|
Post by patriotism101 on Apr 27, 2012 8:15:57 GMT 3
This decision has a repercussions to the Kenyan case and increases the stakes in the next general elections. The subsequent sentencing of Taylor will increase the stakes a notch higher.
It is clear that Uhuruto are growing desperate by the day as their options run out and as a bull which has smelt blood will charge at anything on its path, RAO risks being ripped by a charged bull. Desperate times call for desperate measures and according to Ngunyi, Uhuruto will be stupid to show up at the Hague. After this ruling, I doubt Cecily Mbarire will be advising Uhuru otherwise.
But what are the implications of non co-operation for Kenya? It means RAO has to be stopped by any means necessary including elimination (Midiwo on the money but the delivery was poor) Other options of stopping RAO being considered by these merchants of impunity include:
- Mudavadi having Uhuru as his running mate
- Koskey taking off with the ODM certificate (everyone has a price) and RAO being knocked out of the race by a technicality incurable by law and enforced by the CJ- since his hands will be tied.
- A repeat of the 2007 fiasco- the reason this is still a possibility is because nothing except the name and the commissioners has changed at the electoral body. this time the dynamics will have changed, and Uhuruto can spin a larger margin. If anything, the former foes will be bosom buddies.
- Having RAO sign a memorandum of understanding with the Uhuruto/Kibaki that he will not cooperate with ICC in the matter of the Kenyan case. It remains to be seen whether RAO can sign such a deal- I will not be surprised especially if they put a clause that the 4 will be "prosecuted" by a Kenyan court.
If all this fails, a military coup is still a possibility in Kenya
|
|
|
Post by Onyango Oloo on Apr 27, 2012 9:20:50 GMT 3
|
|
|
Post by adongo23456 on Apr 27, 2012 17:09:02 GMT 3
This decision has a repercussions to the Kenyan case and increases the stakes in the next general elections. The subsequent sentencing of Taylor will increase the stakes a notch higher. It is clear that Uhuruto are growing desperate by the day as their options run out and as a bull which has smelt blood will charge at anything on its path, RAO risks being ripped by a charged bull. Desperate times call for desperate measures and according to Ngunyi, Uhuruto will be stupid to show up at the Hague. After this ruling, I doubt Cecily Mbarire will be advising Uhuru otherwise. But what are the implications of non co-operation for Kenya? It means RAO has to be stopped by any means necessary including elimination (Midiwo on the money but the delivery was poor) Other options of stopping RAO being considered by these merchants of impunity include: - Mudavadi having Uhuru as his running mate - Koskey taking off with the ODM certificate (everyone has a price) and RAO being knocked out of the race by a technicality incurable by law and enforced by the CJ- since his hands will be tied. - A repeat of the 2007 fiasco- the reason this is still a possibility is because nothing except the name and the commissioners has changed at the electoral body. this time the dynamics will have changed, and Uhuruto can spin a larger margin. If anything, the former foes will be bosom buddies. - Having RAO sign a memorandum of understanding with the Uhuruto/Kibaki that he will not cooperate with ICC in the matter of the Kenyan case. It remains to be seen whether RAO can sign such a deal- I will not be surprised especially if they put a clause that the 4 will be "prosecuted" by a Kenyan court. If all this fails, a military coup is still a possibility in Kenya patriotismBefore we contemplate such extreme methods to save the boys there are simpler ways of solving this problem and they are guaranteed to work. This thing is doable. Here is what we have to do. 1. Ban all forms of false hopes being spewed left, right and centre. Things like Kibaki making irresponsible statements in parliament to bring the cases back give false hopes to the indicted fellas and could lead to health complications when the suspects realize no such thing is happening. Ban such behaviour in the country. Extend the ban to hopeless motions like that of the EALA to petition the ICC to take the cases to Arusha. This is not a conflict about treaties not to mention that the EALA has no standing whatsoever with the ICC. Such loose talk must be banned mara moja. And for god's sake spare the citizens the nonsense of collecting signatures to take to Ocampo. I know such talk was forgotten as they were uttered to please some people but folks have other things to do to make a living. Right now many are busy working on their farms in the planting season. Leave them alone. 2. Up the tempo on the prayers. Bring in Legio Maria and Akorino sects to get busy. This thing is spiralling out of control and we need to go beyond the Evengelicals and other mainstream vendors of religion. We need the heavy hitters complete with their local religious paraphanelia. Here is what I mean when I say stuff is spiralling out of control: www.capitalfm.co.ke/news/2012/04/icc-pushes-ahead-with-kenya-trials/And when I talk Legio Maria I don't mean the road side hawkers of the faith or the small community Legio churches. I am talking about the Bishop and Arch Bishop level of providers. In Legio they used to have someone called Ondetto. The man was treated as a god. He was the pope of the faith. Even to see him could blind you if you had little faith. And boy did he ever look scary. I saw him once and told my mom who despised the Legio sect that if that man is anywhere near heaven I am going to go the opposite direction. My mom didn't like that statement and warned me promptly that should I ever turn the opposite direction the welcoming face at the gates of hell (Obel Sibuth) would make me freeze and crawl back to the right direction. In Luo language she referred to it as "Rieko bironi" which loosely translates as "cleverness/intelligence/common sense will come to you". In reality she was telling me cleverness/intelligence/common sense often come to people when they are in real danger and realize just how stupid they have been. That is another story but I am sure the wisdom there may actually also be useful to the suspects. In a nutshell we need the Legio Bishop or pope on board and the Akorino big wigs should come up and do that dance thing. Ocampo can't stand up to these guys if they really get it going. 3. The third phase of the move is to get people possessed with the Holy Spirit. I used to see this in the rural churches. The Evangelicals in Nairobi and even the big time religious "healers" who feel whole stadia have also adopted it. This is the level where an otherwise normal looking person goes beserk in the middle of intense prayers. The person plunges into the ground writhing with unknown forces and speaking in tongues that even they don't know. Folk gather around such person cheering them on with prayers. This could take something like 30 minutes or so when the extremely exhausted individual then stops and is led to a shade completely cleansed of all evil stuff. With the help of experts in this business I am sure Uhuru and Ruto can get into the thick of things and allow the Holy Spirit to posses them and let them go down and wail and scream and talk in tongues. There must be one rule though. They must not inadvertently make any incriminating statements or engage in any form of confessions. But they have to get busy and throw off their clothes and role in the sand and/or mud till their exhausted bodies come to a stand still and they are led to a place to rest. Now you tell me how after that Ocampo can have any chance with these guys. It will be case over. Kabisa. That oil on the head thing hasn't worked so far, so let's try something new. Let's take this thing a notch higher and scare the shit out of Ocampo. That will teach him a lesson.
|
|
|
Post by Onyango Oloo on Apr 27, 2012 17:41:04 GMT 3
|
|
|
Post by OtishOtish on Apr 27, 2012 18:34:29 GMT 3
The writer seems to be happy to cut small corners iin order to buttress his argument. One example: " It is clear, however, that the decision to convict him was not unanimous."Not so. All three judges agreed on the verdict. Judge Sow was an alternate judge and had no say in the verdict. In fact, he seems to have acted quite improperly in the way he inserted himself into the announcement. His colleagues, in return, treated him quite rudely. Score: 1-1
|
|
|
Post by jakaswanga on Apr 28, 2012 16:07:59 GMT 3
What these Judges tell us is that (like Taylor) one can actually be found NOT individually criminally responsible for the crimes (by not proving they exercised command and control over the actual killers) yet still end up in jail. Again like Taylor, one can even be found NOT responsible as a co-perpetrator to a common plan under a joint criminal enterprise but still end up in jail. You don't have to be the mastermind (perpetrator) or co-perpetrator to end up in jail. Job, pause for a bit. Even if this is only a theoritical proposition, engaged in for academic purposes, are not the underlying implications for Kenya, of such magnitude that we can now with certainity say that Emilio Kibaki is in the bind. And that his court realizes this and that is why the succession war has become a do or die with even more desperacy? In the course of this post, keeping in mind all the while no two cases are identical, I will try to officiate why I think the above. Extrapolating freely [with logical impunity rather than wild fantasy] from your fundamental work as I shall quote. These judges nailed Taylor under the Responsibility under Article 6(1) for Aiding and Abetting the crimes. They found evidence beyond reasonable doubt that Taylor aided and abetted the planning of the crimes by providing practical assistance, encouragement, and moral support to the killers on the ground. Applied consistently, this article 6(1) spells much doom for others in Kenya apart from the O4. I think the O4 can do a Samson, and someone who reads law needs to inform me what the technicalities and practicalities of the court are and would be, if one of the indictees convincingly passes the buck up. 1. Would it be too late to issue a warrant for the arrest of Kibaki if UK sings about and can prove Kibaki's blessings, which under this article can be passed as abetting? [State House hosting of Mungiki] 2. How about Ruto doing the same on Raila? If this Judge's reasoning is a comparative possibility to the Kenyan case, it really is curtains for Uhuruto. You may have no direct control over the killers, but so long as you provide them practical things like cash, arms, transport, or even moral support, you are already aiding and abetting the commission of the crimes. This is what should worry Uhuru Kenyatta, Francis Muthaura, William Ruto and Joshua Sang; the Responsibility under Article 6(1) for aiding and abetting the crimes. Taylor was found to have given cash ($ 10,000 - $ 20,000) besides ‘safekeeping’ diamond gifts to known surrogates for commission of the crimes. Judges didn’t believe Taylor’s denial of not knowing those surrogates. The Characters of these men will tested for real [die alone or with others?]. Cash, arms, transport and even moral support. In Kenya, hosting eg mungiki in palatial hotels apart from Ikulu is already moral support I think. That money exchanged hands is nolonger debatable. [only the purpose can be debated: meant to buy many goats for many funerals and house refugees of mungiki relatives?? or facilitate revenge murders??) In the rift too, a lot of money flowed, and in the pre-trial under T rendifilova, it was established that Ruto recieved and honoured cash requests (this happens for any politician in his hommies in Kenya and need not necessarily be for the purposes of murder), but there were some particular quotes which seemed to indicate both parties knew well what the purpose was at that late hour. My question is what happens if Ruto cracks or decides to rat, claiming not all was his personal money, but that he too was an agent acting [dispensing cash with known intentions] on behalf of his pentagon colleagues. And can produce a few .. facts .. of his own to prove his statements? Does the court ignore this as 'movie pronouncements', time-barred fabrications, or is the court mandated to issue further summons to cross examine anybody Ruto may rat on? in pursuit of truth and justice. On top, the Judges found that Taylor’s verbal encouragement and moral support to the killers (conveyed through surrogates) had a substantial effect on the commission of crimes in Sierra Leone. These are things to be noted by Kenya’s Ocampo-4. In Kenya verbal encouragements would have been in ethnic code and proverbial hints. Ethnic radio footage would be a wealth of information, but the argument on interpretation would be lengthy and winded. Taylor was found to have been involved in remote PLANNING of the violence from afar yet neither involved in ORDERING nor INSTIGATING the violence. Despite not being the actual mastermind, or a co-perpetrator, he is still in deep trouble for his peripheral role. Is this also Raila Odinga's and United Kingdom's engineering? Judges sorted out the charges and nailed Taylor only for aiding, abetting, and planning the commission of the crimes; but not for ordering, instigating, or directing the commission of the crimes. I’m sure like our Ocampo-4, he probably didn’t see it coming. Peripheral role, yet significant enough for a conviction ... HmmmThe above line of reasoning means Kibaki and Raila must have legal teams at hand to study this ruling. If this ruling sets a precedent, no one can conseder himself safe. The only point of relief, is that the nature of the crimes in Sierra Leone [not Liberia of which Taylor goes free] are far more spectacular and longer in duration than anything seen in Kenya. And Taylor has successfully been imaged as a particularly evil man --with drugged child soldiers to boot; and with a conviction and commitment to a penitentiary facility in the USA. This means the judges are safe in making 'wide and sweeping' rationalisations ... stretching the meanings of some concepts, Taylor's well known record speaking for itself subconciously.This will not be true with the Kenyan suspects I think. The international reporting of Kenyan horrors was very sanitized. A movie! Of note is also how the Prosecution argued the nexus between Taylor and the atrocious crimes. Judges had no problem ruling there was proof beyond reasonable doubt that serious crimes occurred. Their only difficult task was linking them to Taylor. The crucial clincher was hard evidence in the form of intercepted radio communications and satellite phone conversations. However, not Taylor’s voice was in any of them; but those of his Mungiki-like surrogates. Insider witnesses were key here - confessions of former surrogates and their allies. The Prosecution was able to successfully link Taylor to those surrogates. Taylor’s defense vigorously denied he even knew them. Judges agreed with Prosecution. Yes, linking electronic intelligence to the suspect. Here, the role of super-powers must be analysed (just like when the Nigerian police kept on not being able to find Taylor after his escape, the Americans kept on finding him for them (by GPS-tabs) until they really had to arrest him. Obasanjo ran out of excuses! [or did the americans threaten to freeze his substantial 'oil wealth' laundered in the US as some alleged?] In Kenya too, the USA especially, sits on a wealth of electronic intelligence. The question is what is their game? for they did not collect it to serve the cause of justice in Kenya, but their own interests. So, apart from the calculating americans, does Ocampo have enough 'linkage data', either confessions like in Taylor's case or un-redacted intercepts from Gichangi's boys, to tie his four guests to the grassroot perpetrators of their schemes? It is clear that graduates of these Libya trips each came back with different plans, skills and knowledge. Some probably used them well, others terribly. African scholars need to delve into researching the cost-benefit analysis of these revolutionary pilgrimages to Libya (that were sponsored by Gadhaffi). This appreciation, J ob, is already a work in progress. Also as part of a historical evaluation of the place of Gadhaffi in African [sub-sahara?] history of the 20th century. Controversy will be a key concept here.
|
|
|
Post by adongo23456 on Apr 28, 2012 17:34:17 GMT 3
|
|
|
Post by job on Apr 28, 2012 18:25:38 GMT 3
What these Judges tell us is that (like Taylor) one can actually be found NOT individually criminally responsible for the crimes (by not proving they exercised command and control over the actual killers) yet still end up in jail. Again like Taylor, one can even be found NOT responsible as a co-perpetrator to a common plan under a joint criminal enterprise but still end up in jail. You don't have to be the mastermind (perpetrator) or co-perpetrator to end up in jail. Job, pause for a bit. Even if this is only a theoritical proposition, engaged in for academic purposes, are not the underlying implications for Kenya, of such magnitude that we can now with certainity say that Emilio Kibaki is in the bind. And that his court realizes this and that is why the succession war has become a do or die with even more desperacy? In the course of this post, keeping in mind all the while no two cases are identical, I will try to officiate why I think the above. Extrapolating freely [with logical impunity rather than wild fantasy] from your fundamental work as I shall quote. Applied consistently, this article 6(1) spells much doom for others in Kenya apart from the O4. I think the O4 can do a Samson, and someone who reads law needs to inform me what the technicalities and practicalities of the court are and would be, if one of the indictees convincingly passes the buck up. 1. Would it be too late to issue a warrant for the arrest of Kibaki if UK sings about and can prove Kibaki's blessings, which under this article can be passed as abetting? [State House hosting of Mungiki] 2. How about Ruto doing the same on Raila? If this Judge's reasoning is a comparative possibility to the Kenyan case, it really is curtains for Uhuruto. The Characters of these men will tested for real [die alone or with others?]. Cash, arms, transport and even moral support. In Kenya, hosting eg mungiki in palatial hotels apart from Ikulu is already moral support I think. That money exchanged hands is nolonger debatable. [only the purpose can be debated: meant to buy many goats for many funerals and house refugees of mungiki relatives?? or facilitate revenge murders??) In the rift too, a lot of money flowed, and in the pre-trial under T rendifilova, it was established that Ruto recieved and honoured cash requests (this happens for any politician in his hommies in Kenya and need not necessarily be for the purposes of murder), but there were some particular quotes which seemed to indicate both parties knew well what the purpose was at that late hour. My question is what happens if Ruto cracks or decides to rat, claiming not all was his personal money, but that he too was an agent acting [dispensing cash with known intentions] on behalf of his pentagon colleagues. And can produce a few .. facts .. of his own to prove his statements? Does the court ignore this as 'movie pronouncements', time-barred fabrications, or is the court mandated to issue further summons to cross examine anybody Ruto may rat on? in pursuit of truth and justice. In Kenya verbal encouragements would have been in ethnic code and proverbial hints. Ethnic radio footage would be a wealth of information, but the argument on interpretation would be lengthy and winded. Peripheral role, yet significant enough for a conviction ... HmmmThe above line of reasoning means Kibaki and Raila must have legal teams at hand to study this ruling. If this ruling sets a precedent, no one can conseder himself safe. The only point of relief, is that the nature of the crimes in Sierra Leone [not Liberia of which Taylor goes free] are far more spectacular and longer in duration than anything seen in Kenya. And Taylor has successfully been imaged as a particularly evil man --with drugged child soldiers to boot; and with a conviction and commitment to a penitentiary facility in the USA. This means the judges are safe in making 'wide and sweeping' rationalisations ... stretching the meanings of some concepts, Taylor's well known record speaking for itself subconciously.This will not be true with the Kenyan suspects I think. The international reporting of Kenyan horrors was very sanitized. A movie! Yes, linking electronic intelligence to the suspect. Here, the role of super-powers must be analysed (just like when the Nigerian police kept on not being able to find Taylor after his escape, the Americans kept on finding him for them (by GPS-tabs) until they really had to arrest him. Obasanjo ran out of excuses! [or did the americans threaten to freeze his substantial 'oil wealth' laundered in the US as some alleged?] In Kenya too, the USA especially, sits on a wealth of electronic intelligence. The question is what is their game? for they did not collect it to serve the cause of justice in Kenya, but their own interests. So, apart from the calculating americans, does Ocampo have enough 'linkage data', either confessions like in Taylor's case or un-redacted intercepts from Gichangi's boys, to tie his four guests to the grassroot perpetrators of their schemes? It is clear that graduates of these Libya trips each came back with different plans, skills and knowledge. Some probably used them well, others terribly. African scholars need to delve into researching the cost-benefit analysis of these revolutionary pilgrimages to Libya (that were sponsored by Gadhaffi). This appreciation, J ob, is already a work in progress. Also as part of a historical evaluation of the place of Gadhaffi in African [sub-sahara?] history of the 20th century. Controversy will be a key concept here. Jakaswanga,The onus of respectively charging Kibaki or Raila for either being individually criminally responsible or co-perpetrating a joint criminal enterprise rests solely with the OTP. It is also a fact that the OTP can collect its evidence from numerous sources including foreign intelligence and diplomats. The OTP perused through available evidence and have thus far NOT found substantial reason to link either Kibaki or Raila to the crimes. On the other hand, they have so far successfully convinced PTC & partly Appellate Judges that Uhuru, Ruto, Muthaura and Sang were involved with the gross crimes. I think the “aiding and abetting” standard isn’t a contrived or ambiguous rationalization to merely profile and jail Taylor. You variously characterize it as ‘wide and sweeping’… ‘stretching the meaning of concepts’… etc. What you seem to miss is the Judges’ explanation that “aiding and abetting” through verbal, material or moral support HAS TO HAVE A SUBSTANTIAL EFFECT in fueling the crimes. If Taylor’s “aiding and abetting” didn’t have SUBSTANTIAL EFFECT in commission of the crimes, he would be a free man today. Extrapolating from this standard, the fact that State House hosted Mungiki doesn’t alone prove that Kibaki aided and abetted the criminals; with the latter having substantial effect on the Mungiki killing spree. First, the OTP found out that Kibaki doesn’t even control the dairy of guests invited to State House. Secondly, from the evidence we heard in court chambers, the Mungiki insiders themselves showed that even while in State House, it was the words of Muthaura and Kenyatta (not Kibaki) which had SUBSTANTIAL effect on the Mungiki. One witness account revealed that Kibaki referred all Mungiki concerns to Muthaura to handle. Logically (from evidence), the person at State House who wielded the kind of authority needed to address Mungiki concerns (to stop their extra-judicial killings) was in fact Francis Muthaura, not Mwai Kibaki. Even while at State House Kibaki chose to remain ‘far and removed’ from those Mungiki manenos. On the other hand, the overzealous Muthaura and Kenyatta stuck their heads deep into the murk; from whereupon the OTP found them still stuck! It is the latter duo who “aided and abetted” the Mungiki through verbal, material and moral support. That support had a substantial effect in fueling the crimes. The grim prospect to learn from the Taylor judgment is this. Even if Judges find NO evidence (beyond reasonable doubt) that Uhuru and Muthaura masterminded or co-perpetrated the retaliatory PEV; they could still be found to have “aided and abetted” the commission of the crimes against humanity. That is by view of their verbal, material and moral support which had substantial effect on the Mungiki footsoldiers. This was the gist of my posting. Ruto’s situation is not different. If the only evidence available is one showing that he “aided and abetted” the warrior network; with a substantial effect of fueling the killings and evictions, he would be nabbed. The OTP doesn’t even have to prove that Ruto masterminded or co-perpetrated the whole operation. The hypothesis on Raila’s possible involvement gets even more remote the moment you interrogate whether he wielded any possible authority on such a tribal network – enough to have substantial effect in commissioning localized evictions and killings in North Rift. The OTP operates on evidence, not ‘wide and sweeping’ or ‘overstretched’ academic hypotheses and theorems.
|
|
|
Post by OtishOtish on Apr 28, 2012 18:46:17 GMT 3
This is truly bizarre, given that the court doesn't even deal with criminal matters.
|
|
|
Post by job on Apr 28, 2012 18:51:33 GMT 3
There are only two routes of removing an ongoing case from the ICC; both routes have been blocked in Kenya's case. Even if it was possible - it takes a minimum of one year to remove a case from the ICC. In short, let the powers that be know that their rush to beat the election deadline will be futile. These current cases will continue at the ICC until after the next elections, period! It is also dangerous to invite neighboring countries into partisan bickering within Kenya. These leaders must appreciate the context under which they are operating. In any case, cunning political calculations should be carefully interrogated. Two nonchalant participants favoured by the U.S. - Kikwete and Kagame - are likely double-dealing here as they pretend to play the good-neighbour role. On the other hand, like in their futile attempt to support Libya's Gadhaffi, Museveni and Kibaki will yet again fail miserably if their goal is to help out Kenyatta and Muthaura. You can't rush in the eleventh hour, to convert a regional court that handles trade disputes into a court of human rights; with the sole purpose of sanitizing criminals. That is a big stretch. Who would really take such a cosmetic Kangaroo court seriously? Puleeeaze!!!! Lastly, people like Museveni and Kibaki need to think comprehensively over these human rights courts in the unlikely event they take a life of their own. They themselves might end up in such courts they are now busy establishing. Afterall, wasn't Francis Muthaura the key architect of Kenya's signature and ratification of the Rome Statutes; which established the ICC? Muthaura is right now behind the dock of the same court he helped create.
|
|
|
Post by OtishOtish on Apr 28, 2012 18:52:51 GMT 3
Job: You are right. However, if during the trial it becomes apparent that Kibaki knew what Uhuru, Muthuara, and their Mungiki friends were setting out to do, and he did nothing to stop them, then he would be liable under the "inaction" clause. In that case, the OTP might well decide to go after him. Also, a major difference between him and Raila is that there is a clear (if weak, for now) link between him and the foot-soldiers who actually carried out the atrocities.
|
|
|
Post by OtishOtish on Apr 28, 2012 18:56:05 GMT 3
There are only two routes of removing an ongoing case from the ICC; both routes have been blocked in Kenya's case. Even if it was possible - it takes a minimum of one year to remove a case from the ICC. Clarification: It is a withdrawal that takes effect in one year. But a withdrawal cannot have any effect on cases that have been already started. (Article 125). So it would be an exercise in futility.
|
|
|
Post by jakaswanga on Apr 29, 2012 10:00:22 GMT 3
Jakaswanga,The onus of respectively charging Kibaki or Raila for either being individually criminally responsible or co-perpetrating a joint criminal enterprise rests solely with the OTP. It is also a fact that the OTP can collect its evidence from numerous sources including foreign intelligence and diplomats. The OTP perused through available evidence and have thus far NOT found substantial reason to link either Kibaki or Raila to the crimes. On the other hand, they have so far successfully convinced PTC & partly Appellate Judges that Uhuru, Ruto, Muthaura and Sang were involved with the gross crimes. I think the “aiding and abetting” standard isn’t a contrived or ambiguous rationalization to merely profile and jail Taylor. You variously characterize it as ‘wide and sweeping’… ‘stretching the meaning of concepts’… etc. What you seem to miss is the Judges’ explanation that “aiding and abetting” through verbal, material or moral support HAS TO HAVE A SUBSTANTIAL EFFECT in fueling the crimes. If Taylor’s “aiding and abetting” didn’t have SUBSTANTIAL EFFECT in commission of the crimes, he would be a free man today. Extrapolating from this standard, the fact that State House hosted Mungiki doesn’t alone prove that Kibaki aided and abetted the criminals; with the latter having substantial effect on the Mungiki killing spree. First, the OTP found out that Kibaki doesn’t even control the dairy of guests invited to State House. Secondly, from the evidence we heard in court chambers, the Mungiki insiders themselves showed that even while in State House, it was the words of Muthaura and Kenyatta (not Kibaki) which had SUBSTANTIAL effect on the Mungiki. One witness account revealed that Kibaki referred all Mungiki concerns to Muthaura to handle. Logically (from evidence), the person at State House who wielded the kind of authority needed to address Mungiki concerns (to stop their extra-judicial killings) was in fact Francis Muthaura, not Mwai Kibaki. Even while at State House Kibaki chose to remain ‘far and removed’ from those Mungiki manenos. On the other hand, the overzealous Muthaura and Kenyatta stuck their heads deep into the murk; from whereupon the OTP found them still stuck! It is the latter duo who “aided and abetted” the Mungiki through verbal, material and moral support. That support had a substantial effect in fueling the crimes. The grim prospect to learn from the Taylor judgment is this. Even if Judges find NO evidence (beyond reasonable doubt) that Uhuru and Muthaura masterminded or co-perpetrated the retaliatory PEV; they could still be found to have “ aided and abetted” the commission of the crimes against humanity. That is by view of their verbal, material and moral support which had substantial effect on the Mungiki footsoldiers. This was the gist of my posting. Ruto’s situation is not different. If the only evidence available is one showing that he “aided and abetted” the warrior network; with a substantial effect of fueling the killings and evictions, he would be nabbed. The OTP doesn’t even have to prove that Ruto masterminded or co-perpetrated the whole operation. The hypothesis on Raila’s possible involvement gets even more remote the moment you interrogate whether he wielded any possible authority on such a tribal network – enough to have substantial effect in commissioning localized evictions and killings in North Rift. The OTP operates on evidence, not ‘wide and sweeping’ or ‘overstretched’ academic hypotheses and theorems. Job,The evidence available so far did not meet the threshold to immidiately charge the two principals of our GCG. True or false (it was the scarcity of resources rather than evidence that whitled the list of suspects from 20 to 6), I am saying that status quo continues, but what if Uhuruto has been sitting on some facts, which now for their own reasons they see fit to divulge? I really think these gentlemen have not told the truth and the truth alone so far, and the marshalling of state resources in Kenya to protect them is not just about them alone, but about what else they know. As it is, they are holding the last days of this regime hostage. That can not be because of their personalities nor achievements. They are too easy to replace and life go on. Part of the money Ruto used to facillitate the resistance which made a difference on the ground came from the campaign kitty, and other party big-wigs: Now, if he can prove it was not all personal money, what is the position of the others who contributed? That is peripheral yes, but in the wide vision of this court, already abetting. (The effect of that money on the ground was evidently substantial I submit) This Peripheral role is wide enough to include availing 'campaign' funds which can be traced down to operatives/warriors who engaged in ethnic cleansing. This is why I say on the characters of these two men hang alot of other fates: It is their character which will stand between them and singing, implicating others all the way to the gallows. This is the point I am making. Raila did not wield possible authority? but he had let himself be crowned Kalenjin elder? The office of Kalenjin elder at a time when this warrior regiments were being prepared publicly under the ruse of cultural exercises is too important to ignore, especially when it is mixed with the prospect of that elder becoming the commander in chief of the armed forces of Kenya. That is more than moral support. Code: [Fight for me; when am president you will have amnesty for all]. On another plane on the levels of cultural intimacy, there is a depth here which must be faced because it spills over into politics. What young Kalenjins have sometimes called the Luo debt. Those who have argued intensely in trust with the Kalenjin male lumpen will know what I am talking about. Samoei! Arap Mibei! was the war-chant of warriors rallying to the salvation of Luos in areas like the outskirts of Nakuru. (And in between they must have done a few kikuyus in!). This blood bond, where young Luo men and Kalenjin died together CHIEFLY in national duty, has no place in the conciousness of the Luo elite under Raila, nor in the Ruto axis of Kalenjin elite. (This is why nearly all the educated consensus and commentry/narrative is that a fall out between Raila and Ruto is a fall out between their two communities! No idea about the bonds between men down below!) Job, some facts will never be availed, merely because the warrior code forbids former soldiers to rat. But if they choose the side of Judas ... ---------- This point I will make elsewhere because I conseder it outside the scope of ICC in the Hague. Ruto and Raila may have a deeper bond than the cell-mates camaraderie of Ruto and Uhuru! But their conciousness dictates they ignore it --with the risk of mutual doom.
|
|
|
Post by Titchaz on May 4, 2012 16:21:22 GMT 3
The prosecutor wants 80yrs for the guy! Taylor prosecutor seeks 80-year sentence By AFP Posted Friday, May 4 2012 at 10:34 The chief prosecutor in the trial of Charles Taylor has suggested an 80-year sentence after the Liberian former president’s conviction for war crimes, according to a document made public Thursday. www.nation.co.ke/News/africa/-/1066/1399344/-/13qh5kh/-/index.html
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 26, 2013 19:06:00 GMT 3
|
|