Profiles of ICC ‘key’ witnesses put their credibility to question

Katwa Kigen. Photo/FILE

The International Criminal Court (ICC) has been in a fishing expedition lately as it seeks to move forward with the planned indictment of suspects alleged to have either masterminded or funded the post-election violence in the country.

The court has in the process ruffled many feathers in the way it is carrying out its investigations, especially with demands for high level security meeting minutes at the height of the skirmishes which left thousands dead, displaced and property worth millions of shillings destroyed.

Many people expected the ICC to carry out its investigations in a manner that is not only acceptable but in line with international standards – or at least be seen to be doing so.

Unfortunately, the unfolding scenario with the ICC intervention, even before it takes full charge of the investigations into the PEV cases, has left many not only baffled but also tongue-tied.

For starters, the spiriting out of the 13 “key” witnesses to foreign countries in what was termed an effort to protect them following a threat on their lives has kicked off a major debate as to whether the ICC is serious with its work or it is seeking to dramatise the process for political expediency.

At least seven of the so-called witnesses are people of questionable integrity with some having not only done time in jail but also subject of investigations by security agents.

Interestingly, most of the witnesses are those with a background in political or human rights activism for financial gain as they operate NGOs whose funding has ended up lining their pockets instead of benefiting the intended groups as contained in their proposals to donors.

Still, questions have been raised over the choice of link people by the ICC in the zones they intent to carry out their investigations and zero in on suspects.

Waki list

Most of the link people are politicians who have differences with some leaders who have been mentioned as possible suspects on the Waki list of 12 which was handed to the ICC and awaits to be opened when indictments are issued in due course.

Still, as the investigative arm of the court carries out its inquiries, it has emerged that the point men are NGO operatives whose activities have been questioned by the public, local authorities and government departments.

One of the people, a top manager of a human rights organisation based in Eldoret, has several cases pending in court, including issuing inflammatory statements and issuing a death threat against a woman who declined his sexual overtures. The records are available at Eldoret divisional police headquarters and the law courts.

The rules on trials demand that a lawyer appearing before the ICC shall not engage in any improper conduct such as sexual relations, coercion, intimidation, or exercise any other undue influence in his or her relations with a client.

It is expected that the same people the ICC will be dealing with either as point men on the ground or witnesses uphold the same standards so as not to be seen to be engaging in double standards.

Most of the witnesses do not meet those standards. They are “mercenaries” for hire specialising in character assassination, and political hirelings who can do anything for monetary gain.

Some of the so-called witnesses have not only been yearning to be flown out of the country in the belief they get greener pastures but they also have no responsibilities at the family or social setting.

We also expect the ICC not to over-rely on the Waki commission report and that of the Kenya National Commission on Human Rights (KNCHR) and that of Prof Phillip Alston, the UN special rapporteur, which is littered with unsubstantiated claims, insinuations and innuendos without care to substantiate or establish its credibility.

We expect the ICC to start independent investigations and get to the bottom of the matter without seeking to sacrifice anyone for political reasons or otherwise to please the international community.

It is clear that in such investigations, no one is above the law and it is the general feeling and mood of the country that those with the highest responsibility be held to account for the loss of life and property.

In that regard, the investigations should start with the President and the Prime Minister as the people fought because of them and the chief security officers at the time before moving down the ladder to those who played various roles.

If that would not happen, and if the two principals would not be among those to be flown to The Hague for trial, then the process would be deemed to be biased, a public relations stunt, and politically engineered to suit the interests of donors who have a keen interest in the process.

Mr Kigen is one of the lawyers who accompanied William Ruto to the ICC in The Hague