I wasn’t at The Hague during the opening trial of William Ruto and Joshua arap Sang. But I watched it all in the comfort of my living room. Let me state early that I’m no trained lawyer.
What I do have a decades of experience in watching legal courtroom battles in Kenya and United States of America. I watched the case of Justice Clarence Thomas of the USA whose appointment to the Supreme Court was threatened by a fellow African American on account of sexual harassment years earlier.
The next earth breaking courtroom battle involved American celebrity OJ Simpson after he was accused of murdering White American wife after years of separation.
In the case of OJ Simpson, he fact that he tried to escape twice, once on a flight to New York and next using his four wheel Bronx made him look as guilty as sin.
In the case of Clarence Thomas vs Anita Hill, there were not credible witnesses to support a conviction. As for OJ Simpson, the one single object that the prosecution relied on to convict OJ fell apart.
The hand gloves he is supposed to have used to butcher his wife did not fit OJ’s large hands. At that point, when it was obvious that the gloves could not fit, the Defence Attorney screamed, ‘If it can’t fit, you must acquit!’
Unfortunately high profile cases involving murders, drug trafficking and acts of violence against humanity have never seen the light of in Kenya’s judicial system. Too much intimidation and state interference have ensured that Kenyans don’t get to the bottom of criminal allegations.
When Ruto case opened at The Hague, Kenyans like all other people who have followed the case in the last seven years expected more drama from the prosecution.
In fact way back in the early days of Moreno Ocampo pretrial sessions, Kenyans feared for the suspects should the then deputy prosecutor take over. Then, she looked more solid and determined. But somehow she relaxed after getting Ocampo’s coveted job.
Throughout human history, the judiciary has been a theatre of wits and battle of the minds. That is why lawyers who have been well trained in the art of logic have always mesmerized the courtrooms with their power of delivery.
The Ruto ICC case was a test case in a good legal drama. In this scenario, the opponent looks at the facts presented by the other side and does everything to destroy them at the earliest opportunity.
In this situation, there is no guesswork or second guessing. Targets must be hit in succession until the enemy is on the floor. The ICC Prosecutor Bensouda had this opportunity to demolish the defence having been first to give the opening remarks.
However, she and her deputy went to the battle field with kids’ gloves. There were no punches and no memorable punch lines to take home. Even Bensouda herself looked bored with her own performance.
Things didn’t seem to get better for Bensouda when one of her Prosecution Counsel, Anton Stynberg stood to conclude the Prosecution opening remarks.
However, instead of choosing to play the Ruto video speech he opted to play the video with no audio. This was music to the ears of the Defence Council that already had the same material complete with sound and translation.
When Stynberg made another attempt at visual display to prove that William Ruto was the kingpin of the Kalenjin nation and that he was the undisputed leader of the chaos the rocked Rift Valley, nobody was moved.
The graphic was as flat as they come. In fact the Defense Council hardly referred to the graphics. The prosecution’s nightmare finally came when Karim Khan, William Ruto’s lead counsel took to the floor.
All he did was to play three interviews of Ruto with Joe Koinange in late 2009 and two others during the 2008 crisis. In none of the video tapes, there was no trace of William Ruto the warrior.
However the most devastating tape was the one that Stynberg had masqueraded as the meeting that Ruto had convened to recruit the Kalenjin.
The medal for day went to Joshua Arap Sang. The man spoke for almost one hour without a script. He told the court that Christian upbringing could not allow him to commit the kind of crimes he is accused of.
One wonders what kind of cross examination the prosecution will subject Sang to. May be Prosecutor Bensouda still has something up her sleeves.
No comments:
Post a Comment