The Day Karim Khan Exposed Ruto’s Police Plan at the ICC

Kenya is no stranger to political drama, but the events surrounding Karim Khan's visit to the country have sparked unprecedented controversy.

It all began when Karim Khan, the Chief Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC), reportedly visited Kenya on a private trip. Normally, private visits require an invitation from a host in the destination country, but the details of who invited Khan remain a mystery. Initial rumors suggested Mount Kenya University was involved, but this appears unlikely.

Khan’s low-profile arrival seemed designed to avoid public attention. However, things quickly spiraled out of control when his presence in Kenya was discovered. Early whispers escalated into widespread speculation, with people questioning the purpose of his visit. The official explanation given was that Khan was in Kenya to receive an honorary degree from Mount Kenya University. This narrative raised eyebrows, considering the ICC’s turbulent history with Kenya.

Kenya’s Troubled Past with the ICC

Kenya’s relationship with the ICC is contentious. The Kenyan cases at the ICC, including those tied to post-election violence, made global headlines. Witnesses were intimidated, some disappeared, and others were coerced into changing their testimonies. The ICC itself described Kenya's cases as unparalleled in their complexity and obstruction.

Given this history, critics found it implausible that Karim Khan would travel to Kenya to accept an honorary degree. The institution offering the honor was linked to figures aligned with controversial political actors, further complicating the optics of the situation.

Implications of Khan’s Visit

Martha Karua, a prominent opposition leader, publicly called out the ICC, accusing it of compromising its impartiality. She highlighted Khan’s prior role as a defense lawyer for key figures linked to cases under ICC scrutiny. Her statements prompted a swift reaction, with reports emerging that Khan had recused himself from any ongoing Kenyan cases at the ICC.

This incident raises serious concerns about the ICC’s integrity and the implications of its leadership appearing to have close ties to individuals or institutions under investigation. Kenya’s judiciary has faced criticism for failing to deliver justice, and this episode threatens to further undermine faith in international mechanisms.

The fallout from this visit may have long-lasting repercussions for the ICC, Kenya, and its leadership. What began as a private visit has turned into an international scandal.

Occupy parliament: did police violate the right to protest?

 The protest was sparked by persistent demands from members of the 11th Parliament to have their salaries restored to the levels enjoyed by their counterparts in the 10th Parliament—a request deemed unsustainable and widely opposed by Kenyans. According to an Ipsos Synovate survey, 88% of Kenyans supported the protest.

Unlike the often violent protests of the past, characterized by tear gas and clashes between police and demonstrators, the Occupy Parliament protest stood out for its organization and lack of aggression. Protesters used spray-painted pigs with the names of MPs and the label "MPigs" to symbolize greed, effectively highlighting their discontent. The message was clear: it is unreasonable for MPs to demand higher pay when their salaries are already significantly higher than those of the average Kenyan.

Despite being a peaceful demonstration with all necessary permits in place, some protesters faced police brutality. Officers fired tear gas, used water cannons, and television footage captured a police officer assaulting a protester. This response, though the protest was legal, suggested that not all officers were informed or acting within the law.

The right to protest is fundamental in any civil and democratic society and is enshrined in Article 37 of the Constitution, which guarantees every individual the right to assemble, demonstrate, picket, and present petitions peacefully and unarmed.

Police Spokesman Charles Owino condemned the actions of the involved officers and assured the public that those responsible would be held accountable. He stated, “They will have to say who gave them the orders or take individual responsibility for their actions.”