The prosecutor’s office at the ICC functions more or less like a civil society lobby group. Its work is devoid of any semblance of professionalism and efficiency. This civil society attitude is clearly manifested in how the prosecutor’s office identifies cases for prosecution, conducts investigations and undertakes its prosecutorial function in the courts at ICC.
The prosecutor’s office identifies cases in response to the prevailing world opinion in regard of certain conflict hot zones in the world. This world opinion is in turn shaped by Western democracies whose involvement in world affairs is entirely based on self interest and preservation. It is no wonder that most if not all of the prosecutions undertaken at the ICC have been done with the support and nod of the West.
The investigations just like civil society reports are shoddily conducted in a manner that is heavy with sentimentalities and innuendos rather than hard core facts. Shoddy investigations are perhaps why the conviction rate for the prosecutor’s office is far below expectation.
The equivalent of the prosecutor’s office in Kenya is the Kenya Human Rights Commission here in Kenya. The commission is often culpable of confusing hard core evidence with public perception. The statutory body pursues civil activism at the expense of truth and at times, hard core facts.
However, we have come to a point where the cases are already before the ICC. We must now deal with the situation as is as opposed as to how we would like it to be.
Uhuru Kenyatta and William Ruto are facing charges at the ICC. These charges are not minor offences. They are charges of crimes against humanity including but not limited to mass rape and murder. We must appreciate the fact that the prosecutor’s office may have failed many times in the identification, investigation and prosecution of the six initial suspects. This is why the actual cases against the suspects especially, Mr. Kenyatta seem to be crumbling.
In the end we might find that all four suspects, not just Mr. Kenyatta absolved by the courts of all the crimes they have been charged with. This will not come as a surprise to many Kenyans. In fact, it is highly likely that this will happen.
But would such a verdict actually mean that the four are actually innocent. Many people died and thousands more were rendered homeless during the Post Election violence. That is not in dispute. What is in dispute is who exactly is responsible for all the carnage that we witnessed in early 2008.
Where there is smoke, there is fire. There are clues and pieces of evidence that point to these key suspects. The prosecutor’s office may have fail in its task to properly investigate these clues and pieces of evidence but the fact is that they all point to something bigger. It is highly likely that the four suspects know more than what they are letting on.
The prosecutor’s office may have inadvertently done the four a favor by shoddily investigating the Post Election Violence and by presenting a less than well constructed prosecution case.
It is then our fault in believing in the justice of the ‘white man’. We may have erroneously placed our hope in an international justice system that does not really work. We may have failed to realize that this ‘mzungu’ often has the same imperfections and political considerations that we do.
We must turn to our own ability to be just in our investigations and our judgments. It is possible for us to be just if only we expressed our will and intention to be so. We must provide justice for all Kenyans and more so the victims of the Post Election Violence. We must do this on our own soil and on our own terms. The ‘white man’ may have failed already.
You may also want to read the following meme. Please click on the link below to find out more.