...people expected to speak for the dead are the same ones before the ICC as suspects... A collumnist argues in... As President of Kenya, Uhuru should speak for the suspects, victims of chaos Friday, October 25 2013 By Barrack Muluka okwaromuluka@yahoo I promised to tell you the last two options that President Uhuru Kenyatta has in his predicament with the International Criminal Court (the ICC). The first is that he should do what is expected of him not as a suspect before the ICC, but as the sitting President of Kenya. A good starting point is the Head of State’s brief off-the-cuff address on Mashujaa Day. The President told us of foreigners whom he accused of “trying to mess up with us, out there in the ICC.” He assured us, however, that we would defeat them. Which is a good thing. If foreigners are trying to mess up with us we should aim to defeat them. But the President got me wondering. Was he addressing this matter as the President of Kenya or as a suspect before the ICC? It is quite easy to mix up these things. I concluded that he was speaking as a suspect. For the President of Kenya cannot talk about the ICC without addressing, at the same time, the plight of the victims and especially those who died because of the matter before the ICC. He was tight-lipped on the victims. Is it possible for President Kenyatta to reconcile his two statuses as the President of Kenya and as a suspect before the ICC? As the President of Kenya he needs to speak both for the suspects and for the victims. If the President of Kenya cannot speak out for the victims, who will? As I heard him talk about “defeating them,” on Mashujaa Day, I was vividly reminded of where it is said in the Biblical book of Revelation, “And when he had opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of them that were slain. And they cried with a loud voice saying, ‘How long, O Lord, holy and true, dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth?’ Rev. 6:9).” The President does well to know that the souls of those who were killed are crying out for redress. The Government of Kenya risks being ranked in the league of rogue states, if those in power will not address the voices of the dead. This is particularly so considering that the people expected to speak for the dead are the same ones before the ICC as suspects. people expected to speak for the dead are the same ones before the ICC as suspects. When they only open their mouths to talk about how they think foreigners and their local hirelings have framed them up, they create the impression that the whole thing of 2007–2008 is a lie. But this is no imagination. Kenyans fought. Houses were set on fire. Women were raped. Men were sodomised. Communities were displaced. People were killed. These are not lies. Who was behind the mayhem? The Mwai Kibaki and Raila Odinga Government failed to address this matter. Kenyatta and Ruto are telling us it is all lies. Yes, it may be true that the wrong people are before the ICC. But this, only the judges can eventually determine. We seem very keen to deny ourselves even the opportunity to confirm the innocence of the accused. President Kenyatta seems to prefer his subjects living with questions about his role in this matter to clearing his name. That, however, is his choice. But, in their innocence, what are the President and his government doing about those who were killed? This is not a matter of choice. If the President cannot do anything about these people, therefore, he has no moral authority to talk about the ICC. This is where the Head of State must balance delicately between his position as a suspect and as the President. As the President, he needs to cause the full list of names in the Waki envelop of suspects to be published. All the people on the list should be investigated and possibly arraigned in court. There is one last option, however. The President may wish to lead Kenyans in honest soul searching. He could lead us in a genuine fact finding and reconciliation process. This is not the same thing as the charade that was the Bethwell Kiplagat-led Truth, Justice and Reconciliation Commission. The process would be led by men and women whose assignment is to bring out the truth. It would not be people who have been commissioned to distort and conceal the truth. The process would be sponsored by a contrite Government, whose leaders have seen God. The leaders would refrain from kneeling before just about any spiritual dilettante in cosmetic public dramas of prayer. As a Christian gentleman I know that a nation whose leader kneels before spiritual impostors and allows them to touch his head with hands of unrighteousness courts disaster. In the end, the President may wish to consider, therefore, leading the nation to the path of truth, reconciliation and forgiveness. Now we cannot forgive you for something we don’t know. We also cannot forgive someone we do not know, or one whose sins we do not know. Sins and people are known by names. We must know both. We can only forgive you when you admit to a specific sin and are truly repentant. If we Kenyans could admit to ourselves that we have wronged each other and that we truly want to turn a new leaf – including fairness in availing opportunities in the economy and leadership to Kenyans of all tribes – then we can begin healing. If we were to begin healing, there would be good cause to ask the international community to allow us the space to continue sorting out our own mess. Every Kenyan would feel like he or she was a part of the nation and of its plight and triumph. They would desire that foreigners should leave us alone. Indeed, we would all ask them to leave us alone. This, however, remains a pipe dream so long as the President presides over what is perceived as an exclusivist government that wants to sweep a history of killing and other forms of oppression under the rug. The Truth can save us all. Over to you, Your Excellency.
Posted on: Sat, 26 Oct 2013 03:45:21 +0000
Trending Topics
© 2015