Deputy President William Ruto yesterday maintained his case at the ICC collapsed before even getting to trial.
His lead lawyer Karim Khan told the trial judges that the case is now “in tatters” and does not deserve to be before the court beyond this point.
He said any “reasonable Chamber” should see there is no evidence linking Ruto to any crime and thus his charges should be thrown out.
“The key allegations that this case was based on have disappeared. The foundations of the case are gone. No planning meeting/incident the prosecution relied on at confirmation stage made it through in evidence and the key prosecution witnesses all withdrew,” Khan said.
He added that other than the foundation of the case collapsing, the evidence presented by prosecution witnesses does not stack up.
Khan said it is through this conviction that the case collapsed a long time ago that he had, for the first time in his career, found it necessary to pursue a no-case-to-answer motion.
Ruto's argument is that all the 11 planning meetings that had been mentioned at the Pre-Trial Chamber were now no longer part of the prosecution evidence.
“No reasonable Trial Chamber could be satisfied there was a meeting. Witnesses cannot be relied upon. Three have recanted and denied their evidence under oath and one witness failed to come before the court,” Khan said.
He added the prosecution has no evidence that planning meetings took place at which financial, military and political backers coordinated attacks under Ruto's command.
He said the organogram of the alleged network headed by Ruto and which the prosecution used to have the charges confirmed has also disappeared.
“It makes a good story for an opening speech, but what's happened to this network?” Khan remarked.
Khan told the judges that three-quarters of the alleged financial supporters were no longer part of the evidence the prosecution was now relying on.
“The military component has completely disappeared and disintegrated. That was the engine. The prosecution is in dire straits in their bid to maintain a criminal organisation,” Khan said.
Khan also argued that the withdrawal of prosecution witnesses left prosecutors making allegations unrelated to their initial assertions.
He said the prosecution never called 13 of the witnesses that it had said it would, and those who appeared confessed to having lied.
Khan said the prosecution had anchored its case on a wrong premise – that Ruto was the King of the Kalenjin and his word was law.