Gicheru lawyers question credibility of ICC witness
Lawyers representing Paul Gicheru at the International Criminal Court (ICC) yesterday poked holes in the evidence of the first witness, who took the stand to testify against him.
Michael G. Karnavas in cross examination yesterday tried to question the credibility of the witness accusing him of double dealing, claiming the prosecution treated him as a suspect at first after they did not find him truthful.
The witness even got worked up claiming that the defense counsel were trying to portray him as a liar and asked him to respect his integrity.
“All the information that has been brought to this court is of substance that is why we are discussing it,” he said.
The Judge Miatta Maria Samba had to ask him to calm down noting that during his testimony on Tuesday and yesterday, he gave certain instances where he claimed he meant something different.
“I’m sure the counsel does not demean you or cast aspersions on your integrity, just answer the questions,” said the judge.
Witness interference
The lawyer is on trial over accusations that he corruptly influenced witnesses of ICC in the case against Deputy President William Ruto and journalist Joshua Sang.
Ruto was charged with crimes against humanity at the ICC related to the 2007/8 post-election violence. However, the case collapsed in April 2016.
The court ruled there was insufficient evidence, but it refused to acquit the DP.
In a split ruling, one judge declared it a mistrial because of a “troubling incidence of witness interference and intolerable political meddling”.
While withdrawing the case, the prosecution indicated and got permission from the judges that it can re-introduce the case incase of evidence.
Senior lawyers have argued that if found guilty, Gicheru’s matter could lead to the re-opening of the Ruto ICC case, a move that could have far-reaching consequences on his political career.
The lawyer who surrendered to the court last year is accused of bribing and intimidating witness with the aim of frustrating the prosecution of the case against Ruto and Sang.
“The Chamber found that there are substantial grounds to believe that Mr Gicheru committed, as a co-perpetrator, or under alternative modes of liability, offences against the administration of justice between April 2013 and the closure of the Ruto and Sang case on 10 September 2015, in Kenya,” said the ICC judges when they committed him to trial in July 2021.
According to the defense, some of the prosecution witnesses in their statements had accused him of coaching them to lie to the ICC investigating officers.
“The witnesses say you have provided them with false information…that you helped them confabulate, manufacture falsehoods in order to pass them on as witnesses for the prosecution,” lawyer Michael Karnavas posed to the witness. “I am not aware of such incidents to the best of my knowledge. I have not manufactured or coached anyone, they are lying.”
The witness identified as p800 gave his examination in chief on Tuesday detailing how he was approached and paid to recant his testimony.
The two were charged with fomenting ethnic chaos after a disputed 2007 election in which 1,200 people died.
The defense yesterday accused the witness of not being truthful and honest in his testimony noting that he hid from the investigators at first, meeting lawyer Paul Gicheru.
They further claimed he coached some witnesses so that they could lie to the prosecution in order for them to get into the witness protection programme, a fact that the witness denied.
According to the defense, the witness was also one of the people who also provided some of the witnesses with false information so that they would recant their testimony at ICC.
False information
“So I take it the individuals that were mentioned in passing by the prosecution yesterday, that had accused you that you provided them with information in order for them to lie so that they would either leave the Victims Protection Section or become part of the organization.Were they lying? “The defense counsel asked him.
The witness defended himself saying he did not procure anyone to become a prosecution witness.
He claimed that he came from a country where those in question can do anything in order to protect themselves and might influence even witnesses as evidenced in the case.
“Personally I underwent the same, as a witness of this court I was able to meet the accused person in this court , so the counsel here knows exactly what people like his client can do,they can even be witnesses to come to this court to provide the information,” he claimed.
The defense claimed that one of the witnesses referred to as Number Seven, testified under oath and gave several statements to the prosecution team, where he has repeatedly said that the witness coached him in order for him to get into the witness protection program.
The defense team quizzed the witness of his meeting with Gicheru saying he failed to mention the same to the prosecution, when they invited him over on March 25, 2014.
According to the defense, the meeting with the prosecution team was “a tell it off” interview so the alleged meeting with Gicheru could not have escaped his mind.
The prosecution during opening remarks on Tuesday claimed that they will prove that Gicheru coordinated a scheme to identify, locate and corruptly influence actual and potential prosecution witnesses in the trial of Deputy President William Ruto and Joshua Sang.
The trial continues tomorrow with the prosecution expected to call another witness.
