South Africa Should Have Arrested Sudan’s President, International Court Rules

Just this week, it was announced that Mr. Bashir had accepted an invitation to visit Moscow^[1]. Russia is not a member of the International Criminal Court but it has had few dealings with Mr. Bashir. Western diplomats in The Hague see the invitation as giving President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia a new opportunity to show his disdain for a Western-led drive to promote accountability and international criminal justice.

Watching who shuns and who invites Mr. Bashir has become something of an^[2] international parlor game^[3]. (He recently skipped a meeting in Saudi Arabia^[4].)

But the underlying question could not be more grave: Will a sitting head of government, wanted for crimes against humanity over his government’s violence against civilians in the Darfur^[5] conflict, be held accountable under international law?

Violence in Darfur, a region of western Sudan, erupted in 2003 between the Arab-dominated government and non-Arab rebel groups.

According to prosecutors, government militia gangs, backed by military and police helicopters, were unleashed from 2003 to 2008 to burn hundreds of villages, bomb schools and poison wells, and they also engaged systematically in looting and in the rape of women and girls.

The United Nations estimates that about 300,000 people died and more than two million were uprooted in years of fighting. In 2005, it asked the International Criminal Court, based in The Hague, to investigate.

The court issued an arrest warrant against Mr. Bashir in 2009^[6] and ordered him to face charges of war crimes and crimes against humanity over attacks on civilians in Darfur. Judges later added three counts of genocide.

But the story of Darfur’s atrocities has receded as other conflicts have seized the attention of the news media and rights advocates.

Mr. Bashir has tried to have the charges against him dropped by enlisting other countries to join a campaign against the court. But he has failed to find the necessary support in the United Nations Security Council, which ordered the investigation into the violence and could still ask to suspend it.

Mr. Bashir is one of four Sudanese officials subject to longstanding arrest warrants from the International Criminal Court, along with a former minister of humanitarian affairs, Ahmad Muhammad Harun^[7]; a militia commander, Ali Kushayb^[8]; and a former defense minister, Abdel Rahim Muhammad Hussein^[9].

The situation has been at a stalemate, but it has complicated Mr. Bashir’s international travel. He has avoided the United States, Europe and other places where he might be arrested. Other countries, including Turkey and Saudi Arabia, have quietly disinvited him.

To demonstrate that he has sympathy in the world, Mr. Bashir has made a point of traveling outside Sudan, in Africa and Asia.

Even so, there has been no shortage of embarrassing episodes, such as leaders maneuvering to stay out of official photographs with him, a day-late arrival on an official visit to Beijing after his plane was denied passage over Pakistan, or his sudden disappearance from an official lunch in Nigeria, just before he was scheduled to speak. He vanished after word reached him that local lawyers had filed for his arrest.

Countries that accept the authority of the International Criminal Court are obliged to carry out its arrest warrants.

South Africa dissuaded Mr. Bashir from attending the inauguration of Mr. Zuma, warning that he would risk arrest. But Mr. Zuma’s government argued that Mr. Bashir was entitled to attend the 2015 African Union talks in South Africa because he had immunity during the summit meeting.

A local court ruled that South Africa was required to arrest Mr. Bashir, but by then the government had already allowed him to surreptitiously leave^[10] the country.

The episode^[11] played a crucial role in South Africa’s decision in October to pull ^[12] out of the court^[13].

That drastic move — especially coming from one of the court’s earliest and staunchest supporters — led to wide speculation that a large-scale walk^[14]out by other African leaders would ^[15] follow^[16]. A number of them had been critical of the court because they felt it was picking unfairly on Africa and overlooking other conflicts.

In the end, only Burundi and Gambia withdrew, and Gambia then reversed its decision after a new government took office.

South Africa’s position is unclear. Its High Court ruled this year that Mr. Zuma’s withdrawal from the international court was “unconstitutional and invalid” because he had not secured the approval of Parliament. The government has not appealed that decision^[17], but it is now seeking approval by lawmakers to withdraw from the court.

South African supporters of the court have said they hope the process can be dragged out until after Mr. Zuma’s term ends, in early 2019.

Russia’s decision to welcome Mr. Bashir, who plans to visit Moscow in August, is another snub for the court. Russia withdrew its sig^[18]nature from the court’s founding treaty^[19], which it had never ratified, in November. The United States signed the treaty during Bill Clinton’s presidency but has not ratified it. Washington’s policy has nonetheless been to support enforcement of the treaty.

References

1. ^{^} had accepted an invitation to visit Moscow (www.nytimes.com)
2. ^{^} something of an (query.nytimes.com)
3. ^{^} international parlor game (query.nytimes.com)
4. ^{^} skipped a meeting in Saudi Arabia (www.nytimes.com)
5. ^{^} More news and information about Sudan. (topics.nytimes.com)
6. ^{^} issued an arrest warrant against Mr. Bashir in 2009 (www.nytimes.com)
7. ^{^} Ahmad Muhammad Harun (www.nytimes.com)
8. ^{^} Ali Kushayb (www.nytimes.com)
9. ^{^} Abdel Rahim Muhammad Hussein (www.nytimes.com)
10. ^{^} allowed him to surreptitiously leave (www.nytimes.com)
11. ^{^} episode (www.nytimes.com)
12. ^{^} pull (www.nytimes.com)
13. ^{^} out of the court (www.nytimes.com)
14. ^{^} a large-scale walk (www.nytimes.com)
15. ^{^} out by other African leaders would (www.nytimes.com)
16. ^{^} follow (www.nytimes.com)
17. ^{^} has not appealed that decision (www.nytimes.com)
18. ^{^} withdrew its sig (www.nytimes.com)
19. ^{^} ture from the court’s founding treaty (www.nytimes.com)