Business Daily (Nairobi)
Sam Makinda
10 July 2009
opinion
African Union leaders' decision in Sirte, Libya, last week to refuse any co-operation with the International Criminal Court over the extradition of Sudan's President Omar al-Bashir was short-sighted, disdainful of the Darfurian victims, and could unwittingly encourage other political leaders to undermine human rights, the rule of law, peace and security in Africa.
Their decision, which was contained in a declaration drafted by AU foreign ministers, also underlines the view that our political leaders prefer pursuing their selfish interests to respecting universally accepted norms, rules, and institutions.
Moreover, African leaders have demonstrated that they pay only lip service to the ideals, principles, and objectives of the AU.
President Bashir has been indicted of war crimes in Darfur, and if he believes he is innocent, he should have no fear of facing the ICC.
The AU has affirmed its commitment to end impunity, and Article 4(h) of its Constitutive Act says the continental body has the right to intervene in any African country "in respect of grave circumstances, namely war crimes, genocide and crimes against humanity."
Moreover, the AU adopted the Protocol on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity in 2006 as part of the Pact on Security, Stability and Development in the Great Lakes Region.
Therefore, there was a legitimate expectation that the AU would take appropriate punitive action against those who have committed war crimes in Darfur since 2003.
War crimesBy issuing an arrest warrant for President Bashir in March, the ICC signalled that the international community was unhappy with the AU's efforts of siding with the suspected perpetrators of war crimes and wanted to bring justice to the victims.
The claims by President Bashir's supporters that the ICC is an instrument of Western powers have no basis. The ICC, which was established at about the same time as the AU in 2002, is a creature of global efforts.
Those who claim the ICC is a Western institution should know that the most consistent opponent of its establishment was the leading Western power, the USA.
In spite of this, Gambian President Yahya Jammeh is reported to have recently claimed: "What is unacceptable is the fact that any Western country can have a court that can indict an African head of state".
The reports attributed to Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi that he claimed the ICC represented a new form of "world terrorism" are unfortunate.
If some African leaders believe the ICC is a European institution because it happens to be based in the Hague, they need to be briefed properly.
Indeed, they need to be told that African countries played important roles in the creation of the ICC, especially between 1998 and 2002, and at least 30 AU member states have ratified its statute.
As the ICC chief prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo said in Addis Ababa earlier this week, the ICC and the AU "are working together" to try to resolve the problem in Sudan's Darfur region.
Instead of trying to undermine the legitimacy of the ICC with baseless claims, African leaders should understand that the ICC was created for only one thing, namely to bring justice to the victims of war crimes, genocide and crimes against humanity, whether such victims are Africans or not.
Makinda is a professor of Security, Terrorism and Counter-Terrorism Studies, Murdoch University, Australia.
Be the first to Write a Comment!
Copyright © 2009 Business Daily. 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.
