Hague court to rule on use of testimony of former witnesses
From left: Lawyer J Kimutai Bosek for Mr Joshua Sang, Deputy President William Ruto’s lead counsel Karim Khan and Chief investigations defence counsel Shyamala Alagendra at a press briefing last year. FILE PHOTO
What you need to know:
- The ruling on whether or not to admit prior recorded witness statements was supposed to be delivered before the ICC summer break that started on July 16.
- This will be around the same time a ruling will be delivered on the Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda’s appeal regarding Kenya’s co-operation in President Uhuru Kenyatta’s case. The co-operation judgment will be made in open court on August 19, 2015.
- The only down side to the application being upheld, according to Mr Nderitu, is that it is likely that the weight attached to such statements will be reduced since there will be no chance to cross-examine them.
The wait is almost over for a ruling that could have far-reaching consequences in the case against Deputy President William Ruto and his co-accused, Mr Joshua Sang.
The ruling on whether or not to admit prior recorded witness statements was supposed to be delivered before the ICC summer break that started on July 16.
But it was put off to the “week starting August 10”.
This will be around the same time a ruling will be delivered on the Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda’s appeal regarding Kenya’s co-operation in President Uhuru Kenyatta’s case. The co-operation judgment will be made in open court on August 19, 2015.
In the Ruto-Sang case, Ms Bensouda had applied for the admission into evidence of statements from witnesses who had either withdrawn or recanted their evidence.
According to the legal representative for the victims in the case Wilfred Nderitu, the ruling will come “any time from Monday.”
“If the judges uphold the prosecution arguments then it becomes easy to get evidence into the court and the judges will be affirming that instances of witness interference is of little consequence,” said Mr Nderitu.
The only down side to the application being upheld, according to Mr Nderitu, is that it is likely that the weight attached to such statements will be reduced since there will be no chance to cross-examine them.
“It will be a blow to Mr Ruto and Mr Sang because they will not have the chance to interrogate the evidence.
If the judges agree with the defence to reject the application, it will be a blow to the prosecution.
Mr Ruto and Mr Sang defence say that the admission of the statements would be prejudicial to their clients.
If the application is rejected, the prosecution would close its case and pave the way for the defence to file a no-case-answer motion.
They could also start calling their witnesses which is the most likely outcome.
