Uhuru And Ruto Candidature Is A Crime In Itself

SATURDAY, JANUARY 19, 2013 - 00:00 -- BY SAMUEL OMWENGA

Here is a question for all Kenyans who love their country to consider: What would you say is the most important thing about the upcoming presidential elections?

I bet most people would answer, "The most important thing is that my preferred candidate wins". But that is not the most important thing at all. Your favourite candidate may lose this time round, and emerge victorious in 2017 - a postponement of only five years.

No, by far the most important question is this: Will this be the election which leads to Kenya being consigned to the ranks of the world's pariah-states, subject to global sanctions (like Iran, North Korea, and Syria)? Or will Kenyans have a government which is able to build on the rich legacy of the coalition government of President Kibaki and Prime Minister Raila Odinga?

Allow me to explain further:

The Supreme Court has yet to decide whether these two suspects before the International Criminal Court, Uhuru Kenyatta and William Ruto, can vie for the presidency and vice presidency, respectively.

Common sense would dictate that they should not be allowed to vie simply because it’s oxymoronic to seek to lead the very people you’re accused of being responsible for the butchering, murdering, raping, maiming and destruction of property of their loved ones, friends and fellow Kenyans.

Were the Supreme Court to conservatively interpret the constitution, the two should not be allowed to vie for any office. However, it’s unlikely the court will bar them from vying as there is no clear provision under which to bar them.

That said, it doesn’t mean that Uhuru and Ruto cannot exercise common sense and step aside from vying for any public office. The fact that neither has done so and have instead done the opposite and worse by essentially saying, “We’re too important and indispensable not to vie, so we must vie mpende msipende”, is the more reason why the people must resoundingly tell them hatuwapendi at the polls.

Indeed, the very fact that these two are vying for public office, let alone the presidency notwithstanding the fact they face these serious charges, is so morally offensive, it ought to be criminal.

One cannot but come to this conclusion if one steps back and objectively considers the consequences of a Uhuru/Ruto presidency and vice presidency:

First, as a matter of fact, were the two to be elected, both will be absentee president and vice-president as they will be spending all their time at the Hague defending themselves.

At a common sense level, this is unacceptable for any leadership position, let alone the presidency and vice presidency of a country. Ruto has said they can use technology to run the country from the Hague but one does not need even common sense to conclude that this a moronic thought or idea.

There is just no going around the fact that it’s impractical to govern a country when one is defending himself against accusations of committing crimes against humanity at the Hague, which requires their physical presence there during trial, estimated to run upwards of two to three years.

Second, given this fact, one must assume that the two intend to abscond and not attend their trial, which is no less criminal. In fact, absconding ICC trials is criminal under the Rome Statute and consequences for doing so are not only specific to the absconding suspects, they are even more importantly national in scope and direly so.

For example, were Uhuru and Ruto to abscond once elected, Kenya will be made a pariah state like Sudan, which means we can forget any gains we hope to achieve as a country following full implementation of our constitution, which may not happen, anyway, with these two in power.

One consequence of being labeled a pariah state is that Kenya will be subjected to economic sanctions and none of its officials will be given visas to travel to other countries, especially those that matter to our welfare.

If Kenya is cut from the world economic chain, that will be the end of our country as we know it and if you think Somalia is the least desirable country to live in, you have no idea what the consequences of such economic sanctions can be.

Just the other day, Sweden banned the importation of miraa to that country, a decision which miraa exporter Dan Aritho says is certain to adversely impact the Meru county economy because of its dependency on miraa business.

One needs not be an exporter like Aritho to understand the devastating impact of shutting the country from the world market and agricultural exports being central in our economy, it goes without saying we shouldn’t even entertain the thought of being slapped with sanctions of this nature.

Third, besides economic sanctions, the election of Uhuru and and Ruto would most likely result in the United States, European Union states, and others that support the ICC process shunning us diplomatically.

One likely outcome of such shunning is the relocation of the United Nations Office from Kenya to a different country in Africa and that alone will drain billions of shillings from the country and see the demise and crushing of ancillary business industry that depend on the UN.

There are other consequences but these alone are sufficient reason not to vote for these ICC suspects.

Samuel Omwenga is an investment advisor and blogger in the US