Term ‘madoadoa’ was taken out of context, ICC told

October 18, 2013 4:49 pm
Shares

,

Faal told the witness that Odinga was not referring to the Kikuyus as "madoadoa" but was telling them to vote only for ODM candidates/FILE
Faal told the witness that Odinga was not referring to the Kikuyus as “madoadoa” but was telling them to vote only for ODM candidates/FILE
NAIROBI, Kenya, Oct 18 – Deputy President William Ruto’s Defence Counsel Essa Faal on Friday presented video evidence showing that the derogatory word ‘madoadoa’ was used by the Orange Democratic Movement (ODM) party in the context of three-piece voting in the 2007 General Election.

While cross-examining the fourth prosecution witness, Faal played a video clip where former Prime Minister Raila Odinga (leader of ODM) told a crowd at a rally at Huruma Grounds in Eldoret to vote only for ODM candidates – right from the presidency, parliamentary and civic seats.

“Vote ODM at the bottom, at the middle and at the top, we don’t want madoadoa (blot in the voting pattern),” Odinga was heard and seen telling the crowd before the 2007 poll.

Faal told the witness that Odinga was not referring to the Kikuyus as “madoadoa” but was telling them to vote only for ODM candidates.

“You will agree with me that he never asked for the removal of Kikuyus, in that speech…when ODM told people to vote in a three piece suit and not “madoadoa” you interpreted that to mean they should not vote for Kikuyus? It is in this context that some politicians encouraged the people not to vote for madoadoa,” Faal told the witness.

P0376 replied; “but when he says should not vote for madoadoa, it is my belief he meant that you did contrary to his wish, then you are not with them.”

The witness on Thursday told the court that he heard Ruto in the company of prominent farmer and politician in Uasin Gishu County Jackson Kibor tell a crowd to get rid of ‘madoadoa’ – a term he used to refer to non-Kalenjins.

Ruto’s counsel further informed the court that no Kalenjin was killed on December 28 and 29 and presented a report from the Moi Teaching and Referral Hospital in Eldoret which was taken in as defence evidence.

“On the December 29, Kikuyu youths killed a number of Luo youths at Prof Odhiambo’s house…You did not hear or learn the killing of youth on 29th December,” Faal asked.

“I was told there were confrontations…I did not see it myself, I got that information to that effect at Kona Mbaya. I heard some Luos had been killed but I did not hear the exact place they were killed. What I said was that I heard that there was a confrontation. I did not say that I saw it,” the witness responded.

Faal went on further to quiz the witness over his evidence to the court on Thursday that he saw bodies of three Kalenjins which had multiple injuries including one that had its head cut off.

Using a report from the Moi Teaching and Referral Hospital in Eldoret, Faal pointed to the witness persons identified as numbers

“Did you hear that on the afternoon of December 29, Kikuyu youths killed a number of Luos at the house of Prof Odhiambo,” Faal asked the witness who in response said; “I did not say that I saw it myself, I got information to that effect at Kona Mbaya.”

Faal proceeded with further details of how three Luos and one Kikuyu had been killed in Langas. He told the court that the four bodies had multiple cuts and the cause of death was linked to head injuries caused by sharp objects.

“You will agree with me that Luos were killed in Langas…on 28 and 29 December. You can take my word for it because I have checked it and the prosecution will check it and if I am wrong they will say it, the prosecution…but no Kalenjin was killed in Langas on 28 and 29 December, 2007,” Faal insisted.

“I would say as you have stated earlier the Luos were angry because of the (election) outcome and that is how the confrontation and fighting ensued among the Kikuyus and Luos because that particular side where Luos are majority, there are no Kalenjins,” he said.

The Prosecution said it could not confirm the authenticity of two reports it had disclosed to the defence as evidence in the case against Ruto and Sang.

Senior Trial Attorney Anton Steynberg for the prosecution said the prosecution received one of the documents from the CIPEV.

Faal said all the documents were materials disclosed by the prosecution to the defence despite them having discrepancies on the dates on when one of the people during the Post Election Violence was killed.

Faal said the defence decided to work with a date that looked more accurate.

“The prosecution received from the CIPEV the documents. I can attest to the accuracy of the documents… there are discrepancies between various documents; that discrepancy exists, the date is clearly incorrect,” Steynberg said.

Shares

Latest Articles

Most Viewed