, NAIROBI, Kenya, Oct 8 – The International Criminal Court Prosecution says it has some evidence and witnesses in the case against President Uhuru Kenyatta, even though not sufficient to sustain charges against him.
ICC Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda told the court that they still had a ‘body’ of evidence against Kenyatta.
“The prosecution has scrutinised this body of evidence and we judge this evidence is insufficient to make you sure,” she said in her plea to the judges not to terminate the case but allow an indefinite adjournment.
Senior Trial Lawyer Benjamin Gumpert outlined testimonies of several witnesses who he described to the court as being members of the Mungiki, a sect that Kenyatta allegedly used to carry out attacks in Nakuru and Naivasha.
He told the judges that several witnesses testified that Kenyatta financed Mungiki members to buy weapons and told them that there was an agreement with the sect that attacks would be carried out to protect Kikuyus.
“Witness P0152 was present at a meeting at a hotel attended by Mr Kenyatta. He contributed money and announced that there had been an agreement with the Mungiki that they would fight on the PNU/Kikuyu side during the Post Election Violence,” he alleged.
Gumpert said witnesses P0428, P0505, P0510, P0493 and P0494 told the prosecution that Kenyatta provided financial support to Mungiki members who were paid and facilitated to perpetuate the attacks.
He explained that witnesses P0429 and P0430 were invited to Mr Kenyatta’s home where funds were raised to finance the attacks in Nakuru and Naivasha.
According to the prosecution, Kenyatta worked with several MPs who coordinated the attacks between him and the Mungiki members.
“From yet another MP – who is alleged to be the coordinator of the violence in Naivasha – the witness said, during a meeting at a hotel in Naivasha he contributed Sh200,000 from his personal funds and a Sh1 million which he said came from Kamwana that means young man and it was Mr Kenyatta’s nickname. The money was given for funding of weapons,” he alleged.
He told the court that “that is the total of nine witnesses who will come before the court and the give evidence that I have summarised.”
He explained that the prosecution’s effort to make its evidence strong had been frustrated by the government which has refused to submit Mr Kenyatta’s phone records.
Gumpert told the court that the prosecution was convinced that Mr Kenyatta used other numbers other than the one ending with 891.
“As a wealthy man and a Cabinet Minister he must have had access to many phones. There is every reason to believe that data from telephones is still available and will reveal some relevance to the prosecution’s inquiries,” he argued.