from Judy Miriga

Folks,

Yes, it is 7 (seven) more days to go people……..be prepared……..This is not a drama, ICC with Ocampo is real…….something we must all energize to fruitation……and without pulling back…….

Like I said before, the too many MoUssss Agreement that were signed by Kibaki, Uhuru, Raila, Kalonzo, Prof. Anyang Nyongo……etc., giving the Special Interests Cartels free access to Public Taxpayer and Facilities, Natural Resources and potentials……has compromised them so much that they cannot see the International Special Interests investors in the eye to tell them, they srewed……..It is us people, it is us to step in and the two Principles MUST desolve the coalition government in the next few days before August 28th 2011……..

To get involved in the Interim Caretaker Commission require committed souls who know Way Forward to save Kenya in a short space of time, I am very ready for it, what about you……????

Cheers ….. !!!

Judy Miriga
Diaspora Spokesperson
Executive Director
Confederation Council Foundation for Africa Inc.,
USA
http://socioeconomicforum50.blogspot.com

– – – – – – – – – – –

Kenya: Kibaki Furious Over Ocampo’s Evidence
Emeka-Mayaka Gekara

20 August 2011

Nairobi — Anger and frustration greeted International Criminal Court Prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo’s disclosure of his last bundle of evidence against three eminent Kenyans facing crimes against humanity cases at The Hague.

Sources told the Sunday Nation that President Kibaki and his allies were on Saturday furious over the allegations that State House facilitated the post-election violence.
State House has denied the allegations.

The prosecutor’s State House allegations are being interpreted in some quarters as targeting its chief tenant, the President. Notably, one of the suspects, Head of Public Service Francis Muthaura is the President’s permanent secretary and confidant.
However, Mr Moreno-Ocampo is on record saying that he had no evidence linking President Kibaki and Prime Minister Raila Odinga to the violence.

The disclosure late on Friday set off crisis meetings by defence lawyers who seemed to have been taken by surprise by Mr Moreno-Ocampo’s latest evidence. Our inquiries returned a picture of disillusionment by those around Deputy Prime Minister Uhuru Kenyatta, Mr Muthaura and Post-Master General Hussein Ali.

The prosecutor seems to have caught the suspects and their defence teams off-guard when he confronted them with new evidence only a few days to the confirmation hearings next month, effectively returning them to the drawing board.

A source at State House told the Sunday Nation that the “mood had changed” in the official presidential residence following Mr Moreno-Ocampo’s Friday allegations (Read: Dossier links State House to chaos) that the place was used as a base of planning retaliatory attacks by Mungiki in Nakuru and Naivasha during the post-election violence.
Besides, the prosecutor’s narrative took a dramatic turn when it appeared to implicate Kenya’s military in the 2008 post-election violence saying that Mungiki members were transported from State House to Naivasha in military trucks.

There were strong indications that the defence teams may apply for more time to review the new evidence ahead of the confirmation hearings.

Change tack

“The case has fundamentally changed. We have to change tack because Mr Moreno-Ocampo has shifted goal posts and radically altered his prosecution theory in this case,” said a source close to one of the suspects who spoke under the cover of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the matter.

He pointed out that the prosecutor seemed determined to push the case to trial.

Already, Mr Kenyatta and Maj-Gen Ali’s lawyer’s who have lost a long list of battles with the prosecutor in the past couple of months, have cried foul over the process claiming it was being used to “rubber-stamp” charges against the suspects.

A picture emerges in which successes of defence teams have been decreasing in the run up to the confirmation of charges hearings, an issue that is causing discomfort.

Just last week, they lost the battle to have the number of witnesses increased from two.
The suspects’ effort to have the hours accorded to the witnesses increased was also rejected.

Earlier, an application by lawyers for Eldoret North William Ruto and Tinderet MP Henry Kosgey to have the hearings postponed was defeated. Moreover, Judge Ekaterina Frendiflova has so far not allowed any application for leave of appeal.

“The order of the single judge (on the witness limit) will significantly affect the outcome of the trial in the sense that such a restriction upon the defence to counter the evidence of the prosecutor using persuasive, probative live testimony risks turning the confirmation process into a rubber-stamping of the charges against the suspects,” protested Mr Kenyatta’s lawyers, Mr Steven Kay and Ms Gillian Higgins.

They accused the court of handling the matter as if it had already been decided on before those affected would make their contributions, leaving them with no option but to accept the outcome.

“The confirmation hearing should not be treated as a fait accompli,” they said.
Perhaps as a sign of the frustration, one of Maj Gen Ali’s lawyers, Mr Otachi Bw’ Onwon’ga, has questioned the command responsibility doctrine as applied by international tribunals and the calibre and sources of evidence accepted.

He said evidence can include diaries, letters and press reports which can be used to sanction suspects.

Confirmation hearings for Mr Kenyatta, Mr Muthaura and Maj Gen Ali are set for September 21 to October 11 and the court has indicated the decision on whether the cases will be confirmed will be reached two months after the hearings.
The other three suspects, Mr Ruto, Mr Kosgey and Mr Joshua arap Sang, will have their confirmation hearings from September 1, 2011.

Mr Kenyatta’s political career might be in the balance if the case is confirmed. The same fate would befall Mr Ruto and Mr Kosgey.

Mr Kenyatta and Mr Ruto have declared their intentions to contest the presidency, with Mr Kenyatta touted as President Kibaki’s heir apparent by the central Kenya power elite.
Sources close to the defence teams indicated that there were considerable differences between the evidence the prosecutor submitted in his applications seeking permission to investigate the Kenyan case and the one released on Friday.

In his last batch of evidence, the prosecutor has refined the controversial issue of alleged meetings between the Mungiki criminal gang, Mr Kenyatta and Mr Muthaura.
Whereas in the past he spoke of the meetings being held to plan retaliatory attacks before the 2007 election he now says the raids occurred after the polls.

In the prosecutor’s application of December 15, last year, he alleged that there was lack of police intervention before, during and after the attacks in Nakuru and Naivasha.
Now the prosecution seems to suggest that the police intervention was inadequate.

Uniforms and weapons

For the first time, the prosecution alleges that Mr Muthaura together with Mr Kenyatta provided uniforms and weapons to the Mungiki.

One of the new pieces of evidence alleges that after the election, the police under Maj-Gen Ali’s leadership killed several Mungiki leaders with the intention of eliminating evidence.

“Police specifically targeted Mungiki leaders with knowledge of the involvement of Mr Kenyatta and other PNU politicians in the planning of the post-election violence and reported to senior Kenya Police officers, including Ali,” alleges the prosecutor.

Mr Kenyatta is accused of facilitating Mungiki gangs to organise retaliatory attacks against perceived ODM supporters in the Rift Valley.

It is alleged that the primary purpose of the attacks was to strengthen the PNU hold on power after the swearing-in of the President.

It is further alleged that the recruitment, mobilisation and payment of pro-PNU youth to participate in the retaliatory attacks in Naivasha and Nakuru were carried out in Kanu offices. Mr Kenyatta is the Kanu chairman.

The ICC prosecutor claims that Mr Kenyatta specifically tasked a former Kanu MP to organise the Nakuru operations, thereby placing the Mungiki under a responsible command.

“He directly provided funding for Mungiki operations during the post-election violence or provided information as to where to secure funding. In preparation for the attacks, Mr Kenyatta was also responsible for arming and providing transportation for pro-PNU youth.”

Mr Moreno-Ocampo alleges that, Mr Ruto and Mr Kosgey were in charge of a network with military structure which planned financed the eviction of the Kikuyu, Kamba and Kisii from in Rift Valley in the 2008 post-election violence.

Kenya: Dossier Links State House to Chaos
Oliver Mathenge

19 August 2011

Members of the outlawed Mungiki sect were transported to State House to plan revenge attacks at the height of the post-election violence, according to new prosecution evidence released from The Hague on Friday.

International Criminal Court prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo alleges that members of the illegal group were later transported to Nakuru and Naivasha in military trucks to carry out killings at the height of the murderous violence that followed the infamous 2007 General Election. (Read: How Ocampo plans to implicate Uhuru and group)

This is some of the evidence that Mr Moreno-Ocampo will rely on to try and convince Judges Ekaterina Trendafilova, Peter Hans-Kohl and Cuno Tarfusser to commit Deputy Prime Minister Uhuru Kenyatta, Civil Service head Francis Muthaura and Postmaster General Hussein Ali to full trial for crimes against humanity.

State House yesterday said the reports were recklesss, baseless and untrue. “As we have said earlier no meeting ever took place at State House with any member of the Mungiki.

The Ocampo reference to State House meetings is therefore far fetched and a blatant lie,” a statement said.

Eldoret North MP William Ruto and Tinderet MP Henry Kosgey will also answer to charges of organising a militia which allegedly killed and evicted PNU supporters from areas in Uasin Gishu and Nandi counties.

Radio presenter Joshua Sang faces charges amounting to spreading hate speech and directing warriors where to strike.

Their confirmation hearings start on September 1.

The prosecutor says Mr Kenyatta and Mr Muthaura held fundraising meetings and financed the armed gang which carried out revenge attacks in Nakuru and Naivasha.

Mr Moreno-Ocampo will also tell the pre-trial chamber that the State House in Nakuru and Kanu offices in the town were used as bases.

Mr Ali will be accused of failing to prevent crimes by the members of the outlawed Mungiki sect while he had prior knowledge of the planned attacks on pro-ODM supporters.

The document filed by the prosecutor on Friday says Mr Kenyatta and Mr Muthaura participated in a series of activities, including preparatory meetings to mobilise, coordinate, finance and provide logistical support for the Mungiki.

“Key preparatory meetings include those held in Nairobi on or about December 30, 2007 and in early, mid and late January 2008. There were also preparatory meetings in Central Province on or about December 31, 2007, in Nakuru in early to mid January 2008 and in Naivasha in late January 2008,” Mr Moreno-Ocampo says in the document.

It adds that in the meetings, Mr Kenyatta and Mr Muthaura enlisted the services of Mungiki leaders and concluded plans for the launching of retaliatory attacks in the Rift Valley.

It adds that the recruitment, mobilisation and payment of pro-PNU youth to participate in the Naivasha and Nakuru attacks were carried out in offices belonging to Kanu.
The dossier also says Mr Kenyatta specifically tasked a former Kanu MP to organise the Nakuru operations, thereby placing the Mungiki under a responsible command.

The former MP is also said to have directly provided funding for Mungiki operations during the violence or provided information where to secure funding.

In preparation for the attacks, Mr Kenyatta is also said to have been responsible for arming and providing transport for pro-PNU youth.

“At all times, relevant to the crimes charged, Mr Kenyatta had the capacity to mobilise and influence Mungiki members who in turn received protection and patronage from him. Mr Kenyatta had control over the Mungiki, in part due to his wealth and privileged background,” the document says.

The dossier claims that Mungiki members were driven through secret routes to State House in Nairobi where they were given Administration Police uniforms before proceeding to Naivasha.

“The Mungiki members were then transported from the State House to Naivasha in military trucks by men wearing Kenyan army uniforms. The trucks contained new machetes as well as wooden clubs which the Mungiki were instructed to use,” the document says.
In one of the meetings in Nairobi in early January 2008, the dossier says, Mr Muthaura requested Mungiki leaders to deploy their members to the Rift Valley to carry out revenge attacks.

It says that during the meeting, he placed a phone call to Gen Ali to instruct him to ensure that pro-PNU youth would not be prevented from going into the Rift Valley.
“During another phone conversation with Ali in mid January 2008, Muthaura reminded Ali that the Mungiki were working with them and ordered him not to arrest them,” the dossier says.

Mr Moreno-Ocampo says that available evidence indicates that the Mungiki and pro-PNU youth attacked in a well-organised and regimented manner and that they communicated in Kikuyu and mainly targeted perceived ODM supporters.

“As part of their contribution to the attacks, the Kenya Police granted Mungiki members and pro-PNU youth being transported from other provinces unhindered passage into Nakuru town,” the dossier says linking Mr Ali to the slow and uncoordinated response by the police.

Kenya: Firm Forced to Halt Minerals Search
Bozo Jenje
21 August 2011

A mining firm has stopped prospecting at Mrima Hills in Kwale County after protests from the local community.

The South African company incorporated in Kenya bowed to pressure at a stakeholders’ meeting at Mamba Methodist church and agreed to halt activities until consultations were done.

Mr Yunis Shaik, a director of Pacific Wildcat, a partner of Cortec Mining Kenya, said the company was abiding by a environmental ministry directive to stop prospecting until all disputes were resolved.

“We are aware that residents at Mrima Hill fear being displaced or being exposed to radiation and interference with sacred forests,” he said.

Rare earth metals

Mr Shaik said Cortec Mining Kenya is searching for high grade niobium and rare earth metals.

“We do not want to upset the community and undermine the political leadership. Our aim is to improve the economy,” he said.

Mr Shaik admitted that all stakeholders were not consulted in initial exploration activities.

“We apologise for this and I take responsibility,” he said.

“It is not our intention to take your land, destroy sacred forests or evict people. Ours aim is to better the community by providing infrastructure,” he said.

Lunga Lunga District Officer Fredrick Masinjila said resistance to the project was a result of the company’s failure to consult the provincial administration.

“The company never consulted the local administration. They thought they could get away with doing things without following the proper channels,” Mr Masinjia said.

National Environmental Management Authority official Godfrey Wafula said the agency had not granted the firm a mining licence.

“We will only issue a licence once the Environmental Impact Assessment is done,” he said.

Mr Wafula said Nema would not allow the community to suffer at the expense of investors.

“Nema will weigh the benefits and decide to licence the project or not,” he said.

Kwale World Wildlife Fund project official Elias Kimaru said the company had made the right decision.

“Now the rights of the people will be observed in the all-inclusive and transparent process,” he said.

Nominated councillor Murabu Chaka urged residents to be calm as the parties involved thrashed out the issue.

He said the community had resolved that the project could not be forced on to them.

“The Mrima Hills is sacred to us. During the second world war, a virgin was slaughtered at the top of the hill to stop the war between the Germans and British. Our gods are there,” he said.

Dzombo councillor Benson Mtangeli said he opposed the project due to the radioactivity.

“We are the custodians of the land and are not ready to accept any developments without our views being heard,” he said.

Business Daily (Nairobi)
Kenya: We Should Stop Blaming Nature for Famine Disaster
21 August 2011

Our policymakers must have cringed last week when the announcement came, but the World Bank hit the nail on the head when it said that the famine gripping the Horn of Africa region was man-made.

According to the bank’s lead economist, the famine is as a result of artificially high prices for food and civil conflict in the region.He insisted that droughts have hit the region many times yet as a result of poor policymaking, the end result has always been famineThe current drought has affected millions of people in the region with Somalia, Kenya, Ethiopia and Djibouti being the hardest hit.

The bank blamed high cereals prices for contributing to the problem and accused a small group in Kenya of controlling the market, thus keeping the prices beyond the reach of the majority.

The World Bank said that maize prices in Kenya were between 60 and 70 per cent higher than the world’s average.

This cartel-like behavior is unacceptable. How can a few reap millions of shillings as millions of Kenyans go without food?

What annoys many is that our government officials are still dillydallying, insisting that no one has starved to death yet what Kenyans see in the media tells a different story.

As a result of high food and energy prices around the world, the inflationary pressure has increased, exerted more pressure on millions around the globe, especially the developing world.

Already parts of Kenya are experiencing heavy rainfall, but despite years of being told to promote rain harvesting methods, the rain water is just being allowed to go to waste. In the flood-prone areas, the same song is being repeated. This only begs the question: when will our policymakers ever learn?

What is so hard about ensuring that food deficit regions receive adequate supplies from the bread basket regions of the country?

It really pains one to see farmers in one section of the country complaining that they there is no market for their produce yet in another part of the country scores of people are starving. It’s time the government walked the talk.