Ruto lawyer opposes ICC trials

Eldoret North MP Wiliam Ruto’s lawyers Kithure Kindiki and Katwa Kigen said the defence was not joining the government case but reserved its right to file submissions independently should the present challenge be rejected. Photo/FILE

By NATION CORRESPONDENT
Posted  Sunday, May 1 2011 at 22:22

Eldoret North MP William Ruto’s defence team has written to the International Criminal Court in support of the government’s application challenging the admissibility of the Ocampo Six cases.

Related Stories

• Hague cases set to change the 2012 election game plan
• ICC cases: Kenya denied hearing
• Hope for violence victims as Hague trial opens
• Chaos victims oppose Govt move in Hague case
• 20 witnesses lined up against Ocampo Six

Mr Ruto and Mr Joshua Arap Sang’s lawyers, in response to the order for the parties to file their response to the application, informed the Pre-Trial Chamber that it did not oppose the challenge.

However, Mr Katwa Kigen, the lawyer for the two, said whereas they supported the government’s admissibility case, the defence was not joining the government case, but reserved its right to file submissions independently should the present challenge be rejected.

While supporting the application, Mr Ruto’s lawyers said the government had clearly shown willingness to investigate the defendants. (READ: Wako orders police to probe the Ocampo Six)

Able to cover

“The notion of inability of the State covers only very exceptional scenarios, such as those where there is no central government, or where circumstances such as civil wars or natural disasters lead to the total or substantial collapse of the administration of justice or unavailability of the judicial system,” the lawyers said.

They said that the government had confirmed that the national authorities were investigating the Eldoret North MP, former Industrialisation minister Henry Kosgey and Mr Sang in connection with the same conduct and incidents, which formed the basis for the ‘Decision on the Prosecutor’s Application for Summons to Appear’.

Mr Kigen said that since the ICC prosecution had not commenced its disclosure of evidence to defence lawyers, they could not verify the extent of the evidential overlap between the ICC Prosecution investigations and those of the Kenyan authorities.