Nairobi — This week I plead insanity, and madness galore. For starters, I want to be on the 'Ocampo list'. And I am dead serious. Instead of 20 names, he should make it 21. If we were a decent nation, we would increase the list to 38 million.

However, I will speak only for myself. I did not kill; I did not maim. But in my heart, I 'killed'. Not the 'other' tribes. No. In my angry heart, I 'killed' the two principals and burnt their posh homes.

It was 'reverse killings'. Even then, I 'killed' the president more. He was boss; he did zero as the country fell apart. I was miffed. Then I 'killed' some guy called Kofi Annan.

I considered him more dangerous than mungiki. With his Peace Architecture I saw the country getting into a bigger war. But this is not why I want to be on the 'Ocampo list'.

When ODM preached 'majimbo', I did nothing. And when PNU spoke about 'circumcision' of presidential candidates, I did nothing. Because I was a coward, I am responsible. As citizen no. 4855678, I should be on the list for 'crimes of omission'.

But I have another two reasons. One, the reform agenda is in the hands of foreigners. Unfortunately, these foreigners are either hypocrites or amateurs. On his part, Mr Moreno-Ocampo is an amateur. Not in law, but in political intrigues.

And this is why he will fail. I will be surprised if the judges accept his list of 20 names. The evidence is crap, or 'matope' in Kiswahili. In sum, his case is weak. This is why they are asking him for 'co-relation'.

If they accept the list, therefore, we must read their act as political hypocrisy. More so if the two principals are not on it.

Further, we must read the acceptance with the US and Israel in mind. The two have no faith in ICC, its prosecutor Mr Moreno-Ocampo and its judges.

In rejecting them the US argued that the ICC "...interfered with ... national sovereignty" and they feared that the court could be used for "...politically motivated prosecutions".

Israel agreed and rejected this court. They feared that it was a "...political court without appeal" and would be used to "invent new crimes". To the western powers therefore, it is a 'junk court'. And if they distrust it, why should we trust it?

I want to be on the 'Ocampo list' therefore for accepting half-based solutions from foreigners. More so, foreigners who do not believe in the solutions they prescribe.

But how do we deal with the list of 20 if Mr Ocampo fails. There are two ways. The first is a 'village' argument with no intellectual basis at all. We should release them to the 'gods'. Then we should implore the 'gods' to fix them, their families and their animals. Already, three of the people in the KNHRC list have died in disasters.

Others are looking sick with mysterious diseases, while some walk with a limp. Our women should pray for God to avenge on behalf of the weak. And if this is the illogical path, the logical one is simple: We should delay gratification.

This is our second option. Instead of collapsing the country through this Ocampo man, we should wait. Wait for the country to settle. And our best bet is to pursue these 'thugs' after 2012 if the 'gods' will not have fixed them. On this, I could also be wrong!

Allow me now to give the second reason why I should be on the 'Ocampo list'. Kofi Annan cheated me. He told me that reforms were good and the alternative is evil. Then the Americans supported him. Now they sound like a broken record in their call for reforms.

For a moment, though, I believed them. I supported The Hague and the constitutional review process. And for being cheated, I became a co-conspirator to the coming 'big war'. Unknowingly, and in support of the Annan reforms, I conspired against mother Kenya. For that, I should be on that list. Let me explain.

To support the draft constitution is to commit high treason. It is to sign a covenant of perpetual war. In fact, it reads like the "Book of Why We Fought".

What is worse: It is a constitution by the elite, for the elite and of the elite. The Bomas and CoE processes consulted with the people. And the pure presidential system was never discussed. Our options were always two; a president with a cabinet drawn from parliament, or an executive prime minister. Period.

No one talked about the American system in which a president chooses cabinet from his buddies outside parliament. And if this was not from the people, where did it come from?

This is an elite project supported by foreign experts. It is a dangerous experiment that could collapse the country. More so if we see it against Judge Kriegler's findings.

To him, we fought because the presidency was a coveted seat. Every ethnic group wanted it. And this desire to occupy the seat became an appetite. An appetite we could not control.

The reforms were therefore meant to address the anomaly. But did they? Instead of downsizing the presidency, the draft law has strengthened it. From an imperial president, it has created a 'Toad King'.

This can only increase tribal appetites for the position. By extension therefore, it becomes a critical motivator for the coming 'big war'.

But there is a second reform I get violent about: Majimbo. Historically, the call for majimbo equals ethnic cleansing. It happened in the 1960s, the 90s and in 2007.

And if we rejected it when the country was stable, why accept it when we are fragile? For now, it might not pose an immediate danger. But if the years to come are fragile, we will be riding on the back of a tiger.

The question therefore is this: If reforms are meant to unite the country, why are we balkanising it? I don't get it!

Mutahi Ngunyi is a Political Scientist with The Consulting House, a Policy and Security Innovation Think-tank for the Great Lakes Region and West Africa.