Save

Kenya in the Shadow of the ICC: Complementarity, Gravity and Impact

In: International Criminal Law Review
Authors:
Chandra Lekha Sriram University of London, School of Oriental and African Studies, London, UK cs79@soas.ac.uk

Search for other papers by Chandra Lekha Sriram in
https://brill.com/search?f_0=author&q_0=Chandra+Lekha+Sriram
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
and
Stephen Brown School of Political Studies, University of Ottawa, Canada brown@uottawa.ca

Search for other papers by Stephen Brown in
https://brill.com/search?f_0=author&q_0=Stephen+Brown
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
Download Citation Get Permissions

Access options

Get access to the full article by using one of the access options below.

Institutional Login

Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials

Login via Institution

Purchase

Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):

$34.95

Following contested elections in late 2007, Kenya experienced brief but significant violence. International pressure and diplomacy led to a coalition government, and a commission of inquiry recommended the creation of an internationalized criminal tribunal or International Criminal Court (ICC) involvement, should a tribunal not be created. The government of Kenya both promised to create a hybrid tribunal and to cooperate with the ICC, yet has arguably done neither, engaging in delaying tactics for about a year before the prosecutor requested approval to open an investigation. The specific situation presented by Kenya requires careful analysis of two key principles of admissibility in the Rome Statute, gravity and complementarity. This article, based on fieldwork and interviews in Kenya and in The Hague and on judicial decisions and prosecutorial policy documents, examines the treatment of these to date, emphasizing the use and abuse of the concept of positive complementarity.

Content Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 1065 240 20
Full Text Views 379 51 2
PDF Views & Downloads 292 143 6