|
Post by b6k on Oct 25, 2013 18:11:48 GMT 3
Mank, I didn't want to comment until I watched the video you posted above. This witness like all other prosecution witnesses before him has left the OTP looking like the proverbial ship of fools. His dodgy memory of the most fundamental aspects of his testimony points to the allegations raised by other former witnesses who claimed they were being coached on what to say in order to "stitch Ruto up"! As for nobody wanting the cases to end early, I think Uhuruto both want exactly that. Here is the press conference that Ruto held a few days ago in The Hague (big mistake! but it was probably just a knee jerk reaction once Uhuru received the concession he did from the ICC) where he was hoping he would at least get an excusal like president Uhuru: The order of preference for the Dynamic Duo as stated by WSR above therefore seems to be: (1) dismissal, (2) excusal, (3) deferral. Unlike Kamale I still suspect that as they haven't gotten their way in point 1, & have only been partially successful in point 2 (when it comes to only the president's case, & not the deputy president), if point 3 is also nixed then the duo may attempt to stop going to The Hague all together by falling back on the AU resolution. Let us not forget that 39 African nations have written identical letters to the UNSC demanding a deferral of the KE cases at the ICC: www.the-star.co.ke/news/article-140784/african-countries-write-unsc-deferral-kenyan-icc-casesThis is really a pity since, at least judging from the witnesses testimonies thus far in the Ruto-Sang case, nothing seems to be sticking on Ruto & he would most likely beat this rap if he just went along with the flow...
|
|
|
Post by b6k on Oct 27, 2013 10:25:59 GMT 3
Ahem!... Ms Jendayi Frazer at Safari Park Hotel Nairobi On October 25,2013 during a Sunday Nation Interview. Photo/William Oeri ICC process will end in empty justice, says FrazerBy MUGUMO MUNENE More by this Author The ICC cases facing President Kenyatta, his Deputy William Ruto and radio journalist Joshua Sang should be dismissed because the prosecutor did not conduct credible investigations and the process will end up in “empty justice,” a former US diplomat on Africa has said. Former US Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs Jendayi Frazer says the African Union request to the UN Security Council to postpone the cases for a year should, in fact, be replaced with a dismissal of the cases.Dr Frazer was in office at the time of the disputed 2007 election results and the violence and political agreements that followed what is characterised as one of the darkest chapters in Kenya’s history and was one of the diplomats working to resolve the crisis. “I think the cases are so weak they should be dismissed. Deferral just keeps a cloud over the head of the leadership. But that said, I think you can’t have a case where you are asking the President and the Deputy President to be at The Hague. That doesn’t make any sense to me,” she said. Dr Frazer revealed in an interview with the Sunday Nation that she hired a lawyer “close to the ICC” specifically to look at the evidence against President Kenyatta who, she says, informed her current position. She asked for the legal opinion because she found the case was not consistent with the US embassy briefings from the time of the crisis and her subsequent meetings with Mr Kenyatta at the time. “It did not seem consistent with my meetings with him during the post-election violence; it did not seem consistent with any of the cable traffic coming out of the US embassy at the time. They (lawyers) looked into the case and they said it’s all hearsay,” she said. She then attacked the office of the prosecutor: “Where are the forensics? Who did the actual investigation? … I feel that the victims will be most served by having cases that have real forensics so that people who actually killed them can be brought to justice and that’s not happening. The victims aren’t going to get any justice from the ICC.”
At the start of investigations in 2010, Chief Prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo, deputised by current Chief Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda, promised that he would follow the evidence and nothing more. “We will investigate the crimes, protecting the victims and respecting the rights of the suspects. We will follow the evidence, and we will prosecute those most responsible,” Mr Moreno-Ocampo said. The decision on the quality of evidence will be decided by the trial judges currently handling the matter but Dr Frazer seems unconvinced and says ICC kowtows to Western powers.The straight shooting former diplomat is pessimistic about the outcome of the request by the African Union to the Security Council on the Kenyan cases because “It’s the exact same countries who have been manipulating the ICC. The prominent five are there and this is the problem of the institutions that we have today … that they cannot serve all of us equally.” The “prominent five” are the five permanent members of the UN Security Council who have the power to veto any decision. They are China, US, Britain, France, and Russia. “And that’s how the ICC has gone so terribly wrong. Just give me one case that’s not African. They won’t go after Assad because Russia won’t let them,” she said. Syrian President Bashar al-Assad was recently suspected of using chemical weapons against civilians in a civil war in his country in which thousands have died. The US stopped short of a military strike over Russia’s opposition to such an eventuality and after an agreement that President Assad would cede his chemical weapons to international watch. Dr Frazer referred to the Syrian scenario as part of the ICC failures and called the court a “broken institution” whose prosecutor had no capacity to properly investigate crimes against humanity and had ended up with only Africans in the dock.“I think that people conflict the ICC with justice. I don’t care what the ICC decides in the Kenyan case, there will be no justice. There is no justice when it’s a political case. It was a case brought by politicians essentially failing to act because it was politics,” she said. “If somebody wants to feel empty justice, go right ahead and believe that the ICC represents that for you. The ICC is a broken institution.”
She said the ICC and especially the prosecutor’s office should be reformed for it to properly accomplish its mandate. “The people who believe in international justice should be worried that the ICC is a broken institution. The people who are worried about impunity should be saying we should do something about the office of the prosecutor. Give them the real capacity to investigate crimes against humanity, not to selectively choose politicians to bring forward,” she said. During the interview in Nairobi, Dr Frazer, however, said her views should not be taken as endorsing impunity. “The assumption is that you can’t be against the ICC and against impunity. I’m against the ICC and against impunity. I’m very, very worried about impunity which is why I’m upset with the ICC and the reasons it’s gone so terribly wrong. If the ICC was a serious court and the office of the prosecutor was a serious office, then I would have more confidence,” she said. Dr Frazer was the first high ranking diplomat to fly into Kenya after the break-out of the post-election violence in 2008. She told the Sunday Nation this week that the Bush administration for which she worked for, knew that the election contest was a close call and that most likely, the loser would cry foul but the speed and scale of the violence took Washington by surprise. CLOSE RACE “We knew that the race was very close and any time you have a close race you have the potential for discord. It’s typical in Africa that the loser is going to say there was cheating especially if the race is tight up to the very end. That wasn’t a surprise but the quickness of the descent into violence and the scale of that violence was shocking,” she said. “I was stunned because when I was flying through Europe and I stopped to buy some gadget ... I gave my boarding pass to the shop owner and he said “You are not going to Kenya, are you?” And then when I got on the plane, it was largely empty and that’s when I really knew that things were bad. The planes coming to Kenya are always full of people and no one was coming in such a short period of time,” she said. She had been dispatched to Kenya by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to find President Kibaki and his main challenger, ODM presidential candidate Raila Odinga, holding different positions. On the one hand, she said, President Kibaki said that anyone who disputed the official results should go to court while, on the other hand, Mr Odinga said he did not have any trust in the existing institutions and that his victory had been stolen. She was confident that there would finally be a truce but she returned to Washington without a breakthrough. Dr Rice would later fly to Kenya and meet the opposing sides and it would take her efforts and that of African Union and regional leaders to finally craft agreements and bring a truce. Dr Frazer says the emotions among the people who accompanied President Kibaki and Mr Odinga to meetings was palpable. “There was definitely anger. I wouldn’t say that I saw anger in President Kibaki or even Raila but the people around them had a lot of passion,” she said. “(But) I always believed a truce was possible because they all knew each other and they all had been with each other. The thing about Kenyan politics is that people change alliances rather easily.” She criticised former UN chief Kofi Annan, who brokered the Kenyan deal, saying he should not have used “the ICC as an instrument of mediation”. “That to me doesn’t seem like the criteria for an ICC case. An ICC case is that you have to raise to a certain level of atrocities sustained over many, many years. It’s not a tool of leverage in a mediation process,” she said.
Dr Frazer said that the Obama administration should not peg US relations with Kenya on the ICC cases because Washington deals with countries with major outstanding issues. She cited Russia, which she said had committed atrocities in Chechnya, China’s feud with Tibet and Saudi Arabia and said that the US has its own problems in places like Iraq. “Who really are we? We are not in fact a party to the Rome Statute. Why would we undermine our national strategic interests in terms of the relations between the US and Kenya because of a very weak case which should not have been before the ICC in the first place?” she said. www.nation.co.ke/news/politics/ICC-process-will-end-in-empty-justice-says-Frazer/-/1064/2048502/-/29sc9l/-/index.htmlNjakip, are you still rooting for empty justice?
|
|
|
Post by mwalimumkuu on Oct 27, 2013 16:40:23 GMT 3
B6K,
Frazer has been very consistent on this issue, at least as far as I know. As a person who was in a very privileged position to receive the kind of intelligence she must have received, I am sure she knows what she is saying.
I am one of those who believe that hers was and remains the right position. But as Njakip reminds us all the time, man must eat and survive, both economic and political opportunists took over and distorted everything for their own interests.
Listening to the witnesses who have so far taken the stand, one cannot fail to notice that the narrative is being written a day a time. I was not surprised to hear the last witness almost regretting why he went to the Hague to tell tales, after it dawned on him that he actually knew nothing about what he was saying. The judge swiftly moved in and cut his story short before he was wished a safe travel to exile.
~~ Mwalimumkuu @nyumbakubwa ~~
|
|
|
Post by einstein on Oct 28, 2013 1:31:34 GMT 3
Oh, I can still see several folks hoping against hope! That is 'nice', but the brutal & cold reality of ALL THINGS will soon dawn on ALL of us!!! I just LOVE ALL Kenyans, don't I?
|
|
|
Post by merkeju on Oct 28, 2013 1:32:54 GMT 3
Ahem!... Ms Jendayi Frazer at Safari Park Hotel Nairobi On October 25,2013 during a Sunday Nation Interview. Photo/William Oeri ICC process will end in empty justice, says FrazerBy MUGUMO MUNENE More by this Author The ICC cases facing President Kenyatta, his Deputy William Ruto and radio journalist Joshua Sang should be dismissed because the prosecutor did not conduct credible investigations and the process will end up in “empty justice,” a former US diplomat on Africa has said. Former US Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs Jendayi Frazer says the African Union request to the UN Security Council to postpone the cases for a year should, in fact, be replaced with a dismissal of the cases.Dr Frazer was in office at the time of the disputed 2007 election results and the violence and political agreements that followed what is characterised as one of the darkest chapters in Kenya’s history and was one of the diplomats working to resolve the crisis. “I think the cases are so weak they should be dismissed. Deferral just keeps a cloud over the head of the leadership. But that said, I think you can’t have a case where you are asking the President and the Deputy President to be at The Hague. That doesn’t make any sense to me,” she said. Dr Frazer revealed in an interview with the Sunday Nation that she hired a lawyer “close to the ICC” specifically to look at the evidence against President Kenyatta who, she says, informed her current position. She asked for the legal opinion because she found the case was not consistent with the US embassy briefings from the time of the crisis and her subsequent meetings with Mr Kenyatta at the time. “It did not seem consistent with my meetings with him during the post-election violence; it did not seem consistent with any of the cable traffic coming out of the US embassy at the time. They (lawyers) looked into the case and they said it’s all hearsay,” she said. She then attacked the office of the prosecutor: “Where are the forensics? Who did the actual investigation? … I feel that the victims will be most served by having cases that have real forensics so that people who actually killed them can be brought to justice and that’s not happening. The victims aren’t going to get any justice from the ICC.”
At the start of investigations in 2010, Chief Prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo, deputised by current Chief Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda, promised that he would follow the evidence and nothing more. “We will investigate the crimes, protecting the victims and respecting the rights of the suspects. We will follow the evidence, and we will prosecute those most responsible,” Mr Moreno-Ocampo said. The decision on the quality of evidence will be decided by the trial judges currently handling the matter but Dr Frazer seems unconvinced and says ICC kowtows to Western powers.The straight shooting former diplomat is pessimistic about the outcome of the request by the African Union to the Security Council on the Kenyan cases because “It’s the exact same countries who have been manipulating the ICC. The prominent five are there and this is the problem of the institutions that we have today … that they cannot serve all of us equally.” The “prominent five” are the five permanent members of the UN Security Council who have the power to veto any decision. They are China, US, Britain, France, and Russia. “And that’s how the ICC has gone so terribly wrong. Just give me one case that’s not African. They won’t go after Assad because Russia won’t let them,” she said. Syrian President Bashar al-Assad was recently suspected of using chemical weapons against civilians in a civil war in his country in which thousands have died. The US stopped short of a military strike over Russia’s opposition to such an eventuality and after an agreement that President Assad would cede his chemical weapons to international watch. Dr Frazer referred to the Syrian scenario as part of the ICC failures and called the court a “broken institution” whose prosecutor had no capacity to properly investigate crimes against humanity and had ended up with only Africans in the dock.“I think that people conflict the ICC with justice. I don’t care what the ICC decides in the Kenyan case, there will be no justice. There is no justice when it’s a political case. It was a case brought by politicians essentially failing to act because it was politics,” she said. “If somebody wants to feel empty justice, go right ahead and believe that the ICC represents that for you. The ICC is a broken institution.”
She said the ICC and especially the prosecutor’s office should be reformed for it to properly accomplish its mandate. “The people who believe in international justice should be worried that the ICC is a broken institution. The people who are worried about impunity should be saying we should do something about the office of the prosecutor. Give them the real capacity to investigate crimes against humanity, not to selectively choose politicians to bring forward,” she said. During the interview in Nairobi, Dr Frazer, however, said her views should not be taken as endorsing impunity. “The assumption is that you can’t be against the ICC and against impunity. I’m against the ICC and against impunity. I’m very, very worried about impunity which is why I’m upset with the ICC and the reasons it’s gone so terribly wrong. If the ICC was a serious court and the office of the prosecutor was a serious office, then I would have more confidence,” she said. Dr Frazer was the first high ranking diplomat to fly into Kenya after the break-out of the post-election violence in 2008. She told the Sunday Nation this week that the Bush administration for which she worked for, knew that the election contest was a close call and that most likely, the loser would cry foul but the speed and scale of the violence took Washington by surprise. CLOSE RACE “We knew that the race was very close and any time you have a close race you have the potential for discord. It’s typical in Africa that the loser is going to say there was cheating especially if the race is tight up to the very end. That wasn’t a surprise but the quickness of the descent into violence and the scale of that violence was shocking,” she said. “I was stunned because when I was flying through Europe and I stopped to buy some gadget ... I gave my boarding pass to the shop owner and he said “You are not going to Kenya, are you?” And then when I got on the plane, it was largely empty and that’s when I really knew that things were bad. The planes coming to Kenya are always full of people and no one was coming in such a short period of time,” she said. She had been dispatched to Kenya by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to find President Kibaki and his main challenger, ODM presidential candidate Raila Odinga, holding different positions. On the one hand, she said, President Kibaki said that anyone who disputed the official results should go to court while, on the other hand, Mr Odinga said he did not have any trust in the existing institutions and that his victory had been stolen. She was confident that there would finally be a truce but she returned to Washington without a breakthrough. Dr Rice would later fly to Kenya and meet the opposing sides and it would take her efforts and that of African Union and regional leaders to finally craft agreements and bring a truce. Dr Frazer says the emotions among the people who accompanied President Kibaki and Mr Odinga to meetings was palpable. “There was definitely anger. I wouldn’t say that I saw anger in President Kibaki or even Raila but the people around them had a lot of passion,” she said. “(But) I always believed a truce was possible because they all knew each other and they all had been with each other. The thing about Kenyan politics is that people change alliances rather easily.” She criticised former UN chief Kofi Annan, who brokered the Kenyan deal, saying he should not have used “the ICC as an instrument of mediation”. “That to me doesn’t seem like the criteria for an ICC case. An ICC case is that you have to raise to a certain level of atrocities sustained over many, many years. It’s not a tool of leverage in a mediation process,” she said.
Dr Frazer said that the Obama administration should not peg US relations with Kenya on the ICC cases because Washington deals with countries with major outstanding issues. She cited Russia, which she said had committed atrocities in Chechnya, China’s feud with Tibet and Saudi Arabia and said that the US has its own problems in places like Iraq. “Who really are we? We are not in fact a party to the Rome Statute. Why would we undermine our national strategic interests in terms of the relations between the US and Kenya because of a very weak case which should not have been before the ICC in the first place?” she said. www.nation.co.ke/news/politics/ICC-process-will-end-in-empty-justice-says-Frazer/-/1064/2048502/-/29sc9l/-/index.htmlNjakip, are you still rooting for empty justice? Jendayi Frazer served under President George W. Bush as the special assistant and senior director for Africa from 2001 to 2004. In 2004 she became the first American female ambassador to South Africa, and from 2005 to 2009 she was the assistant secretary of state for African affairs. Currently, Frazer is a distinguished service professor at Carnegie Mellon University. crimes committed by Americans in Iraq under George Bush, which Jendayi Frazer was serving under, the whole reason you will understand why she has a problem with justice
|
|
|
Post by mank on Oct 30, 2013 1:20:34 GMT 3
How does a witness fail to be sure that he attended a particular presidential campaign rally but but be absolutely sure that he had so and so say such and such at the same meeting?
I hate the distractions, by Frazers and AUs. Its the trial stupid.
|
|
|
Post by kamalet on Oct 30, 2013 9:03:49 GMT 3
How does a witness fail to be sure that he attended a particular presidential campaign rally but but be absolutely sure that he had so and so say such and such at the same meeting? I hate the distractions, by Frazers and AUs. Its the trial stupid. Mank That is the charade we have to put up with! The candidates that could easily remember the dates had problems remembering the venue of the meetings! So now a new strategy...remember what was said, do not remember the date and the venue does not really matter! Kamale As for Jendai - she was an exchange undergraduate student at the University of Nairobi and proceeded to teach at the university before returning home and taking up her diplomatic job. So she clearly knows Kenya and the people behave!
|
|
|
Post by mank on Oct 31, 2013 7:28:39 GMT 3
Kamali,
Thanks for filling me in about that sister. I have always felt that she's closer home than her looks; 7th sense, I must say. Still I don't want her messing with the show.
I am still catching up to this show over by the Rhine.
Now I gather that the reason Sang is over there is because he ran some "Hannity Live" kind of show. Interesting then that he's in for the whacking, but "Hannity" is still going, inflaming, insulting, profiling, and all you can imagine ... its a buggy buggy world ... you can't do on Kafiran soil whathem do in You Ass o' Ace ... so don't copy them, and for breaking this simple commandment, hey, Sang has to answer.
We are going to a private session. Again!!!!!!!!!
|
|
|
Post by kamalet on Oct 31, 2013 8:11:01 GMT 3
Kamali, Thanks for filling me in about that sister. I have always felt that she's closer home than her looks; 7th sense, I must say. Still I don't want her messing with the show. I am still catching up to this show over by the Rhine. Now I gather that the reason Sang is over there is because he ran some "Hannity Live" kind of show. Interesting then that he's in for the whacking, but "Hannity" is still going, inflaming, insulting, profiling, and all you can imagine ... its a buggy buggy world ... you can't do on Kafiran soil whathem do in You Ass o' Ace ... so don't copy them, and for breaking this simple commandment, hey, Sang has to answer. We are going to a private session. Again!!!!!!!!! Funny you quote Hannity as I am watching live on TV this morning!!!! I agree if you listen to Hannity, you would then consider the case against Sang a travesty.......unless of course there is a smoking gun in his case him calling for the killing of kikuyus!
|
|
|
Post by mank on Nov 1, 2013 4:11:09 GMT 3
Kamali, Thanks for filling me in about that sister. I have always felt that she's closer home than her looks; 7th sense, I must say. Still I don't want her messing with the show. I am still catching up to this show over by the Rhine. Now I gather that the reason Sang is over there is because he ran some "Hannity Live" kind of show. Interesting then that he's in for the whacking, but "Hannity" is still going, inflaming, insulting, profiling, and all you can imagine ... its a buggy buggy world ... you can't do on Kafiran soil whathem do in You Ass o' Ace ... so don't copy them, and for breaking this simple commandment, hey, Sang has to answer. We are going to a private session. Again!!!!!!!!! Funny you quote Hannity as I am watching live on TV this morning!!!! I agree if you listen to Hannity, you would then consider the case against Sang a travesty.......unless of course there is a smoking gun in his case him calling for the killing of kikuyus! That smoking gun is what I am listening for. I thought the current witness was the real deal, but he's turning out to be a particular disappointment to OTP. ... So far all I have heard is that Sang: - Aired a program on KASS FM - Used a particular language (which Sang himself has indicated would be a Kalenjin language as he was addressing himself to the Kalenjin issues) - Seemed to be leaning ODM - Embraced certain views that were leaning ODM - Did not like it when callers had opinions contrary to the ones he channeled through his program (brings to mind another journalist with a show - Bill O'Reilly of O'Reilly Factor) - Callers used seudonyms ... just like on Jukwaa. - Would conclude sessions with some statement reflecting what the callers had said in that session Like other witnesses before him, he cannot remember anything particular that substantiates the general claims he makes about Sang's conduct on Radio. But again what follows OTP's failure to make the witness remember the allegations he gave OTP to qualify as a valuable witness is a long private session ... perhaps that's where Sang's goose gets cooked? In all, it seems to me that the court will spend a day listening to anything, including nothing. Somebody should play them some good music - there is really a lot of good music in the world. Update:- Perhaps I wrote too fast. The prosecution has fireworks through this witness - what's unclear is if they are still going for Ruto & Sang, or whether their evidence is pointing at others who have not been summoned by the court.
|
|
|
Post by mank on Nov 7, 2013 7:52:15 GMT 3
I seem to be the only one not too bored by this subject so far ... even Ruto is happier "attending to matters of state" than sitting there all day while Tower of Barbel deliberates on what to agree is what he did. I don't know how he can feel so comfortable outside that courthouse when a prosecution witness speaking in Swahili cannot figure when he's misinterpreted, and the guys questioning him cannot tell when either side is misinterpreted either. Go interpreters! Make yourselves heard.
|
|
|
Post by mwalimumkuu on Nov 7, 2013 8:20:21 GMT 3
I seem to be the only one not too bored by this subject so far ... even Ruto is happier "attending to matters of state" than sitting there all day while Tower of Barbel deliberates on what to agree is what he did. I don't know how he can feel so comfortable outside that courthouse when a prosecution witness speaking in Swahili cannot figure when he's misinterpreted, and the guys questioning him cannot tell when either side is misinterpreted either. Go interpreters! Make yourselves heard. Mank,It is not just you. The drama that is this trial continues to play out. The so called international justice has literally been turned on its head. We have witnesses attesting to events that they never even attended but heard of them from neighbors, friends etc. One wonders, what exactly are they witnessing on? It is becoming very clear that the prosecution came up with their own evidence then brought in fellows who were drilled to confirm the evidence. That is why many of the witnesses sing like birds when under examination in chief but completely collapsed under cross examination by the defense. You must have noticed how some of them have tried to be too clever for their own good when faced by the defense lawyers. The whole thing is ridiculously looking too mechanical. ~~ Mwalimumkuu @nyumbakubwa ~~
|
|
|
Post by mank on Nov 7, 2013 15:42:06 GMT 3
Mank,It is not just you. The drama that is this trial continues to play out. The so called international justice has literally been turned on its head. We have witnesses attesting to events that they never even attended but heard of them from neighbors, friends etc. One wonders, what exactly are they witnessing on? It is becoming very clear that the prosecution came up with their own evidence then brought in fellows who were drilled to confirm the evidence. That is why many of the witnesses sing like birds when under examination in chief but completely collapsed under cross examination by the defense. You must have noticed how some of them have tried to be too clever for their own good when faced by the defense lawyers. The whole thing is ridiculously looking too mechanical. ~~ Mwalimumkuu @nyumbakubwa ~~ Mwalimumkuu, I get the sense that Mr. President is seeing through all the clutter. Shaka tu ni when he asks a question and does not realize that the witness answers a totally different question - so he gets satisfied that he just got important info. ... although I think he gets a second chance, when defense gets their turn with the "witness", that whatever he understood to be a response to his question was nowhere close. The interpreters! What a disaster!
|
|
|
Post by b6k on Nov 8, 2013 8:24:04 GMT 3
I seem to be the only one not too bored by this subject so far ... even Ruto is happier "attending to matters of state" than sitting there all day while Tower of Barbel deliberates on what to agree is what he did. I don't know how he can feel so comfortable outside that courthouse when a prosecution witness speaking in Swahili cannot figure when he's misinterpreted, and the guys questioning him cannot tell when either side is misinterpreted either. Go interpreters! Make yourselves heard. I wouldn't go as far as saying I'm bored with the ICC saga, but at least here on Jukwaa there has to be an element of ICC fatigue. A cursory glance at the KE Politics page 1 shows almost half the threads are related to ICC matters in one way or another ignoring everything else that's going on in KE. Has anyone noticed the Huduma Centers launched yesterday providing a one stop shop for all government services citizens require? Even the BBC has given it a mention: www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-24855993Did anyone realize Tullow Oil had gone offline after the "natives" started making demands for more jobs (70% I think was the number) yet many of these oil industry jobs are way over the heads of most Kenyans & end up going to West Africans! I see on Twitter that Tullow will commence drilling again today. Has anyone noted KE has granted 30,000 work permits to foreigners in a couple of years? Did someone mention a row over an allegedly draconian media bill? These were the sort of matters we used to debate on Jukwaa before ICC obtained near full spectrum dominance on this forum. So to me ICC is more of let the dead bury the dead...ie, let the moribund court bury its dead cases... Merkeju, thanks for the Iraq videos. You will soon learn that those who make the rules do not have to necessarily live by them. It's the dividends of empire...
|
|
|
Post by podp on Nov 8, 2013 14:05:26 GMT 3
I seem to be the only one not too bored by this subject so far ... even Ruto is happier "attending to matters of state" than sitting there all day while Tower of Barbel deliberates on what to agree is what he did. I don't know how he can feel so comfortable outside that courthouse when a prosecution witness speaking in Swahili cannot figure when he's misinterpreted, and the guys questioning him cannot tell when either side is misinterpreted either. Go interpreters! Make yourselves heard. I wouldn't go as far as saying I'm bored with the ICC saga, but at least here on Jukwaa there has to be an element of ICC fatigue. A cursory glance at the KE Politics page 1 shows almost half the threads are related to ICC matters in one way or another ignoring everything else that's going on in KE. Has anyone noticed the Huduma Centers launched yesterday providing a one stop shop for all government services citizens require? Even the BBC has given it a mention: www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-24855993Did anyone realize Tullow Oil had gone offline after the "natives" started making demands for more jobs (70% I think was the number) yet many of these oil industry jobs are way over the heads of most Kenyans & end up going to West Africans! I see on Twitter that Tullow will commence drilling again today. Has anyone noted KE has granted 30,000 work permits to foreigners in a couple of years? Did someone mention a row over an allegedly draconian media bill? These were the sort of matters we used to debate on Jukwaa before ICC obtained near full spectrum dominance on this forum. So to me ICC is more of let the dead bury the dead...ie, let the moribund court bury its dead cases... Merkeju, thanks for the Iraq videos. You will soon learn that those who make the rules do not have to necessarily live by them. It's the dividends of empire... 1st red high light it was a great event. the civil service will have to style up and serve the citizens better going forward. this is what PORK and deputy PORK need to be applauded for as it is happening under their watch. a thread dedicated to this would solicit many positives and I agree with you that we need to notice such ground shaking events. 2nd red high light actually the beef locals have is that their top honchos, namely their Hon members of parliament and elite, have been colluding with Tullow to get cow boys living in Karen supplying even that which locals could do. we need to empower our locals so that wealth eventually spreads. remember that school play that was banned for depicting locals could only be hired for watchmen jobs while their land, wealth and real jobs were taken by the foreigners? it may be prudent to take a leaf from how Ghana in Africa and Norway in Europe goes about dealing with local population when wealth, in both cases oil, is found. much as we are emulating the Nigerian example we need to pause and probably re-access our strategy. 3rd red high light this requires sustained pressure on our Parliamentarians just as in USA the President and his Democratic party are being bashed every day at every turn on the Obama Care. 4th red high light couldn't agree with you more. let PORK and deputy PORK plus poor Sang fry in their own fat. Mo1 told us 'nguruwe hujikaanga kwa mafuta yake'
|
|
|
Post by b6k on Nov 8, 2013 15:07:28 GMT 3
I wouldn't go as far as saying I'm bored with the ICC saga, but at least here on Jukwaa there has to be an element of ICC fatigue. A cursory glance at the KE Politics page 1 shows almost half the threads are related to ICC matters in one way or another ignoring everything else that's going on in KE. Has anyone noticed the Huduma Centers launched yesterday providing a one stop shop for all government services citizens require? Even the BBC has given it a mention: www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-24855993Did anyone realize Tullow Oil had gone offline after the "natives" started making demands for more jobs (70% I think was the number) yet many of these oil industry jobs are way over the heads of most Kenyans & end up going to West Africans! I see on Twitter that Tullow will commence drilling again today. Has anyone noted KE has granted 30,000 work permits to foreigners in a couple of years? Did someone mention a row over an allegedly draconian media bill? These were the sort of matters we used to debate on Jukwaa before ICC obtained near full spectrum dominance on this forum. So to me ICC is more of let the dead bury the dead...ie, let the moribund court bury its dead cases... Merkeju, thanks for the Iraq videos. You will soon learn that those who make the rules do not have to necessarily live by them. It's the dividends of empire... 1st red high light it was a great event. the civil service will have to style up and serve the citizens better going forward. this is what PORK and deputy PORK need to be applauded for as it is happening under their watch. a thread dedicated to this would solicit many positives and I agree with you that we need to notice such ground shaking events. 2nd red high light actually the beef locals have is that their top honchos, namely their Hon members of parliament and elite, have been colluding with Tullow to get cow boys living in Karen supplying even that which locals could do. we need to empower our locals so that wealth eventually spreads. remember that school play that was banned for depicting locals could only be hired for watchmen jobs while their land, wealth and real jobs were taken by the foreigners? it may be prudent to take a leaf from how Ghana in Africa and Norway in Europe goes about dealing with local population when wealth, in both cases oil, is found. much as we are emulating the Nigerian example we need to pause and probably re-access our strategy. 3rd red high light this requires sustained pressure on our Parliamentarians just as in USA the President and his Democratic party are being bashed every day at every turn on the Obama Care. 4th red high light couldn't agree with you more. let PORK and deputy PORK plus poor Sang fry in their own fat. Mo1 told us 'nguruwe hujikaanga kwa mafuta yake' Podp, oops! I see you were clearer here on the first red high light than on the thread in question. We agree, basi... On the second red highlight there were two arguments made by the locals. One that they should supply foodstuffs & other material to the drilling plant from within the county but the second one was that they should have dibs on 70% of ALL jobs, & not just of the watchman variety. Methinks any county in KE would be hard-pressed to find qualified individuals to fit such a high quota of jobs in the oil drilling industry. 3rd highlight, again I agree. This is democracy in action. Silence is not an option. There must always be one side checking & balancing the other... 4th red high light...Let us not forget that the ICC cases ALL remain personal challenges despite Amina's noises to the contrary
|
|
|
Post by b6k on Sept 8, 2014 9:34:32 GMT 3
Watching KTN's "The Way It Is" earlier this morning I was gobsmacked to hear Senator Omar Hassan admit that within the global human rights community with whom he still maintains contact with via mailing lists there's a growing consensus that the time has come to man up and admit they got things wrong on the Kenyan ICC cases. He confirmed that he's aware of allegations that he was involved in coaching witnesses (which he denied) but he hinted that Bensouda is not to blame. Ocampo was overcome by media hype and his superstar status in KE (massive security detail, live media coverage of any word he uttered,a convoy of limousines at his beck and call for a man who used to nondescriptly walk the streets of The Hague unnoticed). In short, Omar said it's time for the ICC to admit its mistake, apologize, and save its dignity.
Now some of us have argued right from day one of the Ruto trial that the slamdunk evidence was wanting. With witnesses now openly admitting they lied for money to "stitch Ruto up" whilst Uhuru's case is still mired in "no evidence" to proceed stage, it's high time the lady starts her song.
The late Justice, Hans Peter Kaul, stands vindicated when he voted against the majority (the other 2 judges) when he said both Kenya situation cases did not meet the threshold to be tried at The Hague.
Tick tock, tick tock...
|
|
|
Post by mank on Sept 9, 2014 2:44:58 GMT 3
Watching KTN's "The Way It Is" earlier this morning I was gobsmacked to hear Senator Omar Hassan admit that within the global human rights community with whom he still maintains contact with via mailing lists there's a growing consensus that the time has come to man up and admit they got things wrong on the Kenyan ICC cases. He confirmed that he's aware of allegations that he was involved in coaching witnesses (which he denied) but he hinted that Bensouda is not to blame. Ocampo was overcome by media hype and his superstar status in KE (massive security detail, live media coverage of any word he uttered,a convoy of limousines at his beck and call for a man who used to nondescriptly walk the streets of The Hague unnoticed). In short, Omar said it's time for the ICC to admit its mistake, apologize, and save its dignity. Now some of us have argued right from day one of the Ruto trial that the slamdunk evidence was wanting. With witnesses now openly admitting they lied for money to "stitch Ruto up" whilst Uhuru's case is still mired in "no evidence" to proceed stage, it's high time the lady starts her song. The late Justice, Hans Peter Kaul, stands vindicated when he voted against the majority (the other 2 judges) when he said both Kenya situation cases did not meet the threshold to be tried at The Hague. Tick tock, tick tock... If Omar Hassan was involved in coaching witnesses he better be prepared for a process that does not end with a mere "sorry."
|
|
|
Post by b6k on Sept 9, 2014 9:35:08 GMT 3
Mank, you echo the thoughts of Ahmednassir Abdulahhi who recently said that not only should Bensouda drop her cases, but that those who framed the charges should be prepared to face the full force of the law for cooking them up in the first place. All this at a time when Makau Mutua is facing charges of perjury in a US court and Gladwell Otieno has the makings of yet another personal challenge in the KE courts (which I must add is not directed at her but will most definitely affect her) it seems like Karma is in action in its own way... Bensouda Should Admit That She Has No Case By AHMEDNASIR ABDULLAHI There are two scenarios trial lawyers can’t stand in any court. A clueless and dithering prosecutor who doesn’t know when to throw in the towel and a judge who can’t read the riot act to a prosecutor to close his/her case. Both are great obstacles to a fair criminal trial because the incompetence of these two critical players in the justice system compromises the integrity of the court and the rights of the accused. Both scenarios compromise the long-term viability of the courts and can go a long way in irreparably damaging the very rationalisation of the courts as dispensers of justice. These two scenarios have been the defining characteristic of the trial of President Uhuru Kenyatta and Deputy President William Ruto at the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague. Everyone knows the historic rationalisation of the cases by the previous ICC Prosecutor, Luis-Moreno Ocampo. Keen and objective followers of the trials expected the cases to crumble long ago and were surprised by their longevity and endurance to overcome a number of legal obstacles. All, however, appreciated that it wasn’t the weight of the evidence that always propelled the cases to the next level. The cases were principally propelled by strong political will and the determinant forces who controlled all their facets and launched the trials along a political trajectory. The shocking news this week about the two cases doesn’t surprise Kenyans. We have seen too many comedies of errors from both the court and the prosecutor. First in the Ruto case, we have all along witnessed situations where the prosecutor is rarely able to conduct a criminal trial in line with known international standards. She has broken every rule in the book. Witnesses have been fleeing as if the courtroom is on fire. How can a trial continue when witnesses retract their testimony en mass, give very serious reasons and implicate parties who undertook the exercise? Can’t the prosecutor see that her case is an embarrassment to her office, the court and the entire international justice system? The parties advance two conflicting theories. The prosecutor contends that witnesses have been intimidated or even bribed. The defence contends that the witnesses were initially paid money, coached to implicate the Deputy President and promised a life of luxury and leisure in the West. The truth of the matter is that the prosecutor didn’t do any investigation and instead relied on witnesses that were paid for by local NGOs. PRE-SELECTED The disintegration of the cases is explainable by appreciating that both trials are “designer” cases. Both Ruto and Uhuru were identified and pre-selected by a panel of local and international players and tailor-made evidence created to implicate them. That is the historic foundation of the two trials and the same inevitably undermined the cases. President Kenyatta’s case is equally puzzling and more mortifying for the prosecutor. We have a prosecutor who, time and again, has told the court that mistakes were made in the case and no evidence exists to start a trial. What does the court do? Instead of closing the file, the court allows the prosecutor to engage and indulge in a sickening judicial jamboree. She makes one application after another on the president’s bank accounts, properties, title deeds, M-Pesa accounts etc. To what end? Why should the court preoccupy itself with endless applications that have no bearing on a case the prosecutor admits is over! If the evidence doesn’t exist, why is the court reluctant to terminate the case? Two important issues need to be addressed by both Uhuru and Ruto once Bensouda’s misadventure in Kenya ends. First, they should never forget the victims of the clashes. A fund must be created to address the many victims who are crying for help. Second, they must bring to justice the “panel” and actors who falsely conspired to frame them. This is not a revenge mission. But there is a need to stop the political enterprise of a group of Kenyans who play god on the lives of others. The principal players who bought witnesses as political and commercial enterprises must face the full force of the law. Senior Counsel Ahmednasir Abdullahi is the publisher, Nairobi Law Monthly macalin91@gmail.com www.nation.co.ke/oped/Opinion/Bensouda-should-admit-that-she-has-no-case/-/440808/2443936/-/b8u8l6/-/index.html
|
|
|
Post by mank on Sept 10, 2014 4:13:11 GMT 3
Mank, you echo the thoughts of Ahmednassir Abdulahhi who recently said that not only should Bensouda drop her cases, but that those who framed the charges should be prepared to face the full force of the law for cooking them up in the first place. All this at a time when Makau Mutua is facing charges of perjury in a US court and Gladwell Otieno has the makings of yet another personal challenge in the KE courts (which I must add is not directed at her but will most definitely affect her) it seems like Karma is in action in its own way... Bensouda Should Admit That She Has No Case By AHMEDNASIR ABDULLAHI There are two scenarios trial lawyers can’t stand in any court. A clueless and dithering prosecutor who doesn’t know when to throw in the towel and a judge who can’t read the riot act to a prosecutor to close his/her case. Both are great obstacles to a fair criminal trial because the incompetence of these two critical players in the justice system compromises the integrity of the court and the rights of the accused. Both scenarios compromise the long-term viability of the courts and can go a long way in irreparably damaging the very rationalisation of the courts as dispensers of justice. These two scenarios have been the defining characteristic of the trial of President Uhuru Kenyatta and Deputy President William Ruto at the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague. Everyone knows the historic rationalisation of the cases by the previous ICC Prosecutor, Luis-Moreno Ocampo. Keen and objective followers of the trials expected the cases to crumble long ago and were surprised by their longevity and endurance to overcome a number of legal obstacles. All, however, appreciated that it wasn’t the weight of the evidence that always propelled the cases to the next level. The cases were principally propelled by strong political will and the determinant forces who controlled all their facets and launched the trials along a political trajectory. The shocking news this week about the two cases doesn’t surprise Kenyans. We have seen too many comedies of errors from both the court and the prosecutor. First in the Ruto case, we have all along witnessed situations where the prosecutor is rarely able to conduct a criminal trial in line with known international standards. She has broken every rule in the book. Witnesses have been fleeing as if the courtroom is on fire. How can a trial continue when witnesses retract their testimony en mass, give very serious reasons and implicate parties who undertook the exercise? Can’t the prosecutor see that her case is an embarrassment to her office, the court and the entire international justice system? The parties advance two conflicting theories. The prosecutor contends that witnesses have been intimidated or even bribed. The defence contends that the witnesses were initially paid money, coached to implicate the Deputy President and promised a life of luxury and leisure in the West. The truth of the matter is that the prosecutor didn’t do any investigation and instead relied on witnesses that were paid for by local NGOs. PRE-SELECTED The disintegration of the cases is explainable by appreciating that both trials are “designer” cases. Both Ruto and Uhuru were identified and pre-selected by a panel of local and international players and tailor-made evidence created to implicate them. That is the historic foundation of the two trials and the same inevitably undermined the cases. President Kenyatta’s case is equally puzzling and more mortifying for the prosecutor. We have a prosecutor who, time and again, has told the court that mistakes were made in the case and no evidence exists to start a trial. What does the court do? Instead of closing the file, the court allows the prosecutor to engage and indulge in a sickening judicial jamboree. She makes one application after another on the president’s bank accounts, properties, title deeds, M-Pesa accounts etc. To what end? Why should the court preoccupy itself with endless applications that have no bearing on a case the prosecutor admits is over! If the evidence doesn’t exist, why is the court reluctant to terminate the case? Two important issues need to be addressed by both Uhuru and Ruto once Bensouda’s misadventure in Kenya ends. First, they should never forget the victims of the clashes. A fund must be created to address the many victims who are crying for help. Second, they must bring to justice the “panel” and actors who falsely conspired to frame them. This is not a revenge mission. But there is a need to stop the political enterprise of a group of Kenyans who play god on the lives of others. The principal players who bought witnesses as political and commercial enterprises must face the full force of the law. Senior Counsel Ahmednasir Abdullahi is the publisher, Nairobi Law Monthly macalin91@gmail.com www.nation.co.ke/oped/Opinion/Bensouda-should-admit-that-she-has-no-case/-/440808/2443936/-/b8u8l6/-/index.htmlB6K, I remember when I was suggesting to my hommies that these cases were just scripted theatrical performances. In response they would say, "hey man, wait for Ocampo to spill the beans ... these guys were ferrying people to the war zone .... blah bla blah!" Of course they were reciting the word on the street ... about which nothing I would say would get them to entertain the idea that it was being cooked somewhere. But now what was a conjecture is validated by none other than a prosecution witness ; a witness, quite ironically, dragged into the court against own wish, at the insistence of the prosecutor, against the wise alarming counsel of the defense! What a case! Much more twisted than Cramer vs Cramer, for sure! What I wonder is whether people like AHMEDNASIR ABDULLAHI who write my view of things so eloquently today saw through the bluff those early days, or if they would have given me the same "hey, wait and see what Ocampo knows about these dirty folks." I cannot fault those who believed the hot air ... they were just missing important clues. In any case I too did not know what to expect of Ruto's case, for I could not decipher clues back then. I started to see the clues in that case following a posting by (if I recall correctly) Podp. And buoy, did we not have folks here baiting for Ruto's blood ... and therefore spinning the word from the street with the vigor of a bull! Now what? How much more show remains up the sleeve of the OTP? Egg drooping down the face of the OTP, apparently, is how the show ends ... I wonder whether the OTP sees that vision now, or if denial is their everlasting trait.
|
|
|
Post by b6k on Sept 10, 2014 20:53:24 GMT 3
Mank, as I've admitted before I was one of those who fully supported the ICC process. I fully believed that they wouldn't have requested the Ocampo 6 to present themselves to the court if there was no case to answer to. In Uhuru's case I saw cracks appear when Ocampo spectacularly failed to trap his prey in the only head to head contest the prosecutor has had with a suspect to date. But I gave them the benefit of the doubt that the OTP had more up its sleeve that would come out in the trial stage, given "The Boss" testimony by Nguyai. I was very vocal in baying for Ruto's blood on this forum. Then the Ruto/Sang trial started and it was all downhill from there. The whole case started sounding like it was built on straw to the point that closed sessions became the order of the day. Uhuru's case is yet to begin yet one wonders how he executed a common plan without co-conspiratorsas those he was summoned with were let go eons ago.
At one time the tick-tock, tick-tock counter seemed to indicate when the indictees would see the inside of the slammer, now it seems to be a countdown for when Bensouda will throw in the towel.
|
|
|
Post by mank on Sept 11, 2014 0:17:52 GMT 3
Indeed amigo B6K, I was not much different, and I think it is mainly the timelines of our evolution that differ. When the learned friend (as they would call him) Waki sealed the envelop and paved the Vague/Hague road, I was very excited. For once politicians had to be accountable to some force outside them (the envelop). Meanwhile, while the politicians were tussling with the "be vague/go Hague" decision problem, the discussion I mentioned having had with my homies took place. Both your current His Excellency and (the almost) His Excellency were mentioned as the folks destined for Hague. It made no sense to me, especially for the His Excellency - I could not see the benefit calculus that would have propelled him to do what was being alleged. The situation for the other one seemed different, so I did consider him quite a candidate. The date the envelop was opened I started questioning the whole thing, but still remained open minded for potential surprises. The story behind Sang's inclusion was very interesting - it made the ODM case very curious! Depending on how you thought about it, it seems to weaken the case, but in another way it opened wide the gate of surprises. We know the route from there - thanks to OTP 4, what had been suspicion became transparent, and with that the skepticism increased about the rest that I thought might have been valid accusations. It did not take much from then to see that there was a pattern of deceit in the two cases - when I understood the context in which circumcision ceremonies were coming into evidence in the Ruto case, then it was clear that someone was pulling shots in the ODM wing of the Kenya situation as in the PNU wing. What's mind boggling is that the OTP has had some witnesses that sounded very reliable, pointing fingers at some folks that are not currently charged - yet OTP couldn't seem more disinterested . This is funny pursuit for justice for the victims. Funny thing, as I write this I am catching up on the Monday's session. The mzungu guy from OTP is displaying his extent of ignorance of the African mind - he's having real difficulties with the nature of the fabrication that a lying witness would have devised to fix Ruto instead of directly claiming that Ruto organized chaos. I wonder whether the guy usually has as much difficulties understanding drama, as in movies on at cinemas. He does not for example see it realistic that the witness should have taken the pains of coining imagery to tell a story by implication rather than simply tell the story of Ruto's involvement as he intended it to be understood. In some things he seems to be up to something, but the more he probes the more credible it appears that the witness is truthful about his fabrication of statement given to OTP. OTP has been had! At least it could have saved face.
|
|
|
Post by b6k on Sept 11, 2014 8:10:08 GMT 3
Mank, one begins to understand what Uhuru meant when he said his case will plod along to "it's logical conclusion". Conclusion being the operative word as there seems to be little logic left in keeping those moribund cases alive. They are both beyond ICU assistance and another mechanism needs to be sought for justice for the victims.
|
|
|
Post by jakaswanga on Sept 11, 2014 19:14:44 GMT 3
b6k, I muse like this Not in the world of lawyers who have clients who can pay. The above scenario is a free meals ticket. Now, anybody out there who does not know lawyers is to milk clients? An incompetent prosecutor can simply be replaced by a competent one who can show fight, other than throw in the towel. And a judge can have quite a reason for not ordering the closure of the case. Whe he thinks, for instance, that the truth has not come out in his court, for any number of reasons than the incompetence of the prosecutor. If in deed the prosecutor is clueless and incompetent, and the judge in effect too, then of course that is our usual koti bandias –-like the famous ones Ah-Nassir has made a career wallowing through. That is why Judicial reform was a flagpost of the new constitution. We were running a rot –-all learned friends despite! Clueless and dithering Bensouda: is it because her training is wanting? That she is just a fool patronised upwards by –-who is the dictator she used to work for in Africa? Or is this sad state a symptom of something else, that if the investigations are shoddy for whatever reason, a case is non starter? I think it is also a defining characteristic of these cases, that the gathering of evidence, the fact-finding and investigation (compared to what I gathered in the Yugoslav/Bosnia cases), was the African jua-kali standard. As for the judges not reading the riot act to Bensouda, it is possible they are not satisfied Ruto and Uhuru have nothing to do with at least some of the recanting witnesses. May be they know something about how big man politics works in Africa too. Some witnesses have of course been reported to have ''permanently recanted thier lives'' You know Africa: a man like JM Kariuki just died (not murdered) like that and somehow yes .. trail just went cold. And this is repeated in nearly all African countries. So when witnesses start to recant en masse, a Judge scratches his head, his eyes pop at first, then he grins: these are not just your daily run of suspects, these are the top end of the deal.Then a judge may think it is the more foolish option, to believe a witness who is recanting after a mafia don got bail. –-I remember how Rudi Giuliani, former mayor of New York, and one time anti-mob prosecutor described the situation with humour. He grew up in an Italian neighbourhood and he understood the codes. But he had decided to clean the mess. As prosecutor he faced them, dead or recanting witnesses, and disappeared bodies. No body no murder trial. But he was a homeboy. Equally ruthless, equally tenacious; patient and single-minded he broke them down one by one, and in droves. He has been traveling around the world, this man Giuliani and his tales. Few in the law-enforcement business have not heard of him, and the depths at which truths can be hidden, and the determined work it can take to unearth such. (Eg bodies encased in concrete and sunk to the bottom of the sea!) So some judges, suspecting they are presiding over a comedy and being made fools of, will allow a lot of leeway in fishing! Even dust from crematoria tell tales: can a court accept ash exhibit of a dead body!?) I think there is a caveat necessary here. Intelligent observers tended to agree with the dissenting German judge: crimes were committed yes –-by whoever , but they do not rank as crimes against humanity. Take them back to your local bandies or whatever you call those ramshackle benches. Personally, taking notice of ½ a million Kikuyus forcefully evicted from their homes, I always wondered which legal charge ecompasses this ''ethnic cleansing''! this is a bit too cryptic for a grandmullah –-determinant forces … who controlled all the facets ... And one needs to go through the pre-trial chamber reasoning, and discredit it paragraph for paragraph before the sweeping ... all appreciated it was not the weight of the evidence. Evidence has to be INTERPRETED. And the pre-trial chamber interpretation also needs appreciation. yes on occasion it has been a laughable show. The ease with which investigators amateuristically walked into traps of cash savvy Kenyans for instance, planted grenades which would exploded in court. Nothing sabotages a trial like a shoddy investigation. Those who are used to meticulous processes were sometimes completely dumbfounded by the ''nigerian nature'' of investigations. This puts the judges in a catch 22. They know enough to think Uhuru and Ruto were deeply involved in the said events, even if these are not the genuine witnesses. An ordinary criminal trial would just throw the cases out on technicalities. But this trial, from the victims side, is also a fact-finding mission, a truth seeking commission, given the judges know Ocampo and his investigative team were Nigerian policemen at a murder scene. tailor made evidence created to implicate them. If so, let us have a blood-letting at home. A ruthless reckoning can clear a lot of clogs. (beware what you wish for here, i tell myself) But the motive for identifying Ruto and Kenyatta to be the fall guys is interesting to investigate. Also, this panel of local and international lawyers who cooked this chicanery, in the scenario advanced by Ahmednassir: why would they be so stupid as to think the stratagem would work? A bit of a lawyer would know how cooked up evidence is hard to hold stand in an international court where Qcs would wreak amok at cross examination. How do we explain the obvious stupidity of this panel of local and international lawyers in this thesis? One reason is simply because the level of recalcitrance equivocated by the Kenyan government. It has been so expressly hostile that it raised some further suspicions. Another reason is the judges can not just ignore the other bits they have heard that make sense. The Trendafilova document prophesying the threshold for a trial had been met, needs to be torn apart systematically by cerebral work, first. Another reason is simply: you set Kenyatta free and not Ruto, then you know very well you are toying with, as they say in the middle east, the locks of hell. That is why for me, it is in the interests of Kenya that a law be passed white-washing William Ruto, and rendering the ICC irrelevant. And Uhuru Kenyatta must spearhead it. –-I consider Uhuru already free from this ICC headache. This would be good, only I doubt Uhuruto have the legitimacy to go on revenge missions. It is them who could end up cut down. Michael Gichangi would be one of the fellows whose head would be on the block. I think the military would protect their own, even if retired, and not stomach some upstart hustlers giving the Major General ulcers in his old age. Aah, that reduces the field to civil society only! That is much better. For a moment I thought the grandmullah was calling for the ''real fixers'' of Ruto to be brought to book. We know who they are, and where. At the president's office! Smiling at Ruto everyday, with that mockery of a juniour who knows he is higher up the hierarchy.
|
|
|
Post by mank on Oct 2, 2014 1:45:29 GMT 3
This is significant
|
|