Monday, June 3, 2013

International Criminal Court sets William Ruto, Joshua Sang trial for September 10


Deputy President William Samoei Ruto (left) and former radio journalist Joshua Sang both facing charges of crimes against humanity at the ICC. (Photo:File)
By Biketi Kikechi
Nairobi, Kenya: The international trial of Deputy President William Ruto is now likely to be heard in Kenya or Tanzania.
This follows a landmark decision of theInternational Criminal Court (ICC) Trial Chamber V(A) recommending to the ICC Presidency that it may be desirable to hold the start of trial and other portions thereof, to be determined at a later stage, in Kenya or, alternatively, in Tanzania.
The recommendation could have implications on the other ICC case against President Kenyatta, who has also applied to have his case moved to a location within or near Kenya citing the pressures of office.
 Ruto and his co-accused — radio presenter Joshua arap Sang — are charged with various counts of crimes against humanity springing from the communal violence that erupted after the December 2007 elections. The chamber’s recommendation was made following their 24 January 2013 request and after obtaining observations from the parties and participants, as well as the relevant authorities.
In February, ICC Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda told the court that she had no objection to holding the opening of the case either in Kenya or Tanzania.
Monday, the court said the recommendation made by Trial Chamber V(A) was only a step in the procedure. The final decision on the issue would be made in due course by the judges in plenary session.
New witnesses
“While the seat of the Court is in The Hague (Netherlands), where the Court considers that it would be in the interests of justice, it may decide to sit in a State other than the Netherlands,” said the statement.
Ruto had further asked for his absence during part of the trial citing his commitments as the Deputy President, a request that is similar to the one made by President Kenyatta.
Earlier in the day Monday, the court posted another decision on its website announcing that Ruto’s trial would start on September 10 and that the prosecution had introduced three new witnesses.
The prosecution was also allowed to add “two other important witnesses” but the judges rejected a request to include three new witnesses.
The case was earlier scheduled to begin last month but the defence sought more time to prepare its case.
Judges rejected three new witnesses despite the fact that the prosecution had expressed fears that three others initially lined up had not given assurances they would testify during trial.
The prosecution submitted that it had recently discovered three new witnesses, namely P-564, P-571 and P-572, whose evidence is said to be both “critical” to the prosecution’s case and offering “new and compelling evidence” which “will ultimately aid the Chamber in its determination of the truth and serve the interests of justice”.
“The prosecution explains that as a result of security concerns two of its ‘most critical witnesses’, as well as another witness, have been unable to provide assurances that they will testify at trial,” stated court records.
For this reason, the statement said, the prosecution had continued investigating “in the hope of finding new witnesses to replace” the aforementioned witnesses, in the event that this became necessary.
Witness list
It alleges that the lateness in the discovery of the three persons as potential witnesses is not to be attributed to the prosecution, but rather resulted from the “exceptional and precarious circumstances of the case”.
The prosecution’s request to add “two other important witnesses”, namely P-111 and P-471, to its witness list was also granted with judges ordering the prosecution to disclose their identity to the defence by June 10. The prosecution submitted the addition “will serve to establish the truth”, and that it “will not unduly prejudice the defence” because these witnesses were initially already on the prosecution’s witness list.
Further the material related to these witnesses had previously been disclosed to the defence in January 2013 and November 2012, albeit in redacted form, prosecution added.
Last year, the ICC asked Tanzania, Kenya and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda to make submissions on whether the Kenyan cases could be heard in Arusha.
The trial chamber led by Judge Kuniko Ozaki wanted the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda to advise whether the facilities in Arusha for the Rwanda genocide trials would be suitable for the ICC.
The ICC chief prosecutor, legal representatives for the victims, and the ICC registry were also asked for their opinions.
The ICTR wound up its work and it has four trial chambers in Arusha with support infrastructure of detention cells and offices.
Locally
During early proceedings President Kenyatta and former head of the civil service Francis Muthaura who has since been acquitted asked the court to consider moving their case to Arusha but the judges told them to apply to the ICC Presidency.
Ruto and Sang also applied to ICC presidency on the possibility of having the venue of the cases changed with Attorney General Githu Muigai also writing to the ICC requesting to have the cases heard locally.

No comments:

Post a Comment