Impunity on trial at ICC not Africa.. Says Annan.

[foresight]

Kofi Annan has come out in vigorous defense of ICC.  He was speaking days ahead crucial talks on whether African nations should pull out of the International Criminal Court (ICC). 

The former United Nations secretary-general completely rejected accusations that the ICC was targeting Africa. Saying  "It is the culture of impunity and individuals who are on trial at the ICC, not Africa," 

Challenged on his remarks by questioners, he added: "The leaders are protecting themselves. No one speaks for the victims."

He said if leaders wanted to "fight" the court without caring about the victims of crime or providing alternative tribunals, "it will be a badge of shame for each and every one and for their countries".

Annan was delivering the annual Desmond Tutu International Peace Lecture at the University of the Western Cape on Monday (7 10 2013)

On Saturday, an extraordinary session of the African Union (AU) Assembly meets in Addis Ababa to discuss Africa's relationship with the ICC. 

Reuters news agency recently quoted an AU official as saying that Kenyan officials "have been criss-crossing Africa in search of support" for a withdrawal from the court.

Annan said in Cape Town: "When I meet Africans from all walks of life, they demand justice: from their national courts if possible, from international courts if no credible alternative exists... 

We must always have the courage to ask ourselves 'who speaks for the victims?' On too many occasions, we have failed the victims of the worst crimes by neglecting to bring the perpetrators to justice."

When the international community adopted the Rome Statute setting up the ICC, "I was proud that so many African countries, where judicial systems are weak and divisions run deep, provided such strong support for the court. He added.

 I am therefore concerned by recent efforts to portray the Court as targeting Africa. I know this is not the case. "In four of the cases on Africa before the court, African leaders themselves made the referral to the ICC. 

In two others - Darfur and more recently Libya - it was the United Nations Security Council, and not the Court, which initiated proceedings." He disputed an argument that insisting on justice "might obstruct the work for peace... 

In countries as far apart as Rwanda, Bosnia and Timor-L'Este, we have learned that justice is not an impediment to peace but a partner. When we abandon justice to secure peace, we most likely get neither. The parallel pursuit of justice and peace does present challenges, but they can be managed."

Annan cited the combating of impunity and the enhancing of the integrity of elections as two priorities for Africans wanting to "deepen democracy".

Another priority was to "turn our backs on the 'winner takes all' approach to politics which has been so damaging to our continent". He said the approach had led to "abuses of power by the winner and encouraged losers to reject democracy as a peaceful means for change".

He added: "Too often, the individual interests of leaders have been misconstrued as interests of their country. Political leaders, who derive their position and legitimacy from the people, and are elected to serve them, can never be considered above the law.

"Genuine multiparty democracy provides mutual security to political opponents and encourages them to take part in the process rather than seek to subvert it...  It is transparent and accountable institutions, not 'strong men' or strong leaders that safeguard democracy and create the conditions for peace and prosperity."

allafrica.com/stories/201310072289.html

[foresight]

1) ICC is not targeting Africa
2) Leaders are protecting themselves at the expense of victims.
3) It's a badge of shame for African leaders .
4) Neglecting to bring perpetrators of justice we fail victims.
5) The parallel pursuit o peace and justice should not present challenges they can be managed.
6) Avoid winner takes it all type of leadership and politics.
7) Individual interest of leaders should not be confused with the interest of a nation.

Those were interesting points for debate...

[foresight]

Meanwhile, several major countries in African have indicated that they have no plans to withdraw from the court these include South Africa, Nigeria, Botswana, Ivory Coast and Zambia .... reports the Sudanese Tribune.

The newspaper further reports that the Sudanese president Omer Hassan al-Bashir will travel this week to Ethiopia and Saudi Arabia for the first time since the outbreak of some of the worst protests to engulf the country in recent years.

And that..

The Tunisian president, Moncef Marzouki, said in statements this month that he informed the African Union Commission (AUC) chairperson that his country will boycott the meeting, emphasising that there are a lot of dictators in Africa who are committing crimes. He further disclosed that he has been in talks with several African leaders to discourage them from withdrawing from the ICC.

www.sudantribune.com/spip.php?article4b8362

[foresight]

Roland adjovi who is the Academic Director at the Arcadia Center of Arcadia University in Arusha, Tanzania. 

He previously served as Senior Legal Officer for the Registry of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda and as legal assistant for the Organization for African Unity.

He also served as Editorial Assistant for the African Yearbook of International Law (through AFIL, the African Foundation for International Law). ....

Had the following to say

"Indeed, a coalition of African leaders panicking on the prosecution by the ICC is growing and quite successful in a political brainwash on the continent"

Also

" That coalition was composed of [President of Sudan Omar] Al Bashir, [Former Libyan President Muammar] Gadhafi and [President of Rwanda Paul] Kagame. Now, the Kenyans have joined it and have dragged their other East African fellows, especially [President of Uganda Yoweri] Museveni with them"

But, their argument on political bias by the ICC is misleading and one needs to consider how these cases came to the court...

A -The majority was referred by the African states themselves: Democratic Republic of the Congo, Uganda, Central African Republic, Côte d'Ivoire and Mali. 

B- Two were referred by the UN Security Council where none of the three African States sitting objected: 

C -Res. 1593 on Sudan (Algeria, Benin and Tanzania) and Res. 1970 on Libya (Gabon, Nigeria and South Africa). 

D- In the first instance (Sudan), Algeria abstained but did not oppose the vote, while in the second instance (Libya) even South Africa voted in favor of the resolution. 

E- Only the situation of Kenya is the result of a proprio motu decision of the ICC Prosecutor, but one needs to recall that the strong suggestion came from the Kenyan PEV Commission led by a Kenyan judge, Waki. 

F- In fact, in most cases, it seems that African leaders are the only to be blamed for bringing the ICC into their domestic politics. 

G- But the political campaign is so successful that many Africans are convinced that the ICC is against Africa. 

H- This week the AU will hold a meeting on the way forward with a potential concerted plan for withdrawal, boycott or alternative judicial mechanism. 

He concludes that ..

"Any such move would be highly regrettable for the African people"

jurist.org/forum/2013/10/roland-adjovi-african-brainwash.php

[OtishOtish]

Foresight:

Many thanks for bringing up Annan's comments and the other associated information. I spent about 20 minutes writing a response to your "invitation" to debate the "7 points" but then deleted it. I think it is a fundamentally hopeless task.  Nobody wants to listen to how the cases got to the ICC, that Gadaffi Jnr and his associates have been fighting very hard to get to the ICC, that Ntanganda demanded to be taken to the ICC (rather than face his fellow Africans, whose "capability" he is only too aware of), .... The African head is a very hard one.  Our man!  Our People!

Instead, why not a look at the African Union.   Formerly known as the Organization of African Unity, not that there was ever any organization or unity ...

The African Union: Very hot on the fight against neo-colonial, hyper-imperialism. All for sovereignity and standing up on their own and for themselves. But the reality is that it is no more than another face of Beggarly Africa. Setting aside the free and expensive buildings from China, Germany, etc., as well as many other free goodies, the annual budget says it all. For 2013:

The Executive Council,

2. APPROVES the budget of African Union (AU) for the Year 2013 amounting to US$278,226,622 as follows:

i) A total amount for US$122,866,637 assessed to Member States on the basis of the current Scale of Assessment;

ii) A total amount of US$155,359,986 that is earmarked for the programs is secured from International Partners.

www.au.int/en/sites/default/files/Assembly%20AU%20Dec%20416-449%20(XIX)%20_E_Final.pdf

A historical study of the AU budget is very interesting. A real problem is that all those African leaders who regularly show up to run their mouths and enjoy lavish parties don't open their wallets as freely: there are a lot of "back dues". And the nasty foreigners too are getting irritated: lately they have not been handing over money as quickly as expected. I will not be surprised if the AU ends up with a huge deficit this year, with worse to come next year. Last I looked, there was a desperate call to "mobilize assistance from international partners" to close the gap for this year.

But we leave in a world of equality and so forth, as guaranteed by the UN Charter on Human Rights & other such worthy declarations. All are very equal. Beggars must not be seen to be below those they beg from.

But I digress ...

Mass withdrawal again, eh? Sigh. What I find amazing is that we still get worked up over that one. Anyone who is interested in the history of African "mass withdrawals from the ICC" will find satisfaction via Google,  elsewhere on Jukwaa, etc. How about we skip that one and have something different? "Bring back the cases" is a big hit these days. Reformed judiciary and all that ...

* I think not enough Kenyans appreciate Eugene Wamalwa for the performer that he is. Earning his keep and all that. He single-handedly breathed new life into a joke of an idea that everyone thought was dead---that of extending the jurisdiction of the African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights (which most Africans have never heard of) to covering the sorts of crimes covered by the ICCC.

iwpr.net/report-news/african-leaders-discuss-regional-war-crimes-court

Some people forgot that this was an AU "initiative" and got worked about it! All sorts of writing, such as

www.issafrica.org/publications/papers/implications-of-the-au-decision-to-give-the-african-court-jurisdiction-over-international-crimes

To cut to the chase: it went the way of all great AU initiatives---forgotten as soon as everyone got home from the Great Summit. Dead, even with Mr. Wamalwa doing his best to earn his keep.

* There was a similar joke by the East African Legislative Assembly, to transfer the ICC cases to the East African Court of Justice (which most East Africans have never heard of). Another joke, quickly forgotten.

www.eac.int/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=989:transfer-icc-case-to-the-eacj&catid=146:press-releases&Itemid=194

Now, here's a lesson on the consequences of short-term thinking: This court has the potential to be useful and need not have ended up as the joke that it is right now. Probably the biggest problem it had to deal with was the extent to which the government of Kenya worked to undermine it ... until the ICC cases were confirmed and GoK lost on all admissibility challenges and related appeals!

So, once again, the AU "leaders" are gathering to talk tough. What can one say ... the circus doesn't come to town that often.

The AU 2014 budget: Africans to contribute about $130 million, the nasty colonial foreigners international partners to contribute about $180 million.  (And would the members please catch up on their "back dues".)

Independent and sovereign. Yes, indeed! And, of course, devoted to human rights, justice, and democracy.

[foresight]

OtishOtish

Your write up was worth reading. The things they reveals about the AU is just appalling. The Organization of African Unity, the AU's predecessor organisation, was founded to end the innumerable human rights violations meted out on Africans through the yoke of colonialism. But the AU today is turning a blind eye to the plight of the victims of human rights violations which by the way is perpetrated by the same leaders.

It is well known that African states played a vital role in setting up the ICC and have an unquestionable stake in its core values in producing a just, fair and effective ICC. But this organ of their creation (ICC) is now being undermined with politically motivated claims that it is unfairly targeting Africans.

It's kind of like the dog bitting it's owner... You probably have watched these movies of some genius creating a robot and shortly afterwards the robot develops a brain of it's own and turns against it's creators..

By the way I read that It was largely thanks to the lobbying role played by African states that efforts to undercut the independence of the Court's Prosecutor were rejected by ensuring that the United Nations Security Council could not control the Court's work.

This thing about "withdrawing" is panic driven....they created a monster now they must contend with it...

African states, including Botswana, Cote d'Ivoire, Guinea, Lesotho. Liberia, South Africa, Nigeria, Senegal, Sierra leone and South Africa, also helped bring about the early establishment of the ICC in July 2002 by promptly ratifying the Statute. 

Since then, they have actively supported the ICC and nominated Africans to the positions of ICC judges including the current ICC Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda from Gambia.

The fear is of these leaders is understandable.... the monster they help create has yet to touch on many cases of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes outside of Africa.

The monster has focused entirely on Africa and currently 8 African situations are on the radar. That does not mean that the ICC Prosecutor's decisions are without basis or biased. 

Five of the situations were referred by the affected African governments themselves and two others were referred by the UN Security Council with the support of its African members.

The ICC is playing an important role in delivering justice, and reparation, to African victims in these situations. 

Victims of international crimes especially in Africa,  will tell you that they are so grateful to ICC for ensuring access to justice for the world's most vulnerable people.

The withdrawal anthem is sending the wrong signal about Africa's commitment to protect and promote human rights and reject impunity. All of which are values central to the Act upon which the African Union itself was founded.

What a shame!

[foresight]

Meanwhile...In ADDIS ABABA ....

Reuters reports that African Union chief Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma asked U.N. Security Council envoys on Tuesday how they might react if asked to defer the international trials of Kenya's leaders so they can deal with the aftermath of the Nairobi mall attack. Zuma it appears had suggested that the AU could decide to formally ask the Security Council to defer trials of President Uhuru Kenyatta and his deputy William Ruto.

Zuma said African leaders felt that after the attack by al Qaeda-linked group al Shabaab on the Westgate center in Nairobi last month, Kenyatta and Ruto needed to stay in Kenya instead of travelling to The Hague for their trials.

Several Security Council envoys responded to Zuma by saying the issue of impunity was very important...... and that if..... African leaders had any perception of bias by the International Criminal Court then it should be discussed at the court's Assembly of State Parties, not the Security Council.

The envoys apparently told Zuma they would consider any AU request BUT noted THAT the council had already turned down a previous deferral request in 2011 and rejected a request in May for the cases to be terminated because the council had no such power.

"There's no particular reason to think there would be a different outcome (now)," said one senior U.N. council envoy, speaking on condition of anonymity.

First In May the AUs reason for deferral was  "ICC hearings risked raising ethnic tensions and destabilizing its economy" Now it has changed to "the attack by al Qaeda-linked group al Shabaab on the Westgate center in Nairobi last month. (mine)

And after that

za.news.yahoo.com/aus-zuma-asks-u-n-security-council-kenya-201433943.html

[OtishOtish]

Foresight:

As things stand the AU has other problems, such as appealing to "international partners" to help plug the holes in its budget: the motor-mouth leaders all appear to have big mouths but small wallets. In the circumstances, I don't see any mass withdrawal. What I expect is the Standard-Issue Hot Air that the AU is known for---a "hard-hitting resolution" that hits absolutely nothing.

Another attempt at an Article 16 deferral was inevitable:

jukwaa.proboards.com/thread/8601

but this path has turned into a mild disaster. The looting-fest aspect has now overwhelmed the tragic-attack aspect, not to mention the manner in which the whole operation was bungled. So, instead of a "threat to regional peace", what the boys have ended up with is a list of what they need to deal with for security: deal with national corruption, incompetence throughout the government, petty bloody-mindedness, etc. Those are not matters for the UN Security Council.

[foresight]

How about this....

Johannesburg - Archbishop Emeritus Desmond Tutu warned African leaders against leaving the International Criminal Court on Wednesday, saying it would leave the world a “more dangerous place”. 

He accused the leaders of Sudan and Kenya, “who have inflicted terror and fear across their countries” of trying to “drag Africa out of the ICC, allowing them the freedom to kill, rape, and inspire hatred without consequences.”

Adding to growing cautions on such a move, Tutu called on continental heavyweights South Africa and Nigeria to back The Hague-based tribunal

In an online petition titled “Who will stop the next genocide?” and addressed to to President Jacob Zuma and his Nigerian counterpart Goodluck Jonathan, 82-year-old Nobel peace laureate said that in his lifetime he had seen “great gains made that protect the weak from the strong.

Calling the two countries the “voices of reason at the African Union,” he urged them to “speak out and ensure that the persecuted are protected by the ICC”.

He cautioned that “in just two days time, African leaders could kill off a great institution, leaving the world a more dangerous place.”

“Without the political leadership of Nigeria and South Africa and other democracies across the continent, justice could be buried and the ICC could be killed off,” its text states. 

“We call on you to lead the fight against crimes against humanity and keep Africa in the ICC.”

Asking people to add their names, Tutu said once the petition had hit one million signatures, it would be delivered to leaders at the AU meeting.

www.iol.co.za/news/africa/don-t-leave-icc-tutu-tells-african-leaders-1.1589749#.UlblJaNhiK0

[foresight]

According to the Archbishop Emeritus KENYA AND SUDAN "have inflicted terror and fear across their countries” and are now trying to “drag Africa out of the ICC, so as to allow them the freedom to kill, rape, and inspire hatred without consequences.”....

That's hard tackling...

[Deleted]

Oct 10, 2013 20:57:20 GMT 3 foresight said:

How about this....

Johannesburg - Archbishop Emeritus Desmond Tutu warned African leaders against leaving the International Criminal Court on Wednesday, saying it would leave the world a “more dangerous place”. 

He accused the leaders of Sudan and Kenya, “who have inflicted terror and fear across their countries” of trying to “drag Africa out of the ICC, allowing them the freedom to kill, rape, and inspire hatred without consequences.”

Adding to growing cautions on such a move, Tutu called on continental heavyweights South Africa and Nigeria to back The Hague-based tribunal

In an online petition titled “Who will stop the next genocide?” and addressed to to President Jacob Zuma and his Nigerian counterpart Goodluck Jonathan, 82-year-old Nobel peace laureate said that in his lifetime he had seen “great gains made that protect the weak from the strong.

Calling the two countries the “voices of reason at the African Union,” he urged them to “speak out and ensure that the persecuted are protected by the ICC”.
:
He cautioned that “in just two days time, African leaders could kill off a great institution, leaving the world a more dangerous place.”

“Without the political leadership of Nigeria and South Africa and other democracies across the continent, justice could be buried and the ICC could be killed off,” its text states. 

“We call on you to lead the fight against crimes against humanity and keep Africa in the ICC.”

Asking people to add their names, Tutu said once the petition had hit one million signatures, it would be delivered to leaders at the AU meeting.

www.iol.co.za/news/africa/don-t-leave-icc-tutu-tells-african-leaders-1.1589749#.UlblJaNhiK0

In just 2 days, they've got 500 million signed up.

Here's the petition: secure.avaaz.org/en/justice_for_africa_icc/?byvpSbb&v=30046

[foresight]

Kathure Kebaara I aso signed up.. followed it up with a brief note to your Excellencies Goodluck and Zuma.

From Nigera we are informed that....

Nigeria is unlikely to sign for withdrawal of their membership from ICC. 

The Chairman, Steering Committee of Nigerian Coalition for the International Criminal Court, Chino Obiagwu calls this "a selfish agenda and grand conspiracy by some African leaders to make the International Criminal Court (ICC) not to work. 

He said "We are raising concern for the Nigerian delegation going for the extra-ordinary session of the AU.  We want to draw their attention to the fact that the ICC is still very vital to fighting impunity"

We all know what happened to Charles Taylor now. Without the ICC, Sierra-Leone and Liberia may not be able to convict him. 

President Al-Bashir of Sudan too may not be prosecuted if ICC does not intervene because it may be impossible for Sudanese court to bring him to justice. 

So, the ICC remains a vital instrument in checking international crime and we therefore, call on the Nigerian government not to be persuaded by other African countries to withdraw from the ICC because to do so will send a wrong signal that Nigerian government is not ready to fight impunity and mass violation of human rights.

The ICC is there to do justice. If you have ICC in place, African leaders will strive to do justice. 

Nigerian delegations should not vote in support of the proposed withdrawal from ICC. 

 If some prominent African countries resist the attempt to convince other to withdraw from ICC, the plan by some African leaders to withdraw their membership from ICC will fail.

Diplomatically speaking, Nigeria, South Africa and Egypt have much influence in African politics and if they stand against it, it will not work. 

 If Nigerian delegation does not support it, it will send a signal to those who are pushing for it that it is not going to work. 

The body language of Nigerian government suggests that they will not support it because there was a statement from the Nigerian government in August on why they allowed Al-Bashir into the country. 

The Nigerian government told the ICC that they were taken by surprise that he came into the country for the AU summit. 

Nigerian government in its explanation said Nigeria stand committed in her obligations to the ICC. 

Also in the explanation, the government pointed to the fact that a Nigeria sits in trial Chamber 2 of the ICC, which is the Chamber that issued the warrant of Al-Bashir. 

ICC also replied Nigeria that they are sure of their commitment to the court. 

President Goodluck Jonathan, in his speech at the United Nations General Assembly made case for Nigeria to be granted Permanent seat in the UN and you cannot be pushing for that kind of seat international and diplomatic privilege and also be a party to those pushing for the withdrawal of African countries from ICC.

We don’t expect Nigerian government to support the proposal, especially, now that terrorism in the country has assumed a higher dimension in this country. It is very obvious that the ICC will intervene in this country with the kind of terrorism we are witnessing in this country now. 

leadership.ng/news/101013/terrorism-icc-will-soon-intervene-nigeria-obiagwu

[OtishOtish]

(a) There will be no mass withdrawal. This is Standard-Issue AU Hot Air. Blown out of the lower, less "friendly", end.

(b) The biggest issue for the AU will be how to explain away (a). They will no doubt say that nobody intended to withdraw or discussed anything about a mass withdrawal.

After that, I hope the AU will never again attempt this sort of stunt. It's very tiresome nonsense.

[mank]

Seems to me like its a process of showing us what real impunity is. Giving us a peep at it in the making.

[foresight]

From addis ababa...

Ethiopia's foreign minister opened a special African Union summit Friday with a scathing attack on the International Criminal Court, blasting what he said was its "unfair" and "totally unacceptable" treatment of Africa.

He accused the ICC of singling out Africans for prosecution, and have SPECIFICALLY DEMANDED that the court drop the proceedings against KENYA LEADERSHIP.

"The manner in which the Court has been operating, particularly its unfair treatment of Africa and Africans, leaves much to be desired," Ethiopian Foreign Minister Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus told ministers and delegates at the opening of the two-day meeting.

"Far from promoting justice and reconciliation... the court has transformed itself into a political instrument. 

This unfair and unjust treatment is totally unacceptable," he said of the ICC, the world's first permanent court to try genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity.

The bloc, however, APPEARS DIVIDED on the issue with countries like Kenya, Sudan, Ethiopia and Rwanda taking a tough line.

OTHER NATIONS ARE seemingly MORE RELUCTANT .

By the way...

All of the court's current eight cases against Africans, is what is prompting the AU to accuse the ICC of "hunting" Africans....... EVEN THOUGH MOST OF THOSE CASES WERE REFERRED TO THE COURT BY THE AFRICANS THEMSELVES....

BADGE OF SHAME -

This is how South African anti-apartheid icon and Nobel peace laureate Desmond Tutu describes the African situation and it's leadership.

Quote 1

"The number of African cases was merely a reflection on the human rights situation on the continent."

Quote 2

"Those leaders seeking to skirt the court are effectively looking for a license to kill, maim and oppress their own people without consequence"

Quote 3

They believe the interests of the people should not stand in the way of their ambitions of wealth and power.

Quote 4

 "They simply vilify the institution as racist and unjust, as Hermann Goering and his fellow Nazi defendants vilified the Nuremberg tribunals following World War II," 

www.nation.co.ke/news/africa/African-Union-summit-opens-with-attack-on-ICC/-/1066/2028202/-/ne1p5pz/-/index.html

PS... Mank you can say more...

[foresight]

The AU is heavily divided over the ICC, with East African leaders facing strong resistance from their West African counterparts in their campaign to whip up hostility towards the court. "There are strong passions around the issue. The ICC has been on the agenda of every AU summit since Mr Bashir's indictment.

Quote "In advanced countries, sitting presidents are not hauled before courts. Amina Mohammed  ( Kenya Foreign Minister )

Mark Kersten a UK legal analyst  observes that...

"In a lot of theses cases, the ICC intervened after referrals to it by governments,"  and that "It's not unusual for states to wear two masks, to engage with the ICC when it suits them and to criticise it when it doesn't. It's all very political."

A good example of this is Uganda, which asked the ICC to investigate the rebellion waged in the north by the Lord's Resistance Army (LRA) - a move that led to the court issuing an arrest warrant for the group's leader, Joseph Kony. 

But the same president for purpose of political favors, at Mr Kenyatta's inauguration in April this year,  he said he no longer supported the ICC because it was being used by "arrogant actors" who were trying to "install leaders of their choice in Africa and eliminate those they don't like".

In contrast, Ghana's President John Mahama has expressed strong support for the ICC.

In an interview with France 24 after the AU denounced the ICC for "hunting" Africans at a meeting in May, he said: "I will not go as far as accusing the ICC of racism... 

I think the ICC has done a fantastic job in bringing some people who have committed genocide and mass murder to justice."

It is a fact that while  many African governments are hostile towards the ICC, their constituents are strong supporters of it. "There is a fundamental divide between African leaders and African people.

President Mahama told France 24 that while he supported the ICC, he opposed its decision to try Mr Kenyatta, who was elected to office five years after the violence for which he has been called to account.

"What would you say - the verdict of the Kenyan people or the verdict of the ICC, which of them is more important?" he asked.

But international lawyers argue that the whole point of the ICC is to prevent national leaders from using the "shield" of immunity to escape prosecution for the atrocities which some have been accused of carrying out.

Quote "In advanced countries, sitting presidents are not hauled before courts. Amina Mohammed  ( Kenya Foreign Minister)

[mank]

Oct 12, 2013 2:27:47 GMT 3 foresight said:

From addis ababa...

Ethiopia's foreign minister opened a special African Union summit Friday with a scathing attack on the International Criminal Court, blasting what he said was its "unfair" and "totally unacceptable" treatment of Africa.

....PS... Mank you can say more...

Foresight,

I really don't put much thought in the efforts put to scuttle the cases. I like to follow the cases, and preferably listening to clips so I can discern as much of the info and as purely as it is presented. My comment is from that point of view. I should not say more.

[foresight]

Oct 12, 2013 3:38:00 GMT 3 mank said:

Oct 12, 2013 2:27:47 GMT 3 foresight said:

From addis ababa...

Ethiopia's foreign minister opened a special African Union summit Friday with a scathing attack on the International Criminal Court, blasting what he said was its "unfair" and "totally unacceptable" treatment of Africa.

....PS... Mank you can say more...

Foresight,

I really don't put much thought in the efforts put to scuttle the cases. I like to follow the cases, and preferably listening to clips so I can discern as much of the info and as purely as it is presented. My comment is from that point of view. I should not say more.

Point taken ... I Can respect that Mank.

[foresight]

Latest from AU Meeting in Addis Ababa.

Reuters reports that Africa has agreed that aA SITTING HEAD OF STATE SHOULD NOT BE TRIED BY the International Criminal Court.

And in what appeared to be a change of tone the leaders stated that..

“It should be underscored that OUR GOAL IS NOT AND SHOULD NOT BE A CRUSADE AGAINST ICC (really?) ,but a solemn call for the organisation to take Africa’s concerns seriously,” Ethiopian Prime Minister Hailemariam Desalegn said in an opening address.

Their concerns seemed to focus especially on Kenyan leaders. Following that session, Ethiopian Foreign Minister Tedros Adhanom said trying Kenya’s president and his deputy infringed on that nation’s sovereignty. 

The ministers DID NOT call for a mass walk-out from the court’s jurisdiction, however..... Officials previously said that idea would be on the agenda BUT IT DID NOT DRAW BROAD SUPPORT AMONG THE  the continent’s 34 signatories to the court’s Rome Statute.

Hailemariam told gathered leaders that the court and the U.N. Security Council had showed a “double standard” in the way it treated Africa and said earlier African requests for deferring cases had been ignored.

Ethiopia’s foreign minister said a group led by the AU chair, now Ethiopia, with members from Africa’s five regions would press the U.N. Security Council to defer proceedings against Kenya’s leadership and the Sudanese president.

“We underscored that SITTING HEADS OF STATES AND GOVERNMENTS SHOULD NOT BE PROSECUTED WHILE IN OFFICE" Ethiopia’s Tedros said.     

Ministers called for using video links in the Kenyan trials to ensure leaders could carry on their official duties.

“Demanding respect is the least Africa can do, but I also don’t like to see this mistaken for – as we have seen with some of the detractors of this exercise – that Africans are supporting impunity. We don’t,” Rwandan Foreign Minister Louise Mushikiwabo told Reuters.

After wrangling over wording on Friday, one senior delegate described the result as a “good compromise”. 

Some Africans, including officials from heavyweights South African and Nigeria, had prior to the meeting indicated there was NO BROAD BACKING FOR A WALK-OUT FROM ICC of many African COUNTRIES WHEN IT WAS SET UP.

London-based rights group Amnesty International urged African nations meeting in the Ethiopian capital not to cut ties with the court, saying victims of crimes deserved justice.

Kenyan Foreign Minister Amina Mohamed said she was satisfied with the outcome of Friday’s talks, adding that immunity for a sitting president was “a principle that has existed for a long time” in international law.

www.euronews.com/newswires/2158072-africans-to-tell-icc-heads-of-state-should-not-be-tried/

[OtishOtish]

Another mass-withdrawal meeting by ministers and heads of state to issue the same statement they have issued numerous times in support of Bashir? What happened to all the tough talk before the meeting?

Uhuru to AU leaders: "No, no, no! The translator got it wrong! I said kusema-na-kutenda, not kusema-na-kusema!"

The UN Security Council and the ICC should now take note: Failure to pay attention to the latest AU demands will result in mass withdrawal. Again. Really.
:-)

[OtishOtish]

The final outcome of the talkfest fruitful and constructive talks held by African Heads of state at the most recent Extraordinary Summit of the African Union:

www.au.int/en/sites/default/files/Closing%20Remarks%20of%20PM.pdf

It reminds me of what sometimes happens in my workplace, on issues that everyone understands will go nowhere but which "cannot" just be thrown away: a committee is formed to form a subcommittee to form a group to ... and then to report back up the chain and have a further meeting to ... By the time there is a report back, nobody remembers what the original point was. Usually, it turns out that there was no real point.

[mank]

Oct 12, 2013 13:20:31 GMT 3 foresight said:

Oct 12, 2013 3:38:00 GMT 3 mank said:

Foresight,

I really don't put much thought in the efforts put to scuttle the cases. I like to follow the cases, and preferably listening to clips so I can discern as much of the info and as purely as it is presented. My comment is from that point of view. I should not say more.

Point taken ... I Can respect that Mank.

Highly appreciated!

[OtishOtish]

Oct 12, 2013 18:06:24 GMT 3 OtishOtish said:

Another mass-withdrawal meeting by ministers and heads of state to issue the same statement they have issued numerous times in support of Bashir? What happened to all the tough talk before the meeting?

Uhuru to AU leaders: "No, no, no! The translator got it wrong! I said kusema-na-kutenda, not kusema-na-kusema!"

The UN Security Council and the ICC should now take note: Failure to pay attention to the latest AU demands will result in mass withdrawal. Again. Really.
:-)

We now have some clarification on the red above. Apparently, the general feeling is that the AU is absolutely united on this point but feel that asking folks to stick out their necks, just for Ruto and Uhuru, is a bit too much. Pan-African brotherly love, but, surely, within reason!

Accordingly, whatever the whole world has heard or read about mass withdrawals amount no more that village rumours.    But they will do what they annually demand in the Bashir case: the Security Council must respect Africa and defer cases against a president!

www.au.int/en/content/extraordinary-session-assembly-african-union

And if nobody listens to the AU? Well then, it will probably just have to be another mass withdrawal!

I note that around May/June this year the AU had a draft resolution for a mass withdrawal and that this would be signed "within a few days by all countries". Not sure what happened to that, but on that basis the next mass-withdrawal meeting will not take place until early 2014. I propose that, on this point, we adjourn until then ... at which point the AU will, as they say in my village, show the world why chickens don't grow teeth.###

_________________________________________________________

###: I confess to being somewhat fuzzy on this point. I don't know why chickens would ever want to grow teeth or why it should matter if they didn't, but I have a deep respect for ancient wisdom. So should you.

[foresight]

Oct 13, 2013 0:59:02 GMT 3 OtishOtish said:

Oct 12, 2013 18:06:24 GMT 3 OtishOtish said:

Another mass-withdrawal meeting by ministers and heads of state to issue the same statement they have issued numerous times in support of Bashir? What happened to all the tough talk before the meeting?

Uhuru to AU leaders: "No, no, no! The translator got it wrong! I said kusema-na-kutenda, not kusema-na-kusema!"

The UN Security Council and the ICC should now take note: Failure to pay attention to the latest AU demands will result in mass withdrawal. Again. Really.
:-)

We now have some clarification on the red above. Apparently, the general feeling is that the AU is absolutely united on this point but feel that asking folks to stick out their necks, just for Ruto and Uhuru, is a bit too much. Pan-African brotherly love, but, surely, within reason!

Accordingly, whatever the whole world has heard or read about mass withdrawals amount no more that village rumours.    But they will do what they annually demand in the Bashir case: the Security Council must respect Africa and defer cases against a president!

www.au.int/en/content/extraordinary-session-assembly-african-union

And if nobody listens to the AU? Well then, it will probably just have to be another mass withdrawal!

I note that around May/June this year the AU had a draft resolution for a mass withdrawal and that this would be signed "within a few days by all countries". Not sure what happened to that, but on that basis the next mass-withdrawal meeting will not take place until early 2014. I propose that, on this point, we adjourn until then ... at which point the AU will, as they say in my village, show the world why chickens don't grow teeth.###

###: I confess to being somewhat fuzzy on this point. I don't know why chickens would ever want to grow teeth or why it should matter if they didn't, but I have a deep respect for ancient wisdom. So should you.

OtishOtish..

You were right all along with your analysis and your prediction as to the outcome of this meeting was spot on.

( Opinion).... When African Union (AU) heads of state gathered in Addis Ababa this weekend for an extraordinary summit, Africans might have expected that their leaders would have extraordinary issues to discuss. 

But none of the issues ailing Africa that warrant extraordinary attention were discussed by the African heads of states.

The depressing truth is that the main issue on the agenda in Addis Ababa was how to protect a handful of Africa's most powerful people.

AU leaders concluded that instead of addressing any of the urgent human rights disasters that threaten Africa that the most urgent issue was to unite their voices to obstruct the work of the International Criminal Court (ICC), which has become the last, best hope for many of those Africans who have been victims of atrocities implicating some of these very same leaders.

The ICC is not beyond criticism, nonetheless, it remains the most significant institution and achievement of the world community to fight impunity for the most serious crimes and against the most powerful people. 

Over the past few years, significant progress has been made to hold even heads of states to account - such as former Liberian president Charles Taylor and former Yugoslav president Slobodan Milosevic. 

A key step forward has been the recognition that official status is not a bar to prosecution for the gravest crimes.

Yet despite paying lip service to ending impunity, the central proposal out of Addis was that .....

"SITTING HEADS OF STATE OR ANYBODY ACTING OR ENTITLED TO ACT IN SUCH A CAPACITY SHOULD HAVE IMMUNITY FROM PERSECUTION"

That means Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir should be not be required to appear for trial for genocide and crimes against humanity, or Kenyan President Uhuru Kenyatta for crimes against humanity. (Let's not forget that Bashir is currently the only head of state aside from Syria's Bashar al-Assad who is implicated in bombing his own people on a daily basis.)

There doesn't seem to have been much support for the much-rumored mass withdrawal from the ICC. 

The notion that sitting heads of state should have immunity for genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity is not just appallingly self-serving, it's repugnant.

Just imagine the kind of disincentive it would create for anyone to leave power, as well as the incentive it creates for the unscrupulous to gain or maintain power at whatever cost-by murder, coup, or fraudulent elections, just to name a few.

The proposal also directly undermines the AU's own Charter and principles that proclaim support for the rule of law, respect for human rights, and an end to impunity. 

But most of all, the AU's message from Addis is a profoundly disturbing message to Africans that...

THEIR LEADERS BIGGEST PRIORITY IS NOT DEVELOPMENT, GOOD GOVERNANCE OR RESPECTING BASIC RIGHTS, ITS ENSURING THAT THE LEADERS THEMSELVES ARE INSULATED FROM JUSTICE, AT WHATEVER PRICE

[foresight]

And news coming out of Sudan is that Sudan has expressed frustrations over the African Union Summit’s failure to call for a mass pull-out from the International Criminal Court. 

Sudan’s remarks are an indication of the high hope the country had on AU to rally African nations to withdraw from the Rome Statute during the extra-ordinary summit in Addis Ababa. 

The summit was also evaluating AU’s working relationship with ICC. 

According to Sudan Tribute, Sudan Foreign Minister Ali Karti attributed failure to pull out of ICC to absence of some nations from the summit.

He said the summit saw withdrawal calls from ICC including from his government.

Although some countries expressed readiness to walk out, they indicated the time was not ripe for such a move. He added.

According to him  the AU summit decision did not meet Sudan's expectations to withdraw from the ICC blaming it on some states that adopted "stances" that generally weakened the Africa position.

www.thepeople.co.ke/26012/sudan-frustrated-by-summit-failure-to-call-for-icc-pull-out/