African press review 24 January 2012

Four Kenyans to face the International Criminal Court. Political violence in Sierra Leone. Airzim employees object to working for free. And Julius Malema appeals fights his suspension from the ANC.

The Kenyan dailies are dominated by yesterday's decision by the International Criminal Court (ICC) in Holland to prosecute four public figure for crimes against humanity. The alleged crimes date from the period immediately following the 2007 presidential election and the four face charges including murder, forcible transfer and persecution.

Apart from the seriousness of the crimes, the four accused are major players: Uhuru Kenyatta and William Ruto are both presidential candidiates, both are members of parliament, Kenyatta is Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance. The other two who will face trial are civil service head Francis Muthaura and the radio presenter Joshua Arap Sang.

The problem is that there's a clause in the coalition agreement signed by President Mwai Kibaki and Prime Minister Raila Odinga, committing the two leaders to sack any public officer charged with crimes arising from the post-election violence.

This morning's Daily Nation actually quotes the relevant paragraph in the coalition agreement.

“The parties shall ensure that any person holding public office or any public servant charged with a criminal offence related to 2008 post-election violence shall be suspended from duty until the matter is fully adjudicated upon," it reads.

Kibaki has ordered Attorney-General Githu Muigai to constitute a team of legal experts to advise the government on the way forward.

The Daily Nation also reports that one of the three judges voted against yesterday's decision to try the cases before the International Criminal Court. Judge Hans-Peter Kaul maintains that the ICC is not competent because, although the crimes committed are serious common crimes under Kenyan criminal law, they can not be considered crimes against humanity.

The Nairobi Standard says the ICC decision has hit the Kenyan political arena like a typhoon, striking a blow to the heart of the current administration. Says the Standard, yesterday's decision opens a new page in Kenya’s history with a retiring president leaving behind two of his closest confidantes facing an international trial for crimes against humanity.

In Uganda the Daily Monitor reports that Sierra Leone’s opposition is threatening to initiate impeachment proceedings against President Ernest Bai Koroma for his failure to address the causes of political violence in the country.

Three people were injured last week after supporters of the ruling All Peoples Congress and the Sierra Leone Peoples Party clashed during a disputed local council by-election in eastern Freetown.

The Herald in Harare reports that the Zimbabwe High Court has yet to make a decision on an application by some Air Zimbabwe workers to have the national airline placed under judicial management. The workers claim they have not been paid since 2009. Airzim is saddled with an accumulated debt of 107 million euros.

Management at the national airline say the only solution is to cut staff from the current 1,200 to about 400. Cabinet has already approved the initiative, but the financial details remain to be worked out.

BusinessDay in South Africa reports that the African National Congress appeals committee on disciplinary matters yesterday began hearing Julius Malema’s appeal.

Malema’s lawyers were expected to criticise the process that led to him receiving a five-year suspension from the party.

Malema and five other ANC Youth League leaders are accused of undermining party leaders and sowing division within the party.

The party closed ranks and was tight-lipped during yesterday’s hearing. A handful of Youth Lleague supporters demonstrated outside Luthuli House.

An ANC spokesman said party members were instructed not to comment on the hearing.

The youth leader’s lawyers were expected to argue the initial disciplinary process was flawed because Malema and his colleagues were not given an opportunity to put forward mitigating circumstances before sentence was handed down. They would also argue that the national disciplinary committee was prejudiced.