Since 1998, the Democratic Republic of Congo has struggled with
bitter successive conflicts affecting vast regions of the country,
especially in Kivu and Ituri regions during and after the Second Congo
War.
Despite several peace agreements made between
combatants in 2003, the extreme atrocities committed against vast
numbers of the population soon became internationally acknowledged as
possible crimes against humanity, including genocide, rape, forcible
transfer and sexual slavery.
When the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) referred the first cases to the International Criminal Court
in 2004, it was President Joseph Kabila who signed a letter written to
the then ICC Chief Prosecutor Louis Moreno-Ocampo requesting him to
investigate the DRC situation in order to determine if any person within
the territory of the DRC should be charged with crimes as stipulated in
the Rome Statute.
The state authorities have committed to cooperate with the International Criminal Court.
The
DRC authorities have so far exhibited cooperation in the cases of six
indicted and charged individuals, having arrested and delivered three of
them to the ICC for prosecution.
It is Joseph
Kabila’s signature that began the first investigations ever to be
conducted by the ICC, and today it is Joseph Kabila’s government that
stands in the path of justice by refusing to arrest an indicted fugitive
from justice, Omar Hassan Al-Bashir, the current President of Sudan.
On February 25th 2014, in total disregard of its legal obligations under the Rome Statute, the DRC hosted President Bashir at the 17th
Heads of State and Government summit of the Common Market for East and
Southern Africa (COMESA). Despite calls by the President of the Assembly
of State Parties, H.E Tiina Intelman, and a request by the OTP that the
DRC arrest Bashir the moment he arrived in Kinshasa, the Congolese
authorities refused to comply, stating that they were following the
wishes of the African Union (AU).
To date, 90 civil society organizations have added their voices to the demand for the arrest of President Al-Bashir.
“Congo
as an ICC member has an obligation to arrest and transfer President
al-Bashir to The Hague, where he is wanted for crimes against humanity
and war crimes,” said Georges Kapiamba, president of the Congolese Association for Access to Justice, based in Kinshasa.
HYPOCRITICAL STAND
For
the DRC to turn their backs on the Darfuri victims and to side with the
man charged with horrific crimes against them is not only a devastating
blow to justice in the case of Sudan, but also a clear hypocritical
stand taken by the very initiators of the court processes and functions
in Africa.
“Having long worked closely with the ICC,
Congo should demonstrate that it stands on the side of Darfuri victims,
and arrest al-Bashir,” said Descartes Mpongo, executive secretary of
Christian Activists Actions for Human Rights in Shabunda of the
Democratic Republic of Congo.
Unlike other African
states like Kenya, Zambia, South Africa and Malawi that have avoided
state visits by Bashir by cancelling events, inviting other government
officials or relocating events, the DRC was brazen, choosing to host
Bashir and then purporting to justify its actions.
The DRC has refused to comply by Assembly Resolution ICC ASP-12/Res.3
adopted in November 2013 by the Assembly of State Parties which
categorically states among other measures that “contacts with persons in
respect of whom an arrest warrant issued by the Court is outstanding
should be avoided when such contacts undermine the objectives of the
Rome Statute.”
When it comes to the weak argument that
the DRC is complying with the wishes of the AU, it is only fair to note
that the July 2009 Resolution concerning the arrest of President Bashir
was passed without a vote, and holds no legal weight over the Congolese
authorities.
DEMANDS TO WITHDRAW
Since
the indictment of President Bashir, the AU has developed a strained
relationship with the ICC, one that began with the now pervasive myth of
the ICC being an “imperial and neo-colonial court” funded by western
nations. It is important to note that when it comes to funding of the
court, all state parties are obligated to contribute to the financial
requirements of the ICC, and that includes the DRC and Kenya.
More
importantly, the clear antagonistic demands to withdraw AU member
states from the Rome Treaty en masse appear to stem primarily from
countries that have refused to sign the treaty. Indeed, the increased
insistence on non-cooperation with the ICC comes from most notably from
AU member states that are not state parties to the Rome Statute. Madame Tiina Intelman, President of the Assembly of State Parties was quite categorical.
“As
President of the Assembly, I deplore the visits of persons subject to
arrest warrants of the Court to any State Party. I urge the authorities
of the Democratic Republic of the Congo to fully comply with their
obligation to cooperate with the Court.”
It is unlikely
that the Dafuri victims will ever see justice given the fascist and
insidious nature of the current Sudan regime and the ICC may indeed be
their only hope to not only see justice for crimes already committed but
a possibly more stable political future in the absence of Bashir’s
government.
It is indeed deplorable for persons’ with
arrest warrants to visit any state party in the first place. But it is
without a doubt the rankest mockery for the State party that has thus
far seen the most action taken on behalf of their victims to turn around
and deny the victims of Sudan that same chance at justice from the
ICC.
@bettywaitherero
No comments:
Post a Comment