William Ruto Should Carry His Own Cross at the ICC
William Ruto should carry his own cross at the ICC because Kenya is not on trial
The Jubilee government in Kenya has begun a new round of protests against the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague, after the recent ruling that it would use recanted witness statements as evidence in the case of accused Kenyan Deputy President, William Ruto. The Kenyan mission to the United Nations has written a protest note to the ICC and the Assembly of States Parties, to express its disappointment in this new twist.
Meanwhile, members of Ruto’s United Republican Party (URP) which is dominated by his Kalenjin ethnic group, have begun their seasonal circus shows aka “prayer meetings”, calling for the freedom of their political kingpin from the yokes of the ICC. They have claimed too that since Uhuru Kenyatta’s case was dropped by the Court in December 2014, their main Jubilee coalition partner The National Alliance (TNA), dominated by Uhuru’s Kikuyu ethnic group, is not providing the necessary support to have Ruto released.
It is important to note that Uhuru Kenyatta’s case was not terminated because of his government’s earlier campaigns and protests against the ICC, which comprised “prayers, shuttle diplomacy, protest notes, appeals to the African Union to terminate it, and so forth. It was because the ICC Office of the Prosecutor was asked by the Court’s judges to produce evidence demonstrating that his “alleged criminal responsibility can be proven beyond reasonable doubt” or withdraw the case. The ICC Chief Prosecutor, Fatou Bensouda, had to withdraw it since the Kenyan government had refused to avail vital documents showing Uhuru’s phone and bank records from the post-election (PEV) period in 2007-08. Although the Jubilee government claimed it had cooperated with the ICC as required, the Court accused Kenyatta (in February 2014) of “pure obstructionism” . According to the Prosecutor’s office, “The Kenyan Government’s non-compliance has not only compromised the Prosecution’s ability to thoroughly investigate the charges, but has ultimately impinged upon the Chamber’s ability to fulfill its mandate.”
Extra judicial killings, bribes and disappearance of witnesses
The Prosecutor’s Office had requested for more time to build Uhuru’s case when it suspected witnesses were being killed, intimidated or bribed to recant their evidence against him. According to the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) research and numerous media reports, since the ICC cases began, witnesses have been killed and some journalists have disappeared or fled the country. On April 30, 2015 John Kituyi, editor and publisher of the privately-owned Mirror Weekly newspaper based in Eldoret, was murdered by unknown assailants. His death came just a week after the newspaper ran a story titled: “Now ICC Plot to Lockup Ruto”. The CPJ claimed that three journalists and a family member believed Kituyi was murdered because of the story. See: “Kenyan editor murdered by unknown assailants in Eldoret town”
Eldoret-based Catholic Priest Gabriel Dolan’s piece in the Daily Nation newspaper on August 28, 2015 titled: “Extrajudicial Killings Cause for Concern”, clearly revealed the danger faced by ICC witnesses in Kenya. “The failure of state machinery to investigate the cases of John Kituyi, Jonah Bureti, Meshack Yebei and many others tells its own story of complicity and cover up.”
URP politicians are still peddling the passé lie that former Prime Minister Raila Odinga had “sold” Ruto to the ICC, yet last year, Ruto’s lawyer Karim Khan, claimed (to the shock of the Kalenjin community) that some of those who “fixed” him, were senior government officers in Uhuru’s government. They include former Interior Principal Secretary Mutea Iringo, and the President’s advisor on political affairs, Nancy Gitau. A section of the media reported that: “The two were alleged to have funded the witness protection programme, and coordinated recruitment of witnesses to provide evidence to the Waki Commission to implicate Mr Ruto and the Orange Democratic Movement (ODM) party.”
Some URP members also falsely believe that if Ruto runs as president in 2017 with Uhuru as his deputy, he will be safe because Kenyan presidents have immunity against prosecution. However, they have not considered that this is not applicable in international law, and especially within the Rome Statute of the ICC. William Ruto should carry his own cross at the ICC instead of his crybaby attitude, which might stoke political tensions. He is accused as an individual and he should stop seeking sympathy by posing as though Kenya as a country is on trial at the ICC.
Jared Odero
Kenya Stockholm Blog 
THIS IS the bitter truth. The Kikuyus who testified in Ruto case only explained how they were evicted by Kalenjin youths in the North Rift. Some implicated Ruto as having instigated the killings but their evidence was really shaken by the defence as incredible hearsay. If the court will count on their evidence, Ruto is likely to go free. The worst are the Kalenjin witnesses who had explained in detailed statements how they planned the killings and executed them and who financed them. They then disowned the statements and other even refused to testify but their statements are now admitted as part of the record. The judges will now look at the truth in those statements against other evidence. If they accept them as the truth, and if the Appeals Chamber does not reverse the admission, our DP will be in the worst trouble of his life. And yes its the Kalenjin witnesses will have nailed him.
How prayer rally could turn against Ruto and Sang at The Hague
By Nzau Musau
Updated Sunday, September 6th 2015
Jubilee leaders may be playing into the hands of the International Criminal Court (ICC) through their planned prayer-cum-protest rally against the court’s decision to allow use of recanted evidence in the case against Deputy President William Ruto.
Today’s prayers at Kiptororo Shrine in Kuresoi and Friday’s belated diplomatic protest note against the court could constitute what presiding judge in the case, Chile Eboe-Osuji, referred to as interference of due process in a warning issued on August 19.
Osuji, a Nigerian, refused to admit the recorded testimony on the basis of the amended Rule 68 of Rules of Procedure and Evidence. He, however, admitted the evidence after taking stock of alleged anti-ICC activities emanating from Kenya which he said may have cowed witnesses.
If Kenya succeeds in overturning use of Rule 68, the court could still latch onto Osuji’s arguments to allow use of the prior recorded testimony.
Kalenjin-only event
In admitting the evidence, Osuji said he had noted unprecedented conduct of politicians in Kenya, institutions and leaders whose object has been to prevent the trial from running its course. He said this gave him “exceptional circumstances” to admit the evidence.
See also: Bomet Governor Isaac Ruto now backs TNA/URP merger
“The conducts in question include high profile campaigns on the diplomatic front, as well as parliamentary debates and resolutions,” the judge pointed out in his separate concurring opinion accompanying the August 19 decision
Yesterday, organisers of the Kuresoi rally sought to distance the prayer meeting from anti-ICC activities. They also thawed from their strong stance that the prayers would be a “Kalenjin-only affair.”
“We are not saying the government should scuttle the ICC process. We are only saying that Kenya should prosecute its position by protesting against this blatant betrayal of trust and good faith on the part of the court,” Senator Kipchumba Murkomen told The Standard on Sunday.
On Friday, Kenya, through its permanent mission to the UN in New York, wrote to ICC’s Assembly of State Parties (ASP) to protest at the retroactive use of Rule 68. In apprehension, Kenya had written similar protests to the ASP on May 29 and February 2.
“We just want to pray for our leaders and register our protest against use of Rule 68. The rest of the stories about locking certain people out of the prayers and friction within the coalition are creations of a partisan media,” MP Sammy Mwaita added. Whether or not such statements would sit well with the ICC judges is difficult to tell at this point. However, Osuji responded unequivocally against the canvassing of politicians in Kenya.
Osuji said in addition to actions and utterances from government sources, “there is information to the effect that community leaders were similarly engaged in public utterances against this trial.”
“Such reported public utterances of community and church leaders and elders depending on the particular cultural ethos of the given community, may also contribute to the chilling atmosphere that witnesses may find intimidating—even merely in the manner of news reports, let alone when the reported events actually occurred,” he said.
“All these actions, coming as they were, in the course of this case, were always fraught with the danger of jointly or severally creating or contributing to an intimidating climate for witnesses.”
Osuji said the actions “truly evoke an unbridled form of the very definition of contempt of court.”
The judge said the ICC must be given space to do its work. He said this required the avoidance of acts and conducts that may result in the deliberate or unintentional obstruction of justice in the manner of witness intimidation.
“In my view, the interests of justice directly perturbed by the exceptional circumstances of this case, involving conducts capable of creating a dissuasive atmosphere for Prosecution witnesses, fully warrant the Chamber’s exercise of the article 69(3) authority, for purposes of having regard to the witness statements that the Prosecution urges the Chamber to consider for the truth of their contents,” Osuji concluded.
Crucial prayers
Osuji’s caution has since been mocked by Ugandan activist David Matsanga, often seen as an attack dog for the Jubilee coalition. Matsanga has written a long rebuttal of the judge’s warning accusing him of furthering injustice in attempting to gag the Kenyan public.
“It is imperative for Judge Chile Eboe-Osuji to know that public opinion in ICC matters helps justice grow. OTP has corroded all investigative methods in Kenyan cases,” Matsanga said. He dismissed Osuji’s caution as “threats” and “public relations” from the court.
Yesterday, Baringo North MP William Cheptumo says today’s prayers should not be over-emphasised. He said the prayers are crucial because the August 19 decision had caused fresh anxiety and confusion among people who were already reconciling.
He said the decision effectively revived a “dying case.” Cheptumo, who was assistant minister for Justice at the time the cases were taken up by the ICC, said “no court in the world can do what the ICC has done with regard to recanted witnesses.”
“We can only seek divine intervention hence the prayers. We believe in prayer. We have prayed about many things before and our prayers were answered. We started praying when the accused were six. They are now two. We have all the reasons to pray for the remaining two,” he said.
“We are praying because it’s our problem. Everyone is welcome to pray with us all over the country. We do not want this ICC decision to take us back to square one. How we wish the court itself would understand that they are dealing with a case that is related to peace.”
Dagoretti South MP Dennis Waweru said prayers are important so as to cast away spells of those who want to divide the country. “We should give reconciliation a chance, and the ICC must recognise our efforts as leaders,” said Waweru, also the Central and Nairobi Parliamentary caucus chairman.
Gatundu South MP Moses Kuria said the prayer rallies are justified and described them as “turning point” of ICC-Kenya relations. Kuria, who vowed to attend today’s rally, said the second leg of the prayers will be held in Ruiru next weekend.
“We acted in good faith in negotiating for the amendment of Rule 68. The same guarantees they offered us are the same guarantees they have trashed in this decision. It’s now time we demanded fairness from the ICC,” Kuria said.
The sentiments came as more leaders continued to mount pressure on ICC not to use the recanted testimony in the case against Ruto.
Yesterday, Farmers Party of Kenya, which represents small-scale farmers, said the decision may have unfavourable ramifications.
“Ours is an plea for the court to bear in mind the plight of peasant farmers who were most affected by the violence. They had just started to enjoy the fruits of reconciliation when this ruling came,” chairman David Kigochi said.
ICC Admits Statements of Five Witnesses as Evidence Against Ruto and Sang
News from Kenya Cases at the International Criminal Court
by Tom Maliti
August 20, 2015
Trial judges of the International Criminal Court (ICC) have allowed statements of five witnesses who recanted them in court or failed to testify to be admitted as evidence against Deputy President William Samoei Ruto and former journalist Joshua arap Sang.
Trial Chamber V(a), in redacted decisions made on Wednesday, declined to admit the statements of 11 other witnesses as evidence against Ruto and Sang. The prosecution had applied for the statements of as many as 16 witnesses to be admitted as evidence. The judges of Trial Chamber V(a), however, disagreed on which legal provision was applicable in reaching their decision to admit or not as evidence the statements the witnesses recorded with prosecution investigators.
Judges Olga Herrera Carbuccia and Robert Fremr issued the majority decision in which they said that Rule 68 of the court’s Rules of Procedure and Evidence was the correct provision to use to determine the merits of the prosecution’s application. Carbuccia and Fremr were of the view that Article 69 of the ICC’s founding law, or the Rome Statute, did not apply in this case. This was the alternate provision the prosecution had proposed could be used in assessing their application. Presiding Judge Chile Eboe-Osuji disagreed and in his separate opinion explained why he thought Article 69(3) was the appropriate provision to use when weighing the merits of the application.
Four of the witnesses whose statements have been admitted as evidence following Wednesday’s decisions had been compelled by court order to testify. Once they appeared before the chamber via video link, each of the four witnesses recanted in part or in whole their previous statements to prosecution investigators and they ended up being declared hostile prosecution witnesses.
Trial Chamber V(a) said they admitted the recanted statements as evidence because both prosecutors and defense lawyers had the opportunity to question the witnesses about the contradictions between their testimony in court and their previously recorded statements. The chamber also said they allowed the statements to be admitted as evidence because during the course of the witnesses’ testimony, allegations of witness interference were made, including in some cases allegations of money being offered to the witnesses to change their statements to the prosecution.
The particular witnesses are not named nor are their court-given pseudonyms used in either Trial Chamber V(a)’s majority decision or in the separate opinion of Judge Eboe-Osuji. But during the testimony of Witness 604, Witness 495, and Witness 516 these allegations may have been heard in private session. In addition to each of them being declared hostile, each witness was also granted partial immunity from prosecution from any offenses that involved interfering with, intimidating or bribing witnesses. These are offenses under Article 70 of the Rome Statute. They were not granted immunity from perjury, which is also an offense under Article 70. In exchange the three witnesses were expected to tell the chamber all they knew about any attempts to interfere with witnesses in any way and their involvement. Trial Chamber V(a) approved this deal and the witnesses’ testimony on the matter was heard entirely in private session.
In the case of the fourth witness, Trial Chamber V(a) concluded that there were allegations of witness interference, but what may have led the chamber to reach such a conclusion is unclear, because significant sections concerning this witness are redacted in the main decision. What is clear from the decision is that the witness is among the five who have been declared hostile prosecution witnesses so far.
The fifth witness whose statement to prosecution investigators has been admitted as evidence did not testify in court. In their decisions, the chamber said they are satisfied that all efforts were made to get the witness to court and testify, including involving Kenyan authorities and those of an unnamed country to trace the witness.
“The Chamber is, however, satisfied that the witness is unavailable to testify orally due to obstacles that cannot be overcome with reasonable diligence. In reaching this conclusion the Chamber has had regard, in particular, to the fact that all attempts by the Prosecution to contact or trace the witness [REDACTED] have proved unsuccessful, [REDACTED]. The witness did not appear for testimony on the scheduled date,” the judges said in their majority decision.
To date there is only one witness for whom Trial Chamber V(a) issued a public order scheduling a date to testify. This was for Witness 727, who was ordered to be in court on March 23 but never showed. In March, a lawyer representing Witness 727 said he had gone into hiding because he feared for his life if he testified.
While analyzing the reasons for admitting into evidence the statements of the five witnesses, the judges made clear that doing so was not the same as making a judgement on the strength of the statements as evidence.
“In this regard, the Chamber emphasizes that ‘its assessment of evidence for the purpose of admissibility is a distinct question from the evidentiary weight which the Chamber may ultimately attach to admitted evidence in its final assessment once the entire case record is before it, for the purpose of the verdict in the case’,” the judges said.
Of the 11 witnesses whose statements the chamber declined to admit into evidence, nine of them did not appear before court. Only one of them testified in court but the judges said there was no evidence of witness interference in the case of that witness.
To back their application that the statements of the 10 who did not testify should be admitted as evidence, the prosecution submitted documents to show what they considered evidence of allegations of witness interference involving the nine. The judges decided this was unnecessary. Trial Chamber V(a) said it already had in evidence documents and material detailing allegations of witness interference.
Judge Eboe-Osuji said in his separate opinion that 21 materials had already been admitted into evidence, numbering 288 pages, before the prosecution’s application. He said that as part of their application the prosecution submitted an additional 210 materials, numbering 1,669 pages.
“The Prosecution’s arguments do not reveal any clear difference between what the admitted evidence and the additional material tend to show, such as would make the latter non-cumulative,” wrote Eboe-Osuji, explaining why he agreed with his fellow judges that the additional material was unnecessary.
In their decisions Trial Chamber V(a) did not indicate what next is scheduled in the trial of Ruto and Sang. With Wednesday’s decisions, it is expected that the prosecution will indicate when they will close their case since most of the witnesses the prosecution expected to testify have done so.
Ruto and Sang have been on trial since September 2013 on three counts of crimes against humanity for their alleged roles in violence that followed the December 2007 elections in Kenya.
http://www.ijmonitor.org/2015/08/icc-admits-statements-of-five-witnesses-as-evidence-against-ruto-and-sang/
Why ICC judges admitted recanted witness testimony in Ruto & Sang case
Tuesday, August 25, 2015 – 16:14
By Ishmael Bundi*
The ICC Trial Chamber hearing the case against William Ruto and Joshua Sang gave various reasons for admitting the previously recorded statements of absent and uncooperative prosecution witnesses into evidence.
It would be an understatement to say the decision by the ICC judges to admit the prior recorded testimony of five uncooperative or missing prosecution witnesses in the William Ruto and Joshua Sang case has been met with a hostile reaction from a section of Kenyans. A typical reaction was that of Dennis Itumbi, the director of digital communication in the Office of the President of Kenya, who responded with a furious tirade on Twitter barely hours after the ruling was made public.
“Just read the 55 page, ICC Judges decision on the Ruto and Sang case, ICC has sank [sic] to a whole new low this evening”, read his first tweet. “It is obvious that a witness who pre-recorded a statement in English but could only speak Swahili was coached”, read another tweet mockingly hashtaged #KangarooCourt. Itumbi’s last tweet in the series summarised the central grievance that many critics have against last Wednesday’s ruling: “Nothing justifies admission of witness statements that were written in boardrooms and out rightly denied on oath in the Court”, he wrote.
Judges: Prior recorded statements were true and accurate
But the ruling by Judges Olga Carbuccia and Robert Fremr and the partly concurring opinion by Presiding Judge Chile Eboe-Osuji were more measured and well thought out than Itumbi and others would give them credit for. For example, the judges took pains to explain why they admitted the prior recorded witness statements even though they were not made under oath.
Applying a test that acknowledged the special circumstances in which the testimonies were made, the judges concluded that witnesses were not forced into making the statements, were provided with a translator and were fully aware that their accounts of events were to be presented in court as evidence:
“The Chamber observes that the prior recorded testimony was not given under oath. Nevertheless, it appears to have been taken in the ordinary course of Prosecution investigations by two investigators, was initialled on each page by the witness, investigators and interpreter and contains both a signed ‘Witness Acknowledgment’ as to its voluntariness, truthfulness and potential use in proceedings before the Court and a signed ‘Interpreter Certification’. The Chamber finds this to be adequate to indicate the witness’s acceptance that the prior recorded testimony was true and accurate”, the judges explained.
Judges: Witness interference doesn’t have to be linked directly to Ruto and Sang
Allegations of witness interference have featured prominently in the Ruto and Sang ICC case. When the Office of the Prosecutor (OTP) made its application seeking the admission of the previously recorded statements of as many as 16 witnesses in the case, it stressed that Rule 68 of the ICC’s Rules of Procedure and Evidence allows for such inclusion if it can be shown the witnesses had been interfered with.
“Given the evidence implicating persons acting for the benefit of the Accused in the interference of the Corrupted Witnesses, the interests of justice would be best served by the introduction of their Prior Recorded Testimony into the Court record so as to prevent the Accused from benefiting from crimes against the administration of justice committed on their behalf ”, the OTP argued.
Lawyers acting for Ruto and Sang, in their submissions challenging the OTP’s request, had partly opposed the move by arguing that such statements lack “reliability and are hearsay evidence”. They also contended the statements should only be admitted if the allegations of witness interference could be tied directly to the accused and proved beyond reasonable doubt. Judges knocked down both arguments.
Concerning the reliability of the statements, the judges wrote that, before determining the guilt or innocence of Ruto and Sang, they would look at whether “prior recorded testimonies go to the acts and conduct of the accused, and whether the evidence contained therein is corroborated by any other evidence admitted into the record”.
Judges were also firmly of the view that the prosecution did not have to connect allegations of witness interference directly to Ruto and Sang, writing that “the Chamber does not consider that the unproven link between the improper interference and the accused affects its determination that the interests of justice would be served if this prior recorded testimony is admitted, as the Chamber does not consider that its admission is unduly detrimental to the accused”.
Judges to take into account lack of cross-examination
One reason last Wednesday’s ruling has been termed a “blow” to Ruto and Sang by much of the Kenyan press is that their lawyers will not get a chance to cross-examine the statements of the witnesses. As the Daily Nation’s Walter Menya put it last week :
“This latest ruling is a setback to the defence teams as they will not get a chance to cross-examine the witnesses or test the authenticity of the statements, some of which might link the two accused to the planning and execution of the 2007/8 post-election violence”, he wrote.
The judges, however, were careful to stress in their ruling that the statements had not been subjected to cross-examination by the lawyers for the accused and said they would take this account when considering the importance to attach to the testimonies.
“Although the prior recorded testimony has not been subject to cross-examination, this does not prevent its admission. The Chamber will be mindful of this fact when deciding what weight to attribute to it”, they wrote.
Judge Osuji: Government officials, church leaders, elders and bloggers created a chilling atmosphere for witnesses
In his partly concurring opinion, Nigerian judge Chile Eboe-Osuji devoted a lot of attention to actions, utterances and statements by senior members of Kenya’s government, community leaders, elders and bloggers “the object of which was to prevent the trial running its course”. Osuji said the actions by supporters of the accused “coming as they were, in the course of this case, were always fraught with the danger of jointly or severally creating or contributing to an intimidating climate for witnesses”.
Decrying the “chilling atmosphere” these statements created, Judge Osuji was particularly critical of the statements of Kenyan legislators in parliament.
The presiding judge in the Ruto and Sang case wrote that though parliamentary immunity prevents members of parliament from being found in contempt of court for making statements in the House, “that rule of immunity is not known to prevent the recognition that parliamentary speeches and actions can have the potential to obstruct the course of justice in an active criminal case”. The judges added that such statements by MPs could create “an intimidating atmosphere for witnesses and their families”.
The judge also didn’t spare Kenyans bloggers who, in the past, have attempted to reveal the identities of ICC witnesses.
“In addition to the foregoing concerns, the Chamber has also had to reproach the conducts of anonymous bloggers intent on revealing the identities of protected witnesses, with the obvious aim of intimidating those witnesses”, he wrote.
Judge Osuji differed with his fellow judges who applied Rule 68, as requested by the OTP, to admit by the prior recorded statements of uncooperative or missing witnesses. He felt that the more appropriate rule to apply was Article 69(3).
“I do not share the view that the new r 68 applies. Indeed, in my view, r 68 does not apply in any of its generations. Article 69(3) is the more appropriate provision”, he wrote.
The judge felt Article 69(3) was a better fit because it allowed the Chamber to take into account not just the direct attempts at witness interference but those actions and statements by government officials, MPs, community and church leaders as well bloggers that created a “dissuasive atmosphere” for witnesses:
“In my view, the interests of justice directly perturbed by the exceptional circumstances of this case, involving conducts capable of creating a dissuasive atmosphere for Prosecution witnesses, fully warrant the Chamber’s exercise of the Article 69(3) authority, for purposes of having regard to the witness statements that the Prosecution urges the Chamber to consider for the truth of their contents”, he explained.
*Ishmael Bundi is a pseudonym for a Nairobi-based blogger.
Ruto’s lonely ICC fight and is Kenya keeping the ICC relevant?
Thursday, September 3, 2015 – 13:46
By THTK contributor
In this week’s press review, we tell you why Ruto’s ICC fight has suddenly turned lonely, we ask you if the ICC needs Kenya to stay relevant and tell you why the Kenyan press is fond of depicting the ongoing ICC cases as weak.
Ruto’s ICC fight turns lonely
Deputy President William Ruto suddenly feels lonely and abandoned at the ICC. Several politicians allied to Ruto’s United Republican Party (URP) have come out to complain that the Kenyan government is doing little to “save” Ruto and has effectively “abandoned” him at the ICC.
The Daily Nation, The Standard, and The Star – three of Kenya’s best-selling dailies – all carried stories this week, quoting URP members of parliament criticising the government for not being as vigorous in defending Ruto now that the ICC case against president Uhuru Kenyatta has been withdrawn.
“We wonder why CS Amina and other government officials were so keen, moving around the world to petition the ICC States Parties to terminate the case [against Uhuru], but when it comes to our own they are silent”, complained Bomet Central MP Ronald Tonui according to The Star.
Speaking to The Standard, another URP MP Kangogo Bowen of Marakwet East was more blunt:
“We are not happy. We no longer see the Attorney General taking the initiative like he did for President Kenyatta. The Government lobbying against the ICC cases has shut down. We should be working together but we do not feel that.”
Despairing at what they see as the government’s half-hearted efforts to “rescue” Ruto in The Hague, Rift Valley MPs are turning to a higher power.
MY CHIROMO MORGUE ESCAPADESBy Mugo Wa Wairimu
ESTHER WAVINYA | July 24, 2014 12:51 pm | Just for laugh stories, Stories, Tribute | No Comments
RSS
Mugo Wa Wairimu
Fearless & Candid!
MY CHIROMO MORGUE ESCAPADES
On August 8th, 1996, I was on duty at the CHIROMO Mortuary.
Those were the days when the end used to justify the means; we used to use all available means to supplement our university tuition fees and be left with something to eat. We would occasionally receive handouts for non-official services. And so it happened that an affluent family from the USA lost their beloved one. They airlifted the body fro the USA using an expensive golden coffin.
They made it clear to me that the coffin was just for the purposes of transport the coffin and that they’ll not be using the same to bury the body. That was music to my ears; the golden coffin was worth hundreds of thousands and I knew the family will be leaving it with me since the candy go store a coffin at home. As a struggling student, this was a a big blessing since I could get a ready buyer for the golden coffin. I immediately labelled the coffin so that even neither our Human Anatomy chairman O.G and the mortuary secretary Sarah or even any of my fellow students knew the Golden coffin belonged to me. Fate was on my side; The same day, an affluent man of Masaai/ Samburu origin(name withheld brought his dead brother to the mortuary. Before he left, he called me aside and asked me if I could be of any help in obtaining a wonderful coffin befitting his brother. I enquired what his budget was and he said money wasn’t his problem; his problem was giving his late brother a hero’s send off. I took him round the mortuary coffins and showed him the mortuary coffins as chiromo mortuary also used to sell coffins. I made sure he saw “my” golden coffin last and he instantly fell in love with it. Since I’d already labelled it, I told him I’m not sure the other “customer” will agree to part with it. Luckily, he offered to double what the first customer( non-existent) had offered.
I quickly removed the label and replaced it with another one bearing the details of hid deceased brother. This was after he agreed to part with Ksh 185,000.00 for the coffin. The money was to be paid as the body was being collected. It was then a Friday and the burial was slated for the next day on Saturday. Am so I wok up ver early on Saturday and carried my “boys and girls”~ these were my fellow students I was working with them there and wouldn’t want to mention my names.
One thing was common with them; they did not have the guts or the boldness to broker deals at all but they were always at hand to take my orders at a fee. Another terrible hitch arose, the body that was to be packed in the golden coffin was very tall and could not fit in the coffin past the knee level in the coffin. A major headache it was but that did not kill my determination to pocket the close to 200k for the coffin. I had to think hard and fast. This is how it went. The brother to the deceased was a man of means and a histologist by profession. I interrogated him on the versions rites tha t they YAKE through a buddy before burial and whether they have any interest to open the coffin and view the body. He made things easier for me; He told me by the custom, I was a taboo to even think of opening a coffin to view any body. He instructed me to close the coffin completely and only leave the face visible, period. My headache was taken care of. Without hesitating, I called my 2 colleagues, my fellow students an I had some simple instructions for then, that the body HAD to fit in the golden coffin, COME WHAT MAY!
It doesn’t require rocket science to know what that meant; the tall(or is it long) body had to be reduced to size to ensure it fitted in the coffin; The was no way whatsoever I could watch as close to 200k clean cash disappear in to thin air: This is one instinct where my boldness and the devil may care attitude worked perfectly for me; I called my two colleagues who happened to be two years ahead in campus but couldn’t get the guts to do what I was doing; I offered the Ksh. 500.00 each to “SHORTEN” the body to facilitate it’s fitting I. The coffin. This meant cutting both legs at the knee joint and ensuring the two legs were nicely packed next to the body in the coffin.
Not knowing what was at stake for me. The worked on the body in haste and I two minutes, they body was termed to size and could now fit in the golden coffin. I was confident enough no problems would arise as he had assured may they’ve no interest whatsoever to own the coffin. We the n fitted the body in the coffin, sent the relatives to pay the mandatory Ksh.5000.00 for the body preservation. We then loaded the body onto a waiting track and inside the track, my friend gave me a to tal of Ksh 205,000 00; 185,000.00 for the golden coffin and 20,000.00 for being so nice to them. Mission having being accomplished, I paid my 2 colleagues Ksh 1000.00 each and they were excited.
TUMETOKA MBALI.. MY MORGUE ESCALADES CONTINUE THIS EVENING!(9397)
– See more at: http://www.essyoscarjournal.com/chiromo-morgue-escapadesby-mugo-wa-wairimu/#sthash.nlkcfBJd.dpuf
Belgian farmers want to hang traitors.
Ruto must face the ‘ICC knife’ as a true Kalenjin warrior. Why chicken out yet he said: “Don’t be vague, let’s go to the Hague”.
The phrase “Don’t be vague, go to The Hague” was coined by Isaac Ruto (no relation with William Ruto), who was an MP during the Hague debate and is currently a Senator. “The same MPs tried to obfuscate the debate by claiming that they had no confidence in the local judiciary and would prefer that the ICC conduct prosecution of the masterminds of the violence. The phrase ‘Don’t be vague, go to The Hague’ became part of the political lexicon to justify a preference for the ICC. The preference for the ICC was based on the false assumption that international prosecution would take forever and that by the time the ICC came around to issuing indictments, some of the alleged perpetrators would have been safely ensconsed in State House Nairobi. It seems obvious that the political elite had no intention of holding themselves accountable for the violations that occurred during the post-election violence.” (See Omeje and Hepner, 2013 in: ‘Conflict and Peacebuilding in the African Great Lakes Region’ pp.130-131).
Ruto wanted the ICC
https://kenyastockholm.com/2013/09/12/uhuruto-took-themselves-to-the-hague/
ugo Wa WairimuFearless & Candid!
MY CHIROMO MORGUE ESCAPADES
On August 8th, 1996, I was on duty at the CHIROMO Mortuary.
Those were the days when the end used to justify the means; we used to use all available means to supplement our university tuition fees and be left with something to eat. We would occasionally receive handouts for non-official services. And so it happened that an affluent family from the USA lost their beloved one. They airlifted the body fro the USA using an expensive golden coffin.
They made it clear to me that the coffin was just for the purposes of transport the coffin and that they’ll not be using the same to bury the body. That was music to my ears; the golden coffin was worth hundreds of thousands and I knew the family will be leaving it with me since the candy go store a coffin at home. As a struggling student, this was a a big blessing since I could get a ready buyer for the golden coffin. I immediately labelled the coffin so that even neither our Human Anatomy chairman O.G and the mortuary secretary Sarah or even any of my fellow students knew the Golden coffin belonged to me. Fate was on my side; The same day, an affluent man of Masaai/ Samburu origin(name withheld brought his dead brother to the mortuary. Before he left, he called me aside and asked me if I could be of any help in obtaining a wonderful coffin befitting his brother. I enquired what his budget was and he said money wasn’t his problem; his problem was giving his late brother a hero’s send off. I took him round the mortuary coffins and showed him the mortuary coffins as chiromo mortuary also used to sell coffins. I made sure he saw “my” golden coffin last and he instantly fell in love with it. Since I’d already labelled it, I told him I’m not sure the other “customer” will agree to part with it. Luckily, he offered to double what the first customer( non-existent) had offered.
I quickly removed the label and replaced it with another one bearing the details of hid deceased brother. This was after he agreed to part with Ksh 185,000.00 for the coffin. The money was to be paid as the body was being collected. It was then a Friday and the burial was slated for the next day on Saturday. Am so I wok up ver early on Saturday and carried my “boys and girls”~ these were my fellow students I was working with them there and wouldn’t want to mention my names.
One thing was common with them; they did not have the guts or the boldness to broker deals at all but they were always at hand to take my orders at a fee. Another terrible hitch arose, the body that was to be packed in the golden coffin was very tall and could not fit in the coffin past the knee level in the coffin. A major headache it was but that did not kill my determination to pocket the close to 200k for the coffin. I had to think hard and fast. This is how it went. The brother to the deceased was a man of means and a histologist by profession. I interrogated him on the versions rites tha t they YAKE through a buddy before burial and whether they have any interest to open the coffin and view the body. He made things easier for me; He told me by the custom, I was a taboo to even think of opening a coffin to view any body. He instructed me to close the coffin completely and only leave the face visible, period. My headache was taken care of. Without hesitating, I called my 2 colleagues, my fellow students an I had some simple instructions for then, that the body HAD to fit in the golden coffin, COME WHAT MAY!
It doesn’t require rocket science to know what that meant; the tall(or is it long) body had to be reduced to size to ensure it fitted in the coffin; The was no way whatsoever I could watch as close to 200k clean cash disappear in to thin air: This is one instinct where my boldness and the devil may care attitude worked perfectly for me; I called my two colleagues who happened to be two years ahead in campus but couldn’t get the guts to do what I was doing; I offered the Ksh. 500.00 each to “SHORTEN” the body to facilitate it’s fitting I. The coffin. This meant cutting both legs at the knee joint and ensuring the two legs were nicely packed next to the body in the coffin.
Not knowing what was at stake for me. The worked on the body in haste and I two minutes, they body was termed to size and could now fit in the golden coffin. I was confident enough no problems would arise as he had assured may they’ve no interest whatsoever to own the coffin. We the n fitted the body in the coffin, sent the relatives to pay the mandatory Ksh.5000.00 for the body preservation. We then loaded the body onto a waiting track and inside the track, my friend gave me a to tal of Ksh 205,000 00; 185,000.00 for the golden coffin and 20,000.00 for being so nice to them. Mission having being accomplished, I paid my 2 colleagues Ksh 1000.00 each and they were excited.
TUMETOKA MBALI.. MY MORGUE ESCALADES CONTINUES…(21284)
Comments
21 comments
– See more at: http://www.essyoscarjournal.com/chiromo-morgue-escapadesby-mugo-wa-wairimu/#sthash.pKNxGfgL.dpuf
Meet a racist Neo-Nazi hangurian woman kicking and knocking a fleeing refugee with a kid ?
http://presstv.com/Detail/2015/09/08/428352/hungry-reporter-refuge-attack-
African refugees fighting for survival in racist Spain !
Italian Police skinning African refugees!
Ruto prayer rally yielded nothing, claims MP
07 September 2015, 21:39
Jackson Okata
Nakuru – The much hyped ‘mother of all prayers’ rally held Sunday in Kuresoi to pray for deputy President, William Ruto did not yield anything and can work against the DP in his pursuit to get out of the ICC guillotines, an MP has said.
Kuresoi south MP, Zakayo Cheruiyot said the MPs who gathered at Kuresoi to pray for the DP do not understand what the DP is going through.
Speaking Monday morning at a Nakuru hotel, Cheruiyot said that he understands better what the DP is going through saying that the MPs should stop their empty talk about the ICC cases and work on how they can get the DP out of the Hague-based court.
“Yesterday people gathered in Kuresoi to pray for the DP but instead of praying they were busy politicking. Instead of addressing the real issues they were busy making things worse for the DP. Mere political words and statements will only complicate things for the DP,” said Cheruiyot.
He added, “What people should be doing is ask President Kenyatta and his handlers what they did to bring his case to an end and apply the same on Ruto’s case.”
He called on Ruto to personally handle his ICC issue just like President Kenyatta did before it’s too late.
“Ruto should face the ICC by it horns and confront it the way Uhuru did. Sitting and relying on lawyers cannot be the solution,” said the MP.
http://www.weather.com/science/nature/news/saiga-antelopes-die-central-asia
http://www.livescience.com/52032-saiga-die-off-mystery.html
The most humiliated moment.Lions inside a zoo are fed in a humane way than these Syrian refugees!
Politicians ranked for corruption awareness
BY OLIVER MATHENGE
September 10, 2015
SUSPENDED Lands CS Charity Ngilu, Deputy President William Ruto, and Devolution CS Anne Waiguru came out top in a Ipsos poll about awareness of corruption scandals.
The poll released on Wednesday asked 2,002 adults which individuals had been mentioned in connection with corruption scandals during the Jubilee government period.
The poll found that 50 percent of respondents mentioned Ngilu, 31 percent Ruto and 28 percent Waiguru.
Top-ranked scandals in terms of awareness were 46 percent for Karen land, 38 percent for National Youth Service, 26 percent police recruitment, 20 percent Coast land, 12 percent ChickenGate, 8 percent Ruto Jet, 7 percent SGR, and then a number of other controversies.
“In terms of the individuals allegedly associated with such corruption, it is significant (if perhaps expected) that two of the only three who received more than 10 percent of all mentions are those associated with the most frequently mentioned scandals,” Ipsos researcher Tom Wolf explained.
Just over half of all respondents attest to being aware of at least one scandal that has occurred since the Jubilee government came to power The Deputy President, Ngilu and Waiguru have all vehemently denied any involvement in the alleged scandals.
The survey of 2,002 respondents in urban and rural areas in 41 counties was conducted between July 30 and August 9.
The margin of error attributed to the poll is +/- 2.2 percent with a 95 percent confidence level.
Other individuals mentioned in connection with alleged corruption scandals were below double figures.
How did Kenyans rank leaders?
1. Suspended Lands CS Charity Ngilu 50 per cent
2. Deputy President William Ruto 31 per cent
3. Devolution CS Ann Waiguru 28 per cent
4. Nairobi Governor Evans Kidero was mentioned by 7 percent of respondents.
5. Suspended Transport CS Michael Kamau 7 percent
6. Wiper leader Kalonzo Musyoka 4 percent
7. Uhuru Kenyatta 3 percent
8. Issack Hassan 3 percent
9. James Orengo 2 percent
10. James Oswago 2 percent
11. Davis Chirchir 2 percent
12. Mike Sonko 2 percent
13. Kazungu Kambi 2 percent.
All others mentioned were below 2 percent.
However, a majority of respondents approve of President Kenyatta’s efforts to deal with corruption.
According to the poll, 51 percent of the respondents (70 percent Jubilee and 27 percent Cord) said that President is sincere about the fight against corruption.
It adds that 70 percent of Jubilee supporters believe he will succeed but only 33 percent of those in Cord.
However the perception of corruption under Jubilee rose from six percent in December 2014, to 19 percent in April this year and now stands at 21 percent.
The top issue for Kenyans, according to the poll, is the high cost of living, followed by corruption and then by unemployment.
– See more at: http://www.the-star.co.ke/news/politicians-ranked-corruption-awareness#sthash.Yfx33J2o.2kjPPkIH.dpuf