Kenya: Anxiety at New Trial Date for President
Fears that further delay could jeopardise witness safety, and the case itself.
By Robert Wanjala - International Justice - ICC
ACR Issue 353,
26 Jun 13

Kenyans who suffered directly in the violence that hit their country
in the aftermath of a general election in December 2007 have
criticised the latest postponement of President Uhuru Kenyatta’s trial
in The Hague

Judges at the International Criminal Court, ICC, have put the start
date back for a second time to allow Kenyatta’s lawyers enough time to
prepare their case, following a succession of failures by prosecutors
to disclose evidence punctually.

As well as Kenyatta, Kenya’s deputy president William Ruto is also to
go on trial at the ICC. Ruto is charged with journalist Joshua Arap
Sang in a case separate from that of Kenyatta, because they were on
opposing sides during the conflict.

All three face charges of crimes against humanity for orchestrating
the ethnic violence that followed the disputed result of the 2007
presidential election.

More than 1,100 people were killed and around 650,000 others lost
their homes in the violence.

People living in Kenya’s Rift Valley region, which was at the
epicentre of the unrest in late 2007 and early 2008, are worried that
the latest postponement will endanger witnesses, and could derail
proceedings altogether.

Some witnesses have informed the prosecution that they are afraid to
testify against the suspects.

ICC Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda has repeatedly complained of
interference in her work, and has criticised the Kenyan government for
failing to take a stand against witness intimidation. (See Kenya
Witnesses Face Harassment.)

In March, Bensouda had to drop proceedings against a fourth suspect,
Francis Muthaura, after a witness admitting being bribed. Muthaura,
formerly head of the Kenyan civil service, had been charged in the
same case as Kenyatta.

Maurice, a resident of the town of Nakuru in the Rift Valley,
expressed concerns about the delay which are shared by many.

“It’s legal that the defence must be given more time to prepare, but
judges should also be aware that the accused in this case is a sitting
president capable of using his power to delay or even stop justice,”
he said.

“These postponements continue to subject witnesses and victims to
intimidation and undue pressure for withdrawal from the case. The
prosecution may eventually lose all those willing to testify against
the president and his deputy, due to mounting pressure and threats
from some highly-placed quarters.”

Kenyatta and Ruto, who were elected president and deputy president in
a March 4 election, have denied interfering with witnesses and have
repeatedly pledged to cooperate fully with the ICC.

Kenyatta’s case was supposed to get under way on April 11 but judges
delayed proceedings until July 9. In April, his lawyers told judges
that the July 9 trial date was untenable, prompting the court to
reconsider the start date again.

Defence lawyers argued that the trial should not start until January
2014 because they needed more time to investigate the allegations and
the credibility of five prosecution witnesses whose identities and
full testimonies had at that point not been disclosed to them.

They also raised concerns that the prosecution had failed to disclose
what they said was “critical” evidence.

Prosecutors argued against such a lengthy postponement, pointing out
that the defence had already benefited from the initial delay to July
9. They suggested that the trial start soon after the court’s recess,
which ends in mid-August.

The prosecution also asked judges to consider the welfare of victims
and witnesses in the case.

The legal representative of 231 victims in Kenyatta’s case, Fergal
Gaynor, informed judges that of 51 victims who were consulted, 47 were
opposed to any further postponement beyond July 9.

Gaynor said the victims felt “frustration at the slow pace of the
proceedings, as well as scepticism regarding the defence's strategy in
seeking an adjournment, and concerns as to their own security and the
security of witnesses now that Kenyatta is in power”.

In their June 20 ruling, judges set November 12 as the new date, and
agreed with Kenyatta’s lawyers on the need for a second delay because
of “the volume of new evidence disclosed to the defence only in
January 2013, and the delays in disclosing the identity of a
significant proportion of the prosecution's witnesses”.

The judges considered setting the start date in early October, but
scheduling clashes with other ICC cases and a lack of courtroom space
led them to conclude that proceedings could not begin until November.

Despite the clear legal reasons for the delay, victims in Kenya fear
that the judges are making too many concessions to efforts to delay
the case, and ultimately to get it thrown out altogether.

Last month, the African Union sharply criticised the ICC and wrote to
The Hague requesting that both cases – Kenyatta and Ruto/Sang – be
sent back to Kenya to be dealt with by the courts there. That request
came just two weeks after Kenya’s ambassador to the United Nations
wrote to the Security Council asking it to get the two cases dropped
completely.

“This government is clearly determined to do anything within its
powers to abort the justice process,” Miriam, who lost her home in the
electoral violence five years ago and still lives in the Naka
displacement camp in the Rift Valley, told IWPR. “The court is more
concerned about the reasons presented by the accused than the plight
of victims in the twin criminal cases.”

Earlier this month, more than 90 victims represented in the case
against Ruto and Sang pulled out of proceedings, claiming they were no
longer confident that the process at the ICC was “beneficial” to them.
 (See Kenyan Victims Withdraw From ICC Proceedings.)

The latest trial delay has made victims even more doubtful that they
will see justice done for the 2007-08 bloodshed.

“While it’s the right for the accused and victims [to obtain] equal
justice, the president and his deputy should accept to face the trials
and clear their names once and for all,” Chege, a father of three at
Naka camp, told IWPR.


Robert Wanjala is a freelance reporter in Eldoret, in Kenya’s Rift
Valley region.

This article was produced as part of a media development programme
implemented by IWPR and Wayamo Communication Foundation.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"South Sudan Info - The Kob" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/SouthSudanKob/CAJb14oobHfEG5QMWUCR8XtWewmzPez%2BjPDDEe4Dw_Y9fcAXnGg%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.


Reply via email to