Daily Independent (Lagos)
Daniel Kanu, Austin Oboh and Michael Jegede
10 March 2009
(Page 2 of 3)
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.
Read comments. Write your own.
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.