Witness tells ICC poverty led him to recant statement

Judge Miatta Maria Samba of Trial Chamber III at the opening of the trial in the Gicheru case at the ICC in The Hague (Netherlands) on February 15, 2022 [ICC-CPI]

Poverty led a witness to agree to a Sh500,000 deal to recant his evidence against Deputy President William Ruto and journalist Mr Joshua Sang at the International Criminal Court. 

Witness P-0516 told Trial Chamber II judge Maria Samba that his family was “poor of the poorest”. When a proposal was floated for him to recant his testimony in exchange for a kickback, he did not hesitate.

“Person number two told us he would show us a place. It is number two who took us to number 36. I agreed to that after he told me about the money,” the witness said.

On February 18, 2013, in anticipation of his testimony in the case, P-0516’s identity was disclosed to the Dr Ruto and Mr Sang defence team. The court heard that on July 6, 2014, P-0516 was scheduled to attend a meeting with the prosecution team but he failed to do so. He then cut all communication.

Following his failure to appear, the trial court issued orders requiring him to be in court. He complied and gave his testimony between September 22 and 26, 2014. However, he recanted all the testimony he gave implicating Dr Ruto and Sang for the 2007-08 post-election violence.

He is alleged to have met lawyer Mr Paul Gicheru who gave him Sh500,000. “The evidence shows this recantation was the result of corrupt influence from Mr Gicheru and his associates,” argued ICC deputy prosecutor Mr James Stewart.

The prosecution said the late Mr Meshack Yebei and P-0397 were tasked to hunt for P-0516. According to the prosecution, Mr Gicheru, Mr Yebei and P-0397 met in May 2013 in the lawyer’s office in Eldoret.  It is alleged that Mr Gicheru then asked the two to locate P-0516.

P-0397 told the prosecutors he and Mr Yebei were paid to locate witnesses.

Initially, the witness told ICC investigators he could not recall whether the amount was Sh500,000 or Sh800,000. The prosecution claims P-0516 visited Mr Gicheru approximately four times. P-0516 told investigators that he and P-0397 could not refuse the money because otherwise “these people might come after us.”

“By suddenly withdrawing his cooperation without explanation, P-0516’s behaviour is also indicative of a corruptly influenced witness,” the prosecution continued.