|
|
Post by OtishOtish on May 27, 2013 19:51:42 GMT 3
"Honourables", "Excellencies", "Great Chiefs", Annointeds of God", Etc.:
Targetting Africans? Sure you did your homework on that one?
HOW PEOPLE GOT TO THE ICC:
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
* Referred 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 at the time was 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.)
While African countries have been wailing about being targeted and threatening mass withdrawals, Ivory Coast just joined the ICC two months ago. Looks like somebody forgot to send them that this-is-a-colonial-court memo. ]
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. (The South Sudanese have a new-and-improved attitude, but they were very supportive of that ICC move).
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!"
In particular, note that in its Admissibility challenges of 2011, the Government of Kenya explicitly stated that it invited the OTP Prosecutor to open an investigation in Kenya. What say you on that invitation to be targeted? Not very bright, was it?
Cases: Mali
* Referred to the court by the government of Mali. (No African country has complained about that.)
"Honourables", "Excellencies", "Great Chiefs", Annointeds of God", Etc.:
I hear that you are now ready for another mass withdrawal. I heard that in 2009, over Bashir case. I heard it again in 2011, over the Uhuru/Ruto cases. And now, here we are again. Two-year alarm set on the great AU clock?
Anyways .... here is a question: If indeed the issue is that there are "too many Africans" at the court, why is it that we never hear from you on the other Africans at the court? The ones who are no longer connected to power. When has the AU meetings ever taken up their cases? Surely, Gbagbo, Bemba and others too would appreciate misplaced howls calls for their cases to be "brought back home".
"Honourables", "Excellencies", "Great Chiefs", Annointeds of God", Etc.:
I understand that you have "African solutions" for "African problems". Excellent; that's the African spirit. I can only imagine that the dire state of the continent is because no problems have been brought to your attention. Allow me to help, by providing a partial list of "African problems" that could do with your "African solutions":
1. Starvation and malnutrition on a large scale.
2. All sorts of diseases, many of which can easily be prevented, "finishing" the people.
3. Endless corruption and theft of national resources on a huge scale, mostly carried out by you.
4. Numerous atrocities committed upon civilians, mostly by you and your "security" forces.
5. Grinding poverty that kills even the strongest spirits.
6. Hopelessly sub-standard healthcare, housing, infrastructure, etc.
7. Wars, coups, and suchlike mayhem, all seemingly without end. (That's how some of you got where you are today.)
8. Staggering youth unemployment, a ticking time-bomb.
How's that for a start? Feel free to start African-solving whenever you are ready. To be continued ... same time next year, or should we wait for the next mass withdrawal in 2015 (as per the two-year clock-alarm)?
|
|
|
|
Post by OtishOtish on May 28, 2013 6:21:52 GMT 3
We'll skip the very large contributions to peacekeeping missions and related AU-supported programs and look directly at monies to the AU itself. * The 2013 AU budget (approved in mid-2012) was for about $277 million. * Of that $122 million (44%) is supposed to come from AU members. * $155 million (56%) is expected to be "aid" from "donors".* Almost all of contributions from the AU member states will be eaten up in operational costs. * Almost all programme costs will be paid for by the "donor aid". (NEPAD, Pan African Parliament, etc,.) These are hardly grounds for tough talk about "sovereignty" and "African solutions". One hopes that the AU will work towards talking from more solid foundations if it expects to be taken seriously. 2014 budget: "The financial independence of the AU, launched in 1963 as the Organisation for African Unity (OAU) before being renamed in 2002, has been a source of controversy for a long time, as much of its working budget is financed by foreign donors"www.aljazeera.com/news/africa/2013/05/201352412928567270.html |
|
|
|
Post by kamalet on May 28, 2013 11:24:18 GMT 3
Arguments on how the cases got to the court is a tired one. And I do not even think that is the issue that the AU has with the court.
The problem appears to be the arrogance of the court and its unwillingness to address other areas of humanity crimes committed or still being committed that the court has not bothered to follow with the same gusto as it has done with the African. That is the issue I think that arouses these complaints.
6 millions voters in a majority of votes elected two men to lead them. unfortunately, in a time of what is deemed the African renaissance time, we also have the two guys in court in trumped up charges (as many now believe). So rather than the two taking up their positions to address the problems of the continent as Otishotish lists out, they are now forced to deal with the court's arrogant processes. It is inevitable that the continent will see this process as a distraction to the aims of that renaissance. Kenyans were fully aware of these charges when electing the two to lead them, but they did not expect the court process to be a distraction to the leadership they wanted. We may want to be critical to the AU for the resolution, but we need to see the AU as aligning itself to the will of the Kenyan people.
Which is why this Otishotish campaign is misplaced and surprising. He chose to be closer to the Polynesians than to the African when he disowned his motherland in March!! So do kindly let us the Africans determine our destiny!
|
|
|
|
Post by sindbad on May 28, 2013 13:24:24 GMT 3
Kamale,
Similarly, 6M people voting for two indictees is an equally tired statement for a country that has moved on!
The issue is about taking responsibility and not all this irrelevant arguments you are making. As long as we insist on conducting our affairs in the same manner as this, we should not expect any respect from anywhere and the West will continue to load matters over us and appear arrogant. Even the East, who readily do business with us are in it for what they get, seriously exploiting the opportunities we manage poorly.
Talk about the will of the people, funded by who? It is like the guy who borrows your money to go and drink and his children are being sent away from school for non payment of fees yet they still feel you should not question their behavior.
The Hague/ICC is no longer as significant as the revolutionary transformational and independent thinking that Kenyans require to engage in, otherwise 50 years from today we might still be having these unproductive arguments you present.
|
|
|
|
Post by OtishOtish on May 28, 2013 16:08:02 GMT 3
"We are being targetted!". But nobody wants to look at the facts behind that claim. "We are sovereign and independent!". But just about everybody, including the AU!, requires handouts. Truth is awkward, eh? 6 millions voters in a majority of votes elected two men to lead them. The support Hitler got from the German public was way beyond the figures you give. New Kenyan criminal law: anyone who gets elected to any kind of office---village elder, town councilor, ..., MP, Senator, President---is henceforth granted immunity for any crimes they committed prior to their elections. So African leaders will not deal with the problems in their own countries because they are concerned about Uhuru and Ruto? Wow. I wonder what their populace think of that. How is that possible when Africa is always going to the world with cap in hand. In any case, please note that in " crimes against humanity" the key word is " humanity", and, as far as I can tell, Africans too are humans. That is why other humans in the rest of the world insist that their leaders not be free to slaughter them like chickens and will not leave them alone (as you demand). Still, you are heading in the right general direction: As I have said before, Africa and Africans will get ahead only when Africans get serious about taking care of Africa and Africans. So far, there are no signs of that happening. |
|
|
|
Post by OtishOtish on May 28, 2013 16:13:47 GMT 3
It is like the guy who borrows your money to go and drink and his children are being sent away from school for non payment of fees yet they still feel you should not question their behavior. A guy begs you for money saying he is desperate. You give him some. Instead of using it to buy seeds to plant, repair his house, buy medicine, clothe his children... he used it to by pangas and changaa, gets drunk, attacks his wife and children, ... Then the next week he is back again: I have no food, no medicine, my wife and children are injured, please lend me some more money. He keeps doing this week after week. When you question him about it he angrily responds that you should mind your own business and respect him as an equal. Really. |
|
|
|
Post by kamalet on May 28, 2013 16:45:25 GMT 3
Otishotish/Sinbad
Why not keep within the topic? The issue the AU has is not with the donors but with the court, hence your argument of drinking borrowed money is neither here nor there. Unless of course you are suggesting that merely because you lent me money it gives you a right to sleep with my wife. Whether the court is a tool of the west or not is the issue here. It is simply an accusation of targeted prosecutions as we are dealing with now.
The truth and fact is that Hitler only started gassing the Jews after he had been elected. He was not elected after the murder of the Jews in Germany and Poland. Uhuru and Ruto were elected by a smaller number of 6 million after they were alleged to have raped and killed people. Spot the difference?
|
|
|
|
Post by OtishOtish on May 28, 2013 17:00:16 GMT 3
Otishotish/Sinbad Why not keep within the topic? The issue the AU has is not with the donors but with the court, hence your argument of drinking borrowed money is neither here nor there. It is relevant because the AU "issues" with the court is just one more example of misplaced priorities. It also goes to the heart of arguments that "we are independent, sovereign and can handle our own affairs"---the ICC is involved precisely because African countries have failed to handle their own affairs, e.g. in dealing with their monsters. I know these are points that people don't want to hear; but there they are, and the whole world sees them. Unless of course you are suggesting that merely because you lent me money it gives you a right to sleep with my wife. Whether the court is a tool of the west or not is the issue here. It is simply an accusation of targeted prosecutions as we are dealing with now. So your argument is that if you commit atrocities before you get elected, then it's OK? Anyway, my point is that saying they got so many votes, therefore ... just won't fly. Crimes are to be adjudicated in court and the "popularity" of the person is irrelevant. Look, some African monsters have been caught for once. Let us support the court and quietly let it get on with its work. We should also express our gratitude for its actions, which, among other things, have ensured that for once Kenya had peaceful elections. |
|
|
|
Post by kamalet on May 28, 2013 17:13:35 GMT 3
For the sake of clarity, I think the court needs to remain a credible institution that the world can look up to for justice. Today that court is looked upon its disdain by Africans its even an introduction of racism as a charge against it. But with all that is going against it, suppose as you suggest we let the process run its full course; should it turn out that the three indictees were not guilty after all, will this be the justice that the victims whom you pretend to cry for we're looking? My answer to the question is No. The court will have wasted all those years and failed the Kenyan victim.
With all the criticism the court is getting, perhaps it is time for it to take stock of its performance and decide if it is doing the right thing. It needs to find a way of restoring its own credibility in the eyes of many including the AU.
|
|
|
|
Post by OtishOtish on May 28, 2013 17:25:02 GMT 3
For the sake of clarity, I think the court needs to remain a credible institution that the world can look up to for justice. Today that court is looked upon its disdain by Africans its even an introduction of racism as a charge against it. The only people who look at it with disdain are the African "leaders", many of whom should be in the dock at the court. Other Africans---who have been raped, tortured, had their relatives and friends massacred, etc.---have no problems with the court. Regardless, no amount of "disdain", from wherever, is going to move the court; monsters have been caught and need to face justice. The charge of racism is so absurd it requires no comment. As for the outcome of the trials, let's wait and see. In the meantime, join me in thanking the court for ensuring that Kenya for once had peaceful elections. Even Ruto, who has specialized in electoral violence since 1992, behaved himself this time. |
|
|
|
Post by jakaswanga on May 28, 2013 18:01:37 GMT 3
For the sake of clarity, I think the court needs to remain a credible institution that the world can look up to for justice. Today that court is looked upon its disdain by Africans its even an introduction of racism as a charge against it. The only people who look at it with disdain are the African "leaders", many of whom should be in the dock at the court. Other Africans---who have been raped, tortured, had their relatives and friends massacred, etc.---have no problems with the court. Regardless, no amount of "disdain", from wherever, is going to move the court; monsters have been caught and need to face justice. The charge of racism is so absurd it requires no comment. As for the outcome of the trials, let's wait and see. In the meantime, join me in thanking the court for ensuring that Kenya for once had peaceful elections. Even Ruto, who has specialized in electoral violence since 1992, behaved himself this time. Otishotish/Kamalet, I like the back and forth between the two of you escalating here, because it captures the essence of a very fundamental point. The two, according to me, irreconcillable world views of the African situation. And I am afraid it will not be resolved in a civilised manner. When that Ethiopian goon of a prime Minister, Hailemariam Desalegn is his difficult name I think, stated officially the court is racist, he placed himself outside rational logic. When a man does that, he sets the stage for a brutal clash with reality. When a man is in power, he has the authority, in the person of the security forces, to sustain illusions for a while, running a regime of falsehoods by force. But the crash is inevitable. Not because of the ICC court, but the desire for justice from the own people. It is because these AU leaders have placed themselves to block the path of African justice that they have become a tragic lot. Musenjini, Uhuru Kenyatta's greatest defender at the summit, is a man trying to impose his own son on Uganda, as he tries to discredit a long-standing comrade [ Historical Sejusa]. And how many elections has he rigged ---terrorising Besigye, and now closing down a prominent newspaper!? That is a man the future left behind long ago. He speaks for a dead Africa. Yoweri Museveni is an intellectual corpse. But dangerous because he is all ebola!I think there is a sh!tstorm out there on the horizon! too much stupidity begets sh!t. AU should have resolved to initiate proceeding to WITHDRAW FROM THE ROME STATUTE! That is the measure of seriousness, Kamalet.Now we have to explain why our own President is so fain to cooperate with a RACIST DISCREDITED COURT IN THE WHITEMAN'S LAND! He just lacks the guts to say: I am HE the sovereign of Kenya! fuwak the colonial racist court! But there is a blues song which goes: words come easy, deeds make me queasy!
Pardon me if I stand easy --and I aint gonna do no nothin' at all!Guy could have been singing about the AU and the ICC! |
|
|
|
Post by OtishOtish on May 28, 2013 18:12:05 GMT 3
AU should have resolved to initiate proceeding to WITHDRAW FROM THE ROME STATUTE! That is the measure of seriousness. Jakaswanga: Think of Satruday night at Mama Mboga's as the tots of chang'aa go down. There is plenty of tough talk---men discipline their wives, take no nonsense from the boss at work, etc. Then they go home and cower in front of the wife and on Monday there is no end to sucking up to the boss. Nobody will be withdrawing from the ICC. The tough-talk summit is over, and everyone has gone home; life to continue as usual, with the AU seeking "donor funding" to plug a volcano-sized hole in its budget. |
|
|
|
Post by jakaswanga on May 28, 2013 18:13:34 GMT 3
Otishotish,
Maybe your remember Lady Carla del'Ponte --the swiss judge who was doing the Yugoslav trial in the main. There is a time Serbs complained the court was bias against them, arresting majorly serbs and ignoring Kroats and Bosnian Muslims, and Albanians!
Carla quipped! Jesus Christ Belgrade! My hands are full of Serbs! help me out, arrest these Croat, Bosinian and Albanian fugitives for me and bring them to me! ---and she narrated the fugitive men from those areas! ---Hurry up, don't wait for Mother Carla to do everything for you! Cry babies!
|
|
|
|
Post by jakaswanga on May 28, 2013 18:22:00 GMT 3
The tough-talk summit is over, and everyone has gone home; life to continue as usual, with the AU seeking "donor funding" to plug a volcano-sized hole in its budget.The king of kings is dead! what a pity, he used to bail out the AU every now and again. Sometimes inviting heads of state to his room to dish out the goodies in material form! All for glory. China is different: they drive such a hard bargain Uhuru Kenyatta is running scared! You know they built that $250M conference hall for free. So it is possible the African Union hostility to the ICC is China's standpoint. China does not want the ICC in Tibet! I have been asking myself why the Ethiopian head of state could afford to be a moron in public, calling the court racist. Can not be his mind he is speaking! i will bet my d!k on that! He was a mere mindless puppet being controlled by remote! |
|
|
|
Post by OtishOtish on May 28, 2013 18:22:18 GMT 3
Eyes on the ball, by Judge Eboe-Osuji
"The judicial eyes must at all times remain on the ball, in spite of it all. In the circumstances of the present case, the ball comprises these matters for inquiry: many lives were lost in the post-election violence that was perpetrated in Kenya at the end of 2007 and the beginning of 2008; much trauma was occasioned to many more bodies and minds; and, the violence had a deliberate purpose of malevolence. The processes of this Court have come to be the only known penal judicial inquiry into the events, for purposes of individual accountability for any resulting crimes within the jurisdiction of this Court."
|
|
|
|
Post by OtishOtish on May 28, 2013 18:34:03 GMT 3
The king of kings is dead! what a pity, he used to bail out the AU every now and again. Of the total contribution by members to the AU budget, about two-thirds have always come from just 5 or 6 countries. (Some have not paid their dues in years but are happy to attend the tough-talk sessions.) Anyway ... the Kolonel's was one of the 5 or 6, so you can see how things are. Speaking of free buildings, here's another (with local construction companies doing the work!): addisababaonline.com/african-union-peace-and-security-building-to-start-soon-for-completion-by-2012/ |
|
|
|
Post by jakaswanga on May 28, 2013 18:34:31 GMT 3
For the sake of clarity, I think the court needs to remain a credible institution that the world can look up to for justice. Today that court is looked upon its disdain by Africans its even an introduction of racism as a charge against it. But with all that is going against it, suppose as you suggest we let the process run its full course; should it turn out that the three indictees were not guilty after all, will this be the justice that the victims whom you pretend to cry for we're looking? My answer to the question is No. The court will have wasted all those years and failed the Kenyan victim. With all the criticism the court is getting, perhaps it is time for it to take stock of its performance and decide if it is doing the right thing. It needs to find a way of restoring its own credibility in the eyes of many including the AU. There is another level of disdain I have heard. That the court has been scared to indict Paul Kagame of Rwanda and Yoweri of Uganda, on the genocide on East Congo. when this issue came up recently at the UNSC, Dr. Susan Rice --protector of 'our bastards' as is adviced by Jendayi Fraser, moved heaven and earth to curtail a resolution hereon. ---Word is Kagame and M7 owen her their lives. Real Politic. Yes, considering the number of Africans who have died in genocide the last decade, it is miracle there are so FEW AFRICAN INDICTEES! I therefore agree on this: the 1000 dead in Kenya and the 1/2 a million IDPs is actually a picnic, better be called multiple murders than crimes against humanity. Congo lost +5M dead and >15M IDPs, and 40% female rape rate in the East. And the ICC and UNSC is silent on that. But you got to start somewhere! Kenya is a good place to start. Who knows, may be for us 100 days would be enough to kill half of ourselves! 1/2 a year, no Kenyan left alive! |
|
|
|
Post by jakaswanga on May 28, 2013 18:46:40 GMT 3
Eyes on the ball, by Judge Eboe-Osuji The processes of this Court have come to be the only known penal judicial inquiry into the events, for purposes of individual accountability for any resulting crimes within the jurisdiction of this Court." THE ONLY KNOWN PENAL JUDICIAL INQUIRY INTO THE EVENTS FOR THE PURPOSES OF INDIVIDUAL ACCOUNTABILITY.... I think the Oga-chief-O delivered a TKO on the pretender CJ of Kenya Mutunga and his side-kick the DPP Tobiko. That statement of the Oga brother comes from a mind dealing with civilisation and making a run at it. Crime and punishment. But it begs this question: what is the purpose of individual accountability for resultant crimes? It is possible that, within the philosophical realm grounding Kenyan jurisprudential culture and concepts of justice, the idea of indivdual responsibility, accountability, inferring possible guilt begging punishment is not recognised nor desirable ---and so we cherish impunity, especially at the TOP OF the social ladder. It is therefore so that the Oga brother is out of order to both Tobiko and the CJ! he comes from another planet so to speak! We will get there some day, just not yet! But it is great to have an idea of the future: where there are effective PENAL JUDICIAL INQUIRIES! May be even an upgrade of TJRC! |
|
|
|
Post by OtishOtish on May 28, 2013 18:50:24 GMT 3
Congo lost +5M dead and >15M IDPs, and 40% female rape rate in the East. And the ICC and UNSC is silent on that. According to AU logic, the DRC is a sovereign and independent state that should be left alone to solve its own problems. Anyways ... Surely you mean the AU is quiet. ICC: do you not remember that fellow who with forced to choose between his fellow Africans and the ICC quickly made a sensible choice? And surely you have not already forgotten Mr. Lubanga and Mr. Katanga? The UNSC tends to have quite a few serious meetings on the DRC situation. This year alone, it has had them 22 Feb, 5 Mar, 28 Mar, and 6 May. See for example: www.un.org/News/Press/docs//2013/sc10964.doc.htmwww.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=S/RES/2098 (2013) |
|
|
|
Post by jakaswanga on May 28, 2013 18:57:58 GMT 3
Congo lost +5M dead and >15M IDPs, and 40% female rape rate in the East. And the ICC and UNSC is silent on that. Surely you mean the AU is quiet. As for the ICC do you not remember that fellow who with forced to choose between his fellow Africans and the ICC quickly made a sensible choice? And surely you have not already forgotten Mr. Lubanga and Mr. Katanga? The UNSC tends to have quite a few serious meetings on the DRC situation. This year alone, it has had them 22 Feb, 5 Mar, 28 Mar, and 6 May. See for example: www.un.org/News/Press/docs//2013/sc10964.doc.htmwww.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=S/RES/2098 (2013) It is KNOWN these guys are small fish. Ntaganda or Lubanga at his peak commanded no more than 2000 man millitia, restricted to the Ituri area.
The quashed [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gersony_Report --I have to check this again]report which was commissioned by was it Annan -- details a systematic murder campaign by a motorized, combat-led disciplined and equipped army. Killing at an industrial scale. That was the problem: INDUSTRIAL SCALE KILLING. deliberate extermination as policy.
That, Otishotish, is the horror of East Congo. And the perpetrators and organisers are documented. None of them is on any list of indictees.
This process of disputation is actually akin to the 'holocaust denial' historicals of europe!
|
|
|
|
Post by OtishOtish on May 28, 2013 19:21:15 GMT 3
|
|
|
|
Post by furaha on May 28, 2013 23:04:48 GMT 3
Bensouda strikes back and calls AU's behavior an insult to the victims
ICC chief slams critics after African Union attack
Source: AFP World News / English Date: May 28, 2013
UNITED NATIONS, May 28, 2013 (AFP) -
The International Criminal Court's chief prosecutor hit back at critics Tuesday, a day after the African Union accused the tribunal of racism.
Fatou Bensouda said the critics were defending "perpetrators" of war crimes and crimes against humanity.
The prosecutor did not mention any particular group. But her comments came only a day after an African Union summit said the ICC was targeting the continent on the basis of race.
"We all know who the voices are," Bensouda told a meeting at the UN headquarters when asked by an African diplomat about "voices" questioning ICC tactics.
"The voices are those who are trying to protect the perpetrators of these crimes. They are not the voices who are supporting the victims of these crimes," said Bensouda, who is from Gambia.
The ICC is currently facing mounting diplomatic pressure over charges of crimes against humanity filed against Kenyan President Uhuru Kenyatta and Vice President William Ruto linked to political unrest in 2008 when they were not in office.
An African Union summit on Monday called for the ICC charges to be halted. Kenya has asked the UN Security Council to "terminate" the case.
"We should not take what ICC is doing to turn it on its head," Bensouda said.
"The true victims of the crimes are the victims of war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide, not those who perpetrate them. And now we see that that those voices, what they are all trying to do is protect those who perpetrate the crimes."
"I think this is an insult to the victims," Bensouda said.
"I think this should not be happening and anybody who is concerned about addressing crimes of this nature -- against the thousands and thousands and thousands of victims, African victims -- should be concerned about what is happening right now," she told the UN meeting.
Bensouda vowed that the ICC would "continue to be independent, to continue to be impartial, to apply the law strictly without any political or other considerations."
African governments often express bitterness that all ICC investigations target the continent. But 43 African countries have signed the ICC's founding Rome Statute and 34 have ratified it, making Africa the most heavily represented region in the court membership.
|
|
|
|
Post by omundu on May 29, 2013 1:32:58 GMT 3
:-)) kamale, I am at wits end in finding logic to your arguments.
Sample this your line of reason:
- otishotish gives evidence that we have reffered most of our cases as a continent to the hague and when they expeditiously act on them, you see this as favoritism/racism. logic would portend that if the hague ignored our referrals and just went after the criminals in the west and elsewhere, that would construe favoritism/unfair. It would be akin to an african walking into a shop for service but the shopkeeper ignores him and only serves the white clients who walk in.
- it is also my "humble submission" that you and the AU are using a very juvenile/nursery school line whereby you have been caught committing a crime and your only argument is not whether or not you did it but that the other guy did it and hasn't been caught so you should be let go. A crime is a crime is a crime. Especially when it involves crimes against humanity. Hao wengine its their luck hawajashikwa.I personally don't care about blair in my capacity as an african. I am angry at those that committed atrocities (alleged for now) on their fellow africans. Blair na bush wameua nani ? If anyone has been affected, there are easy processes to take them to the hague. Take them to the hague if you really care what they have done to humanity. The arabs or africans or americans who have been hurt can forward the names. Due process. Weka pressure.
- ati "...what many believe to be trumped up charges". Wacha hiyo selective justice. I will give you the advice you so willingly screamed at others during the elction petition - let the court practice its due process and eventual judgment. You may not agree with it but you will have to accept it as the final arbitrar cast in our constitution... Well, wait for it... And MOVE ON. Ama I await your argument that our very own willy's court is more advanced judicially, more upright in its process than the hague ? Hahahahaha.
- about this conspiracy theory on trumped up charges - who exactly are the puppeteers in this conspiracy ? If it is the Raira we have been hearing, then let Uhuruto ask Muthaura how much he paid raira to make the case go away. Its a much simpler process than going with the four winds to every edge of this planet to find the ever elusive elixir. Ama the red telephone in bensouda's office iko mteja ?
- ati "...the two taking up their positions to address the problems of the continent" DUDE, THEY ARE THE PROBLEM OF THIS CONTINENT THESE PAST JUBILEE YEARS. Problems like murders, genocide, displacement, theft of public and private property, election theft, tribalism.
- the kenyans you deem elected the two were actually foolish to do so and further, morons by expecting that their ascent to power was akin to rubbing the magic lamp and out pops the genie to grant them the three (suspects) wishes. The ballot didn't have an option that stated 'elect uhuruto and make ICC go away" in fact the duo promised they will dutifully attend the cases via skype once elected. What changed ?
|
|
|
|
Post by kamalet on May 29, 2013 8:28:08 GMT 3
Part of the difficulty I find in this debate on the ICC is that it keeps being pushed back to a Pre-March 4 argument. It is an argument driven by anger that two indictees actually got elected by Kenyans. The ICC need not be reduced to a court dealing with Uhuru and Ruto so that the arguments cease being objective.
Fatty Bensouda clearly said yesterday that the court is all about the victims first. I do not think anyone has an argument with that.
I do no agree that if the court becomes the good court only after it acquits Uhuru or Ruto, for there are still the fundamental issues that many are complaining about - apparent selective justice.
The court definitely has a credibility crisis that it needs to address if is going to attract the cooperation of states to bring to it case for the justice of victims. The behaviour of the OTP with the suggestions of going rogue fortify the US argument of not joining the Rome Statute. The Kenya case is certainly one example and if the court was to confirm that as being the case especially with suggestis of witness acquisition fitting a shopping spree at Nakumatt, there will need to be a lot more internal review of juducial process of the court itself. The long term is what the court should be looking at rather than the short term that is driven by who is giving the court any money!
|
|
|
|
Post by podp on May 29, 2013 16:49:43 GMT 3
Part of the difficulty I find in this debate on the ICC is that it keeps being pushed back to a Pre-March 4 argument. It is an argument driven by anger that two indictees actually got elected by Kenyans. The ICC need not be reduced to a court dealing with Uhuru and Ruto so that the arguments cease being objective. Fatty Bensouda clearly said yesterday that the court is all about the victims first. I do not think anyone has an argument with that. I do no agree that if the court becomes the good court only after it acquits Uhuru or Ruto, for there are still the fundamental issues that many are complaining about - apparent selective justice. The court definitely has a credibility crisis that it needs to address if is going to attract the cooperation of states to bring to it case for the justice of victims. The behaviour of the OTP with the suggestions of going rogue fortify the US argument of not joining the Rome Statute. The Kenya case is certainly one example and if the court was to confirm that as being the case especially with suggestis of witness acquisition fitting a shopping spree at Nakumatt, there will need to be a lot more internal review of juducial process of the court itself. The long term is what the court should be looking at rather than the short term that is driven by who is giving the court any money! Let me introduce yet another angle. Anyone who wonders why Yoweri Museveni is vigorously prosecuting Uhuru and Ruto's case against the ICC and the West at the continental political platform should carefully listen to Niccolo Machiavelli when he writes in the 'Prince' that: "Again, the prince who holds a country differing in the above respects ought to make himself the head and defender of his less powerful neighbours, and to weaken the more powerful amongst them, taking care that no foreigner as powerful as himself shall, by any accident, get a footing there; for it will always happen that such a one will be introduced by those who are discontented, either through excess of ambition or through fear, as one has seen already. The Romans were brought into Greece by the Aetolians; and in every other country where they obtained a footing they were brought in by the inhabitants. And the usual course of affairs is that, as soon as a powerful foreigner enters a country, all the subject states are drawn to him, moved by the hatred which they feel against the ruling power. So that in respect to those subject states he has not to take any trouble to gain them over to himself, for the whole of them quickly rally to the state which he has acquired there. He has only to take care that they do not get hold of too much power and too much authority, and then with his own forces, and with their goodwill, he can easily keep down the more powerful of them, so as to remain entirely master in the country." but on a more serious note, there is a nice debate going on at ICC Since its inception in July 2002, the OTP has faced two primary critiques: first that it has been inefficient, and second that it has preoccupied itself with Africa and failed to investigate equally severe conflicts elsewhere. These criticisms do not arise in a vacuum, however, and must be understood within the context of the court’s recent creation, administrative and personnel challenges, legal impediments imposed by the Rome Statute, and external pressure to prosecute as many cases as possible in order to satisfy its value-oriented goal of “guarantee[ing] lasting respect for and the enforcement of international justice.”2 These factors have made the choices of the prosecutor largely inevitable, although future practice must be reformed. iccforum.com/africa |
|
