Why African Leaders are Afraid of the International Criminal Court

In its recently concluded summit in Serta, Libya, African leaders decided not to cooperate with the International Criminal Court on the arrest and prosecution of Al-Bashir, the President of Sudan, who has been indicted by the court for war crimes. One of the reasons given for this resolution was offered by the Prime Minister of Rwanda, Bernard Makuza. He told the Associated Press, “We’re not promoting impunity, but we’re saying that Westerners who don’t understand anything about Africa should stop trying to import their solutions.” It is unfortunate that the “leaders” have come to this resolution. There is no Western solution being offered here than bringing a man who has murdered his own people to justice. Justice is not a Western value but a universal value. The resolution is another attempt by African leaders to protect one of their own. The issue here is not that Western solutions are being exported to Africa, but the question is, “who is next?”

All through the continent, we see similar situations as in Darfur but in a lesser degree. It is a matter of time before those situations would develop into genocide-like activities. There are dictatorships throughout the continent and innocent civilians are being murdered daily because of ethnic, religious or political affiliation. These killings are being directed by the leaders, or they are in some way complacent to the murders. We have seen the “Darfur story” before in the continent. Rwanda, Burundi, Somalia, Uganda, Sierra Leone, and Liberia are just a few countries in which genocide-like activities have taken place. Those killed are human beings, and they deserve a chance to live. Taking their lives prematurely is a deprivation of their most fundamental universal right and those who commit such crimes should face justice. This endemic circle must be broken and this is only possible when the “mighty” and the “untouchables” are subjected to the law. Makuza speaks of African solutions to the problem. In the past, such solutions did not work, and so we should not be under any illusion, they will work this time. The genocide in Darfur has been going on for years and African leaders have not been able to stop it nor have they shown any significant leadership in the issue. They have continued to give Al-Bashir’s government legitimacy. El Samany El Wasila, the Prime Minister of Sudan was quick to note to the AP after the resolution that, “It’s the confirmation of what we always said: The indictment is a political thing, not a legal thing.” According to the AP, he declined to comment on whether Al-Bashir would now visit freely the 30 African countries that are party to the IICC treaty.

Treatises are formal agreements between nations. 30 African countries signed the ICC treaty. They were not forced into signing it. The resolution from the African Union summit does not nullify formal agreements they have made with nations outside Africa. They must continue to keep those agreements. This means that if Al-Bashir should travel to any of these 30 African nations, they are obliged under the agreement to arrest him and turn him over to the ICC. Countries such as Ghana, Chad and Botswana have disagreed already with this resolution. The Ghanaian foreign minister, Mohammed Mumuni said to reporters, “Certainly that’s not the position that we take … for us in Ghana there is absolutely no equivocation at all about our acceptance and respect for the jurisdiction, the integrity and high honor of dignity of the ICC.” Ghana is taking a new democratic leadership role in Africa. We hope other emerging democracies in the continent such as Nigeria and Liberia would follow suit by making strong statements in defense of the ICC indictment of Al-Bashir and stop politicizing it.