HAGUE

ICC: Lawyer Paul Gicheru's trial to kick off on February 15

Lawyer Gicheru is before ICC on allegations of witness interference in Deputy President William Ruto's case.

In Summary
  • ICC Judge Samba directed that a witness who had initially agreed to work with the prosecution but later changed mind be informed of his obligation to appear in court.
  • The prosecution explained that the witness, supposed to be key in the case, broke off contact on January 25, 2022.
Paul Gicheru.
Paul Gicheru.
Image: FILE

The International Criminal Court (ICC) will begin the hearing of Lawyer Paul Gicheru's case on February 15.

Lawyer Gicheru is accused of corruptly interfering with witnesses in Deputy President William Ruto's case during the trial of the 2007/08 poll's case.

Judge Miatta Maria Samba said the trial court will commence the hearing at 11:30 am. The trials will go up to February 21, 2022.

In a statement, Judge Samba also directed that a witness who had initially agreed to work with the prosecution but later changed mind should be informed of his obligation to appear in court or summons be issued.

The witness has been identified only as P-0743. 

"Facilitating, by way of compulsory measure as necessary, the appearance of witness P-0743 to give testimony before the Chamber by video-link on such dates and time and according to the modalities communicated to him by the Prosecution and/or the Registry," she said.

Judge Samba said the prosecutions should make appropriate arrangements for the security of the witness in consultation with the Victims and Witnesses Unit.

She instructed the Registry to prepare and transmit forthwith, in consultation with the Prosecution, the necessary summons to witnesses P-0743 as well as the necessary cooperation request to the relevant authorities.

This was after the prosecution said the witness was becoming unresponsive.

In a letter to the ICC, the prosecution detailed how the witness was not responding and that the witness broke off contact on January 25  2022.

This was after ICC sent an email to the parties setting the deadline to file any requests in order to secure the attendance of witnesses for January 17, 2022.

The prosecution said further attempts in the following days were without success and on January 28, 2022, the witness became unresponsive.

Gicheru surrendered before the ICC in 2020 following an arrest warrant issued by the Hague based court over allegations of witness interference.

"Witness has only now become uncooperative and an order to the summons is the only manner of ensuring the attendance of the Witness at the trial, which is imminent," the prosecution further said.

Upon the facts presented by the Prosecution, the Chamber found that the reasons for which the prosecution seeks to file a request to summon the witness only at this point in time are clearly outside of its control.

Judge Samba said it was not foreseeable to the prosecution that the witness would break off any contact with the Court after the January 17 deadline.

"Indeed, as long as the witness was still in communication with the Court and expressing his willingness to cooperate voluntarily, there was no need for the prosecution to contemplate summoning him," she said.

"In light of the above, the Chamber grants the request. It expects the request for summons be filed forthwith."

The witness was supposed to be key in Gicheru case.

The Prosecution submitted that P-0743’s testimony in the current case is relevant since the witness also testified on witness interference during his testimony before the Chamber in the main case, implicating the accused and mentioning witnesses whose interference is subject of the current proceedings.

The prosecution further said that its request for cooperation is specific enough, clearly identifying the witness and that it has reasonable grounds to believe him to be located within the jurisdiction of the court.

Lastly, the prosecution argues that P-0743’s testimony is required for the ‘determination of the truth’ and therefore necessary.

It explains the relevance of the expected testimony of the witness and argues that due to the current situation but also P-0743’s behaviour in the past – a summons is necessary to obtain his testimony.

WATCH: The latest videos from the Star