• About US
  • Our Work
Tuesday, March 21, 2023
  • Login
JFJ - Journalists for Justice
  • Home
  • Communities of Justice
  • Opinion & Analysis
  • Human Rights
  • Elections
  • About US
  • Our Work
  • Careers
No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • Communities of Justice
  • Opinion & Analysis
  • Human Rights
  • Elections
  • About US
  • Our Work
  • Careers
No Result
View All Result
JFJ - Journalists for Justice
No Result
View All Result

Gicheru asks ICC judge to admit new evidence

byJanet Sankale
May 3, 2022
in The ICC
Reading Time: 3 mins read
A A
Michael G. Karnavas, the lead counsel of Kenyan lawyer Paul Gicheru, during the opening of his trial at the International Criminal Court. Photo credit: @ICC-CPI

Michael G. Karnavas, the lead counsel of Kenyan lawyer Paul Gicheru, during the opening of his trial at the International Criminal Court. Photo credit: @ICC-CPI

Kenyan lawyer Paul Gicheru has asked the International Criminal Court to allow him to introduce new evidence, even after informing the court that he would not present a defence case during his trial for witness tampering.

The request came shortly after he notified the ICC’s Trial Chamber III and the prosecution that he did not intend to mount a defence in a filing dated April 25, 2022.

He filed an application to introduce evidence other than through a witness (a bar table motion). Gicheru, through his counsel, Michael G. Karnavas, asked the court to admit 74 documents relating to eight Office of the Prosecutor (OTP) witnesses, including P-0800, P-0341, P-0613, P-0274, P-0738, P-0516, and P-0739.

The documents include investigation reports, witness statements, transcripts of interviews, witness-related expense reports, transcripts from the main case of Kenya’s Deputy President William Ruto and radio journalist Joshua Arap Sang, forensic extraction reports, OTP screening notes, email communications, translations of transcripts of audio-recorded telephone calls, and statements given to Kenyan human rights organisations and other entities.

RelatedPosts

ICC Issues Arrest Warrants for Putin and Lvova-Belova in Ukraine Conflict

Darfur victims to wait longer for justice as Khan’s new strategy faces challenges

New ICC Registrar to take office in April

The defence asked the chamber to recognise the items, which it said were contained in Annex A of the application, as formally submitted into the record of the case. Karnavas explained that Annex A “…set out in detail the relevance, probative value, and authenticity of all items tendered for admission… All items are prima facie relevant and are probative of the issues at trial, namely the credibility of the witnesses that testified during the OTP’s case-in-chief. Any prejudice caused by the introduction of these items is substantially outweighed by their probative value. None of the prior recorded testimony listed in Annex A is submitted for the truth of its contents.”

In response, the prosecution consented to the admission of only six of the 74 items – 37, 42, 45, and 63-65 – and opposed the rest.

Commenting on Gicheru’s notice that his team would not present a defence while at the same time asking the court to admit more evidence, Trial Chamber III’s Judge Miatta Maria Samba said: “The chamber understands the notice not to present ‘a case’ as the defence’s notification that it will not be presenting a case through the calling of witnesses. However, the chamber interprets the defence’s bar table motion as that it still intends to tender evidence into the record.”

She further directed the defence to file any motion it wishes the chamber to rule on by May 4, 2022.

After the prosecution concluded its presentation of witnesses on March 24, 2022, Gicheru was given a month to notify the court whether he would mount a defence.

Karnavas has all along questioned the credibility of the prosecution’s witnesses, claiming that they are untruthful and dishonest.

In an email interview with Journalists For Justice on why he had not bothered to call witnesses, he was dismissive of the prosecution’s case, calling it “pathetic”, “embarrassing”, and “amateurish”. He claimed it was “… absent of any credible and verifiable evidence…”

“Save for the evidence adduced through cross-examination, no defence was warranted,” he said, and insisted that the burden of proof is with the prosecution.

Earlier, the court had rejected the prosecution’s application to submit fresh evidence.

The OTP had requested the court to allow it a variation of time limit to add five items to its evidence list; to submit eight items of evidence other than through a witness; and to introduce prior recorded evidence of witness P-0397. It explained that the new evidence would “assist the court to determine the truth and contribute to the expeditious conclusion of the trial”.

Gicheru had opposed the application, saying the admission of the items not only offended his full enjoyment of a fair trial and right of confrontation, but denied the court the opportunity to meaningfully assess the witnesses for motive, bias, memory, perception, and demeanour in order to establish their credibility.

The court ruled that it did not recognise the items as formally submitted and barred the prosecution from presenting them.

It also rejected the request for the introduction of prior recorded evidence of witness P-0397, saying it had already ruled on the matter.

Gicheru’s trial started on February 15, 2022. The prosecution presented eight witnesses, who were all cross-examined by the defence. Gicheru is facing charges of witness tampering in the main Ruto and Sang case.

Previous Post

Abd-Al-Rahman paid Janjaweed, witness tells judges

Next Post

Hope at last for Kenyan victims, but is TFV’s planned support enough?

Next Post
Elizabeth Atieno, a survivor of the 2007/2008 post-election violence in Kenya and also an advocate against sexual violence, speaks in Nairobi during a function to mark the seventh International Day for the Elimination of Sexual Violence in Conflict in June 2021. Photo Credit: Twitter

Hope at last for Kenyan victims, but is TFV’s planned support enough?

Please login to join discussion

Recent Posts

  • New marathon international trial in The Hague?
  • ICC Issues Arrest Warrants for Putin and Lvova-Belova in Ukraine Conflict
  • Félicien Kabuga’s IRMCT trial suspended indefinitely over dementia claims
  • Darfur victims to wait longer for justice as Khan’s new strategy faces challenges
  • The Hague to host new Ukraine Damage Register

Follow us on Twitter

JFJ – Journalists for Justice

We call out impunity wherever it occurs; we advocate justice for all victims of atrocity crimes; and we work with people of goodwill everywhere who share our values.

Subscribe to our Newsletter


Loading

No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • Communities of Justice
  • Opinion & Analysis
  • Human Rights
  • Elections
  • About US
  • Our Work
  • Careers

Copyright © 2019. Journalists for Justice has asserted its right to be recognized as creators and owners of the content here. Reproduction in part or in whole is permitted on condition that JFJ is acknowledged and notified.

Welcome Back!

Login to your account below

Forgotten Password?

Retrieve your password

Please enter your username or email address to reset your password.

Log In
This website uses cookies. By continuing to use this website you are giving consent to cookies being used. Visit our Privacy and Cookie Policy.