Recent developments at the ICC have triggered furious reactions from URP legislators. The judges have allowed the prosecutor to use recanted statements of missing and hostile witnesses.
Given the growing fears that there is no way the ICC would spend millions of dollars on the Kenyan cases and fail to secure a conviction, URP leaders are concerned Deputy President William Ruto could end up being a sacrificial lamb.
There are two reasons why the ICC would not take the Kenyan cases lightly.
First, given the publicity the cases have attracted, the court is aware the whole world, and especially Britain, France, America and other Western powers, are keenly watching the proceedings and waiting for the final determination.
The court will have to justify its existence and why it should continue to receive more funding. Without the support of the West, many believe ICC operations would grind to a halt.
It is also widely believed that the West has been uncomfortable with the current political leadership in Kenya and has all along been working behind the scenes, supporting efforts by the opposition to oust President Uhuru Kenyatta's administration.
Going by the widely held perception that the West controls the ICC, could they be plotting to fix Ruto in order to influence a regime change in 2017 to instal leaders who would protect their economic interests?
I differ with the URP leaders' claims that Uhuru’s TNA wing has turned a deaf ear to Ruto’s case. Yes, the Attorney General’s office and the Foreign Affairs ministry played a key role in getting Uhuru's case dropped.
Similarly, the two offices have been burning the midnight oil strategising on how to free Ruto and his co-accused Joshua Sang.
The AG’s office has given Ruto’s defence team all the necessary support to file an appeal challenging the Trial Camber’s decision. Once the appeal is formally lodged before the ICC Appeals Court, the AG will apply for the government to be enjoined in the case.
One of the directors of the Presidential Strategic Communication Unit has announced he would file a petition at the High Court to declare the chamber’s decision goes against the spirit and letter of our constitution and poses a big threat to Kenya’s sovereignty.
On the political front, TNA MPs have come out very strongly in Ruto's defence. They have argued the DP was being persecuted for political reasons and it is time Kenya and Africa pulled out of the Rome Statute, which created the court. Some have asked him to boycott the ICC proceedings.
Besides, Uhuru has solidly stood by Ruto. He has repeatedly brought this matter before the attention of the African Union and international community and argued that the continued trial poses serious challenges to political and socioeconomic development in Kenya.
Uhuru lobbied for the AU to support and ratify the Malabo Protocol, which creates the African People's Court of Justice and Human Rights.
If this would have come to pass, the move would have paved the way for Uhuru to go to the next level and push for the transfer of Ruto’s case from the ICC to a newly created court. He believed truth and justice would have prevailed if Ruto is tried on African soil.
Besides the move would have gone a long way in affirming the commitment of Africa to addressing and resolving its own problems. In other words, the move would have helped to further the cause of Pan-Africanism.
Finally, I would wish to urge the URP leaders to stop creating the wrong impression that their colleagues in TNA have failed to stand by Ruto. The case is at a critical stage and as such the unity of TNA and URP is needed now more than ever.
Joseph Ndonga is a social commentator, political analyst and blogger.