Ruto lawyer hopeful despite ruling

What you need to know:

  • ICC allows recanted evidence in Deputy President’s case.
  • Defence claims decision by court has no effect since prosecution did poor investigations.

Deputy President William Ruto’s lawyer at the ICC on Friday expressed confidence that the case will be dismissed even though the court allowed the prosecutor to admit evidence disowned by witnesses.

Lawyer Karim Khan said allowing Ms Fatou Bensouda to use the recanted evidence would not help the case that, he said, was poorly investigated.

At the same time, it has come to light Mr Ruto may face new charges at The Hague after judges agreed with Ms Bensouda that there was improper interference of witnesses by a “scheme” which was alleged to be working for Mr Ruto.

Responding to the ruling, the lawyer said the case remained weak owing to the failure by the prosecution to carry out proper investigations.

Mr Khan said: “This is a case that has been poorly investigated and wrongly focused from the start.”

Mr Ruto and his co-accused Joshua Sang are the only accused, out of six, still facing charges at the international court for their suspected role in the 2007/08 post-election violence.

Ms Bensouda had told the court that the witnesses had been coerced to recant their statements and that the court should admit it.

But defence lawyer Khan distanced Mr Ruto from the interference allegations. He added that the allegations were yet to be proved.

“Significantly, the trial chamber repeatedly stated that repeated allegations of interference by Mr Ruto and/or the defence generally, remain unproven. We continue to assert that they are absolutely false,” Mr Khan said.

He went to great lengths to defend the DP against allegations that he was involved in the “scheme” whose main agenda was to bribe or threaten witnesses so that they cease cooperating with the court.

However, in their decision made on Wednesday, the judges said there was enough evidence from the prosecution to show that five out of the six witnesses were either bribed or threatened to recant their testimonies.

Mr Khan did not indicate whether they will appeal or not.

Ms Bensouda’s argument on witness interference will be a blow to the deputy president because it can be used to open fresh charges against him.