Taking Kony to ICC may not be such a bad idea In an article entitled, "US lawyer to probe Kony By Frank Nyakairu Feb 5, 2004", it was reported that President Museveni said in London recently that Uganda had referred Kony's case to the International Criminal Court (ICC) at the Hague, Netherlands. Judging from the lack of a robust response in the papers or private conversations, it appears that most people consider this nothing but a diversion. After all, court cases of this type usually take years to complete. Case in point, former President Milosevic of Serbia's (former Yugoslavia) trial has been going on for the last several years. Obviously, it is a good thing for the lawyers and support staff for the opportunity it provides for employments. As for victims of the crimes against humanity, it is of no immediate consequence. Apart from the court proceeding taking too long, in the end, it may not be possible to legally prove that the accused actually committed those crimes. Of course, this is not based on any legal expertise on my part, which I have none. Rather it is based on my everyday observation that sometimes even when one is 100% sure that the accused is guilty, a Johnny Cochran (the OJ Simpson defense of a lawyer) may set the accused free.
Who stands to benefit from this exercise depends partly on the intent and on some unintended consequences. The government is supposedly doing this on behalf of the victims of the war against humanity. Presumably this is because the government wants to end the suffering of the people. If so, it is a noble thing to do. However, the trouble is that there are better options than that. For example, there is no doubt that if given the opportunity to choose from several options, the people would choose an action or a process that would have an immediate impact on the situation on the ground. They would want the government to do something that they have been asking for, namely a political, negotiated peaceful settlement of the conflict. For a start, both rebels and the government can declare immediate ceasefires to end the carnage (47 or more killed last week). They should also begin to use conciliatory language when referring to each other instead of using bellicose and demonizing language. It is certain that if there is a will to help the victims of crime against humanity, the above suggestion would be the best option and probably the shortest route to peace in the north. Obviously, this is a case being done in the name of the people and not because it is the people's choice. Detestable as it may be, a referendum under international supervision would confirm the real people's choice. In any case, who will benefit from the exercise of taking Kony to the ICC? It appears that both Kony and President Museveni will be the beneficiaries. On the one hand, by taking Kony to the ICC, President Museveni is elevating Kony to a higher status than he would otherwise be if the matter was dealt with locally. For better or worse, his name will be enshrined in the record of the prestigious world court. By so doing, President Museveni is also unwittingly providing top level security for Kony because the accused has to be protected under international law, at least until the court decides on the case. Besides, even if he is convicted, it is doubtful if he will be executed under international law. While he will be deprived of freedom, as an international prisoner, he will be protected for life. Given his present predicament of surviving in the bush as a hunted animal, being in prison may not be such a bad place for him. He will never ever have to worry about being killed by President Museveni as he has so many times threatened to do. If this happens, Kony will personally be a winner. On the other hand, if President Museveni wins the case, he will claim a legal victory. He will obviously feel vindicated to the extent that the world body agrees with his claim that Kony is a criminal. However, in terms of the war quagmire, such a legal victory at the Hague will be far from the reality in the north. Whether it will translate into peace in the north is another matter altogether. To begin with, if UPDF has so far failed to arrest Kony in 18 years, would a court verdict at the Hague make UPDF any more successful in its mission? It is doubtful because if it took the USA 8 months with all its resources in a desert environment to capture Sadam in Iraq, how long will it take UPDF with its meager resources, without 42 or so international coalition, to capture Kony in a much more rebel friendly environment? Kony roams where there are no people in the countryside to report his where about since they are all in the camps for the internally displaced people. Besides, Southern Sudan is sort of a no man's land. Even if the conflict in Southern Sudan were to be resolved, it will take years before real changes can occur. UPDF has already been and they are still there looking for Kony. Yet Kony is still loose. Whatever it may be, the outcome of the case at the Hague will not have an immediate impact on the war in the north. Even if Kony is convicted and captured, it is not certain what will happen to the LRA organization. Will the organization disintegrate or will another leader step up and replace Kony and continue their rebel activities? For example, Sadam has been captured in Iraq, but violence has not ceased. Although the situation in Iraq and northern Uganda are different, there are lessons to draw from the Iraqi situation. Having failed to subdue the Iraqi rebels, the USA and its allies are calling upon the UN to help in paving the way to a political resolution of the conflict. At least President Bush has the good sense of realizing his mistake and taking corrective measure in Iraq by going to the UN for assistance. In any case, the Uganda government's effort to defeat the rebels is going to be a protracted one. Before long, 2006 may be upon us and by that time, it is doubtful whether we will have an ex- or a sitting President Museveni. If it is the former, will the new president choose to follow Museveni's war path or dialogue with the rebels to resolve the conflict in the north? If the latter happens, President Museveni's personal desire for a military victory over Kony will remain unfulfilled. >From another perspective, it does not appear that the people on whose behalf President Museveni is taking Kony to the ICC are going to benefit from the exercise immediately or in the long run. It is, therefore, tempting to dismiss it as nothing but a government effort to put pressure on the rebels to give up or to use it for propaganda purposes without really doing the things that would really make a difference in the war. However, upon careful consideration, it may not be such a bad idea for the suffering people in the north that President Museveni is taking Kony to the ICC. First, this case unwittingly marks a turning point in the government attitude towards asking for help from the international community to resolve the conflict in the north. The government has previously refused to turn to the international community for help. Having turned to an international body, Museveni cannot again argue that he does not need the international community to help end the war in northern Uganda. From now on, the people should expect that President Museveni will be consistent and do the right things including 1) Asking the international community to mediate a dialogue with the rebels, 2) Declaring the northern region a disaster area to enable the international community to do more in providing humanitarian assistance and 3) Asking the international community to provide security in the north to facilitate dialogue, humanitarian assistance and resettlement of the internally displaced people. 4) More importantly, negotiating with the other LRA leaders if the case at the ICC is just against Kony. Secondly, if the ICC is really interested in bringing justice to the victims of the war in the north, it should not limit the trial to one individual (Kony) or organization (LRA). It should also investigate all cases of atrocities committed against unarmed civilians by both sides in the conflict. It will be a travesty of justice if the trial is limited to just one individual. After all, injustice is injustice regardless of whether it is caused by the government or the rebels. At least all victims of the war, not just those in favor of the government, should be invited and allowed to testify at the trial. Such witnesses should be accorded international protection to prevent any subsequent abuses by either side in the conflict. In conclusion, considering all the points discussed, it may not be such a bad idea for President Museveni to take Kony to the ICC. This case gives the victims of the war a ray of hope because it may unwittingly open up opportunities for a peaceful resolution of the conflict in ways that might not be obvious. Okot Nyormoi, Houston, USA. -------------------------------------------- This service is hosted on the Infocom network http://www.infocom.co.ug
