ICC declares hostile second witness in DP William Ruto, Joshua Sang case

NAIROBI, KENYA: A second witness was Thursday declared hostile to the Prosecution in the ongoing trial of Deputy President William Ruto and journalist Joshua Sang at the International Criminal Court (ICC).

Witness number 516 was declared hostile by the Trial Chamber after he disowned all the statements he recorded with the ICC in mid-2012.

The ruling was made following an application by prosecuting counsel Lucio Garcia. The application was not opposed by the defence lawyers.

The witness is among the eight who withdrew statements recorded with the ICC investigators but have been compelled by the Government of Kenya to testify.

He is the 23rd witness in the case, but the second to disown his statement, saying he was asked to fabricate it by the investigators.

Another witness who concluded his evidence early this week was also declared hostile after recanting all his initial statements.

The prosecution is allowed to turn around and cross-examine a witness who has been declared hostile in a bid to extract the truth to assist the court.

The declared hostile witness, who began testifying on Wednesday, told the judges that he was given statements by the ICC investigators, asked to put them in his own handwriting and sign them as his own to make them appear authentic.

He told the court that he was linked to the investigators by a woman who asked him to co-operate. He claimed the woman promised him financial support if he agreed to sign the prepared statements.

"When I met her, we talked at length about the statement and the call by the investigators. I asked what would be given to me in return because as poor as I am, I wanted to be in a good position and to be rich. She told me that everything would be offered to me," he said.

The witness was testifying from Nairobi through video link to the ICC in The Hague. He said he met the woman in August 2012 and was called by the investigators in November of the same year at an undisclosed place outside the country.

The statement talked about various meetings held in his locality before and after the 2007 elections. In it, the witness claimed to have attended the meetings and participated in the preparations to evict the Kikuyu from the North Rift.

He gave details of those who attended, the conveners, the time, places, discussions and decisions made in the meetings.

Recanting his statement, he denied having attended any of the meetings or even having any knowledge of the people named in the statement. He claimed that he heard the names for the first time in court.

The prosecution has called the witnesses in a bid to prove to the court that they had been bribed or induced to withdraw their earlier statements. They want the statements admitted by the court even if the witnesses have recanted.

Mr Garcia began cross-examining the witness to prove that everything in his statement could only have come from him hence it was the truth.