ICC Kenya Investigation "Hampered by Intimidation"
Intimidation of investigators as well as witnesses blamed for shortage
of evidence in some areas.
By IWPR contributor - International Justice - ICC
ACR Issue 311, 12 Jan 12

As proceedings against six high-profile Kenyan suspects at the
International Criminal Court, ICC, approach a crucial stage, local
activists say the investigation that resulted in charges could have
gone further had it not been for intimidation and deliberate
obstructionism.

They point out that rape charges are largely absent from the list of
accusations approved by ICC judges, because investigators were
prevented from getting free and unfettered access to victims and
evidence.

Judges will decide later this month whether the prosecutor has enough
evidence for the cases, divided into two groups of three suspects
each, to proceed to trial at the ICC.

Fighting between supporters of Kenya’s Orange Democratic Movement,
ODM, and the Party of National Unity, PNU, following a presidential
election in December 2007 led to the death of more than 1,100 people
and displaced over 600,000 others, and prompted the ICC to launch an
investigation in March 2010 after the Kenyan state had failed to
initiate prosecutions itself.

Three ODM figures – members of parliament William Ruto and Henry
Kosgey and radio broadcaster Joshua Arap Sang – are charged with
crimes against humanity for orchestrating post-election violence. They
face charges including three counts of murder, persecution and
forcible population transfer.

In the second case, three senior PNU officials also face charges in
connection with the violence. Francis Muthaura, chairman of the
national security advisory committee, Deputy Prime Minister Uhuru
Kenyatta, and former police commissioner Mohammed Hussein Ali are
accused of orchestrating the violence in order to hold onto power
after the disputed election.

Threats to witnesses and to individuals cooperating with the ICC
became widespread as soon as investigations began in 2010. The threats
led some key prosecution witnesses to withdraw their testimony after
they had been interviewed by the office of the prosecutor.

“Most of the first-line witnesses were threatened; they were
intimidated,” a source close to the investigation told IWPR. “The team
had to use witnesses who were not strong enough to give evidence, they
had to collect the little evidence they could from others and even the
intimidated witnesses.”

These threats against witnesses were sufficient to cause ICC judges,
at the end of the confirmation of charges hearings in October 2011, to
appeal to the Kenyan public not to interfere in the court’s process.

Sources close to the ICC’s investigations in Kenya have told IWPR that
the prosecutor, Luis Moreno-Ocampo, and his team were inhibited by
widespread intimidation and by the government’s failure to cooperate
with their enquiries.

“Ocampo and his team met a hostile environment,” the source said. “The
state agencies were not ready to give him the cooperation he needed;
he could not get the minutes or reports he required from the
government.”

Ndungu Wainaina, director of the International Centre for Policy and
Conflict in Nairobi, agrees, saying the government openly frustrated
investigations, and some security officers in possession of crucial
information declined to give evidence, forcing the prosecutor to look
elsewhere for evidence.

The Kenyan government refused to speak to IWPR about allegations of
threats, intimidation, and failure to cooperate with ICC
investigators.

Kenyan activists believe fears of intimidation limited the scale of
the evidence the investigators could gather, and that this explains
why some offences like rape were only partially dealt with and certain
geographical locations were omitted.

IWPR approached the office of the prosecutor for its view on these
matters, but declined to comment pending the judges’ ruling on
charges, expected next week.

Some legal experts say the need to keep both investigators and
witnesses safe is reflected in the application for charges that the
prosecutor placed before judges, and in the list that judges approved
in March 2011.

The prosecutor left the crime of rape off the charge-sheet in the case
against Ruto, Kosgey and Sang, despite claims that it was committed on
a wide scale by their supporters.

Judy Gitau, programme officer for the International Commission of
Jurists, believes the prosecutor left out rape charges because of
concerns about protecting witnesses.

“The prosecutorial strategy was to expose victims as little as
possible. He was keen not to expose them to too many risks and
probably that is why he left out rape charges in Case One,” said
Gitau.

In November 2011, Sureta Chana, the legal representative of victims
falling under the Ruto/Kosgey/Sang case, filed an application with ICC
judges to hear the concerns of 126 of her clients who are unhappy at
the prosecutor’s failure to charge the three with rape, looting, and
destruction of property.

Chana accepts that much of the prosecutor’s evidence has to remain
confidential at this stage, but said her clients told her that “they
did not see ICC investigators on the ground who wanted to interview
them”.

Rape is one of the most difficult crimes to prove at the ICC.
Priscilla Nyokabi, head of Kenyan legal aid agency Kituo Cha Sheria,
says that may explain why the prosecutor avoided bringing these
charges.

“Sex offences are hard to investigate, so the prosecutor reasoned
[what chance he had of] winning the charges he brings to the court –
he settles on the charges that he could get more evidence at that
point,” Nyokabi said.

She drew a comparison with the ICC trial of former Congolese warlord
Thomas Lubanga, in which rape charges were also left out of the
prosecutor’s original charge sheet.

In the second case, against Muthaura, Kenyatta and Ali, judges
approved the prosecutor’s application for charges for rape in the town
of Nakuru, but turned down his request for rape charges with regard to
Kibera and Naivasha.

In their March 8, 2011 decision, pre-trial judges ruled that the
prosecutor “failed to provide evidence substantiating his allegation
that rape was committed as part of the attack in Naivasha”, and that
while police action in Kibera, a Nairobi slum, “resulted in deaths,
injuries and rapes”, the prosecutor had not furnished evidence that
linked the three PNU suspects to acts of rape.

See also ICC Prosecutor Urged to Seek Further Kenya Charges on the
omission of other charges including murder in Kibera.

IWPR’s source says the prosecutor’s restricted ability to investigate
deprived him of opportunities to bring stronger evidence in his
application for charges.

“With the heat that was around, he could not have had freedom to
conduct interviews in Kibera, Korogocho or Mlango Kubwa as he could
have desired,” the source said.

The stigma surrounding sexual violence is one factor that makes it
difficult to collect testimony.

“Rape is a problem in Kenya – women are shy and may not want to say
what happened to them. They also do not speak clearly about rape
ordeals,” Nyokabi said.

However, others argue that more evidence could nevertheless have been
found in the Muthaura/Kenyatta/Ali case.

“It’s very difficult to investigate rape but it is not impossible.”
Neela Goshal, a researcher for the advocacy group Human Rights Watch,
said. “We have spoken to rape victims who have identified the
perpetrators, they got [medically] tested, there is evidence rape took
place, for instance in Kibera. Sure, they raped people within homes,
and their neighbours are witnesses and they saw what was going on. The
evidence is there to prosecute people for rape.”

Wainaina defends the work of prosecution investigators in the face of
great hostility in some quarters.

“People expected to see him [Moreno-Ocampo] on the ground collecting
statements. They have to understand there were officers on the ground
who did a lot of investigations amid all these threats,” he said.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Report News ›› International Justice - ICC.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"South Sudan Info - The Kob" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/SouthSudanKob?hl=en.

Reply via email to