Evaluating State Cooperation Obligations Under the Rome Statute: A Case Study of Kenya’s 2007/2008 Post-Election Violence

This article examines Kenya’s compliance with its cooperation obligations under the Rome Statute in relation to the International Criminal Court (ICC) investigations and prosecutions arising from the 2007/2008 post-election violence. While the Rome Statute establishes a binding legal framework requiring States Parties to cooperate fully with the Court, its practical implementation remains uneven, particularly in politically sensitive contexts. The article analyses key areas of cooperation, including evidence provision, witness protection, and judicial assistance. Using a doctrinal legal approach based on the Rome Statute, ICC decisions, and relevant scholarly sources, the study evaluates both the legal framework and its application in practice. The findings reveal that Kenya’s cooperation was selective and inconsistent, characterised by delays, incomplete disclosure of evidence, and weaknesses in witness protection. These limitations significantly affected the effectiveness of the ICC proceedings. The analysis further shows that such patterns of cooperation are closely linked to political considerations, particularly where proceedings involve high-level political actors. The article argues that the Kenyan case exposes structural weaknesses within the ICC’s cooperation regime, especially the absence of effective enforcement mechanisms and the Court’s reliance on voluntary state compliance. It concludes that strengthening international criminal justice requires not only legal reforms but also greater attention to the political and institutional conditions that influence state cooperation.