The high court has allowed Eldoret North MP William Ruto to use an affidavit sworn by a man who claims he gave incriminating evidence against him to the Kenya National Commission on Human Rights, and the Waki Commission.
Ruto wants to use the affidavit of William Kipkemboi to convince court that the KNCHR report that links him to post election violence is not credible.
The report is part of the evidence ICC prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo is using against Ruto and five other Kenyans. Kipkemboi claims the evidence collected by the KNCHR was "verbal, and that it was recorded without taking oath and without an affidavit and without any affirmation as required by law".
He says in his affidavit the commission assembled witnesses on a casual basis and what they told the commission was meant to advance political advantages between PNU and ODM in view of the contested election results.
The court said the affidavit will not cause prejudice to KNCHR since Kipkemboi was the source of the information complained of by RutHowever the ruling was also a blow Ruto's case because high court judges Kalpana Rawal, Jeanne Gacheche and Philemona Mwilu said they could not allow Ruto to rely on some paragraphs in the affidavit saying they were extraneous.
The judges deleted paragraphs in which Kipkemboi claimed witnesses were given content of what to record, upkeep allowances, paid up rental houses and were promised to relocate outside Kenya.
The judges also deleted paragraphs which denied that military officers were sanctioned to carry out violence and that the information given to the commission were for political contest and intended to show that some political parties were involved.
KNCHR wanted the court to strike out the affidavit saying it was improper, could not be relied on and that it was seeking to introduce extraneous issues to discredit the work of the commission.