May 28, 2022

Waendesha Mashtaka wa ICC Wafunga Kesi Dhidi ya Wakili Paul Gicheru

0 0
Read Time:4 Minute, 24 Second

Waendesha mashtaka wa Mahakama ya Kimataifa ya Uhalifu (ICC) wamehitimisha kesi yao dhidi ya wakili wa Kenya Paul Gicheru, huku shahidi wa mwisho akisema maisha yake yalikuwa hatarini kwa sababu ya ushahidi wake.

Shahidi huyo, P-0739, alisema alihofia maisha yake kwa sababu ya aina ya ushahidi wake na watu aliowataja wakati wa siku tatu alizokuwa kwenye sanduku la mashahidi huko The Hague.

“Nataka mwelekeo kuhusu hali yangu kwa sababu ilinijia tangu jana huku nikishuhudia kwamba usalama wangu unatishiwa kulingana na nilichosema,” shahidi huyo alisema.

Aliomba mahakama imhakikishie kuwa msaada wa fedha anaopokea kutoka kwa Kitengo cha Waathirika na Mashahidi wa mahakama hiyo (VWU) hautakatwa kwa sababu amemaliza kutoa ushahidi wake.

He disclosed that after he testified in the terminated case against Deputy President William Ruto and journalist Joshua Sang – where the trial court found that he had given ICC investigators false statements to incriminate Dr Ruto – the court reduced its financial support.

“I am saying this out of experience. The last time I testified (in the Ruto-Sang case) and later the amount (I was receiving from court) was reduced by almost a quarter. That is my worry,” he added.

The defence lawyer depicted the witness as a liar who gave inconsistent testimony.

Judge Miatta Maria Samba told the witness that the Registry will address his concerns. Prosecutor Anton Steynberg said the Office of the Prosecutor will conduct a risk assessment.

“I can assure you of your security and ask the Registry to do what has to be put in place for your security. VWU will do everything to keep you safe,” said Judge Samba.

“The prosecutor has said they will do a risk assessment and put the necessary measures in place. But I have instructed the Registry to act.

“Once he has finished testifying, VWU will do a post-testimony assessment on security. Measures such as permanent relocation will be taken.”

Mr Gicheru’s lawyer, Suzana Tomanović, portrayed the witness, who testified via video link from a third country, as an inconsistent person who could not be believed.

The witness had testified that he was paid Sh2 million by Mr Gicheru to withdraw as a witness in Dr Ruto’s crimes against humanity case.

But when asked by the defence how he utilised the money, the witness could not account for it. But he explained that a person who linked him to Mr Gicheru kept begging for a share of the money and so he was unable to enjoy it.

“Mr Gicheru’s friend had a role in the money I had been given. He would ask for the money to fuel and kept on begging from me,” the witness said.

“That person came to ensure it is running out of my pocket. There is nothing to show because it was not money to be happy (with). We were not writing anything.”

The defence lawyer said that a reading of the witness’ testimony since 2014 did not indicate that he said Mr Gicheru gave him the money or that Mr Gicheru gave money to anybody near the witness.

The witness also testified that the claimed person, identified as Person-19 in court papers, took him to Mr Gicheru’s residence to discuss the money and recanting his evidence against Dr Ruto.

But the court heard that when ICC investigators asked him to describe the house and draw a sketch of its interior, he was unable to do so. He told them he could not remember details about the house.

In the interview conducted in July 2014, the court heard that P-0739 said he had not been to the house.

“I don’t remember talking about his residence and I don’t remember stating about that particular issue,” he said.

He blamed his inconsistencies on psychological issues that he said he was grappling with, because at the time he was concerned about his children’s education.

He also told the court that at the time he recorded his statement with the investigators he was not in the right frame of mind. He got better after being admitted to the ICC witness protection programme and was relocated.

He also testified that Mr Gicheru contacted him often via phone. He also used to contact him.

However, the defence lawyer told the court that an analysis of 3,500 pages of call data did not confirm the phone calls.

“We went through the forensic extraction report of contact numbers and names. You don’t even have Gicheru’s number,” said the lawyer.

Witness P-0739 was the prosecution’s eighth and final witness against Mr Gicheru. The court is waiting for Mr Gicheru to provide direction on April 25 on whether he will mount a defence.

Meanwhile, prosecutors have decided not to proceed with forcing a hostile witness, identified as P-0743, to testify in the matter.

The court had already issued summons against him. He had testified in the terminated trial of Dr Ruto and Mr Sang and prosecutors wanted him to testify in the trial of Mr Gicheru.

But he evaded investigators from the Office of the Prosecutor and dropped communication, and became unresponsive and uncooperative.

Prosecutors also dropped P-0495 and P-0604, saying they were unreliable. The two were also witnesses in the Ruto-Sang case.

Happy
Happy
0 %
Sad
Sad
0 %
Excited
Excited
0 %
Sleepy
Sleepy
0 %
Angry
Angry
0 %
Surprise
Surprise
0 %