FATOU BENSOUDA SHOULD ADMIT THAT SHE HAS NO CASE AGAINST PRESIDENT KENYATTA AND HIS DEPUTY WILLIAM RUTTO.

Since the confirmation of charges against ICC suspect President Kenyatta and his counterpart Deputy President William Ruto, we have seen many comedies of errors from the ICC and the prosecution. In Ruto's case we have seen witnesses admit to the court that they have been bribed to give evidence against him. How can a trial continue when witnesses withdraw their testimony in mass?  
 

In uhuru's case we have seen the prosecutor admit that she has inadequate and or unsatisfactory evidence to proceed with Uhuru case.  Instead of the court closing the file, it allows the prosecutor to engage and indulge in a sickening judicial jamboree. It is important to note that as at Friday the 5^{th day of} September 2014, his trial for five counts of crimes against humanity had been postponed four times. With the ICC Chief Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda seeking another adjournment, this will be the fifth time the matter fails to take off. If there is lack of evidence, why is the court reluctant to terminate the case? In fact, for a prosecutor to admit she does not have sufficient evidence and fail to withdraw the case is a miscarriage of justice. 

The fact is that the prosecutor didn’t do any investigation and instead relied on witnesses that were paid for by local NGOs. Bensouda should realize that her case is an embarrassment to her office, the court and the entire justice system; she should therefore withdraw the case like she did in Muthaura's case. From the foregoing, there is little doubt that Chief Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda has no case against our beloved president Uhuru Muigai Kenyatta and his deputy William Ruto, thus I am still expecting good news from the Hague based International Criminal Court.