If the case against President Kenyatta were to collapse, it would be a disaster for the ICC, but the repercussions for the victims of the 2007/8 violence would be all the more tragic.
The Hague, Netherlands - Yesterday, Kenya's Attorney General Githu Muigai appeared in The Hague to respond to claims that the Kenyan government has frustrated the prosecution in the case against President Uhuru Kenyatta.
The prosecution had accused Nairobi of "pure obstructionism" in its attempts to gather evidence such as phone data or financial assets, but Muigui refuted the claims, insisting that Kenya had wholly fulfilled its legal obligations. The prosecution remained unconvinced, however, and in response to queries over how long it would take the Attorney General to process their requests for information, Muigai merely cautioned: "I do not know and do not want to speculate."
Kenyatta stands accused of crimes against humanity related to post-election violence in 2007/2008 when 1,200 people were killed and hundreds of thousands were displaced. In the absence of credible national courts able to hold the case impartially, the victims of the violence put their faith in the International Criminal Court (ICC). However, six years on, they are still awaiting justice, witnesses have withdrawn amidst allegations of intimidation and bribery, and the case has been delayed time after time.
Kenyatta, the first sitting president to be tried the ICC, has continually expressed his willingness to cooperate with the legal proceedings. Yet at the same time, he has publicly accused the ICC of being a corrupt tool of "recolonisation", his attorneys have persistently called for the case to be dismissed outright, while his government has lobbied its international allies to call for a suspension of the case while he is in office.
Many of the high-level international battles and legal wrangling in case appear to be coming to a head. But as Fergal Gaynor, the legal representative for the victims in the case, highlights, the thing that is often neglected when talking about the Kenyatta case is the victims of the violence.
"Instead of using state funds to provide fair compensation to victims," he says, "the accused used state funds to send high-level teams of diplomats around the world to argue for immunity, deferral or for rule changes on his behalf." Indeed, it is worth remembering that while it might be a disaster for the ICC and notions of international justice if the Kenyatta case were to fall apart, the repercussions for Kenya's victims would be all the more tragic.
No comments:
Post a Comment