At the end of this year, African leaders called for a collective withdrawal from the International Criminal Court. This joined the growing list of criticism of the court which has been accused of being bias towards the African continent. All but one of the 10 investigations launched so far by the ICC have been about the African continent; is the International Criminal Court targeting Africa inappropriately?
South Africa, Burundi and Gambia have all opted out. Kenya, Namibia and many others are reconsidering their membership. One of the reasons for this action is that the court has received information about alleged abuse in other parts of the world but justice has not been done. In 2015, a preliminary investigation was made on the 2014 Gaza conflict after Palestinian Authority submitted evidence to the court. They claimed Israel military committed war crimes while a U.N report showed an evidence of crime committed by Hamas and Israel military. However, nothing concrete was done. There are also allegations of abuses in Iraq, Venezuela, Colombia, Afghanistan, Russia, and China.
Meanwhile, the U.N Security Council, a major stakeholder in ICC is one of the most powerful yet imbalanced systems that in 2002, it exempted the United States from persecution for 12 months and it was renewed annually until Kofi Annan, former Secretary General refused to renew it in 2004 after there was evidence of U.S troops abusing Iraq prisoners. Britain has not been indicted over it involvement in Iraq war after evidences later emerged that there was no direct threat from Iraq’s former dictator Saddam Hussein.
Observation has been raised by African States that their obligations to the court are preventing them from making diplomatic decisions such as immunity for leaders and officials in order to hold peaceful negotiations; while the U.N Security Council has been criticized for lack of objectivity and political inequality. There is no single African country in its permanent seat even after serious lobbying. Sometimes, it ignores African leaders’ requests to try to handle issues first before ICC. Thus, African countries like Namibia are on their way out of ICC because the country no longer needs the court since their own legal institutions are now strengthened.
Nevertheless, the ICC is the last resort for the world’s most vulnerable people. The court rejected various accusations and stated that the cases it handles have to do with jurisdiction and signatory of the Rome Statute which most African countries ratified. But whenever credible national prosecutions are taking place, the court may not exercise jurisdiction.
Frustrations with the ICC are understandable but exiting it is not the best solution. Since its formation, it has been able to deal with serious cases such as genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes. Its flaws should be taken care of through reformation. The African states also need to review its justice system. We should strengthen our judicial system and expand the jurisdiction of the African court of justice and human rights.
ICC should begin to genuinely investigate violations of its law committed by super powerful nations especially those in the U.N Security Council and their allies. A.U should be given more powers, responsibilities together with a permanent representative in the Security Council. This would be a big step for the union to checkmate its members and prevent war crime. Hence, Africans would see themselves as part of the international justice circle.
www.mbnaija.com/2017/05/13/the-international-criminal-court-at-the-hague-making-an-african-case/