How far will the government go to protect those accused at the ICC?

The ICC developments over the last week, while providing some relief that there is sufficient evidence of crimes against humanity, are also troubling.

First, despite his clear, firm and unequivocal promise to the country in December 2010 that he would take action and dismiss anyone whose case was confirmed by the ICC pre-trial chamber, President Kibaki attempted to repudiate that promise, using the well worn trick of appointing a committee to buy time in order to save the accused.

It is to the credit of the Kenyan people that they refused to take this bait and maintained pressure.

We should not have been surprised by these machinations for, over his time as President, Kibaki has formed a habit of not fulfilling his promises to us, and then going on as though nothing has happened.

Foremost here was the promise for a “zero-tolerance” policy against corruption and that there would not be any sacred cows in the fight against corruption.

Well we now have a herd of the sacred cows, which are busy eating at the trough, and whose wealth has reached untold levels, certain of protection and impunity. And there are others too that are in the public domain.

Then there was the tragi-comic response of the new Attorney General, whose verbal acrobatics surely made Amos Wako — once the master acrobat — or even his former law students, blush with shame.

The AG argued that because Mr Francis Muthaura and Mr Uhuru Kenyatta are charged in their personal capacities, they could stay in powerful public service positions, despite the charges, and as though the charges are small nuisances!

That is like suggesting that because an accountant is charged with stealing from his family or local “chama,” rather than from his employer, he can still keep working! Would Prof Githu Muigai employ such an accountant?

Worse, and after making the case that the accused are charged in their personal capacities, the Attorney General then creates a committee, at public expense, to advise the government on how to respond to the ICC developments!

How can that be, when the government is not charged, when the government has no role in the ICC?

This is a supreme waste of public resources, and continues the practice of treating public funds as though they are personal and for the use of a select few...

In creating this committee, Prof Muigai suggested that there were sovereignty issues that needed to be looked into with regard to the ICC.

That is hogwash and legally totally incorrect. It was the government and Parliament that invited the ICC to take up the matter of the election-related violence, clear that our police, prosecution and Judiciary could not handle the issues properly.

Our sovereignty is intact hence, and the fact that this same excuse is re-surfacing could portend the return of other weak reasons to try to maintain impunity in Kenya.

Finally, Mr Kenyatta purports to resign as minister for Finance but remains as Deputy Prime Minister, as though one is a public office and the other not!

The Deputy Prime Minister post is a senior office to that of minister of Finance, and the attempt to blur the lines is unacceptable.

As long as Mr Kenyatta is in Cabinet, with or without portfolio, and with these charges hanging over him, the President remains guilty of lying to us as Kenyans, and also contravening the agreement he made with Mr Raila Odinga in December 2008 on receiving the Waki report.