Uhuru Kenyatta Case (Trial Chamber V(b))
- Charges: Five counts of crimes against humanity (murder, deportation, persecution, rape, and other inhumane acts).
- Judges’ Ruling (2015):
- Judges Kuniko Ozaki, Robert Fremr, and Geoffrey Henderson rejected Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda’s request for indefinite adjournment.
- They found insufficient evidence to proceed and noted Kenya’s government had failed to fully cooperate (e.g., withholding financial and phone records).
- The Chamber ordered Bensouda to either withdraw charges or proceed; she withdrew them.
- Importantly, the judges clarified this was not an acquittal, but a termination due to lack of evidence.
- Fatou Bensouda’s Commentary:
- Called the withdrawal a “blow to victims of the post‑election violence.”
- Criticized Kenya’s lack of cooperation, saying it crippled the prosecution.
- Stressed that the termination left open the possibility of future prosecution if new evidence emerges.
William Ruto & Joshua Sang Case (Trial Chamber V(a))
- Charges: Crimes against humanity (murder, deportation, persecution).
- Judges’ Ruling (2016):
- Charges were vacated “without prejudice,” meaning they could be re‑prosecuted.
- Judges noted “troubling incidence of witness interference and politicisation of the judicial process.”
- They refused to acquit, citing compromised proceedings rather than innocence.
- Fatou Bensouda’s Commentary:
- Agreed with the Chamber’s finding that the case was undermined by tampering and political meddling.
- Condemned the scale of witness intimidation, saying it struck at the heart of justice.
- Emphasized that the ruling left the door open for future prosecution if credible evidence is presented.
Hypothetical Reopening Pathways
Under the Rome Statute, cases can be reopened if:
- New Evidence: Credible, previously unavailable evidence (e.g., financial records, communications, victim testimony).
- Victim Complaints: Large‑scale petitions or formal submissions by victims or civil society.
- Prosecutor’s Initiative: The ICC Prosecutor can reopen investigations proprio motu if jurisdictional conditions are met.
- State or UN Referral: Kenya or another state party, or the UN Security Council, could refer new allegations.
Evidence Gaps Highlighted by ICC Judges & Prosecutor
Uhuru Kenyatta Case
- Financial Records:
- Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda repeatedly requested Kenyatta’s bank and asset records to establish funding links to violence.
- The Kenyan government failed to provide these, despite court orders.
- Phone Logs & Communications:
- Call data records were sought to prove coordination between Kenyatta and perpetrators.
- Judges noted Kenya’s refusal to hand over this information crippled the case.
- Witness Testimony:
- Several witnesses recanted or withdrew, citing intimidation and threats.
- Judges acknowledged widespread interference but said the prosecution could not prove Kenyatta himself orchestrated it.
William Ruto & Joshua Sang Case
- Witness Reliability:
- Judges documented “troubling incidence of witness interference” — witnesses were bribed, intimidated, or disappeared.
- Many key testimonies collapsed under pressure.
- Direct Evidence of Command Responsibility:
- The prosecution struggled to prove Ruto’s direct role in organizing attacks.
- Evidence was circumstantial and weakened by compromised witnesses.
- Political Environment:
- Judges noted “politicisation of the judicial process,” making it difficult to secure cooperation or protect witnesses.
@Nabii Jomo’s son (and grandson) can be dealt with very easily.. even without AI. You must neutralize them before 2027.
