₦airaland Forum

bobosydney:
Thank you and I will check and probably the same thing happened to Charles Taylor when he got arrested in Nigeria and taken to Hague for trial.

On June 4, 2003, the Special Court for Sierra Leone (SCSL) issued an arrest warrant against Charles Taylor, the incumbent President of Liberia. When the warrant was issued, Mr. Taylor was traveling to Ghana for talks with Liberian rebel groups to end a four-year civil war that has destabilized West Africa.

The indictment against Mr. Taylor had been issued on March 7, 2003, but was kept sealed until the Special Court Prosecutor saw in Mr. Taylor's trip an opportunity to apprehend him. The warrant was served on the authorities of Ghana, and transmitted to Interpol.

At the opening of the peace conference in Accra, in the presence of numerous African leaders, Mr. Taylor announced that he would step down by the end of his mandate in January 2004. Just after being applauded, he left the conference abruptly and boarded a Ghanaian plane to fly back to Liberia. Ghanaian authorities did not apprehend him.

On June 17, 2003, Liberia's Defense Minister and the rebels signed in Accra a peace agreement. The agreement provides for an immediate ceasefire, and within 30 days, the deployment of monitors to the front lines. These monitors will facilitate the subsequent deployment of peace-keepers, and a transitional government to replace Mr. Taylor's. As news of the agreement was released, Mr. Taylor warned that there will be no peace in Liberia unless the indictment against him is dropped.

Mr. Taylor's arrest warrant is the most recent step in the trend towards securing international criminal responsibility of (former) high-ranking officers in a State - such as the Head of State, Head of Government and the Minister of Foreign Affairs. https://www.asil.org/insights/volume/8/issue/16/arrest-warrant-against-liberian-president-charles-taylor

The U.S. brought Joint Task Force Liberia's Amphibious Ready Group of three warships with 2,300 Marines into view of the coast. Taylor flew to Nigeria, where the Nigerian government provided houses for him and his entourage in Calabar.

Exile
In November 2003, the United States Congress passed a bill that included a reward offer of two million dollars for Taylor's capture. While the peace agreement had guaranteed Taylor safe exile in Nigeria, it also required that he refrain from influencing Liberian politics. His critics said he disregarded this prohibition.

On 4 December, Interpol issued a red notice regarding Taylor, suggesting that countries had a duty to arrest him. Taylor was placed on Interpol's Most Wanted list, declaring him wanted for crimes against humanity and breaches of the 1949 Geneva Convention, and noting that he should be considered dangerous. Nigeria stated it would not submit to Interpol's demands, agreeing to deliver Taylor to Liberia only in the event that the President of Liberia requested his return.

On 17 March 2006, Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, the newly elected President of Liberia, submitted an official request to Nigeria for Taylor's extradition. This request was granted on 25 March, whereby Nigeria agreed to release Taylor to stand trial in the Special Court for Sierra Leone (SCSL). Nigeria agreed only to release Taylor and not to extradite him, as no extradition treaty existed between the two countries.

Disappearance and arrest
Three days after Nigeria announced its intent to transfer Taylor to Liberia, the leader disappeared from the seaside villa where he had been living in exile. A week before that, Nigerian authorities had taken the unusual step of allowing local press to accompany census takers into Taylor’s Calabar compound.

Nigerian President Olusegun Obasanjo was scheduled to meet with President Bush less than 48 hours after Taylor was reported missing. Speculation ensued that Bush would refuse to meet with Obasanjo if Taylor were not apprehended. Less than 12 hours prior to the scheduled meeting between the two heads of state, Taylor was reported apprehended en route to Liberia.

On 29 March, Taylor tried to cross the border into Cameroon through the border town of Gamboru in northeastern Nigeria. His Range Rover with Nigerian diplomatic plates was stopped by border guards, and Taylor's identity was eventually established. US State Department staff later reported that significant amounts of cash and heroin were found in the vehicle.

Upon his arrival at Roberts International Airport in Harbel, Liberia, Taylor was arrested and handcuffed by LNP officers, who immediately transferred responsibility for the custody of Taylor to the United Nations Mission in Liberia (UNMIL). Irish UNMIL soldiers escorted Taylor aboard a UN helicopter to Freetown, Sierra Leone, where he was delivered to the SCSL. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Taylor_(Liberian_politician)#Disappearance_and_arrest

LaudableXX:
Please recall that the interim Liberian govt had even indicted Charles Taylor, before his arrest was carried out. This implies that his home govt had waived any immunity given to him. In addition a special court in Sierra Leone had issued a warrant for his arrest and sent it to Interpol. At the time Taylor was arrested, was he still the substantive head of state, or was he still holding a diplomatic passport? NO. He had fled to Nigeria after leaving power in Liberia, and a request for his extradition was served on the Nigerian authorities.



Obasanjo was President of Nigeria at that time, and a lot of diplomatic pressure was brought to bear upon him, to allow Taylor to be extradited and allowed to stand trial for his crimes. Don't forget that it was OBJ who offered Taylor a chance to live in exile, in Nigeria.

resurgent2019:
You must really like Buhari. You always support him.
Please, are you a Muslim?

bobosydney:
Laudable, you are right and you have knowledge of law.

resurgent2019:
You must really like Buhari. You always support him.

Please, are you a Muslim?

GavelSlam:

I don't do religion sorry.

And yes, I love Buhari.

resurgent2019:
You don’t do religion? But you must belong to one religion or the other na.

I am just asking, I mean no harm Bro..

GavelSlam:

I was born into a Christian home.

Right now I don't worship anything.

All religions in my opinion are man-made.

I do respect everyone's viewpoint.

resurgent2019:
Even though your antecedents give me cause to doubt you, I will take your word for it.

Good night.

GavelSlam:
What antecedents?

resurgent2019:
Fanatical support for Buhari. Only a radical muslim can support Buhari that much. Fact!

CilicMarin:
Do Nigerian Former Vice Presidents Have Life Diplomatic Passports?

If yes, why did Atiku claim that American embassy denied him visa to their country while he doesn't need any in the first place?

DonPiiko:
LaudableXX

For example, in describing the rule according immunity ratione personae in the Arrest Warrant case, the ICJ stated it applies to ‘diplomatic and consular agents [and] certain holders of high-ranking office in a State, such as the Head of State, Head of Government and Minister for Foreign Affairs’ https://academic.oup.com/ejil/article/21/4/815/418198

Who will arrest Mr. Bashir? While he is in power, Sudanese forces certainly will not arrest him, and the Security Council did not authorize the use of force to execute the arrest warrant. The only remaining option is to arrest him when he is visiting foreign countries.

Mr. Bashir tried to visit South Africa in 2009 and 2010, but was informed that he would be arrested if he did. Earlier this year 2015, the South African government relented, offering him immunity so he could attend an African Union meeting in Johannesburg. However, when a South African judge ordered his arrest; Mr. Bashir managed to get away as the court proceedings were underway. http://genocidewatch.net/2015/08/24/can-al-bashir-be-arrested-in-the-u-s/

The Indian government has clarified that Sudan’s President Omar al-Bashir attended the India-Africa summit in late October, despite the International Criminal Court (ICC) calling for his arrest. India is not party to the Rome Statute that created the ICC, which is an independent international court, and New Delhi didn't oblige it by arresting al-Bashir who is President of Sudan and even the diplomatic protections extends to Head of State. https://www.quora.com/Why-is-India-refusing-to-arrest-Sudan-president-Omar-al-Bashir-when-he-arrives-in-New-Delhi

Sudan’s president has made 74 trips across the world in the seven years he’s been wanted for war crimes | QUARTZ Africa |

President Omar al-Bashir of Sudan has clocked in thousands of miles flying across the world since 2009, despite being a wanted war criminal.

The International Criminal Court (ICC) issued a warrant for al-Bashir’s arrest seven years ago today (Mar. 4) for his role in the Darfur genocide, accusing him of overseeing murder, extermination, forcible transfer, rape, and torture, as well as directing pillaging and other attacks against civilians.

The warrant has not stopped the dictator—one of the longest serving in the world—from traveling 74 times to 21 countries since then, seemingly without fear of prosecution. Few countries, including the seven he visited that are signatories to the ICC, harbor the political will to arrest him, despite the ICC urging all states to cooperate fully with the warrant for his arrest.

Bashir made his most recent trip abroad on Feb. 20, for the African Investment Forum (AIF) in Egypt, where Sudan, Egypt, and Ethiopia agreed to strengthen ties. It is his sixth trip since 2009 to the country, a signatory of the ICC that refuses to execute the warrant.

The African Union has protected Bashir from arrest since day one. In 2009, the AU signed a declaration expressing concern over Bashir’s indictment derailing the Darfur peace process and another in 2010 stating the AU would not enforce the warrant against Bashir.

By 2015, the AU called on the UN Security Council to suspend proceedings against the Sudanese president, urging them to withdraw the ICC referral. The AU has repeatedly accused the court of an unfair bias towards Africa since all current cases involve African countries. This argument ignores the fact that local prosecutors initiated all the cases except for Sudan and Libya.

Close alliances and foreign support from the Middle East has also eased travel restrictions. Saudi Arabia’s Sudan investments outdo all others with an estimated $11 billion in January and another $5 billion in military assistance one month later. A cash-strapped Bashir is all too happy to send troops to Yemen and possibly Syria for Saudi Arabia, expanding Sudan’s military ventures beyond the two internal conflicts.

Despite expressing concern over the conflicts in Darfur and Nuba Mountains, the European Union has provided Sudan €100 Million ($109 Million) to ostensibly curb migration and terrorism, according to a statement issued last month. These same issues have helped warm Sudan relations with the United States, Sudan’s foreign minister Ibrahim Ghandour said. Public claims by Sudan’s spy chief Mohamed Atta to deploy militias on the border to prevent movements of Libyan-based ISIS forces is well received by the US State Department. https://qz.com/630571/sudans-president-has-made-74-trips-across-the-world-in-the-seven-years-hes-been-wanted-for-war-crimes/

LaudableXX:
Thank you! But the arrest of a diplomat by American authorities is even wrong. The best they can do, is declare such a diplomat persona non grata, and give him a few hours to leave their country. He will be politely escorted into the next available plane, and sent back without any excuses, except if his home country has waived his diplomatic immunity, cancelled his diplomatic passport or revoked his diplomatic status.

linearity:
Not only America that do it.

Each country likes to stretch the limits of the Geneva Convention about the immunity granted to diplomats.

In 2011 Pakistan arrested and detained an American diplomat, who shot and killed two Pakistanis and when US refused to waive their diplomatic immunity, Pakistan forged ahead and charged the diplomat to court, but he was later acquitted of the crime and released after US settled the families.

Recently another America diplomat, a military attachee hit and killed a Pakistani, he ran and took cover in the US embassy, despite the fact that the Pakistani government have reached a conclusion that, he cannot be charged due to his diplomatic immunity, they have non the less, put his name in their no-fly list at all airports and airlines in bid to prevent him from leaving the country, meaning they want to detain him in the country.

Had he not be wise and ran straight to the US embassy right away, my guess is, had the Pakistani authorities got hold of him first, he will be kooling his feet’s in jail while Pakistan & US tussle...my belt is, US will smuggle him from the embassy out of the country through Afghanistan.

International law confers on certain state officials immunities that attach to the office or status of the official. These immunities, which are conferred only as long as the official remains in office, are usually described as ‘personal immunity’ or ‘immunity ratione personae’.
However, State officials are, generally speaking, immune from the jurisdiction of other states in relation to acts performed in their official capacity (‘functional immunity’ or ‘immunity ratione materiae’) ...As this type of immunity attaches to the official act rather than the status of the official, it may be relied on by all who have acted on behalf of the state with respect to their official acts.....

"To sue an envoy in respect of acts done in his official capacity would be, in effect, to sue his government irrespective of whether the envoy had ceased to be ‘en poste’ at the date of his suit."

Three related points have been raised to argue that immunity ratione materiae cannot be relied upon to evade liability for international crimes. First, it has been argued that because state immunity is accorded only to sovereign acts, states and their officials can never be immune from the jurisdiction of other states in respect of international crimes because these crimes, for the most part, constitute violations of jus cogens norms and thus cannot be sovereign acts. A related second argument is that since immunity ratione materiae may be pleaded only in order to shield scrutiny from official acts, the acts amounting to international crimes may not be considered official acts.

Thirdly, it has been argued that because jus cogens norms supersede all other norms, they overcome all inconsistent rules of international law providing for immunity. .... It is suggested that these arguments demonstrate a misunderstanding of the basis upon which state immunity is accorded, and that they suggest a false conflict between the rule according state immunity and the relevant jus cogens norms. https://academic.oup.com/ejil/article/21/4/815/418198

lovat:
It might be true they denied him visa because Buhari was barred from entering the UK after the Umaru Dikko debacle and he was overthrown.

adisabarber:
Diplomatic passport does not cover medical costs

Malawian:
You guys don't seem to know what diplomatic passport is. If Atiku actually has one, he can go to America anytime he wants and no one will touch him. Highest they can do is ask him to leave their country.

But then again, his Diplomatic status could be "revoked" by the FG while he is in America and like they say, " as the yawa gas, kasala burst join".

rose54321:
Please say only things you're certain about so you don't misinformation the lay man.

Even with a diplomatic passport you still need to apply for visa to enter most countries.
When you apply you can still be denied by the host country.
Diplomatic Passport isn't automatic entry. Having a diplomatic passport just has few perks like immunity when in the country, free or low visa application fee, fast visa processing, separate boarding area, etc.

So you are wrong with your assertion above.

DonPiiko:
Yes there do, but sometimes countries passport are looked down upon. Nigeria happens to fall into such a category, Atiku is a fugitive as far as the United States is concerned, once he sets foots there he will be arrested, if a serving congress man of a developed country can be jailed, what's the big deal in jailing a former vice president of a developing country, who perpetuated corrupt acts.

AreaFada2:
Under 9ja system, ex-VPs are among those entitled to medical care abroad. So Buhari govt just provided the funds as mandated by law for Ekwueme to secure his visa.

Diplomatic passport holders need a visa. Only some countries exempt such passports from visa for short stays. But it depends on bilateral agreement. Currently hardly any Western country would exempt 9ja diplomatic passports from the usual stringent visa requirements. Too many 9ja diplomatic passports are in circulation anyway. Some ex officials never return theirs as at when due, unless cancelled. Highly connect can retain theirs long after leaving office. Anything goes in 9ja.

DonPiiko:
Yes there do, but sometimes countries passport are looked down upon. Nigeria happens to fall into such a category, Atiku is a fugitive as far as the United States is concerned, once he sets foots there he will be arrested, if a serving congress man of a developed country can be jailed, what's the big deal in jailing a former vice president of a developing country, who perpetuated corrupt acts.

LaudableXX:
You still do NOT get it. I am not saying that such people cannot be arrested, but before the arrest can be made, their diplomatic status must have been revoked, or their passports cancelled. Are you sure this was not done before Bemba was arrested? Do you know the high-level manoeuvres that go on behind the scene before such people can be arrested?

Sometimes, their arrest are even set up by their enemies, from within the borders of their home country. They might know they cannot arrest such a person back home because he is powerful, so they wait until he travels abroad, and then notify the authorities over there. High level international politics dey happen, o! No be play.