PaanLuel Wël Media Ltd – South Sudan

"We the willing, led by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have done so much, with so little, for so long, we are now qualified to do anything, with nothing" By Konstantin Josef Jireček, a Czech historian, diplomat and slavist.

If liability for crimes against humanity is a Western value, what are African values?

The ICC could be wrong, but there is no other court in the world that could give indictees such space and freedom. Attorney General Githu Muigai conveniently “forgot” to tell his audience at The Hague that our Constitution does not allow the impunity and immunity (Article 143 (4)) for the President that he seeks for Kenyatta. The attacks against the ICC charges suggest that Africans are so stupid that they can’t think for themselves and others (read Westerners) have to do it for them.

MIXED FORTUNES FOR KENYA AT ICC MEETING

PRESIDENT Uhuru Kenyatta is not yet out of the woods on ICC despite the impression created by the results of the just-concluded Assembly of State Parties in The Hague. Although Foreign Secretary Amina Abdalla has declared the outcome of the ASP as “a major victory for Kenya” the reality is that Kenya won and lost in equal measure. While Kenya got video-link, trial in absence of accused and partial recognition of heads of state (Rule 134), it lost out on additional instances for introduction of prior recorded testimony by witnesses to the prosecution (Rule 68). Kenya’s loss on Article 68 could not however be immediately picked up as the official spin was that Kenya had managed to “force concessions” or “secure agreement” that the rule would not work retroactively. The fact of the matter however is that such concession is not necessary as Article 51(4) of the Rome Statute expressly provides that amendments to the rules “shall not be applied retroactively to the detriment of the accused.”

About Post Author