The 50th African Union (AU) anniversary celebrations earlier this year in Addis Ababa were overshadowed by calls for the International Criminal Court (ICC) to drop their investigations against the Kenyan leadership.

AU member states, through a joint resolution, demanded that the ICC terminate its investigation for crimes against humanity leveled against the newly-elected President, Uhuru Kenyatta, and his deputy, William Ruto.

The two are implicated in the violence that rocked the country following the general elections in 2007-08, in which more than 1,000 people lost their lives.

The Ethiopian Prime Minister, Hailemariam Desalegn, who is the current AU chairman, implied that the ICC's motivation was inspired more by racism than the need to seek justice.

"The intention was to avoid any kind of impunity, but now the process has degenerated to some kind of race hunting," he is reported to have told journalists during the celebrations in Addis Ababa.

But in a quick rejoinder, the ICC released a statement, in effect denying these allegations, but reaffirming its commitment to follow the law.

"The ICC operates strictly within the mandate and legal framework created by the Rome Statute, the founding treaty of the court, and cannot take political factors into account," read the statement.

It continued, "Decisions are taken independently on the basis of the law and the available evidence and are not based on regional or ethnic considerations."

Not everybody agrees with the line taken by the African leaders on this issue. John Moreti, Botswana's Ambassador to Kenya, told reporters that there was no consensus on the issue and that his country did not support the stance taken by the AU. Only Botswana and the Gambia declined to endorse the AU resolution.

Elizabeth Evenson, senior counsel at Human Rights Watch, does not see how African leaders can turn against the ICC, given that their countries comprise the majority of its members.

"African countries were among the earliest supporters of the ICC at its establishment, and African countries are the largest grouping of the ICC member states," said Evenson.

All of the eight cases currently before the ICC involve Africa, a situation that formed the basis for the position adopted by African leaders.

Four out of the eight cases were referred by African governments. These include cases brought by Uganda, the Central African Republic, the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Mali.

Separating itself from AU opposition, the Government of Cote d'Ivoire filed a declaration accepting the court's jurisdiction, given that at the time it was not an ICC state party.

Even so, Evenson echoes the sentiments expressed by Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma, Chairperson of the AU Commission, to the effect that the ICC is a court of last resort.

In other words, the court acts only when national governments are unable or unwilling to hold those responsible for the world's worst crimes accountable for their actions.

"In Kenya, the ICC prosecutor stepped in only after national authorities failed to bring any measure of justice for horrific crimes committed during the country's 2007-08 post-election violence," said Evenson.

Be that as it may, opponents of the ICC investigations, like Dlamini-Zuma, hold the view that Kenya has since moved on.

They argue that the country now has a reformed judiciary with the capacity to hold the trial at home and therefore the cases should revert back to Kenyan courts.

Calls to have the ICC cases be heard in Kenya are not new. The Kenyan Government tried it once, but these efforts were futile, "because the ICC judges found no evidence that the cases before the ICC were actually being investigated nationally," explains Evenson.

The ICC is also perceived to have double-standards in its application of justice. Evenson explains that even though the UN Security Council can refer non-state-parties to the ICC as demonstrated with the referrals of Darfur and Libya, the Council remains a highly politicized body, which has not shown consistency or even-handedness in its referrals.

"It is true that there is a double standard still at work in international justice, however, it is not the ICC but international politics and states' perceived political interests that are to blame," she said, adding that the new Kenyan Government should instead put politics aside and allow the ICC process to run its independent course. CA

(Reporting from Kenya)