International Justice

CJ354 Endicott College

Kenya and al-Bashir

We’ve talked a lot in class about Sudan’s President Bashir and the fact that he has traveled outside of Sudan in countries that are member states of the ICC and still has not been arrested.  I was looking into it a little bit and I found an interesting article on AlJazeera from back in November that was about Kenya’s stance on Bashir.  Bashir has traveled to Kenya before and has not been detained, but back in November a Kenyan court decided that if Bashir ever returns to the country the arrest warrant will be taken seriously and he will be detained.  The article can be found here.


I’ve also been thinking about everything we’ve been learning about and it always seems to be a top-down approach.  Even though some trials have more of a victim-centered approach, there still seems to be a need for a bottom-up approach to help victimized communities cope and move forward.


3 responses to “Kenya and al-Bashir

  1. littleclimber February 27, 2012 at 12:09 pm

    It’s great to hear that Kenya has decided to finally comply with the agreement it made when signing onto the International Criminal Court. However, I don’t think that an excessive amount of gratitude is in order in response to the promise to arrest Bashir should he return. The truth is that the Kenyan government had an obligation to do so in November when Bashir was in fact in Nairobi, when they had the perfect opportunity to take him into custody. Unfortunately they may have forfeited their only chance to do the right, just, and legal thing, to arrest Omar al-Bashir and extradite him to the Hague. While the declaration of the intent to comply with the obligations in the future is nice, it may very well be too little too late.

  2. dodger18 February 28, 2012 at 11:36 am

    I agree, it seems that Kenya’s decision to comply with the ICC is a step in the right direction. It does bother me that the arrest papers were issued after the ability of Kenya to detain him. This would have been a great international pr move for the Kenyan government especially considering the forming of their new constitution. But all that being said, Kenya is a country struggling after a time of escalated violence, and it is good to see them complying with international law. As to the bottoms up approach to dealing with international criminals, the ICC should have no responsibility to prosecute low level criminals. Its job is to bring to justice only those most responsible, to deter any future wide spread violence. Once the leaders and old regimes are done away with, the country can take it upon them self to prosecute other crimes of lesser note.

  3. Alana Tiemessen March 1, 2012 at 8:22 am

    It does remind us that most states want to appear to cooperate with the ICC, and the international community in general, because of the legitimacy it confers on them. Unfortunately in the Kenya situation, this has not yet led to any domestic accountability. One important issue to address will be impunity of the Kenyan police – none of whom have been prosecuted for the many people they killed in the post-election violence.

%d bloggers like this: