| dc.description.abstract | The exercise of exclusive state sovereignty is generally the preserve of independent
states. Since the end of the cold war, the world has experienced a gradual change in the
notion of the exercise of state sovereignty and it has departed from that envisaged by the
Treaty of Westphalia of 1648. The creation of non state actors in the form of judicial
institutions and particularly the International Criminal Court (ICC) has impacted the
manner in which some states, particularly in Africa are governed. By operation of
international criminal law and universal jurisdiction of the ICC, a state such as The Sudan
for instance, has a serving president against whom warrants of arrest have been issued by
the ICC for crimes against humanity. His physical access to the world particularly in
states which are willing to co-operate with the ICC in effecting the arrest is restricted.
The research concludes that there is demonstrated impact of the operation of international
criminal law through the International Criminal Court in some of African states’ exercise
of sovereignty. Absolute sovereignty is therefore not realizable and domestic
constitutional security of tenure of heads of states and government as well as other senior
states officials cannot shield them from prosecution for crimes against humanity.
Attention has been paid to Kenya and ICC cases and this paper seeks to examine whether
the entry of the International Criminal Court into the Kenyan jurisdiction in order to try
the suspects of the post elections mayhem of between December 2007 and February 2008
has interfered with its sovereign authority. The research is limited to events of between
December 2007 and March 2011-from the beginning of post elections violence to
indictment of suspects of the violence at the Hague in March 2011.While noting that the
country (Kenya) is not on trial but individuals, the study concludes that pursuant to the
entry of ICC in Kenya, there has been impact on politics, structures of governance and
exercise of exclusive authority and Kenya’s international image both positively and
negatively. This research concludes that political changes alone cannot be sufficient
reason to conclude that Kenya’s sovereignty has been substantially undermined. Rather,
the rule of law must be upheld and there must be accountability for crimes in the interest
of justice. | en |
