Is there an attempt to have the President snub ICC?

What you need to know:

  • Ms Mohammed makes clear Kenyatta the candidate was transformed into Kenyatta the President, and the two are different and thus deserving of different treatment by and from the ICC
  • Nairobi would not mind a mass AU walk-out from the statute and would, in fact, encourage it

Is Nairobi preparing the ground for President Uhuru Kenyatta’s refusal to present himself to the International Criminal Court (ICC)?

Some churches, motley activists and political leaders have gone to court or made demands on the President not to obey orders to appear before the court.

Many argue that the President’s appearance before the ICC at The Hague would amount to interference in Kenya’s sovereignty and a clear attempt to destabilise the country. This, they say, would create a leadership vacuum that would ravenously suck in individuals keen to take advantage of the uncertainty to grab power.

However, the person to watch carefully and listen to keenly is Foreign Secretary Amina Mohammed. At a news conference on Wednesday, she appeared to float a trial balloon. She challenged journalists to tell her if they had witnessed a sitting head of state being tried in a court of law and especially in a foreign country.

In her words, courts wait to have their day when the president exits power. She said this is what happens in the North, a rare term more popular at scholarly seminars than news conferences, in reference to the West; as she skirted the diplomatic landmine of naming European capitals and especially Washington.

Ms Mohammed makes clear Kenyatta the candidate was transformed into Kenyatta the President, and the two are different and thus deserving of different treatment by and from the ICC. She reminds us that ICC is yet to rule on the President’s application to attend trial via video link so that he can stay home and govern.

Her demeanour, tenor and the gauntlet she threw to the media were deliberately defiant. This hitherto unseen deportment was first on display, and globally, last month when Ms Mohammed appeared on BBC’s current affairs programme Hard Talk to field questions from experienced anchor Zainab Badawi.

She argued that the cases facing the President and his Deputy William Ruto should not, in fact, proceed for they face certain collapse as did similar ones against Mr Francis Muthaura, Mr Henry Kosgey and Mr Hussein Ali.

Ms Mohammed was quicker on the draw as if she were out to run the battle-hardened news anchor ragged on air in a remarkable reversal of roles.

'OUT OF TOUCH'

This was also in evidence on Wednesday when she harshly attacked former UN Secretary- General Kofi Annan for living in Geneva and, therefore, out of touch with Africa. Mr Annan was speaking in his capacity as an eminent African who helped pull Kenya back from the abyss occasioned by the political violence of 2007 and 2008.

He was speaking as one who mediated between President Mwai Kibaki and challenger Raila Odinga and brought about the Grand Coalition Government. By her blunt putdown of the man, Ms Mohammed appeared to be saying that that belongs to the past and that because Mr Annan holds no recognised position, he should not pontificate to Africans.

But why that harshness? Mr Annan had only expressed the view that if the African Union (AU) quits the Rome Statute, the continent would wear this exit as a badge of shame. So Ms Mohammed, while demonstrating that she adds a political bearing to her practised diplomatic and legal backgrounds, appeared to use a mallet to hit a fly. (READ: Annan warns on quitting ICC)

Why? Perhaps because Nairobi has had enough of Annan or perhaps because Annan reminds Nairobi that the Kenyan leadership is at The Hague because of that now infamous so-called (Justice Philip) Waki envelope. Or is it because of the view gaining currency that Nairobi intends to lead Africa in a mass walk-out of the Rome Statute?

Nairobi would not mind a mass AU walk-out from the statute and would, in fact, encourage it. That is why Ms Mohammed, like Mr Kalonzo Musyoka before her, would traverse the continent soliciting support for Kenya’s bid to have the ICC cases transferred to the continent. AU met on Friday and Saturday to discuss the Rome Statute because President Kenyatta and his Deputy have been arraigned before the ICC.

Secondly, AU knows ICC’s indictment of Sudan’s President Omar el-Bashir and demand that would-be hosts arrest him on its behalf has severely diminished the man’s international operations.

So, Nairobi dangles ICC the carrot of co-operation, which demands reciprocation, then, wields the stick of an AU-backed rejection of the court. This walk- out would diminish ICC’s status significantly. However, if the President is considering not appearing before the ICC, he needs to personally make his case to Kenyans for they will bear the consequences.

Opanga is a media consultant. [email protected]