ICC - a paper tiger?

This is a bitter blow for international justice and for the International Criminal Court (ICC), which was created to call the perpetrators of crimes against humanity to account.

122 states ratified the Statutes of Rome, the legal framework within which the court operates; Kenya became a signatory on March 15, 2005.

Many civil society organisations in Africa helped craft these statutes, because they were no longer prepared to see human rights violations in their countries go unpunished.

The trial of Uhuru Kenyatta was ill-starred from the very beginning. In the initial stages, before the decision to go ahead with the trial had been taken, the judges were at odds with one another. A German judge, the late Hans-Peter Kaul, voted against a trial in The Hague. He felt the criminal cases under investigation should be heard by a Kenyan court.

More than 1,000 people died in the 2007/8 post-election violence in Kenya and hundreds of thousands fled their homes. The laborious investigations by Chief Prosecutor Fatima Bensouda's predecessor, Luiz Moreno Ocampo, were hampered by obstruction in Kenya.

As time passed, more and more witnesses disappeared, changed their minds or simply refused to give testimony. Important documents were often released only in part or not at all.

Over the last year, the start of the trial was postponed several times. Kenyatta faced five charges of murder, rape and deportation for allegedly masterminding the post-election violence.

Kenyatta refused to meet demands by Bensouda that he should disclose details of pertinent financial transactions, although he had previously declared his willingness to cooperate with the court.

Kenyatta, like everybody else on trial in a court of law, was 'innocent until proven guilty.'

However, human rights groups, surviving victims and relatives will view the decision to abandon the case with dismay.

They had hoped that the court would uncover the truth about the events in 2007/8 and bring perpetrators of crimes against humanity to justice

The ICC's record so far is poor. It has handed down just three verdicts - two of guilty and one acquittal. Is the court a toothless tiger? Surely not! But the court urgently needs more financial resources and a better infrastructure so it can address the problems that have been troubling it from the very beginning.

The court is completely dependent on the cooperation of the states in which it is carrying out investigations. This must change. It needs its own police force, one that can investigate on its own behalf and detain suspects. There should be no immunity for heads of state. Investigators should also have sufficient financial means to grant effective witness protection. They should be able to investigate cases on the ground without hindrance - and they need to be faster, more precise and more efficient.

There is no alternative to the International Court of Justice in The Hague. War crimes, genocide, incitement to violence should no longer go unpunished. Victims and their families need to be reassured that the ICC can and does hold independent and fair trials, and that the perpetrators - whatever their rank or standing - will be brought to justice.

Andrea Schmidt is the head of DW's Kiswahili service