Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Strained Relationship: Reflections on the African Union’s Stand Towards the International Criminal Court from the Kenyan Experience

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Africa and the International Criminal Court

Part of the book series: International Criminal Justice Series ((ICJS,volume 1))

Abstract

This chapter comments on the current stand of the African Union towards the International Criminal Court, and on the AU’s position regarding the prosecution of incumbent African Heads of state before the Court. It analyzes how the African political elite, ordinary citizens and victims of crimes under international law view the International Criminal Court. In both cases Kenya is the main point of reference, because it has been in the center of the most recent critical positions taken by the African Union. Ultimately, it is shown that the current views of the AU Assembly about the International Criminal Court are not necessarily the views of Africans in general, and that the Court remains a relevant institution for Africa today as it was when it was established.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    See, e.g., Jalloh 2012, p. 203 et seq; Villa-Vicencio 2011, pp. 38–41; Mills 2012, p. 404 et seq; Hansen 2013; Cote 2012, pp. 411–412; Murithi 2012, pp. 4–9; and Murithi 2013.

  2. 2.

    Article 13(b) of the ICC Statute, read together with UN Charter, Chapter VII, Article 39.

  3. 3.

    Articles 13(c) and 15 of the ICC Statute. See also Bergsmo and Pejic 2008, pp. 581–593.

  4. 4.

    International Criminal Court, Press Release 2004.

  5. 5.

    International Criminal Court, Press Release 2005.

  6. 6.

    International Criminal Court, Press Release 2004.

  7. 7.

    See Referral letter by the government of Mali http://www.icc-cpi.int/NR/rdonlyres/A245A47F-BFD1-45B6-891C-3BCB5B173F57/0/ReferralLetterMali130712.pdf. (All internet sources in this chapter were accessed on 24 March 2014).

  8. 8.

    See Article 12(3) of the ICC Statute; and the Letter reconfirming the acceptance of the ICC jurisdiction http://www.icc-cpi.int/NR/rdonlyres/498E8FEB-7A72-4005-A209-C14BA374804F/0/ReconCPI.pdf.

  9. 9.

    See, e.g., the following specific decisions and declarations of the AU Assembly on the International Criminal Court as adopted in its various Sessions Ext/Assembly/AU/Dec.1(Oct.2013), Extraordinary Ordinary Session, 12 October 2013; Assembly/AU/Dec.397(XVIII)—Doc.EX.CL/710(XX), 18th Ordinary Session, 29–30 January 2012; Assembly/AU/Dec.366(XVII)—Doc. EX.CL/670(XIX), 17th Ordinary Session 30 June–1 July 2011; Assembly/AU/Dec.334(XVI)—Doc. EX.CL/639(XVIII) 16th Ordinary Session 30–31 January 2011; and Assembly/AU/Dec.245(XIII) Rev.1—Doc. Assembly/AU/13 (XIII) 3, 13th Ordinary Session, 1–3 July 2009. The Decisions can be found in the Annex to this book.

  10. 10.

    See Constitutive Act of the African Union of 11 July 2000, Article 3(d).

  11. 11.

    See Decision CM/Dec.399 (LXVII), 67th Ordinary Session of OAU’s Council of Ministers Addis Ababa, 25–28 February 1998.

  12. 12.

    See EU Council Common Position 2003/444/CFSP of 16 June 2003.

  13. 13.

    See EU Council Common Position 2002/474/CFS amending Common Position 2001/443/CFSP.

  14. 14.

    EU Council Common Position 2003/444/CFSP, Article 1(2).

  15. 15.

    EU Council Common Position 2003/444/CFSP, Articles 2 and 3.

  16. 16.

    See Coalition of the International Criminal Court 2002.

  17. 17.

    See Coalition of the International Criminal Court 2002. For more information see Bantekas 2012, pp. 439–440.; Hafner 2005, p. 323 et seq.; Benzing 2004, pp. 181–236.

  18. 18.

    See, for example, AU Decision Assembly/AU/Dec.245(XIII) Rev.1, 3 July 2009, Article 10.

  19. 19.

    See ICC Statute ratification status at https://treaties.un.org/pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=XVIII-10&chapter=18&lang=en.

  20. 20.

    See ICC Statute, Article 1.

  21. 21.

    See Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties of 1969 (VCLT), Article 26.

  22. 22.

    See VCLT, Articles 34 and 35.

  23. 23.

    See Akande 2009, pp. 342–338; Fletcher and Ohlin 2006, pp. 428–433.

  24. 24.

    Constitution of Kenya of 2010, Articles 143(1) and (4).

  25. 25.

    AU Press Release No. 002/2012, 9 January 2012, p. 2.

  26. 26.

    See Chap. 3 in this volume by Trendafilova (under Section 3.3.3., Head of State Immunity and Security Council Referrals).

  27. 27.

    See Blommestijn and Ryngaert 2010, pp. 432–436.

  28. 28.

    Murithi 2012, p. 6.

  29. 29.

    See ICC, Press Release 2014.

  30. 30.

    AU, Decision Ext/Assembly/AU/Dec.1(Oct.2013), Article 10(ii).

  31. 31.

    See Republic of Kenya, Report of the Commission of Inquiry into Post-Election Violence (CIPEV), 2008, pp. 345–352. See also Kenya National Commission on Human Rights (KNCHR) 2008.

  32. 32.

    See CIPEV Report, p. 473.

  33. 33.

    See Decision on the Prosecutor's application for summonses to appear for Francis Kirimi Muthaura, Uhuru Muigai Kenyatta and Mohammed Hussein Ali, 8 March 2011; and Decision on the Prosecutor's application for summons to appear for William Samoei Ruto, Henry Kiprono Kosgey and Joshua Arap Sang.

  34. 34.

    See CIPEV Report, p. 472.

  35. 35.

    International Crisis Group 2012, p. 6.

  36. 36.

    Cf. Asaala 2012, p. 131; International Crisis Group 2012, pp. 6–7.

  37. 37.

    See The Star, 12 March 2011; International Crisis Group 2012, p. 6.

  38. 38.

    The Daily Nation, 21 February 2009.

  39. 39.

    International Crisis Group 2012, p. 7; The Daily Nation, 26 March 2011.

  40. 40.

    See Drakard 2011.

  41. 41.

    See Jalloh 2010.

  42. 42.

    See Daily Standard, 13 October 2013.

  43. 43.

    The Daily Nation, 19 July 2009. See also Musila 2009, p. 456. For a detailed discussion on the independence of judges and lawyers as well as on allegations and investigations into corruption of judges in Kenya, see Mbote and Akech 2011, pp. 99–115.

  44. 44.

    Alai and Mue 2011, p. 1232. For example, the survey conducted by Infotrack Research & Consulting in November 2009 showed that the public support was 62 % for the ICC trials and 2 % for trials under the proposed Special Tribunal. See Alai and Mue 2010. In September 2010, a poll by Synovate indicated that despite the judicial and legal reforms planned domestically, the public support for accountability measures was as follows: trial at the International Criminal Court (54 %), local trials (22 %), granting of amnesty (22 %). See Reuters 27 September 2010. From another poll published by Synovate in April 2011, the results were: ICC trials (61 %) and a special tribunal (24 %). See The Africa Review, 5 April 2010.

  45. 45.

    Kenya National Dialogue and Reconciliation Monitoring Project 2011, p. 25, para 60.

  46. 46.

    Kenya National Dialogue and Reconciliation Monitoring Project 2011, p. VI, para 9.

  47. 47.

    Kenya National Dialogue and Reconciliation Monitoring Project 2011, p. 8, para 26.

  48. 48.

    Kenya National Dialogue and Reconciliation Monitoring Project, January 2012, p. 52, para 133, and p. 57, para 142.

  49. 49.

    As quoted verbatim in Kenya National Dialogue and Reconciliation Monitoring Project 2011, p. 25, para 59. See also International Center for Transitional Justice 2011, pp. 51–54.

  50. 50.

    Kenya National Dialogue and Reconciliation Monitoring Project 2011, p. 9, para 27. See also p. 12, para 34, showing that in March 2011, the confidence was at 72 %.

  51. 51.

    In December 2010, confidence in the International Criminal Court per province was: North Eastern (82 %), Western and Nyanza (75 %), Eastern (74 %), Rift Valley (60 %). See Kenya National Dialogue and Reconciliation Monitoring Project 2011, pp. 9–12, paras 28–33.

  52. 52.

    Kenya National Dialogue and Reconciliation Monitoring Project January 2012, p. 51, para 132; see also Second Review Report, May 2012, paras 52–60 (indicating, at para 56, that by May 2012, up to 58 % of Kenyans were happy about the work of the International Criminal Court in Kenya).

  53. 53.

    See Ext/Assembly/AU/Dec.1 (Oct.2013), para 10(ix).

  54. 54.

    The Daily Nation, 14 November 2013.

  55. 55.

    See Prosecutor v. Francis Kirimi Muthaura, Uhuru Muigai Kenyatta and Mohammed Hussein Ali, Decision on the confirmation of charges, 23 January 2012; Prosecutor v. William Samoei Ruto, Henry Kiprono Kosgey and Joshua Arap Sang, Decision on the confirmation of charges, 23 January 2012.

  56. 56.

    Kenya National Dialogue and Reconciliation Monitoring Project, January 2012, p. 57, para 142.

  57. 57.

    Kenya National Dialogue and Reconciliation Monitoring Project 2003, para 75.

  58. 58.

    The Star, 3 April 2012.

  59. 59.

    See Kenya National Dialogue and Reconciliation Monitoring Project, January 2012, p. 53, para 134; Human Rights Watch 2013, p. 5.

  60. 60.

    See ICC Press Release 2013.

  61. 61.

    See ICC Press Release 2004.

  62. 62.

    See Human Rights Watch 2011, pp. 22–29.

  63. 63.

    See ‘Statement by H.E. Yoweri Kaguta Museveni President of the Republic of Uganda at the 68th United Nations General Assembly’ http://www.statehouse.go.ug/media/speeches/2013/09/25/statement-he-yoweri-kaguta-museveni-president-republic-uganda-68th-united-.

  64. 64.

    Cf. Allison 2012, pp. 25–28.

  65. 65.

    See Werle 2009, p. 15.

  66. 66.

    See, e.g., Chap. 12 by Okoth in this book on the abuse and politicization by the Security Council of the mandate under Article 16 of the ICC Statute.

  67. 67.

    See ICC letter to the African Union dated 13 September 2013, Ref. 2013/PRESS/00295-4/VPT/MH attached to ICC Press Release, ICC-CPI-20130920-PR943.

References

  • Akande D (2009) The legal nature of security council referrals to the ICC and its impact on Al Bashir’s immunities. J Int Crim Justice 7:333–352

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alai C, Mue N (2010) Kenya: impact of the Rome Statute and the International Criminal Court. ICTJ briefing: the Rome Statute review conference June 2010, Kampala. http://ictj.org/sites/default/files/ICTJ-Kenya-ICC-Impact-2010-English.pdf

  • Alai C, Mue N (2011) Complementarity and the impact of the Rome Statute and the International Criminal Court in Kenya. In: Stahn C, El Zeidy M (eds) The International Criminal Court and complementarity: from theory to practice, vol II. Cambridge University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Allison S (2012) Is there an African alternative to the International Criminal Court? Afr Fact J Good Gov Afr 5:25–28

    Google Scholar 

  • Asaala EO (2012) The International Criminal Court factor on transitional justice in Kenya’. In: Ambos K, Maunganidze OA (eds) Power and prosecution: challenges and opportunities for international criminal justice in Sub-Saharan Africa. Universitätsverlag, Göttingen, pp 119–143

    Google Scholar 

  • Bantekas I (2012) International Criminal Law, 4th edn. Hart Publishing, Portland

    Google Scholar 

  • Benzing M (2004) U.S bilateral non-surrender agreements and article 98 of the Statute of the International Criminal Court: an exercise in the law of treaties. Max Planck UNYB 8:181–236

    Google Scholar 

  • Bergsmo M, Pejic J (2008) Article 15: prosecutor. In: Triffterer O (ed) Commentary on the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Verlag C.H. Beck, München

    Google Scholar 

  • Blommestijn M, Ryngaert C (2010) Exploring the obligations for states to act upon the ICC’s arrest warrant for Omar Al-Bashir: a legal conflict between the duty to arrest and the customary status of head of state immunity. Z Int Strafrechtsdogmatik 5:428–444

    Google Scholar 

  • Cote L (2012) Independence and impartiality. In: Reydams L, Wouters J, Ryngaert C (eds) International prosecutors. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Drakard M (2011) International Criminal Court investigation of Kenyans is perceived as mixed blessing. The cutting edge 11 April 2011. http://www.thecuttingedgenews.com/index.php?article=51772&pageid=13&pagename=Analysis

  • Fletcher GP, Ohlin JD (2006) The ICC: two courts in one? J Int Crim Justice 4:428–433

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hafner G (2005) An attempt to explain the position of the USA towards the ICC. J Int Justice 3:323–332

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hansen TO (2013) Africa and the International Criminal Court. In: Murithi T (ed) Africa’s international relations: a handbook. Routledge, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Jalloh C (2010) Kenyan parliament endorses ruto motion calling for withdrawal from ICC statute. International Criminal Law in ferment blog. http://iclferment.blogspot.com/2010/12/kenyan-parliament-endorses-ruto-motion.html

  • Jalloh C (2012) Africa and the International Criminal Court: collision course or cooperation? N C Cent Law Rev 34:203–229

    Google Scholar 

  • Mbote PK, Akech M (2011) Kenya: justice sector and the rule of law. The Open Society Initiative for Eastern Africa, Nairobi

    Google Scholar 

  • Mills K (2012) “Bashir is Dividing Us”: Africa and the International Criminal Court. Hum Rights Q 34:404–447

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murithi T (2012) Africa’s relationship with the ICC: a need for restoration? Perspectives: Polit Anal Comment Afr 2012:4–9

    Google Scholar 

  • Murithi T (2013) The African Union and the International Criminal Court: an embattled relationship? Institute for Justice and Reconciliation, Policy Brief No. 8, March 2013. http://ijr.org.za/publications/pb10.php

  • Musila G (2009) Options for transitional justice in Kenya: autonomy and the challenge of external prescriptions. Int J Transitional Justice 3:445–464

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Villa-Vicencio C (2011) The ICC in Africa. Thinker 26:38–41

    Google Scholar 

  • Werle G (2009) Principles of International Criminal Law, 2nd edn. T.M. Asser Press, The Hague

    Book  Google Scholar 

Cases

  • Prosecutor v. Francis Kirimi Muthaura, Uhuru Muigai Kenyatta and Mohammed Hussein Ali, Decision on the confirmation of charges, 23 January 2012, ICC-01/09-02/11-382-Red.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prosecutor v. William Samoei Ruto, Henry Kiprono Kosgey and Joshua Arap Sang, Decision on the confirmation of charges, 23 January 2012, ICC-01/09-01/11-373.

    Google Scholar 

  • Decision on the Prosecutor’s application for summonses to appear for Francis Kirimi Muthaura, Uhuru Muigai Kenyatta and Mohammed Hussein Ali, 8 March 2011, ICC-01/09-02/11-01.

    Google Scholar 

  • Decision on the Prosecutor’s application for summons to appear for William Samoei Ruto, Henry Kiprono Kosgey and Joshua Arap Sang, 8 March 2011, ICC-01/09-01/11-01.

    Google Scholar 

Other Documents

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Dar Es Salaam, Dar Es Salaam, Tanzania

    Sosteness Francis Materu

Authors
  1. Sosteness Francis Materu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sosteness Francis Materu .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Humboldt-Universität Juristische Fakultät, Berlin, Berlin, Germany

    Gerhard Werle

  2. Faculty of Law Department for Criminal Law, University of the Western Cape, Bellville, South Africa

    Lovell Fernandez

  3. Humboldt-Universität Juristische Fakultät, Berlin, Berlin, Germany

    Moritz Vormbaum

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 T.M.C. Asser Press and the author(s)

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Materu, S.F. (2014). A Strained Relationship: Reflections on the African Union’s Stand Towards the International Criminal Court from the Kenyan Experience. In: Werle, G., Fernandez, L., Vormbaum, M. (eds) Africa and the International Criminal Court. International Criminal Justice Series, vol 1. T.M.C. Asser Press, The Hague. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6265-029-9_13

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Societies and partnerships

Search

Navigation