Daily Independent (Lagos)
Daniel Kanu, Austin Oboh and Michael Jegede
10 March 2009
analysis
When Manuel Noriega of Panama, was captured by a contingent of U.S. soldiers in 1989, the world was literally shaken from the heat it generated.
Noriega, was then sitting President of Panama, one of the Latin American countries, known more for its drug-related image than many other things. In fact, his abduction and subsequent trial in America, was on account of this. But what seemed to make the most news was not the drug angle, but the fact that a sitting leader of a sovereign country, could be uprooted from his country and taken away in that fashion. However America, has since shown it is possible. Noriega, was eventually jailed and the world moved on. In fact, the U.S. has not only shown the Noriega possibility, but upped the ante almost a decade after by the invasion of Iraq, where it not only seized another sitting President, Saddam Hussein, but, tried and executed him. The effect and debate of the propriety of these two events, even though not totally isolated in world history, have continued to engage commentators in the international arena.
But, what appears capable of causing a shift of attention from them, is the current development in one of Africa's hotbeds of crisis - Sudan.
Last Wednesday, the International Criminal Court (ICC), issued a warrant for the arrest of its President, Omar Al-Bashir. And the reason, was not markedly less controversial, even though it appears so in some other respects. While Noriega met his fate for his involvement in drugs and Saddam for terrorism, the Sudanese leader is now a wanted man for war crimes against humanity, no thanks to his role in the on-going conflict in Darfur, a black-populated part of his country. Unlike Panama and Iraq, which were considered a sole effort, this is the first ever of such treatment to against a sitting Head of State, by a world body.
Of course, as expected, it has continued to generate a chain reaction. Al-Beshir's government immediately dismissed the move as thousands of Sudanese took to the streets to vent their anger. His allies, including the China and Russia, have raised objections, while the African Union (AU), has taken a measured position, with what appears a feeble protest.
However, Darfur's rebels are in celebration, finding tacit support from the U.S. and European Union (EU).
The development is a major highpoint in a conflict that has since 2003, led to the death of 300,000 people and reported rape of thousands and displacement of millions.
Spokeswoman for the court in Hague Laurence Blairon announced the decision, reached by the Pre-Trial Chamber of the ICC, during a press conference held at the Court's seat.
"Today (Wednesday), pre-trial chamber one of the International Criminal Court... issued a warrant for the president of Sudan for war crimes and crimes against humanity. He is suspected of being criminally responsible... for intentionally directing attacks against an important part of the civilian population of Darfur," she said.
Blairon said that the court would transmit as soon as possible to the government of Sudan a request for Al-Bashir arrest and surrender.
The Sudanese President, according to her, would face five counts of crimes against humanity and two of war crimes. While Al-Bashir would not face charges of genocide as requested by the ICC's chief prosecutor, they could be added to the warrant at a later stage if more evidence emerged.
She said Al-Bashir and other high-level Sudanese political and military leaders had orchestrated and coordinated the attacks.
Her words: "The violence in Darfur was the result of a common plan organised at the highest level of the Sudanese government, but there was no evidence of genocide."
The ICC Prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo, had made the application for the warrant on 14 July 2008, following an investigation into the situation in Darfur, opened by on June 1 2005.
Yes At The Hague, No In Sudan
Sudan's Constitution currently affords its Head of State immunity from criminal prosecution while in office. However, no international instrument has ever recognised any immunity for crimes against humanity or war crimes. Thus, Al-Bashir has been urged to surrender himself immediately to face trial.
Khartoun Reacts
The Sudanese leader has not only denied the charges, has dismissed the consequence of the arrest warrant, which he had described as having "no value." In fact, he was seen dancing on a podium during a rally in the country's capital, Khartoum, shortly after the ICC pronouncement.
His government, has said it would not cooperate with the court. "We will not deal with this court," Justice Minister, Abdel Basit Sabdarat told Al-Jazeera television, adding, "It has no jurisdiction, it is a political decision."
Daily Independent gathered that despite the outward show of indifference, Sudanese, still awaited the outcome of the ICC decision with bated breath, which threw a pall of tension over the country.
In defiance, they had vowed thereafter during protests to protect their President with every drop of their blood.
Already, the country appears to have begun its own offensive, expelling about 10 foreign aid agencies after the warrant was issued, even as fears of reprisals by Al-Beshir's supporters, has caused the beefing up security around some strategic embassies of perceived enemy countries.
A Measure Of Pressure
The Sudanese situation could be seen as a major victory for international human rights bodies, which see the Darfur crisis as a major smear on world conscience. In fact, these bodies are presently in celebration mood, even though they feel victory is not complete yet. Irene Khan, Amnesty International's Secretary General said there is no going back on the ICC verdict.
"The law is clear. President Al-Bashir must appear before the ICC to defend himself. If he refuses to do so, the Sudanese authorities must ensure that he is arrested and surrendered immediately to the ICC," he said.
He argued that should Al-Bashir leave Sudan, the government of any country in which he finds himself had an obligation to deny him safe haven by arresting him immediately as a fugitive from justice and surrendering him to the ICC.
"No one is above the law. If you are charged with a crime, you must stand up and face those charges in a court of law. President Al-Bashir will have the opportunity to do this before the International Criminal Court," Khan had argued.
Indeed, the body is also said to be campaigning for a similar treatment for other Sudanese officials, such as
Ahmad Harun, a minister in the Sudanese government and Janjawid as well as militia leader Ali Kushayb.
Both are suspected of war crimes and crimes against humanity committed in Darfur. The ICC issued arrest warrants against them in April 2007.
Road To The Slaughter Slab
With the human calamity the six-year old war is said to have caused, notwithstanding that Khartoun says only 10,000 have died, even the UN, seems to have been boxed to a corner. Its Security Council, which could suspend ICC proceedings, has indicated no plans of doing so or even meeting.
Libyan Ambassador, Ibrahim Dabbashi, the Councils rotating President for the month of March, told reporters that no immediate meeting of the council would take place for now. "We will not call an immediate meeting of the council," he said, even though he acknowledged the division with the Council on the issue. Indeed, the most possible option for now is the likelihood of getting support of the UN to invoke Article 16 of the ICC statue, which allows the council to defer ICC proceedings for up to one year at a time.
Dabbashi, said no formal negotiations were under way on a resolution to halt the case but that the Libyans were meeting individually with the 14 other Council members to persuade them on the need for it.
African and Arab states are to visit the UN later this month to ask the Security Council to stay action, he said.
Dabbashi said that on behalf of African states, he informed the Council of the AU's decision to send a high-level delegation in cooperation with Arab states to the UN.
The ministerial delegation is expected to visit the UN headquarters on March 15 and 16 to try to convince Council members to use Article 16 of the Rome Statute to defer the ICC's warrant, he added.
Different Voices, Many Passions
There is no doubt that what may soon become known as the Al-Bashir treatment was not made possible by human rights organisations, but respected voices on the African continent. One of such voices, was that of South African Archbishop and Nobel peace laureate, Desmond Tutu. Before the ICC verdict, he had called on African leaders to support the warrant. He said it was shameful that so many African leaders had rallied around Al-Bashir, despite his alleged war crimes in Sudan.
"Because the victims in Sudan are Africans, African leaders should be the staunchest supporters of efforts to see perpetrators brought to account," Tutu had written.
Tutu, has since slammed the AU, for calling on the UN Security Council to suspend the courts proceedings.
The Save Darfur Coalition also commended the decision even as its president Jerry Fowler emphasised in a statement that the decision represented an important step in the effort to end impunity for the crimes committed in Darfur.
He urged President Barack Obama's administration to immediately take advantage of this new window of opportunity for peace in Sudan.
But Khartoum, seems to have some backing from expected quarters.
The Arab League, AU and the Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC), have urged the UN to stop the ICC. Their argument is that the move would undermine the fragile peace in Darfur, the same argument advanced by Russia and China. The AU, which has long argued against any warrant being issued, said it could strike a fatal blow to faltering peace efforts. "The need for justice should not override the need for peace," AU Commission Chairman Jean Ping, was quoted as saying.
Arab League chief Amr Mussa, was reported to have conveyed his organisation's position, saying it was very disturbed by the decision.
The Islamic Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (ISESCO) on Thursday said it strongly rejected the decision, which it saw as "flawed and unfair."
The Rabat-based organisation, again, advanced the same argument of the decision having a damning effect on the Darfur crisis.
The decision is a sure sign of the double standards of the world's superpowers and "runs counter to international law and the universally accepted principles of international justice," it said.
The Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK), on Sunday, also criticised the decision, saying it posed a threat to world peace and disturbed stability of international relations.
A spokesman from the Foreign Affairs office of the communist country, stated that the decision was not only an interference on the internal affairs of a nation but also hurt the dignity of Sudanese people.
But, the United States, Britain and France, which like Russia and China are permanent Council members with veto powers have said they see no reason to defer the process. They say Khartoum had undermined the peace process in Darfur and has refused to hand over two Sudanese men already indicted by the ICC for war crimes in Darfur.
The US government, which has a package of sanctions against Sudan, said those guilty of atrocities must face justice, while warning that violence against foreigners as a result of the warrants would not be tolerated.
"The White House believes those that have committed atrocities should be held accountable," White House spokesman Robert Gibbs told reporters.
Elsewhere, some Western diplomats, said there were no negotiations on a resolution to stop the ICC prosecution because those favouring deferral lacked the votes to get it through.
The Sudan Debacle
The conflict is believed to be between the black Africans (The Afro-Sudanese in South Sudan, Darfur, Nubia, etc) fighting against Arabs, said to be minority settlers, in control of the regime, ruling from Khartoum. The battle is said to be against racism. In fact, the treatment the touted Arab supremacist rule, is allegedly meting out on the blacks, is reportedly worse, than the case of Apartheid. This includes the raiding of black African villages by Arabs, who sell their captives into slavery in Northern Sudan and other parts of the Arab world. It is this that has led to the quest for self-determination by the victims.
But Khartoum claims that its war on the Afro-Darfurians is just a counter-insurgency operation, and that its war on South Sudan is a jihad, a religious war to Islamise the Christians and polytheists of South Sudan.
Foremost Nigerian writer, Prof Chinweizu, said Khartoum's real objectives, under cover of Jihad against the 'infidels' in South Sudan and of counter-insurgency in Darfur, is Arab expansionism, with Arab colonialism, enslavement and Arabisation for the conquered black Africans.
In fact, Sudan is seen as the microcosm of Africa's unacknowledged Arab problem, a problem of racism, colonialism, enslavement and an Arab agenda of cultural, political and territorial expansion, analysts say.
Its highly diverse culture, has indeed been torn apart by a brutal civil war between Northern Muslims and Southern Christians. Both have endured over two decades of internal warfare, which experts say neither side can win on the battlefield. But the struggle is not solely a political one. Theology and a clash of religious values between fundamentalist Muslims, Christians, and animist groups are in part driving this conflict. Today, experts think the war has the potential to destabilise much of East Africa, partly because Sudan's military rulers see themselves as the leading edge of Islamic revolution, many contend.
In recent years, Al Bashir has been accused of intensifying efforts at forced conversions, especially of Christians, under threat of death. A U.S. Department of State human rights report says pressure on non-Muslims to convert is strong. "The government treats Islam as the de facto religion and has declared that Islam must inspire the country's institutions and laws.
Overall, an estimated 70 per cent of the country adheres to Islam, 10 percent to traditional/animist beliefs, and 20 percent to Christianity.
To forge national union, Sudan's leaders have pursued a policy of grafting Arabic culture and Islamic religion onto the country by force. Yet, southerners persistently reject the north's culture, religion, and government," the report said.
The religious war in Sudan is among the longest running in the world. Since 1983 there have been an estimated loss of two million lives.
Exigency Versus Sovereignty
Some analysts have continued to wonder, since Wednesday's announcement, how a sitting Head of State could be arrested and the method to be employed.
It is simple, posits a professor of law at the University of Lagos, Akin Ibidapo-Obe. He said Al-Bashir could be arrested under international law.
"The ICC will follow thoroughly the verdict to serve as a deterrent to others. The world will hold you to account for any grievous crime. The international community has to move fast. They can send troops to execute the warrant. You cannot localise human rights. It is a global thing. Don't forget that an African and two white judges were part of the judgment and they are persons of impeccable character. The warrant can be implemented. Justice must go ahead and let the heavens fall but no heaven will fall," he submitted.
Chief Ebenezer Babatope former aviation minister, agrees, saying under the international law, Al-Bashir could be arrested but with implications.
"Under the international law he can be arrested. But if the person is a sitting President it may not be the best arresting him. He could be allowed until he leaves office because enforcing that mandate will be risky and they may not want to risk a war there as the situation is volatile," he submitted.
However, Head of History Department University of Lagos (UNILAG), Professor Abayomi Akinyeye's own grouse was that the timing of the warrant was wrong.
The academic said that more emphasis should have been placed on how the on-going peace process would be consolidated to accord lasting solution to the crisis in Sudan, adding that it would be difficult to effect the arrest of a sitting head of state.
"The Sudanese crisis is still ongoing. One would have wanted the dust to settle. The peace process would have been allowed to consolidate. Peace and normalcy to have been fully returned to Sudan before you take this step of issuing a warrant of arrest," Akinyeye averred.
But, former Attorney-General and Minister of Justice, Chief Richard Akinjide, said that the success of the arrest or otherwise would depend on the co-operation of others since those that issued the warrant had neither the police nor the army to enforce compliance.
"The people that issued the warrant of arrest have no police force or the army to mandate compliance. It is the co-operation of the Sudanese majorly that will decide whether or not they will comply," he told Daily Independent.
The legal luminary warned African leaders to be cautious and to tread softly on the issue, as what is happening in Sudan is a product of European imperialism.
"African government must be careful. What happened in Darfur is scandalous and the African Union should have a meeting and deliberate their stand on the issue. America is not a signatory to it and above all what is happening in Sudan is a product of European imperialism. They (African Leaders) must be very careful because once it succeeds in one African country all other states of Africa will become vulnerable," he cautioned.
"The government of the Sudan is obliged under international law to execute the warrant of arrest on its territory," Moreno-Ocampo, who first asked the court to issue an arrest warrant for al-Beshir last year, also told reporters.
The Darfur rebel Justice and Equality Movement (JEM), which signed an accord with Khartoum last month, welcomed the announcement, but said it was no longer possible to negotiate with the Sudanese government.
"I don't think that ethically it is possible to negotiate with someone who committed crimes in Darfur and has lost legitimacy," Ahmed Tugod Lissan, JEM's chief and secretary for political affairs, was quoted as saying.
The Lebanese Foreign Ministry, Thursday expressed deep concern over the development, according to reports. "This will have a negative impact on stability in Sudan and on the peace agreement," the ministry said in a statement. The ministry confirmed its solidarity with Sudan, support to Sudan's sovereignty and unity and respect of its population and leaders.
It called on the UN Security Council and regional and international sides to support the current political process in Sudan, and urged to refrain from adopting double standards in dealing with crises, by ignoring the recent Israeli aggression on Gaza and its aggression on Lebanon in 2006.
Understanding The International Criminal Court
The ICC is the Worlds first permanent war crimes tribunal, coming into force in 2002 with its headquarter at The Hague, the Netherlands. It is an independent body, not a UN court. A court of last resort, the ICC acts only when member countries are unwilling or unable to dispense justice themselves. It may prosecute individuals responsible for genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes committed after July 2002. The UN Security council can ask the court to open an investigation.
Read comments. Write your own.
Copyright © 2009 Daily Independent. All rights reserved. Distributed by AllAfrica Global Media (allAfrica.com). To contact the copyright holder directly for corrections — or for permission to republish or make other authorized use of this material, click here.
AllAfrica aggregates and indexes content from over 125 African news organizations, plus more than 200 other sources, who are responsible for their own reporting and views. Articles and commentaries that identify allAfrica.com as the publisher are produced or commissioned by AllAfrica.
I totally support the decision of the ICC and thoughts of other right thinking africans who have made comments abt the subject matter. No african leader or head of government should be spared to face criminal charges. The situation in sudan is worrisome and more so because we have a despot bent on killing black Sudanese because they choose religion other than islam. This is tantamount to arab imperialism and must stop. The Arab North is using the oil resources in the south to develope the former at the detriment of the people of the south.They hired and payed islamic militia to terrorise, kill and rape innocent women just in the name of a jihad. I agree that this shameful act is worse than apartheid Russia and China support the leadership in the North for economics reasons. The Chinese have never done anything good in africa. They sell us adulterated and second hand goods because they are themselves fake. Our corrupt leaders use them to strenghten their grip on power. The Russian leadership in moscow are alike. It baffles me when they talk abt interfering in the internal affairs of a sovereign state to make their argument for going against decisions of right thinking people or world body. The situation in gaza shouldn't be compared to this because hamas is a terrorist organisation Finally, i posit that the lunatic president of sudan must be brought to book. This will serve as a deterent to others.