Witness protection in the Kenya cases: balancing secrecy with accountability
Lucy Hannan

When Chief Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC), Fatou Bensouda, announced in December 20141 that the Court had been forced to drop crimes against humanity charges against Kenyan president, Uhuru Kenyatta, she attributed the poor state of evidence to lack of cooperation and ‘unprecedented interference’ with witnesses. She spoke of death, bribery and intimidation. Bensouda called it “a dark day for international criminal justice”.

The Office of the Prosecutor (OTP) was explicit about the situation of witnesses relating to arrests warrants issued for three persons over allegations of witness interference in the Kenyatta case. It also emphasized witness interference when the case against Kenya’s deputy president, William Ruto, was terminated, saying:

“The fact is that Prosecutions before the ICC can stand or fall on the willingness of witnesses to come forward and tell their story in the courtroom. In this case, 17 witnesses who had agreed to testify against the Accused subsequently withdrew their cooperation with the Court. Prosecution witnesses in this case were subjected to intimidation, social isolation and threats to prevent them from testifying. In the end, the Trial Chamber was in effect prevented from having the opportunity to
assess the true merits of the Prosecution case”.

Download the full report in PDF here

or Read the full report below

Tweet