photograph and without the aid of evidence, including perhaps medical evidence, but in this case, the photographs, which are NPO information and cannot be described in the open Court reasons, make it clear that the person was killed in the location he was photographed.
576 Fourthly, there is nothing in the evidence at all which suggests a reason the body of EKIA56 would have been moved. The bodies of EKIA50 and EKIA57 were left outside the compound and the SSE process was conducted on them outside. In other words, they were not brought into the compound and there is no apparent reason why the body of EKIA56 would have been brought inside the compound.
577 Finally, the applicant did not put to any witness of the events at W108 that he, the witness, had moved the body of EKIA56 or had seen it being moved or had seen it in some other location.
578 The respondents submit that the Court can be "comfortably satisfied" that EKIA56 was killed in the tunnel courtyard. No witness suggested that any legitimate engagements occurred inside the compound. In the circumstances, the fact that EKIA56 was killed in the tunnel courtyard, corroborates Person 41's evidence and undermines the evidence of the applicant and his witnesses about EKIA56's death occurring outside the compound. The respondents submit that it is thus powerful evidence that EKIA56 was found in the tunnel and executed by Person 4 in the circumstances described by Person 41.
Challenges to the Respondents' Case
579 Before making any findings about the location of the body of EKIA56 (other than that it was not moved) and the circumstances of his death, it is necessary to consider a number of matters, including the applicant's account of the engagements of EKIA56 and EKIA57.
580 The applicant reminded the Court (correctly) on a number of occasions that he does not bear the onus of proof and that that rests on the respondents. Whilst an acceptance of the applicant's account means the respondents' case must be rejected, a rejection of the applicant's case does not of itself mean that the respondents' case is established. I must be satisfied to the required level that the respondents' case is correct.
581 The applicant relied on documents relevant to the deaths of EKIA56 and EKIA57 and on oral evidence of engagements outside the north-western corner of W108. I turn to consider those matters.
