Deputy President William Ruto travelled back to The Hague last night despite the African Union's resolution that he and President Uhuru Kenyatta should skip their trials.
Ruto was booked on a KLM flight that was scheduled to leave Nairobi for Amsterdam at 10.45pm.
His trial resumes today even as the world waits to see what African leaders will do next after they passed a resolution on Saturday in Addis Ababa that sitting presidents should not be tried while still in office.
The AU said the Kenyan cases should be deferred. The International Criminal Court has previously referred the AU to the UN Security Council in an attempt to distance the court from political machinations by the African leaders.
The continuation of Ruto's trial today appears to be an indication of how complicated it is for him and the President to apply the AU resolution in their individual cases.
Today, the prosecution will re-examine the second witness against Ruto and radio journalist Joshua Sang before calling the third one.
On Friday, Ruto's lawyer Karim Khan branded Prosecution Witness 326 a liar poking holes into his testimony by use of video and pictures.
"I am putting to you that you have put forward a concocted and false account that you have presented as the truth. Can I say you hibernated after five years and conned your way to The Hague and you continue to lie for financial gain?" Khan said.
Saturday's extraordinary summit decided to set up a contact group of the Executive Council to undertake consultations with the members of the UN Security Council, in particular its five permanent members.
The engagement with the UN Security Council is on all concerns of the AU on its relationship with the ICC, including the deferral of the Kenyan and Sudanese cases, in order to obtain their feedback.
"If the request does not a response, Heads of State agreed to request postponement of the trial," AU chairperson Haile Mariam Desalegn said.
The summit also agreed that Kenya should send a letter to theUN Security Council requesting the deferral, in conformity with Article 16 of the Rome Statute, of the proceedings and this letter would be endorsed by all African states parties.
Addressing the summit, Uhuru accused the ICC and Western powers of trying to control Africa's politics through an unfair judicial process.
He accused the court of not listening to the African leadership and yet it was making decision based on communication received from activists.
"When your excellencies' resolution was communicated to the court through a letter to its president, it was dismissed as not being properly before the Court and therefore ineligible for consideration. When a civil society organisation wrote a letter bearing sensational and prejudicial fabrications, the Court took urgent and substantial decisions based on it," Uhuru said.
Uhuru was referring to a controversial letter by some Kenyan activists which the prosecution used to oppose a request to have the cases conducted in Kenya or Tanzania.
Last week, Uhuru filed an application seeking to stop the proceedings alleging "serious, sustained and wide ranging abuse of the court process by some of the prosecution witnesses and intermediaries".
In the application filed by Uhuru's lawyer Stephen Kay last evening, Uhuru wants a permanent stay of the proceedings or in the alternative, asks the trial chamber to hold a hearing to determine his complaint before the start of his trial on November 12.
He wants three prosecution witnesses and two prosecution intermediaries called as witnesses in the hearing which, if found in his favour, would require that the court proceedings be permanently stopped.
Uhuru claims the witnesses had been intimidating and interfering with potential defence witnesses and embarked on a wide scale course of conduct against the defence which amounts to a perversion of the course of justice before the court.
He alleges one of the prosecution witnesses was responsible for bringing ten other trial witnesses to the prosecution whose evidence must now be considered as irredeemably tainted.
He also claims some of the prosecution witnesses have changed their testimony after they received money.