The question “Is the International Criminal Court targeting Africa inappropriately?” is influenced obviously by the fact that all the cases so far being handled by the ICC fall within Africa as if crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court are not taking place in other continents. However, assuming Africans so far indicted by the Court actually committed these crimes, should the question still arise simply because their counterparts in other continents are not being investigated nor prosecuted?

I do not think the ICC is inappropriately targeting Africans because these crimes are actually taking place in Africa and are committed by Africans, though some of them may bear complicity of powerful nations.

While I do not, however, support a practice where people committing these crimes in other continents of the world being shielded from the ICC's scrutiny, I would love to see that African culprits are brought to international justice. This is actually good for Africa. And in the long-run, this will contribute to liberate Africa and its people from negative foreign influence and in fact, it is not an encroachment on state sovereignty because foreign aids has never be seen as an invasion of sovereignty by the African leaders so, international justice should not be seen as one.

Above all, a critical look of the cacophony of complaints against the trials of African leaders by the ICC would reveal that this has come mainly from the African leaders themselves and not from ordinary African people who have always been the victims of these crimes. So, the motive of their complaints is understandable but is it justifiable? The ICC is an institution created to end impunity in relation to crimes that shake the foundations of humanity and obviously, ordinary African people are the ultimate beneficiaries of this.