Kenyan president close to walking free after being accused of crimes against humanity as his lawyers say the prosecution have ‘no evidence’
The highest-profile case at the International Criminal Court took a step closer to collapsing on Wednesday as prosecutors admitted they still had no evidence to proceed with the trial of Uhuru Kenyatta, Kenya’s president.
At a special hearing on Wednesday, Mr Kenyatta’s lawyers immediately requested that the case be thrown out with their client given a not guilty verdict, but prosecutors instead requested another indefinite adjournment.
Judges at the court, based in The Hague, will now decide whether there is any chance of a trial taking place, considering that the prosecution has failed to find fresh evidence despite being granted an extra six months to do so.
Many Kenyans who support Mr Kenyatta are increasingly angry at the court’s delays, and are demanding that the case be thrown out.
“We are now in the position that this case has failed, and failed in a way that there is no prospect of it going ahead in the future,” Stephen Kay QC, Mr Kenyatta’s lawyer, told the court’s judges.
If the prosecutor will not withdraw the charges, you [the judges] can act to terminate this case. It would be an affront to justice if my client was not given a verdict of not guilty.
“If the prosecution had any evidence, we would have a trial. They do not.”
Mr Kenyatta denies five counts of crimes against humanity, including being an “indirect perpetrator” of murder and rape, over alleged links to Kenya’s post-election violence almost seven years ago, when 1,300 people died.
The ICC’s chief prosecutor, Fatou Bensouda, has admitted that she has no evidence to proceed to trial, and has on two earlier occasions this year requested adjournments to find new material. Several key witnesses whose testimony provided the bulk of her case have withdrawn their statements or disappeared.
Ms Bensouda claims that Kenya’s government is obstructing her office’s requests for documents including Mr Kenyatta’s bank statements, which she says may help her case.
Wednesday’s hearings, known as a ‘status conference’, were an opportunity for the prosecutor to request another indefinite adjournment.
It appeared, however, that prosecution lawyers would accept a termination of the case “without prejudice”, which means the current case collapses but a new one may take place if fresh evidence comes to light in the future. If Mr Kenyatta is instead acquitted, no new case may be launched.
“If this case is terminated, then the [Kenyan] government will see that obstruction of access to evidence is a viable policy,” Fergal Gaynor, the lawyer representing the victims of the violence, told the hearings.
“If we allow the prosecution to withdraw the charges completely, I frankly think that would be the complete end for the justice process for the victims in this case.”
No date was set for the three-judge panel to deliver its decision.
William Ruto, Kenya’s deputy president, also faces post-election violence crimes against humanity charges in a separate trial at the ICC, which is already underway. He denies the charges.
