Aside from the communal baying for the IEBCs blood over the past week for having the audacity to make Kenyans wait for the conclusion of the elections, another interesting piece of news has slipped by mostly unnoticed.
This has been happening parallel to the ominous statements issued by the United Kingdom and the United States about the consequences of making bad decisions a.k.a voting in the UhuRuto duo.
With the dreaded candidates poised to win, the movements from the two powers will be interesting in the immediate future what with the views that China doesn’t really mind who runs a country so long as they are ready to do business. The paltry bargaining power that the west and Europe are increasingly finding themselves wielding must be disconcerting and may explain why armed responses seem to be the only card they have left.
The relaxation of the terms and conditions of the cases against the suspects emphasizes the fact that legal and economic decisions are not independent from the political situation in the particular time frame. Obamas decisions must be timed and weighted by the mood on the ground in kenya lest the rejection winds up causing more harm than good by way of govt cooperation and having a regional ally.
It is instructive that the US is not a signatory to the rome statute on which the ICC is based so the moral authority to actually make other nations adhere to it is not exactly intact. But what do we expect from the largest exporter of weaponry and by extension war.
My basic premise is that court processes that are meant to be impartial and use the law as their holy text are undetachable from the prevailing political climate. The ICC being an international independent body should be the least to be concerned by the nuances of a national election in which the suspects are top contenders but we see a very measured approach to how the cases are handled and the media briefings issued by the prosecutor.
This is also illustrated by the happenings in the southern states of the US at the prime of and decline of slavery in the United States of America. It seems preposterous that what is considered the land of the free or the brave just a couple of years ago felt that counting niggers like cattle and considering them to be assets was perfectly legal. This was considered lawful within the context of the political climate and I dare say it was legal as a consequence of the political climate as opposed to existing next to it in a symbiotic relationship.