ICC TRIAL THREAD

`

Ruto’s actual trial starts in a matter of hours. This thread can serve for links (video or script) on the trial and related analyses for the trials.

Of preliminary concern is the trial calendar.

Initially, Uhuruto’s 3 weekly blitz was going to create a Constitutional issue, and definitely a power vacuum, at least symbolically. The duo were also likely to both be out on December 12th, a day they badly want to use to wave the anti-colonial flag. This is a day set aside to bash the convenient boogeymen – Brits – who are blamed for insisting that PEV must be punished.

Ahmednassir has already started character-assassinating the British journalist (William Pike), a co-owner of the Star newspaper. It is a silly season where independent media must be intimidated from reporting the naked truths spilling from the Hague. Non-pliant White folks must be labelled spies and espionage agents. The coded dog whistle to the tribal base — ahead of anticipated chilling details from the court — is, “msisome hiyo Star, ni gazeti ya waKoloni!

This is essentially a sophisticated form of economic intimidation and sabotage, wrapped around anti-colonial protectionism targeting British-owned media. This economic warfare is surreptitiously unfolding in the financial and other sectors as well. We are officially touted as now facing East. The anti-ICC, anti-West propaganda is in full gear. It will likely be coordinated and regulated via the good ‘ol Daily Nation, NTV, K24, and KTN safely under good hands of Uhuru’s handlers – as exemplified by their choreographed performance during the last presidential election. The pro-Jubilee media rarely seeks truth about the dalliance with China.

Uhuru’s angry and emotional saber rattling at his Ruiru backyard was a choreographed prelude to a new 4-weekly ICC case roster — which will now have the suspects intermittently alternating between the dock and Ikulu at different times. Uhuru will rule for 4 weeks followed by Ruto another 4 weeks. Each suspect will endure a subdued 4 weeks of chilling revelations at the Hague followed by 4 weeks of saber rattling at home. Its gonna be a rocky ride for sure, where Jubilee’s rhetoric of national unity will unravel in real time on camera.

Watch out for the following:

1) Possible eventual absconding by one suspect.

2) Possible emphasis of OTP on Ruto’s case – thanks to archived evidence from none other than Kibaki’s men at NIS (formerly NSIS).

3) A gradual rise in international interest in these cases as the Syrian situation slowly diffuses.

Advertisements

259 comments on “ICC TRIAL THREAD

  1. Bensouda now accuses Uhuru of eliminating Mungiki members

    International Criminal Court prosecutor Fatou Bensouda has alleged that President Uhuru Kenyatta.

    International Criminal Court prosecutor Fatou Bensouda has alleged that President Uhuru Kenyatta was involved in the killing of various senior Mungiki leaders to silence the group and cover-up his guilt.

    In a confidential ex-parte filing of July 11 available to the prosecution and the government only, but which was made public on July 29, the prosecution further alleges that Maina Njenga, as head of the Mungiki movement whose members spearheaded the violence, received payments from Mr Kenyatta after he was released from prison in October 2009.

    “He (Maina Njenga) was not released from prison until October 2009 and any transfers of money to him are likely to have occurred after this date,” argues Ms Bensouda in the July 11 submission to justify the June 1, 2007 and December 15, 2010 time frame for the records that she seeks.

    President Kenyatta strenuously denied links with the outlawed Mungiki sect in his sworn testimony during the pre-trial hearings in 2011.

    “To be a commander or anything in Mungiki, first of all I would have to be a member, and I have never been a member of Mungiki,” he had told the court during the pre-trial hearing when his lead defence counsel, Stephen Kay, led him in his evidence. “I have never mobilised or tasked Mungiki for any activity whatsoever.”

    In his testimony at the pre-trial hearings, Mr Kenyatta, then Deputy Prime Minister also denied attending any Mungiki meetings as alleged by former ICC prosecutor Luis Moreno Ocampo.
    “I did not attend any meeting with Mungiki or anybody else at State House on that day that is being referred to [November 26, 2007] or on any other date,” he had said and even threatened to sue Prof Peter Kagwanja who had written an academic paper linking him to Mungiki.

    The submission was made in compliance with the Trial Chamber’s order during the July 9 status conference.

    In it, the prosecution states that various witnesses in its custody have allegedly linked President Kenyatta to the killings of various senior Mungiki members in the years 2008 and 2009 in order to cover up his involvement with them and through them in the post-election violence.

    “While these killings are not the subject of any charges, if true, the accused’s involvement would be a powerful indicator of his guilt. These killings are also likely to have involved the expenditure of funds,” the prosecution said.

    The prosecution also alleges that the Deputy Prime Minister in the grand coalition government later footed the funeral costs of a number of Mungiki leaders as well as that of Mr Njenga’s wife, Ms Virginia Nyakio, who was shot and killed in January 2010.

    “If true, the obvious motive would be to secure the silence of the deceased’s family members,” Ms Bensouda said.

    The grave allegations against President Kenyatta are contained in the prosecution’s submission to support the temporal scope of the request for the financial and property records that Ms Bensouda wants the government to provide to her office to carry on with the trial of Mr Kenyatta.

    His defence lawyers have asked the International Criminal Court to end the trial and review the case against Mr Kenyatta, saying a key prosecution witness lied.
    In a document made public last year, President Kenyatta’s lawyer, Steven Kay, said a prosecution witness ony identified as “OTP-4, had lied about being present at meetings between Kenyatta and the Mungiki, the powerful criminal underground movement, in the run-up to the controversial 2007 presidential election and its violent aftermath.

    Mr Kay said: “After the confirmation hearing, OTP-4 resiled from his evidence and admitted he had lied and was not present at the meeting as alleged.”

    “OTP-4 has also admitted lying about another meeting at which he alleged he was present between Kenyatta and Mungiki personnel,” the defence lawyer said.

    The prosecution has misled judges by using OTP-4’s statements to get them to confirm the charges against his client, Mr Kay told the court, calling it “fraudulent evidence”.

    “For the reasons set out above, the Defence … requests the Chamber to refer the … issue of the validity of the confirmation decision back to the pre-Trial Chamber and vacate the day set for trial,” Mr Kay said.

    Ms Bensouda wants the government to cooperate with her office in obtaining Mr Kenyatta’s assets, phone details, M-Pesa transactions and value-added tax information, foreign exchange transactions and companies or businesses he owned or had interests in between June 1, 2007 and December 15, 2010.

    The prosecution has also asked the government to assist it to obtain information on assets owned by Mr Kenyatta’s family and associates as well as land or real property registered in Mr Kenyatta’s name either personally or through third parties, which might have been transferred to any other person or entity between June 1, 2007 and December 15, 2010.

    “The end date of December 2010 is the date on which summonses to appear were issued. The OTP accepts that the gathering of worthwhile evidence after this date is unlikely.”

    In the prosecution filing, Ms Bensouda argues that the records covering that period were necessary to enable her office and other parties avoid “risks (of) improper conclusions being drawn from the data.”

    The government has contested the time frame, arguing that it was too wide and irrelevant to the charges. Instead the government wants the prosecution to restrict itself to the period of the post-election violence between December 2007 and February 2008.

    But Ms Bensouda argues that the only way in which the significance of withdrawals of cash or transfers of money, land or other property at the time of the violence can be properly assessed is by comparing the records for other, more “normal” periods, in order to establish whether such withdrawals or transfers were unusual.

    PERIOD UNDER REVIEW

    “Such an analysis would place the transactions during the PEV in their proper context and enable the OTP to determine whether there is any significance to the payments or transfers made, or whether they were normal activities habitually engaged in by the accused,” said Ms Bensouda.

    The ICC prosecutor added that the shorter period advocated by the government “would prevent a proper comparison being made and would lead to an analysis based upon a narrow snapshot of time, taken out of context”.

    “In the OTP’s view, such an approach risks improper conclusions being drawn from the data,” said Ms Bensouda.

    Ms Bensouda stated that an examination of transactions during the pre-violence period was appropriate to establish the preparations Mr Kenyatta made ahead of the 2007 General Election.
    Trial Chamber V (b) consisting of judges Kuniko Ozaki, Robert Fremr and Geoffrey Henderson on July 29 upheld the prosecution’s argument for a wider time frame.

    The judges held that “investigative enquiries need not be confined merely to the immediate period of the violence”.

    “Such inquiries are also appropriately conducted with respect to any period during which it is reasonably surmised, having regard in particular to the existing evidence, that related preparatory or post-violence steps may have been undertaken by the accused,” the judges said.

    The chamber said it was satisfied the prosecution had appropriately specified and justified, “in terms of relevance and necessity”, the time frame. The trial of President Kenyatta is highly dependent on the government providing the records requested by the prosecution after certain key witnesses were withdrawn or recanted their testimonies. The Chambers has tentatively set October 7 as the opening date of the trial.

    http://mobile.nation.co.ke/news/Bensouda-now-accuses-Uhuru-of-eliminating-Mungiki-members/-/1950946/2406818/-/format/xhtml/-/e6udr7/-/index.html

  2. ICC acts tough on Uhuru’s assets, phone records


    President Uhuru Kenyatta during a televised address to the nation at State House in Nairobi.

    By WALTER MENYA

    The International Criminal Court has directed that the Kenyan government be compelled to provide the property and financial records associated with President Uhuru Kenyatta if the government was not ready to fully cooperate.

    In a ruling on Tuesday, the judges further unanimously endorsed the prosecution’s revised request that Attorney-General Githu Muigai had contested during the status conference on July 9.

    The AG seems to have lost his argument, as the Trial Chamber V (B) ruled that the prosecution’s request was right within the provisions of the Rome Statute of cooperation.

    The judges said voluntary compliance was welcome but not satisfactory and other measures, including compulsory acquisition of the records, be employed to obtain the documents.

    “The chamber considers that additional steps, pursuant to ordinary domestic investigative channels — utilizing compulsory measures where appropriate — ought to be undertaken in parallel and in a timely manner.”

    ‘ALL MEANS POSSIBLE’

    The judges further directed the prosecution to “pursue all possible means to get Mr Kenyatta’s telephone records.

    At the status conference on July 9, Mr Muigai had argued that the prosecution’s request lacked specificity.

    Out of the items prosecutor Fatou Bensouda had asked for from the Kenyan authorities, she has only received the bare minimum, with Mr Muigai citing legal and technical hurdles.

    The AG had argued that the government would “continue cooperating within the limitations placed by the law of Kenya and within the limitations placed by the administrative, managerial and other issues that affect this.”

    Of the items that Ms Bensouda had requested she was only able to obtain the details of four the vehicles Mr Kenyatta owned or regularly used between November 1, 2007 and April 1, 2008. These were obtained with the consent of the accused.

    KENYATTA’S ASSETS

    In fact, Lands secretary Charity Ngilu, in a letter that was read to the court, said that “doing the best with the resources and time available to us, we have not located any land, title or property registered under the name of Uhuru Muigai Kenyatta.”

    President Kenyatta’s trial for crimes against humanity is tentatively set to commence on October 7.

    Ahead of the commencement of the trial, the prosecution wants information on Mr Kenyatta’s assets, phone details, M-Pesa transactions and Value Added Tax information, foreign exchange transactions and companies or businesses he owned had interests in between June 1, 2007 and December 15, 2010.

    The prosecution is also hoping to get information on assets owned by Mr Kenyatta’s family and associates, as well as land or real property registered in Mr Kenyatta’s name either personally or through third parties that might have been transferred to any other person or entity between June 1, 2007 and December 15, 2010.

    http://www.nation.co.ke/news/politics/ICC-acts-tough-on-Uhurus-assets-phone-records/-/1064/2402752/-/o826h3/-/index.html

    • the futility of trying to run circles round the ICC. now there goes plan Z down the drain what next? Having experienced EVERYTHING we have over the past couple of months to keep the ICC at bay, I shudder to imagine anything worse as ‘we’ make a last-ditch effort. Poor Kenyans – may God help us
      uhuru is innocent right? personally if faced with a case of such magnitude and if innocent, I would comply with any request from the court….even if required to walk bolingo along Kenyatta avenue.

      • Akinyi,
        Plan Z could be gone but there are still Å,Ä and Ö. These guys dont give up. Why is he so afraid?

  3. Now that Uhuru Kenyatta has been caught pants down interfering with CDRs from Kenya telco companies, what do you think will happen.

    When Uhurus case was set to collapse, he has now given Bensouda the break she needed. While the chamber was unlikely to rule that she collects new evidence, this tampering and falsifying of data has all of a sudden opened a window for new evidence collection. These guys think that every case can be tampered with the way they do in kenya.

    Here it is
    http://www.nation.co.ke/news/politics/ICC-Part-of-evidence-in-Uhuru-case-forged/-/1064/2170418/-/3svjakz/-/index.html

    • looks like the OTP has succumbed to kenyan pressure and is going to lose the case against Uhuru. all or most of the witnesses have withdrawn and OTP does not appear to have a clear strategy. unless otherwise, looks like the case will get thrown out, what a waste of energy. but even worse, no justice for victims.

      looks like the only way for justice is for populations/communities to take up arms and defend themselves against warlords and aggressors

      looking at CAR, south sudan, DRC etc, all those passively sitting or running away from conflict hoping for some international intervention or miracle, should just forget it. the only way out is armed resistance and struggle. no one is going to fight for the weak or law abiding. only those with true hunger for leadership get rewarded, no matter the means used to achieve the objectives. that appears to be the reality

      • @tnk
        I have just watched the NTV news, and they have gleefully reported the case has all but collapsed. But I would treat such news with a pinch of salt, until I get confirmation from independent sources, we’ve seen how our media has been quick to report slanted news in favor of Uhuru especially where the ICC is concerned.

      • DC,
        Bensouda wants the commencement of the Kenyatta case postponed for at least three months while she adds vital evidence to nail the president.

        While some local newspapers and their zombie reporters who never do research have been quick to say that the case has all but collapsed, the Kenyatta corner is unusually mum. These are people known for noise making and chest thumping.

        Truth of the matter is that Kenyatta and his lawyers know full well that the case is not about to collapse anytime soon. Had Bensouda no case she would have withdrawn it all together the way she did with Muthauras. I believe that she has a good possibility of having a tight case against Kenyatta if given time. Not only can she dig up more evidence but the fact that Kenyatta has been interfering with witnesses is a real big deal in itself.

        Kenyans have waited for five years for the cases to commence. 3-4 more months should not be a problem as long as justice will be done.

        Interestingly, some Kalenjins are now grumbling that Ruto has been left on the hook. To them I say, read James Hadley Chase – “That’s the way the cookie crumbles”. Their man is in a tight corner and Kenyatta is not in the mood of helping him until he is sure he (Kenyatta) is completely free. By then it will be too late. Love or hate the so called dynamic duo, they really love shafting each other.

      • @mzee

        I think there are a lot of options however reading in between the lines from the OTP application

        http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1703998.pdf

        scroll to the facts on page 4

        items 6 through 9 paints a picture of a kenyan who perpetuated a rumour and tried to give it credibility by alleging that he was in fact a participant in some events. after some of the interviews, the witness has decided to state that he in fact was never in any of the functions. whether this is due to intimidation or whether he was simply fattening up rumour, is a hard call to make.

        evidently the safaricom records that UK lawyers obtained were instrumental in killing the rumour factory.

        I agree and we all know that these events happened, and that planning and sponsoring of violence happened. the problem here is that fact got fused with fiction. fiction grew legs and run ahead. the people with the real knowledge of events appear to have been sidestepped, sidelined or otherwise killed or somehow disposed off.

        the others have only snippets of details.

        all that the defence therefore needs to do, and has done, is focus on the rumors and kill them , thereby attacking credibility of witness account, as indeed they have done

        OTP is therefore forced to scramble to weed out the factual testimony from rumour.

        at the same time, the real witnesses, are progressively being intimidated and scared into silence.

        it will require a resolute eye-witness, someone who has integrity of character and also was privy to the inner working but with a strong conscience and also vivid memory/recollection of events as they happened, to take the OTP stand. unfortunately there was a mix of gold diggers, rumour peddlers and others, as well as real victims but with no real knowledge of the networks, and its going to be a tough climb for the OTP

        the interesting thing here is how fast Kenyans unravel. i think we are about to go through a very interesting 2nd phase of jubilee govt. i think we are about to learn the difference between vindication and vindictive. i dare say watch this space or rather, the bloodbath about to take place.

      • tnk, about the Safaricome records if you read carefully you will notice that what the Defence got was *fabricated* although it appears to be what got the OTP to question the witness again.

      • John

        yes i read that OTP paragraph and was not sure the intended meaning, it was a little ambiguous and could mean that either the defence presentation was a fabrication, or that the witness testimony was a fabrication. considering that the judges will tend to favor doubt over prosecution i decided to take it from defence viewpoint.

        i think unless the OTP through the redacted parts of the application have presented a strong case, i fear that the judges will succumb to the highly elevated political strategy and will most likely decline further postponement and either terminate the case or insist they run with current evidence.

        my experience with law enforcement is that they tend to take the path of least resistance, only in movies do we have some hero cop or hero defender of rights who is ready to go the extra mile, but in real life, law enforcement want to have a job and go back home to kiss their spouses and children. in fact i had more faith in the pre-trial chamber and the three judge bench, than i do with the trial chamber. the two dissenting judge voices who have consistently been on the side of law and victims appear to be largely ignored.

      • Dibbley,
        Also reading between the lines one can see that Bensouda now wants to vigorously follow the line that she has always wanted but had been denied by the Kenyan government. That’s looking into Kenyattas financial transactions during the PEV. The ICC seems to believe that they can still nail Kenyatta from these financial records alone. My guess is that they have a good idea of how much was sent to the murderous mungiki group during PEV. They just need to confirm the same by looking at the various transactions that Kenyatta made. Truth be told, had Kenyatta nothing to hide as far as his financial transactions were concerned, he would have long ago provided them, for this would actually set him free. But I think that he does not know what the ICC knows hence the hesitation.

      • Bensouda says President Uhuru Kenyatta’s case will still be heard

        Updated Sunday, December 22nd 2013 at 08:54 GMT +3

        By FELIX OLICK NAIROBI, KENYA: President Uhuru Kenyatta’s case at the International Criminal Court has not yet collapsed, at least not for now, the global court has said. The ICC also said its Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda was not laying ground to have the cases dropped.

        ICC Prosecutor maintained she is not yet done with the president and insisted she would not drop the charges as it happened against former Civil Service Chief Francis Muthaura.

        The Gambian-born Prosecutor through ICC Spokesman Fadi El-Abdalla said she still had 30 witnesses against Mr Kenyatta and was only seeking an adjournment to tighten the case for the sake of the victims of the deadly chaos that rocked Kenya.

        “The Prosecutor has simply requested an adjournment to allow the prosecution additional time to follow some leads and investigative steps,” Mr Abdalla said as he dismissed rumours that the adjournment request was meant to prepare Kenyans psychologically on the impending termination of the case. “For now, the judges’ decision on the request as well as the future of this case should not be the subject of any speculation.”

        But despite Bensouda’s strong face, international law experts are pessimistic about her chances of nailing the indicted leader.

        Alex Whiting, a professor of International Law at Harvard University in the United States said Bensouda’s chances of securing a conviction are slim. “It is no secret that the investigative environment for this case has become enormously difficult.

        “If the Prosecution is granted the adjournment, it will be extremely challenging to develop sufficient evidence at this point to proceed with the case, but the Prosecutor seems committed to try,” he told the Standard On Sunday.

        Human rights organisations and the lawyer representing the victims of the deadly violence Fergal Gaynor reacted with outrage to the Prosecution decision, raising tough questions to Bensouda’s office. “The victims will want a very clear explanation as to why, after all these years, the Prosecutor has not yet collected sufficient documentary evidence — including cellphone data, intercepts, and official records — which, combined with testimonial evidence, would be sufficient to satisfy the evidentiary standards required at trial,” said Gaynor.

        Initially, Bensouda had indicated that she intended to use satellite images and remote sensing data, calls and emails as part of the evidence.

        She notified the Chamber that her expert — a renowned United Nations satellite specialist — would produce satellite images on the locations of interest and alleged meetings.

        “This (satellite expert) specialised knowledge and skills will assist the Chamber in understanding and interpreting these images, which will in turn inform the Chamber’s analysis of evidence that underpins the crime base incidents in Nakuru, PEV-related preparatory meetings and sites of gathering of internally displaced persons in and around Nakuru and Naivasha,” said Bensouda.

        Controversial meeting

        Noticeable in the areas that Bensouda wanted processed in the satellite images are the precincts of State House, as she seeks to establish if the controversial meeting took place at the venue. It’s during this meeting that Mungiki sect members were allegedly asked to carry out retaliatory attacks against perceived ODM supporters in Naivasha and Nakuru.

        In her list, Bensouda’s had also captured Nairobi members club on or around January 3, 2008 where it is alleged Uhuru and Muthaura met for similar preparatory meetings. But Dr Musila however says that Satellite images require corroboration by witnesses since it may not identify individuals “From Satellite images you can only see people moving. This has been used in International tribunals such as International Tribunal for Yugoslavia,” he sated. “But it will not tell you this is so and so. You will have to corroborate it with witness testimony,”

        On Thursday, Bensouda admitted that she had inadequate evidence against the President and conceded her proof ‘does not satisfy the high evidentiary standards required at trial’.

        International Law Don David Musila said that Bensouda is still likely to fail if her hopes of securing additional evidence are only pegged to the Government.

        Bensouda decision to seek for a three months adjournment has triggered a flurry of speculations with some claiming that powerful nations have a hidden hand, after the United Nations Security Council declined to defer the case.

        But the ICC has come out strongly to dispel the rumours insisting that the Court decisions are taken independently without external political interference. “The Prosecutors’ request as well as the judges decisions are taken independently of any political considerations. The Prosecutor acts in accordance with the Rome Statute legal framework and is guided solely by the facts and evidence gathered during an independent and impartial investigation,” Abdalla stated.

        The accusations against Mr Kenyatta – crimes against humanity including murder, rape and forcible transfer – were based in part on what the prosecution contended was the use of Mr Kenyatta’s extensive family wealth to finance death squads in the midst of the violence that erupted after Kenya’s 2007 presidential election.

        Jubilee Coalition strategist Tony Gachoka, says the latest development finally vindicates the President from any wrongdoing: “Separately, ICC has been dealt a major blow with regard to its credibility. This is equally a big blow to people around the President, who in their heightened demonstration of sycophancy, were misleading the President into a ditch over a case that had absolutely no merit.”

        Gachoka’s sentiments are in reference to earlier advice by some Jubilee–allied politicians to the President not to attend the hearing of his case at The Hague. Some even threatened to mobilise matatu drivers to block roads leading to the Jomo Kenyatta International Airport ( JKIA) on Kenyatta’s appointed day of travel.

        In the meantime, the Chairman of President Kenyatta’s The National Alliance (TNA), Johnston Sakaja, has urged the Prosecutor to stop and reflect on the ongoing trial of Deputy President William Ruto.

        “The witnesses she has used so far have been proven by the defence to be liars. Indeed, they are afraid to give their identities and have been providing evidence with their identities concealed,” he said in a statement to newsrooms.

        Infamous meeting

        In her eight-page application to the three-judge Bench, Bensouda cited the withdrawal of two key witnesses as the main reasons she had realised that the proof in her vault was not sufficient to nail President Kenyatta for crimes against humanity, including murder, rape and mass displacement of persons.

        According to Bensouda, witness P-0012 had initially accepted that he attended the infamous State House meeting where it is alleged that Kenyatta sanctioned retaliatory attacks in Nakuru and Naivasha using members of the outlawed Mungiki sect.

        “In P-0012’s first three interviews, he stated that he attended a meeting at Nairobi State House on or about 30th December 2007, in which he described the Accused participating in the organisation and funding of violence that later unfolded against perceived ODM supporters,” the ICC Prosecutor noted in her application to the ICC judges.

        http://www.standardmedia.co.ke/?articleID=2000100605&story_title=bensouda-says-uhuru-s-case-will-still-be-heard/

      • tnk, the sentence in question may be awkward but I don’t see it as ambiguous. One is because the “that” is a “defining” word, given the structure of the sentence, and what it refers to is the phone records. Two is the statement that the Defence have accepted that something was fabricated. That cannot be referring to the evidence from the witness, because the Defence have all along claimed that it was.

        Going back to the substance, yesterday I had a chat with two lawyers who know about such cases. Their opinion is that the adjournment will be granted because the judges will not be the ones who want to be seen as killing the case, they will leave it to the prosecutor to do that. It seems to be quite a mess and ultimately it’s Kenyans who will pay the price, even the ones who are now celebrating. People have now seen that when in power or with access to the levers of power even the world’s highest court cannot catch you. That is a bad lesson.

      • John

        Have read that paragraph again and I guess my mind at the time refused to process the possibility that OTP was accusing the defense team of presenting fabricated phone records, but you are right, that is indeed what is stated there.

        I also concur that this is going to be a bad lesson in that perpetrators of politically instigated violence have now been given (or are going to be given) a free pass. All they have to do is grab power, by whatever means necessary and will therefore earn “legitimacy” for their prior actions

        Case in mind to watch are the events unfolding in CAR, South Sudan, possibly Syria, Egypt, and even Al-Shabaab over in Somalia, if they can do some sham of “democratic election” at least for the areas they occupy, will earn legitimacy to govern.

        And these are to name just a few.

        One hopes that the judges in the trial and appeals chambers can rise above all this and make a ruling that speaks for victims of such raw power grabs, but at this point in time am a little skeptical since basically the OTP is requesting to gather evidence after fingering a suspect, which true justice cannot allow, it has to be the other way, collect evidence first then get your suspect.

        all in all, my hope had been for the trials to continue and irrespective of whether the suspects are indicted or not, would have really liked to hear all the details regarding the planning, sponsorship and driving reasons or motives for the horrific and senseless violence. rabble rousing is an easy thing to do, but there is a time when for one brief moment, starting from just before a machete flies through the air and then when it lands on human flesh and then the horror of the action i,e maiming or killing, that is a moment when the individual must truly contemplate their action as an individual. sure it can be diluted by frenzied mobs as well as encouragement from sponsors, but when one is alone, the guilt comes back to haunt the person.

        its the testimony from these people that i wanted to hear. recalling the truth commissions and courts in south africa and rwanda, there are a lot of people that need closure, no matter what kind of brave faces they carry around. those that do not need closure are simply power kegs waiting for the next opportunity to explode and do the exact same thing they did before, because their issues remain unresolved.

        well, will be looking forward to what the judges decision will be. but certainly wont hold my breath on this

      • tnk, my Xmas vacation started at noon today, so I could manage a long leisurely lunch my international criminal lawyer friend. Interestingly, he thinks both gloom and celebrations are premature because there is a great deal we don’t know. According to him, Bensouda would not have asked for an adjournment and asked for a status conference to discuss investigative steps unless she has some good leads in this. He thinks Bensouda suggesting implicitly that the case will collapse without additional time may just be a way to help focus the minds of the judges, because nobody wants this case to collapse. I think we will just have to wait and see what Jan brings.

        Some of what you just wrote highlighted one of your earlier points whose significance I did not appreciate at first reading

        “looking at CAR, south sudan, DRC etc, all those passively sitting or running away from conflict hoping for some international intervention or miracle, should just forget it. the only way out is armed resistance and struggle. no one is going to fight for the weak or law abiding”

        I think that, sadly, you are right, no matter what happens with the Kenyan cases. What we have seen earlier and slightly with the Sudanese cases and to the extreme with the Kenyan cases will make people wonder if it is worthwhile getting involved in African messes. The accusations of race hunting, neo colonialism, the diplomatic
        manoeuvres to shield people, and so on have left a bad taste in many mouths. E.g. looking at the abuse that even people like Kofi Annan have taken in the Kenyan press, does anyone expect that they would help again if something like that happened? The international community must increasingly have doubts about whether further engagement in such matters is worth the trouble unless their vital, especially economic or security, issues are at stake. I thinking further disengagement will happen. In my own country there is a bad right wing element that has always opposed such involvement on the grounds that it is a waste of money. What is happening more and more is that they are laughing at humanitarians and with tough economic times here, many are accepting the view that we should look more inward and focus on ourselves.

        Just for the ICC cases, what do Kenyans really think about the issue of the witnesses? I find it amazing that with all those horrific crimes that took place there are not more people with conscience and integrity who will stand tall for justice and the truth. In Ruto’s case it looks like there might be good witnesses but only because the government powers wanted to fix him, and in Uhuru’s case it looks like too many Mungiki liars trying to save their lives or earn a few quid from any side. Maybe this is a bad question but it is in my mind anyway, are tribe and money so strong that there are no decent Kenyans left?

        I am just looking at my watch and it will shortly be Christmas Eve. I wish to take this opportunity to wish DC writers and readers happy holidays and an auspicious start to the new year. I admit that I feel a bit discouraged right now in the Kenyan ICC cases, as justice seems to be drifting away, but I hope we can all start the new year strengthened in our beliefs for basic human rights and values.

      • tnk, a P.S. There is another statement of yours whose depth I did not appreciate at first reading

        “but there is a time when for one brief moment, starting from just before a machete flies through the air and then when it lands on human flesh and then the horror of the action i,e maiming or killing, that is a moment when the individual must truly contemplate their action as an individual.”

        I think people have to first take responsibility as “individuals”, then they must take responsibility as larger groups, up to the level of nations. Notwithstanding bad effects like slavery and colonialism, I think of Africa’s tragedies is this persistent belief that the Western world controls everything that happens there. The history of the lack of local Kenyan prosecutions in the PEV shows that not everything can be blamed on external forces, and I think at some point Kenyans need to look beyond the ICC and instead reflect deeply on things like the TJRC, why it was set up and what it has accomplished.

        The other thing is a need for a move to a more outward looking focus. It might not be said openly and definitely not at the highest levels of diplomacy, but from the outside many see people doing things to themselves and then refusing to take the responsibility and instead blaming others. I know that in Kenya “choices have consequences” is a joke, but it is true from the level of the individual right up to the national level.

  4. FYI

    Andrew J Franklin 254 722754242

    Begin forwarded message:

    http://africommons.com/2013/12/13/a-guest-post-on-the-state-of-kenya50-where-did-the-time-go-and-what-do-we-have-to-show-for-it/

    “It’s mid-May, do you know where your election results are?”

    Good question! As Kenya prepares to celebrate 50 years of Independence – and, remarkably for Africa, largely free of tribal massacres, wars, natural and/or manmade disasters, successive failed or successful military coups d’etat, vicious secret police operations or state sponsored “disappearances – this steadily failing state is increasingly unable to conduct normal run of the mill governmental functions.

    The GOK was able to carry out a national census until the late 1990s, deliver mail and inland cables, find the owners of automobiles allegedly involved in traffic offenses, pay pensions, etc. The more international assistance and support for the GOK and its myriad associated agencies, parastatals, universities and authorities the faster state operations have deteriorated.

    The incredible investment in “IT” prior to the 2013 General Elections was not only supposed to prevent or mitigate electoral fraud but was also a belated recognition of just how bad government administration had become.

    The IEBC was unable to organize or conduct “voter education” prior to the March 4th polls and is probably unable to find all 120,000 (?) temporary workers hired for these elections; media reports indicate that election- related pay owed to the police, NYS recruits and prison warders has still not been paid.

    In essence it is an amazingly foolish leap of faith to expect the IEBC to release any election results for President, Governors and members of the National Assembly and Senate. The longer these results are kept from the public the greater will be arguments that these elections were stolen; 50% of the country is already on a slow boil and the new administration is clearly not able to handle long simmering insecurity in Mandera, Garissa and Wajir Counties or in Western Kenya where criminal gangs are terrorizing the populace.

    Reports of a resurgence of Mungiki in and around Nairobi as well as continuing MRC related activity in the “Coast Province” counties – including Lamu – show that the state of national insecurity is more serious than anyone will publicly admit. The heavy handed response on Tuesday, 14/05/2013, by some 400 “security personnel” drawn from the disparate forces within the “National” Police Service to only 250 noisy demonstrators – and 15 or so pigs and piglets – outside Parliament showed an usual lack of any police command and control.

    Meanwhile the Obama Administration seems blissfully unaware or unconcerned of the situation in Kenya; our bureaucrats just seem to be hunkering down and covering their asses.

    Reports that the police fired live ammunition to “break up the crowd of peaceful demonstrators” after tear gas and water cannon proved “ineffective” indicates a lack of discipline or concern for innocent bystanders or onlookers in offices, shops or even the carparks in the vicinity of Parliament right smack in the CBD!

    The use of live ammunition to quell demonstrations in Kisumu in the aftermath of the Supreme Court decision on March 30th elicited little comment in the domestic media and certainly no public protests from the US Embassy. Apparently the rubber bullets procured by the NPS prior to the elections are still in their original packing?

    The bottom line is that “Something’s happening here. What it is, is very clear…” To Some!

    Andrew J. Franklin, J.D.
    Former U.S. Marine, resident of Nairobi since March, 1981

    • Why take out Thuo?

      http://www.the-star.co.ke/news/article-149288/six-face-murder-charge-over-thuo-poison

      I had a discussion about this with my friends in Nairobi just after Thuo died. We were driving in Nairobi last month going to G Pot eatery. I told them I found it very strange that the bar owner where Thuo died was talking to the media about Thuo having high blood pressure just minutes after Thuo’s death. They were trying to justify his death. Only family members can talk about such stuff.

      Of course Thuo is a big spanner in Uhuru’s PEV murders. Thuo was one of the Copa buses owner with Michuki who is also dead. These were the vehicles that were ferrying the mass murderers in Naivasha and Nakuru. Thuo was also in many fundraising events with Uhuru for mass murders during the PEV. Thuo was there when he was needed to commit the crimes against humanity. He is no longer needed. Down goes Thuo. It is not a laughing matter. But others may keep laughing. Good for them. My be NOT. This ICC matter is very complicated. Killing George Thuo may not be a very bright idea after all. We will see.

      • Adongo,
        I wonder if these people care. They will kill until there is no one else to kill.
        Its a pity that we have leaders who kill you then go to your funeral to pay their last respects. I think that the moment these guys discovered that the only way to kill the cases was to do away with witnesses, they have been at it day and night.

        What will happen when UKs case collapses? Will witnesses in Rutos case start dying too? How about poor sang, who will kill witnesses for him? Just wondering

      • see comments

        MohanMathew
        • 2 hours ago

        All those who swallow the ‘finding’ Thuo died of some damn petsticide, may please dive into the Indian Ocean ! All of us who eat chicken, beef, mutton, etc., and the vegetarians equally will have pesticides in liver because the animals and plants that constitute our food inevitably contain high concentrations of pesticides

        I am not a pathologist or a professional assassin, but can say with a degree of certainty Thuo was a
        victim of some high dose of a beta blocker drug. Or it might be a drug produced from a plant called ‘fox glove’ . Both types are used to control irregular heartbeat / palpitation. They are more often fatal when introduced into a healthy person than not. They make the death ook normal, too. If the family is serious, an independent autopsy should be conducted to dig up the truth.

        Thuo could have been a strong defense witness but why risk even a remote possibility of him telling the truth, someone wondered. And there goes Thuo !

        2

        Reply

        Share ›

        Avatar
        Ugali Saucer
        • 3 hours ago

        ICC collateral damage. No stone was left unturned to save the Prince. The CID Chief should also watch his drinks.

        Porkies, very strange name for a club.

        1

        Reply

        Share ›

        Avatar
        Chumbu Kombit Ugali Saucer
        • an hour ago

        they poke your ribs and you laugh till you drop dead at porkies
        1

        Reply

        Share ›
        Avatar
        David Muoki Ugali Saucer
        • 3 hours ago

        Ugali wateva, the late Thuo was a close friend of President Uhuru for ur info.

        Reply

        Share ›
        Avatar
        makray David Muoki
        • 37 minutes ago

        Close friends are as deadly as sworn enemies. The guy who backs you up when you’re pulling ‘clande’ escapades in nightclubs is the one who can smash your marriage in a minute. The elimination of people who know too much is nothing new in politics the world over. Check out how many former Yugoslav’s had accidents and sudden illnesses in the lead-up to the late Milosevic’s trial at The Hague, for example.

        Reply

        Share ›
        Avatar
        Chumbu Kombit David Muoki
        • an hour ago

        Yes he was a close friend his knowing too much for the president’s comfort/safety
        1

        Reply

        Share ›
        Avatar
        burg20_03 David Muoki
        • 2 hours ago

        So what? History is literally a minefield of friends turn foe! Remember Caesar’s friend, the callous Brutus? He stabbed Caesar in the back!
        1

        Reply

        Share ›
        Avatar
        carlosdanger45 David Muoki
        • 2 hours ago

        …hahahaha…………and that is precisely his undoing!!!
        1

        Reply

        Share ›

        Avatar
        DanToro
        • 3 hours ago

        What about if that with the knowledge that the ICC case against Warlord collapsing, interested parties decided to flick him off because he knew too much?

        1

        Reply

        Share ›

        Avatar
        MohanMathew DanToro
        • 2 hours ago

        What else, in the name of Jesus Christ, brother DanToro ?

        Reply

        Share ›

        Avatar
        iamtiredofthis
        • 4 hours ago

        Yeah, why would a bartender and waitress want him dead? Who really set them up for this?

        Show 1 new reply
        1

        Reply

        Share ›

        Avatar
        MohanMathew iamtiredofthis
        • 2 hours ago

        They didn’t but the King’s men did !
        1

        Reply

        Share ›
        Avatar
        Obakortd iamtiredofthis
        • 3 hours ago

        Ask the wife.But the guy had made a will where he was the executor.He went to the widow so that they can discuss

        Reply

        Share ›

        Avatar
        papo hapo
        • 5 hours ago

        “…[Among the six suspects are the owner of Club Porkies Paul Wainaina, a waiter at the bar, a friend of Thuo’s only identified as Lubasi and a woman bar patron who bought Thuo a drink.]…”

        Such a random cast of plausible accomplices…..what could be their motive???

        “…[Detectives privy to the investigations said government analysts and pathologist]…”

        Schedule of significant persons – reads as such;

        Dr Peter Ndegwa, Dr Gachie – Kenyatta National Hospital

        Ndegwa Muhoro – CID chief, John Kariuki – head of Serious Crimes Unit

        1

        Reply

        Share ›

        Avatar
        MohanMathew papo hapo
        • 2 hours ago

        I see they can discuss the post-mortem report in their vernacular though written in English !

        By the way when was Thuo expected in the Hague to sing about the Citihoppa involvement ?
        1

        Reply

        Share ›
        Avatar
        Nyakwaragakhan MohanMathew
        • 2 hours ago

        Dirty work stains conscience, it follows you all through to the grave. Ouko killer is alive but I think he enjoys his freedom with worries about the cost it had to take with sending tens of men and women to the grave.
        1

        Reply

        Share ›
        Avatar
        Chumbu Kombit MohanMathew
        • an hour ago

        there is nothing wrong in discussing an autopsy report in mother tongue. They are all qualified to be in the positions they hold.
        1

        Reply

        Share ›

        Avatar
        Cherie_Bondowe
        • 6 hours ago

        Fall guys. Who sent them and why?

        1

        Reply

        Share ›

        Avatar
        jtambo
        • 4 hours ago

        Very strange turn of events. Being bought a drink by a woman bar patron suggests Thuo was in a joint that he is well known. Poison theory brings forth alot of speculation. The law should take its course.


        Reply

        Share ›

        Avatar
        Ugali Saucer jtambo
        • 3 hours ago

        The law in Kenya only takes ONE course, don’t hold your breadth.

        Reply

        Share ›

        Avatar
        carlosdanger45
        • 4 hours ago

        …..Just when we think that we ve seen the end of this thing, it gets curiouser and curiouser 😦
        it goes to remind hangers on that they are expendable….if you are going to do dirty spade work for the LORDS, you have to think twice because when the shit hits the fan, they will come for you…..sorry fella, you should have thought; oh sorry, you are dead already 😦


        Reply

        Share ›

        http://www.the-star.co.ke/news/article-149288/six-face-murder-charge-over-thuo-poison

      • Folks,

        It looks like Bensouda is not going to give any free passes to indicted suspects even after all that headache the AU had to go through at ASP meeting. We will see what the judges rule but the real trouble here is that the ASP amended the subsidiary rules on procedure and evidence but they never amended the relevant parts of the statute itself and any inconsistency between Rome statute and the subsidiary rules means the Statute overtakes the rules.

        The bits of the Statute which will cause headache to the accused are the requirements that all suspects be treated equally and all the requirement of physical presence. The ASP did not amend any of that.

        Here is Bensouda:

        http://standardmedia.co.ke/?articleID=2000101959&story_title=icc-prosecutor-fatou-bensouda-wants-dp-ruto-at-the-hague

        I will look for the actual presentation from the OTP in the ICC website but this is going to be a battle. The Kenya media was so confused bout this whole ASP thing they kept reporting their own imagined amendments often claiming that the ASP amended the Rome Statute. That was never done and it requires 7/8 of all members of the ASP to actually amend the statute. It is a very hard thing to do.

        The Kenyan delegation were busy jumping with joy instead of asking the hard questions. The motion that was passed by the ASP members needed to be anchored in the statute itself and nobody was asking that. The threshold for amending the Rome Statute is a mountain our little dwarfs will find very hard to grasp. I think Ruto may get a break from the judges but this thing is headed to the Appeal Chamber if that happens.

      • And here is the Ruto alleged attack weapon. This thing doesn’t look good for him. They forgot one thing. When you want to silence witnesses, you kill them in cold blood. This other crap is dangerous. For You. Uhuru and his Mungiki mob should start a consultancy in this line of business. Kill The Witnesses Inc. KTW 50 FM and TV will follow. Soon come. Yes.

        Here is poor Baraza:

        http://www.nation.co.ke/news/Barasa-blow-in-ICC-battle-against-arrest/-/1056/2146494/-/ojarfc/-/index.html

  5. Sorry folks,

    I do not have time to expound on this post due to time constraints and hope to revisit it when time allows!

    But i gotta say this, I SHALL NEVER ACCEPT an Uhuru Kenyatta legacy bathed in the innocent blood of Kenyans! How I wish Uhuru Kenyatta could have his name cleared at the ICC before talking thus:

    “The project will define my legacy as President of Kenya and it is my personal desire that the implementation is done to the highest standard,” Mr Kenyatta said. “Kenya will fully meet its obligations towards the project. I will personally oversee its implementation.”

    http://www.nation.co.ke/news/Four-presidents-to-attend-ground-breaking-ceremony/-/1056/2091126/-/nmf4ws/-/index.html

    Four presidents to attend ground-breaking ceremony

    By JOHN NGIRACHU

    Four heads of state from the East Africa Community converge in Changamwe, Mombasa today to preside over the ground-breaking ceremony for the standard gauge railway line whose construction is expected to cost Sh1.2 trillion.

    President Uhuru Kenyatta will lead Presidents Yoweri Museveni (Uganda), Paul Kagame (Rwanda) and Salva Kiir (South Sudan) in the ceremony.

    The line to be built by the China Communications Construction Company will run from Mombasa to Malaba, Kampala and then Kigali and later to Juba.

    Construction work will be undertaken in three phases with Phase One starting from Mombasa to Nairobi, followed by Nairobi-Malaba and Kisumu in Phase Two and Malaba-Kisumu to Kampala in Phase Three. The projected completion date is 2016.

    Wednesday, President Kenyatta met Mr Liu Qitao, the head of the company that will build the Mombasa-Nairobi railway at State House Nairobi.

    He said the railway was one of the Vision 2030 flagship projects and the largest to be undertaken in the country in 50 years.

    “The project will define my legacy as President of Kenya and it is my personal desire that the implementation is done to the highest standard,” Mr Kenyatta said. “Kenya will fully meet its obligations towards the project. I will personally oversee its implementation.”

    He also said Kenya was working closely with Uganda and Rwanda to ensure the railway extends to their countries because the project’s success would boost ties between the neighbouring countries.

    Mr Liu said his company would ensure that the work is of high quality work and that it is completed on time. The firm has expressed interest in developing the Lamu port and other urbanisation programmes in various cities.

    “All the resources necessary for the successful project implementation, including personnel and finances, have been mobilised,” said Mr Liu.

    In Parliament, four MPs questioned the process through which the Chinese company was awarded the contract to build the railway line.

    During a press conference at Parliament Buildings, Mr Alfred Keter (Nandi Hills, URP), Mr Peter Kaluma (Homa Bay Town, ODM), Mr Suleiman Dori (Msambweni, ODM) and Mr Simba Arati (Dagoretti North, ODM) said the project was overpriced and was likely to become a burden on Kenyan taxpayers. They also questioned why the contract was single-sourced.

    The MPs said the tender should have been handled as required by the Public Procurement and Disposal Act and its regulations, which demand a competitive bidding process.

    “In as much as we support the initiative, we do not support the process of single sourcing the contractor. The loan from Exim Bank will be paid through public funds and it is important that the process to identify the contractor is transparent and follows the laid down procurement laws,” said Mr Keter.

    Mr Keter also cited a report in the Press that the Attorney General had written to the Public Procurement Oversight Authority warning that the award of the contract was in breach of the law.

    http://www.nation.co.ke/news/Four-presidents-to-attend-ground-breaking-ceremony/-/1056/2091126/-/nmf4ws/-/index.html

    • `
      It is interesting that Uhuruto and followers, steered by self-patting assurances from the diplomatic and legal teams of Amina Mohammed and Githu Muigai, are celebrating what essentially is a pyrrhic victory. Kenyatta must be wary of these self assuring high fives and fallutin’ by sycophants! It is really victory that never was. Here is a preliminary analysis of the implications of the amended rules:

      http://opiniojuris.org/2013/11/28/will-new-rpe-134-provisions-survive-judicial-review/#comments

      It can be said that the Assembly of State Parties devised a clever move to diffuse the building tension emanating from the UN Security Council’s rebuffing of the AU request for deferral. It will take the supporters of the accused a while before they realize the folly of their premature celebrations.

      The practicality of these amended rules are eventually heading for judicial review –in the ICC Appeal Chambers – which will set the way forward; essentially reiterating their default position outlined in the respective rulings for Ruto & Uhuru’s requests for excusal. Let’s keep in mind that none of the Statutes have been amended.

      For those who think Kenyatta will not be required to show up in court at all, prepare for shock. There will definitely be times when the accused will be required to show up for trial in person. There will be cases when the video will be used, and I suspect, rarely, will total excusal (& representation by lawyer) will be applied. The Appeal Chamber will put life into the interpretations of these rule “changes” soon. I sense that the first format (appearance in person) will be the default position, with the latter two options only to be applied for exceptional circumstances. That default position is what is consistent with the Statutes, the freshly amended rules, and prior Appeal Chamber rulings.

      • Job, everyone seems to be passing the buck! UNSC to ASP and ASP to court. It sure looks like the ASP child-minder has just given out some candy to calm down some excitable kids until their parents come home and put back some reality. It seems to be working!

      • John,

        That’s right! To some, ICC is terrible & remote controlled by Raila, UK and Obama! UNSC –bad & imperialist! ASP – good! Thus, cause for celebration now.

        There is also a lot of media disinformation and propaganda in Kenya. Rather than report accurately about this new uncharted territory, complicit mainstream (Kenyan) media is essentially tossing champagne. I wonder what for. Isn’t Kenyatta’s trial beginning in February?

        Media is quiet about the impending judicial review of the changes –expected to interpret the practical aspects of the new rules.

        The Jubilee friendly media is essentially setting up public expectations of Kenyatta’s supporters…so that when the Appeal Chamber orders Kenyatta to physically show up in court…those supporters will see the court (Judges) as being biased against Kenyatta.

        Am I seeing fresh excuses being preset for absconding?

      • Job

        I don’t really think the ASP resolution on attendance was a major game changer. It certainly provides the ICC with more options for the accused, but still leaves the administration of justice to the courts.

        I wonder how the judges will rule on the non-cooperation of the kenya government regarding declaring Uhuru’s assets. Its funny that they are stonewalling yet Forbes has a ball-park estimate that can be used.

        I also wonder how long before people finally get tired of using kid gloves?

        Surprisingly (or maybe not) Ruto wants his case concluded expeditiously and who knows maybe he will walk. But Uhuru has no intention of his case starting or being heard and not being concluded because there are other issues for which he could easily find himself indicted.

        It would be an interesting turn of events of one of them walked and the other got indicted, it would not matter which one. Uhuru’s people would be mortified if Ruto walked after they fixed him and then assumes presidency.

        On the other hand, Ruto’s folks would be disconsolate if the fixing does him in while Uhuru walks.

        Its weird but they need to both walk or both get indicted, any other way and something hits the fan

      • John, I agree with you about the Kenyan ‘media’ who are abhorrent entities that should be referred by other names because what they practice is nowhere near credible and trustworthy journalism.

        The latest prosecution application is very serious and puts the criminal run government in a fix as they will have to demonstrate that they will action the court request or else.

        Me thinks it’s only a matter of time, if it has not already happened, before the Judges concluded that the two criminals are hostile to the ICC as there is already overwhelming evidence to proof this i.e.

        i. Kenyatta refusal to disclose his family’s stolen wealth
        ii. The Kenyan kangaroo courts in cahoots with the government previous refusal to have the PPC give statements
        iii. The use of the kangaroo courts again to defeat the extradition request of the criminal that has been identified in witness bribing and intimidations.

      • Just like in Uhuru’s case, witness intimidation on its own, will earn these two guys jail time. Thereafter the trials will proceed and find further evidence for the main crimes. All that the court needs, is at least one steadfast and unwavering witness/victim testimony, and I think that that will be a surprise witness.

        Ruto’s conversion to Christianity is that of a marked man facing true criminal conviction. He know fully his actions, but still hopes that not everyone has the details and somehow will evade justice. On the other hand, Uhuru knows his only hope lies in ensuring that no one gets to testify, and that he does not step into that dock.

        The defense testimonies of Uhuru and Ruto will automatically nail each other no matter how hard they try not to.

        Meanwhile back at home, their lieutenants will finally have gained control of instruments of power, (no matter how little or great) and will therefore have no reason to continue singing their praises except for more political/clout mileage.

        July came and went, so did November. February is just round the corner. We can wait

  6. the proceedings on final day deliberations regarding Head of State
    2 hours

    Just finally listened to the entire clip. Njonjo is brilliant and completely dismantles the porojo from the Kenyan delegation.

  7. Have just picked up this article from the EASTANDARD

    Jubilee Govt is at war with the Brits

    Hehehe

    http://www.standardmedia.co.ke/?articleID=2000098325&story_title=british-diplomats-ejected-from-hotel

    By PETER OCHIENG

    Three senior officials from the British High Commission were flushed out of a hotel in Eldoret where they were scheduled to hold a day-long meeting with several civil society organisations from North Rift region. Second Secretary in Charge of Political Affairs Tom Howe, Director of Political Affairs C Sugden and another officer only identified as Nancy, were kicked out of Sirikwa Hotel in Eldoret town, the venue of the aborted meeting, after the county Deputy Governor Daniel Chemno accused them of violating diplomatic protocol. Mr Chemno who stormed the meeting at around 11.30 am when introductions were ongoing, hit out at the officials to the consternation of participants, claiming that the county government was not informed about the forum. “I have just come to register my displeasure to you the officials from the UK High Commission. How can you come here without having the courtesy of notifying the county government of your presence and purpose of your visit as diplomatic protocol demands. It is wrong that we are just being informed by locals,” posed Chemno. The deputy governor told them the meeting was secretive noting that such forums should not take place at this time when the issue they were discussing at the meeting was being discussed at the International Criminal Court (ICC) with state parties. Earlier on, a team of plain clothes police officers had camped at the hotel after local leaders raised concern over the presence of the British High Commission officials. Some officials claimed they were on a mission to collect new evidence and recruit additional witnesses to testify against the Kenyan leaders facing crimes against humanity charges at the ICC. There was commotion and tension in the hall where the officials and participants were set to hold the meeting forcing the organisers to kick out journalists who had come to cover the event. Wesley Chirichir, the coordinator of Kenya Sports Foundation told the journalists to leave the venue saying their presence was not needed as the meeting was a closed door consultative forum. “We kindly request you not to take any photos or notes as this meeting is purely closed door and therefore your presence is not welcome for now,” stressed Mr Chirchir. Chemno accused the British government of undermining the county government and their leadership terming its action as unwarranted and vowing to notify President Uhuru Kenyatta of the matter.

    The deputy governor said the whole issue was done secretively arousing suspicions among the local leadership about the British High Commission’s top officials’ tour of the county. But reacting to Chemno’s accusations, one of the officials, Mr Howe, said that their mission should not arise any suspicion as they had come to have a peaceful forum with various civil society groups drawn from the region. No word from governor He said before they came to Eldoret, they had tried to contact the Governor over their mission with no success. “We have been trying to get in touch with the Governor for the last two weeks but our efforts did not bear any fruits. We even texted him but he never replied to our inquiries,” said Tom. Howe asked the local leadership not to harbour any suspicion over their mission in the county noting that they had come to meet with civil society organizations and elders from various communities on matters of peace and reconciliation. Speaking to the Press later, one of the conveners of the aborted meeting Simon Kipkosgey, the coordinator of Kenya Sports Foundation and Stephen Cheboi, the chairman of the North Rift Human Rights Organisation, said they were working with the British to develop sports as a means to enhance peace and unity among local communities. “We were looking for partnership with the British government that could see our youth take part in mini Commonwealth Games as part of the wider campaign to promote peaceful co-existence among communities,” stated Chirchir.

      • i used to wonder how moi would take university professors and turn them into delirious puppets, and now we see a repeat here where seemingly intelligent folk like macharia and amino become mind numbing babbling idiots

        the whole country has simply turned everything into an ICC, affair what a mess

      • `

        It is unfortunate/sad there was no single person in that room to debunk/counter the plethora of lies peddled by
        Kamau – starting with the obvious one that Kenyans reject Kenyatta’s prosecution at the ICC. The latest figures show that an absolute majority – 2/3 of Kenyans – actually support the ongoing trials at the Hague.

        Macharia has also inconveniently LIED about presidential immunity from prosecution. The Kenyan Constitution does not give immunity from prosecution for sitting Presidents in cases of crimes pursuant to international treaties (subject to international law). That’s our Katiba. It precisely allows our President to face trial whenever he or she commits serious international crimes.

        The ineptitude of this diplomat is illustrated in the numerous verbal fires he lights within his presentation starting with his peers – the Argentinian legal aide (FARC issue) and the Jordanian UN Ambassador (Prince Zeid). That’s aside from the fundamental gaffe regarding Nuremberg trials. Is anyone surprised these fellas can’t charm broad support?

        Kenyatta’s “personal” ICC problem has turned into a very expensive affair for Kenyan taxpayers. It is also threatening the nation’s collective interests – given the recent tantrums passing as “undiplomatic diplomacy”. Even longstanding neighborliness with Tanzania is under threat. The spectacle is quite embarrassing to watch.

        The bumbling bureaucracy has now thrown its last hope in effecting amendments to the rules of procedure accompanying the Rome Statute. What confusion! This Hail Mary discussion – which started on Friday, to continue on Monday – cannot salvage Kenyatta’s mortal fear of attending trial. The idea was started too little too late.

        The Working Group on Amendments (WGA) has barely had any time for consultations – they actually do consult very widely! Even if they wanted to appease the grumbling lackeys sent by Kenyatta (under auspices of Kenya and AU); such decisions won’t be easily made within such a short notice. These decisions require majority consensus (at least 2/3 of member states have to be in line with the plot).

        Another trajectory that the sycophantic but lazy handlers of Kenyatta have belligerently failed to acknowledge is that behind the huge schism of national dissension is a deep valley of despondency by a section of Kenyans equally victimized by PEV that has persistently been ignored since the violence.

        The potent voice of this silent swathe of Kenyans keeps humming at every negotiation table Kenyatta handlers have been to. In the UNSC deferral debate, the victims’ lawyer, Mr. Gaynor, made an eloquent presentation that catalogued how this lot has been discriminated against during IDP resettlement and compensation schemes in both the Kibaki and Kenyatta governments. Any neutral eye in the world can therefore see the ICC as the only remedial chance for justice for this group.

        Until the day that son of Jomo would start treating the forgotten humanity (invisible IDPs) of Kenya that he helped evict from Naivasha, Tigoni, Limuru and other places (including families of slain demonstrators in Kibera, Mombasa, Busia, Kakamega, Nakuru, Kisumu and other places) as victims worthy of compensation and resettlement, he will not convince the globe he can guarantee justice for PEV victims. What has he done for this group (his direct victims) in the more than 6 months he has been president?

        Kenyatta himself knows why he is fighting tooth and nail not to attend trial, unlike Ruto. He tried Westgate to seek a yearlong deferral but failed. But thanks to super lenient trial Judges at the IC, he got a ¼ deferral – essentially pushing his trial commencement date from November to February 2014. He doesn’t seem to like the reprieve. Is this really about deferral? With this prevailing theatre of the absurd, will Kenyatta show up? Be your own judge!

      • Job, an interesting point is that after Uhuru asked for a permanent stay of proceedings and Bensouda responded, Uhuru now wants the judges to hold off from making a decision on that application. It looks like Bensouda’s response surprised them and they did not know they were being targeted; so they claim they now need to do more investigations.

        http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1684236.pdf

        I think we can expect something like what was announced today in the Bemba case.

        http://www.icc-cpi.int/en_menus/icc/press%20and%20media/press%20releases/Pages/pr962.aspx

      • John,

        Footdragging by all means suggests that Kenyatta knows something we probably don’t know about the impending trial. Innocent people tend to wish for speedy trials to clear their names. Guilty parties on the other hand, would wish to delay, postpone, defer,…etc

        Secondly, that bombshell in the Bemba case IS definitely something Kenyatta must be afraid of. The latter has been King when it comes to sorting witnesses. It is THE achilles heel in Kenyatta’s predicament. I suspect the OTP has been quite busy investigating that angle.

  8. Jubilee leaders Saturday issued a stinging criticism of Western nations they say were responsible for the collapse of the move by the African Union to have the Kenyan cases at the ICC postponed for a year.

    The attack on the decision by the UN Security Council to reject the deferral of President Uhuru Kenyatta’s and Deputy President William Ruto’s cases in The Hague dominated Jubilee rallies.

    Speaking at a meeting in Kericho, Mr Ruto said he was not surprised by the Security Council’s outcome.

    Mr Ruto, who described the resolution as “a side issue”, said it was a clear testimony of who the true friends of Kenya were as more than 35 MPs who accompanied him heavily criticised the UN Security Council members who abstained from the Friday vote and forced the deferral bid to collapse.

    “We are saying what happened yesterday is a clear testimony of genuine friends who can stand with us when it is shining or raining. We thank them for standing with us. We have a plan … we will work and endure any difficulties,” he said.

    “They say adversity is the mother of invention. We will sort these things out as they are side issues. We can now say we have genuine, legitimate and consistent friends. We can now work with them and the rest of world to ensure there is peace in our region and country,” he said.

    Mr Ruto spoke at a thanksgiving ceremony for Bureti MP Leonard Sang at Litein East School as it emerged that the UK prefers video technology to cushion President Kenyatta and Mr Ruto from the constraints of physical appearance in court.

    The same subject featured in two other rallies in Bomet and Transmara where the Deputy President attended other thanksgiving meetings.

    Mr Ruto said he and President Kenyatta were not shaken by the resolution as they were clear they will triumph in the end.

    The MPs allied to the Jubilee Coalition criticised countries that blocked the postponement of the cases as requested by the African Union.

    The eight Security Council members who collapsed the move used the backhand method of abstaining from the vote.

    Leader of Majority in the National Assembly Aden Duale turned the heat on former United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan, accusing him of being behind “a well-orchestrated international plot” to have President Kenyatta and Mr Ruto jailed by the ICC.

    Speaking in Litein, Kericho County, Mr Duale said the plan was meant to deny the two leaders a chance to govern the country.

    “The international push to throw Kenyatta and Ruto into jail was started by none other than Kofi Annan so that somebody else can become president of Kenya. It is time for Kenyans to learn the truth,” he said.

    “The Hague issue has local and international investors. The ones who abstained were international investors. You know who the local investors are,” he told the crowd at the function.

    Mr Duale led MPs and two governors at hitting out at those who abstained, accusing them of being “cowardly and unfriendly” with the angry leaders unleashing their wrath on the US, Britain and France.

    Mr Duale accused the three nations of masterminding the failure of the deferral bid and called on President Kenyatta and Mr Ruto to stop conducting any business with them.

    “We have known who our friends are and who we will do business with. The rest can look for business elsewhere because we shall have no business with our enemies,” he said.

    The leaders spoke as it emerged that London had dispatched an official to Nairobi to try and appease the Kenya government over the goings-on in New York.

    Deputy National Security Adviser at the Cabinet Office Oliver Robbins met Foreign Affairs Permanent Secretary Karanja Kibicho in the company of British High Commissioner to Kenya Christian Turner on Wednesday and said that Britain favoured avenues such as the use of video link “to free” President Kenyatta and Mr Ruto from the constraints they face in the discharge of their duties while attending trial.

    According to Mr Kibicho, Mr Robbins stated that the British Government recognised President Kenyatta and Mr William Ruto and their constitutional obligations to the people of Kenya.

    “Mr Robbins delivered the message from the UK government on the need to free the President and his deputy from attending their trial and instead leave their lawyers to continue with the case in The Hague. He pointed out that, in order to achieve this goal, the British diplomats in New York have been instructed to lobby for the best solution including the use of available technologies such as video links,” Mr Kibicho added.

    The Sunday Nation learned of the Wednesday meeting as leaders across the country gave differing opinions on how the President and his deputy should proceed following the collapsed deferral bid.

    Kakamega Senator Boni Khalwale said the President should not skip trial and should continue to cooperate with the ICC.

    His Homa Bay counterpart Otieno Kajwang said: “Go to The Hague, clear your name and come back other than drag all Kenyans into the mess of non-appearance. (Foreign Affairs Cabinet Secretary) Amina Mohamed must be realistic in her shuttle diplomacy.”
    Siaya Senator James Orengo said the solution to the problem would only be found at the ICC and added that the Security Council decision confirmed so.

    Funyula MP Paul Otuoma said President Kenyatta should not feel as though the cases were driven by malice. He said the President should face the cases “like a man”.

    At the Jubilee rallies, leaders maintained hostile positions with Mr Duale accusing the US of practising impunity, noting that despite the nation’s forces having killed innocent civilians in foreign countries across the globe, none of its leaders had been taken before a court.

    At the same time, the Garissa Town MP warned those who were waiting for the government to collapse due to the ICC cases to stop dreaming and urged Kenyans to pray for the two leaders to win the cases.

    Mr Ruto said that he and President Kenyatta would work with the UNSC resolution, terming it a result of too much politics that has surrounded the ICC cases.

    Nairobi Women’s Representative Rachael Shebesh kicked off the debate with what she called modern-day colonisation in her criticism of the Security Council decision.

    Mrs Shebesh said Kenya was among the most respected countries on the African continent noting, however, that the ICC cases were hanging over this fact.

    She added that she had greatly been embittered and disappointed by the US decision to abstain from the vote, accusing it of betrayal, considering that Kenya had gone through a lot of problems including terrorist attacks in the past because of the relationship shared by the two countries.

    The legislator added that President Kenyatta and his deputy had not asked for too much in requesting for a deferral, noting that they had already expressed their willingness to cooperate with the ICC.

    ing with the Hague-based court until their cases were finalised.

    She now wants the Jubilee government to reconsider its links with the countries which did not back the deferral bid accusing them of “arrogance and belittling a sovereign state.”

    “We will sit down and go back to the drawing board and see why we put our energies as a country to help countries which hold back their help when we need it. Development cannot be brought by leaders who are forever behind the dock,” she said.

    Elgeyo Marakwet Senator Kipchumba Murkomen and his Kericho Counterpart Charles Keter said they were “shocked” by the decision and accused the UK and the US of being fair weather friends.

    Kericho Governor Prof Paul Chepkwony said the ICC cases have too much lies and predicted that the ICC judges hearing the cases will soon throw them out.

    Emurua Dikirr MP Jonah Ng’eno argued that abstention by the 8 member states was a sign of their enmity to Kenya and called on President Kenyatta and Mr Ruto to consider shifting trade links to focus more on friends and leave out the “enemies of Kenya.”

    “One day we shall get a perfect opportunity to return the favour,” he warned.

    Kieni MP Kanini Kega expressed confidence that Kenyatta and Ruto would prevail over the ICC cases, adding that the two leaders were innocent of all the claims made against them.

    By TIMOTHY KEMEI @timothykemei timothykemei@gmail.com and MOSES ODHIAMBO mogada@ke.nationmedia.com

    http://www.nation.co.ke/news/politics/America-betrayed-us-over-ICC-vote-fumes-Jubilee-/-/1064/2076266/-/ha7iag/-/index.html

    • The Uhuruto gang and their crew are becoming Mugabe like as days go by. Everything is blamed on colonialism as if its the former colonial masters who sent them to murder folks.

      Let these people be men, face the ICC, win their cases and come home in glory. But the fear is that they as guilty as hell and will be locked up.

      The good thing for Kenya is that the verdict is coming before their term in office ends. Which means that we perhaps wont see them on the ballot box come 2017.

      Ati they were shocked at the UK/US decision not to support Kenya. Really? Where do these people live? And how do they think? UK and US would have been the last countries to support impunity.

      My point is that these fellows are full of themselves and have difficulty in reasoning. They are wallowing in ignorance.

      Washindwe!

    • `
      The ICC-siege on Kenya’s daily life is getting pretty bizarre as idiocy and confusion reigns. Yesterday, blazing Bensouda filed this urgent application against Ruto’s confused shenanigans.

      http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1683931.pdf

      The ink has barely dried on Judge Osugi’s recent and final warning to Ruto to refrain from commenting on either the merits or procedure of his case outside the court.

      Against this backdrop, the super-confused, impunity-thriving and belligerent Jubilee government has appointed Ruto to lead a delegation of Kenyans to the Assembly of State Parties meeting in Hague – to specifically push for amendments to the procedure for trying them.

      The program has indeed allotted space for Ruto’s speech.


      Where is Karim Khan to leash cantankerous Ruto?

      Even within government circles, the decision about who leads or attends such meetings cannot be done without the direct involvement of Kenya’s Attorney General.

      It is pretty obvious Githu Muigai is deliberately misadvising William Ruto to see the latter walk into a legal sink-hole (see thread on Mt. Kenya Mafia killing Ruto softly).

      This is definitely the snake oil salesman pitch for Ruto’s arrest warrant.

      Well, the OTP has its eyes wide open, precisely setting the stage for that. They are not taking it lightly.

      The OTP just realized about Ruto’s planned speech to the Assembly of State Parties 2 days ago and has swiftly rushed to protest in Presiding Judge Osugi’s court.

      (a) They are reminding Judges that Ruto’s planned absence from court was not sought for such activities. Ruto is on notice for abusing the courts lenient allowance for excusal from appearance.

      (b) They are asking the Judges to open their eyes to Ruto’s blatant belligerence against their gag order. Ruto is on notice for violating terms of his summonses.

      (c) They are also reminding the world that Ruto is actually an accused criminal before the court –who should not be discussing matters pertaining to the procedure of his trial outside the court (as warned by his trial Judge).

      I will not rule out a parallel secret application for a bench warrant of arrest against William Ruto by the OTP; either already filed or waiting to be filed after Ruto’s speech at the ASP.

      Even sidestepping the impending sanctions on Ruto , the latter’s attendance alone is the self-inflicted shot that kills these requests for amendments to rules/procedures and the Rome Statutes per se. It is called stupidity on steroids. You do not export impunity to the face of custodians of the law. Just basic commonsense. Since when do criminals invite themselves into drafting sessions for laws/judicial procedures against criminals?

      It is about time that Uhuru and Ruto realize the world views them as accused criminals, period! It is also time they realize the world DOES NOT equate the two to be the state or nation called Kenya. The fact that ICC was lenient enough to allow them relative freedom to attend trials outside the gated walls behind which Gbagbo, Nkunda, Lubanga, and Taylor reside should not be over-stretched into plain abuse. Uhuru and Ruto may be glorified heroes in their respective tribal enclaves but outside that perimeter, they are seen for what they are — ICC indictees! The Rome Statutes do not grant special privileges to people with leadership titles. They don’t discriminate the treatment of criminals –whether white collar or blue collar. The sooner this reality sinks to them, the better.

      I never knew the gross stupidity, ineptitude, incompetence and general cluelessness of these Jubilee greenhorns would be this breath-taking. Kenya is in for a rough ride!

      • Job, that seemed to be an insult to the world and I don’t know how people who came up with the idea think. As it is, Kenya is the only country where the head of delegation will not address the assembly. Ruto was pulled off at the last minute and Amina Mohamed talked this afternoon, but the thing must surely leave a bitter taste in many mouths.

      • According to sources in Kenya, DP Ruto will lead other government of Kenya representatives in ASP discussion tomorrow (Thursday), according to leader of majority in parliament Aden Duale

      • `
        John, Phil et al.,

        UPDATE: on Ruto, he is playing with fire!

        On Kenyatta and Amina Mohamed’s ineffectual but expensive diplomatic forays — bound to fail spectacularly!

        More pointedly, tomorrow (Thursday) at 3pm GMT, Amina Mohammed is to participate in another panel discussion where the nitty gritties of the proposed rule changes are to be deliberated.

        That session is to be moderated by the Permanent Representative of Jordan to the UN (& 1st President of the Assembly), Prince Zeid Ra’ad Zeid Al-Hussein.

        At the recent Kuwait summit, Uhuru was literally courting the youthful King Abdullah of Jordan, whose biological brother (Prince Zeid) is the one to moderate that session mentioned above. It is expected that the formal panel discussion led by Prince Zeid would be carefully steered into active advocacy for changing rules to “pragmatically” allow for concessions demanded requested by Kenya.

        Wishful thinking!

        King Abdulla of Jordan and Uhuru

        King Abdulla of Jordan and Uhuru pictured yesterday

        This is the kind of eleventh-hour diplomacy that the inept government of Kenyatta is trying to play. Kenyatta and his incompetent greenhorns are basically closing the stable door after the horse has bolted. Long before this, there was actually a Working Group that had been meeting throughout the year working on proposed amendments to the Statutes and any changes to the rules. Kenya was a no-show to this Working Group, until the eleventh hour – typical Kenya style. They are now running like headless chicken with Johnny-come-lately requests, which they are trying to force on this conference through the backdoor. Back-doors opened through personal requests such as these to King Abdulla and his brother Prince Zeid.

        Let me save Uhuru some personal embarrassment by offering free advice.

        King Abdulla and Prince Zeid CANNOT make any international decision before consulting with their godfathers in the West – specifically the US of A.
        King Abdulla is a frequent visitor to the White House, and actually chats with Obama on the phone quite regularly. In Obama’s last visit to Jordan, King Abdulla escorted and personally chauffeured the US President in the King’s personal limo.

        Any misguided attempt to undercut the West, or the US specifically, through King Abdulla of Jordan is stupid for lack of a better word.

        Furthermore, the antagonistic (anti-West) speeches Kenyatta is making these days at these conferences –whether in Addis Ababa or yesterday in Kuwait — will spectacularly backfire. Kenyatta’s latest megaphone pronouncement is in support of the state of Palestine, declaring to open Palestinia’s embassy in Nairobi.

        As Kenyatta jumps into these hasty and thoughtless decisions, I hope he realizes Kenya has a tonne of problems locally that his feckless government has FAILED to attend to — run-away insecurity, massive unemployment, ethnic divisions, corruption, escalating commodity prices, and a chain of labor unrests from all sectors!

        What is the point of antagonizing the Israelis who have literally been effecting a greenhouse revolution in Kenya at this point in time. Furthermore, the Arab leaders he is courting are first and foremost beholden to the West, period! Those who weren’t, like Gadaffi, are not in power anymore.

        Uhuru should grow from this sheer naivety and realize that King Abdulla (Jordan) or any Kuwaiti or Saudi Arabian King or Prince is a solid ally of the West.

        Watch this space Kamwana!

        In the meantime, as Amina Mohamed and her super-expensive “consultative” (but frankly ignorant) team prepare to burn more of Kenya’s taxpayer money in these inconsequential sessions, let her be reminded that tomorrows session is to be followed by an informal interactive session. Human Rights advocates and civil societies are preparing to attend this session tomorrow to argue the other side of the coin. It is expected to be quite interesting to say the least.

        From recent history, this other side of the coin has been winning every diplomatic battle Amina has laid her hands on, ama?

        Uhuru knows he is not attending the ICC trials –he should stop wasting Kenya’s taxpayer money trying to make convenient excuses for non-attendance to his personal problems at the ICC.

        Kenyatta should be reminded that his case is not a simple misdemeanor case. It is more serious than a felony. His charges are the most serious charges any human being can be charged for in court. If Kenyatta decides to skip trial (as predicted), the consequences will be grave.

        Unlike Sudan, where Bashir can remain in power until he dies, Kenya is a democracy with millions of citizens (& foreign allies with deep interests) willing to fight to keep it that way.

        His best bet would be to forget about over-bloated egos and attend court to answer the serious charges.

        He should go to court and explain why he masterminded the killing of innocent Kenyans at Naivasha/Nakuru.

        He should explain why he has since refused to compensate any of the victimized families (Naivasha/Tigoni/Limuru/Nakuru IDPs) as he discriminatively doles out billions of taxpayer funds to other IDPs from his own community.

        Where else will Naivasha victims find justice after their own country foresake them?

        There are very solid, compelling and valid reasons why 67% of Kenyans support these ICC trials.

      • Job,
        I had not seen Uhurus visit in that light. Thanks.
        But how long do we have to drum into the heads of these fellows that pulling a “Mutunga court” on the ICC is close to impossible. These two fellows and their side kicks are going to bankrupt the country with their personal matters. The only way out for Uhuru is to abscond.

      • Job, not sure that Jordan will offer them much. At the 2nd plenary today the Jordanian representative stated that states must remember that the ICC is not there so that the strong can get more protection.

      • Phil,
        Ms Bensouda has thrown a spanner in the works which practically bars Ruto from attending/leading Kenyan delegation to ASP. This lady is methodical.

        What was Ruto thinking? Christ!

        ——————————————–

        ICC prosecutor Fatou Bensouda has filed an urgent application asking the court to lift the excusal it gave Deputy President William Ruto to skip Thursday’s hearing.

        Ms Bensouda said that the excusal had been granted on the grounds that he would be in Kenya when President Uhuru Kenyatta travelled to Kuwait for the third Africa-Arab Summit.

        The ICC allowed the cases against Mr Kenyatta and Mr Ruto to alternate after their lawyers said the Constitution does not permit their absence from the country at the same time.

        However, according to Ms Bensouda, Mr Ruto may have misled the trial chamber since he is expected to lead the Kenyan delegation to the Assembly of State Parties to The Hague Thursday.

        Kenya is pushing for an amendment to the Rome Statute to stop the court from indicting sitting heads of state and government.

        Ms Bensouda also submitted that Mr Ruto’s absence from Kenya could be a demonstration that his and Mr Kenyatta’s absence from the country at the same time was not anchored in the Constitution.

        “The Prosecution requests Trial Chamber V(A) to reconsider and vacate its decision to grant the excusal of the accused, Mr William Samoei Ruto from attending his trial on 21 November 2013,” she said in her application.

        “The Prosecution has been informed that Ruto is set to lead the Kenyan delegation to the Assembly of States Parties’ (ASP) 12th session, which commences on 20 November 2013 in The Hague.

        “The prosecution notes that Ruto’s excusal request was premised on the fact that he would be constitutionally required to be present in Kenya until 21 November, due to the absence of Kenya’s President, Mr Uhuru Kenyatta during that time.”

        She said that considering Mr Ruto’s scheduled presence at the talks, his rationale for an excusal was no longer valid.

        “Either Kenyatta will return to Kenya before 20 November 2013, making Ruto available to appear at trial on 21 November, or alternatively Ruto’s presence in Kenya is not in fact indispensable, notwithstanding Kenyatta’s absence,” she said.

        Mr Kenyatta was expected back in the country from Kuwait last night.

        Ms Bensouda also asked the court to bar Mr Ruto from commenting on the Kenyan cases when he heads the Kenyan delegation to the ICC state parties meeting.

        The trial chamber had in the first phase of the proceedings cautioned Mr Ruto from discussing the case against him outside the courtroom. The judges gave the warning after Mr Ruto granted a media interview while in The Hague.

        Ms Bensouda said that if allowed to speak at the meeting, Mr Ruto will be commenting on cases in which he is a party. The Deputy President is facing three charges of crimes against humanity as is his co-accused, radio journalist Joshua arap Sang. President Kenyatta is facing four.

        According to the notification by Kenya to the assembly of ICC state parties, Mr Ruto will be leading the Kenyan delegation to the meeting which started Wednesday.

        “The ASP was requested to re-arrange the speaking schedule accordingly, indicating that Ruto intends to personally address the assembly,” said Ms Bensouda.

        She also wondered why the Trial Chamber V(a) has failed to publish the reasons for excusing Mr Ruto from trial today yet the ruling was rendered on November 8.

        Meanwhile, the state parties have accepted to discuss Kenya’s suggestion, which is being pushed by the Africa Union. The AU wrested the agenda from one led by the United Kingdom, which was pushing to have the amendments be done on the mode of attendance rather than immunity.

        Mr John Bradshaw, the head of Communications for Kenya and Somalia at the British High Commission in Nairobi Wednesday said the UK had tabled an amendment to the ICC Rules of Procedure which would allow attendance by video conference during parts of the trial.

        “The UK has tabled this amendment in a constructive and helpful spirit to address AU concerns. We encourage all parties to enter into these discussions in the same constructive spirit,” he said in a statement emailed to the Nation.

        Foreign Affairs Principal Secretary Karanja Kibicho had earlier criticised the UK for its insistence on video trial, arguing that it was part of a ploy to detract from the real issues.

        “Africa is at a loss as to the logic behind replacing a motion mandated by the Africa Union. The AU was categorical in its decision to exempt sitting heads of state from trial while in office.”

        In what appeared to be a reply to Dr Kibicho, Mr Bradshaw said: “Some commentators and parliamentarians in Kenya have suggested that the UK’s proposed amendment on video conferencing is designed to replace or substitute other proposed amendments at the ASP. This is not true.”

        The Kenyan delegation has indicated that it will “play to the end” to see that Article 16 is changed.

        But activists have opposed the move, arguing it would dent the value of the need to fight impunity. A position paper presented by a group of NGOs asked the state parties to consider the value of victims and reject the proposed amendments.

        Additional reporting by Aggrey Mutambo

        http://www.nation.co.ke/news/politics/Ruto-absence-from-court-irks-Bensouda/-/1064/2082088/-/ng5ofc/-/index.html

      • mzee

        Ruto has always been joking that a lion that’s rained on, is not a kitten

        well methinks that they’ve been calling the ICC a wet kitten for so long that he believed it and then went out and pulled its tail

        … and just as he pulled the tail, he is for the first time also looking in a mirror and seen for himself for whom he is in this courtroom scenario … he is a mouse!

        at this point it does not matter whether the tail he pulled is that of a wet cat or wet lion, the problem is that he is a mouse, that is what needs to be urgently addressed!

        …well Mr Ruto, good luck with all that

        …hehehe eti you get excusal to be in kenya while uhuru is out, and then you fly out to lay laws governing the institution that is trying you. i wonder if that is the average IQ for kenyan?

        ==

        have the read OTP request and its fully loaded

        http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1683931.pdf

        ==

        i believe Ruto has just hang himself up completely over the excusal. Khan is a tough advocate, but on this one, he is going to be hard placed. something tells me that ICC chamber is going to make a terrific ruling on this application

      • ICC judges allow Ruto to skip trial despite Bensouda’s appeal

        The International Criminal Court on Thursday allowed Deputy President William Ruto to skip attending the resumption of his case despite a contest from the Prosecution.

        ICC Trial Chamber V (a) judges granted Mr Ruto’s excusal but only for Thursday based on his earlier application to be absent.

        “The excusal is limited to a single day. The Chamber considers that granting the request will result in Mr Ruto’s absence only for a period which is strictly necessary and that such a limited excusal is consistent with absence from trial remaining the exception and not the general rule in this case,” the Court announced in a brief statement after the ruling.

        ICC Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda had on Wednesday made a three-point submission to the Chamber appealing the excusal.

        She argued that the earlier basis for allowing him to stay away from the case was now invalid.

        The Prosecutor said Mr Ruto had been granted leave to fill the constitutional requirement of being in the country while President Kenyatta was away on official duty (in Kuwait).

        (Read: Bensouda wants Ruto barred from ICC talks)

        “The prosecution requests Trial Chamber V(a) to reconsider and vacate its decision to grant excusal of the accused, Mr William Samoei Ruto, from attending his trial on 21 November 2013,” she argued in her petition.

        EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES

        Mr Ruto has been banking on the October 25 decision by the Appeals Chamber of the ICC had decided that ruled that the absence of an accused person from trial is allowed under exceptional circumstances if such a person had explicitly waived his right to be present at trial.

        This Appeals Chamber concluded that while a trial chamber enjoys discretion under Article 63(1) which requires trial to happen in the presence of the accused, that discretion is based on each case.

        Mr Ruto had on November 11 also submitted his waiver of presence thus allowing the trial to proceed without him attending it.

        But in her petition, Ms Bensouda argued that that she had been “informed” Mr Ruto would be leading a delegation to the ongoing Assembly of State Parties meeting meaning both he and Mr Kenyatta would be away at the same time.

        However, President Kenyatta returned to the country on Wednesday evening, and Mr Ruto is not leading the Kenyan delegation.

        Instead, the Deputy President was due to arrive at The Hague on Thursday afternoon but it wasn’t clear if he will attend the ASP.

        The drama at the Court occurred even as Kenya pushed for amendments on a number of Articles on the Rome Statute which the Kenyan delegation led by Foreign Affairs Cabinet Secretary Amina Mohamed argues have been causing tension between the Court and the African continent.

        These amendments include suggestions that heads of States be granted immunity until they leave office and that it shouldn’t be a requirement for the accused to be present during trial.

        But moments after she addressed the plenary at the ASP, activists told reporters that Kenya’s push was a ploy to weaken its operation and encourage impunity.

        http://www.nation.co.ke/news/politics/ICC-judges-allow-Ruto-to-skip-Thursday-hearing/-/1064/2082978/-/39q3nf/-/index.html

  9. And Khan is not ready to apologise to anyone. Kimeumana jameni! When it rains, it pours!! Heheheee!!

    null
    Deputy President William Ruto is welcomed by his lawyer Karim Khan to the International Criminal Court at The Hague for the Status Conference of his case. He is accompanied by his wife Rachel (centre). Khan says he will not apologise to Principal Secretary Mutea Iringo over fixing Ruto claims. Photo/FILE NATION MEDIA GROUP

    Deputy President’s lawyer Khan: I will not apologise to Iringo over fixing claims

    By LUCAS BARASA

    Deputy President William Ruto’s lead counsel Karim Khan says he will not apologise to Principal Secretary Mutea Iringo over statements made at the International Criminal Court.

    Mr Khan said he and his defence team were just doing their duty of defending Mr Ruto in court “without any favour and protecting the truth”.

    “There’s no cause to apologise. As a Queen’s Counsel, I know my responsibility,” Mr Khan told Nation.co.ke in a telephone interview, adding that he stood by evidence presented in court.

    Mr Khan said he was proud of his defence team’s work and that they will continue to thoroughly investigate the case facing Mr Ruto.

    He said it is up to the judges to determine the truth about the case, if it is proved beyond reasonable doubt that Mr Ruto committed the charges facing him or not, or if the charges were fictitious.

    Mr Iringo had written to lawyers representing Mr Ruto to protest the allegations that he ‘fixed” the DP to face trial at the ICC.

    ‘NEVER BEEN PART OF PLANS’

    In the letter dated November 12, 2013 Mr Iringo said he has never been part of any plans to offer cash and protection to witnesses who would testify against Mr Ruto.

    The PS said he was a law abiding citizen and a strong believer in the rule of law and that the claims made during the ongoing trial at the ICC were unfair, false and without basis.

    “I am not aware of any group that was allegedly tasked with identifying witnesses to present to the Waki Commission. Indeed, I was never involved in the Waki Commission proceedings in any way,” Mr Iringo said.

    The PS said Mr Khan’s legal team “should avoid playing political games and instead conduct legitimate and credible investigations without tarnishing names of innocent individuals using privilege of the ICC forum, when these individuals have no means and or similar platform to respond to such accusations”.

    Kericho senator Charles Keter on Sunday demanded the removal of 10 government officials who might have been involved in coaching witnesses to implicate Mr Ruto.

    Siaya senator James Orengo has since demanded a statement from the government on what it was doing to ensure such people do not continue serving in their positions.

    http://www.nation.co.ke/news/politics/Khan-will-not-apologise-to-Iringo-over-fixing-claims/-/1064/2071584/-/9s91vqz/-/index.html

    • Einstein

      This is one of the reasons, I really wanted the ICC cases to proceed. Just listening to this evidence without the in-camera bs we would be subjected to in Kenya is very refreshing. As Job and Mzee have pointed out, the Jubilee Coalition whose foundation is deception, is slowly being pushed into a corner.

      In order for Ruto to escape he has to paint or rather expose those who “fixed” him. These are the guys who are firmly in Uhuru’s corner. In order for Uhuru to escape his people must fix Ruto. I have always maintained that even if the OTP case is weak, all they have to do is engineer it such that Ruto’s defense nails Uhuru while Uhuru’s defense hammers Ruto’s

      But these guys are serial liars, so expect them to build up even more incredulous lies as they attempt to beat the justice systems. It never ceases to amaze me, that these guys claim innocence. They claim the cases as weak. The charges are fabricated, etc etc. But the amount of energy, money and effort they have spent in tracking down witnesses and intimidating, bribing etc is unprecedented.

      Anyway am just looking forward to all the witness testimony and hope that all of it will be heard within the next year or so.

      That deferral story is dead in the water and the only reason the UNSC is still toying with it, is so as to save face for the AU. Note that the UNSC is making it clear that the cases are about two individuals who are suspects and it is not about African Presidents or for that matter, African people.

      Friday shall come and go. February is also not too far. Meanwhile in the meantime Ruto will go to Hague again for another 2 months, in which whatever little clout he is still left with, will completely be taken away from him or his office and he will be left with a shell of a deputy president for him to exercise on the weekends when he is let out. Now remember this will go on for about 4 years.

    • Op-Ed Contributor
      Kenya Tests International Justice
      By MAKAU W. MUTUA
      Published: November 5, 2013

      Facebook
      Twitter
      Google+
      Save
      E-mail
      Share
      Print
      Reprints

      Buffalo, N.Y. — Is the International Criminal Court racist?
      Related News

      International Court Postpones Kenyatta’s Trial (November 1, 2013)

      Opinion Twitter Logo.
      Connect With Us on Twitter

      For Op-Ed, follow @nytopinion and to hear from the editorial page editor, Andrew Rosenthal, follow @andyrNYT.

      Some African leaders have leveled this preposterous accusation against the court, which was established in 2002 to hear cases of genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity.

      The ironies are rich. It’s true that all eight of the countries where the tribunal has opened investigations thus far have been in Africa. But half of the cases were referred to the court by Africans. (The others originated with the United Nations Security Council or the court’s chief prosecutor.)

      Moreover, it seems that African leaders, who overwhelmingly agreed to the Rome Statute that set up the tribunal, now complain about it because it is doing its job too well — by pursuing justice and accountability even, or especially, at the level of heads of state. Hypocrisy is the homage that vice pays to virtue.

      The court currently faces a critical challenge to its legitimacy. Two defendants — President Uhuru Kenyatta and Deputy President William Ruto of Kenya — face charges relating to deadly postelection violence in Kenya in 2007-8. Although they have pledged to cooperate with the court’s proceedings, leaders of the African Union asked the Security Council last week to defer the cases for one year, saying that Kenya, which is still dealing with the aftereffects of a deadly terrorist attack on a shopping mall in Nairobi in September, would be destabilized by the absence of its two leaders.

      The African Union’s criticism of the I.C.C. has come from several leaders in the region: Prime Minister Hailemariam Desalegn of Ethiopia, President Yoweri K. Museveni of Uganda and President Paul Kagame of Rwanda, who have all shown authoritarian tendencies.

      But it would be a grave mistake for the international community to view these leaders as speaking for the desires and aspirations of their peoples.

      The violence that followed the presidential election of December 2007 remains a blot on Kenya’s history. President Mwai Kibaki, a Kikuyu, was declared the victor over Raila Odinga, a Luo, in an election that was widely viewed as illegitimate. The Kikuyu and the Luo have been historical rivals for power. But in the 2007 elections, Mr. Odinga united all the major ethnic groups (including Mr. Ruto’s Kalenjin) against Mr. Kibaki and the Kikuyu.

      Mr. Ruto is accused of organizing and orchestrating Kalenjin militias to attack, kill and evict the Kikuyu from the Rift Valley, his people’s ancestral base. Mr. Kenyatta is said to have organized the Mungiki, a deadly Kikuyu militia, to counterattack the Kalenjin, which they did viciously. Over 1,100 people were killed, and 650,000 displaced.

      Kofi Annan, the former United Nations secretary general, brokered a peace deal that led to a coalition government in which Mr. Kibaki remained president, but Mr. Odinga was named prime minister.

      Remarkably, Mr. Kenyatta and Mr. Ruto — erstwhile mortal enemies, and both charged with crimes against humanity — teamed up to win this year’s elections. They defeated Mr. Odinga in an election viewed, again, as having likely been stolen.

      The two men have said they would cooperate with the court’s work but have intensified a diplomatic offensive, begun in 2011, to try to stop justice.

      In a fiery speech at an African Union meeting in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, on Oct. 12, Mr. Kenyatta and others urged African states to withdraw en masse from the I.C.C., which he called a tool of Western powers.

      His government, a pivotal ally of the United States, has stated that Kenya’s “true friends” must support the deferrals, or risk a deterioration of relations. Kenya is forging closer ties with China, Russia, Brazil, India and South Africa, another sign of its effort to pressure the West to delay the cases.

      If the Obama administration caves in, it would sound a death knell for the I.C.C. It would represent a legal and moral abandonment of victims of violence and their survivors, and give criminal suspects more time to intimidate, bribe or even kill witnesses. It would say that presidents are free to kill, maim and rape their citizens with impunity.

      Statesmen like Mr. Annan, of Ghana, and his fellow Nobel laureate Desmond Tutu, of South Africa, hope that Mr. Obama will stand firm against the deferral, as he has until now.

      Security and the fight against terror will be important factors for Mr. Obama to weigh in his decision whether to veto the deferral request. Kenya has a role in maintaining regional stability — but it has greatly exaggerated that role following the Shabab attack on the Westgate shopping mall in Nairobi on Sept. 21, which killed 67 people.

      The United States needs Kenya in its fight against terror, but Kenya needs the United States even more in its war against the Shabab, the deadliest terrorist organization in East Africa. Kenya has received millions in United States military aid since 2006. Dozens of United States law enforcement agents are in Kenya providing forensic support to the police.

      Nor should the United States worry too much about Mr. Kenyatta’s threat to “look east” to China. The Kenyan elite is Western-oriented and the Kenyan diaspora is concentrated in Britain and America. Kenya relies on investments, trade, and tourists from the West.

      In a speech in Cape Town in June, Mr. Obama said that democracy and transnational justice were preconditions for attracting trade and investment and maintaining lasting peace and security. He must remain steadfast.

      Does the United States want to revert to the Cold War policy when it supported murderous dictators in Africa? Does it want to turn the clock back three decades, and listen to dictators like Mr. Mugabe, Mr. Kagame and Mr. Museveni? Or will America listen to Archbishop Tutu and Mr. Annan and veto the deferrals?

      Makau W. Mutua is the dean at Buffalo Law School, State University of New York. He is the author of “Kenya’s Quest for Democracy: Taming Leviathan.”

      INTERNATIONAL NEW YORK TIME
      http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/06/opinion/kenya-tests-international-justice.html?smid=tw-share&_r=0

  10. Anti-Western drivel has no place in Kenya

    Laikipia County is threatening to sever relations with Western countries that oppose deferral of the ICC cases facing President Kenyatta and Deputy President Ruto.

    The Governor of Laikipia would do well to explain exactly what links would be cut since the county does not have its own official relationships with Britain and the US, or any other foreign countries.

    To that extent, the governor’s threats should be dismissed as the usual drivel from politicians crying out for attention.

    There are no diplomatic links to cut. Nor has the county the capacity to impose trade or travel restrictions on foreign states. However, such threats, in the present environment, cannot be ignored because of the security ramifications.
    The Governor specifically mentioned British and American interests in Laikipia that could be affected if the two countries did not change their positions on the ICC cases.

    He singled out the British Army training camps in Laikipia, and the “hospitality” accorded to Britons and Americans who have settled in the county.

    British troops train in Laikipia and adjacent counties under a bilateral agreement with Kenya. The county government is entitled to spurn the economic benefits of hosting such a large number of soldiers, but would be advised to register its objections with the national government rather than through rabble-rousing at political forums.

    The implied threats against individuals, however, amount to careless talk when every corner of the country is trying to woo investors and tourists.

    Worse, criminals might interpret the threats as a licence to target farms, ranches, tourist camps and other enterprises associated with British and American investors. If that happens, the inciters must be prepared to face the consequences.

    http://www.nation.co.ke/oped/Opinion/-/440808/2070740/-/6xur5bz/-/index.html

    • einstein,

      Here is The Boss threatening to lock up his boys because they have given info to incriminate him. Talk about using criminals to catch criminals. Uhuru is just making his case more dangerous. He has completely freaked out. These mungiki chaps are scaring the shit out of Uhuru. Uhuru is going to lose this game. It is dumb to threaten witnesses right infront of the judges.

      All witnesses have the same protection. Uhuru cannot at one time claim the witnesses have given statements indicating they committed crimes and at the same time allege that the witnesses are lying when they say Uhuru was the mastermind of the alleged crimes.

      http://standardmedia.co.ke/?articleID=2000097563&story_title=clash-over-mungiki-icc-witnesses

      • Something is very clear. Uhuru has had alot of palling with Mungiki and is scared like hell that they will open up at the ICC.

        What is also emerging is that the possibility of Uhuru being locked up is very high for he is doing wrong things on multiple fronts.

        I for one will let him carry his cross.

  11. EDITORIAL
    Kenya and the International Criminal Court
    By THE EDITORIAL BOARD
    Published: November 9, 2013

    Two Kenyan leaders charged with crimes against humanity have retaliated with an all-out attack on the International Criminal Court. Although Kenya is a court member, and President Uhuru Kenyatta and Deputy President William Ruto have agreed to cooperate, they are doing everything they can to discredit the institution by accusing it of racial bias and of being a Western tool.

    Let’s be clear: The court has the case because Kenyans refused to initiate their own process to ensure accountability for the victims of the violence that followed the 2007 election, when mobs went on a rampage, killing, raping and setting fire to homes and businesses. More than 1,100 people died in the ethnic clashes. They are the real victims here, and they deserve justice.

    An African Union panel, led by Kofi Annan, the former United Nations secretary general, mediated an end to the crisis, and a Kenyan inquiry commission concluded that at least some violence was organized with the aid of businessmen and politicians. The commission called for a special tribunal to bring those responsible to account. If that didn’t happen, it said, the case should be turned over to the International Criminal Court. After the Kenyan Parliament twice rejected proposals to create a tribunal, the case went to the I.C.C. prosecutor, who charged six people with crimes against humanity — among them Mr. Kenyatta and Mr. Ruto, who were leaders of rival political parties in 2007-8 and have since joined forces.

    The charge of racism against the I.C.C., while specious, has a certain appeal: Of the eight cases brought by the court, all involve African states. There are indeed real questions about why charges of war crimes and crimes against humanity have not been pressed elsewhere — in Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria. Still, serious abuses occurred in each of the African cases now before the court, and they need to be adjudicated.

    While the court may be flawed, it is the last resort to deliver justice for victims of conflict in countries that lack the capacity or will to do so themselves. Last May, the African Union passed a resolution accusing the court of targeting Africans. What it really should have focused on, and applauded, is that the court is also defending Africans, including the 1,100 Kenyans slaughtered in 2007-8.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/10/opinion/sunday/kenya-and-the-international-criminal-court.html?_r=0

  12. I think its too late to to demand sacking of Ruto fixers. Accept and move on. You shouted for more than five years of how Raila was fixing Ruto but evidence is showing otherwise. So, cry baby cry. I dont think that the Mt. Kenya maffia will give even an inch,
    ——————————————————————

    Kericho Senator Charles Keter on Sunday sensationally claimed that some individuals who wanted to ‘fix’ Deputy President William Ruto are currently in government.

    The senator, who was speaking during a fundraising ceremony in aid of the construction of the Litein Faith Church sanctuary in Litein Town, Bureti Constituency of Kericho County, said the individuals were behind a plot to send Mr Ruto to the International Criminal Court in The Hague.

    “I think it is a shame that the same people who wanted to fix Ruto are sitting comfortably in government. How do you serve the government of the person you wanted to jail?” the visibly annoyed senator asked.

    According to Mr Keter, the government officials he was referring to had gone to great lengths to send people to the ICC to give false testimony against Mr Ruto. He called for the officials to be kicked out of government at once and prosecuted for their misdeeds, accusing them of betrayal

    THREATENED TO REMOVE OFFICIALS

    The Senator – a close ally of Mr Ruto – further hit out at the officials whose names he however refused to divulge, wondering where their loyalty lay as they are allegedly now working for the same leader they tried to have jailed.

    Mr Keter went on to say that should President Kenyatta and Mr Ruto find themselves unable to remove the officers, he would marshal the support of like-minded political leaders to have them kicked out of government by any means possible.

    “We cannot keep on sharing power with such individuals. Some of us are not ready to negotiate with such people. We are not going to do that because we want the truth to prevail and we do not know where the loyalty of these people really is,” he added.

    His views were supported by MPs Benjamin Lang’at (Ainamoi) and Leornard Sang (Bureti) and the more than 10 Members of County Assembly (MCAs) who also attended the fundraising ceremony. The leaders expressed confidence that Mr Ruto was innocent of all the charges facing him at The Hague-based court. (READ: Ruto, Sang ICC trial on a 2-week break)

    http://www.nation.co.ke/news/politics/Charles-Keter-Kericho-Senator-William-Ruto/-/1064/2068690/-/kh2pn6/-/index.html

  13. Can somebody please advise UhuRuto to offer the Russians some concrete economic deals in Kenya so as to get the backing of the Russians viz-a-viz the UNSC?! Not that the move would change the situation anyway!! Heheheee!!!

  14. This write up from Ethiopia on ICC vs Uhuruto is long but very interesting
    —————————————————–

    ICC shows Kenyatta-Ruto cases no escape from justice: Where did AU go wrong on these highly charged matter?
    25 Oct

    by Keffyalew Gebremedhin, Posted on The Ethiopia Observatory

    Automaticity of Ruto’s excusal from his trial rejected

    We already had occasion on October 19, 2013 to comment on the ICC Trial Chamber’s conditional “excusal from continuous presence at trial” given to ICC-indictee Uhuru Kenyatta October 18, 2013. We showed uneasy sympathy with the Court’s action, out of awareness that the Kenyan state could not be auto- or remote-piloted, especially at this time when that country needs the full attention of its head of state.

    On the other hand, when the Appeals Chamber this morning announced its decision rejecting ICC-indictee William Ruto’s request, which was before the Court supported by Burundi, Eritrea, Rwanda and Tanzania, for similar treatment of conditional excusal as Kenyatta’s under Article 63 (1) of the Statute, we took great satisfaction recognizing that this latest decision would put into balance the right to justice of both sides of the Kenyan tragedy – those in the dock and the victims – as a result of events in the bloody 2007-2008 election.

    What this action reminds us is that justice is indivisible, to the notion and principle of which the African Union (AU) was totally contemptuous. Therefore, in upholding the appeal by the Prosecutor what the Appeals Chamber has done is to inform the world that protracted advocacy of justice for powerful people we witnessed at the AU summit and ever since after is not necessarily justice for ordinary citizens, especially the victims.

    For this precedent-setting decision, this blog would congratulate Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda and her energy, which sprung her into action against the granting to Ruto of conditional absence from the trial with 20-page appeal document the Prosecutor entitled: “The accused shall be present during the trial.”

    The Prosecutor’s essential point is that “The Majority of Trial Chamber V(a) (“Majority”) erred in law when it disregarded this statutory requirement and excused Mr Ruto from attending substantially all of his trial.” In explaining that, the Prosecutor stated, “Whatever “discretion” a Trial Chamber may have, it does not permit it to discard controlling statutory requirements, or to substitute its own policy preferences for those of the States Parties. The Majority it [sic] is bound to apply the law as it stands. The Decision fails to do this, and is incorrect as a result.”

    Meanwhile, it is our understanding that whatever resolution that is being drafted for action by the Security Council, requesting the ICC to defer the trial for a year of both Kenyan ICC-indictees may in this situation be forced to move to its natural death. We are equally pleased by the position the United States took, as articulated on October 23, 2013 briefing to the press. There, the State Department indicated, “We continue to encourage Kenya to meet its commitments to ensuring accountability for the victims of the post-election violence, including by cooperating with the ICC.”

    The AU Chairman and a few of his colleague’s anti-ICC highnoon

    Today’s important decision at the ICC’s Appeal Chamber brings this blog to winding down its long engagement on this matter. Therefore, as a concluding remark on the efforts so far, especially regarding the AU’s misguided action against the ICC, a revisitation is made hereunder. It should be clear at the outset that this blog is not defending ICC’s imperfections, although they represent improvements as compared to our national and regional failings as far as justice is concerned.

    As ineffective as the Court may have been, it is our considered view that Africans could benefit more by seeing it was work in progress and strengthening it, since it is their last recourse and means to small redress via international justice in the circumstances.

    Issues aside, Prime Minister Hailemariam Desalegn’s secular crusade against the Court has been blindly persistent and naïvely risk-seeker. Fortunately, instead of giving indicted African leaders in power total relief from accountability while in office – as the AU leaders had wanted – with its clear decisions in Kenyatta-Ruto cases, the ICC has successfully countered the AU’s excesses, which is aimed at protecting those in power.

    The prime minister’s headlong dive into this imbroglio started in 2013, with Ethiopia’s assumption of the rotating chairmanship of the AU. As a long time keen observer of the AU and Ethiopia, this blog must frankly state that Hailemariam’s arguments on this matter have been fortified by emotions, not the logic and clarity the situation demands. Obviously that is why the position he tried to promote within Africa and the international community has appeared demented – including that of the few cheerleading heads of state colleagues of his in East Africa, driving him from the front and behind.

    More importantly, the cause they claim to have espoused, .i.e., ensuring respect for the dignity of Africa and Africans became two-edged sword. The majority of Africa did not persuasion to see that the efforts of some of our leaders was vacuous and, at its worst, deceptive.

    Why do we say this?

    It is because, by definition the ‘African dignity’ platform they campaigned on was that of the ‘dignity of serving African heads of state.’ This ‘dignity’ only empowers them to imprison at any time without due course; it is the freedom and liberty to silence and cruelly eliminate political opponents. In reality, it is the indignity by which they empower themselves to determine the contents of election boxes.

    When that does not work for them as shortcut to power, their ‘African dignity’ is translated into the power to cause division of all sorts amongst peoples and within society along ethnic lines and tear apart a country or countries with rich cultures, history and sense of unity that have kept them together and at peace and mutual tolerance.

    Briefly put, the crux of their logic is that this ‘African dignity’ needed the defense and protection of Africans rallying together – if possible with small help from the United Nations Security Council – to ensure the freedom of our leaders to exercise impunity.

    The proper question in this situation to be addressed to African leaders is how dignity could be divisible. This is to say, as they claim, is there separate class of dignity for “sitting African heads of state” that must be protected and another for the victims of the powers to be or state violence as in Darfur, DR Congo or Kenya during the 2007-2008 election and many more from the past or those that come in the future?

    Fortunately, the international community is not impressed with a few activist heads of state within the AU. It only entertained some serious commentators in the media, who on account of it had a field day to air their ridicule stern disapprovals.

    Moreover, since Al-Bashir’s indictment in 2008 the United Nations Security Council has received the complaints of AU’s heads of state against the ICC. However, in each of those instance, according to Hailemariam’s statement to the UN General Assembly at its 68th session on 25 September 2013, the Council did not even acknowledge receipt of the AU leaders’ requests, much less acting upon it.

    Is this because the whole international community has decided to stand against “sitting African heads of state”? As an African, I do not think for a moment that is the case. Rather the reason is that the requests of African heads of state – especially those in East Africa – have lacked political sensitivity toward the victims of their cruelty, an astute political appreciation of the situations and a sense of accountable governance and, most of all, the moral quality.

    After all, the Security Council has been aware that, of 20 cases in eight situations that have been brought before the ICC, it is only two cases – Cote D’Ivoire and Kenya – the ICC’s Chief Prosecutor under the provision of Article 15 and authorization by the Pre-Trial Chamber turned into investigating.

    The rest, as states parties to the Rome Treaty were brought to the Court by four African states. These are: Uganda the Joseph Kony case, the Central African Republic, DR Congo and Mali brought to the court their internal problems of destabilization.

    The situations in Darfur, the Sudan and Libya were referred for action by the Court by the UN Security Council.

    In the light of this it is unfortunate that some like Uganda should now delete from their memories that and join the East Africa heads of state crowd to become complainants against the ICC.

    Let us be clear about one thing. The ICC is not a real store of justice or effective as an institution – ‘ a court of last resort’ – in protecting the interests of ordinary Africans from the impunity of those in power. Clearly, if the whole of Africa were to fall prey to this anti-ICC machination, the victims would still be more and more Africans.

    While Article 4 of the AU’s Constitutive Act since 2000 has endeavored to hold African states in partnership with the ICC – at least at the level of principles, obligating to commitment of “respect for the sanctity of human life, condemnation and rejection of impunity and political assassination, acts of terrorism and subversive activities” – what is happening now shows that Africa still has a long way to move forward.

    Put in another way, sad as it is, this narrowing of differences at the level of principles, has hardly managed to stop many African leaders from becoming the prime tormentors of their peoples. That is why it has been starkly clear now for many Africans that the intention of their leaders was a botched attempt at securing insurance in their flight from present and future justice.

    For instance, we read in news sources that a documentary has already been made in Sweden about the massacres, human tragedies that have befallen Ethiopian Ogadenis for at least a decade and a half by the TPLF army. It is understood that jurists in Sweden are shocked by the tangible first-hand evidences before them. Becuase of this they are reportedly planning to hold the Ethiopian regime accountable by approaching either the ICC or the appropriate United Nations treaty body, the Committee Against Torture to get investigations initiated.

    This means that, if the AU were to succeed in killing this experiment in international justice, as attempted by Hailemariam et.al., the first casualties would have been the very many ordinary African citizens in a number of countries that end up needless victims.

    We realize that in some of those countries already visited by cruelty and impunity to date, despite the lapse of time, peace has hardly been fully restored; with the fabrics of their societies badly hit, there still is no sense of coming together amongst and across ethnic groups in a number of these societies.

    That is why it is important for the AU leaders to stop and think, before they jump the gun. Everyone aiming at bringing peace and harmony within peoples and communities would serve Africa better.

    One last thing on this is that our leaders need not see an opening in the latest respite Kenyan leader(s) would get from the ICC docks. This is to say, founding normalcy on the premises of justice and confidence is better guarantee for lasting peace in Africa.

    This in turn is the ultimate guarantee for success, an improved tool for development and vital defense against terrorism, to which Africa has increasingly become vulnerable.

    A forgotten host country interests and the Meles legacy

    On a separate note, as an Ethiopian, we should point out that I strongly feel that Hailemariam’s unbridled gear against the ICC has undermined Ethiopia’s longstanding interests as a headquarters country for the regional organization. The Ethiopian government has also been depository of the Charter of the pan-African organization.

    What makes a host country different from others in regional and international relations is the fact of it usually being burdened with added responsibility to pay close attention to the health of the organization. A good host country would have clear insight of what issues would strengthen it, or come down the road as a boomerang to damage the organization. Failure in that is an unmistakable evidence not only of poor stewardship of the organization but also secular weakness in the diplomacy of the host country.

    Divisions could weaken organizations; it is like cancer metastasizing in a human body, eventually causing death. All that it needs is an unguided missiles like Sudan’s Al-Bashir, Museveni or Gaddafi II, etc, to start the political fire of dissension derailment from agreed upon objectives.

    Thank heavens that, in this ICC case we could witness some West African states, mostly and French speaking Africa, quietly and firmly making the point that they need the ICC, notwithstanding its defects and ineffectiveness.

    Why the Ethiopian regime is nervous about ICC-indictment of Sudanese and Kenyan leaders

    For Hailemariam and his colleagues, there were only two considerations. First, they ask what Meles said on that matter. Of course, on January 22, 2011, Meles intimated to the envoy Kenya sent to Addis Abeba in the person of Vice-President Kalonzo Musyoka:

    “We will not hesitate therefore to support a position presented by Kenya, not only because we must always come to the aid of our neighbour, but also because we believe that the course the country has taken would be the best under the circumstances.”

    This is much easier promising to support as a member than the single minded chairman nation that has no other considerations handling the gavel. For that, Hailemariam went beyond the call of duty as chair, cursing and belittling the Court, for that matter even against the facts.

    The probably this is because the second goal is to get Kenya fully supplanting its historic, wise and longstanding friendship with Ethiopia with that of the TPLF. This results with Kenya not allowing its territory to be used by forces opposed to the Addis Abeba regime, which has a number of them.

    Moreover, since the regime is also interested in becoming a regional hydropower center, it has been trying to remove any danger to any of its business interests, especially regarding the sale of electric power from Gibe III dam. Linked to this is also the difficulty the future state of Lake Turkana and how its residents would fare, when the Gibe III current is up and running, possibly within a year.

    That is why the whole ICC issue has become a terrible diplomatic soup no one can eat. Before the Kenyan indictees for the same reason, Meles put his finger in a failed rescue effort of Omar Al-Bashir – the Sudanese head of state fugitive from justice. On July 28, 2008, The Los Angeles Times dubbed this move by Meles as A diplomatic offensive in Sudanese president’s behalf.

    If both Meles Zenawi and now Hailemariam Desalegn were to seriously considered Ethiopia’s interests at heart, they could have refrained from making the mistake of cementing on one side, while making a hole on the other with their self-serving anti-ICC expeditions that has harmed Africa’s image and interests – including Ethiopia’s.

    All said and done, Hailemariam’s efforts at choosing to obey Meles’s ghost has clearly ignored Ethiopia’s present and future interests, much as it has what is good for ordinary Africans – the people whose rights are always being trampled underfoot.

    Both the people of Sudan and Kenya and elsewhere need genuine justice, normalcy, peace and security; in the case of Darfur, United Nations peacekeepers have not been spared even at the time of this writing.

    Let’s face it, this attempt by the AU, the leaders of Kenya and the Sudan especially, in trying to escape from justice, they have hurt the longstanding interests and images of their respective countries, including the cheerleaders.

    *Title adjusted from ICC showed Ruto no escape from justice: Where did African Union go wrong on this highly charged case?

    http://ethiopiaobservatory.com/2013/10/25/icc-showed-ruto-no-escape-from-justice-where-did-african-union-go-wrong-on-this-highly-charged-case/

      • Could Mututho be one of the said intermediary for the boss?
        Below is a hypothesis by a blogger on the star newspaper which Uhuru would love to gag with his recent state sponsored bill.

        Uhuru Kenyatta’s fear is that He maybe seen as rewarding Mututho with a job after Mututho contacted ICC witnesses and passed a threat message to ICC witnesses on reasons why they should withdraw their statements as witnesses,it is on this light that his appointment was revoked but many do remain in darkness and fake reasons given justifying hypocritical actions as if truth is a stone age extinct animal unknown today.These are proven facts.

        Four days before Mututho appointment, Uhuru Kenyatta was in Maai Mahiu Naivasha Mututho’s backyard where Mututho was in a meeting of PEV victims relocation,
        Mututho had earlier engaged a Maai Mahiu family into talks on how their son would withdraw as a ICC witness with a promise to facilitate with air fares of 15 people relocated abroad to come back home after three key ICC witnesses were to withdraw their statements,
        Immediately after a local TV station aired the first face of the deal which was a threat to one of the three ICC witnesses and Mututho calling them to issue a perceived threat and intimidating them on a consequence to follow for failure to withdraw,,Mututho was rewarded by appointment as the Chairman of Nacada.
        For a whole Month nothing happened on his appointment now after Bensouda stating she has recorded audio bribery claims of witnesses interference and intimidation,Mututho appointment is revoked, Concocted lies and schemes with stories on why Mututho appointment was revoked is a picture drawn so as to cover true hidden unfolded scenarios only known to the few involved.

      • Adongo,
        I have read the whole thing and I must say that from line 40 onwards is pretty toxic. It shows the murderous nature of the Muthamaki. It does not look good for this fellow just on the above accounts, before we even enter the trail proper. Murdering and attempting to murder witnesses are serious and a confirmation of the mans blood thirst. Rutos case is child play as compared to this.

      • `
        Adongo,

        This is exactly what we predicted. That’s a heavy submission right there…and it explains a lot of Uhuru’s fears. The issue of witness intimidation/assassinations/ bribery is what will do in Uhuru and Ruto. It is not even a joke. Bensouda is untangling this mess with finesse.

        It is evident that some Mungiki who’ve dabbled both sides don’t even know who to trust anymore.


        But what is guaranteed is that a few of these Mungiki will stick with the OTP side solely for protection
        …Their fear is real as their incriminating confessions are already on record. The silver lining for them is that their kids (and many of their enterprising wives) are thriving under the witness protection scheme and have already integrated into Western lifestyles – them kids are twenging mbaya sana and happily singing hickory dock rhymes. Such ex-Mungiki parents can’t just fathom taking these kids away from the safety and comfort of San Fransisco or Ottawa back to the mercies of Uthiru or Githurai — simultaneously exposing themselves to shiny 9mm lead hunks fired from Njenga Thuo’s (& other hitmens’) Ceska pistols.

        That’s Uhuru’s problem right there. The allure of money will not sway ALL Mungiki. Some are in real fear of their lives, having witnessed their former partners in crime mowed down by assassin bullets. Knowing they have already spilled the beans and had their families adjusted to foreign lifestyles, they have “moved on”…they will dig in and go all the hog sticking with OTP.

        And as you can see from Bensouda’s submission, they are detailing every desperate attempt by Kenyatta’s handlers to lure them with bribes. Only guilty people bribe witnesses not to testify. It is Kenyatta’s greatest fear.

      • Yeah John! Now they can take their deferral to where it really belongs i.e the Assembly of States Parties [to the Rome Statute] and get another thwacking! Impunity shall NEVER be allowed to carry the day at international forums. They can confine impunity to Kenya and Africa if they so wish.

        Look at China in this pic below. The godfather of impunity indeed! How shameful!

        UN rejects bid to stop Uhuru Ruto ICC cases

        UNITED NATIONS

        The UN Security Council on Friday rejected an African Union demand to suspend the International Criminal Court trial of President Uhuru Kenyatta and his deputy William Ruto.

        A resolution proposed by African states calling for the deferment was the biggest challenge yet to the trials of President Uhuru Kenyatta and Vice President William Ruto who face charges of crimes against humanity at the ICC.

        But the resolution got only seven votes, two below the number needed to pass in the 15-member body.

        Eight council nations, all ICC members or supporters including Britain, France and the United States, abstained to ensure the failure of the resolution. (READ: Reject ICC cases bid – Amnesty International)

        “We feel that the Assembly of States Parties [to the Rome Statute] is the right place to take the grievances,” said the United States ambassador to the UN, Samantha Power, “But we have decided to abstain rather than vote no.”

        Security Council rules stipulate that a resolution requires nine affirmative votes in order to be approved.

        WITHOUT VETO

        It was the first time in decades that a Security Council resolution has failed in such a way without a veto by one of the permanent members.

        Article 27 of the UN Charter states that “decisions of the Security Council on substantive matters shall be made by an affirmative vote of nine members including the concurring votes of the permanent members; provided that, in decisions under Chapter VI, and under paragraph 3 of Article 52, a party to a dispute shall abstain from voting.”

        Abstention has been used as a strategy by permanent members to avoid offending a state in question even when it still supports the opposition to a resolution.

        The African nations, led by Rwanda, who proposed the resolution faced strong criticism for the challenge and the way it was forced upon the council.

        Guatemala’s UN ambassador Gert Rosenthal said the attempt to suspend the trial was an act of “contempt” against countries that had sought to help Africa with peacekeeping troops and efforts to boost justice in the continent.

        Mr Kenyatta and Mr Ruto are accused of masterminding unrest after a 2007 presidential election in which at least 1,100 people died. Kenyatta and Ruto took office after an election this year.

        Mr Ruto’s trial has started, while that of Mr Kenyatta is scheduled to get underway February 5 after being delayed three times.

        Reported by Kevin Kelley, BMJ Muriithi, Aggrey Mutambo and agencies.

        http://www.nation.co.ke/news/politics/United-Nations-Security-Council-Vote-ICC-Cases/-/1064/2074792/-/lnsn6o/-/index.html

      • `
        Absolutely as predicted. NO DEFERRAL!

        The Westgate “terror act” didn’t do the magic. All that bloodshed, loss of lives, and property destruction –and of course the sweat from wakina Gichangi, Karangi et al., up in smoke! Tragic shame!

        This UNSC decision is foresighted –otherwise a deadly precedent would have been stamped…whereby Third World dictators and genocidal architects would be plotting their own versions of Westgate whenever called into scrutiny.

        Grapevine has it that Karim Khan has meanwhile documented compelling evidence de-linking Ruto from Baraza’s witness interference charges (under Article 70). Khan is seeking to prove that his client absolutely had no direct links with Baraza who is under the legal guardianship of Jubilee/TNA-affiliated lawyer Kibe Mungai.

        Under whose instigation could Baraza have been acting if not Ruto’s? That’s the elephant in the Jubilee tent. It is certainly from forces that want to bring harm to Ruto’s case. Forget the witness coaching by the Iringos and Gitaus — this could be a more deadly form of malicious sabotage from within.

        It seems Khan has warned Ruto to be VERY weary of his Jubilee friends working through the NSI. Khan first made it clear Ruto and him were not part of the deferral scheme –which has just failed as he expected. Khan then called out the architects who “recruited and coached” witnesses against Ruto –and affirmed his statement in spite of Iringo’s public denial. Khan has then publicly delinked Baraza from Ruto.

        It is becoming clear Baraza is yet another of NSI’s creations concocted to worsen Ruto’s case at the Hague. It seems Ruto’s potent enemies are all within the Jubilee government. They want to absolutely ensure that no possibility ever happens in ICC that puts Uhuru in jail while leaving Ruto free to rule Kenya.

        There is surely no honour among thieves! The Ruto-enemies are working unfettered in the Jubilee government — despite their outing by Khan, or the calls for their resignation (“noise”) from Keter, and in spite of political threats from Murkomen.

        If it is indeed true that Ruto has no links with Baraza — then the NSI could be the culprits. What is known is that Kibe Mungai (Baraza’s lawyer) is a very close associate of Githu Muigai.

        The AG is covertly delaying Baraza’s extradiction to Hague by playing time-delaying games in Kenyan courts (courtesy of the latter’s “lawyer” Mr. Kibe Mungai). Ruto and Khan on the other hand, want Baraza to be quickly extradited to the Hague –to prove they have nothing to do with him.

        The continued delay should worry Ruto. Should Baraza suddenly die, then the trajectory of Ruto’s case might

        turn against him.

        Ruto should therefore use his position in government to ensure Baraza stays alive. He should closely watch those who’ve clung onto Baraza and interrogate their motives.

        The mashetani crew might eliminate the latter in a bid to keep Ruto further away from the helm. The key to these folks is to COMPLETELY avoid a possible situation where Ruto walks while Kenyatta is nabbed.

      • there was a time (once upon a time) that uhuruto were reasonable men. right now they have immense power and clout, surrounded by sycophants, some very intelligent people, but regrettably most are pretenders to the throne, but people with immense resources at their disposal.

        dictatorship is made of these.

        how the narrative shifted from justice for victims of PEV to unbridled blind support of suspects is just one of the coups of the mind, very well engineered.

        next we have seen some smokescreen about breaking “colonial ties” such as labeling ICC as a colonial tool, recently the snubbing of commonwealth substituted with Kuwait econ conference engineered by none other that the powerful AU president current head of RSA.

        we have also seen some tough stances regarding diplomatic posting. all these point towards a more “liberated” africa, but sadly with the same old homeguards (or old colonial relics) still in charge. what has however changed is that the so called hoi polloi are now firmly behind these guys. i think that was an amazing coup, where you chop of someone’s limb(s) and that person, on his own volition blames the guy trying to protect him. it takes genius

        kenyans prefer lies and deceit and the attendant violence, those of us preaching otherwise are in for a rude shock.

        its time to smell the coffee and re-organise our approach. we do not need to necessarily join the wolves, but the message of right and wrong, is so obscure, no one cares anymore.

        i say that its time to take on a whole new level.

      • Folks,

        I am here in Jamhuri, watching stuff as I wait for my own Nyayo House case against the state. I will keep you folks briefed about that as time allows. I am holed up here in Nairobi having to sort this out first. It kills me because I miss the village.

        Any how the UNSC hope dropped with a thud after all the AU makelele. Now they have been told to take their theatrics to the ASP in Netherlands. That starts on Wednesday next week Nov. 20, 2013. It will be probably like throwing a hail mary pass after the last whistle is gone. After that things could be very tense.

        Right now some are still in denial. Many people I have talked to just want this thing resolved by the courts with no more headache for the country.

        The one thing people are asking is what happens after all the escape windows are closed. I had an interesting discussion yesterday with people who are active the politics of the land. The general sentiment is that things will be worse for Uhuru and for the country if he decides to abscond. It seems that is the general sentiment on the ground even among Uhuru supporters. The fear of the unknown is thicker than blood.

        Right now only one thing is certain. Nobody knows how this thing will end. Not even Uhuru has any clue. The republic is entering a stage of absolute unknown and there are no known unknowns. That much we know. It is ON.

      • Adongo,
        Wish you the best in your case. I hope that you win it.
        Otherwise our mademoni are in for a shock. After seeing all the doors closing, now they are going by James Orengos advice ie amending the Rome Statue itself. But even that will be an uphill task. Kenya/Africa does not have the numbers. Of the 122 members, Africa has 35 only. Lets just say that this is another long shot

      • mzee,

        Thanks.

        In the typical Kenya way they are trying to kill very many birds with no stone.

        One they want an amendment to force the court not to hide the identity of the witnesses. That is just pure rubbish. The ASP cannot force the courts to endanger the lives of witnesses. They will be told it is up to the court on the basis of the evidence before them to make rulings on such matters.

        Second they want the ASP to pass a resolution that sitting heads of state will be given special preferences eti, video link, non requirement for physical presence etc. They most likely will be told those matters are better handled by the courts on the basis of evidence before them. To make these kind of amendments the ASP will have to mutilate key portions of the Rome Statute which prohibits special treatment of indicted suspects on grounds of their status. These are not things you can do on the fly. The ASP cannot pass resolutions that contradict key aspects of the Rome Statute.

        Last Uhuru and his mob do not know yet whether to launch another frontal attack on members of the UNSC who abstained from voting to support Uhuru. Mara they call them cowards and non-friends and yet they still need their help.

        Remember one thing. Of the 8 security members refused to support impunity in Kenya 7 are active members of the ASP. Of all the seven UNSC members who supported the impunity peddlers none is a member including Russia and China. Of the 122 members 25 are from Western Europe and 18 from Eastern Europe. That could be an easy 40+ no vote. Of the rest 17 are from Latin America most of whom support human rights. Then we have 18 from Asia Pacific and the Carebbean many of whom also support human rights. Within the African vote there are some major differences. Talk about tyranny of numbers.

        Simply put, Uhuru and Ruto will have the judges to get any breaks. Otherwise just run. We will meet them in the racing lanes. No doubt.

      • Mzee and Adongo, last month the ASP had a pre-session retreat attended by ambassadors from about half of the signatories. I am surprised that it was not reported by African media as most of it was about Africa and the ICC.

        In the report, the second of these two sentences is significant

        “Many countries expressed the view that the concerns by the African Union should be taken seriously. Some countries supported this view but also noted that the upcoming Assembly could not take a decision on amending the Rome Statute.”

        http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/asp_docs/ASP12/ICC-ASP-12-INF.2-ENG.pdf

      • How low can the DN sink? their monday headline ‘UK supports video link trials for Kenya’.

        I still remember after the petition when Obama congratulated Uhuru, the DN ran a headline ‘BLOW FOR RAILA AS OBAMA COURTS UHURU’.

        SMH …

      • Folks,

        The Jubilee desperados have gone totally nuts about this ICC thing.

        Here is today’s news.

        http://www.the-star.co.ke/news/article-144258/kenya-rejects-uks-icc-video-link-proposal

        Why is this so sad for them?

        1. Of all the so called proposed amendments, only the UK one which these confused makelele chaps are weeping about came close to being doable. The vodoo proposals from Kenya and the AU are just plain rubbish which have no chance anywhere.

        The AU proposal which Jubilee was thrilled with is total nonsense. The AU has proposed that no sitting president should ever be tried at the ICC. Uhuru boys swallowed that whole.

        To pass that amendment according to the Rome Statute they need 87.5% of the member states(106 countries) not only to vote for it but also to ratify it. That is impossible unless you are living in the lalaland of the impunity peddlers. The totally confused Amina Mohamed thinking this was like amending the Kenyan constitution was yapping yesterday that the AU needs two thirds vote (81 countries). Let her find somewhere to take a nap and at least learn about how the ICC ASP works.

        In fact all ASP amendments need 87.5% votes to pass even the frivolous ones Uhuru is hanging on. They won’t get that. Secondly the amendments ought to have been sent to the ASP working group through the UN SG three months ago. None of that has happened.

        So what has happened? The nonsensical amendments have already been thrown out much to the shock of the Uhuru impunity peddlers at The Hague.

        2. Any amendment what ends up to be contradictory to the provisions of the Rome Statute is null and void to the extent of the contradiction.

        This means no amendment that contradicts Article 63 (1) of the statute which states that all indicted suspects have to be present at the hearing is dead.

        The UK proposed amendment tried to cleverly dodge that stating that Article 63(1) may be met by allowing indicted suspects to be present through a video link. Even that is problematic but at least it has a small window. But these fools don’t get it. That is their problem.

        3. Also don’t forget that any amendments if they ever make it through will only take effect 1 year after the countries that voted for them ratify them. Please don’t tell that to the Jubilee cry babies. We don’t want them to go wailing all over the place.

        4. The real problem here for Uhuru is that Kenyan presidents are used to laws being changed to suit their interests and now all of a sudden people are telling them to go to hell and are refusing to change the laws to suit them. It is a shock for them. It is going to take a while to sink in but it will by Feb. 5, 2014. Yes it will. That is all there is to this madness.

      • Adongo, I have been following the sessions of the Assembly of States Parties session. The proposals to amend the Rome Statute will be discussed but there will be no vote.

        African countries appear to be divided in their support for Kenya’s view. Botswana made a very strong statement in support of the ICC and even stated that it will be a candidate for next president of the Assembly. Senegal also made a strong statement in support of the ICC. Plus we should not forget that several African countries cannot vote on anything because they have not paid their dues for some time.

      • John Dibbley and Adongo,
        You guys are spot on.
        Seems that these guys are so used to having blodied noses they cant wait.
        Perhaps there is something they intend to show that we are not seeing. Or they can bend the ICC rules the way they do Mutungas. I cant figure it out. They should have known that game was up the moment African countries opposed them. But again, we are dealing with Jubilee

    • Folks,

      That ruling by the Appeals Chamber is a blow to the accused. There will be no special treatment at the ICC. The idea of bending the Statute to suit the political interests of accused persons is specifically prohibited by the Rome Statute.

      It is interesting that even the two judges who gave a dissenting opinion actually wanted even a stronger ruling prohibiting this king of excusals. They argued that Article 63 is specific that indicted persons have to be present during the trial. So really there is no window and this ruling is final. After all the dancing from the impunity worshippers who have been screaming that the ICC must wake up and respect their muthamaki the court has now spoken to restore the dignity of the ICC process. Back to square one. Stay there.

      Next is the UNSC which is a hail Mary pass. It has a very narrow window. Reading the AU “extraordinary” demands attached to the application at the UNSC I tend to think AU has done more damage than good to the case. AU makes some winded statements why African sitting heads of state must never be brought to the ICC. That is not only a load of rubbish, it is also outside the scope of UNSC. Only state parties to the ICC in their annual reviews can make such decisions and they never will. The ICC is specifically designed to try the untouchables and there are none more dangerous and notorious than African sitting heads of state. The UNSC thing is going to flop badly.

      Option Z which may be the only thing left is the pariah state option. Bring it on.

      • Adongo, last night I had dinner with two gentlemen whose connections to the diplomatic community I have no doubt of. In their view, the deferral request is already dead because at least the USA will not support it.

      • What about this nonsense by Nation.

        Very shallow one-sided analysis .

        “Who among Big Five will support Kenya’s #ICC deferral quest? http://t.co/UbQeBBV3yQ

        Nation think we cannot access authoritative sources in Washington. This

        “MS. HARF: So we’re aware of the request. We’re in the process of reviewing it. We, of course, are – continue to encourage Kenya to meet its commitments to ensuring accountability for the victims of the post-election violence, including by cooperating with the ICC, and remain committed to our 50 years of partnership with the Government and people of Kenya. Again, we’re reviewing that current request but don’t have anything further on that.”

        http://m.state.gov/md215780.htm#KENYA

        Does not sound like people ready to support deferral at UNSC.

      • phil,

        As you an see here from hired guns like Jendayi Frazer the situation is getting very desperate. Their wishful thinking is that the cases will somehow be stopped altogether. How will that work. It is nonsense.

        http://www.nation.co.ke/news/politics/ICC-process-will-end-in-empty-justice-says-Frazer/-/1064/2048502/-/29sc9l/-/index.html

        Sadly for Uhuru nobody in the US administration today listens to Ms Frazer. She is politically irrelevant and still stuck in the Bush mentality. It is at times like this that you understand why Uhuru really hoped that Mitt Romney would be the president of the US today. There would be some lunatic at the UN today(probably John Bolton).

        But we still have Dr. Susan Rice. She is the one who will cast the US vote at the UNSC and advise president Obama on what should be done. This UNSC thing is dead kabisa. They may not even reach the voting stage. If it goes there it will be smashed to smithereens.

        The ICC decision will have to be made by Uhuru himself in the next couple of weeks. There are no other open doors. To go or not to go. That is Uhuru’s decision.

      • Adongo and Phil,
        That the USA will encourage impunity is a joke. Even during Bush time he refused to let Kibakis theft stand. We ended up with a government of national unity. To expect that Obama would allow such treachery is a dream of the highest order. The spin by the local papers is just foolish in this day and age when everyone has access to information. Uhuru will have to go to the Hague and suffer the humiliation that he deserves if he actually took part in the crimes he is accused of. Crying like a baby while he had all along told us that he would be cleared is silly. Let the ICC make that determination.

        WASHINGTON, Oct. 24 (UPI) — The U.S. government expects Kenyan leaders to honor their commitment to address post-election violence through ICC cooperation, a spokeswoman said.

        Read more: http://www.upi.com/Top_News/Special/2013/10/24/US-reviewing-Kenyas-case-with-ICC/UPI-21801382622659/#ixzz2iwc57cZc

      • WHAT’S BLUE is reporting that the AU deferral request has just been printed in blue, which means it is ready to be voted upon. The most likely date for that is Friday.

        http://www.whatsinblue.org/

        It appears that a veto will probably not be necessary, as there is not enough support to get 9 votes, although this seems to be an unusual case:

        “However, even if a draft resolution calling for such a deferral is put to a vote and none of the permanent members veto it, there is a possibility that the draft might not receive the requisite nine votes for adoption. While relatively rare, there have been a few cases historically in which this has happened. One notable example occurred in June 1993.”

        It appears that the sponsors don’t expect any success but have come up with a strange idea:

        “African members of the Council have suggested that this resolution is a test of whether countries are either for or against Africa. This has upset some Council members who believe that this is an issue about two individuals and should not be linked to support for Africa.”

    • Ok so, blanket excusal is out, case by case it is, with excusal being the exception rather than the norm.

      It therefore follows that the number of excusals will start to diminish over time, meaning Ruto must carefully select when to be excused.

      We’ve already established running via skype is a dream. Excusals are best only if Uhuru is out of the country. The options are closing in fast. Politically he needs to be in charge of his destiny and resume command, absentee DP is not a great strategy.

      The witnesses are meanwhile, hammering the points home.

      I think URP is about to experience a political makeover.

      • Blog-Admin, the OTP did not oppose the 3-day excusal but made it clear that they do not consider this an “exceptional circumstance” and that it should not be taken an an indication of how they will react to future requests.. I think they agreed to it so as to show flexibility and put a definite nail in the deferral request. I predict that once that request is killed, they will get tougher.

      • John

        You are right, but I also think that the Trial Chamber is now provided with more clear guideline on when to exercise discretionary powers and may in due course make rulings irrespective of whether the OTP opposes or not. I think the OTP will take advantage of the excusals to fortify their case/witnesses and the excusals in between the sessions may in the end do more harm than good since the OTP will have a chance to consolidate and review as the case progresses. But we do have some interesting times ahead.

      • One thing I like about this discretionary excusals under special circumstances is that the courts have brilliantly closed any dim hopes for the UNSC deferral. The court has said we will let them go for a couple of days if they have very pressing matters to attend to and we will limit the duration of that excusal and remember the trial may be allowed to proceed even when they are away.

        So UNSC will tell the indicted amigos to take their concerns if and when they have them to the ICC which is flexible. But this is like the flexibility I had in the hands in the Special Branch when they were transporting me from Mombasa to Nairobi. We reach some joint they tell me, adongo you can go eat some food in the restaurant. I was even allowed to wander around and go to the washrooms. But try climbing that washroom wall to make a dash for your life and you are dead meat.

        This was just a very bad day for Uhuru and Ruto and frankly they didn’t expect it. They had believed in their own hype about ICC being cornered and forced to behave. Naah.

        This was a stunner to the bone. They will absorb it slowly after a few more chest thumping false hopes. Shauri zao:

        http://www.standardmedia.co.ke/?articleID=2000096255&story_title=why-ruto-s-double-blow-at-icc-shook-jubilee

        And now they say they have to escalate the deferral circus show. How do you do that. You summon the UNSC envoys to Nairobi and give them a thorough beating and tell them this will only stop when the ICC cases against uhuru and ruto are deferred? May be. Have more Westgates? May be. Send Shebesh to Pan African Parliament? May be. Or may be just keep burying your head in the sand. That’s it. That is the plan. Good luck with that. Seriously!

  15. The Kenya Civil Society opposes deferral bid:

    23rd October 2013

    HE Ambassador Agshin Mehdiyev
    Ambassador/Permanent Representative of the Republic of Azerbaijan
    The United Nations and
    President of the Security Council
    for the Month of October, 2013,
    New York, USA.

    RE: KENYAN GOVERNMENT REQUEST FOR A DEFERRAL OF THE ICC CASES

    We, the undersigned Kenyan civil society organizations, write with regard to the Kenyan government’s request for a deferral of the ICC cases. The organizations listed below have interacted regularly with victims and affected communities and have been engaged with the accountability process in Kenya since the onset of the 20072008 post-election
    violence (PEV).

    Given the above, we believe that abandoning the process of accountability would send the wrong signal in Africa and internationally. Kenya and other governments voluntarily ratified and domesticated the Rome Statute which established the International Criminal Court (ICC) in order to stem impunity internationally. The Kenyan cases were initiated by the Waki Commission, which investigated the PEV and recommended the establishment of a Special Tribunal to try perpetrators of crimes against humanity locally, failing which the ICC would be called on to intervene.

    Following three failed attempts to establish that tribunal, the intervention of the ICC was triggered by AU mediator Kofi Annan. It is on this basis that the ICC Prosecutor (OTP) exercised proprio motu powers to conduct investigations leading to the indictment of six, now three, Kenyans by the ICC for crimes against humanity. The ICC process in Kenya is thus a Kenyan and African-initiated process. The attached memorandum contains detailed information on the reasons we believe that these cases should NOT be deferred, including:

    1. The conditions of Chapter VII of the UN Charter on which a successful request must be based do not apply to Kenya: The prevailing situation in Kenya is suitable for trials against the Head of State and his deputy. The perceived threats to peace and security indicated by the government do not meet the threshold required to invoke Chapter 7 of the UN Charter. Trials against the President and Deputy President do NOT constitute a threat to peace and security in Kenya. The causes of insecurity in parts of Kenya are NOT related to the ICC proceedings. The ICC is the only existing credible deterrent to a repeat of events similar to the PEV on a mass scale.

    2. Threats to Kenya’s security are exacerbated by bad governance not by accountability: Terrorism and insecurity in the region occur in a context of impunity, poor governance, corruption and their consequences, which have prevailed in the country for decades. The Annan-brokered agreement prescribed fundamental reform of the security sector, which has been resisted. The recent Westgate tragedy made the dysfunctionality of our security institutions only too clear. Previous terrorist attacks have taken place in Kenya and were not linked to the accountability which must be sought both for the post-election violence and the rule of law concerns which create an enabling environment for terrorism in Kenya. Rather than facilitating improved security, deferral of the cases would further embed impunity and the associated breakdowns that increase opportunities for further such attacks.

    3. There have been repeated failures to establish credible local justice mechanisms or to effectively prosecute crimes against humanity: Kenya failed to establish a local justice mechanism to try offences committed during the post-election violence, which would have obviated the need for the Court’s intervention. The failure was caused by a lack of political support for a tribunal by current and past political leadership and their supporters. Five years later, there has been no progress to speak of on prosecution of the post-election violence in Kenya.

    4. A deferral will complicate the already endangered situation of witnesses and others: The resulting delay will compound existing delays in the trial of the Kenyan cases and prolong hardships to witnesses, victims and human rights defenders. Witnesses in the Kenya cases have been killed, compromised and intimidated. The Prosecutor regularly reports witness intimidation and bribery. An arrest warrant
    has recently been issued in connection with this problem. A deferral could place the lives of witnesses at risk.

    5. There is still public support for accountability before the ICC: Despite the hostile political climate, more than 50 per cent of the Kenyan population still supports the Court. Ordinary and prominent Kenyans continue to speak out on the need for accountability. Victims and survivors continue to call for both retributive and restorative justice. Official statements about a lack of public support for the ICC process do not reflect these voices.

    6. The Kenyan government has yet to establish good faith in its dealings with the ICC: Despite official expressions of support, the Kenyan government has actively sought to undermine the ICC. Attempts to mobilise the African Union membership against the ICC to the extent of proposing a mass withdrawal are the most recent escalation in the campaign against cooperation with the process. The proper and constructive forum to bring forth legitimate grievances on the ICC engagement in Africa is in the Conference of States Parties, of which the African member states form the largest bloc.

    The undersigned organizations present this letter and attached memorandum in good faith, with the hope that victims who still bear the suffering and scars of the post-election violence will not be robbed of their chance to secure accountability. Further, the facts are presented to clarify misleading information on the state of peace and security in Kenya.

    Yours Sincerely,

    Africa Centre for Open Governance (AfriCOG)
    Coalition on Violence against Women (COVAW)
    Inform-Action
    Kenya Human Rights Commission (KHRC)
    Kenyan Section of the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ-Kenya)
    Kenyans for Peace with Truth and Justice (KPTJ)
    Muslims for Human Rights (MUHURI)

    CC: Ambassadors- All Member State Permanent Mission Representatives to the
    United Nations Security Council

    • mzee and phil, thanks for the links. been looking for more information regarding the civil society memorandum.here is the full memorandum. glad there are folks doing a good job behind the scenes.

      Kenyan Civil Society Memorandum to the UN Security Council against Deferral of Kenya’s cases before the ICC

      • Adongo, we can be sure that Azerbaijan will not support. They have been very busy trying to build good relationships with the USA for some time and have been very active in supporting the USA in Afghanistan and Iraq, in some USA led peacekeeping missions, and also some NATO activities.

        Unlike you and Job, I am still not sure about China on the other side. I think they talk the right talk but I don’t see that they have an interest in Kenya worth making too muck noise about.

        The other thing that is likely to take out some steam out of this even before Thursday is the formal meeting tomorrow on Somalia. It appears that Al Shabab (and Wesgate) will come up in the discussions to strengthen AMISOM. Consequently that will deflate any attempt to milk Westgate for a deferral on Thursday.

    • `

      Just read that memo. The civil society is playing its dutiful job — defending human rights’ of victims and witnesses in danger of continued elimination. Great job!

      This deferral business is turning into a big joke. I think many Kenyans have been misled by propaganda from the now notorious regime-and-impunity-apologist Daily Nation. Out here in the West, especially the US, Kenya is actually turning into a global laughing stock. Its notorious propensity to clutch onto straws of impunity is becoming legendary. My American colleague who knows my Kenyan roots joked yesterday about this entire deferral request after reading it from AP newswire.

      “The Kenyan President has a serious request to the world” he started…”He is too busy to attend criminal trial for mass murders”…he then joked.

      The point is — it’s not even funny if you think about the gravity of these matters. Kenya is making a big fool of itself..with all these acrobatics of a President setting all national institutions, personnel and systems to solely preoccupy with his avoiding trial!

      Kenya is wasting colossal sums of taxpayer money, flooding the corridors of the UN HQ building with lobbyists who include paid external diplomats from other African countries (Ethiopia and Rwanda) in a vain mission that will end with refusal to grant deferral. Unlike the Daily Nation which feeds local Kenyans on a daily diet of lies and wishful thinking, international media closer to the very actors sitting in the UN Security Council is awash with reports and analyses of statements already alluding to refusal to grant the request…whether on AP, CNN, Al Jazeera, VOA, BBC, New York Times etc.

      Where the Daily Nation is reporting that the UN Security Council (UNSC) has scheduled a meeting to hear Kenya’s deferral request (in view of the Westgate attacks), the rest of international media is confirming that no FORMAL MEETING was granted for this issue. The only thing whispered is about an informal session to hear Kenya’s deferral request. That alone tells you the weight by which the UN Security Council considers this matter — very unimportant, Westgate notwithstanding! The West will not hesitate to milk from the publicity of Westgate attacks to further expand its global anti-terrorism ideology but will simultaneously check any attempt by the likes of Kenyatta to use the same as pretext to skirt justice. Kenyatta is trying to bite more than he can chew….hurling abuses to the same forces he is pleading for help.

      The UNSC will allow an INFORMAL SESSION to briefly listen to Kenya’s deferral request on Thursday this week, October 31st, 2013. This happens to be the last day in which Azerbaijan holds the rotational Presidency of the UNSC and on November 1st, 2013 China takes over for a month.

      That timing alone can tell inferring minds what the outcome of the deferral request is likely to be. It is likely to be a decision contrary to China’s position in support of deferral.

      That date in itself is very strategic for those who understand the nuanced geopolitics that goes on in the UN.

      In lay terms, the UNSC will “dispense away” this “small matter” of deferral exactly one day before China takes over the monthly-rotational Presidency of the UNSC.

      These are the important details that Daily Nation will never reveal. Of the 5 permanent state (PS) members of the UNSC with veto power, China and Russia have been lately engaged in a tiff with the other 3 PS members — Britain, France, and USA — largely over issues in Libya, Syria etc.

      Even putting other merits aside, the writing is already on the wall that the 3 PS members above will do a pay back to China and Russia in defeating any initiative the latter secretly backs –such as this deferral request. No matter how hard and expensive Kenya lobbies, they won’t likely pull even a majority of votes on their side, out of the 15 members (UK, US, France, Russia, China, Azerbaijan, Luxembourg, Australia, Argentina, S. Korea, Pakistan, Guatemala, Rwanda, Togo and Morocco). Let’s remember any 1 of the first 5 PS member states can veto the deferral request and it is dead.

      Other reasons this request will be defeated include:

      – The UN Security Council has never deferred a case ever.

      – The UNSC has conspicuously noted that today (Oct. 28th, 2013), as Kenyatta is hosted by Rwanda’s Kagame –currently on UNSC spotlight over sponsoring M23 rebels in Congo…the same M23 rebels have just killed a Tanzanian UN peacekeeper in Eastern Congo. Was Kagame pointing the middle finger to Tanzania and the International community? At the very moment, Kagame has assembled about 10 African heads of state (including Kenyatta) in a “belligerence” conference camouflaged as discussing IT matters yet viewed as a pretext backdoor meeting for sabotagin and subverting international peace/justice interventions. When this deferral is finally rejected, Kenyatta should seriously think whether his relentless hanging on the coattails of Kagame and Museveni is taking him anywhere. The latter duo have been finally exposed by none other than the UNSC as perpetrators of regional aggression in Congo. Peddlers of political violence are known to identify with each other. Is the world seeing birds of the same feathers flocking together in Kigali?

      – AU resolutions can only sway 3 members from Africa (underwhelming minority).

      – The Int’l community sees the Westgate bluff for what it is – it ain’t no “threat to regional security” but rather a straightforward case of Kenyan Security failing to act on prior intelligence provided by NSI and the likes of Nairobi Senator Sonko about the impending attack.

      – The fact that no formal meeting was scheduled suggest this is not an emergency or crisis in the eyes of the UNSC.

      – AU lobbyists flooding the UN building is actually likely to backfire spectacularly — this type of lobbying by corrupt and impunity-craving Africans is of nuisance value, and less weighty compared to the well drafted letters sent by the civil society.

      • Job, excellent analysis. Just one small correction on my part. There is no evidence that China supports the request for deferrals. I think China simply does not care. There has been some Kenyan spin on the Chinese position but if you read Chinese statements carefully they are vague statements that say very little. E. g.

        “We hope the international community will respect the Kenyan people’s choice, and the ICC will heed the advice of African nations and the African Union,”

        Also for past requests, China has never pushed to have the issue placed on the UNSC agenda. China in fact rarely takes a hard position or pushes anything when it comes to African matters, contrary to what Uhuru hoped when he went on his trip.

        Another thing about the African countries on the UNSC is that Morocco, as far as I know, is not part of the AU and has had problems with the group.

      • John,

        I agree that Morocco may not be a shoe-in vote for deferral. On China, we can at least agree that they are very good at one thing –concealing their intentions. Whether secretly or not, China is in my view supporting Kenyatta’s deferral request, going by previous statements where they characterized the ICC intervention as an assault on Kenya’s “sovereignty”.

      • job,

        I was looking at the list of UNSC member states that you posted and I tend to agree that Uhuru’s game plan to save himself from the ICC will have a huge problem just getting the 9 votes forget facing the veto:

        15 members (UK, US, France, Russia, China, Azerbaijan, Luxembourg, Australia, Argentina, S. Korea, Pakistan, Guatemala, Rwanda, Togo and Morocco

        From that list Uhuru can bank on Rwanda, Togo and China for sure. Beyond that it is a nightmare. Remember for this matter to be formaly tabled in a UNSC panel, aside from this informal chit chats it has to have 9 votes in the bank and then there can be negotiations to plead with the veto countries not to use their veto.

        If an isue doesn’t have 9 votes it will die at the informal slaugther house. Some will say Russia is in the bag. Nope. Russia will vote if they see the issue already has the numbers. Secondly Russia will not want to have another rambo with the US and other countries the way they have had on Syria.

        So the first order of the day for Russia is to figure out where the US is on the matter. If they are on board Russia will be ready. If they are opposed Russia is not picking up a fight over Kenya. They did it for Syria because they have massive economic and military interests in Syria and the region. They will not risk a fight over Kenya where their interests are minimal at most. China wil wait and follow the wind, but they are likely to offer their vote and nothing else.

        Then we have countries like Pakistan and South Korea as well as Guatemala. Pakistan may have issues with the US but they have strategic interests to work together and they have a lot more going on in the background. South Korea will not support a motion to destabalise the ICC and they will go with the US which is their key ally. Guatemala’s has matured politically over the last couple of decades and they take human rights very seriously. Argentina absolutely NO for impunity. Luxembourg a big NO. Morroco leans NO. That leaves only Azerbaijan and I am not sure they are going to stick their toe in the fire for Kenya. US, UK and France will not offer an alleyway escort for impunity.

        So I just can’t see where Uhuru gets the 9 votes he needs for this even to be formally tabled. And when you bring in the veto powers this is a very dead matter. The prospects are slim to zero. But don’t tell that to Uhuru cheer crowd. Let the dancing go on for another few days then muthamaki will have to face the reality and he will have to make a decision to go down with the country or to get a little courage and face his devils alone. We will be here.

      • The meeting is now over. The result seems to be what was expected. It particular, it seems the USA made it clear that it was opposed to the idea. Maybe clarifications will come in official statements.

      • john,

        Let’s get some updates on the UNSC matter. This UNSC fantasy is just a bad dream. It won’t happen. Uhuru has been given a break with the trial pushed to Feb. 5, 2014. That means Ruto’s trial will go on uninterrupted.

        It is going to be interesting to find out what muthamaki will do after they get the official rejection from the UNSC. I think all the talk about withdrawals yada yada will vanish and Uhuru will lie low hoping for a miracle before Feb. 5, 2014. There will be none. Unfortunately for Ruto he has no powers to make any decisions on how things go. Only Uhuru can make that call. That is the food chain.

        Personally I would want to get a look at how things went on at the UNSC where so much hope was invested. Expect that hope to be replaced with bile and all the talk about Mzungu court support from the west. We don’t care.

      • Adongo, I thin there will be a lot of spin from Kenya and the AU about something positive. However, it is significant to note that the USA ambassador did not even bother to stay to the end of the meeting at Noon although the meeting went on until about 12:30 PM.

      • That should be “leaving at Noon but the meeting went on until about 1:30PM”, i.e. for nearly another 1.5 hours. A junior person was left “in charge”.

      • Amina must rue the day she got convinced/coerced to quit her UN job to run errands for an African dictator…..shauri yake.

        By moving uhuru’s trial date to february, which isn’t far i think the ICC has effectively sucked out all of the air from the deferral balloon. the mission isn’t accomplished now what next? continue camping at the UN, manufacture a more vicious ‘southgate’ and force a formal meeting and deferral?

      • Akinyi, the unofficial word is that Amina is very upset and will not make a statement today even though the meeting ended several hours ago. Unfortunately, for whatever reason, the local Kenyan media has been misleading the Kenyan public to believe that this was a sure thing.

      • Akinyi, according to the article you link to

        “Kenyan Foreign Minister Amina Mohamed added in a comment to the Nation newspaper that none of the 15 council members had voiced outright opposition to the request.”

        This is not true. The USA was clearly opposed yesterday and its ambassador left right after stating the countries position. The African countries seem intent on pushing a draft resolution they have been working on but which has been going nowhere. Here is a more truthful and recent look at the situation.

        http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/11/01/kenya-icc-un-idUSL1N0IM1R720131101

        “Diplomats, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the United States stated on Thursday that it was opposed to a deferral.

        and

        ” Council diplomats said there was not enough support for a deferral of the Kenyan cases to be approved.”

        The UNSC has 7 members who are signatories to the Rome Statute. Apparently they too have *all* indicated that they will not support a deferral.

      • The major thing at the Hague recently is that it is clear that Ruto has realized that NSIS evidence cannot be dismissed as being from coached and paid liars. So he has to go after the entire Kibaki regime.

        http://www.standardmedia.co.ke/?articleID=2000096750&story_title=ruto-defence-links-kibaki-to-chaos

        Talking to a legal friend of mine who as extensive experience in such matters, he thinks what is going on now is preliminary things he would do and the real OTP case against Ruto as *key* is yet to beging.

      • Hehehee! I’m laughing my ass off. Now, Kibaki not only stole the election in 2007 but also took Ruto to The Hague and not Raila as Ruto told us a thousand times previously? Really??

        Ruto, may you pay the dear price of scandalising innocent people’s names!!

        Just carry your own cross my brother!!!

      • Folks,

        We figured this pretty well. The UNSC gamble has flopped badly for uhuru. The impunity peddlers got five votes. They needed nine. Russia stayed on the fence, so did Pakistan. Anti-impunity had seven solid votes including three veto powers. Game over. It is what it is.

        Now we are on to the Assembly of State Parties conference at The Hague Nov. 20- Nov.28, 2013. AU has to take its issues there as they promised. Good. There are 122 State Parties to the ICC. Kenya is one of them. For now. Many of the AU member states screaming most about the ICC like Rwanda and Ethiopia are not even State Parties to the ICC Rome Statute.

      • `
        The idea of pouring more taxpayer money in lobbying at the Assembly of State Parties Conference is frankly abuse of office.

        Kenyatta promised that the ICC matter would be a personal issue…but now Kenyan coffers are inefficiently being drained of millions of shillings into these wasteful ventures. Like the deferral attempt, this is going nowhere.

        It is plain abuse of office — which unfortunately is being enabled by the Jubilee (TNA + URP) dominated legislature. What a doomed prospect!

    • The OTP is being very tactical. Its blocking all manner of excuses by Uhuru. While its says that it does not oppose postponement, look at the reasons it gives. They simply say that the postponment should not be hinged on Uhurus presidency.

      “The Prosecution does not accept that the Accused’s presidential duties are a reason to delay the trial. He assumed those duties in the full knowledge thathe was facing trial at the International Criminal Court.”

      The only reason they give for vacating the date is judicial economy.

      “In the interests of judicial economy, given that the Prosecution does notoppose the Defence Application, the Prosecution will not further develop the issues to which grounds(ii)-(v)give rise”

      http://www.scribd.com/fullscreen/180294132?access_key=key-44pwppdwwtmtwj85g57&allow_share=true&view_mode=scroll

      This simply means that Ruto is going to continue attending the trials till the time Uhuru trails starts. Talk about locking down your deputy at the Hague

  16. I think that the ICC is very smart.
    It seems to me that by excusing Uhuru from continuously attending the trials, they have actually exhausted all his avenues of trying to abscond. Besides, the set conditions are very tough. What more, he has to be there on the big day, the day of judgement.

      • John,

        I agree. This matter will be resolved by the Appeal Chamber. Whichever way they rule will be final. OTP will appeal the Uhuru ruling just like they did with Ruto otherwise they will look ridiculous.

        I suspect the Appeal Chamber ruling may come down within the next week or so. They know people are waiting for them to come up with their ruling.

        In all I think Uhuru is not very happy with this development. It has punctured his momentum towards absconding with all the Al Shabaab hyperbole. Uhuru simply does not want the case to go on period. He knows what is in there. The UNSC one year window is to start the process towards that objective. This new ruling as temporary as it may be throws a monkey wrench into the UNSC Hail Mary pass which as we know is dodo.

    • `
      Folks,

      1) I generally agree with Mzee, John, & Adongo’s sentiments on this ruling. In the short run, it throws spanners into the works of Uhuru’s deferral plan. It is an inconclusive enticement with a catch. Will he jump at the offer or not? If Uhuru already decided he is absconding, this little matter will not excite him after all. However, if he was only trying to avoid humiliation sitting behind the dock — he must know that once the train leaves the station, there is no alighting en-route (see my last point 4).

      2) This decision will be appealed by OTP. The issue of Ruto being forced to attend while Uhuru being largely excused will have to be considered. The judicial process has to appear to be free and fair to all parties. Judges who will rule in the appeal chamber will be different. I see them doing exactly what they did to Ruto…and I concur with Adongo the ruling may come quite soon, before Uhuru’s trial commencement date on Nov. 12th.Therefore, after taking off steam from the deferral pressure, the hammer may knock down the table compelling Uhuru to attend after all. It’s a roller-coaster of ups and downs with this ICC.

      3) Even without the appeal, a careful study of this preliminary ruling reveals that room has still been left to call Uhuru whenever the chamber wants — essentially a wild-card that could force more attendance than anticipated on paper.

      4) The PEV monkey is still on Uhuru’s back. I’ll repeat again — it’s no longer about the sufficiency of evidence on the substantive trial, but evidence gathered by OTP regarding witness interference (intimidation, bribery, and assassinations). Whether Uhuru is listening in from Nairobi or Hague, this secondary matter is quite lethal…in that it gives credence to the substantive trial itself.

      • job,

        It seems that the strategy now is that Ruto will keep going to The Hague while Uhuru will insist on waiting for the UNSC to suspend the trial:

        http://www.standardmedia.co.ke/?articleID=2000095815&story_title=ruto-to-stay-at-the-hague-pending-un-council-s-move

        It is a stupid strategy from every angle. Uhuru’s trial begins in just three weeks from now. Nobody can force the UNSC to act in a hurry because of Uhuru. Even if they do chances are they will reject Uhuru’s demands. Then what.

        Even worse is the ruling by the chamber V yesterday. They told Uhuru to show up on Nov. 12 for the beginning of his trial and if he doesn’t an arrest warrant will be issued. The trouble for people like Uhuru is that for the first time they face something they cannot control. Big headache. Shauri zao. We don’t care.

      • And here is Uhuru’s Political Advisor Nancy Gitau lying through her teeth. After working for USAID for 17 years she rants on and on about evil NGO’s. She has been busted as one of those who lined Ruto up for the firing squad and now she is trying to wiggle her way out of it. Rubbish. Where do they get people like this?

        Here we go:

        http://www.standardmedia.co.ke/?articleID=2000095876&story_title=waki-commission-statements-were-changed-in-report-president-uhuru-kenyatta-s-chief-advisor-on-political-affairs-opens-up&pageNo=1

      • `
        Adongo,

        Nancy Gitau goes on a tirade against the West yet skirts the single important question that prompted the interview in the first place…why she fixed Ruto at the ICC.


        Without question, she specifically helped create Ruto’s legal woes at the ICC, using her links at USAID, influence at KNCHR, and proximity in the Waki Commission. She was hired by the PNU/Kibaki-era honchos to nail Ruto, and spectacularly she did it. She cannot now turn around to claim innocence, after Ruto has outed her.

        In fact in my other piece on a separate thread (penned before reading this article) I mentioned her name among pretenders in a group that delicately plays a game of keeping Jubilee hanging on to power yet keeping Ruto at a safe distance away from the helm. If I were Ruto I would face such green snakes head-on…demanding that Uhuru starts by firing them.

        Ruto should DEMAND that Uhuru fires Nancy Gitau, Mutea Iringo, et al., if there is sincerity within the so called Uhuruto association. Anyway, that’s their own business in the house that’s full of deceit called Jubilee.

        The likes of Nancy Gitau are the overpaid staffers pilfering taxpayer resources to the tune of tens of millions of shillings annually…working against the interest of the same people. It is the height of folly to suddenly play the anti- imperialist card when the same people have been feeding Nancy Gitau for 17 years at USAID.

        There is absolutely no difference between the journalist with an ICC warrant Barasa and Nancy Gitau. They were both well-paid intermediaries of these very institutions they are today criticizing. Greedy turncoats with zero credibility, folks who will not wink an eye figuratively sleeping with the next highest bidder. Bure kabisa!

What Say You Now?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s