Connect with us

Hi, what are you looking for?

top
Ruto's defence team opposed the proposed amendment saying it was insignificant/CFM

Kenya

ICC judge rejects bid to amend Ruto charges

Ruto’s defence opposed the proposed amendment saying it was insignificant, because the prosecutor failed to establish any good cause or to provide any explanation for her delayed request, considering that the evidence collected on the alleged crimes committed in the greater Eldoret area on or about 30 and 31 December 2007 has been in the hands of the prosecutor for many months.

“Granting the Request at this stage of the proceedings would impel the defence from being ready to effectively represent Mr Ruto given the upcoming commencement of the trial as currently set,” said Ruto’s team.

The Deputy President’s team argued granting the request would require additional time to conduct defence investigations, thus negatively impacting on Mr Ruto’s right to expeditious proceedings, as enshrined in article 67(l)(c) of the Statute.

Sang’s Defence on its part argued that the prosecutor’s “justification for seeking to amend the charges lacked merit and failed to provide reasons as to why the evidence was unknown or unavailable or could not have been collected until after confirmation”.

“It (the request for the amendment of charges) has not focused its investigative activities “on allegations which, though contained in witness statements, have not been part of the case against the accused as defined by the judges,” said Sang’s team in their application.

On 23 January 2012, the chamber issued, by majority, its decision on the confirmation of charges pursuant to Article 61(7)(a) and (b) of the Rome Statute in which it confirmed the charges presented against Ruto and Sang and committed the two accused persons to trial on the charges as confirmed.

About The Author

Pages: 1 2

Comments
Advertisement

More on Capital News