Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.

Claim: Kenya’s deputy president Ruto said “None of [the dropped ministers] even made it to court because the allegations that were made [against them] did not have any basis.”

Q1: Is it true that None of Kenya's dropped ministers made it to court because the allegations that were made [against them] did not have any basis?
A1: They were both acquitted after successfully challenging the composition of the ethics agency. But Kamau was back in court in April 2019, on the same charges.

Q2: Out of the dropped ministers, were there any who were charged and taken to court?
A2: Yes, because Former Transport Cabinet Secretary Michael Kamau was charged with violating procurement laws.

Q3: Was Charity Ngilu, a former land minister, acquitted?
A3: A criminal case against former Lands Cabinet Secretary Charity Ngilu touching on the Sh8 billion Karen land has been terminated.

The court on Monday dropped the case following a Court of Appeal order that declared the trial unconstitutional.

Q4: Was former Transport Cabinet Secretary Michael Kamau acquitted?
A4: Although he was first acquitted, the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) has ordered that former Transport and Infrastructure Cabinet Secretary Michael Kamau be charged afresh over corruption. This was due to new evidence sufficient to convict the former CS whose previous case was dismissed by Court of Appeal.
user
justification: Both of the ministers were acquitted by the ethics agency. Later on, Kamau was taken to court in April 2019. And he was charged with violating procurement laws. While Charity Ngilu was charged with obstructing commission officials from investigating the 134-acre Karen land scandal.

verdict: 'Refuted'
assistant