ODM alleges 10 points linking President Uhuru to Ruto ‘ICC fixing’
By Standard Reporter | October 9th 2015
NAIROBI, KENYA: ODM on Friday laid bare ten alleged reasons linking President Uhuru Kenyatta to ‘fixing’ of his deputy William Ruto in his ICC case.
The opposition alleged that the critical evidence against DP William Ruto was supplied by the then Director of Intelligence Mr Michael Gichangi who testified on July 21, 2008 and gave dossier that named and implicated William Ruto.
It said the ICC Pre-trial Chamber relied a lot on the evidence supplied by Mr Gichangi to confirm the charges against Ruto.
“Later, Michael Gichangi’s name was submitted to the I.C.C as one of the witnesses for Uhuru Kenyatta’s case. This made it clear who Michael Gichangi was working for all along. On this matter of ICC, Gichangi was working for Uhuru Kenyatta,” said the ODM.
Moses Kuria has confessed that he procured and coached witnesses against William Ruto in 2008. At that time, ODM says Moses Kuria was an employee of Mr Uhuru Kenyatta. According to the party, Uhuru had seconded him to the P.N.U Presidential campaign which Uhuru had joined when he agreed to support Mwai Kibaki’s bid for a second term. After the 2007 elections, ODM goes on to say Moses Kuria joined the U.K centre which was the headquarters of Uhuru Kenyatta’s political activities. “He continued to work there until he was elected Member of Parliament for Gatundu South. Moses Kuria was always an employee and agent of Uhuru Kenyatta in procuring and coaching witnesses against William Ruto,” says ODM.
Full statement by ODM titled ten reasons Uhuru fixed Ruto
As a party, we believe truth and honesty are the best tools with which to govern a nation. We detest politics of lies, misinformation and mere survival. We therefore reluctantly return to the matter of the case facing Deputy President William Ruto and Mr Joshua arap Sang at The Hague because we believe this nation needs to be set free and only the truth shall set us free.
We are here to restate the position we took this week that President Uhuru Kenyatta was fully aware of and funded the procuring of witnesses against his Deputy William Ruto. We also restate that contrary to what Jubilee is saying, Uhuru Kenyatta has done nothing to make sure the case facing Ruto, ends in Ruto’s favour. Here are our reasons. They are ten in number.
Moses Kuria has confessed that he procured and coached witnesses against William Ruto in 2008. At that time, Moses Kuria was an employee of Mr Uhuru Kenyatta. Uhuru had seconded him to the P.N.U Presidential campaign which Uhuru had joined when he agreed to support Mwai Kibaki’s bid for a second term. After the 2007 elections, Moses Kuria joined the U.K centre which was the headquarters of Uhuru Kenyatta’s political activities. He continued to work there until he was elected Member of Parliament for Gatundu South. Moses Kuria was always an employee and agent of Uhuru Kenyatta in procuring and coaching witnesses against William Ruto.
Moses Kuria claims that P.N.U is the one that funded the procuring and coaching of witnesses. We all know that immediately after the elections, the bank accounts of P.N.U were looted by its officials and cronies of President Kibaki. P.N.U was left broke. It never paid its suppliers for campaign materials or its employees after the election. It had no money to conduct the exercise of procuring witnesses which Moses Kuria was engaged in. The money for procuring witnesses came from the U.K. Centre.
The head of the U.K. Centre was Mr David Murathe, who is currently the JAP Vice Chairman. The U.K. Centre employed Moses Kuria and funded the procuring and coaching of the witnesses. David Murathe is one of Uhuru Kenyatta’s closest confidants. Uhuru cannot therefore claim to be ignorant of what David Murathe and Moses Kuria were doing.
Very critical evidence against William Ruto was supplied by the then Director of Intelligence Mr Michael Gichangi. He testified on 21st July 2008 and gave dossier that named and implicated William Ruto. The ICC Pre-trial Chamber relied a lot on the evidence supplied by Mr Gichangi to confirm the charges against Ruto. Later, Michael Gichangi’s name was submitted to the I.C.C as one of the witnesses for Uhuru Kenyatta’s case. This made it clear who Michael Gichangi was working for all along. On this matter of ICC, Gichangi was working for Uhuru Kenyatta.
In November 2013, long after Ruto and U.R.P. had assisted Uhuru Kenyatta to become president, Ruto asked Uhuru to let him have evidence held by N.I.S. The evidence was to assist Ruto in his defense. Uhuru refused, even despite the fact that Ruto was now Deputy President and entitled to receive any information he needed from N.I.S. The information William Ruto needed was in the custody of Michael Gichangi. But they would not allow Ruto to have it.
When the I.C.C named Ambassador Francis Muthaura, then the Head of the Civil Service, as a suspect, the government shopped for a lawyer to represent Muthaura. That lawyer was Karim Ahmed Khan. Khan was sourced for and retained by the government and the P.N.U/Uhuru faction of suspects. After the charges against Ruto were confirmed, the P.N.U/Uhuru faction convinced Ruto that Karim Khan was the lawyer that would help him and that he should reject O.D.M’s offer of George Oraro who had managed to free Henry Kosgey. Until this day, Karim is paid by Uhuru Kenyatta and his government. And Ruto’s case keeps going from bad to worse.
Dr. Jendayi Frazer, the then Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs in the United States Government, came to Kenya as early as 5th January 2008, at the height of the Post Election Violence. Dr. Jendayi Frazer is a close family friend of the Kenyattas. She spends most of her time in Kenya, with the Kenyattas. Jendayi went to school with Uhuru’s siblings. Dr. Jendayi Frazer was very instrumental in getting I.C.C to take on the Kenyan cases. But she turned against the international court when they also indicted Uhuru Kenyatta. After she left State Department in 2009, she dedicated her time to fighting the I.C.C on Uhuru’s behalf, calling the case against him “a weak one based on hearsay”, and saying the “I.C.C has fallen from high ideals of global justice and accountability”.
Ever since Uhuru’s case was dropped, Dr. Jendayi Frazer, no longer fights the ICC and is quite happy with the court continuing with the prosecution of William Ruto. On his part Uhuru Kenyatta has not seen the need to ask Dr. Jendayi Frazer to help William Ruto. In fact, all the international lobbyists who had been retained by the government to help fight the ICC have been stood down ever since Uhuru’s case collapsed. When Uhuru visited New York late last month, two of the lobbyists who helped with his case sought audience with him to figure out if they could be of service to Ruto. Uhuru never granted them audience.
One of greatest challenges of Ruto’s case at the I.C.C is Rule 68 that allowed the prosecutor to introduce recanted evidence. This Rule was passed by the Assembly of State Parties with the full consent of Kenya through foreign secretary Amina Muhammed. The government was not worried about Rule 68 because all Uhuru’s witnesses had already died or disappeared. Rule 68 was NOT going to affect Uhuru.
Instead, the government was only worried about amending Rule 134 so that Uhuru could be exempted from having to attend trial and allowed the use of video technology for trials.
When questioned about how Kenya had handled these amendments, Amina said everything had been done in the spirit of “give and take.” It is clear someone was being given away and another one was taking their freedom. The question then is, give to who? Take away from whom?
Later, after Rule 68 had been successfully used against Ruto, Amina Mohammed started a flurry of activities to have the Rule reviewed by the Assembly of State Parties. Of course this is not possible since Kenya consented to it in the first place. In fact, since Uhuru’s case collapsed, Kenya has resumed paying its dues to the ICC faithfully, unlike when Uhuru’s case was active. The current campaign is therefore an exercise in futility to cover the eyes of Ruto’s supporters and give them false hope.
Despite being described as “doing a good job for the President and his Deputy” at The Hague, Ambassador Ruthie Chepkoech Rono was removed by Uhuru Kenyatta as High Commissioner for Kenya to The Hague. Ambassador Rono is from Ruto’s Kalenjin Community. She had been at The Hague since the Kenyan cases began. There was every reason to retain Rono at The Hague especially while Ruto’s case is going on.
Instead, Ambassador Rono was removed and replaced by a junior diplomat, Ambassador Rose Makena Muchiri, from Uhuru’s Kikuyu community, just when Kenya needed its best and experienced diplomat at The Hague.
At the height of the case against Uhuru, the T.N.A. brigade in Jubilee started the move to withdraw Kenya from the I.C.C. Ever since Uhuru’s case was dropped; nothing has been heard of this again. Uhuru sponsored a motion at the African Union seeking to have an international Criminal Court for Africa to replace the I.C.C. the motion was adopted. Uhuru even paid 1 Million dollars from Kenya to the A.U. to start the process. Ever since his case collapsed, Uhuru has not spoken on that issue again. We have no option to conclude that Uhuru Kenyatta did everything to get Ruto to The Hague and has done nothing to get Ruto out of The Hague.
'My daughter wasn't late MCA's side-lover'
- Knec gives new rules for exams as private schools reject move
- Zambia's founding president Kenneth Kaunda dies aged 97
- Kalonzo surprises himself by taking firm stand on 2022
By Peter Kimani
- I haven’t asked for your support, Raila to Kalonzo
- Curfew in 13 counties changed, to start from 7pm to 4am
By Brian Okoth