ICC prosecutor Luis Moreno Ocampo has now moved to conceal the fresh information gathered after March 31 from suspects Uhuru Kenyatta, Francis Muthaura and Hussein Ali. In the latest application in the lead up to the September 21, confirmation of hearings for the three, Ocampo not only wants to redact the information he is going to hand over to the three but also use anonymous summaries of witness statements.
The redactions are also meant to protect information related to ongoing investigations. All redactions are meant to protect witnesses and members of witnesses’ families from possible harm by the suspects whom the prosecutor still considers as powerful.
Ocampo has already provided the three with 14 documents which did not require any redaction, 11 of these containing incriminating evidence and three of them which are intended for use by the prosecution. “The Prosecution seeks redactions both to the face of documents being disclosed, and to the meta data accompanying the documents in accordance with the e‐Court protocol,” Ocampo says in the letter dated August 1.
Particularly intriguing is Ocampo’s application in respect of two prosecution witnesses. He wants to be authorised to disclose anonymous summaries of their statements for reasons he has confidentially communicated to the judges. He has blacked out tens of paragraphs in which he has explained the underlying reasons in respect of the two witnesses whose testimony he considers to be of vital importance to his case.
He also alerts the judges that he intends to disclose information contained in the statement of one individual whom he has interviewed as well as the screening notes of another who has undergone a screening process. This particular evidence of the latter two witnesses is meant to fulfill Article 67 (2) of the Rome Statute which requires of the prosecutor to disclose to the defence evidence in his possession which he believes shows or tends to show the innocence of the suspects.
Such evidence may also mitigate the guilt of the suspects or may affect the credibility of the prosecution evidence. In other words, this is the kind of information Ocampo would want to conceal or that which he doubts. It may as well be that of rejected witnesses. In request for the redaction largely to protect the witnesses, Ocampo requests that it affect all the three suspects in all instances because as he says, the suspects are known to be familiar and friendly with each other and that their lawyers work together.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment