The first private sessions of the Ruto/Sang trial have been held with Witness 536. The court wants to preserve the principle of public trials so it asked the calling party (the side calling the witness) to produce a redacted transcript of any closed hearing within 24 hours of receiving the confidential transcript. The other parties have a chance to respond to this redacted transcript within 2 days. Thereafter it will be sent to the registry and hopefully released to the public.
The same Trial Chamber also rejected the Ruto Defence request to appeal against the decision allowing the Prosecutor to add two witnesses to her case.
The Appeals Chamber (Judge Usacka partly dissenting) rejected Nigeria and Ethiopia’s request to give observations on the appeal against the decision on Ruto’s absence from court.
Pursuant to an order by the Appeals Chamber, the Prosecutor responded to the defence request to vary the decision on suspensive effect. The Prosecutor asked the Judges of Appeal not to change their decision on suspensive effect. She argued that as an accused answering summons, Ruto cannot expect life to ‘continue as normal’ even if he wants to be in Kenya to lend a hand on the matter of the Westgate massacre.
The VPRS gave its 5th report on the status of victims in the Ruto/Sang case.
The Ruto Defence asked the trial chamber not to allow the Prosecutor to re-characterise the mode of liability with which she charged Ruto. The prosecutor wants to charge Ruto with forms of secondary (accessory) liability.
Tagged: 5th Periodic Report, Additional Witnesses, Amicus Curiae, Appeals Chamber, Ethiopia, Leave to Appeal, Nigeria, Redacted Transcript, Suspensive Effect, Variation of Legal Characterisation, VPRS, Witness 536