Karim Khan says William Ruto innocent, blames Luis Moreno Ocampo for botched probe

William Ruto’s defence lawyer Karim Khan, makes his opening statement on Tuesday.

By Wahome Thuku

The Hague, Netherlands: William Ruto’s defence lawyer, Karim Khan, sought to paint him as an innocent man who had been wrongly picked and hauled to the ICC.

The lawyer, in his opening statement, presented Ruto as a popular leader who worked to unite the entire country. Here is his verbatim statement.

“In this courtroom, a lot will be heard. The whole life of Mr William Ruto, his passion, his commitment, his objectives and his spirit has been a testimony for a brighter Kenyan future, a cohesive, united Kenya marching forward not as a group of ethnic communities but as one people under one flag.

There was a lot of excitement today (Tuesday) because of a deputy head of state coming to the ICC and interest in Kenya and internationally. The first time ever in the annals of international criminal law that a serving deputy head of state has voluntarily come before the court and bowed his head to justice in the expectations that justice will be done. It is not a small event, but a notable achievement, and the person who deserves applause for that approach is the client that I have the honour of representing.

Judicial inquiry

• .

  Keep Reading

• 
  MPs: Dons returned to work with no signed document
• 
  Church leaders boldly criticise State over unpopular policies
• 
  Experts' report questions Ruto's bottom-up model amid hardships
• 
  Kenyans demand unity as political leaders foment ethnic tensions

One cannot escape the reality that this investigation has been exceptionally deficient. One day after this case is over, either withdrawal or dropped or not guilty verdict entered, there will have to be an inquiry, whether it’s a judicial inquiry or one by Assembly of State parties, regarding how on earth it was that despite the safeguards that the drafters of the Rome Statute put in place, the safeguard of a pre-trial chamber, that somebody innocent, I’m not saying not guilty, has come before this court to answer charges that will be shown to be patently false.

From the prosecution’s own evidence, we will show that these investigations by her predecessor’s office (I’m not putting the blame on Madam Bensouda alone), it was the former prosecutor Luis Moreno Ocampo who must take lots of blame for the systematic failings of his office which still bedevil the OTP today.

From the prosecution’s own evidence, we can argue and show that the investigations were completed targeting Mr William Ruto before this court. The judges of this ICC even authorised investigations. But it’s a remarkable state of affairs. It’s not rhetoric by the defence. That is what the evidence of the prosecutor will establish and show in this case.

Your Honour, I heard my learned friend Madam Bensouda state today (yesterday) she will prove this case beyond reasonable doubt. That is a matter you will decide in due course. But I couldn’t help but recall that only yesterday, I had the honour of attending the press conference she was giving and she was asked three times whether or not she had a strong case and she declined to answer that yes. She was confident she had the right man, the case had proper foundation and she would prove the case beyond reasonable doubt.

Walk the walk

William Ruto has set the benchmark and standard of what it is to not just talk the talk but walk the walk in relation to commitment and conviction in relation to international justice. It’s very easy for somebody in the comfort of an armchair or in a TV studio to pontificate about the rights of the law.

But until one is faced with the most awful allegations, it’s difficult to see how one would react. Mr William Ruto has acted in an extemporary fashion. As this case unravels, witnesses are not here, they have withdrawn. The case will be adjourned tomorrow until Tuesday for want of prosecution witnesses. 

I don’t want your honours or anybody in this courtroom or watching, to be under any illusion why those witnesses have withdrawn or dropped or don’t come. There is a rotten underbelly in this case which the prosecutor has swallowed hook, line and sinker, indifferent to the truth, all too eager to latch on to any account, any version, any story that somehow tips the box in relation to putting foreword a summons or a confirmation hearing. No semblance to reality at all.

I have said it in Kenya and it’s been carried by the press many times and I say it today, with Mr William Ruto behind me for all the millions of people in Kenya to see and hear, with his authority and his instructions, we don’t want witnesses to withdraw. We want the witnesses to come and be free to speak to the prosecution, and the defence to speak the truth.

And those who come to this court and speak the truth are heroes. Those willing to speak without inducement or coercion, without fear or favour but simply because they are motivated by most lofty human principle that truth and justice have a value even though I may not benefit. That is one of the hallmarks of the civilisation of man.

Those witnesses should be left alone to speak to the prosecution and defence without any attempt by any party, any political interest groups, any NGO. We hope the court will notice, we put the people of Kenya on notice that those who are willing to speak the truth there are full protective measures available to the prosecution and the defence.

The court will pay proper regard to the dignity of witnesses. Nobody has anything to fear. But those that think that this is a foreign court in a foreign land that can be easily deceived, that they can spin a yarn that will entrap an innocent man should be aware that this court can arrest and detain anybody who seeks to pervert the course of justice.

William Ruto, on the contrary, has been in support of this court. His plea has been that you give the court space.

(Seeks to play a clip of an October 2009 interview with a Kenyan TV station, with Ruto supporting proposed investigations by ICC Prosecutor Moreno Ocampo)

The hope of many victims in Kenya was that we would get to the bottom of what happened in 2007/2008.  The only thing we will know by the end of this process is who was not responsible for the post-election violence because the victims were so poorly served in the investigations of this case.

What the prosecutor (Mr Ocampo) did is latch on to an infected information stream. It was convenient, easy and may be described as lazy investigations. He did not have regard for the source of the information or the various undercurrents that exist in a sophisticated democracy or in Kenya. Because of that, the prosecution was swept along and drowned in the ocean of their own making by relying upon a drip of evidence that was selectively put out.

Miscarriage of justice

 It’s bad enough when a miscarriage of justice take place domestically. I caution this court that dealing with foreign nationals, dealing with often highly polarised political divides, has even more responsibility to ensure procedures are in place to ensure the prosecution gets it right.

To gain justice, humanity must never leave us, the sense of compulsion and empathy. You have enormous responsibility because a man’s life and his good name are in your hands.