Habari Za Nyumbani–on jambonewspot.com

Visit www.jambonewspot.com…..your community website for more

Archive for January 23rd, 2012

Full Transcript of the ICC ruling on the Kenyan situation

Posted by Administrator on January 23, 2012

Full Transcripts
ICC Confirms Charges on 4 Kenyans
ICC at the Hague : January 23, 2012
—————————————————————————————————————–

Good morning to everyone who is joining us from in and around the Court and also to those joining us from the Republic of Kenya via the internet or otherwise.

Pre‐Trial Chamber II of the International Criminal Court composed of Judges Hans‐Peter Kaul to my right, Cuno Tarfusser to my left and I – Ekaterina Trendafilova – the Presiding Judge of this Chamber, has decided to appear in Court this morning in order to present an oral summary of its decisions concerning the charges of the Prosecutor against:

William Samoei Ruto, Henry Kiprono Kosgey and Joshua Arap Sang in Case 1 and

Francis Kirimi Muthaura, Uhuru Muigai Kenyatta and Mohammed Hussein Ali in Case 2.

Before presenting a summary of the Chamber’s findings, I would like to clarify that this is not a hearing or a Court session. The Prosecutor and the Defence teams are not present, the Legal Representatives of victims are also not in attendance, the Registrar and her colleagues are not here, and the Chamber’s legal officers are also absent from the courtroom.

Rather, the Chamber is alive to its role in ensuring that both the public at large and interested Kenyans, are duly informed of the Chamber’s decisions regarding charges emanating from the violence, which engulfed the Republic of Kenya, after the announcement, on 30 December 2007, of the results of the presidential elections.

In Case 1, the Prosecutor presented 6 counts charging the 3 Suspects with crimes against humanity of murder, deportation or forcible transfer of population and persecution.

In Case 2, the Prosecutor presented 10 counts charging the other 3 Suspects with crimes against humanity of murder, deportation or forcible transfer of population, rape and other forms of sexual violence, other inhumane acts and persecution.

The Chamber is mindful of concerns regarding the precarious security situation in parts of the country. It is also attentive of its responsibility to maintain stability in Kenya, and to fulfill its duty vis‐à‐vis the protection of victims and witnesses.

Thus, the Chamber considered it necessary to issue the two decisions on the charges of the Prosecutor on the same day and did so today before this appearance. The parties and participants were notified accordingly of the decisions.

Now I will turn to the decisions of the Chamber issued today.

After having thoroughly examined and analyzed individually and collectively all the evidence presented, the Chamber, by majority, decided to confirm the charges against four of the six suspects, as will be explained later in more detail.

Judge Kaul appended a dissenting opinion in both cases. He maintains that the ICC is not competent because the crimes committed on the territory of the Republic of Kenya during the post‐election violence of 2007‐2008 in his view were serious common crimes under Kenyan criminal law, but not crimes against humanity as codified in Article 7 of the Rome Statute.

Before turning to the task at hand, namely the summary of the Chamber’s decisions, I would like to briefly recall some of the important procedural developments of the two cases. This will give a better idea of the work of the Court, of the parties and participants in the cases.

Since 8 March 2011, when the Chamber issued its decisions on the summonses to appear, in the two cases, the Chamber has been continuously seized with a multitude of issues. Throughout the proceedings, the Chamber placed at the centre of its activities its duty to ensure the fair, expeditious and independent conduct of the entire process. The Chamber also gave substantial consideration to the protection of victims and witnesses and the various rights of the defence.

On 7 and 8 April 2011, in Case 1 and Case 2, respectively, the initial appearance hearings took place, during which the Chamber set the dates of the confirmation of charges hearing.

This stage was followed by a series of judicial activities. In particular, the Chamber facilitated the participation of victims by issuing a number of decisions in this regard.

In the first case, the Chamber received 394 victims applications for participation, amounting to 4,246 pages and admitted 327 victims as participants in the proceedings.

In the second case, we received 249 applications for participation with the total of 2,864 pages and admitted 233 victims to participate.

Moreover, for the purposes of ensuring the security of the victims and witnesses, the Chamber also took decisions on the Prosecutor’s proposals for redactions, which amounted to around 12,000 pages.

Apart from that, the Chamber also issued two decisions on the Government of Kenya’s challenges to the admissibility of the cases, in which it ultimately found the cases to be admissible. The Chamber’s decisions were upheld on appeal.

Furthermore, in readiness of the confirmation of charges hearings, the Chamber issued a number of decisions organizing and facilitating the disclosure of evidence between the Prosecutor and Defence. Together, the six Defence teams and the Prosecutor in both cases disclosed approximately 30,000 pages of evidence, for the purpose of the Chambers’ determination on the charges presented.

On 1 September 2011, the confirmation of charges hearing in Case 1 commenced, as decided during the initial appearance, and lasted for 7 days.

Similarly, as determined during the initial appearance of the Suspects in the second case, the confirmation of charges hearing in Case 2 started on 21 September 2011, , lasting for 12 days.

Thus, since the start of the cases, the Chamber has received 4,905 filings, including their annexes, from the Prosecutor, the Defence teams, Victims representatives, amici curiae and the Registry. Including today’s decisions, the Chamber has issued 252 decisions, in both cases.

This concludes the procedural background of the two cases to date.

At this point and on behalf of the Chamber, I must explain that we are not passing judgment on the guilt or innocence of the individuals. The Chamber is tasked by law only to evaluate the strength of the Prosecutor’s case at this pre‐trial stage ‐ that is to determine whether the Prosecutor presented enough evidence before the Chamber to confirm the charges. The standard required by the law, is that there are “substantial grounds to believe” that the crimes charged were committed, and that the Suspects were responsible for them.

Summary of Decision in Case 1

I will now turn to the merits of Case 1, the Prosecutor v. William Samoei Ruto, Henry Kiprono Kosgey and Joshua Arap Sang. It concerns crimes committed in Turbo town, the greater Eldoret area, Kapsabet town and Nandi Hills from on or about 30 December 2007 until the end of January 2008. I would like to underline the following:

As mentioned at the start, the Prosecutor charged Mr. Ruto, Mr. Kosgey and Mr. Sang, for crimes against humanity of murder, deportation or forcible transfer and persecution.

Mr. Ruto and Mr. Kosgey were charged as indirect co‐perpetrators, while Mr. Sang was charged as having contributed to the said crimes against humanity.

I will first summarise the findings of the Chamber on the crimes, and then the findings as to the criminal responsibility.

With respect to the crimes charged and based on the evidence placed before it, the Chamber found that the Prosecutor has established substantial grounds to believe that the crimes against humanity of murder, deportation or forcible transfer and persecution were committed. These crimes resulted in the death of hundreds, and the displacement of thousands of civilians from Turbo town, the greater Eldoret area, Kapsabet town and Nandi Hills.

The Chamber also found that these crimes were committed as part of an attack directed against particular groups, namely, Kikuyu, Kamba and Kisii, due to their perceived political affiliation to the Party of National Unity.

As to the criminal responsibility of Mr. Ruto and Mr. Sang, the Chamber found, on the basis of the evidence presented, that they are responsible for the charges levied against them.

In particular, Pre‐Trial Chamber II confirmed the charges against Mr. Ruto as an indirect co‐ perpetrator with others, pursuant to article 25(3)(a) of the Rome Statute, while it found that Mr. Sang contributed to the commission of said crimes against humanity, pursuant to article 25(3)(d)(i), to the extent specified in the written decision.

However, in relation to Mr. Kosgey, the Chamber found that the Prosecutor’s evidence failed to satisfy the evidentiary threshold required. The Chamber was not persuaded by the evidence presented by the Prosecutor of Mr. Kosgey’s alleged role within the organization.
In particular, the Prosecutor relied on one anonymous and insufficiently corroborated witness. Moreover, the Chamber determined that Mr. Kosgey suffered prejudice due to the redaction of certain dates related to a number of meetings that he allegedly attended, which proved to be essential for his defence and for the finding on his criminal responsibility.

In light of these facts and the entire body of evidence relating to Mr. Kosgey’s criminal responsibility, the Chamber declined to confirm the charges against Mr. Kosgey.

Summary of Decision in Case 2

Turning now to Case 2, the Prosecutor v. Francis Kirimi Muthaura, Uhuru Muigai Kenyatta and Mohammed Hussein Ali.

As mentioned earlier, the Prosecutor charged Mr. Muthaura, Mr. Kenyatta and Mr. Ali with crimes against humanity of murder, deportation or forcible transfer, rape and other forms of sexual violence, other inhumane acts and persecution.

Mr. Muthaura and Mr. Kenyatta were charged as indirect co‐perpetrators, while Mr. Ali was charged as having contributed to the said alleged crimes against humanity.

As to the crimes, the Chamber found, on the basis of a thorough review of the evidence individually and collectively, substantial grounds to believe that between 24 and 28 January 2008 there was an attack against the civilian residents of Nakuru and Naivasha perceived as supporters of the Orange Democratic Movement, in particular those belonging to the Luo, Luhya and Kalenjin ethnic groups.

The Chamber also found that the attack resulted in a large number of killings, displacement of thousands of people, rape, severe physical injuries and mental suffering.

Thus, the evidence established substantial grounds to believe that the crimes of murder, deportation or forcible transfer, rape, other inhumane acts and persecution were committed.

With respect to the criminal responsibility of Mr. Muthaura and Mr. Kenyatta, the Chamber was satisfied that the evidence also established substantial grounds to believe that they are criminally responsible for the alleged crimes, as indirect co‐perpetrators, pursuant to article 25(3)(a) of the Rome Statute, having gained control over the Mungiki and directed them to commit the crimes.
However, in relation to Mr. Ali, the Chamber found that the evidence presented does not provide substantial grounds to believe that the Kenya Police participated in the attack in or around Nakuru and Naivasha. Since Mr. Ali was charged with contributing to the crimes through the Kenya Police, the Chamber declined to confirm the charges against him.

The Chamber will now outline the impact of its decisions on: (1) those against whom the charges have been confirmed; (2) on those against whom the charges have not been confirmed (namely, Mr. Kosgey and Mr. Ali); (3) as well as on the victims.

As a result of the decisions issued today, Mr. Ruto, Mr. Sang, Mr. Muthaura and Mr. Kenyatta are committed to trial. They will be tried before a different Chamber for the charges confirmed. To this end, one or more Trial Chambers will be established by the Presidency of the ICC.

In this regard, the Chamber wishes to highlight that victims, who are already represented before this Chamber, may participate in the trial. Other victims will have the right and opportunity to apply to participate during the trial stage. Victims will have also the right to request reparations, should the accused persons be found guilty.

The Chamber wishes to be unequivocal and state that Mr. Ruto, Mr. Sang, Mr. Muthaura and Mr. Kenyatta are merely accused before this Court. The Chamber would like to emphasise, for the purposes of clarity, that the presumption of innocence remains fully intact.

At trial, the Prosecutor will have the burden of proving the guilt of the accused beyond a reasonable doubt, pursuant to article 66 of the Statute. Furthermore, the decisions issued today by this Chamber do not affect the liberty of the accused, which remains undisturbed.

This, however, absolutely depends on the accused’s adherence to the conditions contained in the summonses to appear, which continue to remain in full force. At this point, the Chamber recalls its previous warning to the Suspects that their continued liberty is subject to their non‐engagement in incitement of violence or hate speech.

As to Mr. Kosgey and Mr. Ali, the Chamber wishes to clarify that they are no longer Suspects before the Court. However, the Chamber recalls article 61(8) of the Rome Statute, according to which the Prosecutor may present additional evidence requesting confirmation of charges against Mr. Kosgey and Mr. Ali.

We have now concluded the summary of the Chamber’s decisions in Case 1 and Case 2. At this juncture, the Chamber would like to express a few sentiments.

Today and indeed throughout the proceedings in these cases, we have appeared in our official capacities as Judges of the International Criminal Court. Offices which task us with the sole purpose of achieving justice ‐ justice for all – for victims but equally, justice for those who appeared before the Court. This is not rhetoric but a tangible goal we all genuinely strive for.

In reaching our decisions we have reviewed all the evidence individually and collectively, regardless of its source, firmly guided by the provisions of the Court’s statutory documents. In the fulfillment of our judicial mandate, we have looked through impartial and independent lenses, in order to ascertain whether the requisite threshold in article 61 of the Statute, for confirmation of the charges has been reached.

It is our utmost desire that the decisions issued by this Chamber today, bring peace to the people of the Republic of Kenya and prevent any sort of hostility. The decisions are the result of intensive and committed judicial work of the Chamber, conducted impartially, independently and conscientiously in the interests and in the service of justice.

That concludes Pre‐Trial Chamber II’s appearance this morning. Before we leave the courtroom, on behalf of the Chamber, I would like to thank everyone who has been following this public appearance and especially the people of the Republic of Kenya.

Advertisements

Posted in Kenya | Tagged: | 1 Comment »

Kenyan suspects to appeal against ICC ruling

Posted by Administrator on January 23, 2012

By XINHUA

Three of Kenyan suspects whose charges were confirmed on Monday by the International Criminal Court (ICC)’s Pre-Trial Chamber said they will swiftly appeal against the ruling which they termed as “strange.”

Addressing a joint press conference in Nairobi after Pre-trial Judge Ekaterina Trendafilova ruled that there is sufficient evidence to try them at the Hague, William Ruto and Joshua Sang said they disagreed with the ICC ruling and expressed confidence the appeal court will vindicate them.

“The charges are strange to me. My lawyers will appeal expeditiously after analyzing the content of the ruling. The devil will be defeated. My faith is firmly rooted in God,” Mr Ruto told journalists in Nairobi.

The former minister who has traversed the country popularizing his candidature for this year’s or early next year’s elections also said he was firmly in the presidential race.

“I want to inform Kenyans that I’m firmly in the presidential race. To my worthy competitors, let us meet at the ballot and let the people of Kenya decide,” Ruto said.

“To my family especially wife Rachel, mother Sarah and children I am eternally grateful. I am persuaded and clear in my mind truth will prevail and innocence confirmed,” he added.

Head of Civil Service Francis Muthaura, through his lawyer Karrim Khan, said he will seek to appeal against the decision of the Pre-trial chamber.

“It is our view that we will prevail on appeal, and if not, when time comes and the truth comes out, this case will be expelled and Mr Muthaura will remain a free man as he is today< said Mr Khan.

Deputy Prime Minister Uhuru Kenyatta also released statement on Monday evening insisting on his innocence in the face of the charges.

“I would like to reiterate before the people of Kenya and before the entire world, that my conscience is clear, has been clear and will always remain clear that I am innocent of all the accusations that have been leveled against me. I have cooperated with the ICC throughout the process and will continue to do so because I believe in the rule of law.

“Fellow Kenyans, as I have gone through this process, it has been abundantly clear to me that this trial has not been just about the individuals charged at the ICC. This trial has been about more. This trial has been about a country trying to come to terms with itself and its past – a country that is picking up the broken pieces from this dark period,” Uhuru said in the statement.

Mr Ruto and Mr Sang, who are accused of organizing attacks on members of ethnic groups seen as incumbent President Mwai Kibaki supporters, backed then opposition presidential candidate Raila Odinga in the 2007 presidential polls.

Kibaki was hurriedly declared the winner of the 2007 disputed election, and is serving his second term as president.

The ICC Pre-trial Judges had earlier on Monday confirmed charges against four of the six Kenyan suspects believed to have played the biggest role in the 2007/08 post-election violence that took the country to the precipice of civil war.

The judges confirmed charges against Deputy Prime Minister Uhuru Kenyatta, Eldoret former Higher Education Minister Ruto, Head of Civil Service Francis Muthaura and journalist Sang.

The ICC said the prosecution provided sufficient evidence to show that Muthaura, Uhuru, Ruto and Sang are criminally responsible for crimes committed in Kenya and should be committed to a full trial.

However, charges against suspended Industrialization Minister Henry Kosgey and former Police Commissioner Hussein Ali were not confirmed after the Judges found insufficient grounds for sustaining the charges against them.

Reacting to the ruling, Sang said he did not expect the world court to confirm charges against him and expressed optimism the ICC appeals chamber will clear him of the charges.

“The court has spoken. I totally disagree with its findings. May God bless my efforts to prove my innocence,” said Sang who is popularly known by his radio fans, presents a breakfast show called “Lene Emet” (Kalenjin for what is the world saying).

The prosecutor claimed that Sang used his radio program to collect supporters and provide signals to members of the plan on when and where to attack.

Sang was a shock inclusion in the list of six suspects that was released by ICC prosecutor Louis Moreno Ocampo, a list which included three powerful politicians and two State employees.

Sang, a father of two who is neither a politician nor a state agent was hardly known at the time outside the audience of his early morning show. His profile has however been heightened with the ICC process with the name Sang becoming a household name all over the country.

Source:

Posted in Kenya | 3 Comments »

Kenyan Aid Worker Missing in Pakistan

Posted by Administrator on January 23, 2012

http://platform.twitter.com/widgets/hub.1326407570.html

A Kenyan aid worker and his Pakistani driver working for an international charity are missing, feared abducted in southern Pakistan, police said Monday.

Police official Saqib Ismail said the Kenyan works for Care International and that his car was found abandoned in the town of Naushahro Feroz on Sunday. Since then, there has been no news of about the men’s whereabouts.

Six foreigners, four of them aid and development workers, have already been abducted since July in nuclear-armed Pakistan, where US forces last year killed Osama bin Laden and which stands on the frontline of a Taliban insurgency.

The Kenyan is missing in Pakistan’s southern province of Sindh in an area badly affected by devastating floods in 2010 and again by floods in 2011 that mobilised a huge international aid operation.

Javed Suharo Jaskani, police chief of Naushahro Feroz, said the foreigner was around 40 years old and had been working in Pakistan for about a year.

“He left (the town of) Sukkur for Dadu (part of the flood-affected areas) yesterday and his car was found abandoned at Naushahro Feroz,” said Jaskani.

“His driver, who is a local person, is also missing,” he added, saying that police believe local bandits kidnapped them for ransom.

Nothing appeared to have been taken from the vehicle, with the foreigner’s laptop and bag containing his personal effects left behind, police said. – ANP/AFP

Posted in Kenya | Comments Off on Kenyan Aid Worker Missing in Pakistan

Ruto slams “strange” ICC charges

Posted by Administrator on January 23, 2012

Nairobi – Kenyan presidential candidate William Ruto on Monday dismissed as “strange” the International Criminal Court charges against him over 2007-08 post-election violence.
“Allegations against me will forever be strange to me. My legal team will move expeditiously to analyse the ruling and the actions to take,” Ruto told reporters at his Nairobi home.
“I am committed to demonstrate my innocence.”
Ruto is among four prominent Kenyans the ICC ruled on Monday should face trial over deadly post-election violence four years ago. Ruto is charged with crimes against humanity for murder, forcible transfer and persecution.
Charges against Uhuru Kenyatta, finance minister and son of Kenya’s founding president, were also confirmed.
Both Ruto and Kenyatta are seen as leading challengers to Prime Minister Raila Odinga in the next presidential election, which is due to be held by March 2013 at the latest.
Source:

Posted in Kenya | 10 Comments »

Video of the ICC proceedings in the Kenya situation

Posted by Administrator on January 23, 2012

Posted in Kenya | Tagged: | Comments Off on Video of the ICC proceedings in the Kenya situation

ICC judges confirm cases against four top Kenyans

Posted by Administrator on January 23, 2012

A picture released on December 15, 2010 by the Hague-based International Criminal Court (ICC) shows a combo of the six Kenyans, named by prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo, alleged to have masterminded the 2007-08 post-election violence that claimed 1,500 lives.

A picture released on December 15, 2010 by the Hague-based International Criminal Court (ICC) shows a combo of the six Kenyans, named by prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo, alleged to have masterminded the 2007-08 post-election violence that claimed 1,500 lives.

Pre-trial Judges at International Criminal Court on Monday confirmed charges against four of the six Kenyan suspects claimed to have played the biggest role in the 2007 2008 post-election violence that took the country to the precipice of civil war.

In a majority decision, the judges confirmed charges against Deputy Prime Minister Uhuru Kenyatta, Eldoret North MP William Ruto, Head of Civil Service Francis Muthaura and journalist Joshua arap Sang.

Charges against Tinderet MP Henry Kosgey and former Police Commissioner Hussein Ali were not confirmed after the Judges found insufficient grounds for sustaining them.

Judges Ekaterina Trendafilova and Cuno Tarfusser voted to the affirmative while Judge Hans-Peter Kaul dissented.

“After having thoroughly examined and analyzed individually and collectively all the evidence presented, the Chamber, by majority, decided to confirm the charges against four of the six suspects, as will be explained later in more detail.

“Judge Kaul appended a dissenting opinion in both cases. He maintains that the ICC is not competent because the crimes committed on the territory of the Republic of Kenya during the post‐election violence of 2007‐2008 in his view were serious common crimes under Kenyan criminal law, but not crimes against humanity as codified in Article 7 of the Rome Statute,” said Judge Trendafilova who read out the ruling.

“As to the criminal responsibility of Mr. Ruto and Mr. Sang, the Chamber found, on the basis of the evidence presented, that they are responsible for the charges levied against them.

“In particular, Pre‐Trial Chamber II confirmed the charges against Mr. Ruto as an indirect co‐ perpetrator with others, while it found that Mr. Sang contributed to the commission of said crimes against humanity.

“However, in relation to Mr. Kosgey, the Chamber found that the Prosecutor’s evidence failed to satisfy the evidentiary threshold required. The Chamber was not persuaded by the evidence presented by the Prosecutor of Mr. Kosgey’s alleged role within the organization.

“With respect to the criminal responsibility of Mr. Muthaura and Mr. Kenyatta, the Chamber was satisfied that the evidence also established substantial grounds to believe that they are criminally responsible for the alleged crimes having gained control over the Mungiki and directed them to commit the crimes.

“However, in relation to Mr. Ali, the Chamber found that the evidence presented does not provide substantial grounds to believe that the Kenya Police participated in the attack in or around Nakuru and Naivasha. Since Mr. Ali was charged with contributing to the crimes through the Kenya Police, the Chamber declined to confirm the charges against him.”

Mr Ruto held a press conference at his Karen residence immediately after the ruling had been made, where he insisted on his innocence and said his legal team will be looking at their options.

“These allegations are and will forever be strange to me. I have been and will forever be a stranger to the allegations against me. My legal team is going to analyse the different actions we will take as a team,” said Mr Ruto.

He added:” I am firmly in the (Presidential) race and to my worthy competitors let us meet at the ballot and let the will of Kenyans prevail.”

William Ruto, Henry Kosgey and journalist Joshua arap Sang each faced charges of murder, deportation or forcible transfer of the people, causing serious injury and persecution based on political affiliation.

ICC Prosecutor Moreno – Ocampo accused Mr Ruto and Mr Kosgey of planning attacks against PNU supporters as far back as December 2006.

The prosecutor claimed that Mr Sang used his radio programme to collect supporters and provide signals to members of the plan on when and where to attack.

Mr Moreno-Ocampo, in his application to the court, claimed that in response to the attacks, three “prominent PNU members and/or Government of Kenya officials Francis Kirimi Muthaura, Uhuru Muigai Kenyatta and Mohammed Hussein Ali developed and executed a plan to attack perceived ODM supporters in order to keep the PNU in power.”

Source: http://www.nation.co.ke/News/-/1056/1312504/-/yx4xk8z/-/index.html

Posted in Kenya | 5 Comments »

Kenyatta and Ruto to face ICC trial over Kenya violence

Posted by Administrator on January 23, 2012

THE HAGUE, Netherlands (AP) — International Criminal Court judges on Monday ordered four prominent Kenyans, including two potential presidential candidates, to stand trial for allegedly orchestrating a deadly wave of violence triggered by their country’s disputed 2007 presidential election.

Among the four suspects sent for trial were Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister Uhuru Kenyatta and former Education Minister William Ruto, who both are planning to run for the presidency this year.

More than 1,000 people were killed in postelection violence in Kenya after police ejected observers from the center where votes were being tallied and the electoral body declared President Mwai Kibaki the winner.

 

Posted in Kenya | 9 Comments »

 
%d bloggers like this: