21 thoughts on “Ocampo Six and the Kenyan Situation: Ask the Court”
Kenyan leaders think they can challenge ICC Court and yet they themselves have not done anything in their own Court concerning the perpetrators and at the same time they don’t even know whether something happened in 2007/08 or not?. Most of our leaders have been blinded by impunity and corruption simply because they are used to bribes and corruption in Courts Cases in Kenya. But now let them learn the law where there is not bribes and corruption.
Whichever corner our leaders are hidding in will be known. I am sorry to Kalonzo’s trips wasting taxpayers money for failure. That is ashame.The World is watching to see how our leaders are inefficiency to lead the Country.
Where are Kenyan investigating journalists to un-cover the ongoing rumours in kenya that ,The govt is seeking defferal for a period of one(1) year while at the same time PNU &govt is training guerrillas in both Somali and Libya.
Obama govt (USA) asked Kibaki to sack Gen Ali (Shifta)http://www.nation.co.ke/News/politics/US+asked+Kibaki+to+sack+police+chief+Ali+/-/1064/1122774/-/gltaobz/-/index.html
Two Kenyans carried out separate suicide attacks on African Union forces in Mogadishu, killing 21 people, according to secret US cables.
One bombing at the fortified headquarters of the AU mission in Somalia is said to have claimed the lives of six soldiers and four civilians while the other left 11 Burundian soldiers dead and injured another 15.
If the information in the cable is accurate, the attacks on February 22 and May 24, 2009, would represent the first recorded use of Kenyan suicide bombers in the war-torn country and serve as a stark illustration of the danger the nation faces from the al Shabaab militia.
In a cable dated July 5, 2009, US ambassador Michael Ranneberger offers Washington what could be the most detailed profile of al Shabaab activities in Kenya yet published.
He says the militia had stepped up recruitment efforts in a number of areas, including Eastleigh, Isiolo and North Eastern Province.
The dispatch appears to echo the concerns voiced by Police Commissioner Mathew Iteere on Monday when he released the profiles of 11 militants said to be ready to attack targets in Kenya.
The terrorist group claimed responsibility for two suicide bombings that killed 74 football fans in Kampala last year and is considered the region’s biggest security threat.
According to the cable, dozens of Kenyan youth had been lured to Somalia to take part in the country’s decades-long civil war.
“There are a number of factors that make Kenya a fruitful source for recruiting young men to join such extremist groups as the Somalia-based al Shabaab militia,” the cable says.
“Kenya’s close proximity to Somalia, its sizeable population of ethnic Somalis, high levels of poverty and unemployment, history of poor governance, and a worrisome youth bulge all contribute to the risk factors.
“Kenya’s ethnic Somali population in particular suffers from lower levels of development and education than their fellow Kenyans. Idle, unemployed youth are at particular risk.”
The cable offers the names of the two alleged suicide bombers and provides details of how they were recruited in Isiolo and Eastleigh. (The Nation is withholding the names of the suspected bombers to protect their families.)
Both had completed high school and were aged 25 and 26. According to a family friend who spoke to an embassy political officer in Isiolo, the bomber responsible for the February 22 attack was recruited in 2006 to fight in Somalia against the Ethiopians.
According to the man, the youth grew a beard and “came into good money” after his recruitment. “The journey started at the Garissa Lodge in Eastleigh.
“Four to five boys at a time would go on a bus to Doble and on to Kismayu, where they trained in a camp for three weeks. After that, recruits received mobile phones, which is how they subsequently received their orders.
“When the Islamic Courts Union fell in late 2006, they reassembled in Doble and he returned to Kenya, but not before his commanders destroyed his (and others’) mobile phones, which had sensitive numbers programmed in them.”
The second youth was also recruited from Isiolo, which the cable describes as a hotbed of Shabaab activity.
The diplomats offer the names of four mosques in Eastleigh and another four in Isiolo which they say are key
While money is being spent on the stupid and disastrous shuttle diplomacy, the IDPs are being treated like animals, hunted down by Kibaki’s security, beaten up, and arrested. Kibaki had rather spend money defending his Six criminals yet his Kikuyu people who voted for him 100% remain suffering in dirty camps and should not demonstrate.
Listen to one lady in the video link below asking Kibaki to deploy the ruthless Special Programs Minister Esther Murugi to the Langata animal park because she cannot deal with human beings.
Here we go…and congratulations to our Kenyan brothers and sisters in New York on marching to protest against the Kalonzo-led damn Shuttle Diplomacy. Meanwhile, this video link shows that the mission flopped:
If the ICC does not try these guys then it will be a confirmation to kenyans that justice is selective based on class. As much as I love my country I do not like the political class of Kenya. Instead of concentrating on providing good services to the people, they are always caught in corrupt,criminal and tribal activities. Kenyans need to wake up and smell the coffee.
1. Have no contact directly or indirectly with any person who is or is believed to be a victim or a witness of the crimes for which the suspects have been summoned.
2. Refrain from corruptly influencing a witness, obstructing or interfering with the attendance or testimony of a witness, or tampering with or interfering with the Prosecution’s collection of evidence.
3. Refrain from committing crime(s) set forth in the Statute.
4. Attend all required hearings at the International Criminal Court.
The six Kenyans summoned to appear before the International Criminal Court over post election violence will walk into court as free men and will not be finger-printed.
Gilbert Bitti, senior legal adviser to the Pre-Trial Division explained the process:
Q. Do the Ocampo six need to be finger-printed?
A. It is important to reiterate that the persons for whom a summons to appear has been issued will come before the court as free persons. In light of the above, there is no formality as the taking of fingerprints.
Q. Will any right be read to them?
A. On April 7 the Pre-Trial Chamber will hold a hearing in the presence of the person to satisfy itself that the person has been informed of the crimes, which he is alleged to have committed, and of his rights under the Rome Statute.
From this moment the person will enjoy all the rights in accordance with article 67 of the Rome Statute, including the right to have adequate time and facilities for the preparation of his or her defence and to have the assistance of a counsel, without payment if the person lacks sufficient means to pay for it.
Q.Will there be confirmation that their rights have not been violated in the surrender?
A. The Chamber issued summonses to appear therefore these persons are expected to come voluntarily on 7 April and appear before the Pre-Trial Judges of the court.
Q.Do they go to the registrar’s office?
A. They will enter the court’s premises as any other free person and then they will proceed to the Pre-Trial room to appear before the judges of the PTC II.
Q.Or to the detention centre?
A. It is adamant to reiterate that the persons summoned are appearing as free men. In light of that, there is no ground for taking them to the detention centre.
Q. Or straight to the court?
A. As mentioned above, the summonses to appear have been issued by the Pre-Trial Chamber and persons summoned voluntarily appear before the court.
They will enter the court’s premises as any other free person and then they will proceed to the Pre-Trial room to appear before the judges of the PTC II.
Q. Will their movements now be determined by the court?
A. Once more, the suspects are free men and as such their freedom of movement, at this stage, is not restricted by the court.
They could leave the court immediately after the hearing and go back home.
.OCAMPO WITNESSES NOW SENT TO EUROPE .
Thursday, 10 March 2011 00:01 BY STAR TEAM . TRAGEDY: A man wipes his face in front Kiambaa KAG church where some 30 people were burned alive in Eldoret
.
IN the last week the ICC has relocated to Europe witnesses for the Kenya post-election violence cases. The witnesses had been living in a neighbouring country since last year.
The relocation was made just before the ICC issued summonses to the six people who Chief Prosecutor Luis Moreno Ocampo believes bear the greatest responsibility for the 2007-08 violence.
Eleven witnesses, most with their families, started being moved from various safe houses to European countries where they will stay until they can testify if and when the cases against the Ocampo Six are confirmed.
Most of the witnesses are from Rift Valley and Central. “We are now being moved to unknown locations in Europe,” said a text message from one witness who left the neighbouring country two days ago.
The ICC with support from donor countries placed them under witness protection last year and relocated them with more than 50 family members.
Four witnesses have been classified as “highly credible” and will testify on the violence in Eldoret — including the burning of Kiambaa KAG Church where more than 30 people were killed in January 2008.
Some witnesses said they had overcome threats and refused inducements to return home and retract their evidence. In one instance, a witness allegedly turned down an offer of Sh50 million claiming he feared for his life and his family.
Three witnesses are former Mungiki members who were in Naivasha and who reportedly attended meetings that discussed how the attacks in that town were to be conducted. These witnesses allegedly have both verbal and recorded evidence to be presented to the ICC.
The relocation of the witnesses took place just before Tuesday’s announcement that the ICC had issued summonses to Deputy Prime Minister Uhuru Kenyatta, Civil Service chief Francis Muthaura, former Police Commissioner Hussein Ali, former Cabinet ministers Henry Kosgey and William Ruto and radio journalist Joshua arap Sang. The six have said they will respect the summonses and go to the Hague on April 7.
Yesterday Attorney General Amos Wako, Internal Security minister Prof George Saitoti and Justice minister Mutula Kilonzo issued a joint statement saying the government will challenge the admissibility of the evidence as well as the jurisdiction of the ICC.
Last year two of the three ICC Pre-Trial Chamber judges found that the court had jurisdiction to deal with the Kenyan cases and they were admissible as they met the threshold set by the Rome Statute. There was one dissenting judge.
Yesterday’s statement came after President Kibaki chaired a meeting of the Cabinet Sub-Committee on ICC attended by Uhuru, Muthaura, Saitoti, Wako and Mutula to discuss the ICC summonses. “The President wanted to know what the decision means and what needs to be done,” said a source who attended the meeting.
Kibaki apparently also wanted to know if Uhuru, Muthaura and Ali were now required to quit their offices. Uhuru reiterated his innocence and on his Facebook page announced his willingness to honour the summons. “I will continue to cooperate unwaveringly with the ICC and to uphold the rule of law. I welcome the decision by the Judges to issue a summons for me to appear on the 7th of April 2011. I am grateful that I will finally have the opportunity to be heard and I am entirely confident of my innocence,” declared the Deputy Prime Minister.
Ruto’s lawyer Katwa Kigen said his client was going to appear in court as instructed. “So far there has not been any formal service of charges nor summons on our client. Upon such formal service our client will make his response to both the charges and summons,” said Kigen, adding that his client would prove his innocence “at the first available instance and at all opportunities.” Kosgey said he had yesterday morning written to the ICC confirming he would voluntarily appear before the judges.
Ali and Muthaura’s intentions to willingly go to the Hague were conveyed by their lawyers Evans Munari and Kennedy Ogeto as did Kimutai Bosek who is representing Sang.
Bosek said that his client was not only dissatisfied with the summons but concerned by the conduct of the ICC Pre-Trial Chamber judges. “These judges are behaving like political activists as opposed to judicial officers,” Bosek said. He said his client would appeal against the summons and also challenge Ocampo’s allegations.
In Eldoret, some elders representing IDPs still living in camps said they preferred the Ocampo Six be tried in a local tribunal and not in the Hague.
Their chairman Albert Githuka said a local tribunal was more credible and would give many witnesses including IDPs an opportunity to testify. But other IDPs supported the Hague option saying they were not convinced that a local tribunal would deliver them justice
Raila, Karua and Mudavadi to benefit from ICC trials —Wikileaks.
Friday, 11 March 2011 00:02 BY FRANCIS MUREITHI
Prime Minister Raila Odinga, his deputy Musalia Mudavadi and Narc-K leader Martha Karua would be the greatest beneficiaries if the International Criminal Court was to prosecute the post-election violence suspects, US ambassador Michael Ranneberger told Washington in 2008.
In a diplomatic cable dated November 4, 2008 and released yesterday by Wikileaks, Ranneberger said Gichugu MP Karua was going to gain politically if Deputy Prime Minister Uhuru Kenyatta was prosecuted. Ranneberger said Odinga and Mudavadi would benefit from the prosecution of Eldoret North MP William Ruto.
Though by the time he sent the cable the ICC had not officially taken up the cases, Ranneberger noted there was such a possibility in case Kenya failed to establish a local special tribunal as recommended by the Commission of Inquiry into Post-Election Violence commonly referred to as the Waki Commission.
The cable was sent to Washington three weeks after the release of the Waki report and the disclosure that a secret envelope containing names of key suspects had been presented to Chief Mediator Kofi Annan for onward transmission to the ICC in case Kenya failed to establish a local tribunal. “Those calling for a go-slow approach (on Waki report) in both ODM and PNU accuse those seeking full implementation of the report as attempting to settle political scores against rivals who are potentially implicated in post-election violence,” said Ranneberger.“There may be some element of truth in these charges — certainly Martha Karua’s 2012 presidential bid would be helped if Uhuru Kenyatta were to face trial. Likewise, Odinga (and Mudavadi) would benefit from a potential trial of William Ruto — a potential rival whose future would be severely diminished,” added the ambassador.
ICC judges on Tuesday summoned Uhuru, Ruto, Tinderet MP Henry Kosgey, head of Public Service Francis Muthaura, former Police Commissioner Hussein Ali and Kass FM journalist Joshua arap Sang to appear at the Hague on April 7. Though the six have not been formally charged, the ICC Pre-Trial Chamber has ruled that they have a case to answer.
In the cable, Ranneberger added that gaining political mileage was not the only reason some politicians were pushing for the full implementation of the Waki report and the prosecution of the top suspects. “But it stretches the truth to suggest that support for implementation is solely motivated by these short-term political considerations. Kibaki, in his last term, does not need to worry about future political rivals,” explained Ranneberger. “He (Kibaki) and Odinga seem to be motivated by the need to address post-election violence to move the country forward. For her part, Martha Karua has been a proponent of ending Kenya’s culture of impunity since her days leading the fight for multi-party democracy in the 1990s,” the US envoy added.
Ranneberger said though Kibaki and Raila were championing the full implementation of the Waki report, they faced difficulties because some MPs allied to both PNU and ODM were opposed to the report’s implementation. “Indications are that Odinga will have a hard time bringing his Orange Democratic Movement (ODM) to support his call for full implementation of the report,” Ranneberger said.
He added that PNU was yet to come to a unified position on implementation. Some key PNU figures such as Karua, who by then was the Justice and Constitutional Affairs minister, had called for full implementation while others had taken a more cautious approach.
Ranneberger said that PNU Central Province coordinator and MP for Kinangop David Ngugi had met embassy officials and revealed that PNU regional leaders had agreed that the report be implemented, but that it must be handled cautiously because of the inflammatory nature of the charges likely to be levelled against Kikuyu leaders. “Ngugi also noted that PNU feels obliged to protect Uhuru Kenyatta, who many see as the next leader of the GEMA (the ethnic Kikuyu, Embu, and Meru) political grouping and a future president of Kenya,” Ranneberger told Washington.
Though Ranneberger’s cable was sent in November 2008 and the identities of the Ocampo Six were made public in December last year, the suspects and their allies have in recent weeks intensified their anti-ICC campaign.
The suspects and their allies have been addressing rallies where they have been speaking out against the ICC process and claiming that it was being pushed by some of their political rivals who hoped to gain from their prosecution.
Apart from expressing support for a local process the suspects and their allies have been urging the public to sign a petition which is expected to be presented to the UN Security Council as proof that majority of Kenyans were opposed to the ICC process.
Rift Valley MPs allied to Ruto and those from Central Kenya allied to Uhuru have accused Raila of pushing for the prosecution of the Ocampo Six as a way of fixing Uhuru and Ruto politically.
——————————————————————————–
Ladies and gentlemen of Jukwaa, I am quite confused here by all this HAGUE stuff. I need us to think about the following matters.
1. Our VEEP is telling the world that we have a new constitutional dispensation, hence new ‘institutions’ that can try the PEV suspects locally. Some members of that same government are saying that the 6 have no case to answer, so, why do you want to set up a local tribunal to try someone who has no case to answer? My 2 cents tells me that, WHEN (not if, as I choose to be optimistic about the charges being confirmed) the trial proper begins, and the evidence is out in the open, there are many people going to be hit by the tsunami. I would then like to hear what they will have to say, when they actually face the witnesses who were there, and recorded the stuff, took part, etc… The PNU wing knows that when the shit hits the fan, many more will be implicated, so they are desperate to shield their own…
2. The sudden bravado shown by the AG smells of some very sinister plot. How come even Mutula, the only ICC protector in the august house, has finally realized that the ICC has no jurisdiction on the PEV case? I bet you he must have been told a few things to make him ‘wake up’. He seems to have been bitten by the ‘water melon bug’ that has side effects that are manifested by acute indecision and self contradiction… Poor man!
3. The police were told to ‘CHILL’, literally, as all the crimes were being committed, and then some 3 years down the line, you expect the same police to initiate investigations? on what? for whom? HOW? And we expect the world to believe that we actually have ‘new institutions’? PLEASE!!! We all know the nature of the police service in Kenya, and anyone hoping to get them to do anything is in for a rude shock.
4. Mututho, who is renowned for sobering the country with his alcohol laws, was actually brave enough to refer to the O6 as ‘hawa mashujaa wetu’… I mean? Does this guy think before he talks or is it a case of the mouth being faster than the brain, with the brain only catching up to ‘digest’ what the mouth had said when it is too late? How can someone accused of hiring gangs to go and kill, maim and displace his fellow countrymen be called ‘mashujaa wetu’???? Are they now at par with our founding fathers? The freedom fighters?
5. Ruto today says that ‘he has forgiven Mr. Ocampo and group for telling lies about him’ and that the truth shall come out. I mean, is this guy for real? It seems the real victims have been given the back seat, and are there only for political leverage… All those who attended the prayer service were encouraging him, yet he is accused of hiring goons to probably kill some family members of some of those gathered at the same prayer service…
6. Two of the PEV suspects are at the top of the government hierarchy, and they continue to influence govt. activities and policies, and wine and dine with the high and mighty. This is really a sad state of affairs. I am sure, if a local tribunal were ever formed, no one would ever face the court, as many have said in this forum before…
For those in Kenya, please try and get a copy of today’s STAR (11th March 2011) and read the article by Yash Gai. He is spot on on why PORK should be impeached, for brazenly going against the constitution he swore to uphold and protect…
I feel so frustrated and let down by the whole system that I risk seeming and sounding confused, but again, that is the consequence of bad governance. We lose direction, and it needs time and effort to stick on the right path. We all need to be vigilant, and vocal when there are transgressions on our laws. We need to remind the ‘leaders’ that they are our servants, and not the other way round.
GOD BLESS KENYA!!!Its Burning Kweli!
Becouse of trying to save and protecr (ANDU AITU)
The Lawyer Fails (SIMPLE) to understand how Super-Powers tapes(eardroves) leaders in Rogue -States).The so called Imperialist controls Satelites,Echerons stationed in the UK (England.)During the Kenya Crisis Whatever Orders from STATE-HOUSE/Police HQ/NSIS)GUS/APS/Military etc was being eardroves) This is a very easy and simple job being carried by the (greatest Forces) on Earth who are able to eardove (Russian Submarines ) Under the sea in both Summer and Winter -time.
These Powers Controls satelites /Any telephone Communications anywhere in the world. Israel (Mossad)(Russian KGB) UK MI6/5 has also capability to (listen(tapp) whatever is being communicated world-wide (for their both Local and International security intrests)
here a reader must understand the Imperialist intrest in Kenya and in the (HORN OF AFRICA) This GEMA-Kikuyu Writer &a Lawyer Fails to capiture the above writen essay> that during the PEV the Powers mentioned above were very bussy (Sikiaring) any Order Comming from State-House/ defence hq7etc< The USA as a friend of Kenyans and their intrests in the country May (Share) the information with Haue(Judges) Becouse the USA wants to see the end of Impunity perpetrated by the undemocratic forces of impunity in Kenya.
Why the ICC judges dealt Ocampo a major blow Citizens
BY KIBE MUNGAI
Last Tuesdays majority decision of the Pre-trial Chamber II of the International Criminal Court to issue summonses against the Ocampo Six is anything but music to ICC Prosecutor Luis Moreno Ocampo and his Kenyan supporters and fans who may never get to read and understand the significance of the ruling.
Without a doubt, serious crimes under Kenyan law and international law were committed between December 2007 and January, 2008 but the ICC Prosecutor set about his job in a politically-motivated way whose consequences are discernible in the majority decision of the ICC Chamber II.
It should be remembered that before and after 31st March, 2010 when the ICC Chamber granted the Prosecutors request to commence an investigation into the post election violence (PEV) in Kenya he often said that he intended to prosecute a number of persons from both the ODM and PNU side of the Kenyas political divide. By mid-2010 Ocampo had indicated that the list of his suspects will include three pro-ODM and three pro-PNU Kenyans. In early December, 2010, Ocampo announced in Nairobi that despite the fact that investigations into PEV were incomplete his office will not prosecute more than the six Kenyans he had already identified and was planning to name.
This critical background is necessary to bear in mind for two reasons. First the identification of the six suspects was not a direct result of evidence. On the contrary Ocampo intentionally sought to gather evidence to punish some people from ODM and PNU sides to make an example out of Kenya to the world and presumably to prevent recurrence of the PEV in the 2012 general elections. Secondly, Ocampos vow that no other persons will be charged at the ICC was not only a gross abuse of power but an indirect exoneration of other persons that many Kenyans believe they as much, if not more, responsibility for the atrocities committed in Kenya after the 2007 general election.
When the names of the suspects and the charges against them were announced on 15th December 2010, I took the position that Ocampos politically motivated charges will be hard to prove in Court. Besides the fact that the identification of the suspects was politically driven, the choice of offences was selective and the motive was rather fictional and oblique. The majority decision of the ICC chamber vindicates my skepticism about Ocampos intentions and modus operandi in several ways.
Ocampos central thesis is more political than legal and will ultimately prove to be his undoing in the case against the six Kenyans. On one hand William Ruto, Henry Kosgey and Joshua arap Sang are accused of having coordinated a series of actors and institutions to establish a network whose goals were firstly, to gain power in the Rift Valley Province and ultimately in the Republic of Kenya. The second purpose was to punish and expel from the Rift Valley those perceived to support the PNU. Two issues are notable. First, whereas Ruto and Kosgey were senior leaders in ODM which was competing for power with PNU, Ocampo charges accuse them of creating a network outside ODM which effectively leaves ODM out of the ICC equation. Secondly, any Kenyan imbecile alive during the PEV knows that there was no competition for power in the Rift Valley. The truth of God is that Ruto and his group sought to install Raila Odinga the ODM presidential candidate as Kenyas chief executive.
The other hand of Morenos thesis relates to PNU. The charge here is that in response to the Ruto, Kosgey and Sangs planned attacks on PNU supporters, Francis Muthaura, Uhuru Kenyatta and Mohammed Hussein Ali developed and executed a plan to attack perceived ODM supporters in order to keep the PNU in power. Thus the three planned the killing of ODM supporters in Nairobi and Kisumu through excessive force by the Police and they also co-ordinated Mungiki-led attacks in Nakuru and Naivasha. The interesting bit here is that whereas Muthaura, Uhuru and Ali were supposed to be responding to actions of Rutos network rather than ODM-inspired mass action agenda, Moreno basically accused them of killing ODM Luo and Luhya supporters as opposed to the ODM Kalenjin supporters on whose behalf the network was acting.
Given this backdrop I am not surprised that Moreno scored rather poorly before the ICC Chamber in at least five respects. First, the two judges found that Ocampo did not present sufficient evidence to establish reasonable grounds to believe that Ruto and his group committed acts of torture as alleged in Count 3 which was consequently dismissed. Secondly, the judges rejected Ocampos arguments that the attacks in Nakuru and Naivasha occurred pursuant to an organised State policy.
Thirdly, the judges found that the evidence presented by Ocampo did not provide reasonable grounds to believe that the events which took place in Kisumu and/or Kibera can be attributed to Muthaura, Kenyatta and/or Ali and so the charges were dropped. Fourthly, the judges found that Ocampo failed to provide evidence to support his allegation that rape was committed as part of the attack in Naivasha. Finally, the judges rejected Ocampos request for Uhuru, Muthaura and Ali not to have contact with other suspects personally, by telephone, in writing or through intermediaries.
Evidently, in round one of the trial Ocampo scored poorer against Uhurus group than against Rutos group despite the fact that the suspects had no right to challenge his case. At the next stage of the prosecution Ocampo will face a more daunting task. With allegations about alleged crimes in Kibera and Kisumu having been dropped, Ocampo will stand or fall depending on the judges take on the alleged atrocities in Nakuru and Naivasha. I believe Ocampo will meet his waterloo in either or both Nakuru and Naivasha because evidence will let down his politically motivated charges.
According to the Waki Report, 278 Luos, 268 Kikuyus and 158 Kalenjins were killed during the PEV. There were 119 unidentified bodies, the majority in Uasin Gishu, Nakuru and Trans Nzoia Counties where Kikuyus were the main victims of the PEV. In Naivasha 50 people were killed while in Nakuru 213 people were killed. Since Naivasha is in the greater Nakuru District and indeed is part of Nakuru County, in todays parlance this means that Nakuru County with 263 people killed was the most affected followed by Uasin Gishu County with 230 fatalities.
Whereas the Waki Report does not provide the ethnic breakdown of deaths in Nakuru, anecdotal evidence shows that more PNU supporters than ODM supporters/Rutos network supporters died in the violence and even more PNU supporters were displaced in Nakuru County. I can hardly wait to see how in a County where more Kikuyus or PNU supporters were killed and displaced, Ocampo will prove that the PNU trio were the aggressors. Who then will take responsibility for the atrocities committed in Nakuru County now that Ruto and his network were not charged with them? What does ICC justice have to offer to the majority of victims in Nakuru County now than it has embraced the justice for the minority? If ODM as an institution seeking power in the 2007 general election is innocent as Ocampo implies, is any other organisation really guilty of PEV atrocities? Is Ocampo really acting in the best interests of victims?
KIBAKI DID NOT TRUST MILITARY- WIKILEAKS KIBAKI DID NOT TRUST MILITARY- WIKILEAKS .
Saturday, 12 March 2011 00:02 BY ISAAC ONGIRI . CAUTIOUS: President Mwai Kibaki
.
PRESIDENT Kibaki rejected Chief Mediator Kofi Annan’s advise to order the military into the streets to quell the 2007-08 post-election violence fearing for ethnic divisions within the armed forces, Wikileaks has revealed.
In a US diplomatic cable dispatched from Addis Ababa by Ambassador Donald Yamamoto after a meeting between Ethiopian Prime Minister Meles Zenawi and US Assistant Secretary of State Dr Jendayi Frazer in February 2008, Annan told the Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice that Kibaki had rejected the proposal.
Annan had suggested to Kibaki that he should have allowed limited deployment of the army as violence spilled out across Kenya after the disputed December 27, 2007 presidential elections. The cable is sub-titled: Kenya in a dangerous position.
Frazer, who had a candid discussion with Zenawi on Kenya, shared Kibaki’s concerns over divisions in the military and expressed fears the situation could degenerate into a coup d’etat against Kibaki if ethnic divisions in the military became pronounced over the violence.“Frazer noted that Secretary Rice had recently spoken with Annan, and Annan mentioned that he had suggested to Kibaki that he bring the military out in a limited way, but that Kibaki demurred based on concerns regarding ethnic divisions within the military,” the diplomat wrote in the cable dated June 2, 2008.
The cable reports that Frazer feared a coup against Kibaki could degenerate into a civil war in Kenya.“The Kikuyu response could lead to civil war, as many Kikuyu fundamentally don’t believe that the election was stolen and are incensed by the violence that the opposition is encouraging,” Frazer reportedly said.
At the time Rwandan President Paul Kagame suggested a military solution for the Kenyan conflict in which over 1,300 people died and over were 300,000 displaced.
The Rwandan leader who spoke from Kigali as the world focused on the Kenyan situation prescribed a militarised solution to restore stability as the situation appeared to worsen.
Apart from being the President, Kibaki is the Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces (C-in-C) while General Jeremiah Kianga is the Chief of the General Staff (CGS).
The Ethiopian PM on his part expressed his misgivings on the military’s loyalty to Kibaki saying it may not be consolidated. “While the military may not quit, they will not be monolithically behind Kibaki, which is why some Kikuyus are turning to the militia instead,” Zenawi said.
Zenawi however regretted the use of Mungiki and other militias in the violence against civilians. “It has to be made clear to the Kikuyu establishment that ethnic cleansing is unacceptable as a response to the violence and that they cannot ‘fight fire with fire’ or use militias to fight on their behalf,” the Ethiopian leader reportedly said.
Yesterday a senior ODM minister for the first time revealed to The Star that Kenya could have been plunged in civil war if Raila Odinga had accepted advice by two members of the ODM Pentagon to declare himself President.
“Two senior members of the ODM who sat in the powerful Pentagon put pressure on the PM at the Parliamentary Group meeting held on 31st January, 2007, at Orange House to declare himself the President,” said the minister.
The minister said the Pentagon members had advised that a press conference be convened where Raila was to declare himself the President-elect.
The minister, who cannot be quoted due to the sensitivity of the matter, said two top lawyers qualified as commissioners of oath — one from Nyanza the other from Rift Valley — had been tasked to swear in Raila at a brief ceremony they intended to have televised live.
Raila however declined to take the oath and refused to declare himself President saying it would escalate the “already too bad situation” and increase the casualties.
Yesterday, Wikileaks revealed that Frazer is reported to have said that dealing with Raila and finding him culpable for anything had become difficult. Frazer said it was difficult because “Odinga is an excellent communicator and very good at playing the victim and the media love the concept of the ‘good guy’ versus the ‘bad guy’.”
Frazer, according to the cable, told Zenawi that President Kibaki was furious with Raila whom he believed was behind the violence.
But Frazer believed Kibaki had an upper hand than Raila in stopping the violence and bringing stability as he was the only decision-maker within PNU while Raila was sandwiched by his Pentagon colleagues in ODM and could not act alone.“Kibaki has the power of the state behind him and is the only decision-maker on his side, while Odinga is one of five making the decisions. Odinga is probably the most reasonable of the five, but he is constrained by the hardliners within his coalition,” Frazer said in the cable.
Frazer accused Pentagon member William Ruto of being double-faced, presenting one face to the international community and a different one to the local people.
“Certain individuals within PNU allegedly raised funds and organized gangs to perpetuate the post-election violence in Central Province. A number of meetings were held in Nairobi by some leaders from Central Province where the plight of Kikuyu IDPs was discussed.
The meetings started to take a sinister turn when retaliation against non-Kikuyu communities was discussed during which time these leaders met at Kenyatta International Conference Centre (KICC), Landmark Hotel and Marble Arch Hotel.
Leaders who attended these meetings included Njenga Karume, the immediate former MP of Kiambaa. Other participants in the meetings were Stanley Githunguri, MP for Kiambaa, who allegedly organized fund raising; Kabando wa Kabando, MP for Mukurweni, who organized the delivery of weapons; Uhuru Kenyatta, Deputy Prime Minister and MP for Gatundu South, who organized finances to fund pro-Kikuyu organized gangs; and Mary Wambui, a PNU activist, who allegedly organized finances and arranged for arms to be delivered from Ethiopia via Moyale and Marsabit. Another politician mentioned adversely in relation to whipping ethnic tensions is Peter Mungai Mwathi, Lari MP, who uttered inciting statements at Kirathimo camp when he asked Mungiki to arm itself to defend Kikuyu people in the Rift Valley.”
National National PNU drops plans to quit coalition PNU drops plans to quit coalition .
Saturday, 12 March 2011 00:02 BY FRANCIS MUREITHI . NOT LEAVING: Nominated MP Jimmy Angweni Jeremiah Kioni and Jamlek Kamau at a past press conference at PNU Headquaters.
.
THE Party of National Unity has backed down on its plan to pull out of the coalition government. The PNU called off its National Delegates Conference which was to be held yesterday to endorse a decision to pull out of the partnership with the ODM.
The PNU vice chairman George Nyamweya yesterday said the NDC has been postponed indefinitely but did not elaborate on the reasons for the postponement.
Announcing the date for the NDC, the PNU leadership said it was to be attended by 4,200 delegates comprising 20 officials and members from each of the 210 constituencies. Invitation letters had already been dispatched to branches across the country.
Those organising the NDC were Nyamweya, Jamleck Kamau (vice chairman), Maina Kamanda (organising secretary), Jimmy Angwenyi (vice-chairman) and Ndaragwa MP Jeremiah Kioni.
They had announced the NDC was to endorse the plan to pull out of the coalition arguing that it was the only option to ensure smooth running of the country.
The PNU leaders said Prime Minister Raila Odinga was destabilising the country and that’s why they wanted to bring the partnership to an end.
The PNU leaders said the NDC was the party’s highest decision-making organ and that even President Kibaki as party leader could not overrule it.
The idea to pull out of the coalition was mooted about one month ago after Raila rejected President Kibaki’s nominees for the posts of Chief Justice, Attorney General, Director of Public Prosecutions and Controller of Budget.
The situation was further aggravated when House Speaker Kenneth Marende rejected the list directing that the nomination process be done afresh in consultation with the PM.
The PNU lawmakers said Raila was eroding the separation of powers between the Executive and the Legislature and that Marende’s ruling was drafted by Parliament’s legal department and the PM’s office.
The PNU group was however forced to drop plans to censure Marende and overturn his ruling after President Kibaki withdrew the contentious list of nominees.
Under the National Accord and Reconciliation Act the coalition shall stand dissolved if the Tenth Parliament is dissolved, or if the coalition parties agree in writing “or if one coalition partner withdraws from the coalition by a resolution of the highest decision-making organ of that party in writing.”
It is however silent on whether a snap election should follow a withdrawal of one partner from the coalition. Kibaki allies maintain the President would be at liberty to form a new government of national unity without the position of Prime Minister.
The National Accord Act however states that “this Act shall cease to apply upon dissolution of the Tenth Parliament, if the coalition is dissolved, or a new constitution is enacted, whichever is earlier.”
Another clause dealing with the transitional provisions of the new constitution implies there will be fresh elections “if the coalition established under the National Accord is dissolved and general elections are held before 2012”.
The government has turned to two British lawyers associated with the case against Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir at the International Criminal Court in a last-ditch attempt to end the case against the Ocampo Six….
Kenyan leaders think they can challenge ICC Court and yet they themselves have not done anything in their own Court concerning the perpetrators and at the same time they don’t even know whether something happened in 2007/08 or not?. Most of our leaders have been blinded by impunity and corruption simply because they are used to bribes and corruption in Courts Cases in Kenya. But now let them learn the law where there is not bribes and corruption.
Whichever corner our leaders are hidding in will be known. I am sorry to Kalonzo’s trips wasting taxpayers money for failure. That is ashame.The World is watching to see how our leaders are inefficiency to lead the Country.
Where are Kenyan investigating journalists to un-cover the ongoing rumours in kenya that ,The govt is seeking defferal for a period of one(1) year while at the same time PNU &govt is training guerrillas in both Somali and Libya.
Obama govt (USA) asked Kibaki to sack Gen Ali (Shifta)http://www.nation.co.ke/News/politics/US+asked+Kibaki+to+sack+police+chief+Ali+/-/1064/1122774/-/gltaobz/-/index.html
This is why Kibaki renewed Gen Gichangis tenure >He knows too much and he is PNU gema ears&eyes>
Somali blasts blamed on Kenyans
By MURITHI MUTIGA mmutiga@ke.nationmedia.com
Posted Thursday, March 10 2011 at 20:55
Two Kenyans carried out separate suicide attacks on African Union forces in Mogadishu, killing 21 people, according to secret US cables.
One bombing at the fortified headquarters of the AU mission in Somalia is said to have claimed the lives of six soldiers and four civilians while the other left 11 Burundian soldiers dead and injured another 15.
If the information in the cable is accurate, the attacks on February 22 and May 24, 2009, would represent the first recorded use of Kenyan suicide bombers in the war-torn country and serve as a stark illustration of the danger the nation faces from the al Shabaab militia.
In a cable dated July 5, 2009, US ambassador Michael Ranneberger offers Washington what could be the most detailed profile of al Shabaab activities in Kenya yet published.
He says the militia had stepped up recruitment efforts in a number of areas, including Eastleigh, Isiolo and North Eastern Province.
The dispatch appears to echo the concerns voiced by Police Commissioner Mathew Iteere on Monday when he released the profiles of 11 militants said to be ready to attack targets in Kenya.
The terrorist group claimed responsibility for two suicide bombings that killed 74 football fans in Kampala last year and is considered the region’s biggest security threat.
According to the cable, dozens of Kenyan youth had been lured to Somalia to take part in the country’s decades-long civil war.
“There are a number of factors that make Kenya a fruitful source for recruiting young men to join such extremist groups as the Somalia-based al Shabaab militia,” the cable says.
“Kenya’s close proximity to Somalia, its sizeable population of ethnic Somalis, high levels of poverty and unemployment, history of poor governance, and a worrisome youth bulge all contribute to the risk factors.
“Kenya’s ethnic Somali population in particular suffers from lower levels of development and education than their fellow Kenyans. Idle, unemployed youth are at particular risk.”
The cable offers the names of the two alleged suicide bombers and provides details of how they were recruited in Isiolo and Eastleigh. (The Nation is withholding the names of the suspected bombers to protect their families.)
Both had completed high school and were aged 25 and 26. According to a family friend who spoke to an embassy political officer in Isiolo, the bomber responsible for the February 22 attack was recruited in 2006 to fight in Somalia against the Ethiopians.
According to the man, the youth grew a beard and “came into good money” after his recruitment. “The journey started at the Garissa Lodge in Eastleigh.
“Four to five boys at a time would go on a bus to Doble and on to Kismayu, where they trained in a camp for three weeks. After that, recruits received mobile phones, which is how they subsequently received their orders.
“When the Islamic Courts Union fell in late 2006, they reassembled in Doble and he returned to Kenya, but not before his commanders destroyed his (and others’) mobile phones, which had sensitive numbers programmed in them.”
The second youth was also recruited from Isiolo, which the cable describes as a hotbed of Shabaab activity.
The diplomats offer the names of four mosques in Eastleigh and another four in Isiolo which they say are key
While money is being spent on the stupid and disastrous shuttle diplomacy, the IDPs are being treated like animals, hunted down by Kibaki’s security, beaten up, and arrested. Kibaki had rather spend money defending his Six criminals yet his Kikuyu people who voted for him 100% remain suffering in dirty camps and should not demonstrate.
Listen to one lady in the video link below asking Kibaki to deploy the ruthless Special Programs Minister Esther Murugi to the Langata animal park because she cannot deal with human beings.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7UzJuhxUW-4
Here we go…and congratulations to our Kenyan brothers and sisters in New York on marching to protest against the Kalonzo-led damn Shuttle Diplomacy. Meanwhile, this video link shows that the mission flopped:
If the ICC does not try these guys then it will be a confirmation to kenyans that justice is selective based on class. As much as I love my country I do not like the political class of Kenya. Instead of concentrating on providing good services to the people, they are always caught in corrupt,criminal and tribal activities. Kenyans need to wake up and smell the coffee.
Conditions given by court
That the six would;
1. Have no contact directly or indirectly with any person who is or is believed to be a victim or a witness of the crimes for which the suspects have been summoned.
2. Refrain from corruptly influencing a witness, obstructing or interfering with the attendance or testimony of a witness, or tampering with or interfering with the Prosecution’s collection of evidence.
3. Refrain from committing crime(s) set forth in the Statute.
4. Attend all required hearings at the International Criminal Court.
The six Kenyans summoned to appear before the International Criminal Court over post election violence will walk into court as free men and will not be finger-printed.
Gilbert Bitti, senior legal adviser to the Pre-Trial Division explained the process:
Q. Do the Ocampo six need to be finger-printed?
A. It is important to reiterate that the persons for whom a summons to appear has been issued will come before the court as free persons. In light of the above, there is no formality as the taking of fingerprints.
Q. Will any right be read to them?
A. On April 7 the Pre-Trial Chamber will hold a hearing in the presence of the person to satisfy itself that the person has been informed of the crimes, which he is alleged to have committed, and of his rights under the Rome Statute.
From this moment the person will enjoy all the rights in accordance with article 67 of the Rome Statute, including the right to have adequate time and facilities for the preparation of his or her defence and to have the assistance of a counsel, without payment if the person lacks sufficient means to pay for it.
Q.Will there be confirmation that their rights have not been violated in the surrender?
A. The Chamber issued summonses to appear therefore these persons are expected to come voluntarily on 7 April and appear before the Pre-Trial Judges of the court.
Q.Do they go to the registrar’s office?
A. They will enter the court’s premises as any other free person and then they will proceed to the Pre-Trial room to appear before the judges of the PTC II.
Q.Or to the detention centre?
A. It is adamant to reiterate that the persons summoned are appearing as free men. In light of that, there is no ground for taking them to the detention centre.
Q. Or straight to the court?
A. As mentioned above, the summonses to appear have been issued by the Pre-Trial Chamber and persons summoned voluntarily appear before the court.
They will enter the court’s premises as any other free person and then they will proceed to the Pre-Trial room to appear before the judges of the PTC II.
Q. Will their movements now be determined by the court?
A. Once more, the suspects are free men and as such their freedom of movement, at this stage, is not restricted by the court.
They could leave the court immediately after the hearing and go back home.
http://www.nation.co.ke/News/politics/Suspects+to+appear+as+free+men/-/1064/1122822/-/boap1gz/-/index.html
.OCAMPO WITNESSES NOW SENT TO EUROPE .
Thursday, 10 March 2011 00:01 BY STAR TEAM . TRAGEDY: A man wipes his face in front Kiambaa KAG church where some 30 people were burned alive in Eldoret
.
IN the last week the ICC has relocated to Europe witnesses for the Kenya post-election violence cases. The witnesses had been living in a neighbouring country since last year.
The relocation was made just before the ICC issued summonses to the six people who Chief Prosecutor Luis Moreno Ocampo believes bear the greatest responsibility for the 2007-08 violence.
Eleven witnesses, most with their families, started being moved from various safe houses to European countries where they will stay until they can testify if and when the cases against the Ocampo Six are confirmed.
Most of the witnesses are from Rift Valley and Central. “We are now being moved to unknown locations in Europe,” said a text message from one witness who left the neighbouring country two days ago.
The ICC with support from donor countries placed them under witness protection last year and relocated them with more than 50 family members.
Four witnesses have been classified as “highly credible” and will testify on the violence in Eldoret — including the burning of Kiambaa KAG Church where more than 30 people were killed in January 2008.
Some witnesses said they had overcome threats and refused inducements to return home and retract their evidence. In one instance, a witness allegedly turned down an offer of Sh50 million claiming he feared for his life and his family.
Three witnesses are former Mungiki members who were in Naivasha and who reportedly attended meetings that discussed how the attacks in that town were to be conducted. These witnesses allegedly have both verbal and recorded evidence to be presented to the ICC.
The relocation of the witnesses took place just before Tuesday’s announcement that the ICC had issued summonses to Deputy Prime Minister Uhuru Kenyatta, Civil Service chief Francis Muthaura, former Police Commissioner Hussein Ali, former Cabinet ministers Henry Kosgey and William Ruto and radio journalist Joshua arap Sang. The six have said they will respect the summonses and go to the Hague on April 7.
Yesterday Attorney General Amos Wako, Internal Security minister Prof George Saitoti and Justice minister Mutula Kilonzo issued a joint statement saying the government will challenge the admissibility of the evidence as well as the jurisdiction of the ICC.
Last year two of the three ICC Pre-Trial Chamber judges found that the court had jurisdiction to deal with the Kenyan cases and they were admissible as they met the threshold set by the Rome Statute. There was one dissenting judge.
Yesterday’s statement came after President Kibaki chaired a meeting of the Cabinet Sub-Committee on ICC attended by Uhuru, Muthaura, Saitoti, Wako and Mutula to discuss the ICC summonses. “The President wanted to know what the decision means and what needs to be done,” said a source who attended the meeting.
Kibaki apparently also wanted to know if Uhuru, Muthaura and Ali were now required to quit their offices. Uhuru reiterated his innocence and on his Facebook page announced his willingness to honour the summons. “I will continue to cooperate unwaveringly with the ICC and to uphold the rule of law. I welcome the decision by the Judges to issue a summons for me to appear on the 7th of April 2011. I am grateful that I will finally have the opportunity to be heard and I am entirely confident of my innocence,” declared the Deputy Prime Minister.
Ruto’s lawyer Katwa Kigen said his client was going to appear in court as instructed. “So far there has not been any formal service of charges nor summons on our client. Upon such formal service our client will make his response to both the charges and summons,” said Kigen, adding that his client would prove his innocence “at the first available instance and at all opportunities.” Kosgey said he had yesterday morning written to the ICC confirming he would voluntarily appear before the judges.
Ali and Muthaura’s intentions to willingly go to the Hague were conveyed by their lawyers Evans Munari and Kennedy Ogeto as did Kimutai Bosek who is representing Sang.
Bosek said that his client was not only dissatisfied with the summons but concerned by the conduct of the ICC Pre-Trial Chamber judges. “These judges are behaving like political activists as opposed to judicial officers,” Bosek said. He said his client would appeal against the summons and also challenge Ocampo’s allegations.
In Eldoret, some elders representing IDPs still living in camps said they preferred the Ocampo Six be tried in a local tribunal and not in the Hague.
Their chairman Albert Githuka said a local tribunal was more credible and would give many witnesses including IDPs an opportunity to testify. But other IDPs supported the Hague option saying they were not convinced that a local tribunal would deliver them justice
Raila, Karua and Mudavadi to benefit from ICC trials —Wikileaks.
Friday, 11 March 2011 00:02 BY FRANCIS MUREITHI
Prime Minister Raila Odinga, his deputy Musalia Mudavadi and Narc-K leader Martha Karua would be the greatest beneficiaries if the International Criminal Court was to prosecute the post-election violence suspects, US ambassador Michael Ranneberger told Washington in 2008.
In a diplomatic cable dated November 4, 2008 and released yesterday by Wikileaks, Ranneberger said Gichugu MP Karua was going to gain politically if Deputy Prime Minister Uhuru Kenyatta was prosecuted. Ranneberger said Odinga and Mudavadi would benefit from the prosecution of Eldoret North MP William Ruto.
Though by the time he sent the cable the ICC had not officially taken up the cases, Ranneberger noted there was such a possibility in case Kenya failed to establish a local special tribunal as recommended by the Commission of Inquiry into Post-Election Violence commonly referred to as the Waki Commission.
The cable was sent to Washington three weeks after the release of the Waki report and the disclosure that a secret envelope containing names of key suspects had been presented to Chief Mediator Kofi Annan for onward transmission to the ICC in case Kenya failed to establish a local tribunal. “Those calling for a go-slow approach (on Waki report) in both ODM and PNU accuse those seeking full implementation of the report as attempting to settle political scores against rivals who are potentially implicated in post-election violence,” said Ranneberger.“There may be some element of truth in these charges — certainly Martha Karua’s 2012 presidential bid would be helped if Uhuru Kenyatta were to face trial. Likewise, Odinga (and Mudavadi) would benefit from a potential trial of William Ruto — a potential rival whose future would be severely diminished,” added the ambassador.
ICC judges on Tuesday summoned Uhuru, Ruto, Tinderet MP Henry Kosgey, head of Public Service Francis Muthaura, former Police Commissioner Hussein Ali and Kass FM journalist Joshua arap Sang to appear at the Hague on April 7. Though the six have not been formally charged, the ICC Pre-Trial Chamber has ruled that they have a case to answer.
In the cable, Ranneberger added that gaining political mileage was not the only reason some politicians were pushing for the full implementation of the Waki report and the prosecution of the top suspects. “But it stretches the truth to suggest that support for implementation is solely motivated by these short-term political considerations. Kibaki, in his last term, does not need to worry about future political rivals,” explained Ranneberger. “He (Kibaki) and Odinga seem to be motivated by the need to address post-election violence to move the country forward. For her part, Martha Karua has been a proponent of ending Kenya’s culture of impunity since her days leading the fight for multi-party democracy in the 1990s,” the US envoy added.
Ranneberger said though Kibaki and Raila were championing the full implementation of the Waki report, they faced difficulties because some MPs allied to both PNU and ODM were opposed to the report’s implementation. “Indications are that Odinga will have a hard time bringing his Orange Democratic Movement (ODM) to support his call for full implementation of the report,” Ranneberger said.
He added that PNU was yet to come to a unified position on implementation. Some key PNU figures such as Karua, who by then was the Justice and Constitutional Affairs minister, had called for full implementation while others had taken a more cautious approach.
Ranneberger said that PNU Central Province coordinator and MP for Kinangop David Ngugi had met embassy officials and revealed that PNU regional leaders had agreed that the report be implemented, but that it must be handled cautiously because of the inflammatory nature of the charges likely to be levelled against Kikuyu leaders. “Ngugi also noted that PNU feels obliged to protect Uhuru Kenyatta, who many see as the next leader of the GEMA (the ethnic Kikuyu, Embu, and Meru) political grouping and a future president of Kenya,” Ranneberger told Washington.
Though Ranneberger’s cable was sent in November 2008 and the identities of the Ocampo Six were made public in December last year, the suspects and their allies have in recent weeks intensified their anti-ICC campaign.
The suspects and their allies have been addressing rallies where they have been speaking out against the ICC process and claiming that it was being pushed by some of their political rivals who hoped to gain from their prosecution.
Apart from expressing support for a local process the suspects and their allies have been urging the public to sign a petition which is expected to be presented to the UN Security Council as proof that majority of Kenyans were opposed to the ICC process.
Rift Valley MPs allied to Ruto and those from Central Kenya allied to Uhuru have accused Raila of pushing for the prosecution of the Ocampo Six as a way of fixing Uhuru and Ruto politically.
——————————————————————————–
Ladies and gentlemen of Jukwaa, I am quite confused here by all this HAGUE stuff. I need us to think about the following matters.
1. Our VEEP is telling the world that we have a new constitutional dispensation, hence new ‘institutions’ that can try the PEV suspects locally. Some members of that same government are saying that the 6 have no case to answer, so, why do you want to set up a local tribunal to try someone who has no case to answer? My 2 cents tells me that, WHEN (not if, as I choose to be optimistic about the charges being confirmed) the trial proper begins, and the evidence is out in the open, there are many people going to be hit by the tsunami. I would then like to hear what they will have to say, when they actually face the witnesses who were there, and recorded the stuff, took part, etc… The PNU wing knows that when the shit hits the fan, many more will be implicated, so they are desperate to shield their own…
2. The sudden bravado shown by the AG smells of some very sinister plot. How come even Mutula, the only ICC protector in the august house, has finally realized that the ICC has no jurisdiction on the PEV case? I bet you he must have been told a few things to make him ‘wake up’. He seems to have been bitten by the ‘water melon bug’ that has side effects that are manifested by acute indecision and self contradiction… Poor man!
3. The police were told to ‘CHILL’, literally, as all the crimes were being committed, and then some 3 years down the line, you expect the same police to initiate investigations? on what? for whom? HOW? And we expect the world to believe that we actually have ‘new institutions’? PLEASE!!! We all know the nature of the police service in Kenya, and anyone hoping to get them to do anything is in for a rude shock.
4. Mututho, who is renowned for sobering the country with his alcohol laws, was actually brave enough to refer to the O6 as ‘hawa mashujaa wetu’… I mean? Does this guy think before he talks or is it a case of the mouth being faster than the brain, with the brain only catching up to ‘digest’ what the mouth had said when it is too late? How can someone accused of hiring gangs to go and kill, maim and displace his fellow countrymen be called ‘mashujaa wetu’???? Are they now at par with our founding fathers? The freedom fighters?
5. Ruto today says that ‘he has forgiven Mr. Ocampo and group for telling lies about him’ and that the truth shall come out. I mean, is this guy for real? It seems the real victims have been given the back seat, and are there only for political leverage… All those who attended the prayer service were encouraging him, yet he is accused of hiring goons to probably kill some family members of some of those gathered at the same prayer service…
6. Two of the PEV suspects are at the top of the government hierarchy, and they continue to influence govt. activities and policies, and wine and dine with the high and mighty. This is really a sad state of affairs. I am sure, if a local tribunal were ever formed, no one would ever face the court, as many have said in this forum before…
For those in Kenya, please try and get a copy of today’s STAR (11th March 2011) and read the article by Yash Gai. He is spot on on why PORK should be impeached, for brazenly going against the constitution he swore to uphold and protect…
I feel so frustrated and let down by the whole system that I risk seeming and sounding confused, but again, that is the consequence of bad governance. We lose direction, and it needs time and effort to stick on the right path. We all need to be vigilant, and vocal when there are transgressions on our laws. We need to remind the ‘leaders’ that they are our servants, and not the other way round.
GOD BLESS KENYA!!!Its Burning Kweli!
Becouse of trying to save and protecr (ANDU AITU)
Read about (BIASED) GEMA Lawyer!>Kibe Mungai!
The Lawyer Fails (SIMPLE) to understand how Super-Powers tapes(eardroves) leaders in Rogue -States).The so called Imperialist controls Satelites,Echerons stationed in the UK (England.)During the Kenya Crisis Whatever Orders from STATE-HOUSE/Police HQ/NSIS)GUS/APS/Military etc was being eardroves) This is a very easy and simple job being carried by the (greatest Forces) on Earth who are able to eardove (Russian Submarines ) Under the sea in both Summer and Winter -time.
These Powers Controls satelites /Any telephone Communications anywhere in the world. Israel (Mossad)(Russian KGB) UK MI6/5 has also capability to (listen(tapp) whatever is being communicated world-wide (for their both Local and International security intrests)
here a reader must understand the Imperialist intrest in Kenya and in the (HORN OF AFRICA) This GEMA-Kikuyu Writer &a Lawyer Fails to capiture the above writen essay> that during the PEV the Powers mentioned above were very bussy (Sikiaring) any Order Comming from State-House/ defence hq7etc< The USA as a friend of Kenyans and their intrests in the country May (Share) the information with Haue(Judges) Becouse the USA wants to see the end of Impunity perpetrated by the undemocratic forces of impunity in Kenya.
Why the ICC judges dealt Ocampo a major blow Citizens
BY KIBE MUNGAI
Last Tuesdays majority decision of the Pre-trial Chamber II of the International Criminal Court to issue summonses against the Ocampo Six is anything but music to ICC Prosecutor Luis Moreno Ocampo and his Kenyan supporters and fans who may never get to read and understand the significance of the ruling.
Without a doubt, serious crimes under Kenyan law and international law were committed between December 2007 and January, 2008 but the ICC Prosecutor set about his job in a politically-motivated way whose consequences are discernible in the majority decision of the ICC Chamber II.
It should be remembered that before and after 31st March, 2010 when the ICC Chamber granted the Prosecutors request to commence an investigation into the post election violence (PEV) in Kenya he often said that he intended to prosecute a number of persons from both the ODM and PNU side of the Kenyas political divide. By mid-2010 Ocampo had indicated that the list of his suspects will include three pro-ODM and three pro-PNU Kenyans. In early December, 2010, Ocampo announced in Nairobi that despite the fact that investigations into PEV were incomplete his office will not prosecute more than the six Kenyans he had already identified and was planning to name.
This critical background is necessary to bear in mind for two reasons. First the identification of the six suspects was not a direct result of evidence. On the contrary Ocampo intentionally sought to gather evidence to punish some people from ODM and PNU sides to make an example out of Kenya to the world and presumably to prevent recurrence of the PEV in the 2012 general elections. Secondly, Ocampos vow that no other persons will be charged at the ICC was not only a gross abuse of power but an indirect exoneration of other persons that many Kenyans believe they as much, if not more, responsibility for the atrocities committed in Kenya after the 2007 general election.
When the names of the suspects and the charges against them were announced on 15th December 2010, I took the position that Ocampos politically motivated charges will be hard to prove in Court. Besides the fact that the identification of the suspects was politically driven, the choice of offences was selective and the motive was rather fictional and oblique. The majority decision of the ICC chamber vindicates my skepticism about Ocampos intentions and modus operandi in several ways.
Ocampos central thesis is more political than legal and will ultimately prove to be his undoing in the case against the six Kenyans. On one hand William Ruto, Henry Kosgey and Joshua arap Sang are accused of having coordinated a series of actors and institutions to establish a network whose goals were firstly, to gain power in the Rift Valley Province and ultimately in the Republic of Kenya. The second purpose was to punish and expel from the Rift Valley those perceived to support the PNU. Two issues are notable. First, whereas Ruto and Kosgey were senior leaders in ODM which was competing for power with PNU, Ocampo charges accuse them of creating a network outside ODM which effectively leaves ODM out of the ICC equation. Secondly, any Kenyan imbecile alive during the PEV knows that there was no competition for power in the Rift Valley. The truth of God is that Ruto and his group sought to install Raila Odinga the ODM presidential candidate as Kenyas chief executive.
The other hand of Morenos thesis relates to PNU. The charge here is that in response to the Ruto, Kosgey and Sangs planned attacks on PNU supporters, Francis Muthaura, Uhuru Kenyatta and Mohammed Hussein Ali developed and executed a plan to attack perceived ODM supporters in order to keep the PNU in power. Thus the three planned the killing of ODM supporters in Nairobi and Kisumu through excessive force by the Police and they also co-ordinated Mungiki-led attacks in Nakuru and Naivasha. The interesting bit here is that whereas Muthaura, Uhuru and Ali were supposed to be responding to actions of Rutos network rather than ODM-inspired mass action agenda, Moreno basically accused them of killing ODM Luo and Luhya supporters as opposed to the ODM Kalenjin supporters on whose behalf the network was acting.
Given this backdrop I am not surprised that Moreno scored rather poorly before the ICC Chamber in at least five respects. First, the two judges found that Ocampo did not present sufficient evidence to establish reasonable grounds to believe that Ruto and his group committed acts of torture as alleged in Count 3 which was consequently dismissed. Secondly, the judges rejected Ocampos arguments that the attacks in Nakuru and Naivasha occurred pursuant to an organised State policy.
Thirdly, the judges found that the evidence presented by Ocampo did not provide reasonable grounds to believe that the events which took place in Kisumu and/or Kibera can be attributed to Muthaura, Kenyatta and/or Ali and so the charges were dropped. Fourthly, the judges found that Ocampo failed to provide evidence to support his allegation that rape was committed as part of the attack in Naivasha. Finally, the judges rejected Ocampos request for Uhuru, Muthaura and Ali not to have contact with other suspects personally, by telephone, in writing or through intermediaries.
Evidently, in round one of the trial Ocampo scored poorer against Uhurus group than against Rutos group despite the fact that the suspects had no right to challenge his case. At the next stage of the prosecution Ocampo will face a more daunting task. With allegations about alleged crimes in Kibera and Kisumu having been dropped, Ocampo will stand or fall depending on the judges take on the alleged atrocities in Nakuru and Naivasha. I believe Ocampo will meet his waterloo in either or both Nakuru and Naivasha because evidence will let down his politically motivated charges.
According to the Waki Report, 278 Luos, 268 Kikuyus and 158 Kalenjins were killed during the PEV. There were 119 unidentified bodies, the majority in Uasin Gishu, Nakuru and Trans Nzoia Counties where Kikuyus were the main victims of the PEV. In Naivasha 50 people were killed while in Nakuru 213 people were killed. Since Naivasha is in the greater Nakuru District and indeed is part of Nakuru County, in todays parlance this means that Nakuru County with 263 people killed was the most affected followed by Uasin Gishu County with 230 fatalities.
Whereas the Waki Report does not provide the ethnic breakdown of deaths in Nakuru, anecdotal evidence shows that more PNU supporters than ODM supporters/Rutos network supporters died in the violence and even more PNU supporters were displaced in Nakuru County. I can hardly wait to see how in a County where more Kikuyus or PNU supporters were killed and displaced, Ocampo will prove that the PNU trio were the aggressors. Who then will take responsibility for the atrocities committed in Nakuru County now that Ruto and his network were not charged with them? What does ICC justice have to offer to the majority of victims in Nakuru County now than it has embraced the justice for the minority? If ODM as an institution seeking power in the 2007 general election is innocent as Ocampo implies, is any other organisation really guilty of PEV atrocities? Is Ocampo really acting in the best interests of victims?
(Mr Mungai is a Nairobi based lawyer) – CapitalFM
KIBAKI DID NOT TRUST MILITARY- WIKILEAKS KIBAKI DID NOT TRUST MILITARY- WIKILEAKS .
Saturday, 12 March 2011 00:02 BY ISAAC ONGIRI . CAUTIOUS: President Mwai Kibaki
.
PRESIDENT Kibaki rejected Chief Mediator Kofi Annan’s advise to order the military into the streets to quell the 2007-08 post-election violence fearing for ethnic divisions within the armed forces, Wikileaks has revealed.
In a US diplomatic cable dispatched from Addis Ababa by Ambassador Donald Yamamoto after a meeting between Ethiopian Prime Minister Meles Zenawi and US Assistant Secretary of State Dr Jendayi Frazer in February 2008, Annan told the Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice that Kibaki had rejected the proposal.
Annan had suggested to Kibaki that he should have allowed limited deployment of the army as violence spilled out across Kenya after the disputed December 27, 2007 presidential elections. The cable is sub-titled: Kenya in a dangerous position.
Frazer, who had a candid discussion with Zenawi on Kenya, shared Kibaki’s concerns over divisions in the military and expressed fears the situation could degenerate into a coup d’etat against Kibaki if ethnic divisions in the military became pronounced over the violence.“Frazer noted that Secretary Rice had recently spoken with Annan, and Annan mentioned that he had suggested to Kibaki that he bring the military out in a limited way, but that Kibaki demurred based on concerns regarding ethnic divisions within the military,” the diplomat wrote in the cable dated June 2, 2008.
The cable reports that Frazer feared a coup against Kibaki could degenerate into a civil war in Kenya.“The Kikuyu response could lead to civil war, as many Kikuyu fundamentally don’t believe that the election was stolen and are incensed by the violence that the opposition is encouraging,” Frazer reportedly said.
At the time Rwandan President Paul Kagame suggested a military solution for the Kenyan conflict in which over 1,300 people died and over were 300,000 displaced.
The Rwandan leader who spoke from Kigali as the world focused on the Kenyan situation prescribed a militarised solution to restore stability as the situation appeared to worsen.
Apart from being the President, Kibaki is the Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces (C-in-C) while General Jeremiah Kianga is the Chief of the General Staff (CGS).
The Ethiopian PM on his part expressed his misgivings on the military’s loyalty to Kibaki saying it may not be consolidated. “While the military may not quit, they will not be monolithically behind Kibaki, which is why some Kikuyus are turning to the militia instead,” Zenawi said.
Zenawi however regretted the use of Mungiki and other militias in the violence against civilians. “It has to be made clear to the Kikuyu establishment that ethnic cleansing is unacceptable as a response to the violence and that they cannot ‘fight fire with fire’ or use militias to fight on their behalf,” the Ethiopian leader reportedly said.
Yesterday a senior ODM minister for the first time revealed to The Star that Kenya could have been plunged in civil war if Raila Odinga had accepted advice by two members of the ODM Pentagon to declare himself President.
“Two senior members of the ODM who sat in the powerful Pentagon put pressure on the PM at the Parliamentary Group meeting held on 31st January, 2007, at Orange House to declare himself the President,” said the minister.
The minister said the Pentagon members had advised that a press conference be convened where Raila was to declare himself the President-elect.
The minister, who cannot be quoted due to the sensitivity of the matter, said two top lawyers qualified as commissioners of oath — one from Nyanza the other from Rift Valley — had been tasked to swear in Raila at a brief ceremony they intended to have televised live.
Raila however declined to take the oath and refused to declare himself President saying it would escalate the “already too bad situation” and increase the casualties.
Yesterday, Wikileaks revealed that Frazer is reported to have said that dealing with Raila and finding him culpable for anything had become difficult. Frazer said it was difficult because “Odinga is an excellent communicator and very good at playing the victim and the media love the concept of the ‘good guy’ versus the ‘bad guy’.”
Frazer, according to the cable, told Zenawi that President Kibaki was furious with Raila whom he believed was behind the violence.
But Frazer believed Kibaki had an upper hand than Raila in stopping the violence and bringing stability as he was the only decision-maker within PNU while Raila was sandwiched by his Pentagon colleagues in ODM and could not act alone.“Kibaki has the power of the state behind him and is the only decision-maker on his side, while Odinga is one of five making the decisions. Odinga is probably the most reasonable of the five, but he is constrained by the hardliners within his coalition,” Frazer said in the cable.
Frazer accused Pentagon member William Ruto of being double-faced, presenting one face to the international community and a different one to the local people.
Kibaki govt defferal Rubbish will be challenged>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a6JrGXMPYdw&feature=player_embedded
ICC : Why is Kibaki worried?
“Certain individuals within PNU allegedly raised funds and organized gangs to perpetuate the post-election violence in Central Province. A number of meetings were held in Nairobi by some leaders from Central Province where the plight of Kikuyu IDPs was discussed.
The meetings started to take a sinister turn when retaliation against non-Kikuyu communities was discussed during which time these leaders met at Kenyatta International Conference Centre (KICC), Landmark Hotel and Marble Arch Hotel.
Leaders who attended these meetings included Njenga Karume, the immediate former MP of Kiambaa. Other participants in the meetings were Stanley Githunguri, MP for Kiambaa, who allegedly organized fund raising; Kabando wa Kabando, MP for Mukurweni, who organized the delivery of weapons; Uhuru Kenyatta, Deputy Prime Minister and MP for Gatundu South, who organized finances to fund pro-Kikuyu organized gangs; and Mary Wambui, a PNU activist, who allegedly organized finances and arranged for arms to be delivered from Ethiopia via Moyale and Marsabit. Another politician mentioned adversely in relation to whipping ethnic tensions is Peter Mungai Mwathi, Lari MP, who uttered inciting statements at Kirathimo camp when he asked Mungiki to arm itself to defend Kikuyu people in the Rift Valley.”
– Kenya National Commission on Humans Rights
National National PNU drops plans to quit coalition PNU drops plans to quit coalition .
Saturday, 12 March 2011 00:02 BY FRANCIS MUREITHI . NOT LEAVING: Nominated MP Jimmy Angweni Jeremiah Kioni and Jamlek Kamau at a past press conference at PNU Headquaters.
.
THE Party of National Unity has backed down on its plan to pull out of the coalition government. The PNU called off its National Delegates Conference which was to be held yesterday to endorse a decision to pull out of the partnership with the ODM.
The PNU vice chairman George Nyamweya yesterday said the NDC has been postponed indefinitely but did not elaborate on the reasons for the postponement.
Announcing the date for the NDC, the PNU leadership said it was to be attended by 4,200 delegates comprising 20 officials and members from each of the 210 constituencies. Invitation letters had already been dispatched to branches across the country.
Those organising the NDC were Nyamweya, Jamleck Kamau (vice chairman), Maina Kamanda (organising secretary), Jimmy Angwenyi (vice-chairman) and Ndaragwa MP Jeremiah Kioni.
They had announced the NDC was to endorse the plan to pull out of the coalition arguing that it was the only option to ensure smooth running of the country.
The PNU leaders said Prime Minister Raila Odinga was destabilising the country and that’s why they wanted to bring the partnership to an end.
The PNU leaders said the NDC was the party’s highest decision-making organ and that even President Kibaki as party leader could not overrule it.
The idea to pull out of the coalition was mooted about one month ago after Raila rejected President Kibaki’s nominees for the posts of Chief Justice, Attorney General, Director of Public Prosecutions and Controller of Budget.
The situation was further aggravated when House Speaker Kenneth Marende rejected the list directing that the nomination process be done afresh in consultation with the PM.
The PNU lawmakers said Raila was eroding the separation of powers between the Executive and the Legislature and that Marende’s ruling was drafted by Parliament’s legal department and the PM’s office.
The PNU group was however forced to drop plans to censure Marende and overturn his ruling after President Kibaki withdrew the contentious list of nominees.
Under the National Accord and Reconciliation Act the coalition shall stand dissolved if the Tenth Parliament is dissolved, or if the coalition parties agree in writing “or if one coalition partner withdraws from the coalition by a resolution of the highest decision-making organ of that party in writing.”
It is however silent on whether a snap election should follow a withdrawal of one partner from the coalition. Kibaki allies maintain the President would be at liberty to form a new government of national unity without the position of Prime Minister.
The National Accord Act however states that “this Act shall cease to apply upon dissolution of the Tenth Parliament, if the coalition is dissolved, or a new constitution is enacted, whichever is earlier.”
Another clause dealing with the transitional provisions of the new constitution implies there will be fresh elections “if the coalition established under the National Accord is dissolved and general elections are held before 2012”.
State enlists Queen’s Counsel in Hague cases
Posted 29 minutes ago
The government has turned to two British lawyers associated with the case against Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir at the International Criminal Court in a last-ditch attempt to end the case against the Ocampo Six….
Uhuru Wont Resign Kenya is Kikuyu & Uhuru is Kenya>http://www.capitalfm.co.ke/news/video.php?newsID=12008
Listen to this PNU govt Papegoya>
http://www.standardmedia.co.ke/InsidePage.php?id=2000031558&cid=4&ttl=We will not detain the Ocampo six, says ICC registrar
There is a Kikuyu Proverb that says>Njau ndiongio Kamukwa! Which means >You do not show a cow that you are going to butcher it!
The Hague cannot tell the Ocampo named Six that Once the Step in Hague they will be locked untill their cases is determined!
Njau ndionagio Kamukwa!