Deputy President William Ruto allowed to continue skipping ICC hearings

Deputy President William Ruto (right) and his lawyer Karim Khan at the ICC.

By Wahome Thuku

Kenya: Deputy President William Ruto can continue skipping proceedings of the case against him at the International Criminal Court (ICC).

The ICC Trial Chamber V (a) hearing the case has rejected an application by the Prosecution for permission to appeal against its earlier decision allowing Ruto to be away during some proceedings.

The decision by the three judges Eboe Osuji, Olga Harrera Carbuccia and Robert Fremr will enable Ruto to concentrate on national affairs particularly running the Government when President Uhuru Kenyatta is away.

Ruto is enjoying an amendment to the rules made by the Member States of the Rome Statute, allowing the court to excuse accused persons who are mandated to fulfil extraordinary public duties at the highest national level.

The Trial Chamber V (a) made the oral decision on January 15, 2014 to conditionally excuse Ruto from being present at the hearing.

• .

  Keep Reading

• 
  Inside Ruto's ambitious scheme to contain runaway wage bill by 2027
• 
  Price cuts: Why State could be taking undue credit
• 
  Gachagua and poisoned chalice that is Kenya's vice-presidency
• 
  We will make public cause of chopper crash that took General Ogolla, Ruto says

On February 24, 2014 the Office of the Prosecutor filed an application at the Chamber for permission to appeal against the decision.

Determination

Chief Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda had argued that the decision would affect the expeditious determination of the case if the Appeals Chamber were to rule. She wanted the Chamber to nullify the proceedings of the days when the Deputy President did not attend and order a fresh hearing. Besouda argued that there was uncertainty as to the reliability of the evidence adduced in Ruto’s absence.

“The risk of nullification by the Appeals Chamber of the proceedings from which Mr Ruto is absent can significantly impact the outcome of the trial as well,” the prosecution submitted. If the nullified parts of the evidence were to be repeated, witnesses would be recalled to testify.