Uganda and Namibia were other countries that wanted to be enjoined in the appeal.
The send ruling that will shape perceptions about the court is whether Ruto and Sang have a case to answer.
On a different issue but one that still affects the strained collaboration with the court, South Africa picked a bone with the ICC after it was tasked to explain why it failed to arrest Sudanese President Omar al Bashir who is wanted for alleged war crimes when he visited the country.
As a result of these differences, African states with Kenya at the fore have been pushing for mass withdrawal from the Rome Statute with the latest achievement being adoption of a proposal during the just concluded AU summit held in Addis Ababa at the end of January.
The proposal was among other things seeking the termination of the case against Ruto and Sang.
READ: AU adopts President Uhuru’s proposal for ICC mass withdrawal
The defence teams of Ruto and Sang attributed their arguments to impoverished investigations anchored on recruitment of questionable witnesses who they allege were bribed and coached on how to fix the accused before The Hague based court.
African States which enjoy majority of the ICC membership have joined Kenya in questioning the court which they accuse of unfairly targeting the continent.
Of the 123 member states, 34 African states – almost one third of the Rome Statute – have signed and ratified the Rome Statute of the ICC.
So far, 23 cases in nine situations have been brought before the court.
All the situations are in Africa.
Their annoyance with the court stems from arguments that ICC targets only Africa whereas it is silent about crimes allegedly committed elsewhere.
If judges terminate the case, Orina explains, Africa will feel that the court has heard its concerns.
“If the appeal succeeds and the Appeals Chamber agrees that the rule ought not to have been applied to the Kenyan case, the court might gain some much needed credibility from the AU.”
About The Author
