Kenya: Govt Must Cooperate Fully With ICC

The lords of impunity are at it again. Even as hundreds of Kenyans continue to languish in dilapidated IDP camps to which they were consigned following the 2007/2008 post-election violence, a section of the country’s leadership is keen to frustrate the International Criminal Court (ICC) in its quest to bring the perpetrators to book. The irony is that the government had pledged to fully cooperate with the ICC in its investigations but some of those serving in the very government are busy placing roadblocks to scuttle the process of justice.

Among the leaders who seem to have undergone a complete metamorphosis after welcoming the ICC to the country is Justice, National Cohesion and Constitutional Affairs minister Mutula Kilonzo. An otherwise brilliant lawyer of international repute, Mutula has suddenly taken an about turn, arguing that having enacted a new constitution, Kenya no longer requires the ICC. What balderdash! The ICC  got interested  in the country not because Kenya had an old constitution but due to the war crimes and crimes against humanity that were perpetrated by some of the leaders now in government at the height of  2007/2008 clashes. Needless to say, Parliament failed to establish a local tribunal to try the ring leaders, leaving the ICC with no option but to step in, given that Kenya is a signatory to the Rome Statute of the ICC.

For starters, Kenya -- East Africa's largest economy considered an island of peace in the region -- erupted into unprecedented chaos soon after the announcement of Presidential results in December 2007. The presidential election was a closely contested race between incumbent Mwai Kibaki of the Party of National Unity (PNU) and Raila Odinga of the Orange Democratic Movement (ODM). While initial results gave Raila an assailable lead, Kibaki ironically overtook him on the last day of vote counting amid allegations that the Electoral Commission was doctoring results in favour of Kibaki.

Fighting between Kibaki's and Raila's supporters then broke out in major towns, culminating in deaths and destruction of property. Worse still, the violence degenerated into an ethnic war in which communities which had lived together peacefully for decades, killed and kicked out rival ethnic members, before setting their property on fire.  But the international community moved in quickly, with the African Union appointing a panel of eminent African persons chaired by former UN secretary general Dr Kofi Annan. The panel's mediation led to the February 28, 2008 formation of a grand coalition government in which Kibaki became president and Raila the prime minister. The two are now sharing power.

Back to Mutula. Immediately after the bill to establish a local tribunal was defeated in Parliament, the Justice Minister quickly embraced The Hague option. But what has suddenly made him change his mind? Any keen observer of the Kenyan political landscape knows that having seen the dexterity with which ICC has moved into Kenya, Mutula is now keen to shield some of the leaders in the PNU coalition who could end up at The Hague and their 2012 presidential ambitions scuttled. Those who know Mutula very well should not see his change of heart as a surprise. During the oppressive single party days of the Kenya African National Union (KANU), Mutula strongly defended the party even as it continued to violate human rights with impunity, not to mention that he was for many years ex-President Daniel Moi’s lawyer.

It is not lost on observers that a cabal of ministers who initially traversed the country thumping their chests that ICC investigations would take decades to complete are now running scared as the noose tightens around their necks. Key among them are ministers William Ruto (Higher Education) and Uhuru Kenyatta (Finance) who also went to court to have their names expunged from the Kenya National Commission on Human Rights(KNCHR) report that linked them to the post-election violence. Given that the report was one of the documents used by Justice Philip Waki to compile the names that were secretly handed in an envelope to the ICC, it is beginning to dawn on both Uhuru and Ruto that their date with ICC Chief Prosecutor  Luis Moreno Ocampo is nigh. That is why their sidekicks are busy arguing that that Kenya is not a failed state and handing over the suspects to The Hague would compromise the country's sovereignty. It also explains why the security chiefs and provincial administrators have denied ICC access to the minutes of security meetings held during and after the post-election violence.

But it is high time these people, described by UN Special Rapporteur on unlawful executions  Prof Philip Alston as ‘the phenomenon of embodiment of impunity’ , realised that victims of the post-election violence are crying out for justice, which must be seen top be done before the next general elections due in 2012, to forestall a repeat of the violence. This is also the view held by human rights groups. The onus is on the government to cooperate fully with the ICC if it is keen on ending impunity as stipulated in the new constitution.

The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (often referred to as the International Criminal Court Statute or the Rome Statute) is the treaty that established the International Criminal Court (ICC). It was adopted at a diplomatic conference in Rome on July 17, 1998, and it entered into force on July 1, 2002. As of January 2009, 108 states are party to the statute. Kenya became a signatory to the Rome Statute on August  11, 1999, and ratified the treaty on March 15, 2005