with half the knowledge on what they are doing. In my work, I know that people who have half the knowledge in what they are doing can cause a lot of damage for a very long time whereas people who have no clue just wouldn't get a chance to screw things. Opanga's trick is to use half baked concepts to concoct a whole story of things Ocampo was supposed to do which he did not do. Like the idea that Ocampo had an obligation to interview suspects. That is nonsense and at least he should know that much. Opanga even expects Ocampo to go and get safaricom records on Muthaura's phone conversations giving orders to Ali when he knows very well that these people use secured phones. These are not chicken thieves or car jackers. These people are at the core of the power and protection of the Kenyan state. |
|
|
|
Post by kamalet on Sept 26, 2011 21:22:12 GMT 3
Bottomline.....Opanga has no mind of his own and he has to be bought to come up with such a story! , you can't deny that Opanga is making things up. Half truths are often more dangerous than outright lies. As they will tell you little knowledge is very harmful. If you are having surgery the worst possible thing is to get an expert with half the knowledge on what they are doing. In my work, I know that people who have half the knowledge in what they are doing can cause a lot of damage for a very long time whereas people who have no clue just wouldn't get a chance to screw things. Opanga's trick is to use half baked concepts to concoct a whole story of things Ocampo was supposed to do which he did not do. Like the idea that Ocampo had an obligation to interview suspects. That is nonsense and at least he should know that much. Opanga even expects Ocampo to go and get safaricom records on Muthaura's phone conversations giving orders to Ali when he knows very well that these people use secured phones. These are not chicken thieves or car jackers. These people are at the core of the power and protection of the Kenyan state. Whilst you are entitled to your own opinion it is always a good thing to respect another person's opinion. What makes you think your understanding is more correct that Opanga's? In fact both of you could be wrong. |
|
|
|
Post by roughrider on Sept 26, 2011 21:35:51 GMT 3
Kamale;
I don't know and don't care if Kwendo Opanga has a mind of his own or not. What matters here is that sometime in 1998, he was fired from his job at the Nation allegedly for accepting bribes from Moi and Kanu in order to write favourable editorials and columns. Talk of ethics!
|
|
|
|
Post by adongo23456 on Sept 26, 2011 21:39:42 GMT 3
Kamale, you can't deny that Opanga is making things up. Half truths are often more dangerous than outright lies. As they will tell you little knowledge is very harmful. If you are having surgery the worst possible thing is to get an expert with half the knowledge on what they are doing. In my work, I know that people who have half the knowledge in what they are doing can cause a lot of damage for a very long time whereas people who have no clue just wouldn't get a chance to screw things. Opanga's trick is to use half baked concepts to concoct a whole story of things Ocampo was supposed to do which he did not do. Like the idea that Ocampo had an obligation to interview suspects. That is nonsense and at least he should know that much. Opanga even expects Ocampo to go and get safaricom records on Muthaura's phone conversations giving orders to Ali when he knows very well that these people use secured phones. These are not chicken thieves or car jackers. These people are at the core of the power and protection of the Kenyan state. Whilst you are entitled to your own opinion it is always a good thing to respect another person's opinion. What makes you think your understanding is more correct that Opanga's? In fact both of you could be wrong. Opanga is a veteral journalist and editor. I respect his opinion but as you know whereas all of us are entitled to our opinions, none of us can ever be entitled to their own set of facts. Opanga wanted to make Ocampo look stupid by claiming that he refused to interview the suspects while that is somehow a requirement of the Rome Statute. It is just a simple fact that the Rome statute does not place any obligation on Ocampo to interview the suspects. So Opanga there created his own "fact" which is fiction and then blasts Ocampo for not doing what he is not required to do in the first place. Opanga also deliberately ignored the fact that Ocampo did everything in his power to interview state security agents to get their side of the story. It is interesting some of those same state security agents if not their surbodinates are now trying to be witnesses for the suspects and so far the first one we have seen has made a royal mess for Muthaura and the group of suspects. We know that Opanga as a veteran in the business could easliy have checked these facts and given a more objective assessment of the reality of the situation. You be the judge why he didn't do his own investigations to verify his facts while he is lambasting Ocampo for not doing investigations. |
|
|
|
Post by b6k on Sept 26, 2011 21:41:27 GMT 3
Adongo, there's no such thing as a secure cell phone. If the orders were given at the Nairobi Members Club as alleged, it's unlikely Muthaura carried a secure state house phone to that venue. Safaricom, or whichever cell provider is his better option, should still have records of any such calls.
|
|
|
|
Post by danielwaweru on Sept 26, 2011 22:00:56 GMT 3
Adongo, there's no such thing as a secure cell phone. If the orders were given at the Nairobi Members Club as alleged, it's unlikely Muthaura carried a secure state house phone to that venue. Safaricom, or whichever cell provider is his better option, should still have records of any such calls. LOL at 'whichever cell provider is his better option'. Well said  |
|
|
|
Post by adongo23456 on Sept 26, 2011 22:05:34 GMT 3
Adongo, there's no such thing as a secure cell phone. If the orders were given at the Nairobi Members Club as alleged, it's unlikely Muthaura carried a secure state house phone to that venue. Safaricom, or whichever cell provider is his better option, should still have records of any such calls. In theory it is true that safaricom should have records of all phone records. But believe or not some people are more equal than others. You may have to go to the Supreme Court to ever access any phone records of top state agents. Let nobody tell you that if you see Kibaki talking in a cell phone you will ge the data on that. Nope. It is just the ninyangarikas like you and me whose records are available. To begin with do you even imagine that the cell phone used by Muthaura is actually listed in his name? Not a chance. State agents of that calibre will only use cell phones if certain security features are guaranteed and the phone companies know that. The other day I believe it was the same Muthaura or may it was saitoti trying to ban safari com from issuing phones with no registry record. They said many thieves were not traceable through phones for lack of records. Now if your kawaida bank robber can fool safaricom what do you think dudes plotting mass murder and rapes would do? |
|
|
|
Post by phil on Sept 26, 2011 22:23:33 GMT 3
Adongo, there's no such thing as a secure cell phone. If the orders were given at the Nairobi Members Club as alleged, it's unlikely Muthaura carried a secure state house phone to that venue. Safaricom, or whichever cell provider is his better option, should still have records of any such calls. Iko hotline. In recent years, hotlines are indeed portable. Given to state officials in high ranking sensitive positions like Muthaura. These hotlines are outside the scope of telecommunications services providers. If there are anyone with such records, it is the government itself. |
|
|
|
Post by adongo23456 on Sept 27, 2011 0:26:01 GMT 3
Adongo, there's no such thing as a secure cell phone. If the orders were given at the Nairobi Members Club as alleged, it's unlikely Muthaura carried a secure state house phone to that venue. Safaricom, or whichever cell provider is his better option, should still have records of any such calls. Iko hotline. In recent years, hotlines are indeed portable. Given to state officials in high ranking sensitive positions like Muthaura. These hotlines are outside the scope of telecommunications services providers. If there are anyone with such records, it is the government itself. Damn right. And here is more. They can't even keep tabs on other phones how on earth are they going to keep tabs on phones held by Muthaura and president Kibaki? Here we go: www.nation.co.ke/Features/smartcompany/Switching+off+fake+phones+a+tough+call+/-/1226/1243354/-/9x7hi5/-/index.html |
|
|
|
Post by b6k on Sept 27, 2011 1:55:20 GMT 3
Adongo so in one breath you say Muthaura & co belong to a class of their own & in the next he is the owner of an Okia instead of a Nokia? That doesn't add up.
The likes of the bespectacled balozi are the type who would've gone postpaid from day one, assuming they use cellular communication. Do you think Muthaura would be caught dead running out of credit midsentence? Or scrambling to get airtime scratch cards for that matter?
The thing about postpaid is it has always been compliant with the CCK rules that trickled down to we mere mortals. To get the bill to a postpaid user a contract would be entered into & signed off by the user showing name, address, occupation, etc. Bills could be itemized or summarized but records exist.
Hell there are even records for prepaid users. Billing technology is quite simple & since these Safaricom types follow every cent, they have a running record of all calls with 411 such as duration, who you called & when you called.
Assuming Phil is right on the mobile secure comms, those will usually be supplied by a friendly superpower that can eavesdrop in on them at will anyway. Keep on reading Wikileaks & transcripts may be available.
|
|
|
|
Post by subsaharanite on Sept 27, 2011 22:42:50 GMT 3
We all know that a company like Safaricom that is partly owned by GOK will have to tore the line. We further know that the unknown shareholders of Safaricom are possibly government officials who arm twisted vodafone into allocating them 5% of the company as a kickback. This company clearly has and can engage in not so transparent deals. Safaricom therefore is a corrupt institution.
In a world where catastrophic events can occur at a click of a button, its not rocket science to make records of Muthaura's phone conversations disappear from Safaricom's servers with no trace. Lets be realistic. Phone records are not emblazoned on someone's forehead. Muthaura's grip is strong enough to have them expunged.
|
|
|
|
Post by b6k on Sept 28, 2011 6:47:22 GMT 3
Subsaharanite, you speak of the GK as if it is one monolithic entity. In reality you can divide the GK into at least 3 distinct units. 1) the Moi faction which although no longer in power still retains a lot of influence in both government & business circles; 2) the Kibaki faction which currently holds the reins of power & directs the GCG; & 3) the Raila faction which remains a reluctant partner in the GCG & is said to hold 50% of power but in reality has much less than that.
The faction which you allege owns or owned 5% of Safaricom via Mobitelea (Moi & Biwott telecom?) would be the Moi faction who's business interests often rival the other 2 factions (in fact KE's history can be said to be the sum of competing business interests of these 3 factions & a few other players, but I digress). It is therefore not a given fact that this faction will cooperate with the Kibaki faction to save Muthaura & co. They may decide to assist, but at a price.
|
|
|
|
Post by subsaharanite on Sept 29, 2011 1:12:40 GMT 3
B6K
You are right,GOK, in principal is made up of two factions; Kifaction which also encompasses the KANU remnants and RAO's half loaf. But we all know the latter has limited access to the inner working and decisions of the GOK. This is well illustrated by the ministerial allocations. Whereas Odinga's side controls most physical and infrastructural ministries, Kifaction controls administrative and the finance units. In other words, Kifaction indirectly controls Odingas half loaf. So when I talk of the GOK, its I disagreeumption that we all know whose faction is in control.
Apart from MOBITELEA, GOK still has a major stake in SAFARICOM through TELKOM and if I were the MD of SAFARICOM, I would definitely listen to what my boss (GOK) says because it wont take Kifaction a lot of time to change a few laws here and there that would either fire me or change the business environment. Further, you only need one IT geek within the organization to effect Muthaura's or GOK's orders.
|
|
|
|
Post by b6k on Sept 29, 2011 10:10:11 GMT 3
Now you're talking! One IT geek, a few millions of KE monopoly money, & voila, what records? The geek is sacked, no charges a brought forth against him & he retires merrily into the sunset with millions in the bank. No new laws are needed. Just subvert existing ones & take no action against the perp.
|
|
|
|
Post by nalinali on Oct 3, 2011 17:06:50 GMT 3
I had to bring this thread back to life as a matter of concern. The concern is that one Mr Kwendo Opanga who has struggled to present a facade of intellectual objectivity is fast sinking into the morass of parochial if not naive thinking. Yesterday's article coming one week after another article with the same bent, is a specimen of a tired editor who seems to be taking his cues from either Moses Kuria or K24 with all the idiocy.
|
|
|
|
Post by mzalendo on Oct 4, 2011 14:59:11 GMT 3
NALINALI lay it bare here.
|
|
|
|
Post by subsaharanite on Oct 5, 2011 0:20:41 GMT 3
Opanga is certainly in the system. He no longer writes. He is simply a scribe for hire and whoever pays the most gets his services. Its a pity that such a talent is being wasted for personal purposes. But I do understand that Kenyan being a capitalistic state, you gotta put your mouth where the money is. Okwendo perhaps has realized that his days as a writer are numbered. He is probably preparing for his retirement. So he needs a bank account with many zeros.
|
|
