Hot on the heels of the bizarre aide-memoire submitted to the United Nations Security Council came another from the government of Kenya to the African Union at its 50th anniversary summit. This one was better written. But its message was the same.

The government resolution reiterated the slew of points to which we have become accustomed. That the two suspects were supposedly democratically elected and continuing their trials is an affront to Kenyans’ “sovereign will.” That the two suspects are “agents of cohesion” and continuing their trials is a threat to “healing,” peace and security — not just in Kenya but in the entire region.

Termination of cases

The government concluded by asking that the AU urge termination of the Kenyan ICC cases — or a referral to domestic proceedings.

The government of Uganda then leapt into the fray, draft resolution in hand, on behalf of East Africa. The outcome was the AU’s own resolution. urging referral of the Kenyan ICC cases to a national mechanism under the principle of complementarity.

But the government was being disingenuous. First, it distorted the true story of how the suspects ended up at the ICC in the first place — which, as we all know, was on the basis of urging by Kenyan parliamentarians, including the two suspects.

Second, it attempted to reduce the ICC’s follow-up to the Kenyan situation to being about a rogue Prosecutor with a “political axe to grind” — that is, wishing to “make Kenya an example to the world.” That the Prosecutor is independent is well-known.

Third, it was wrong to state that the two suspects’ assumption of political office is a reflection of Kenyans’ sovereign will. Not all Kenyans accept that the 2013 elections were free and fair, despite the questionable Supreme Court ruling. Even if they did, the two suspects only “won” in respect of half the country — by no means an overwhelming expression of the sovereign will.

Finally, it was also wrong to imply that there is a functional national mechanism to refer the Kenyan ICC suspects too. The International Crimes Division of the High is far from being up and running — it is still notional at best.

The government knows full well that what it asked for was beyond the remit of the UN SC and of the AU. So why has it asked anything of either? The government is playing politics on behalf of the two suspects. It threw a bunch of balls into the air just to see where they will land.

In Kenya, this ups the public-relations campaign to mute continued questions about the elections and keep the fires of anti-ICC sentiment well stoked. Elsewhere, this keeps the West on the back foot — making sure the West continues its backpedalling and inability to move forcefully against the two ICC suspects.

The effort thus has nothing to do with the law. It is about the manipulation of politics through public relations. Full stop. Victims, survivors and accountability be damned.

L. Muthoni Wanyeki is doing her graduate studies at L’Institut d’etudes politiques (Sciences Po) in Paris, France