Argument: Justice is important

Justice is important in its own right, for the victims of the atrocities and for the development of Kenya. Victims have a right under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights [1] to have access to justice. Being elected should not be a blanket ban from being prosecuted for your crimes. In fact, the rule of law establishes the principle that leaders are subject to the same laws as all citizens. By seeing leaders being prosecuted for crimes, everyone sees the system working, allowing citizens to trust and buy further into the democratic system. As a consequence, the pursuit of justice is the most important factor above and beyond any claims of interference.

[1] Article 8, Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Candidate 1: "The ICC indictment undermines democracy

Uhuru Kenyatta is a sitting president of a democratic nation. This means that he was elected by the people to serve them. By indicting a sitting leader, you undermine their ability to rule the country as they will be forced to spend long periods outside their country focusing on something that is irrelevant to the governance of their country. The ICC has demanded that Kenyatta and Ruto attend the trial in person. [1] By forcing the President and Deputy President to spend long hours away from the country involved in a trial the ICC is effectively disenfranchising the people who voted from him to be their leader. Further, Kenyatta is first and foremost accountable to the Kenyan people, who have chosen him as leader despite these claims. It is clearly unwelcome interference by the ICC for the court to take the President away from his duties.

[1] Statement by ICC, ‘Kenyatta case: ICC Trial Chamber V(b) reviews decision on presence of accused at trial’, whereiskenya.com, 27 November 2013, http://whereiskenya.com/icc-judges-kenyatta-case-videolink-kenyatta-must-person-5th-february/"
Candidate 2: "Having the president out of the country undermines stability

While Kenyatta and his deputy William Ruto have been visiting the ICC, they should have been leading their countries. While the indictment has occurred both have remained the leaders of their countries, but have been absent while major events such as the Westgate shootings occurred. Despite the need to strong leadership in the midst of a potentially divisive event, Ruto was only granted one week away from trial. [1] Having a clear and stable leadership is important for Kenya to develop, restrict violence and ensure that policy development is able to continue, particularly given the cross-ethnic powering sharing arrangement between Kenyatta and Ruto. Absence of leadership during the fear and uncertainty surrounding this event might lead to a fresh round of violence as supporters take to the streets in protest – this election had put former enemies Kenyatta and Ruto together, easing ethnic tensions in the region [2] .

[1] Ndonga, Wamubi, ‘Kenya: Ruto Can Return to Kenya For A Week Over Westgate – ICC’, allAfrica, 23 September 2013, http://allafrica.com/stories/201309230358.html

[2] ‘Will Africa pull out of the ICC?’, BBC News, 11 October 2013, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-24452288"
Candidate 3: "Justice for violence is not fundamental to peace, as can be seen by the comparatively peaceful 2013 elections. Having now established working relationship between ethnic communities, why stoke the fire by prosecuting community leaders? 60% of Kenyans say they do not believe that the case even if it runs to a conclusion will not help heal Kenya. [1]

[1] Wanyama, 2014"
Candidate 4: "A pointless trial that victimizes African leaders

While the ICC feels free to interfere with African countries it would never dare to do so in a western country; leaders such as George Bush, Tony Blair, Nicholas Sarkozy and others who have launched various armed interventions have not been put on trial. Not only is it victimization and interference the trial of Kenyatta is also likely to be pointless; it is on the point of collapse. The prosecutor Fatou Bensouda has stated “Having carefully considered my evidence and the impact of the two withdrawals, I have come to the conclusion that currently the case against Mr. Kenyatta does not satisfy the high evidentiary standards required at trial”. [1]

[1] AFP, ‘'Not enough evidence for Kenyatta trial': ICC prosecutor’, Google, 19 December 2013, http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5gogR-q3dBDCH4lzeEEnUnA4kfGag?docId=271e8feb-da06-4fd8-a859-9cc7c1e5a0f6"
Candidate 5: "Kenya can prosecute these crimes itself

Kenya has a functioning judiciary and police force. They have successfully prosecuted some individuals for these crimes and it should be left to Kenya to deliver justice for itself. There have been several cases brought before the courts. [1] Kenyans overwhelmingly see the ICC is ‘imperialist’, and 61% want the ICC to terminate its case against Kenyatta. [2] If and when Kenya’s leaders should be tried should be left to the domestic judiciary to decide.

[1] Nebehay, Stephanie, ‘UN urges Kenya to probe violence after 2007 elections’, Reuters, 26 July 2012, http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/07/26/ozatp-kenya-un-rights-idAFJOE86P07M20120726?sp=true

[2] Wanyama, Henry, ‘Kenya: 61 Percent of Kenyans Want ICC Cases Dropped – Poll’, allAfrica, 1 February 2014, http://allafrica.com/stories/201402030215.html"
Candidate 6: "Justice can still be sought by either local courts or after Kenyatta’s term ends. Justice should be done without ICC interference in the domestic affairs of Kenya. Even so, this does not seem like the pursuit of justice by the ICC, rather a witch hunt by the ICC for African leaders [1] .

[1] ‘African Union accuses ICC of ‘hunting’ Africans’, BBC News, 27 May 2013, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-22681894"
Candidate 7: "The Kenyan Parliament decided against creating a special tribunal, the court should not have then gone over the elected representatives’ head to hand the case to the ICC. The Parliament has since shown its displeasure at the ICC’s interference by voting to leave the ICC entirely. [1]

[1] AP, ‘Kenya votes to leave ICC days before deputy president’s Hague trial’, The Guardian, 5 September 2013, http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/05/kenya-icc-international-criminal-court"

Justice can still be sought by either local courts or after Kenyatta’s term ends. Justice should be done without ICC interference in the domestic affairs of Kenya. Even so, this does not seem like the pursuit of justice by the ICC, rather a witch hunt by the ICC for African leaders [1] .

[1] ‘African Union accuses ICC of ‘hunting’ Africans’, BBC News, 27 May 2013, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-22681894
