Sunday, February 17, 2013

Uhuru, Ruto And Irony Of ICC Impact On Polls



It is one of the biggest ironies of Kenyan politics that the International Criminal Court (ICC) cases against Uhuru Kenyatta and William Ruto - initially seen as likely to bury their political careers - might yet turn into one of the propellers in their race to State House.
It is also interesting how the two men who were seen as the likely beneficia- ries of their indictment – Prime Minister
Raila Odinga and Vice President Kalonzo Musyoka – have instead suffered signifi- cant losses because of the ICC case.
Opinion polls indicate that Raila is now neck and neck with Uhuru in the race for next month’s elections while Kalonzo, who up to a few months ago was an ally of Uhuru and Ruto, is Raila’s running mate. The two have repeatedly pointed fingers at Raila as the cause of their legal tribula- tions, arguing that his refusal to accept the results of the 2007 election kicked off the violence which landed them in The Hague. They have also claimed that Raila’s allies in the civil society were behind the list of the post-election violence suspects and the witnesses that the ICC used to indict them.
But Raila, whose political fortunes have plummeted considerably in Rift Valley since the naming of Ruto, his erstwhile point man in the region, as one of the suspects, has however denied he had in any way influenced The Hague's decisions. On Friday, Raila said he “respects and welcomes” the High Court ruling which allowed Uhu- ru to run in the coming elections.
“I have repeatedly said that my main competitor should have the opportunity to face me in a free and fair election whose outcome is determined by the people of Kenya,”Raila said aftertheCourt ruling.
But what amazes is the manner in which Uhuru and Ruto have turned what analysts ini- tially saw as a sure career killer into a career builder – one likely to shape the outcome of the next elections.
When on December 15, 2010, the two were named alongside Cabinet Minister Henry Kosgey, the then Head of Public Service Francis Muthaura, former Police Commissioner Hussein Ali and radio journalist Joshua arap Sang, as the people who
held the greatest responsibility for the 2007/08 post-election violence, many analysts saw the development as their worst political nightmare.
If their goose appeared cooked in December 2010, it looked burnt be- yond rescue when, in January 2012, the pre-trial chamber of the ICC confirmed cases against four of the suspects including Uhuru and Ruto.
Not only were questions raised lo- cally about the constitutionality of the ICC suspects running for presi- dent, sentiments from Western gov- ernments suggested that they would be uncomfortable working with a government of ICC suspects, thus making their candidatures seem even more untenable.
But Uhuru and Ruto’s popularity in their Central Kenya and Rift Valley backyards respectively have grown considerably since their naming and subsequent indictment. Their message against Raila has also been well received by their supporters,
effectively locking Raila and other competitors out of the said regions. Open or subtle opposition of their candidature by foreign powers also appears to have had the opposite effect: the more reservations about their running for president were raised, the more popular they be- came at home.
The two have cleverly depicted the Western nations’ concerns as neo- colonialist designs and their rivals as their lackeys or stooges. They have also appealed to nationalistic senti-
ment by portraying the ICC as an extension of the said imperial forces. Even their critics would grudgingly agree that their strategy has worked. Slightly over two weeks to the elec- tions, the two are on a roll, particuarly after the High Court on Friday dismissed a petition seeking to stop them from running.
While throwing out the case filed by civil society groups, the High Court stated that it did not have the jurisdiction to determine disputes relating to a presidential election, before or after elections. Only the Supreme Court, the High court ruled, has the exclusive jurisdiction to de- termine such a dispute.
The court also agreed with the Jubilee candidates’ oft repeated argument that barring them from running would amount to denying them their constitutional rights since they were yet to be found guilty of any crime.
“The presumption of innocence serves not only to protect the rights of the accused but to maintain pub- lic confidence in courts,” the court ruled, adding that it “cannot exercise the rights of citizens to choose leaders of their choice.”
An appeal to the Supreme Court could be overtaken by events, according to observers, given only three weeks remain to the elections.
A day before the case which was considered as their last obstacle was dismissed, the two were been busy trying to remove hurdles at the ICC likely to complicate matters in case the two win the March 4 election or in the event of a runoff. During the hearings of the pre-trial status con- ference, their lawyers requested for a postponement of the date of com- mencement of the cases which are scheduled for April 10 and 11.

No comments:

Post a Comment