|
|
Post by b6k on Apr 9, 2013 17:04:26 GMT 3
Although I clearly heard M7, say at least 3 times, that the following was his " personal opinion" the DN seems to hint that he was "speaking on behalf of African leaders". That said, it is interesting to hear what he had to say about the ICC during Uhuru's inauguration:  Uganda's Museveni praises Kenya for rejecting ICC 'blackmail'
Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni congratulated Kenyans Tuesday for voting in Uhuru Kenyatta as Kenya's fourth president in defiance of his looming international trial for crimes against humanity. "I want to salute the Kenyan voters on...the rejection of the blackmail by the International Criminal Court (ICC) and those who seek to abuse this institution for their own agenda," he said at a speech following Kenyatta's taking of the the oath of office. Both Kenyatta and Vice President William Ruto both face trial at The Hague-based ICC for crimes against humanity for their alleged roles in orchestrating ethnic killings and widespread violence that followed 2007 polls. More than 1,100 people were murdered and several hundred thousand forced to flee their homes. Both Kenyatta and Ruto have rejected all charges but have said they will cooperate with the ICC. "I was one of those that supported the ICC because I abhor impunity," Museveni added, who said he was speaking on behalf of African leaders at Kenyatta's swearing-in ceremony in a crowded football stadium. "However the usual opiniated and arrogant actors using their careless and shallow analysis have now distorted the purpose of that institution. They are now using it to install leaders of their choice in Africa and eliminate the ones they do not like." He said the violence in 2007 was "regrettable and must be condemned", but said that a "legalistic process, especially an external one, however cannot address those events". Top leaders of Uganda's Lord's Resistance Army (LRA) rebels, fighting in the Central African Republic, South Sudan, Sudan, and the Democratic Republic of Congo, also face trial at the ICC. But Museveni said that Uganda had referred rebel chief Joseph Kony "to the ICC because he was operating outside of Uganda. Otherwise we would have handled him ourselves." www.nation.co.ke/News/politics/Ugandas-Museveni-praises-Kenya-for-rejecting-ICC-blackmail/-/1064/1743650/-/envd36/-/index.html |
|
|
|
Post by Daktari wa makazi on Apr 9, 2013 17:19:29 GMT 3
Shame he did not tell us about Kony - whom on his head the Americans have now put a bounty.
|
|
|
|
Post by b6k on Apr 9, 2013 17:27:24 GMT 3
Shame he did not tell us about Kony - whom on his head the Americans have now put a bounty. Actually he did, as quoted above (in the last sentence) with the flimsy reason that US soldiers can operate like doctors without borders while his mboys cannot....except in DRC ;D ;D ;D |
|
|
|
Post by b6k on Apr 9, 2013 22:50:05 GMT 3
|
|
OJ
New Member
Posts: 26
|
Post by OJ on Apr 9, 2013 23:25:16 GMT 3
M7's bashing of the ICC was completely uncalled for. The ICC did NOT come calling. We called the ICC to come and redeem the situation. With this in mind, it is completely incorrect to claim that certain 'individuals' are using the court to impose leaders. IF our politicians had agreed on the local tribunal, the tune would have been completely different.
For M7 to say that he 'abhors impunity', one only has to revisit the History of Uganda, and the heavy handed State machinery that is used to quiet opposition and stifle human rights. Here finally is an institution that cannot be manipulated for political gain. This is the antidote for impunity. The very existence of the court serves as a deterrent to others. M7 should be the first to support the court, unless he has something to fear the ICC for.
There is no need bashing an institution that you have entrusted with the responsibility to oversee something our own institutions were UN-able/willing to handle...(don't be vague, go to the Hague)...
This is the last chance at seeking justice for the victims of the great crimes. The ICC is their last beacon of hope. Let us leave it alone to handle it's/our business...
|
|
|
|
Post by tatyen on Apr 10, 2013 5:39:08 GMT 3
One only needs to look at how Museveni has treated Besigye to see what the man means about democracy and free will. For African leaders, self determination means the right to kill, maim and intimidate your own citizens without external interference. I must give credit to UhuRuto for the effectiveness of their propaganda machine in getting Kenyans to forget the true genesis of the ICC issue. I for one did not see a single American, Briton or indeed any european for that matter looting and killing kenyans during the 2007 post election violence. It was we Kenyans that did this to ourselves, and when the shit hit the fan we went running to the same Western countries to come and help us restore order. None other than William Ruto coined the phrase 'dont be vague, go to hague' and they got what they asked for.
I maintain that the ICC process is very essential particularly in the Kenyan Context. If only to rive home the message that impunity can no longer reign at the expense of the common citizen. Im my opinion UhuRuto should hold their peace and concentrate their efforts at fighting the court case where it matter the most - in the hague. If they are indeed innocent as they have so often protested, then they should have nothing to fear.
|
|
|
|
Post by OtishOtish on Apr 10, 2013 5:58:14 GMT 3
What a cheeky guy. (For today, we'll skip his very successful pleas to the Chief Imperialists, the USA, to help him catch Kony and his leading associates.) In fact, Museveni has been the world-leader in making referrals so that he could then try and use the court, although that only became apparent after he had referred the cases. Realizing that he was getting into hot soup, over Uganda's involvement in the DRC---the DRC, around that time filed a formal complaint with the International Court of Justice over the matter---he decided to get the ICC and others involved so that he could use their "mandate" to do what everyone does in the DRC (i.e. steal the mineral wealth) while claiming that he was just there looking for Kony. Museveni then went beyond that and tried to use the court in a way that has been widely discussed for (a) its crudeness, and (b) highlighting the fact that there are those who will try to use the court. It provided a useful lesson (which was learned) by the court, those who support it, those who study global-scale mischief, etc. There are many excellent commentaries on what Museveni tried to pull. The following is not the best but is what I can readily lay my hands on. In May [2006], however, Museveni appeared to offer Kony a friendly inducement, again demonstrating his proclivity to use the court for leverage, riding roughshod over the ICC's legal obligations. "The President said much as Kony and four of his cohorts had been indicted by the International Criminal Court, if he got serious about peaceful settlement, the Government of Uganda would guarantee him safety" (The New Vision, Uganda).
Chief Prosecutor Moreno Ocampo immediately responded, "The governments of Uganda, Sudan, and Democratic Republic of Congo are obligated to give effect to the arrest warrants, ..."
...
President Museveni appeared to regard the ICC's involvement as bargaining chip for his dealings with the LRA ... As a weak test of sovereignty versus supra-nationality, the Ugandan case showed that the court could attain a degree of at least symbolic independence, rejecting Museveni's claims that he could order the ICC warrants lifted.From: Negotiating Sovereignty and Human Rights: Actors and Issues in Contemporary Human Rights Politics, Edited by Noha Shawki and Michaelene Cox. After having been told to fwack off by the court and again told to fwack off by the LRA leaders (unless he got the ICC off their backs), Museveni then started his own version of "we need to bring home these cases", and in a way that shows he is full of it when he says he referred the cases to the ICC because the LRA was "operating outside Uganda". Mr. Museveni retreated from his blunt statement to the LRA leaders that they would "have to accept peace or be killed or be taken to the ICC" and started singing a new song---the "Bring Home The Cases" song. Museveni now claimed that the tribal elders of Uganda had prevailed upon him to insist on the type of "traditional justice"* that is practiced in Uganda ... the kind those wazungus don't understand (nothing to do with where Kony was): news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/7291274.stmKony and his friends never bought this idea of "bringing home the cases" so that they could be subjected to "traditional justice", which does not involve anything "punitive". They just kept at their kazi iendelee. So, doubling back real quick ... Museveni, after al his statemements that the Hague was not the right place, then goes back to they are international terrorists, the worst sort of the worst criminals, etc., etc., etc. They should be at the ICC. And would the "international community", led by the US, please do something. Since his attempt to use the ICC failed, Museveni seems to displeased with the court. Some time ago, I discussed LRA case with a Ugandan friend, and he was of the view that if Museveni's government and the LRA could reach an agreement that brought about peace and reconciliation, then the ICC should stay out. I argued that he was wrong. Given that we have already starting hearing similar stuff in the Kenyan cases, a few points are in order: The ICC is not in the reconciliation business. Its mandate is quite clear: to end to end impunity with respect to certain crimes, and that is to be done by charging those believed to be most responsible and punishing them if they are convicted.** Even in the ordinary case of Citizen X murders Citizen Y, a normal court will insist on some punishment, regardless of whether Citizen X is contrite, has been forgiven by the relatives of Citizen Y, etc. In such "normal cases", the normal path for Citizen X would be to apply for an early release from jail, perhaps with the support of whomever. But there must be punishment. Of course, reconciliation and peace etc. are important, and one hopes that they will happen in the Kenyan cases---real reconciliation, that is.*** But that is not what the ICC is about . Any reconciliation must be left to Kenyans themselves. The building of long-lasting peace must be left to Kenyans themselves. But those who bear the greatest responsibility for the PEV must be punished. If people feel that those heading to the Hague have brought about peace, reconciliation, etc., that's good. Nevertheless, they must still be tried; matters of justice are not decided on the basis of changing whims in a fickle public. And so the best thing to do would be to help them by making appropriate pre-sentencing submissions and asking the court for relatively short sentences. Anyway ... apart from the its two-faced nature, Museveni's "praise" remind me of a little story---probably apocryphal---that I once heard: Guy A is walking down the street and finds Guy B playing with a loaded gun, tossing it this way and that. "Be careful! You might hurt yourself!", the first guy yells. "And who the fwack are you to tell me what I should do? Mind your own bloody business, I am my own man!", responds Guy B. And he adds, "Just to show you what I think of your univited advice and to prove that I am in charge of myself, I'll even shoot myself in both feet!". Bang, bang. Puts a piece of lead through each foot. At this point, Guy C happens to be passing by, and he says to Guy B, "That's showing him, buddy! Good for you! People must be taught to keep out of others' affairs". I had to go home, so I never got to hear the end of the story ... but I think Guy A must have learned a very painful lesson. ______________________________________________________________________________ * This "traditional justice" has never been extended to the Matsanga we have come to know so well. It appears that there are still outstanding warrants for his arrest, in relation to three murders he allegedly help commit while working for the LRA. The law in question is mostly what Uganda inherited from those nasty colonialists. ** There are tens of thousands who were responsible for the 2007-2008 mayhem, and one would have hoped that they would be dealt with nationally---the government of Kenya, in its ICC Admissibility challenge, told lie after fantasy after lie in that regard---but, well, ... this is Kenya. *** We have had a "Truth, Justice and Reconciliation Commission of Kenya". As is usual with Kenyan "commissions", it has provided several years of solid "eating". This one even gave us an entertaining "bonus": notwithstanding its name, most of the commissioners' time and energy went into quarreling amongst themselves! Beyond that, they do not even understand their role: rather than take it to be a process, they seem to think that what is sought can be obtained by the issuing of a Final Report. |
|
emkei
New Member
Posts: 28
|
Post by emkei on Apr 10, 2013 7:55:07 GMT 3
There is a reason why there is an "I" in ICC acronym. The "International" means that the court's mandate cuts across all continents. That is easy to say until you take stock of all the cases that the court has handled since inception. All have targeted Africans. Have there been crimes committed in other continents that qualify to be "crimes against humanity"? Yes. Has ICC raised a finger about it? NO. Is it by chance that only Africans are being tried in ICC? NO.
Maybe Africans are still savages and the "whites" are their saviours. As expected our very own activists will wax lyrical supporting this form of skewed justice. I dont blame them, he who pays the piper..
|
|
|
|
Post by OtishOtish on Apr 10, 2013 15:01:48 GMT 3
There is a reason why there is an "I" in ICC acronym. The "International" means that the court's mandate cuts across all continents. That is easy to say until you take stock of all the cases that the court has handled since inception. All have targeted Africans. Have there been crimes committed in other continents that qualify to be "crimes against humanity"? Yes. Has ICC raised a finger about it? NO. Is it by chance that only Africans are being tried in ICC? NO. Targetting Africans? The majority of the Africans there were sent by their fellow Africans! See this, on another thread: HOW PEOPLE GOT TO THE ICC: DEMYSTIFYING THE "COURT TARGETS AFRICANS!" CLAIM:Cases: Joseph Kony, Vincent Otti, Okot Odhiambo and Dominic Ongwen* Referred to the court by the President of Uganda. (At the time no African countries complained.) Cases: Thomas Lubanga Dyilo, Germain Katanga, Bosco Ntaganda, Mathieu Ngudjolo Chui, Sylvestre Mudacumura* Ref erred to the court by the President of the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) (At the time no African countries complained.) Cases: Jean-Pierre Bemba Gombo * Referred to the court by the Government of the Central African Republic. (At the time no African countries complained.) Cases: Laurent Gbagbo, Simone Gbagbo* Prosecutor's initiative. But note that (a) Ivory Coast is not even a signatory to the statute, but it handed jurisdiction to the ICC, and (b) the Prosecutor took steps only after getting a letter from its president, with the specific request for "the assistance of the court in order to ensure that the perpetrators would not go unpunished". (At the time no African countries complained.) Cases: Saif Al-Islam Gaddafi, Abdullah Al-Senussi* Referred to the court by the UN Security Council. But note that, with the Libyan Government mounting an Admissibility challenge, the two are fighting hard to be sent to the Hague. (No African country is complaining about their request) Cases: Sudan* Referred to the court by the UN Security Council In the face numerous ongoing atrocities that we all know about. Cases: Kenya* Prosecutor's initiative. But we know of the process that started with Waki and ended with the infamous cry "Let's not be vague! Let's go to the Hague!" Cases: Mali* Referred to the court by the government of Mali. (No African country has complained about that.) Yes, it does seem that way. Shall we discuss the 5+ million dead in the Congo, the continuing rapes, mutilations, etc that are still going on there? As for "savious", all we need do is consider a very basic matter---the ability to feed oneself. How many times do people die from starvation during famine in Kenya? How many times do we fail to plan for drought and then wail to the "international community" to "do something" and save us? Look, Africa needs to be rid of the monsters that Africans call leaders. How that is done, whether it is "skewed", ... doesn't matter; it is to our benefit. Or are you suggesting that those monsters be left alone until others in other parts of the world are also caught? Rather that howls of "we are being targeted!", how about Africans themselves do something about the continuing dire state of African and Afrians? |
|
|
|
Post by podp on Apr 10, 2013 15:49:51 GMT 3
There is a reason why there is an "I" in ICC acronym. The "International" means that the court's mandate cuts across all continents. That is easy to say until you take stock of all the cases that the court has handled since inception. All have targeted Africans. Have there been crimes committed in other continents that qualify to be "crimes against humanity"? Yes. Has ICC raised a finger about it? NO. Is it by chance that only Africans are being tried in ICC? NO. Targetting Africans? The majority of the Africans there were sent by their fellow Africans! See this, on another thread: HOW PEOPLE GOT TO THE ICC: DEMYSTIFYING THE "COURT TARGETS AFRICANS!" CLAIM:Look, Africa needs to be rid of the monsters that Africans call leaders. How that is done, whether it is "skewed", ... doesn't matter; it is to our benefit. Or are you suggesting that those monsters be left alone until others in other parts of the world are also caught? Rather that howls of "we are being targeted!", how about Africans themselves do something about the continuing dire state of African and Afrians?red high light George Ayyiteh in 'Africa Unchained" says in part Common sense dictates looking both ways before crossing a street, or risk being hit by a truck. For decades, African leaders looked only one way, at "external factors": colonial legacies, the lingering effects of the slave trade, an unjust international economic system, and predatory practices of multi-national corporations, among others, to explain the miserable economic performance of the continent. A lot of studies have already been done about the external factors and it is no secret to say that these factors are beyond the control or manipulation of most African countries on an individual basis. It is therefore a MUST to make an unerring examination of all causative factors, both external and internal, in order to arrive at a lasting solution. “A big obstacle to economic growth in Africa is the tendency to put all blame, failures and shortcomings on outside forces. Progress might have been achieved if we had always tried first to remove the mote in our eyes” Oluwole Owoye and Nicole Bissessar have in their paper 'Bad Governance and Corruption in Africa: Symptoms of Leadership and Institutional Failure' study provides the empirical evidence which supports the argument that bad governance and corruption are symptoms of leadership and institutional failure in African countries. they find that leadership changes are either frequent or infrequent, and in both cases, these leaders prefer to govern where institutions are very weak or do not exist, so that they will not be accountable for their corrupt behavior and abuse of office. With the absence of effective checks and balances, corruption continues unabated over the past four or more decades. From visual inspection of corruption data for the continent, they observe that many countries transitioned into highly-corrupt nation-states in recent years. their empirical results confirm not only the weaknesses of these institutions in controlling corruption but also the lingering effects of institutionalized corruption in many African countries. |
|
|
|
Post by mugabe on Apr 10, 2013 17:54:41 GMT 3
There is a reason why there is an "I" in ICC acronym. The "International" means that the court's mandate cuts across all continents. That is easy to say until you take stock of all the cases that the court has handled since inception. All have targeted Africans. Have there been crimes committed in other continents that qualify to be "crimes against humanity"? Yes. Has ICC raised a finger about it? NO. Is it by chance that only Africans are being tried in ICC? NO. Why even bother educate some of this people? It is a waste of times. The definition of a troll Targetting Africans? The majority of the Africans there were sent by their fellow Africans! See this, on another thread: HOW PEOPLE GOT TO THE ICC: DEMYSTIFYING THE "COURT TARGETS AFRICANS!" CLAIM:Cases: Joseph Kony, Vincent Otti, Okot Odhiambo and Dominic Ongwen* Referred to the court by the President of Uganda. (At the time no African countries complained.) Cases: Thomas Lubanga Dyilo, Germain Katanga, Bosco Ntaganda, Mathieu Ngudjolo Chui, Sylvestre Mudacumura* Ref erred to the court by the President of the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) (At the time no African countries complained.) Cases: Jean-Pierre Bemba Gombo * Referred to the court by the Government of the Central African Republic. (At the time no African countries complained.) Cases: Laurent Gbagbo, Simone Gbagbo* Prosecutor's initiative. But note that (a) Ivory Coast is not even a signatory to the statute, but it handed jurisdiction to the ICC, and (b) the Prosecutor took steps only after getting a letter from its president, with the specific request for "the assistance of the court in order to ensure that the perpetrators would not go unpunished". (At the time no African countries complained.) Cases: Saif Al-Islam Gaddafi, Abdullah Al-Senussi* Referred to the court by the UN Security Council. But note that, with the Libyan Government mounting an Admissibility challenge, the two are fighting hard to be sent to the Hague. (No African country is complaining about their request) Cases: Sudan* Referred to the court by the UN Security Council In the face numerous ongoing atrocities that we all know about. Cases: Kenya* Prosecutor's initiative. But we know of the process that started with Waki and ended with the infamous cry "Let's not be vague! Let's go to the Hague!" Cases: Mali* Referred to the court by the government of Mali. (No African country has complained about that.) Yes, it does seem that way. Shall we discuss the 5+ million dead in the Congo, the continuing rapes, mutilations, etc that are still going on there? As for "savious", all we need do is consider a very basic matter---the ability to feed oneself. How many times do people die from starvation during famine in Kenya? How many times do we fail to plan for drought and then wail to the "international community" to "do something" and save us? Look, Africa needs to be rid of the monsters that Africans call leaders. How that is done, whether it is "skewed", ... doesn't matter; it is to our benefit. Or are you suggesting that those monsters be left alone until others in other parts of the world are also caught? Rather that howls of "we are being targeted!", how about Africans themselves do something about the continuing dire state of African and Afrians? |
|
emali
Full Member
Posts: 219
|
Post by emali on Apr 10, 2013 20:49:42 GMT 3
There is a reason why there is an "I" in ICC acronym. The "International" means that the court's mandate cuts across all continents. That is easy to say until you take stock of all the cases that the court has handled since inception. All have targeted Africans. Have there been crimes committed in other continents that qualify to be "crimes against humanity"? Yes. Has ICC raised a finger about it? NO. Is it by chance that only Africans are being tried in ICC? NO. Targetting Africans? The majority of the Africans there were sent by their fellow Africans! See this, on another thread: HOW PEOPLE GOT TO THE ICC: DEMYSTIFYING THE "COURT TARGETS AFRICANS!" CLAIM:Cases: Joseph Kony, Vincent Otti, Okot Odhiambo and Dominic Ongwen* Referred to the court by the President of Uganda. (At the time no African countries complained.) Cases: Thomas Lubanga Dyilo, Germain Katanga, Bosco Ntaganda, Mathieu Ngudjolo Chui, Sylvestre Mudacumura* Ref erred to the court by the President of the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) (At the time no African countries complained.) Cases: Jean-Pierre Bemba Gombo * Referred to the court by the Government of the Central African Republic. (At the time no African countries complained.) Cases: Laurent Gbagbo, Simone Gbagbo* Prosecutor's initiative. But note that (a) Ivory Coast is not even a signatory to the statute, but it handed jurisdiction to the ICC, and (b) the Prosecutor took steps only after getting a letter from its president, with the specific request for "the assistance of the court in order to ensure that the perpetrators would not go unpunished". (At the time no African countries complained.) Cases: Saif Al-Islam Gaddafi, Abdullah Al-Senussi* Referred to the court by the UN Security Council. But note that, with the Libyan Government mounting an Admissibility challenge, the two are fighting hard to be sent to the Hague. (No African country is complaining about their request) Cases: Sudan* Referred to the court by the UN Security Council In the face numerous ongoing atrocities that we all know about. Cases: Kenya* Prosecutor's initiative. But we know of the process that started with Waki and ended with the infamous cry "Let's not be vague! Let's go to the Hague!" Cases: Mali* Referred to the court by the government of Mali. (No African country has complained about that.) Yes, it does seem that way. Shall we discuss the 5+ million dead in the Congo, the continuing rapes, mutilations, etc that are still going on there? As for "savious", all we need do is consider a very basic matter---the ability to feed oneself. How many times do people die from starvation during famine in Kenya? How many times do we fail to plan for drought and then wail to the "international community" to "do something" and save us? Look, Africa needs to be rid of the monsters that Africans call leaders. How that is done, whether it is "skewed", ... doesn't matter; it is to our benefit. Or are you suggesting that those monsters be left alone until others in other parts of the world are also caught? Rather that howls of "we are being targeted!", how about Africans themselves do something about the continuing dire state of African and Afrians? Excellent Rejoinder ;D |
|
|
|
Post by jakaswanga on Apr 10, 2013 22:37:01 GMT 3
[Rather that howls of "we are being targeted!", how about Africans themselves do something about the continuing dire state of African and Africans? Otishotish, Perhaps you come from law school and legal practice so you just look at the important men only. Afrika is a theater of brutal struggle and Africans, ordinary Africans are battling everyday for their futures. It takes real terror to keep them in check. You saw yourself at Marikana mines, South Afrika, where a NEW UNION HAD ORGANISED THE MOST WRETCHED OF LABOURERS. Jacob Zuma and Cyril Ramaphosa had them shot like wild animals. It is all on Camera. No much to you, but that is how the struggle goes. Piece meal. Bloody. Do you know how many people have stood up against Paul Kagame and paid the price of death? THEY ARE UNREPORTED, but they are there. Matyrs to freedom. ---You will catch your fellow lawyer Obama listing all the Israelis killed by Palestinians, but you will never catch him acknowledge a single torture victim of Museveni, or you name one of his golden boys in Afrika! Nigeria: actually when Obasanjo and co rigged the elections for the corpse Yar'Adua, there was a mutiny by a brigade that did not want to do their part in the charade. Moral dissent. Crushed to death. Not reported --Obasanjo is an elder statesman who commands respect. But those Nigerians had had enough of nonsense elections, and paid the full price. Small, but there it is, adding their blood as building block to the moral regeneration of their land. The hidden Afrika. You saw how Museveni after rigging his elections, deployed his army in Kampala --instead of looking for Brother Kony in the bush! and Besigye half-blind, ran to Kenya for treatment. That is the struggle. Not much to you. But these unreported piecemeal efforts is the slow progress of what Africans are doing to take hold of their future. Watch the price they pay. Idris Deby of Chad, I gathered mowed down a college of demonstrating students. High oil production and prices, but no equipment in schools, nor freedom to question priorities. Afrika, that it is not the regular news, does not mean people are not fighting the good war. The forces of terror are overwhelming currently, but ordinary men and women are out there, dying for the things they believe in. ---What are Africans doing you ask? I suggest one be wary of ever belittling them. There is a war out there. A real war between the opressed and the opressors. Damn you never saw it! |
|
|
|
Post by tatyen on Apr 10, 2013 23:02:29 GMT 3
OtishOtish,
Thank you for that brilliant demolition of Emkeis flawed argument against the ICC. I have always maintained that as Africans, we set our standards way too low. Like Crabs in a bucket, we are unwilling to let anyone sensible rise to the top. Western countries as much as we may demonize them in the name of self-determination, have a whole lot of things going on for them. One of these is the rule of law. Get onto google right now and you will find several instances where European ministers and even presidents have been forced to resign over 'scandals' that no African minister in his 'right mind' would consider serious enough to merit a national conversation. Just this year, the German minister for research and technology Annette Schavan resigned following accusations of plagarising sections of her PHD research thesis. In 2011 the British Defense minister resigned after it emerged that he had allowed a good friend, the best man at his wedding to accompany him on a foreign trip payed for with tax payers money. In 2012 Pal Schmitt, the Hungarian President was also forced to resign after accusations of plagiarizing huge sections of his doctorate thesis. In France Budget Minister Jerome Cahuzac was forced to resign after investigations were launched into an undeclared Swiss Bank account held in his name, and of course we all remember Bill clinton's near impeachment after he lied to the nation about his relationship with Monica Lewinsky.
The point i am trying to get at here is that in these mature democracies, your word counts for something as a politician, and the electorate holds you to account for it. The very moment that public trust in you is breached, the sensible thing to do is to resign.
Now let us contrast this with Africa, where crimes as heinous as rape, murder and forcible transfer of entire populations, are excellent grounds on which to launch a presidential campaign. Where instituting genocide against a section of your citizens like Bashir is doing in Sudan can be defended as exercising your right to national sovereignty. Where unleashing your security goons to beat up opposition leaders and intimidate them into silence like Museveni is doing to Besigye, can be euphemised 'robust democracy'. Where bringing down the economy of an entire country and plunging an entire generation of young Zimbabweans into abject poverty, is a fair price to pay for 'our right' to self determination. Where raping your best friends HIV infected daughter and not even bothering to wear a condom, like Zuma did in South Africa can be construed as a sign of your virility and ability to conquer even death itself. Where looting your county's oil wealth as succesive Nigerian heads of state have done, while leaving the general population in languid squalor is considered your patriotic duty. Shall i continue?
This is what leadership has come to exemplify in Africa - a bunch of greedy, morally corrupt self serving thieves, that ride on the backs of their own hard working citizens with no moral compunction like it is their God given right to do so - and then you wonder why African countries are still 'developing' when the Asian countries like South Korea, Malaysia and Indonesia with whom we stood on equal footing at our independence have growing into economic superpowers. This is why we need the ICC in Africa now more than ever, because there has to be integrity in leadership before a country can truly prosper. Without it all that is left is despair and all the manifest evils that follow in its wake.
This moral corruption of the political class is also infecting the general population. In countries like Nigeria, corruption has been institutionalized to a point where that very nationality is synonymous with crime. And look at kenya - look at how matatus drive on our roads, look at how government hospitals operate on bribery, look at how even basic services like water and sanitation are denied to the majority who live in slums when our so called leaders grow fantastically wealthy! At its heart the ICC is one of our biggest weapons in the fight for the very soul of Kenya. Because if we succumb to the 'peace at all costs' brigade and withdraw the charges at this point, we will be sending the message to an entire generation of our children, that impunity is to be rewarded with even greater power - needless to say, the country will be lost forever!
|
|
|
|
Post by OtishOtish on Apr 11, 2013 1:30:57 GMT 3
[Rather that howls of "we are being targeted!", how about Africans themselves do something about the continuing dire state of African and Africans? Otishotish, Perhaps you come from law school and legal practice so you just look at the important men only. Afrika is a theater of brutal struggle and Africans, ordinary Africans are battling everyday for their futures. It takes real terror to keep them in check. You saw yourself at Marikana mines, South Afrika, where a NEW UNION HAD ORGANISED THE MOST WRETCHED OF LABOURERS. Jacob Zuma and Cyril Ramaphosa had them shot like wild animals. It is all on Camera. No much to you, but that is how the struggle goes. Piece meal. Bloody. Do you know how many people have stood up against Paul Kagame and paid the price of death? THEY ARE UNREPORTED, but they are there. Matyrs to freedom. ---You will catch your fellow lawyer Obama listing all the Israelis killed by Palestinians, but you will never catch him acknowledge a single torture victim of Museveni, or you name one of his golden boys in Afrika! Nigeria: actually when Obasanjo and co rigged the elections for the corpse Yar'Adua, there was a mutiny by a brigade that did not want to do their part in the charade. Moral dissent. Crushed to death. Not reported --Obasanjo is an elder statesman who commands respect. But those Nigerians had had enough of nonsense elections, and paid the full price. Small, but there it is, adding their blood as building block to the moral regeneration of their land. The hidden Afrika. You saw how Museveni after rigging his elections, deployed his army in Kampala --instead of looking for Brother Kony in the bush! and Besigye half-blind, ran to Kenya for treatment. That is the struggle. Not much to you. But these unreported piecemeal efforts is the slow progress of what Africans are doing to take hold of their future. Watch the price they pay. Idris Deby of Chad, I gathered mowed down a college of demonstrating students. High oil production and prices, but no equipment in schools, nor freedom to question priorities. Afrika, that it is not the regular news, does not mean people are not fighting the good war. The forces of terror are overwhelming currently, but ordinary men and women are out there, dying for the things they believe in. ---What are Africans doing you ask? I suggest one be wary of ever belittling them. There is a war out there. A real war between the opressed and the opressors. Damn you never saw it! Jakaswanga: I'm going to skip the "emotional" and "dangerous" words like "belittling. My point is this: Sure, the world is unfair; most nations care only for their interests. But if one looks at the worst that is happening to Africans, it's being done by Africans. That's what I'm calling on Africans to stop---the doers to stop the doing, and the the done-to to do whatever is necessary to stop the former. Let's take Kenya as our case study for today. There are about 18 million Kenyans eligible to vote. Of those about 14 million registered to vote. Of the 14 million, 12 million actually voted. And then just about everyone voted along tribal lines, with little regard to the issues, which even the politicians hardly bothered with. So who gets the blame when Kenya continues to go to the dogs and if the election of ICC criminals backfires? Whose responsibility is it when we end up with Sonko as a senator, Kabogo as a governor, and the MPs first action is working on more money for themselves? I recognize the struggles you mention, but "piece-meal" and "blood" are not strictly necessary. When I say Africans should take charge of their own fate, I include the 6 million "missing" Kenyans, and I appeal to them to be more "proactive". I also appeal to all Kenyans to educate themselves on the relevant issues and to exercise their democratic rights accordingly. We do not need "bloody" in order to tackle thinks like tribalism and corruption in Kenya. Think of all the things Kenyans have been excited about in the period leading up to the elections. Was food security a major issue? People got excited about laptops for school kids while forgetting the little matter that the physical and brain development of about 1/3 of Kenyan children are stunted due to malnutrition. So we'll have dirty, starving kids, covered with flies, dying from all sorts of easily preventable diseases, jiggers eating them alive ... but they will have laptops. Then there's "dull" but necessary thins like the provision of clean drinking water. And 14 million Kenyans can't literally sh*it right: www.the-star.co.ke/news/article-113565/lack-latrines-costs-kenya-sh27-billion-every-year But for kenyans it's "our man!" and "eating". The very people who paid a heavy price for the freedom Kenyans enjoy today have now been turned into "the evil society", by Kenyan "leaders" and a segment of Kenyan society. And so on, and so forth, If Kenya goes backwards, who would be to blame? Are Kenyans and their "leaders" doing what they should be doing for Kenya and Kenyans? All these are problems that can be sorted out without "bloody". The fundamental changes required in, say, Kenya, do not require "blood"; what they require is a fundamental change in Kenyans. So, to narrow my "call": Kenyans ought stop complaining about the outside world and start taking care of Kenya and Kenyans. And, extrapolating from Kenya, this sort of situation is repeated, to varying degrees, in many parts of Africa. The rest of the world has its own problems; it's time for Africa to start taking care of the ones it has. What's more, a great deal can be done without "blood" and "revolution". Where, for example, people have some say in the who will lead them, then even just voting properly can be a very significant doing-something. |
|
emkei
New Member
Posts: 28
|
Post by emkei on Apr 11, 2013 9:40:25 GMT 3
A popular forklore story narrated to children has it that once upon a time, the hare and the hyena made a pact that they would go home to beat their nagging wives. The cunning hare went home and furiously beat a drum while the hyena fearing to be undone, and assuming that the drum beats were wails of hare's wife, mercilessly battered his wife to death.
The reasoning of some amongst us have suprisingly striking resemblance to the hyena of yore. I rest my case.
Emkei
|
|
