Eldoret North MP William Ruto (left, back row), Tinderet MP Henry Kosgey (centre, back row) and radio presenter Joshua Arap Sang (right, back row), during their hearing on April 7, 2011 at the International Criminal Court (ICC). Photo/AFP
By OLIVER MATHENGE omathenge@ke.nationmedia.com
Posted Friday, July 22 2011 at 11:33
Posted Friday, July 22 2011 at 11:33
Suspended Higher Education Minister William Ruto will give testimony to the Pre-Trial Chamber on September 1 during the confirmation of charges hearing, his lawyers have told the judges.
The Eldoret North MP says that he will also be calling live witnesses during the hearing to rebut accusations by Prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo that he was among those at the centre of organising and funding the 2008 post-election violence.
Radio presenter Joshua Sang has also told the court that he would also call witnesses and take the stand to give his testimony.
They argue that though the confirmation of charges hearing has a limited scope, it is only through live witnesses that they can get a fair hearing.
“The Defence notes that it has a duty to select its best pieces of evidence in order to convince the Chamber that the charges brought against Mr Ruto should not be confirmed. The Defence submits that this can only be done if the Defence is given the opportunity to call the witnesses listed in the annex to give live testimony,” Mr Ruto’s lawyers say in their argument which is similar to that submitted by Mr Sang.
The two have however asked the Pre-Trial Chamber to keep their list of witnesses confidential until the hearing.
The two who are among six Kenyans that the prosecutor seeks to have charged over the violence have also challenged Mr Moreno-Ocampo’s decision to not call live witnesses and instead use their statements for the hearing.
They argue that evidence given by live witnesses has the advantage of being subjected to cross-examination by the opposing party, and “thus having its veracity and reliability tested” and consequently, the credibility of the witness evidence is more easily ascertained.
They further argue that the witnesses who have given statements to the Prosecution implicating them are not being honest and they intend to counter “these allegations from anonymous accusers” by presenting the Chamber with testimony from people who are willing to have their integrity and the truthfulness of their word challenged in court.
Mr Ruto says that one witness has indicated that because he serves people of varying political affiliations, he is not willing to appear partisan by signing an affidavit which may be viewed as “supportive” of Mr Ruto.
“The witness has suggested that if he were asked to give live evidence before the Court, this would seem less-partisan and he would be willing to testify,” the submission reads.
Mr Sang indicates that three of his witnesses have expressed similar sentiments.
The two have submitted list of witnesses and have set out the anticipated subject matter and scope of each witness testimony.
They have also asked the court to have all the witness testify “as each one has a unique perspective” on their alleged involvement in the post-election violence.
At the same time, Mr Moreno-Ocampo has released evidence that he says “potentially vindicates Mr Ruto, Mr Sang and Tinderet MP Henry Kosgey. The evidence is mostly in form of media reports capturing a tussle between Mr Ruto and the Kenya National Commission on Human Rights over witnesses.
One of the media report was where the KNCHR witnesses claimed that they were “paid to nail Ruto”.
Also on evidence list are four photographs and a news video by one of the local TV stations.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment