This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/20/world/africa/icc-kenya-president-uhuru-kenyatta.html

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Hague Court to Reconsider Whether Kenya Obstructed Prosecution of President 2007 Case Against Kenyan Leader Is Under Scrutiny
(about 5 hours later)
PARIS — President Uhuru Kenyatta of Kenya may face proceedings at the International Criminal Court in The Hague after all, under a ruling issued Wednesday. PARIS — The failed case against President Uhuru Kenyatta of Kenya moved into the spotlight again on Wednesday when judges demanded a fresh inquiry into whether the Nairobi government obstructed access to crucial evidence against him.
An effort to prosecute Mr. Kenyatta at the court collapsed last year when prosecutors said they had insufficient evidence to link him to deadly ethnic violence after a disputed election in 2007. An effort to prosecute Mr. Kenyatta at the International Criminal Court collapsed last year when prosecutors said they had insufficient evidence to link him to deadly ethnic violence after a disputed election in 2007, when Mr. Kenyatta was deputy prime minister.
But appellate judges issued an order on Wednesday directing the trial court to hold new hearings, reopening one aspect of the case: whether Mr. Kenyatta’s government actively obstructed the original prosecution. But appellate judges at the court issued an order on Wednesday directing the trial court to re-examine one aspect of the case: whether Mr. Kenyatta’s government had actively obstructed the original prosecution.
A planned trial of Mr. Kenyatta, the first sitting president to appear before the court in The Hague, was postponed five times, and never formally got underway. Prosecutors complained that the Kenyan government had ignored its obligations to cooperate during months of pretrial hearings. A planned trial of Mr. Kenyatta, the first sitting president to appear before the court in The Hague, was postponed five times and never formally got underway. Prosecutors complained that the Kenyan government had ignored its obligations to cooperate during years of investigations and pretrial hearings.
Lawyers said on Wednesday that the newly ordered hearings could end with a reprimand of the Kenyan government, or possibly, though less likely, with a revival of the collapsed case against the president. Either way, the hearings promise to put the tortuous Kenyatta case back in the spotlight. Lawyers said Wednesday that the newly ordered inquiry could end with a reprimand of the Kenyan government, or possibly, though less likely, lead to a revival of the collapsed case against the president. Either way, the appellate ruling promises to put the tortuous Kenyatta case back on the agenda.
Prosecutors said that the Kenyan government blocked their access to police officers who witnessed the deadly violence in 2007, and that it ignored repeated requests for documentary evidence, including financial statements and cellphone records. They said the Kenyan government threatened some witnesses and bribed others, creating an atmosphere of fear that deterred witnesses from testifying. Prosecutors said that the Kenyan government had blocked their access to police officers who witnessed the violence of 2007, and that it ignored repeated requests for documentary evidence, including crucial financial statements and cellphone records. They said that associates of Mr. Kenyatta threatened some witnesses and bribed others, and that pro-government news media created an atmosphere of fear that deterred witnesses from testifying.
Mr. Kenyatta’s lawyers say that he is innocent and that the case collapsed because the charges were flimsy and based on little more than rumor.Mr. Kenyatta’s lawyers say that he is innocent and that the case collapsed because the charges were flimsy and based on little more than rumor.
In 2011 — before he became president — Mr. Kenyatta was accused of helping to orchestrate and finance ethnic clashes in 2007 that left more than 1,200 people dead and more than 600,000 forced from their homes. In 2011, two years before he became president, Mr. Kenyatta was accused of helping to orchestrate and finance the 2007 ethnic clashes that left more than 1,200 people dead and forced more than 600,000 from their homes.
Fergal Gaynor, the lawyer representing the victims in the court, said that he had met with more than 700 of them in recent months, including some who lost their homes and jobs. “They want the truth to emerge,” Mr. Gaynor said. “They still want to know who planned those waves of attacks on them.” Fergal Gaynor, the lawyer representing the victims, said that he had met with more than 700 of them in recent months, including some who had lost their homes and family members.
“Victims were really appalled by the prosecutor walking away after a long and insidious campaign of obstruction of justice,” he said. “The country has a long history of impunity for those in power. The last thing the victims wanted was for the prosecutor to give up in the face of adversity.”