International Criminal Court issues warrant for Sudan president
- Details
- Created on Wednesday, 04 March 2009 15:55
- Written by Pachodo.org News Room
Judges at the International Criminal Court ordered the arrest Wednesday of President Omar Hassan al-Bashir of Sudan, charging him with war crimes and crimes against humanity for a concerted government campaign against civilians.
They did not include the charge of genocide requested by the prosecutor.
In issuing the order, the three judges brushed aside diplomatic requests for more time for peace talks and fears of a violent backlash in the country. They had taken more than seven months to examine the evidence.
It is the first time the court, which opened in 2002, has sought the arrest of a sitting head of state, though other international war crimes courts have issued warrants for Slobodan Milosevic of Serbia and Charles Taylor of Liberia while they were sitting presidents.
The judges charged Bashir with five counts of crimes against humanity, including murder, extermination, forcible transfer, torture and rape. The two counts of war crimes were for attacks against a civilian population and for pillaging.
In their statement, they said the court did not recognize immunity for a head of state and called on all countries, including those who were members of the court and of the United Nations to cooperate with the court.
Thousands of Sudanese gathered in central Khartoum within minutes of the court's announcement, waving Sudanese flags and posters showing the president's face to demonstrate their support for him and denounce the court's decision. The government in Khartoum vowed to ignore the court's ruling.
"The court is only one mechanism of neo-colonialist policy used by the West against free and independent countries," said a Sudanese presidential adviser, Mustafa Osman Ismail, according to Reuters.
The question of genocide in Darfur has been divisive, and was so among the judges, who said two to one that the prosecutor had not provided sufficient evidence of the government's intent, the key issue in determining genocide. The Bush administration and other governments as well as human rights activists have called the government's actions genocide.
Proving genocide in court is a high hurdle because it is not about the magnitude of the atrocities. Genocide requires proof that an accused had "specific intent" to "destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group as such" on the basis of their identity. The prosecutor had argued that the government specifically tried to exterminate three ethnic groups - the Fur, Masalit and Zaghawa African tribes in Darfur - and that even after driving them of their lands and killing many people, armed militia continued their genocidal campaign by raping and impregnating the women in the refugee camps, thereby further subverting the tribes.
The registrar for the court, Silvana Arbia, said at a news conference that the crimes took place during a five-year campaign against rebel organizations in Darfur which opposed the government in Khartoum that began in 2003. The campaign, the court said, was the result of a plan agreed upon at the highest level of the government in Khartoum, and lasted at least until July 14, 2008, the date of the arrest warrant.
The arrest warrant is likely to complicate the international debate over how to solve the crisis in Darfur. It came despite concerns voiced by UN diplomats, the African Union, the Arab League, and some humanitarian organizations that it could provoke renewed violence in the country and put at risk the peace process in southern Sudan.
Even if Bashir is not brought to the court in the near future, analysts said the warrant will weaken Bashir's position internationally and isolate him.
The question now is who will execute the warrant. Sudan is legally obliged to arrest Bashir, but that is not expected to happen any time soon. The Hague court has no police force or military of its own, and the 24,000 or so UN peacekeepers stationed in Sudan have no mandate to detain war crimes suspects.
If Bashir travels to any of the 108 nations that are members of the court, he risks arrest, because court members will be obliged to detain him. The 80 or so countries that are not court members, including China, Russia and the United States, have no such obligation. But lawyers say those nations can arrest Bashir because several treaties state that heads of state enjoy no immunity if they are charged with genocide, crimes against humanity or war crimes.
Even if Bashir remains free, analysts who favored his arrest say the warrant is likely to have a worldwide effect.
"This means he will be a fugitive, a man on a wanted poster held to be most responsible for the atrocities of Darfur," said Richard Dicker, a director of Human Rights Watch.
Some analysts and activists argued that the warrant could undermine his political position at home. Nick Grono, deputy president of the International Crisis Group, wrote recently that "although Bashir and his security apparatus are still entrenched in power, the indictment is likely to weaken their hold. It may even cause the army and intelligence agencies, the ultimate wielders of power, to contemplate a future without Bashir."
Others fear, however, that weakening Bashir could result in more violence in the region, at least in the near term.
"I am sure there will be some crowd movements, there will be some violence here and there," said Alain Le Roy, the UN undersecretary general for peacekeeping operations.
Some figures in the government have threatened bloodshed in response to an indictment. Salah Gosh, the head of Sudanese intelligence, was quoted in Sudanese press reports as calling for the "amputation of the hands and the slitting of the throats of any person who dares badmouth al-Bashir or support the International Criminal Court's allegations against him."
Another worry, Le Roy said, was that any of the groups involved in the conflict, including the governments of Sudan and Chad as well as the rebels, might take advantage of any uproar surrounding the court's decision to foment violence. And the delays in deploying UN peacekeeping troops to Darfur, with only about 64 percent of the force there, will likely worsen because of possible new tension in the region.
Le Roy also said, however, Sudan had reassured the UN officials that the government would respect its commitment to protect UN peacekeeping missions and other agencies. There were no immediate plans to scale back patrols or otherwise retreat from the prescribed mission he said.
The court issued warrants for two Sudanese citizens in 2007 in connection with the bloodshed and humanitarian disaster of Darfur. The two men are Ahmad Muhammad Harun, a former security official, now a government minister, and Ali Kushayb, a former militia leader. Judges said that there were reasonable grounds to conclude that they were responsible for torture, mass rape and the forced displacement of entire villages in Darfur in 2003 and 2004. Neither has been arrested.
The Security Council can postpone action against Bashir and even stop a trial. But on the eve of the ruling, the council remained largely divided over how to react. Sudan's supporters, including the African Union and Arab League, called again Tuesday for the council to invoke Article 16 of the statute creating the court which allows it to suspend any indictment. But France, Britain or the United States would likely use its veto to block such a move.
Sudanese and other African officials have criticized the court as a neo-colonial tool that so far has singled out Africa. But court officials point out at three of the four criminal investigations under way at the court, involving Congo, Central African Republic and Uganda, were all brought by the governments of those countries themselves, while the case of Sudan was referred to the prosecutor by the UN Security Council.
Source: Herald Tribune - New York
Newer news items:
- Ban, Obama to discuss Sudan, global economic crisis - 08/03/2009
- SPLM condemns aid group expulsion - 08/03/2009
- REPLY TO THE ARTICLE OF MR. DENG MANGOK. - 06/03/2009
- Throwing Sudan's president in jail would bring a measure of justice. It would also be a disaster for Darfur. - 06/03/2009
- S. Sudan President Agrees Bashir's Arrest is Dangerous - 06/03/2009
Older news items:
- Salva Kiir appeals for calm ahead of ICC verdict - 04/03/2009
- Salva Kiir speaks of justice - 04/03/2009
- The odds of the genesis of a Dinka Empire in south Sudan. - 03/03/2009
- Riek Machar: 57 killed in clashes in southern Sudan - 02/03/2009
- Press Statement of GOSS on the Malakal Incident on 23rd February 2009 - 26/02/2009
-
06-03-2009 04:09:50 |Unregistered| William Okuch Dak
African leaders have shamefully failed to protect their people against Arab oppressions. Nasty things as slavery, atrocities or genocides, land and property confiscations have been pratice by Arabs against black indignous people on their continent for centuries. Ever move to bring such inhuman acts into termination were buried by Arab rapidly influential lobbist available around our world. Arab leaders are capable to use AU or any African humanitarian or political organizations against the will of African people.
Let me share information with you. Yesterday morning at university, I gave informative representation to students about ICC arrest warrant. One Arab student said this. "US and Israel Presidents Bush and Olermet must be indicted not Basheir because they have killed millions of Arabs and Muslims." In front of th students I asked him this question which made him to sit on his chair with feeling of guilty.
ONE: Are people in Darfur American or Israeli? If yes, you have right but if not then you are testifying that those people are non-Arabs while Bashier ho kill them is Arab.
We all know how Arab representative to United Nations Security Council were able to use African represetatives to block any move to issue the arrest warrant against criminal president.Western representatives alone who share the suffering with black nations in Sudan have supported issuing of arrest warrant as it happened.Thank to God that solution to liberate Africans from Arabs emerged from ICC.
It is a victory against Arab league which use Sudan as bridge to control Africa. It is move to block Arab notion of Islamizing and Arabizing the African Contient.
However, anyone leader whose presidential office was returned into prosecutorial office must be prosecuted as president Bashir.
-
08-03-2009 04:13:36 |Unregistered| lal
This is not only an Arab-African issues! It's a worldwide problem... and it needs to be treated with all eyes opened... Because in global views, Mr. Bashir is defined as a leader who only care for land and resources.... please withdraw your supports for him!_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________you, and all other sudaneses will help to fill the above blank... have a nice day8)
-
08-03-2009 08:49:02 |Unregistered| Awad
To William Okuch Dak?
1. The International Criminal Court (ICC) is structurally unable to deliver justice as it is controlled by the UN Security Council which has the power to refer whatever case it deems fit to the ICC, and to intervene to suspend the proceedings of the court at any stage. The selectivity, double-standards and injustice that characterize the acts and positions of the Security Council are self-evident. As such, the ICC can never act against big powers, wielders of veto right, three of whom do not recognize the jurisdiction of the ICC. The only conclusion that can be made here is that the ICC is meant solely to deal with developing and weak states, especially the African Countries. Currently all the cases before the ICC belong to African Countries. The ICC is, therefore, a tool to reinforce and perpetuate the injustice and double-standards that prevail in the intentional relations.2. According to International Law experts who studied the Rome Statute 1998, and how it come into being, articles 97 of the Statute, on the Principal of complimentarity and article 98-2, were tailored especially to address the concerns of the US that the Rome Statute might be used against its nationals given its world-wide military operations and occupation of Iraq.
3. The resolution 1593 of the Security Council to refer the situation in Darfur in the ICC has provided for the exemption of the US Nationals from being prosecuted for any crimes occurred in Darfur.
4. For some of International Law experts, it is against the spirit of the Rome Statute that a body, some of its members do not recognize the ICC, the Security Council, could refer the situation in Darfur to the very same ICC. The irony is that the US which was instrumental in taking the issue of Darfur to the Security Council and was behind most of its resolutions on the issue that culminated in the resolution 1593, does not recognize the jurisdiction of ICC and has exerted all possible pressure to see to it that its national are totally exempted from the jurisdiction of the ICC. And once again, the US is now blocking attempts by the African Union, Arab League and NAM Countries to use article 16 of the Rome Statute to defer the proceedings of ICC with regards to the Darfur Conflict.
5. France, which is on the forefront in adopting and supporting the ICC move against the Sudan, has readily rejected the findings of the Independent Commission of investigation into the Rwanda Genocide of 1994, that, following more than two years of investigation, accused the French Government not only of being aware of the preparations for the Genocide, and helping train the perpetrators, but also of direct involvement in the killings. Published in August 2008, the report named 33 French Politicians and Military Senior Officers as suspects to be prosecuted with regards to the Genocide. Among them are the Late President Mitterand and two former Prime Ministers; Allan Juppe, and Dominique Villepain. The report confirmed the accusations that have been haunting France for the past 14 years of partial responsibility of the Genocide, especially in the light of the fact that the main supporter of the Rwandan government responsible of the genocide and the presence of significant French Military in Rwanda at the time. In fact, the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) through its ten years investigation produced sufficient evidence to try French Government Officials. Rather than co-operating with the ICTR France actually did its best to undermine its work. In June 2004, the European Court of Human Rights condemned France for sheltering suspected perpetrators of Rwanda Genocide wanted by the ICTR. The Paris-based International Federation for Human Rights asserted that cases related to the Rwandan Genocide had been in general met by “Certain Coolness by the French Judiciary Authorities”.
6. Despite having the power to initiate his own investigation upon receiving information about possible occurrence of crimes that the Rome Statute covers, the ICC prosecutor has adamantly rejected to act on documented complaints about atrocities committed by the US occupying forces in Iraq. He has equally been reluctant to act on the complaints by the Palestine National Authority about the recent Israeli heinous atrocities in Gaza. Israel crimes have been characterized as war crimes by a UN investigation committee in 2006, headed by Archbishop Desmond Tutu, but has been continuously shielded in the Security Council by US and the UK.
-
08-03-2009 08:49:39 |Unregistered| Awad
(2)
7. The ICC prosecutor has never visited Darfur, the scene of the alleged crimes, nor have any of his assistants for first hand information. Instead, he relied on information outsourced from dubious organizations and on hearsay allegations. Thus, it is not surprising that the application submitted by the ICC prosecutor is abound with sweeping generalizations and far-fetched allegations that reflect ignorance of social and demographical realities in Darfur.
8. The decision of the ICC on the 4th of March to approve the application of the prosecutor to issue warrant of arrest against the President of the Republic of the Sudan on account of war crimes and crimes against humanity accusations, and not Genocide accusation, has long been disclosed by Western quarters before the announcement by the court. It was disclosed by the former US Envoy to the UN last October, while many Western media outlets published details of the decision several weeks ago. This suffices to show that the ICC is not immune from political influence and raises serious questions about its integrity and impartiality.
-
08-03-2009 09:01:10 |Unregistered| Awad
and you said or dream about this ?
Thank to God that solution to liberate Africans from Arabs emerged from ICC.how was bring the peace to Southern Sudan?
And how gave them the hope to have Government in Sudan Map and history?
What ICC done for the Southern Sudan and Sudanese ?
Bring arms, infected aids, poisonous ideas in order to the hero of the peace? see you in new Sudan Hero of ICC
-
11-03-2009 01:25:19 |Unregistered| William Okuch Dak
Thank you Awad for your respond. I do understand the inhuman games being play by super power nations. I believe such power suppose to be used to protect the weaks rather than oppressing them.
However, what I will not agree with you underestimating the roles played by other Western governments and non-governmental organizations to end the war in South.
Awad, suffering of the native Sudanese under Arabs did not started in 1955, but it began during Arabs venture to Sudan in 13 century. What was so called Turkish-Egyptian government and independent Sudan had doubled our grievances. We waged several wars against the North. Did we success? How many peaces were violated by the Northerners?
US and NGOS Roles toward peace in Sudan. They have interfered to bring the CPA. IN 1993, Dr. Riek Machar and Dr. Ganang were summoned by US congress and they were encouraged to united for sake of their country. In 2003, they again were in US for the same purpose. Those were ones of many attempts played by US and Western countries to bring CPA.IGAD Roles: It has its partners in Europe such as Italy, Denamark, Sweden, Norways etc. Their subordiantion with IGAD helped to bring CPA. CPA was signed upon the principles of IGAD.
UN security council has once exported its setting to Kenya where its members met. That was an attempt to force our conflicting parties to sign CPA.
SPLM recognized that itself that US role is very important to force the government of Khartoum to implement provisions of CPA. This was confirmed by Pagan Amum. Amum had threatened that Abaye case have to be handed over to US.
Awad, let not to hold the foriegners accountable for our failures to deal with our own affairs. You have CPA now. Under GOSS, triblaism nepotism, inequal distribution of power and wealth are also foriegner poisonous ideas?
We need a friend to support us. African leaders have failed as I said to help us. Our obligation is to make our dream come true without puting wieghs our others. We can make others to listen to us rather than surrendering.
Latest News/Articles
The 4th March 2009 will go down in the Sudanese history as a breakthrough moment in our long struggle against the Northern Arab ruling elites in Khartoum.It has been said that political leaders who do not understand the limitation of power are doomed to pay a high price.President Bashir is a product of culture of dishonesty which is common among Khartoum's rulers.What a shame on Sudanese Arabs!There will be in no peace in Sudan apart from the kingdom of law and order.