In 1998 I was working with the United Nations High
Commissioner for Refugees(UNHCR), Branch Office; Nairobi, as an Assistant
Protection Officer. At the time UNHCR-BO, Nairobi was screening asylum seekers from
Rwanda, Burundi, Congo DRC, Uganda, Southern Sudan, Somalia, Ethiopia and
Eritrea to determine if they deserved protection as refugees under the 1951
Geneva Convention and the 1969 OAU Convention. Asylum seekers from Somalia
& Southern Sudanese automatically qualified to be admitted as refugees
under the 1969 OAU Convention. The complex cases were from Ethiopia and Rwanda where
serious atrocities had preceded the violent change of governments and it was
not easy distinguishing victims from the perpetrators of atrocities which led
people to flee to Kenya. The United Nations had in November 1994 established
the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) in Arusha to try the
perpetrators of Genocide which had occurred in Rwanda between January and
December 1994.
 |
| UN Secretary General Ban Kii Moon addressing ICTR |
In 1999, the UNHCR in conjunction with the United
Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) decided to
bring to a close the issues of legitimacy and eligibility for refugees from
Rwanda, Burundi and Congo DRC. The UNHCR and OCHA launched the Great Lakes
Operation (GLO) in Nairobi and hired Eligibility Officers whose task was inter
alia, registration of urban refugees; their families and unaccompanied minors
as well conducting interviews to document their for flight. For Rwandese
caseload the Eligibility Officers were also required to identify any direct
perpetrators, accomplices, financiers and potential witnesses of the genocide
and crimes against humanity which had occurred in that country between January
and December 1999. Identities and reports of any such people were to be shared
with a Liaison Officer in the Office of the Registrar, ICTR, Arusha.
The Registrar of the ICTR and his staff visited
Nairobi to explain to the Eligibility Officers what exactly they were required
to do if they positively identified suspects and potential witnesses of
genocide and other crimes committed in Rwanda. They explained that although ICTR
had strict timelines within which to end their investigations and try the
suspects, the timelines could be extended depending on how much information we
gathered and the evidential accounts we documented. During a break, one staffer told us (jokingly) that we should
collect as much information as possible; document every account with some sort
of “evidence” and not “rush” the process because any rush would lead to the disbandment
of ICT and GLO; loss of prestigious jobs and hefty perks we were enjoying from
the UN! We laughed at the joke but we got the message. To many ICTR staff in
Arusha the tribunal was not just about justice for the victims of genocide, but
about jobs and hefty salaries. The evidential value of the accounts we recorded
did not matter so much either. GLO officers documented credible horrendous
accounts from the victims of the genocide (possible witnesses) and identities,
locations and family relations of some perpetrators who were living in Kenyan
and Tanzanian Cities but the Registrar’s Office never acted on them. In fact
some of the suspects we identified in Nairobi were able to relocate to West
Africa, Belgium and France while ICTR was sitting pretty at Arusha. This is one
reason the Government of Rwanda has very unkind words for the ICTR which 20
years down the line is yet to complete the cases before it. The tribunal has
failed to meet its 2008 and 2012 deadlines set by the UN Security Council; it
has completed only 50 trials with 29 convictions, still has 11 on-going trials
and 14 pending trials. The UN has set a new December 31, 2014 deadline but you
can bet it won’t be met either. All because of money! Yes, Judges, the
Prosecutor and the Registrar cannot “rush” the process and kill the goose that
lays the golden egg.
 |
| ICC |
Currently, the International Criminal Court (ICC) is
seized of two cases from Kenya. The Office of the Prosecutor (OTP) has
severally admitted that they do not have any evidence to commence the trial
against President Uhuru Kenyatta. In the case against Deputy President William
Ruto and Mr. Joshua Arap Sang, the OTP is unable to progress its case since
some of the witnesses have withdrawn and admitted having lied to the court.
Just like in the case of ICTR, these witnesses and evidential accounts were
procured through intermediaries. But the OTP and the Judges do not want to end
the circus and focus their energies to much more serious situations in Syria,
Libya, Afghanistan and Iraq. The whole charade clearly portrays ICC as a
political, neo-colonial and racist court which is only fit to try Africans and
other racial undesirables.
 |
| Deputy President & Joshua Arap Sang in court |
The OTP, the Office of the Registrar and Judges know
that if they bring the two Kenyan cases to a close, they will become jobless!
So, it does not matter to them whether there is evidence against President
Kenyatta and his Deputy Ruto, the cases will be kept pending for as long as
possible. That is international “justice” for you. It is not and was never
about justice for the victims or accountability for perpetrators of crime, but
about prestige and hefty perks for the lawyers; Judges, Prosecutors and intermediaries
contracted to gather "evidence"!
Twitter:
@DeCaptainCFE
No comments:
Post a Comment