William Rono's Evidence

At the time of the 2007 election William Rono was an activist in President Kibaki's Party of National Unity. After the election he was elected PNU chairman for Eldoret North in the Rift Valley. In the post election violence his house was attacked by supporters of the Orange Democratic Movement. In the aftermath of the violence he and other PNU activists set out to fix leading figures in the Rift valley ODM on charges of organising violence. The main targets were Ruto, Joshua Sang and Henry Kosgey. They also hoped to fix Raila Odinga, the national leader of the ODM but the main focus was on the local Rift valley leaders whom they could better hope to credibly implicate. At the same time, he says, ODM activists were seeking to fix PNU figures on charges of election rigging and counterviolence.

His aim was not to get the targets convicted but rather to trash their reputation before the various investigations set up to look into the violence,primarily the investigations of the Kenya National Commission on Human Rights and the Waki commission. Rono himself acted as one of the witnesses and knew seven of those who were relocated to Tanzania to become ICC witnesses. All of these had positions in the PNU or affiliate parties such as NARC Kenya, currently led by Martha Karua. All were poor, several unemployed. Typically they were victims of the post election violence seeking revenge. They were from the Kalenjin community, chosen because Kalenjin witnesses had a better chance of fixing Kalenjin politicians such as Ruto Sang and Koskei. All of these witnesses testified to both the KNCHR and Waki rendering unremarkable the fact that they came to similar conclusions. He says the witnesses met together to discuss their evidence.

Rono also says the PNU set up a secretariat to coordinate the framing process. It was headed by a prominent lawyer in Nairobi allied to Martha Karua. He said there was close co-ordination between Martha Karua's office and the KNCHR and several of the lawyers with the Waki commission. Rono says he knew Karua even before the elections, but that she never directly asked him to lie, though he was encouraged to testify by a lady from the Justice ministry sent by Karua and that Karua often sought information about the statements he had made. He says that Odinga's people also questioned him about his testimony but their involvement came later than Karua's. Rono originally received just 30,000 shillings a month from the KNCHR. This was upped to 40,000 and finally to 60,000 as he expanded his testimony against Ruto.He also received 35,000 a month from US Aid. He was housed in accommodation costing 120,000 shillings (close to £1000) a month in an exclusive part of Nairobi. He and the others were promised relocation to the West. He says they went from rags to riches overnight. They were first relocated to Tanzania, one by one. Rono was supposed to go first, but he kept on making excuses as he had cold feet once it became clear that the aim was to convict Ruto. In the end he never went to Tanzania.

Rono disagreed with John Busii that Ruto's name was not in the original KNCHR report. He said that a student lawyer by the name of Bosire working with the KNCHR had told him the names that would be in the report and said Ruto's was one of those named. Neither Busii or Rono were willing to change their statement when I told them of the contradiction. I thought this was actually a good sign as it showed that unlike the ICC witnesses they refused to be coached. Potentially the two statements are compatible. Florence Jaoka, formerly chair of the KNCHR has said there were ommissions in the original report due to pressure of time. A former Odinga aide, Tony Gachoka has claimed that questions were raised in closed sessions of the Waki Commission over the existence of more than one report from the KNCHR. According to Kenya's “Standard” newpaper The Waki commission accepted “On the Brink of the Precipice,final report” into evidence after considering the KNCHR's explanation in closed session. All other versions of the document were embargoed. It is thus possible that there was more than one “original” report and that both my witnesses are correct in their recollections. William Rono told me that the original investigation by the KNCHR was quite fair and that the statements made by witnesses against Ruto then were much less incendiary than their later testimony so it may be there was some doubt over whether to include Ruto's name.

William Rono said he had been told by Bosire that Raila Odinga's name was included in the original report. John Busii couldn't remember if he had seen it, which surprised me but also seemed to confirm his honesty. Since he suspected Ruto was framed on Odinga's behalf (though not necessarily with his knowledge) it would have been easy to support his theory by saying Odinga's name had been included. As he pointed out to me it was now four years since the report. The role in the conspiracy played by Omar Hassan, currently senatorial candidate and deputy chairman of “friends of Raila” and Ken Wafula (also an Odinga supporter) may have been motivated simply by the desire to move the spotlight from Raila rather than fear of Ruto's presidential ambitions.

Rono told me that he resigned from the witness programme after Omar Hassan questioned him about his reluctance to go to Tanzania and gave him seven days to prepare for relocation. He says he was unwilling to participate in an attempt to convict innocent men at the ICC. He believes that all of the “Ocampo four” were wrongly accused. However he did not claim inside knowledge of the ODM plot to fix PNU leaders and some others who think Ruto innocent nevertheless think Kenyatta guilty, a proposition which, however, is perfectly compatible with the idea that most or all the evidence against Kenyatta has been manufactured.

While Rono cannot be cited as an authority on the ODM machinations, his allegations about the PNU plot to frame ODM leaders deserve to be listened to. His evidence made sense and cohered with that of my other sources. Even where he differed from them his refusal to be coached added to his veracity.

Perhaps there will be readers who feel that the evidence cited so far falls short of absolute proof of Ruto's innocence. However they should be aware that there are certainly others out there who could confirm my story if only they had the courage.

Read part 4 of "The Framing of William Samoei Ruto" - "Reflections on the ICC Process"