|
Post by tactician on Sept 1, 2010 20:49:06 GMT 3
tactician, You are engaging in wishful thinking. Those hoping that Kenya will pull out of the Rome Statute to save a handful of killers are dreaming. The forces of impunity have one problem in Kenya. There is a virtual 90% consensus among the public that they do not want impunity. Once people get indicted they will ran to their tribes to save their ass and then is when things wikll start falling apart for them. Some are already positioning themselves to hawk their tribal votes. The moment they are indicted by Ocampo even their tribes won't save them. They will simply become fugitives. Ocampo's people are already in Kenya as we speak and nobody can even dare question what they are doing leave alone fight them. Just today Saitoti and the entire security committee met with Ocampo's reps in Nairobi and they all said everything is going as planned. So when will the forces of impunity you are boasting about kick out Ocampo. The investigations are almost complete. Why would Ocampo need the UN to ask him to investigate the Kenyan case. It is all but finished. The only thing left is to issue indictments and that is done by the ICC judges not even Ocampo, nor the UN can do that. Once Ocampo presents evidence to the ICC judges they will make their decision. The only hope for the merchants of impunity is to hope that the ICC judges reject Ocampo's evidence and refuse to issue indictments. That is where all those who want support these people need to focus there prayers. Once the indictments are issued nobody cares. Kibaki can hide them and refuse to hand them over and then they just have to live like figutives like Mr. Filicien. They will be dead meat for all practical purposes. adongo You speak like what you say are facts. You read the public mood regarding the Bashir saga....going by the comments i have come across, most kenyans did not want Kenya to arrest Bashir. In fact the joke in nairobi is that Ocampo should look at the map and see where Sudan is - then he can go there and arrest Bashir. This is for someone who they have no inkling about. Wait until they indict some players and leave others - no way Kenya will arrest these fellas. The only way they can do it is indict Kibaki & Raila first. Any other way and it will sound like a political witch hunt.. Now lemme make a prediction - if the ICC does not go for Kibaki and Raila and instead indicts the lower fellas, this will look like witch hunt to clear the way for Raila...indeed this already is the mood. This will be the beginning of the Kalonzo pitia kati kati miracle as he leads the KKK. Just my thoughts...i'm out
|
|
|
Post by kamalet on Sept 1, 2010 20:59:17 GMT 3
Ever heard of the BIA's until they were partially withdrawn in 2008? May not.
|
|
|
Post by adongo23456 on Sept 1, 2010 21:02:45 GMT 3
tactician,
It is indeed a FACT that Kenya signed an arrangement that they would welcome the ICC to investigate the the PEV. Is it NOT?
It is a FACT that the ICC investigations are going on as speak and has been for months now. Is it NOT?
It is a FACT that the ICC does not need anything from the UN after they have finished their investigations. Is it NOT?
So yeah, FACTS are FACTS and sometimes we have to live with them however unpleasant they may be.
Now taking cover under Raila again is tiresome. You cannot kill people and then turn around and say if Raila is not charged with you then it is witch hunt. That is rubbish. If Raila was involved in the PEV then he has to go to the Hague. At this time I don't know who has told you who is going to be indicted. Ocampo hasn't given any names but as usual the guilty are afraid. Let them be very afraid.
Let those going to the Hague go and fight their wars there. Kenyans will choose their president and other leaders whichever way they want. Nobody can blackmail people ati oh if you arrest me then Kalonzo will become president. Who cares.
adongo
|
|
|
Post by job on Sept 1, 2010 21:58:03 GMT 3
tactician, You are engaging in wishful thinking. Those hoping that Kenya will pull out of the Rome Statute to save a handful of killers are dreaming. The forces of impunity have one problem in Kenya. There is a virtual 90% consensus among the public that they do not want impunity. Once people get indicted they will ran to their tribes to save their ass and then is when things wikll start falling apart for them. Some are already positioning themselves to hawk their tribal votes. The moment they are indicted by Ocampo even their tribes won't save them. They will simply become fugitives. Ocampo's people are already in Kenya as we speak and nobody can even dare question what they are doing leave alone fight them. Just today Saitoti and the entire security committee met with Ocampo's reps in Nairobi and they all said everything is going as planned. So when will the forces of impunity you are boasting about kick out Ocampo. The investigations are almost complete. Why would Ocampo need the UN to ask him to investigate the Kenyan case. It is all but finished. The only thing left is to issue indictments and that is done by the ICC judges not even Ocampo, nor the UN can do that. Once Ocampo presents evidence to the ICC judges they will make their decision. The only hope for the merchants of impunity is to hope that the ICC judges reject Ocampo's evidence and refuse to issue indictments. That is where all those who want support these people need to focus there prayers. Once the indictments are issued nobody cares. Kibaki can hide them and refuse to hand them over and then they just have to live like figutives like Mr. Filicien. They will be dead meat for all practical purposes. adongo You speak like what you say are facts. You read the public mood regarding the Bashir saga....going by the comments i have come across, most kenyans did not want Kenya to arrest Bashir. In fact the joke in nairobi is that Ocampo should look at the map and see where Sudan is - then he can go there and arrest Bashir. This is for someone who they have no inkling about. Wait until they indict some players and leave others - no way Kenya will arrest these fellas. The only way they can do it is indict Kibaki & Raila first. Any other way and it will sound like a political witch hunt.. Now lemme make a prediction - if the ICC does not go for Kibaki and Raila and instead indicts the lower fellas, this will look like witch hunt to clear the way for Raila...indeed this already is the mood. This will be the beginning of the Kalonzo pitia kati kati miracle as he leads the KKK. Just my thoughts...i'm out Tactician,This is as ridiculous as it gets. Just where did you read the 'public mood' that Kenyans don't want the mastermind of Darfur genocide al-Bashir arrested?That is actually the confused and misplaced mood reigning in the circles of suspected masterminds of PEV who are afraid of the inevitable and impending Justice. You may be right that the same clique above are joking in Nairobi streets about Ocampo reading the map to go find al-Bashir in Sudan, but I can certainly tell you that majority Kenyans, IDPs still languishing in camps, families and loved ones of PEV victims see no joke - they only hope to see and get justice. That's their mood right there!!! Then you brag about.... This is typical Ruto braggadocio. Reminds me of Sadam Hussein bragging in the days preceding the Iraq invasion. There are times when attempts to coerce and threaten a nation into accepting injustice only works against you. Empty threats are the biggest signs of guilt. ICC can arrest any mastermind of PEV with NO CONSEQUENCE whatsoever on the EXISTENCE & STABILITY of Kenya. Can you go and bank these words. Who says Kibaki and Raila are not being investigated regarding PEV. Why are some people already suspecting cabinet members under Kibaki and Raila yet not the principals? your guess is as good as mine. The guilty (& their hirelings) are afraid!! Then you claim: Lemme also make a prediction. ICC will indict the real PEV masterminds irrespective of their position in government or rehearsed cries of 'witch hunt', watch this space.If that cry of witch hunt is to be the 'wind assistance' Kalonzo Musyoka hopes to cash on in KKK to blow his back kati kati into the Presidency - so as to continue protecting the PEV masterminds & subvert ICC, I will welcome that campaign with open arms and say - AMEN!!! KKK (what a befitting acronym) is free to pitia kati kati and underestimate the blood, cries and pains of fellow Kenyans slaughtered and shot dead during the PEV. More so, they can wine and dine at the top, leaving the security terrified grassroots exposed as they did in 2007/8. All these will be revisited soon, and no one will hide behind tribe!!!!!! - not even if you want to balloon it into three tribes KKK- why does anyone imagine that an ordinary Kamba (or any other K or tribe for that matter) will stand with a mastermind of PEV when they didn't condon the murders in the first place.Let the Argentinian Amigo - Mr. Moreno Ocampo, do his thing!
|
|
|
Post by mank on Sept 1, 2010 22:09:44 GMT 3
Mank
Yes - someone invited Bashir to Kenya fully aware that the ICC had a warrant on him. So if we worried about a conflict with ICC we would not invite someone with an ICC warrant on his head. I also presume that the person who invited Bashir was consciously aware of the resolutions of the AU General Assembly which passed a resolution binding members to ignore the ICC warrant until the issues raised by the AU were addressed by the UN Security Council.But AU did not require Kenya to invite Bashir. So, if the concern with conflicting ICC was important to us, we would have avoided conflicting both the ICC and AU. The AU charter becomes an argument why we did not arrest Bashir, but not why we had him as a guest in the first place. I know this has been explained with the regional relationship theory. Bashir is not Sudan. It is Sudan the country that Kenya in general has to have the purpose of relating with - so, any statement that Bashir was invited in Kenya's interest is deceptive. Note BAshir could not have come if he was not given personal assurances.
You have strongly argued about the law being broken and I can only assume that the law you refer to is the new constitution making law any international agreements Kenya enters into as well as the domestication of the ICC statute. If this is the case To the extent that the two laws provide for obedience to a specific treaty/agreement on the ICC, I agree.
Your assumption is correct - the new constitution. So we are together on that, and it is the main argument I have been making.
However, Kenya is a signatory to the UN charter as well as the AU Constitutive Act which being international agreements binding Kenya, also fall under their application in Kenyan laws as per the new constitution. Now the question which our constitution does not answer is what happens when these international conventions that we have signed are inconsistent with one another. The AU resolution on Bashir in my view bound Kenya as it was persuant to a decision and policy of the Union. The ICC Warrant obligates Kenya to arrest anyone with a warrant on their head. Just how do you reconcile this and if "for whatever reason" Kenya decided to invite Bashir, can they hide behind the AU resolution and get away with it?
We have two arguments going alongside each other here, and I realize Tactician was working on the second. The first is: why did we invite Bashir knowing well we would put ourselves in the conflict of the 2 charters? The second one is about the light this Bashir case shines on the controversial issue of domesticating international treaties as law when Kenya ratifies them. I have not engaged in the 2nd, but it is an issue. I was resisting going there so to stay loyal to the immediate issue. The fact that AU has required its member states to ignore the ICC charter with relation to Bashir does not take away the fact that we had passed a law that made the same charter domestic law. Besides, even if we had not passed it, it would not be pursuant to the AU requirement that we would be inviting Bashir to set us up to contravene the ICC charter (AU only requires that we do not arrest the man, not that we invite him so we get entangled with the ICC). So, under no circumstance is it enough to point at the AU charter, to explain the case of having Bashir on our soil when we knew we were committed to arresting him if he showed up. It has to have been very important for someone to have Bashir in Kenya - it is not about the AU charter. Tactician has mentioned something about the prospects that some politicians would be interested in withdrawing Kenya's endorsement of the Rome statute. I would not be surprised if that is the motivation of this intentional confrontation with the ICC. It is not apparent to me that the AU charter, or any nation interest, led us to the confrontation (with the ICC and breaking of our own law). AU charter seems a convenient cover for a deliberate confrontation.
I ask all this because you wish us not to discuss the morality of the issue with regard to Bashir and Sudan, but within the context of Kenyan law!
Please help reconcile the dilemma I find myself in!
Kamale
I cannot reconcile the dilemma. However, there was no real dilemma in this case, since we opted to place ourselves in the dilemma. If Bashir had shown up into Kenya on his own expeditions, then we would be in a real dilemma. And that is something we have to brace for with this new constitution. In this case, however, there was no dilemma until we invited a man whose presence was going to be problematic because we would be required by one agreement to arrest, and by another not to arrest.
|
|
|
Post by adongo23456 on Sept 1, 2010 22:48:30 GMT 3
job,Even before the ink has dried. Moreno is on his way. I understand the investigations has been very thorough and very professional. The Bashir debacle seems to have made Moreno pretty mad and even more determined to end this littlel matter of impunity in Kenya. I think he wants to close this thing up and take his evidence before the judges and lower the hammer on these chaps. The nation will wait and see what happens. www.standardmedia.co.ke/InsidePage.php?id=2000017381&cid=4&ttl=ICC to summon key personalities
|
|
|
Post by politicalmaniac on Sept 2, 2010 0:45:43 GMT 3
But AU did not require Kenya to invite Bashir. So, if the concern with conflicting ICC was important to us, we would have avoided conflicting both the ICC and AU. The AU charter becomes an argument why we did not arrest Bashir, but not why we had him as a guest in the first place.
I know this has been explained with the regional relationship theory. Bashir is not Sudan. It is Sudan the country that Kenya in general has to have the purpose of relating with - so, any statement that Bashir was invited in Kenya's interest is deceptive. Note BAshir could not have come if he was not given personal assurances.
The first is: why did we invite Bashir knowing well we would put ourselves in the conflict of the 2 charters?
I cannot reconcile the dilemma. However, there was no real dilemma in this case, since we opted to place ourselves in the dilemma. If Bashir had shown up into Kenya on his own expeditions, then we would be in a real dilemma.
And that is something we have to brace for with this new constitution. In this case, however, there was no dilemma until we invited a man whose presence was going to be problematic because we would be required by one agreement to arrest, and by another not to arrest. These are the questions that have not been answered Today the lame duck P.O.R.K from othaya is mumbling about the positives of the bashir invitation, eti it enhances reconciliation between the warring Sudanese parties. HOW? JAMENI, HOW SO? And as Hon Miguna asked in a thread elsewhere, was this invitation worth it? Was the invitation worth the negative fallout in the eyes of the International community? Was the invitation worth the outrage amongst us citizens who were expecting the glow of the signing ceremony to last at least three or so days? Even 24hrs did not elapse before rumblings were heard. Now the three mafiaya amigos, rasputin and the two other thugs have chokozaad the nyuki's nest. Now Ocampo is very much on the way.....talk about law of unintended consequences. These bloody idiots think that the ICC statutes codified into Kenyan law are similar to the piece of MoU paper their President signed with LDP. What a bunch of stoopid bloody arrogant fools they are. And that hireling wetangula needs a slap upside his head.
|
|
|
Post by mank on Sept 2, 2010 1:16:23 GMT 3
Pm, what they need is a real whoopass!
|
|
|
Post by kamalet on Sept 2, 2010 8:15:05 GMT 3
I know this has been explained with the regional relationship theory. Bashir is not Sudan. It is Sudan the country that Kenya in general has to have the purpose of relating with - so, any statement that Bashir was invited in Kenya's interest is deceptive. Note BAshir could not have come if he was not given personal assurances. Mank I hive off everything else and leave this one paragraph as it seems the most irksome in your argument. Do you acknowledge that Bashir is the President of Sudan with all its sovereignty? If you do, then surely you must accept that when the Kenyan president wants to invite someone from Sudan, he can only invite his counterpart as the legitimate president of Sudan? Even if you say we invite "SUDAN", should not Sudan decide then who they would like to send to Kenya - or should we be choosing for them? So there you have it - Bashir the ICC suspect & Bashir the President of Sudan, and I think it is the latter that was invited to represent his country! But if we were to lighten matters, and move into the silly world of the law, the invitation to Bashir would not have violated the promulgated constitution on the basis that it was not yet law, and any violation would have happened after Uhuru Park - do you agree?
|
|
|
Post by mank on Sept 2, 2010 16:21:03 GMT 3
I know this has been explained with the regional relationship theory. Bashir is not Sudan. It is Sudan the country that Kenya in general has to have the purpose of relating with - so, any statement that Bashir was invited in Kenya's interest is deceptive. Note BAshir could not have come if he was not given personal assurances. Mank
I hive off everything else and leave this one paragraph as it seems the most irksome in your argument.
Do you acknowledge that Bashir is the President of Sudan with all its sovereignty? If you do, then surely you must accept that when the Kenyan president wants to invite someone from Sudan, he can only invite his counterpart as the legitimate president of Sudan? Even if you say we invite "SUDAN", should not Sudan decide then who they would like to send to Kenya - or should we be choosing for them?
So there you have it - Bashir the ICC suspect & Bashir the President of Sudan, and I think it is the latter that was invited to represent his country!
But if we were to lighten matters, and move into the silly world of the law, the invitation to Bashir would not have violated the promulgated constitution on the basis that it was not yet law, and any violation would have happened after Uhuru Park - do you agree?Yes, I acknowledge that Bashir is the President of Sudan with all its sovereignty. I do not know the protocol used in inviting state leaders to other state functions. So, let me take it that Kibaki would have had to invite Bashir in the first place. Gather some patience and explore with me a version of how this could have gone: (1) Kibaki invites Bashir, per the protocol I rely on you to have fairly presented. (2) Bashir calls to ask, "hey, you are inviting me over their, yet you are signatory to the Rome statute which would require you to hurl me to the Hague if I come over there. Are you serious"? (3) Kibaki says something like, "you know, you are our neighbour, and we are out to promote good neighobourliness. that is why we invite you to our esteemed occasion." (4) Bashir asks, "does that mean you will not do to me what your little club wants you to do to me?" (5) Kibaki says something like, "if it were for me personally, I would assure your safety. However, this issue is bigger than me, and I certainly do not want to risk a messy scene involving you or me in any way. I would suggest you send your closest representative; so in a way we can have your esteemed participation yet not any commotion with the little club". Kamale, is that a way we would have had Sudan represented by someone else, and not raise any rubbles? Can you call the above choosing for Sudan? Bashir belongs where he belongs according to the ICC out of nothing Kenya did. So why do you insist on rationalizing privileges for Bashir that are stripped by the ICC warrant of arrest? It is not just "the silly world of the law" that makes the invitation of Bashir fowl in the mouth. Just getting entangled with the ICC over our insistence that Bashir deserves our dignity is fowl enough to make us avoid him like leprosy. In my turn, if we were to lighten matters, and move into the silly world of the law, inviting Bashir did not violate the constitution which was not yet promulgated. The exit of Bashir from Kenya after the constitution was promulgated violated the law. Reasonable and law-abinding people would have foreseen this, and avoided giving Bashir the assurances that he would go home safe. What's your next strategy?
|
|
|
Post by kamalet on Sept 2, 2010 18:05:37 GMT 3
Mank
I think the small chat between Kibaki and Bashir would have been far-fetched as Kibaki would then not have invited the man if he wanted to impose conditions. You either invite the man knowing he cannot be touched or not at all.
Was it the same Kibaki who talked of tempering justice with mercy? In this case, Kenya could have rightly arrested Bashir in total compliance of the law - and fully serve the interests of the ICC and perhaps those as reviled by the man as you are. So who would have been laughing and who would have been offended?
I guess in the case, Ocampo would have been singing the praises of Kenya as well as those shedding tears for this visit. But what about the fallout amongst other AU countries that have an expectation that Bashir has a role in securing the South Sudan problem before moving to the Darfur issue?
When all is said and done, people are fully justified in being reviled by Bashir, but hanging on the word of the law may not be the solution to the problems that face our northern neighbour!
|
|
|
Post by politicalmaniac on Sept 2, 2010 18:33:27 GMT 3
Since the Panuarers have no LEGAL DEFENSE to explain the stoopid idiotic and illegal invitation to bashir, they keep on using the "good neighbor defense". Its exactly what the crack lickin' wetangula has been mouthing to anyoe who would listen
But their even inventive and desperate defenses reached a new convoluted high.
Lets play Doctor Psychiatrist and ascribe bashir multiple janus faced personalities, The first is the rogue fugitive ICC indictee, the only current sitting Pres who enjoys that honor. Not even mugabe has been seen fit to be bestowed that honor.
Then lets hive off his persona who occupies the office of President of Sudan.
Then lets invite THAT ONE, to Nairobi.
Not only does One need a very agile creative narcissistic mind to jump through those loops to justify an illegality successfully, but one need to be an amoral creature.
|
|
|
Post by mank on Sept 2, 2010 18:44:48 GMT 3
Mank
I think the small chat between Kibaki and Bashir would have been far-fetched as Kibaki would then not have invited the man if he wanted to impose conditions. You either invite the man knowing he cannot be touched or not at all.
Was it the same Kibaki who talked of tempering justice with mercy? In this case, Kenya could have rightly arrested Bashir in total compliance of the law - and fully serve the interests of the ICC and perhaps those as reviled by the man as you are. So who would have been laughing and who would have been offended?
I guess in the case, Ocampo would have been singing the praises of Kenya as well as those shedding tears for this visit. But what about the fallout amongst other AU countries that have an expectation that Bashir has a role in securing the South Sudan problem before moving to the Darfur issue?
When all is said and done, people are fully justified in being reviled by Bashir, but hanging on the word of the law may not be the solution to the problems that face our northern neighbour! But you see my friend, we are just going in a circle and no matter which way into the the center, the conclusion is that Kibaki was determined to break the law by inviting Bashir, the person. You agree with me on that in saying Remember I gave the chat in response to your question as to how I imagine Kibaki would invite Sudan without inviting Bashir the man - the small chat shows exactly that. And yes, it is a diplomatic way of inviting Sudan without inviting Bashir, don't you think? Hence back to the question I said is the grand question - looking past all the load of bull that has been given to justify inviting the man, since non of it holds up, what was the real motivation for inviting the man? The answer is something we can only speculate, but I have seen none that stands up to rational analysis. You keep bringing back what it would have meant to ICC and AU if we arrested the man, when all I am arguing is that we would never have been involved in this irreconcilable dilemma unless we were interesting in being in it. There then is my suspicion as to why we are in the controversy: it is precisely because some one wanted it, and chances are that we will see Kenya seeking more and more conflicts with the ICC. By the way, when before was the ICC called a "Kangaroo Court"?
|
|
|
Post by adongo23456 on Sept 2, 2010 18:44:49 GMT 3
kamale,
The issue is not arresting Bashir. The issue is inviting an international fugitive to the country. The big fallout Kenyans are going to face and already facing is that just when we thought the country had turned a page to look forward to things turning around Kibaki drags this skunk around and now the whole place is stinking.
Kenya is going to needs tons of money from the Western countries to implement this new katiba, set up all those commissions and get things moving. We need big money. Those waxing lyrical about China being the new friend of Kenya may not know that China does not fund these things. They don't bother with things like governance and human rights etc.
Kenya by now should have been working on funding arrangements and building partnerships with our friends to get stuff moving and here we are forced to repair the image of the country again due to some foolish moves by Kibaki and his chaps. This was an utterly irresponsible move and it is going to cost the country. Very dumb move.
|
|
|
Post by mank on Sept 2, 2010 18:59:56 GMT 3
kamale,The issue is not arresting Bashir. The issue is inviting an international fugitive to the country. The big fallout Kenyans are going to face and already facing is that just when we thought the country had turned a page to look forward to things turning around Kibaki drags this skunk around and now the whole place is stinking. Kenya is going to needs tons of money from the Western countries to implement this new katiba, set up all those commissions and get things moving. We need big money. Those waxing lyrical about China being the new friend of Kenya may not know that China does not fund these things. They don't bother with things like governance and human rights etc. Kenya by now should have been working on funding arrangements and building partnerships with our friends to get stuff moving and here we are forced to repair the image of the country again due to some foolish moves by Kibaki and his chaps. This was an utterly irresponsible move and it is going to cost the country. Very dumb move. Adongo, I suspect the architects of this scandal would be happy to have it termed "dumb" once their current explanations are turned on their head. I think it is plain scandalous, with some very intended consequences. That is why I find it unbelievable that those in position to set the ball rolling seem either not to consider this as an atrocity on the law, or to be complacent.
|
|
|
Post by kamalet on Sept 2, 2010 19:32:32 GMT 3
Adongo
Personally I think there are much bigger interests in the success of the Kenyan constitution for all the donor countries and the Bashir saga will not say for instance stop the Americans from being partners in the actualisation of the constitution. If it is in the bigger interests of the US for Kenya to successfully implement the constitution, then you can be certain that Sudan or anything else that Kenya does will not be an impediment.
You will perhaps recall that the US sent a civil servant to the inaugration of Bashir ( a fete I think also Kibaki attended) and when Hillary Clinton was questioned, she talked of bigger interests of the US. The question was whether the Obama government in sending an american to the fete went against their campaign against Bashir.
As for the other countries, and I agree that China will only do what is in its interest and not Kenya's, they will review their options for Kenya - but it is all very clear that they cannot ignore Kenya, and they know that Kenyans are determined to get the document working for them. I disagree that it is funding that Kenya requires as it has its own money which it can comfortably burn at a party hosted by Kalonzo at parliament and the one hosted at Carnivore last Friday by the PM! If we can burn millions partying why does anyone think we need any money!!!
When Israel committed the murders of the Turkish aid frotilla, the entire world was livid and even the US and the UN condemned the actions of Israel. Today that incident is forgotten as will the Bashir one.
All that will be left is a moral argument as we are having!!
Mank
If you ask me, the ICC will disappoint you as it has perhaps disappointed the people of Bosnia and Liberia that had issues with the merchants or leaders of death in their countries.
I think even the people of Darfur sit and hope that something can happen, but deep inside they must know that nothing will happen to Bashir - after all was he not elected by the people of Sudan notwithstanding the warrant over his head?? The African leadership have no intention of handing him over so there is little the ICC will do as they have no arresting power!
As for those who imagine that Ocampo holds little hope of Kenya government support, they are right and should know that it does not matter which leader seats up State House Avenue, the handing over of Kenyans to the ICC will not happen and in the event of it happening, there will be those who will imagine nothing else but a witchhunt which in typical Kenyan format will lead to political fallout.
Kenya is a country of endless largess and when you are the leader, you do not give up power easily - example, how many of these our monkey leaders wanted to give up their fuel guzzlers for a VW Passat?
All I am preaching is realism!!!
|
|
|
Post by politicalmaniac on Sept 3, 2010 0:06:05 GMT 3
The reality of dual split personalities? Where the one fits the bill at that convenient time is then chosen? The bashir we invited was "this one", and NOT THAT bashir, you know, the ICC indicted criminal?
Dunia ni kigeugeu!
|
|
|
Post by mank on Sept 3, 2010 0:12:34 GMT 3
Mank
If you ask me, the ICC will disappoint you as it has perhaps disappointed the people of Bosnia and Liberia that had issues with the merchants or leaders of death in their countries.
I think even the people of Darfur sit and hope that something can happen, but deep inside they must know that nothing will happen to Bashir - after all was he not elected by the people of Sudan notwithstanding the warrant over his head?? The African leadership have no intention of handing him over so there is little the ICC will do as they have no arresting power!
As for those who imagine that Ocampo holds little hope of Kenya government support, they are right and should know that it does not matter which leader seats up State House Avenue, the handing over of Kenyans to the ICC will not happen and in the event of it happening, there will be those who will imagine nothing else but a witchhunt which in typical Kenyan format will lead to political fallout.
Kenya is a country of endless largess and when you are the leader, you do not give up power easily - example, how many of these our monkey leaders wanted to give up their fuel guzzlers for a VW Passat?
All I am preaching is realism!!! Kamale,I think you are too keen on makinig this an issue of perceived competing moral statae of the ICC versus African nations. I cannot fathom what motivates you. I will not be disappointed by the ICC because I have little expectations - in fact I have not stopped to think about any expectations from that end. What has the ability of the ICC in doing anything got to do with my questioning the logic of inviting a man whose presence only means trouble and nothing good? So what if he was elect by Sudan? Kenya is not part of Sudan. You said Mank
As for those who imagine that Ocampo holds little hope of Kenya government support, they are right and should know that it does not matter which leader seats up State House Avenue, ... I suspect you are right. I should point you to this, which I said earlier: ..... That is why I find it unbelievable that those in position to set the ball rolling seem either not to consider this as an atrocity on the law, or to be complacent.
|
|
|
Post by adongo23456 on Sept 3, 2010 0:33:50 GMT 3
Kamale,
I think we have all said as much as we could about the Bashir saga. One thing is certain, it ruined Kibaki's biggest event in his life time as a politician. The old man went out of his way to make this a big special day. He ended up with egg all over his face. He is not happy about it and I don't think he anticipated the reaction which has drowned out everything else from the big party.
The funding issue is a big deal. All these changes and little successes we have achieved after the 2007 debacle has been to a very big extent due to assistance from the Western countries which some love to vilify when they point at our nakedness and at the same time gobble money and support from. Those are the people who have sustained groups like CoE, even the treacherous TJRC, Waki Commission, Kriegler Commission, reforms in the Justice ministry etc. Free Primary Education would not even be a semi reality that it is today without the funds from the Western countries.
With the new shift we were really well placed to tap into that support and do a lot of good things. Now we need to work real hard to regain that confidence from them. It will be done. At least there are some sensible people in the country.
But the thing I wanted to tell you is that your hopes for Ocampo chaps in Kenya are misguided and not really helpful to the poor fellows. You assert with authority that those indicted by the ICC for crimes against humanity will not be handed over by Kibaki or whoever. I thought you would be very mad about that as a Kenyan. But you seem to celebrate that concept. That is your right, but let me say this. Once Ocampo indicts his boys whoever they may be, it really doesn't matter whether Kibaki grabs them and throw them to the cells in the Hague or keeps them in the country.
If Kibaki decides to protect ICC suspects after being indicted, something you seem to think is obvious, they will need to read the manual of survival as a fugitive from Filicien Kabuga. Those who support them need to dig them caves to jump in and out of from time to time. Kibaki will surely fire them from the cabinet. Kibaki will want to claim that he doesn't know where they are. It is going to be a living nightmare for Kibaki in his last years on this earth. Will it be worth it for him? I don't know. Will it be worth it for the boys to live as wanted international fugitives for the rest of their lives? I don't know.
But I know one thing. If any Kenyan is indicted by the ICC for crimes against humanity committed against the people of Kenya they will be history as far as the future of the country is concerned. Nobody can run Kenya from a cave. That much I know.
There is one big difference between the Bashir situation with the ICC and the Kenyan situation. Bashir was a head of state when he was indicted. In Kenya unless Kibaki is indicted by the ICC those indicted will not be running the country. It will be upto Kibaki and his co principal do decide whether they want to have a fight with the ICC and the UN to protect some fellas. That is a tough call and nothing is guaranteed.
adongo
|
|
|
Post by merlin on Sept 5, 2010 20:32:40 GMT 3
William Ruto tells the world that "the Cabinet was informed of the invitation of Sudan President Omar al-Bashir to the promulgation ceremony at Uhuru Park.” and “We should only accept the reality and forge ahead, ” www.standardmedia.co.ke/InsidePage.php?id=2000017678&cid=4&William Ruto is a clever (con) man. He does not say it was a Cabinet decision to invite Omar al-Bashir and give no indication when and how the Cabinet was informed of this visit. However he creates the impression that all the Cabinet ministers inclusive the PM and VP did know about the visit in advance. It could be a form of reconciliation or a call for Unity?
|
|
|
Post by job on Sept 5, 2010 22:06:10 GMT 3
And what does he say about ICC's invitation by the same government to set up a fortress in Nairobi?
|
|
|
Post by mank on Sept 5, 2010 23:03:18 GMT 3
For a man struggling to regain political relevance he should be commenting on the interface between Bashir's presence in the country on Aug. 27th and the law that was promulgated same day. Instead he is seeking relevance through the irrelevant and forced logic. He is trying to sound different from the other politicians yet being the same. Useless.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 6, 2010 1:08:15 GMT 3
[glow=red,2,300]"We should not do things and regret later. We should only accept the reality and forge ahead," said Ruto.[/glow]
I too had a particular reaction to the comments by Ruto; where he instructs Kenyans on how to ignore history even when it is most recent and egregious. Forget the insults big and small, forget too any and all atrocities because as we all know it benefits him and his ilk. OK Ruto, there is a little problem. And that is we are not that daft and ill informed.
Then as you say merlin, he tries to pass off the invitation to Bashir as having come from "The Cabinet". I did say that if Raila was involved in this it would make the let down that much worse. We already know what to expect all of the time from the other side right?
|
|
|
Post by kamalet on Sept 6, 2010 14:26:29 GMT 3
Kamale,I think we have all said as much as we could about the Bashir saga. One thing is certain, it ruined Kibaki's biggest event in his life time as a politician. The old man went out of his way to make this a big special day. He ended up with egg all over his face. He is not happy about it and I don't think he anticipated the reaction which has drowned out everything else from the big party. The funding issue is a big deal. All these changes and little successes we have achieved after the 2007 debacle has been to a very big extent due to assistance from the Western countries which some love to vilify when they point at our nakedness and at the same time gobble money and support from. Those are the people who have sustained groups like CoE, even the treacherous TJRC, Waki Commission, Kriegler Commission, reforms in the Justice ministry etc. Free Primary Education would not even be a semi reality that it is today without the funds from the Western countries. With the new shift we were really well placed to tap into that support and do a lot of good things. Now we need to work real hard to regain that confidence from them. It will be done. At least there are some sensible people in the country. But the thing I wanted to tell you is that your hopes for Ocampo chaps in Kenya are misguided and not really helpful to the poor fellows. You assert with authority that those indicted by the ICC for crimes against humanity will not be handed over by Kibaki or whoever. I thought you would be very mad about that as a Kenyan. But you seem to celebrate that concept. That is your right, but let me say this. Once Ocampo indicts his boys whoever they may be, it really doesn't matter whether Kibaki grabs them and throw them to the cells in the Hague or keeps them in the country. If Kibaki decides to protect ICC suspects after being indicted, something you seem to think is obvious, they will need to read the manual of survival as a fugitive from Filicien Kabuga. Those who support them need to dig them caves to jump in and out of from time to time. Kibaki will surely fire them from the cabinet. Kibaki will want to claim that he doesn't know where they are. It is going to be a living nightmare for Kibaki in his last years on this earth. Will it be worth it for him? I don't know. Will it be worth it for the boys to live as wanted international fugitives for the rest of their lives? I don't know. But I know one thing. If any Kenyan is indicted by the ICC for crimes against humanity committed against the people of Kenya they will be history as far as the future of the country is concerned. Nobody can run Kenya from a cave. That much I know. There is one big difference between the Bashir situation with the ICC and the Kenyan situation. Bashir was a head of state when he was indicted. In Kenya unless Kibaki is indicted by the ICC those indicted will not be running the country. It will be upto Kibaki and his co principal do decide whether they want to have a fight with the ICC and the UN to protect some fellas. That is a tough call and nothing is guaranteed. adongo Adongo I think any country that was going to fund any of the reform initiatives was going to do it on the basis of the national interest Kenya represents to them. Consequently the Bashir trip would be a lot more an excuse to walk away from commitments rather than the reasons! Even when governance was a good excuse to chop off aid, there are those other countries who still went ahead to provide that aid notwithstanding the problems of governance. A stable Kenya and a reformed Kenya is a lot more important to these guys and I am not convinced that Bashir being in Kenya is a sufficient REASON to withdraw any promised help. Unfortunately as none of us 'is those countries' we can only speculate!
|
|
|
Post by kamalet on Jun 15, 2015 9:17:11 GMT 3
How time flies!!! Nearly 5 years ago we were arguing about Bashir visiting Kenya for the promulgation of the new constitution. Today the whole world is talking about the visit of Bashir to South Africa for the AU summit. Bashir is this ICC Warrant escaping president of Sudan. The debate on the WWW is quite interesting and the #ICC and #Bashir have been trending quite a bit this weekent.
The debate is not different to the one we are having today. The ICC and Africa's interests.
What is really a shame is the impotence of the ICC in this whole saga and the lack of support it seems to get from Africa apart from the lip service that is purely diplomatic.
The fact that Bashir walks in and out of Pretoria notwithstanding a court order 'directing the government' to detain him until the matter is heard reminds me of the ruling by Justice Ombija (who is appealing the decision to declare him unfit to serve the judiciary) that Kenya should arrest Bashir if he sets foot in Kenya - the only difference in the case of SA being the application was heard when the Sudanese president was on the ground.
Perhaps even a bigger reason for the ICC to reform itself if after all these years it is not able to proceed with the Darfur case!!!
|
|