Nairobi — I don't envy Louis Moreno-Ocampo in his position as the International Criminal Court (ICC) chief prosecutor. However, that is not to suggest that I will be either sympathetic or forgiving if he does a botched job in investigating Kenya's post-election violence suspects.

When the Rome Statute was enacted in 1998, human rights advocates everywhere gloated over the prospect of a world court that would finally confront the demon of impunity. It was believed that leading perpetrators might run, but they would no longer hide.

It was thought that prosecuting "those bearing the greatest responsibility" for war crimes, genocide and crimes against humanity, meant that never again would the world witness atrocities on the scale of the previous century.

However, seven years after The Hague-based ICC's establishment, there is much more scepticism than delight over its performance and capacity. For most of the time, the court lacks staff, resources and international support. Paper pledges and political indifference have characterised most of its tenure.

Beginnings are always difficult and a lot of time and effort have gone into establishing the court and enlisting member states. Currently, 110 states have ratified the Rome Statute. Missing from the list, however, are such powerful countries as India, China, Russia and the United States. No wonder, US ambassador Michael Ranneberger can issue only puerile threats about the reform agenda, and has nothing of substance to say about impunity and support for the ICC.

So lacking support from the "big guns", Moreno-Ocampo has spent most of his time acting more like a diplomat than a crime prosecutor. His strategy is persuasion and cooperation rather than enforcing the statute.

In all fairness, he has had little option, as the ICC mandate may well be clear and precise, but it lacks enforcement powers. In other words, without its own police force, the court is totally dependent on international cooperation to arrest suspects.

Thus, the chief prosecutor is reduced to going about his work in a trial-and-error manner. However, we have witnessed more errors of judgment than court trials in the past seven years.

The only trial going on at The Hague right now is that of little known Thomas Lubanga of the D.R. Congo. And the case is moving at a snail's pace.

Mr Moreno-Ocampo hardly got off to a dream start in 2004, with his handling of the conflict in neighbouring Uganda. Instead of using his prerogative powers, he sought an invitation from the Uganda government to investigate atrocities in the country's north. Uganda's President Yoweri Museveni gladly accepted to cooperate, since the sole focus was on atrocities committed by Joseph Kony's Lords Resistance Army (LRA), with no investigation to date made of the atrocities of government Uganda Peope's Defence Forces.

The ICC got its first state referral case and Museveni got another weapon to attack the LRA. Moreno-Ocampo was thereafter widely accused of reluctance to prosecute government officials.

However, in all fairness, the indictments against Kony and four of his rebel leaders had an impact on the war in the region. The LRA became more and more isolated as Sudan could no longer grant them a safe haven, and with the signing of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement in 2005, Khartoum was obliged to disarm all militias and maintain peace.

So Kony and company were forced to the negotiating table. Their arrests have remained elusive, but the atrocities have considerably reduced. This latest case is about Kenya and Kenyans must take up the running on every front to ensure it has a satisfactory outcome.