Wawili wakipigana nyasi huumia!
In the past week the media was awash with furor over Uhuru Kenyatta’s
appearance at the International Criminal Court and documentaries from the
archives to show how he cases have been built to get this far. It was feared
that having a president sit in court would have put the country’s sovereignty
on trial, however the president pulled a stunt that made everyone marvel at the
brilliance of his advisers. Whether unnecessary or necessary, I bet you have to
agree with me the president scored nothing less than an A in winning the
populace.
Finally Ocampo made an example out of Kenya, a dream he held when
starting the cases; I mean which other president would take himself to the
court? The decision that the 3 judge bench is going to make in the next 14 days
will be landmark. In my opinion it either hits had the accused (in this case
the president) or boomerangs on the court, no way it is going to spare the two
at the same time! If you follow international news keenly you must have noted
there have been several interviews that sought to find out, or question if you
like if the International Criminal Court is serving the ‘purpose it was established
for,’ with the former prosecutor Moreno Ocampo featuring prominently in the
interviews. The Kenyan cases seem to have put the court under tight scrutiny
especially from Africa, where we seek to know if the court us serving the
purpose for which it was established or it is simply a politicking tool for
regime change or an instrument of post-colonial hegemony. Journalists have
tried to measure the court’s success by the number of convictions (guilty
verdicts) the court has been able to secure; only two from one country with the
first one coming a decade after the court was established.
We all know it has been a bare knuckle fight as the prosecution
struggles to keep the case alive, at the same time conceding that there’s no evidence
to sustain the case. We’ve had so many sideshows and tantrums from the
prosecutor even in the other case concerning the deputy president. In the
pretrial chamber, the evidence was evaluated and found to be insufficient to
sustain a case against Francis Muthaura yet it was the same evidence which was
being relied on in the case against Uhuru Kenyatta. Where has this evidence
suddenly disappeared to? I keep wondering. The case against Kenyatta has been
like a tag of war with two equal forces. The court has to protect its
reputation just like President Kenyatta has to.
Back to the 3 judge bench presided by Judge Kuniko Ozaki: it is in their
disposal to adjourn the case indefinitely, terminate the case or invoke article
87(7) of the Rome statute and declare Kenya as non-cooperative referring it to
the assembly of state parties. The latter
would be a decision that even we Kenyans should anticipate. This is where we
may realize that the case is political just like the court. This decision may
attract sanctions against Kenya as well as souring Kenya’s relationship with
the international community. Termination of the case may finally give Uhuru a
good night’s sleep since he’ll have been acquitted. It will also be a bitter
consequence of the incompetence of the OTP, for pursuing other issues other
than justice for the victims. The case comes at a time when the court seems to
be under pressure to show its ability to deliver justice as well as prove it’s
not a western political tool that only targets Africa with vested interests. Perhaps
we all should blame the fix on Ocampo for doing a shoddy job, but who will hear
the plight of the victims? The Kenyan cases are like a bullfight and like the
Swahili say, “the grass will hurt”,
unfortunately the grass here refers to the victims. Who will serve them
justice?
