New ICC ruling worries Ruto

NAIROBI. – A ruling by the ICC judges that admits testimony by hostile witnesses against Kenya’s Deputy President William Ruto could complicate his case. The DP’s legal and political teams are very concerned by this latest development. He has spoken to his lawyers about it and the likely consequences.

The ruling was delivered late on Wednesday and admitted into evidence the prior testimony of hostile witnesses in the ongoing crimes against humanity case at The Hague. According to Ruto’s allies, this has enhanced the prospects of a conviction against the DP and his co-accused, journalist Joshua Sang.

“What I can tell you is that there are concerns about what is going on at The Hague,” a URP lawmaker told the Star. “We are going to ask the DP to appeal the ruling.”

Alex Whiting, a professor of international law at Harvard University, summed up the ruling as “a very significant decision for the case”.

In Parliament, some 40 Jubilee lawmakers tore into the ICC, accusing The Hague-based court of sabotaging the administration’s efforts to unite local communities.

“First, it confirms something that the prosecution has been saying for years, that witnesses were improperly interfered with in the Ruto case,” Whiting told the Star yesterday.

In Parliament, some 40 Jubilee lawmakers tore into the ICC, accusing The Hague-based court of sabotaging the administration’s efforts to unite local communities.

They said the decision by the ICC trial judges to admit recanted witness statements as evidence against Deputy President Ruto was part of a plot to break up the Jubilee Alliance ahead of the 2017 polls. “The Chamber completely discounted the importance of credible evidence in criminal trial, thereby obliterating basic tenets of justice, marking a new low in the court’s determined descent into travesty,” the MPs said.

In their ruling, the three-judge Bench agreed with Prosecutor Bensouda that there was a systematic scheme to interfere with witnesses in the case.

The Chamber said this gave “rise to the impression of an attempt to methodically target witnesses in order to hamper the proceedings”. – The Star