He says the Pre-Trial Chamber was right in finding that Mungiki was an organisation with capacity to commit widespread or systematic attacks on civilians.
He says the courtâs finding was that PNU youths recruited into Mungiki became part of the organisation for committing the crimes.
Moreno-Ocampo argues that the appellants had failed to demonstrate the existence of any "reversible error" in the ruling and the grounds of appeal should be dismissed.
"An appellant is obliged not only to set out the alleged error, but also to indicate with sufficient precision how the error would have materially affected the decision," he submits.
Ruto and Sang argue that if the âNetworkâ in their case comprised eminent ODM representatives, the court should have found that it was purely for achieving the party objectives and not for punishing the PNU followers as the prosecution asserted.
But Moreno-Ocampo maintains that evidence produced in court, including that of purchase of weapons, transportation of perpetrators to target areas, and establishment of scheme for paying them was not a pro-ODM political objective.
"These are actions clearly directed at a policy to carry out attacks against a civilian population," Moreno-Ocampo submitted.
"After a thorough assessment of evidence the majority (of judges) found that the Network had responsible command and established hierarchy, with Ruto as the leader and that it possessed the means to carry out widespread or systematic attacks against civilian populations," he went on.
He also dismissed claims that the judges relied on anonymous witnesses to get to the conclusion, saying the court had a right to do so at the confirmation stage.
Moreno-Ocampo says the Pre-Trial Chamber had correctly found that the case fell within the jurisdiction of the ICC. He wants the suspects compelled to raise their issues at the trial itself