Africa’s ICC Tightrope

　　The International Criminal Court’s (ICC) decision to grant Kenyan PresidentUhuru Kenyatta leave not to attend all of his trial in November, on charges of crimesagainst humanity, is a sign that the ICC was not after regime change in Kenya as manyobservers had speculated. Kenyatta will only be required to attend the opening andclosing sessions of his trial, along with hearing when victims present their testimony inperson. Kenyatta had argued that attending the trial in The Hague would prevent himfrom governing his country.

　　The ICC decision followed a hastily called AU summit in Addis Ababa, where the Africanbody criticized the ICC of bias against African leaders, specifically because Kenyattais the first incumbent head of state to stand trial before the ICC. Both Kenyatta and hisdeputy William Ruto are charged with organizing violence after the 2007 Kenya elections,in which an estimated 1,200 people were killed. Ruto’s trial began in Septemberand his exemption from attending the entire trial is under an appeal suspension.

　　Kenyatta’s case has understandably been the cause of much discussion, criticismand finger pointing. At the AU summit that sought to examine Africa’s relationship withthe ICC, the AU was adamant in declaring that heads of state in office ought not to beindicted by the ICC, saying that “sovereignty, stability and peace [of member states]would be undermined.”

　　The irony of the case is that of the 122 states that are members of the ICC, 34 areAfrican, all having pledged to protect equal treatment for individuals in cases involvingcriminal responsibility for international crimes. Kenyatta’s case has subsequently blown adark cloud over the the biggest regional membership of the ICC.

　　African leaders, meanwhile, say that while they acknowledge the functions of theICC are needed to oppose global crimes against humanity, they should not be targetedand “so-called superpower leaders with UN veto-power” who arbitrarily invade weakernations should also be brought to account. Seeking to balance affairs, AU CommissionChairperson Nkosazana Dlamini Zuma told the summit, “It is critical that we remainwithin the legal framework of the Rome Statute” (which governs the ICC). Her wordsindicate that a mass withdrawal of African members from the ICC is unlikely.

　　Currently the ICC is investigating eight cases, all in Africa – Uganda, the DRC, CentralAfrican Republic, Darfur, Kenya, Libya, Cote d’Ivoire and Mali. Based on this, it must beasked if the opposition of ICC prosecution by African leaders is a process of closingranks to protect each other. While the message from Africa that the continent wants tobe treated fairly has been made unequivocally, reluctance from African member statesto cooperate with the ICC would threaten its ability to effectively try these cases, andwithout African cases it has no work and its entire future is put in doubt.

关注读览天下微信， 100万篇深度好文， 等你来看……