THE HAGUE: Kenya’s Deputy President William Ruto pleaded not guilty to crimes against humanity charges at the International Criminal Court yesterday, while back home Kenyans feared the case could reignite political violence they have struggled to overcome.
Ruto and co-defendant Joshua arap Sang are charged with orchestrating a post-election bloodbath five years ago, working with other conspirators to murder, deport and persecute supporters of rival political parties in Kenya’s Rift Valley region.
Ruto’s lawyer accused prosecutors of conducting a flawed and prejudicial investigation using tainted evidence and raised the possibility — not yet confirmed by judges or prosecutors — that this week’s hearings would be adjourned because witnesses for the prosecution could not attend court.
Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda, in her opening speech, insisted the charges against the two men would stand. “The crimes of which Ruto and Sang are charged were not just random and spontaneous acts of brutality,” said Bensouda.
“This was a carefully planned and executed plan of violence ... Ruto’s ultimate goal was to seize political power for himself and his party in the event he could not do so via the ballot box.”
It is the first time such a senior serving politician has appeared in court to face international justice. Kenya’s President Uhuru Kenyatta, Ruto’s former rival and now his political ally, will also face trial on similar charges of crimes against humanity, beginning in November.
The court’s public gallery was packed with dozens of Kenyan lawmakers and members of Ruto’s family who had travelled to The Hague in a show of solidarity.
The cases have split public opinion, and witness testimonies of the violence in 2007-08 that killed more than a thousand people could re-open old wounds.
They are also a major test for prosecutors at the decade-old ICC, who have had a low success rate and face accusations of focusing on African countries, while avoiding war crimes in other global hotspots.
“One day there will need to be an inquiry ... into how on earth it happened that somebody not just not guilty but innocent came before the court to answer charges that have been shown to be patently false,” said Karim Khan, Ruto’s lead counsel.
Earlier, as the parties took their places in the courtroom, Ruto had appeared relaxed, laughing and smiling with his lawyers, while Sang gave the thumbs-up to a reporter. Bensouda looked on impassively as Ruto’s lawyer listed what he said were shortcomings in the prosecution’s case.
Contrary to the prosecution’s claim that Ruto, a Kalenjin, hated people of the Kikuyu tribe, his sisters were both married to Kikuyus, Khan said. And, he asked, how likely was it that Ruto had amassed a cache of guns and grenades under the eyes of the local Kikuyu police chief?
Khan played videos of interviews in which Ruto expressed support for the ICC’s investigation and pledged to cooperate with the court despite describing the charges he faced as “something only possible in a movie”.
Rival members of Kenyatta’s Kikuyu and Ruto’s Kalenjin tribes, wielding machetes, knives, and bows and arrows, went on the rampage after a disputed 2007 election, butchering more than 1,200 people and driving hundreds of thousands from their homes. Reuters
