President Uhuru Kenyata's appearance at the International Criminal Court(ICC)tomorrow has once again brought to the fore the opinion held by many that the court is unfairly targeting leaders of Third World counties.

When the treaty establishing the ICC came into force on the 1st of July, 2002, the optimism that greeted at has been replaced with an uncertainty brought about by its constant trial of Third World countries and its perceived soft stance on leaders from powerful countries who have committed similar crimes. Many have however argued that the crimes committed in these countries are far worst and equating them with those that happen in other places is akin to comparing a lion to a pussy cat. However, a crime is a crime.

It is imperative to point out that the ICC doesn't just take up a case until it has been referred to it by citizens of that country. And in its defence, most of these Third World countries have a Judicial system that can best be described as non-existent. So it is understandable that most of its beam has been on these countries.

When President Uhuru Kenyata of Kenya took office in 2013, there was already a court case hanging over him over his role in the post election violence that claimed thousands of lives in that country. In short, there are those who argue that the ICC case was instrumental to his victory at the polls. There was a sense of injustice amongst Kenyans who felt that the ICC was an attack tool of the West. And so, voting Kenyata in was the perfect opportunity to defy the West. However, since he took office, he has succeeded in building bridges with the West. Hence, it wasn't surprising that President Obama also visited Kenya on his most recent trip to Africa.

Still, there are those(especially in Africa)who feel his appearance at the Hague(a first for a sitting President)is a slap on Africans. This sentiment was re-echoed at a meeting of the African Union that was held some months back. At that meeting, some delegates posited that the best course of action was for all African countries to pull out of the ICC.

However, pulling out of the ICC could have resulted in a serious backlash from the West, and so, it wasn't surprising that that course of action was shelved.

And then there is the case of a former President of Liberia, Charles Taylor. His trial and subsequent conviction at the Hague was greeted with wild jubilation in Liberia; and brought about some from of closure for the thousands who were killed by him and those who were permanently scarred. Another trial that was greeted with the same action was that of former Yugoslav leaders who committed serious crimes against humanity. President Omar al-Bashir, through his actions in Sudan, has also earned himself a 'Call-up' at the Hague, a call he is yet to answer. We still await the capture of Joseph Kony; the notorious Ugandan warlord who has committed unimaginable crimes to face the consequences of his actions at the ICC.

President Uhuru Kenyata has decided to hand over power; albeit temporary, before honoring the invitation at the Hague. Probably to prevent dragging the Presidency through the mud.

Whatever the final outcome of this trial, the ICC, over the years, has done wonderfully well. African leaders need to understand that even if they manipulate their country's Judiciaries to their will, they will still be made to answer for their actions at the ICC. The ICC must also shed the toga of going after leaders of Third World countries and must be seen to have done so.

After all; what is good for the goose is also good for the gander!