August 27th 2010 will mark a great day in the minds of all Kenyans and probably most Africans. Well to the international human rights community, the international media and the International Criminal Court, it will be a dark moment. To Africans, it will be great seeing that a pure success story had come to light. Kenya, once termed as East Africa’s peace haven, had just erupted into turmoil at the blink of an eyelid. That was in 2007/2008. Now, they had gone to the polls again and overwhelmingly voted in favor of the new constitution.
The first constitution to have come from an entire internal process. Not something that had been carried over fromn Europe and imposed upon the people. This was a document achieved through local efforts even though some will say it is for the people but not by the people. It was such a relief seeing that the New Africa was coming of age. Of course, the constitution had to be implemented in front of the people and the whole world too.
Thus August 27th would be the day to implement it. Celebrations had to be planned and as is the custom, leaders from the entire East African region would be invited. Jakaya Kikwete had suffered a minor accident after falling on the dais while campaigning so he could not attend. What would make it curious is to who was invited; Rwanda’s tall and lanky president Paul Kagame, Kenya’s immediate neighbour Uganda’s president was invited and Yoweri Kaguta Museveni was there. President Omar el Bashir was also invited. Shockingly upon many people, Comoros’ president Ahmed Abdallah Mohamed Sambi was also there.
Apart from the Comoros president, the other three Heads of States invited are all under suspicions of human rights violations. Bashir has even been indicted by the ICC against the killings in Darfur. Human rights officials and groups were incensed that he would be allowed to travel to Kenya. Funny thing to note is that Kenya’s documents also lie at the table of ICC Chief Prosecutor Moreno Ocampo over the 2007 Post-Election Violence.
Protesters were all over Nairobi’s Central Business District protesting against Bashir’s presence but were dispersed within minutes. Kagame and Museveni may not have that much of a public profile with regards to any crimes but it was felt that the government of Kenya were in bad taste to invite Bashir and Kagame. International media also noted that there was a ceremony in Kenya but their eyes were trained on Omar el Bashir. Most of the coverage was on his
Bashir- President of Sudan
presence.
Few questions arise out of this. Was the Kenyan government in good taste when they invited Bashir as a “Head of State”, as Kenya’s Foreign Minister said it? Would it have been better if they had invited some of Africa’s fledgling democracies like Somalia, Somaliland and Burundi? Was the international media justified in the way they covered the event? Is the African Union justified in their shielding of Bashir despite his status at the ICC? If you were the President of Kenya and you invited Bashir, would you have had Bashir arrested even though your country is a signatory to both the ICC and African Union, which says that no African Head of State (read Bashir) would be prosecuted by the ICC?
Photo- courtsey of Wikipedia
In answer to your question: Those who invited and hosted Bashir to the ceremony, violated the law of the very same constitution they were signing into law. They acted un-constitutionally. Simple fact.
Better, and in detail: http://www.kenyaimagine.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=3642%3Athe-curious-case-of-the-promulgation-that-didnt&catid=267%3Athe-law&Itemid=130
I wouldn’t say African Union is shielding Bashir, and Kenya did nothing wrong. Here is the reason why:
In July 2009 the Union made it clear that it would not co-operate with the UN’s request because the UN refused to acknowledge the AU’s request to delay Bashir’s arrest for at least a year. This means that Bashir is free to travel across Africa. Therefore, as a AU member, Kenya have a right to invite Bashir. It may come across as morally wrong to some people but I believe Kenya did nothing wrong – legally.
AU members asked for the delay as they felt that the ICC unfairly targets Africans and went on to criticise the court for imposing what they called “new world terrorism”. In my view, AU’s frustrations are understandable. Why did the UN ignore the appeal? The UN’s Security Council have the capacity to ask the court to suspend the case for a year, with possibility for renewal, why did they not evoke that right?
While the atrocities that Bashir is alleged to have committed are indeed atrocious and deserve punishment, AU also has a genuine concern for Sudan and not the said sympathy for Bashr. Their point is that an arrest for Bashir would create power vacuum in Sudan. This could worsen the situation and not resolve. Has the UN and ICC got any post Bashir arrest plan(s)?
I think this programme shed more light on this matter watch at 39 minutes http://www.voxafrica.com/en/ShootTheMessenger/The-Notting-Hill-Carnival-2010
Interesting take there Jimmy. But is the UN obliged to take any requests into consideration although the lives of people are being lost in Darfur?
Of course that’s one of the obligations of the UN – to protect people – the people of Darfur in this case. In fact, this is one of the reason, if not a pre-text, why the UN issued the warrant of arrest. And the point of AU is that the move is counter productive – it would put more people (especially in Darfur) at risk and not necessarily protecting them.