|
Post by b6k on Sept 19, 2013 8:51:24 GMT 3
Except for the things I have found in the papers, among them the very significant witness naming of the Kiambaa church arsonist leaders, I am in the dark with regard to what transpired at the court on Tuesday. I look forward to catching up; perhaps on Thursday. My thinking is that this is the time Kenya needs to get serious and try to deliver to the fullest ... since ICC does not really have ropes to pull against Stephen Chemalang’, Emmanuel Bull, Kimepo and the rest of the bull, Kenya would be lighting a bulb here if she offered to start a parallel case against all those mentioned, starting with these 3 irritations - but not just to offer to start, but to start and prosecute thoroughly, with the victims of the violence in mind - especially those victims that are also witness and that know who did the torching! I think ICC would be impressed. MankWhen Khan was insisting on the witness to be reminded out the consequences of lying I wondered what he had up his sleeve. As you might be aware, the internet was awash with the name of the witness and one blog even had a photo alleging it was of the woman. The people she named were actually the Kiambaa 4 that were acquitted of the charge of burning the church with the judge saying that it was police incompetence that lost the case for the victims. In fact Chemalang' was confirmed by prosecution witnesses of having helped people that were being burnt. The key prosecution witnesss then PW4 is alleged to be the same witness 0536 at the Hague who lied to court in revenge for Chemalang having sacked her from his campaign team and refusing to help here relatives who were in distress. Now if it turns out that 0536 and PW4 in the Kiambaa 4 case is the same person, she should be preparing to cool her heels in jail for perjury. In the meantime a fifth witness due in the Hague this week withdrew from the case. Indeed Kamale, I have also seen other blogs that are connecting witness 0536 to a witness PW4 in a case that was heard in Nakuru KE from 2008 to 2009. That case had 33 witnesses in it and if you read the judge's conclusions (yes they are freely available on the 'net posted by bloggers who believe there are no consequences to their actions) you can see testimony which appears to be identical to witness 0536's testimony at the ICC. The problem for the witness is that the KE case wasn't redacted & did not conceal witness identities. The same harsh admonition the witness suffered in the KE may come to play out at the ICC once the defence questions her...this time with dire consequences you refer to... Mank, I missed yesterday's proceedings, but I was following on Twitter and could see the chamber was going into a lot of private sessions as requested by the OTP. I always assumed that there would no longer be any need for private sessions once the cases went to court since the general KE public ends up missing a lot of the juicier details at the ICC that prove guilt. I hope the defense relies less on these private sessions as they go about proving the innocence of their clients...
|
|
|
Post by b6k on Sept 19, 2013 8:58:55 GMT 3
Just copied below, in verbatim, from the star newspaper to remind the Jubilee propagandist, on Jukwaa and elsewhere, what the ICC case is all about. She said the attackers doused the mattresses placed against the church walls with petrol before setting them alight. Leting then threw the empty jerrican on the roof of the church. "Everyone inside tried to get some way out there. It was very difficult," the witness said. At the church door Kalenjin youths blocked those who attempted to run out of the burning church. She said the youths were armed with clubs, big sticks, arrows and axes. She managed to escape but almost went mad when she heard fleeing children being thrown back to die in the blaze. As she ran, she saw an old man hacked to death with an axe. She saw another woman whom she knew being raped. "Its difficult to tell but I will tell because that's a woman I knew. She was struck by an axe. She was raped.... I lost it then," she told the court. The witness claimed she saw other people being axed and speared outside the church. She said she saw Brown strike a man she knew who was then speared and slashed. The witness presented a sketch of where the man was hiding before he was fished out by Brown and his accomplices. She said many people who took refuge in the church had used bicycles to ferry their families there. Photos of the burnt bicycles piled on one side of the church were also presented. "I removed all my clothes and was left entirely naked. I did this to scare off the youths. In Kalenjin culture it's a curse when a woman strips naked in front of young men. I wanted to save my brother's life," she told the court. The witness said Brown then threw the seriously injured man to her telling her to "take that trash." He had an arrow lodged in his head and he had been nearly decapitated. "He took a few steps and then fell to the ground," she said. She then dragged the man through forest trails to a nearby tarmac road. Nobody disputes that there were a lot of horrific events during PEV. The key question is, are the people in the dock really the ones who ought to be there? From the evidence we have been allowed to hear thus far it appears that Chemalang'& his pals (who have already been acquitted in KE) are the ones who are on trial, not Ruto or Sang. It will be interesting to see how the OTP will tie in the two co-accused into the violence that was unleashed at Kiambaa & elsewher in RVP. Don't forget the ICC was very selective about the events it decided to hear/charge at The Hague. According to the ICC's selective thinking, there were no horrific events in either Kisumu or Kibera...
|
|
|
Post by b6k on Sept 19, 2013 9:08:51 GMT 3
Whomever characterized this court as a Kangaroo Court (must have been Mank) must have known exactly how it operates. The prosecution after hitting a brick wall with its witnesses, it is now calling for blanket trials in total darkness. It has not escaped any keen observer that the OTP in a very desperate last minute effort is recruiting new witnesses whose evidence has not been scrutinized and measures made to protect their identity. This is how and why the first witness' identity could be told only a sentence into her testimony. Instead of OTP owning up to its failings, it is trying to transfer blame to Kenya's parliament and Kenyans at large, and to a very large extend to the accused. Kenya's parliament is an independent institution which does not answer to any court. Its mandate is to make laws for the good of Kenya and its citizens. In so doing, it needs not make any reference to anyone To therefore drag it into the ICC proceedings is to simply buy time by an OTP that is obviously clueless. Many who can remember the then prosecutor Moreno Ocampo's declaration that the Kenyan cases would serve as an example to the rest of the world may want to know what he exactly meant. Did he mean an example as in how to frame someone, try them in darkness and pass a verdict behind dark-drawn curtains or how not to be fair? The truth is, the OTP has failed not only to independently investigate and identify credible witnesses, but to also protect those they already have so as to allow the court proceedings to be carried out in the manner prescribed by the law. Shifting blame will not wash. Njakip's trial continues. ~~ Mwalimumkuu @nyumbakubwa ~~ Mwalimumkuu, I don't think you finished the last sentence. Did you mean to say "Njakip's trial continues to unravel"?
|
|
|
Post by b6k on Sept 19, 2013 9:18:21 GMT 3
Are the MPs hanging @ the Hague, making ludicrous comments continually helping the Ruto and Sang cases? I didn't think so. And just like the proposed local tribunal, lots of people told them so. Told them that it wasn't a wise strategy. But did they listen? Hardly. KK, I have to agree with you that the MPigs aren't helping Ruto/Sang's cause much. Whether they are there on their dime, they're actually squandering our time as parliament is back in session & they're getting salaries for doing absolutely nothing. But, hey, I suppose they're used to doing just that anyway. I just hope HE Uhuru Kenyatta won't go to The Hague with the entire cabinet in tow...
|
|
|
Post by b6k on Sept 19, 2013 9:31:30 GMT 3
... On a separate note, the translators at the ICC have proven to be rather horrible at their work. ... Question: Where did the people who were there that morning spend the night before? Swahili response: Tulikuwa na wakongwe, kwa hivyo tuliwaachia wakongwe kanisa .... Translation: We had some courageous people .... Hawangepata mkalimani maarufu kweli? I must wonder if some things the translator said actually came from the witness ... like "I had gone to a feast before going to the church." Even the Nigerian judge independently picked on the indipendence of the translator from the speaker, noting that the translator started talking before the speaker was done. Mank, I missed that bit of drama! Maybe the translators have also been coached. If jerry cans can turn into gourds & calabashes, khaki shorts to leaves, we may soon be hearing Njakip's beads & chicken bones being presented by the OTP The MPigs in the video posted by KK do have a point. It may have been better for the ICC to hire Kenyans to translate our peculiar Swahili which is being lost in translation in a big way (it's not only KE that hires its own to enjoy a good gravy train!). I wouldn't go as far as saying a witness residing in ELD was speaking Sheng though...
|
|
|
Post by b6k on Sept 19, 2013 15:37:38 GMT 3
|
|
fimbo
Junior Member
Posts: 60
|
Post by fimbo on Sept 19, 2013 16:55:07 GMT 3
Mank,
All the OTP has to show is that: 1. The atrocities were organized and committed by a "group" for a common purpose 2. Ruto being the leader of the "group", is presumed GUILTY, at the very least by omission by failing prevent said atrocities by "his" foot soldiers.
I think Ruto is fooling himself if he does not realize that the burden of proof is on him to show that there was no common purpose. In this regard, recanting and disappearing witnesses are not helping his case.
|
|
|
Post by jakaswanga on Sept 19, 2013 18:10:31 GMT 3
Mank, All the OTP has to show is that: 1. The atrocities were organized and committed by a "group" for a common purpose2. Ruto being the leader of the "group", is presumed GUILTY, at the least by omission by failing prevent said atrocities by "his" foot soldiers. I think Ruto is fooling himself if he does not realize that the burden of proof is on him to show that there was no common purpose. In this regard, recanting and disappearing witnesses are not helping his case. Damn right Fimbo! My fellow teacher but administrative senior, M-Mkuu, is running away with himself here I am afraid. There is need to tend to some detail, before we remove Njakip's head from his torso totally ! A SHORT REMINDER: {for long reminders, please google Njakip's promiscuity on the subject right here on Jukwaa} Someone here should bother to publish Article 25(3)a of the Rome Stature in full. www.icc-cpi.int/en_menus/icc/situations%20and%20cases/situations/situation%20icc%200109/Pages/situation%20index.aspxAnd too the articles on murder --7(1)(a/d/h) should be clearly stated here on this thread. Once these are comprehended in full, the relevance of the Kiambaa harrowing testimony may begin to sink in. THERE ARE SIX COUNTS IN TOTAL in the original confirmation. But recently I gathered the bench allowed the OTP to institute additional charges. I do not yet know what these are, and under which article/s. But I presume they are not any less tame than the solid six. It might be important here, to consider the evidence and ponder the reasons why Kosgey was not indicted, and the rest of the cases met the pre-trial chamber threshold. What WAS THE COMMON PLAN? Do we, as Kenyans, deny there was a common plan? If there was, still does not mean Ruto was part of it! But I think it is Bensouda's plan to prove Ruto was the central axis in it. I have not yet heard KHAN qc argue there was no common plan --that is, that the NETWORK is a figment of the poorly creative imagination of the incompetent Ocampo! Neither have I heard him intimate that the expulsion of the 1/2 a million or so 'madoadoas' from the RV was inadvertent, arising from no COMMON PURSPOSE BY A CLEARLY IDENTIFIABLE GROUP, that it was at best merely a question of an overenthusiastic disorganised mass action of 'unled' mobs of spontaneous youth!
|
|
|
Post by jakaswanga on Sept 19, 2013 18:21:44 GMT 3
Nobody disputes that there were a lot of horrific events during PEV. The key question is, are the people in the dock really the ones who ought to be there? From the evidence we have been allowed to hear thus far it appears that Chemalang'& his pals (who have already been acquitted in KE) are the ones who are on trial, not Ruto or Sang. It will be interesting to see how the OTP will tie in the two co-accused into the violence that was unleashed at Kiambaa & elsewher in RVP. Don't forget the ICC was very selective about the events it decided to hear/charge at The Hague. According to the ICC's selective thinking, there were no horrific events in either Kisumu or Kibera... It will be interesting to see how the OTP will tie in ... as you pinpoint! That is the crux of the matter and why it is, according to me, paramount to scour over the said articles of the criminal statute when men are charged with crimes against humanity. ---Common plan, command control, abetting, facilitating, distinct and identified 'group'/organisation against another equally distinct and identifiable [coded lingo for Kalenjin vs Gikuyu?] Remember Ekaterina Trendafilova and her ilk [Kaul of Germany dissenting] found enough legal grounds under the said statute to confirm the charges. Well, she is no godess of law, but at the same time neither is she a lay caucasian nincompoop infatuated by the aura and aroma of an Argentine' beguiling latino machismo! (however stale!) :-Xs
|
|
|
Post by mank on Sept 19, 2013 18:27:21 GMT 3
Mank, All the OTP has to show is that: 1. The atrocities were organized and committed by a "group" for a common purpose2. Ruto being the leader of the "group", is presumed GUILTY, at the least by omission by failing prevent said atrocities by "his" foot soldiers. I think Ruto is fooling himself if he does not realize that the burden of proof is on him to show that there was no common purpose. In this regard, recanting and disappearing witnesses are not helping his case. Comeon Fimbo! You don't really mean that, do you? My school in law has been through uncountable hours sitting infront of the TV on Saturday watching the America's real world mystry program, 48 hours. With that background I know that the burden of proof is on the prosecution. All the defense has to do, in good courts, is create reasonable doubts. A court does not send a person to Jail based on the theory of prosecution. Chemalang' was himself a candidate for some office. For his guilt to translate to Ruto's guilt, their association has to be sufficiently argued by the prosecution. But even without Chemalang's guilt, it would be a stretch for the court to assume that the Kalenjin could only have been under Ruto's command to do those things they did. The commanding role of Ruto will need to be evident, not assumed.
|
|
fimbo
Junior Member
Posts: 60
|
Post by fimbo on Sept 19, 2013 18:32:30 GMT 3
I think it is even worse for Ruto on WHO the leader was/is. An organized group must have leadership. If Ruto is not the leader then that is the same as saying there was no organized group.
OTC can (a.) finger him (b.) By elimination, show that he is the only man left standing or (c.) he is the only "leader" before the judges and he is "good enough".
|
|
fimbo
Junior Member
Posts: 60
|
Post by fimbo on Sept 19, 2013 18:41:10 GMT 3
Mank, All the OTP has to show is that: 1. The atrocities were organized and committed by a "group" for a common purpose2. Ruto being the leader of the "group", is presumed GUILTY, at the least by omission by failing prevent said atrocities by "his" foot soldiers. I think Ruto is fooling himself if he does not realize that the burden of proof is on him to show that there was no common purpose. In this regard, recanting and disappearing witnesses are not helping his case. Comeon Fimbo! You don't really mean that, do you? My school in law has been through uncountable hours sitting infront of the TV on Saturday watching the America's real world mystry program, 48 hours. With that background I know that the burden of proof is on the prosecution. All the defense has to do, in good courts, is create reasonable doubts. A court does not send a person to Jail based on the theory of prosecution. Chemalang' was himself a candidate for some office. For his guilt to translate to Ruto's guilt, their association has to be sufficiently argued by the prosecution. But even without Chemalang's guilt, it would be a stretch for the court to assume that the Kalenjin could only have been under Ruto's command to do those things they did. The commanding role of Ruto will need to be evident, not assumed. Mank, You are right to the extent that if the OTP fails to show that the atrocities were committed by a "group" for a common purpose then NJAKIP walks.
|
|
|
Post by mank on Sept 19, 2013 19:02:47 GMT 3
Question: Where did the people who were there that morning spend the night before? Swahili response: Tulikuwa na wakongwe, kwa hivyo tuliwaachia wakongwe kanisa .... Translation: We had some courageous people .... Hawangepata mkalimani maarufu kweli? I must wonder if some things the translator said actually came from the witness ... like "I had gone to a feast before going to the church." Even the Nigerian judge independently picked on the indipendence of the translator from the speaker, noting that the translator started talking before the speaker was done. Mank, I missed that bit of drama! Maybe the translators have also been coached. If jerry cans can turn into gourds & calabashes, khaki shorts to leaves, we may soon be hearing Njakip's beads & chicken bones being presented by the OTP The MPigs in the video posted by KK do have a point. It may have been better for the ICC to hire Kenyans to translate our peculiar Swahili which is being lost in translation in a big way (it's not only KE that hires its own to enjoy a good gravy train!). I wouldn't go as far as saying a witness residing in ELD was speaking Sheng though... B6K,It is here, from around minute mark 15. I think the translators are just not versed in the language ... not just the Kenyan dialect. Something like "Courageous people" for "Wakongwe", jameni! Only a kangaroo court does things this way! I think it is "Vinyasa" that got translated into "leaves" ... the translator was guessing its something vegetative, probably relating "nyasa" with "nyazi." Its strange that no one on team Ruto raised objections to that, as I think it was material. I know the court would have had to listen, if Khan had a grasp of the language. The man can raise a stink! So much so that often its uncomfortable waiting to hear the judges take of his "prayers."
|
|
|
Post by b6k on Sept 19, 2013 21:23:50 GMT 3
Nobody disputes that there were a lot of horrific events during PEV. The key question is, are the people in the dock really the ones who ought to be there? From the evidence we have been allowed to hear thus far it appears that Chemalang'& his pals (who have already been acquitted in KE) are the ones who are on trial, not Ruto or Sang. It will be interesting to see how the OTP will tie in the two co-accused into the violence that was unleashed at Kiambaa & elsewher in RVP. Don't forget the ICC was very selective about the events it decided to hear/charge at The Hague. According to the ICC's selective thinking, there were no horrific events in either Kisumu or Kibera... It will be interesting to see how the OTP will tie in ... as you pinpoint! That is the crux of the matter and why it is, according to me, paramount to scour over the said articles of the criminal statute when men are charged with crimes against humanity. ---Common plan, command control, abetting, facilitating, distinct and identified 'group'/organisation against another equally distinct and identifiable [coded lingo for Kalenjin vs Gikuyu?] Remember Ekaterina Trendafilova and her ilk [Kaul of Germany dissenting] found enough legal grounds under the said statute to confirm the charges. Well, she is no godess of law, but at the same time neither is she a lay caucasian nincompoop infatuated by the aura and aroma of an Argentine' beguiling latino machismo! (however stale!) :-Xs Jakaswanga, might that not be a case of GIGO...garbage in, garbage out?
|
|
|
Post by b6k on Sept 19, 2013 21:33:44 GMT 3
Mank, I missed that bit of drama! Maybe the translators have also been coached. If jerry cans can turn into gourds & calabashes, khaki shorts to leaves, we may soon be hearing Njakip's beads & chicken bones being presented by the OTP The MPigs in the video posted by KK do have a point. It may have been better for the ICC to hire Kenyans to translate our peculiar Swahili which is being lost in translation in a big way (it's not only KE that hires its own to enjoy a good gravy train!). I wouldn't go as far as saying a witness residing in ELD was speaking Sheng though... B6K,It is here, from around minute mark 15. I think the translators are just not versed in the language ... not just the Kenyan dialect. Something like "Courageous people" for "Wakongwe", jameni! Only a kangaroo court does things this way! I think it is "Vinyasa" that got translated into "leaves" ... the translator was guessing its something vegetative, probably relating "nyasa" with "nyazi." Its strange that no one on team Ruto raised objections to that, as I think it was material. I know the court would have had to listen, if Khan had a grasp of the language. The man can raise a stink! So much so that often its uncomfortable waiting to hear the judges take of his "prayers." Mank, I'm not sure whether the Ruto team has any Kenyans in it. The only counsels who raised objections to the translations were Kenyans...Nderitu (Victim's lawyer) on the prosecution side & Katwa Kigen (Sang's lawyer) on the defence side. It's a pity the judges have decided to do everything "in camera" so we will no longer be able to see how the Swahili language is further mauled at the ICC..
|
|
|
Post by b6k on Sept 19, 2013 21:53:03 GMT 3
Now that the ICC case 1 is being conducted under a veil of secrecy we no longer have the privilege of watching the proceedings. Sadly, we will miss Karim Kahn's rebuttal of witness 0536 which promised to be a thriller. Here is the full press conference that was held on the eve of day 1 at the ICC in The Hague.
First HE The Registrar of the ICC, Fatou Bensouda of the OTP with their respective Q&A sessions:
...followed by Karim Kahn & Katwa Kigen, jointly for the defence & Wilfred Nderitu (victims' lawyer) & their respective Q&A sessions:
I like the way Nderitu widens the scope of the 2007/8 PEV to 1992 & 1997...
|
|
|
Post by mank on Sept 19, 2013 22:12:12 GMT 3
Comeon Fimbo! You don't really mean that, do you? My school in law has been through uncountable hours sitting infront of the TV on Saturday watching the America's real world mystry program, 48 hours. With that background I know that the burden of proof is on the prosecution. All the defense has to do, in good courts, is create reasonable doubts. A court does not send a person to Jail based on the theory of prosecution. Chemalang' was himself a candidate for some office. For his guilt to translate to Ruto's guilt, their association has to be sufficiently argued by the prosecution. But even without Chemalang's guilt, it would be a stretch for the court to assume that the Kalenjin could only have been under Ruto's command to do those things they did. The commanding role of Ruto will need to be evident, not assumed. Mank, You are right to the extent that if the OTP fails to show that the atrocities were committed by a "group" for a common purpose then NJAKIP walks. Fimbo, I am thinking the "common purpose" is also a controversy that will need to be supported, unless the defense does not protest it. OTP has defined its common plan, which, to parapharase, is to kill and displace a certain ethinic group from RV. However the evidence we are hearing suggest that the prime grievance of arsonists as they went on rampage was "this one is from tribe x, so they did not vote for us." OTP's common plan is a house of cards. If Khan does not go at that all guns blazing, then I will be ready to agree that it is because he is convinced the less they deal with that topic, the better for their man (or to say it differently, they must feel that Ruto did certain things that make it difficult for him to be saved with a shot at the common plan as framed". Listening to the hearings of Sept 18, I think I hear OTP now playing theatrics!
|
|
|
Post by mank on Sept 19, 2013 22:19:41 GMT 3
Mank, I'm not sure whether the Ruto team has any Kenyans in it. The only counsels who raised objections to the translations were Kenyans...Nderitu (Victim's lawyer) on the prosecution side & Katwa Kigen (Sang's lawyer) on the defence side. It's a pity the judges have decided to do everything "in camera" so we will no longer be able to see how the Swahili language is further mauled at the ICC.. Whao whao whao ... what a miscalculation by the group! I have been seing a fellow as dark as yours truly and I thought he was Kenya. Did Ruto not anticipate that witnesses would speak Kenyan (whether Swahili or English)? Another Sir Charles M yugane, or what?
|
|
|
Post by mank on Sept 19, 2013 22:33:59 GMT 3
Now that the ICC case 1 is being conducted under a veil of secrecy we no longer have the privilege of watching the proceedings. Sadly, we will miss Karim Kahn's rebuttal of witness 0536 which promised to be a thriller. Here is the full press conference that was held on the eve of day 1 at the ICC in The Hague.... I am listening to yesterday's proceedings, and the usual Khan is dressing down the court on the subject. He's not fooling around. I worry it might reach a point that, if Ruto has any desire to stop cooperating, he could use this twist as justification to do so. Further, I see many give-aways to those who witnessed Kiambaa church tragedy (as victims, arsonists or victims by-standers) as to whom 0536 is. So I doubt that private sessions are really doing much.
|
|
|
Post by mank on Sept 20, 2013 0:08:50 GMT 3
Now that the ICC case 1 is being conducted under a veil of secrecy we no longer have the privilege of watching the proceedings. Sadly, we will miss Karim Kahn's rebuttal of witness 0536 which promised to be a thriller. Here is the full press conference that was held on the eve of day 1 at the ICC in The Hague. ... Oh my goodness, B6K, I had not caught on the point you have been making till now. I thought you were talking about a veil of secrecy because of the private sessions. I am only catching now, that it is a real and total veil of secrecy (at least what I hear being requested as I am lagging behind). As Khan and Katwa Kigen say, Ocampo assured all that OTP witnesses were already secured and there was nothing anyone would do as they were not in the country. So, why would prosecution all of a sudden want the public to trust a secret process? I don't want to see the end from here, but I hope they have thrown this nonsense out in trash and proceded with giving us what we have been promised (already compromised by the private sessions ... reductions.)
|
|
|
Post by Mobimba on Sept 20, 2013 0:09:10 GMT 3
Apparently, South Africa and Nigeria, the kingpins of AU/Africa, plus Zambia have absolutely no intention of joining Kenya in pulling out of the ICC. And men of probity know that Uganda and Tanzania will never cut links with the ICC… but will continue to urge Kenya to do so as they (UG&TZ) stand to gain the most where Kenya’s current pariah status becomes official. I suspect the planned AU extraordinary summit will steer clear of any suggestion of a complete walk-out of African signatories to the Rome Statute… further embarrassing the wants of UhuRuto. The most the AU can do is issue another ‘mother of all statements’. www.standardmedia.co.ke/?articleID=2000093896&story_title=au-leaders-to-discuss-whether-to-pull-continent-out-of-the-icc
|
|
|
Post by b6k on Sept 20, 2013 10:10:29 GMT 3
Mank, I'm not sure whether the Ruto team has any Kenyans in it. The only counsels who raised objections to the translations were Kenyans...Nderitu (Victim's lawyer) on the prosecution side & Katwa Kigen (Sang's lawyer) on the defence side. It's a pity the judges have decided to do everything "in camera" so we will no longer be able to see how the Swahili language is further mauled at the ICC.. Whao whao whao ... what a miscalculation by the group! I have been seing a fellow as dark as yours truly and I thought he was Kenya. Did Ruto not anticipate that witnesses would speak Kenyan (whether Swahili or English)? Another Sir Charles M yugane, or what? Mank, the "fellow as dark as yours truly" is most likely Gambian Essa Faal. He used to sit on the OTP side before he resigned during Ocampo's tenure & joined the defense. He was actually with Karim Kahn's team that secured the acquittal for Ambassador Muthaura. He has followed his boss to try & do the same for Ruto...
|
|
|
Post by b6k on Sept 20, 2013 10:17:35 GMT 3
Now that the ICC case 1 is being conducted under a veil of secrecy we no longer have the privilege of watching the proceedings. Sadly, we will miss Karim Kahn's rebuttal of witness 0536 which promised to be a thriller. Here is the full press conference that was held on the eve of day 1 at the ICC in The Hague.... I am listening to yesterday's proceedings, and the usual Khan is dressing down the court on the subject. He's not fooling around. I worry it might reach a point that, if Ruto has any desire to stop cooperating, he could use this twist as justification to do so. Further, I see many give-aways to those who witnessed Kiambaa church tragedy (as victims, arsonists or victims) as to whom 0536 is. So I doubt that private sessions are really doing much. Mank, it is shocking, to say the least, that after months of having Njakip harp on about how we will get to see western jurisprudence at its best, his kangaroo court decides to save face (the potential of Karim Kahn poking too many holes in the OTP's case in full public view must've been too much for the judges) by drawing down the curtains on the entire testimony of the first witness. Who knows, they may decide to hold the whole trial behind closed doors at this rate! So much for Ocampo's "making an example out of KE". I will not be surprised if he finds himself hauled out of retirement to answer some very tough questions...
|
|
|
Post by kamalet on Sept 20, 2013 11:28:11 GMT 3
I have been mulling on the idea to start a new thread to discuss the goings on at the Hague but will keep my thoughts on this thread as the time ti took to get moving has led to some of the issues I wanted to discuss being here already!
The behavior of OTP in the matter of witness 0536 has been most astonishing. First they were caught flatfooted and had to rush this witness to the stand. Secondly the defence seemed all too ready to shred her evidence into small pieces of lies hence the insistence of Khan that she be warned on the consequences of lying. The unmasking of the witness was rather too easy for many and betrayed the OTP's laziness in evidence gathering as she just rendered the same evidence given by PW4 in the Kiambaa 4 case. It may be two different witnesses but the extent of coaching on how to give the evidence was quite interesting! So do not blame Kenyans for putting one and one together!
But I think all this was planned to pay into the hands of the prosecutor and he seized the opportunity well. Kenyans were waiting with bated breath for the 4 hours on prosecution evidence to see how Khan was to expose the woman for the liar she was alleged to be. Now if this allegation by Khan that she was a liar had any truth to it, then forcing the court to hear the rest of her testimony in private helped the OTP as the extent of his incompetence would not have been exposed.
The negative I see about this case being heard in secrecy is that Kenyans were promised (and repeated here in Jukwaa ad nauseum by Njakip)that the court will have matters heard in the open. The ICC outreach office even went the extra mile to buy large screen TVs for the people in the affected areas to follow the proceedings that are intended to bring justice to them. Now those TV sets are a complete waste of time as no one is seeing what is going on in the court. I would like the victims to believe that the court is after the truth and being in the centre of it all, they would like to see the truth said in the court to secure conviction for those that caused them that much grief.I do not believe they would like the wrong people jailed!
On the political front, the secrecy does the court a lot more harm for there are those that are closely following the Kenya cases around the world and not just the Kenyans and who would like to confirm the notion of a politicised court. On that score, the court should be a lot more open and allow a truthful witness to testify as well as letting those that would have lied to fall by the wayside without setting foot in court. The present decision only helps the OTP with the first witness for if she is found guilty of perjuring herself, then expect a lot more witnesses to fall away when they realise they can be jailed. I cannot help noticing that those recanting their evidence claim they were coached on how to lie!
The court will also be on the spot light depending on what I have a feeling will happen next week. The following is my own imagination of proceedings in court today:
Khan will make an application for the court to allow Ruto to return home over the weekend as Uhuru leaves the country on Sunday for the UN General Assembly in New York. The court will have two options, either to adjourn for the duration of Uhuru's absence or proceed with the hearings in Ruto's absence notwithstanding the ruling on suspensive effect by the Appeals court as was in the Bemba case. The Nigerian will be faced with a difficult one as either way Ruto will fly home. If the judge agrees to let him return home, then all is fine and helps the court's credibility. But my suspicion is that the Nigerian will decline to allow the adjournment or in absentia hearings and will order that Ruto appears in court on Monday. Ruto will in defiance proceed home and come monday the judge will be forced to issue a warrant of arrest against Ruto. Now all that is the legal stuff. However, it forms the basis of the Amicus Briefs that the court has from several African countries and will be the perfect fodder for the AU heads of State summit on October 13 in Addis to justify their vitriol on the ICC. It will also signal an immediate lack of cooperation by Uhuru on the basis that he could be arrested by the court should he appear there. Now that is a mother of stand offs which will weigh very heavily on the Nigerian.
Keep an eye on the ICC today!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 20, 2013 17:59:20 GMT 3
Ruto & Sang ICC Trial: 20 Sep 2013 - Part 1
Ruto & Sang ICC Trial: 20 Sep 2013 - Part 2
for better version from ICC here:
|
|