By EMEKA-MAYAKA GEKARA gmayaka@ke.nationmedia.com
Posted Saturday, January 28 2012 at 22:30
Posted Saturday, January 28 2012 at 22:30
Testimony from witnesses who appeared for Eldoret North MP William Ruto and journalist Joshua Sang was suspect and of little value, according to Pre-Trial Chamber II judges at the International Court of Justice.
They were persuaded that some of the witnesses, especially former GSU commandant Samson Cheramboss and Reverend Jackson Kosgei, were themselves alleged to have attended meetings at which the violence was planned, and what they said could, therefore, not offer much value to the court, according to a transcript of the judges’ decision.
The suggestion here is that the two witnesses are second-tier suspects in the case and, therefore, their evidence was treated with a pinch of salt because they could have been attempting to cover up their alleged presence in the meetings.
And also of significance is the fact that the judges were persuaded that there are substantial grounds to believe that Mr Ruto and Mr Sang participated in meetings where youths took an oath to kill members of the Kikuyu, Kisii and Kamba communities.
The meetings in question allegedly took place at Mr Ruto’s home, the Sirikwa Hotel in Eldoret, a milk plant in Molo, and at the home of Mr Cheramboss.
However, the judges held that Mr Sang may have not taken part in a December 30, 2006 meeting allegedly attended by Mr Cheramboss and Rev Kosgei.
The prosecutor alleges that Mr Ruto, Mr Sang and Rev Kosgei were present during an oath-taking ceremony at the Molo milk plant on the night of April 15, 2007. (DOWNLOAD: Sang's Final Submission)
Prosecution Witness Eight explained in detail the procedure of the ceremony, according to which Mr Ruto and other important representatives of the Kalenjin community were sprinkled with blood drawn from dogs previously slaughtered under the supervision of a traditional elder.
Mr Ruto and others allegedly took an oath “to kill the Kikuyu mercilessly, the Kisiis mercilessly, the Kambas mercilessly,” said the witness. (DOWNLOAD: Ruto's Final Submission)
But in his testimony, Rev Kosgei denied that claim, arguing that dogs are “considered abominable animals” and that the Kalenjin “don’t do ceremonies using dogs”.
The preacher also rejected the allegation, saying he was in Nairobi at that time. During the confirmation hearing, Mr Cheramboss testified that he has never been to Mr Ruto’s home.
“Given the circumstances surrounding Mr Cheramboss, in terms of his alleged involvement in the planning of the attack during the different meetings as one or more of the prosecutor’s witnesses testified, the chamber considers that the probative value to be attached to his testimony is lowered,” the judges said.
“With regard to Rev Kosgei, due to the circumstances surrounding his alleged involvement, which implies an interest in denying his presence in the meeting, his testimony will also be accorded lower probative value.”
Moreover, Rev Kosgei is reported to have made a derogatory speech during a planning meeting, passages of which are quoted in detail by a witness.
The chamber dismissed video evidence by the suspects indicating that they were in different locations, saying the tapes were not authentic.
In addition to the meetings, the prosecutor alleges that Mr Cheramboss used his para-military experience to train fighters and erect roadblocks during the violence.
And, in his testimony, Mr Cheramboss confirmed his training in the handling of weapons and erection of roadblocks.
Mr Cheramboss testified in defence of Mr Ruto while Rev Kosgei defended the journalist. Further, the judges rejected claims by the Ruto defence team that the prosecutor’s witnesses were coached. (READ: Ruto claims six witnesses were coached)
“There is no evidence to demonstrate that the witnesses were actually coached to renew and adjust all previous testimonies so that they could be almost similar and could corroborate each other,” said the judges.
The Ruto defence had also argued that the witnesses were self-confessed criminals, who participated in the post-election violence, but the judges held that they were credible and reliable.
Indeed, a reading of the decision returns a picture in which the judges retained faith in the witnesses – some of whom attended the meetings – and their testimonies.
And although no charges were brought against Mt Elgon MP Fred Kapondi over the violence, the judges seemed persuaded that he may have played a significant role, especially in the purchase of weapons.
The chamber was persuaded that he had attended one of the violence planning meetings.
Mr Kapondi has denied participation in the violence.“The chamber is satisfied that there are substantial grounds to believe that Mr Kapondi, notwithstanding his incarceration between April 17, 2007 and December 14, 2007, was in a position to arrange the purchase and supply of weapons to the network.”
No comments:
Post a Comment