Bashir’s ‘escape’ from Nigeria offers some relief to rights groups
Article
Comments (46)
email Email
print Print
pdfSave
separation
increase
decrease
separation
separation
facebook
myspace
twitter
buzzyahoo
July 16, 2013 (WASHINGTON) – The Sudanese government sought to
downplay the significance of the sudden return by president Omer
Hassan Al-Bashir from Nigeria as further details emerged on his
condensed program of work during his participation in the HIV summit
in Abuja.
JPEG - 18.1 kb
Sudan’s President Omer Hassan al-Bashir takes part in the African
Union Summit on health focusing on HIV/AIDS, TB and malaria in Abuja
on July 15, 2013 (Getty Images)
"President Bashir returned normally to Khartoum after participating in
the summit in Abuja to resume his work in Khartoum", his press
secretary Emad Sid Ahmed told Reuters.
This explanation contradicted slightly with the one provided yesterday
by the spokesman for the Sudanese embassy in Nigeria Mohammed Moiz who
attributed Bashir’s sudden departure to other engagements without
giving details.
The New York Times (NYT) quoted delegates at the conference as saying
that Bashir abruptly left the room in the middle of an official lunch
on Monday.
Furthermore, during the afternoon session, when Bashir was scheduled
to speak, he could not be found confirming the unexpected nature of
his absence even by the organizers of the conference and the hosts.
Later Bashir’s press secretary told NYT that “most presidents don’t
attend entire conferences”.
A Sudanese diplomat who would not give his name told The Associated
Press that Bashir left at 3 p.m. Monday, less than 24 hours after he
arrived and in the middle of a two-day summit which ends on Tuesday.
Bashir’s presence has stirred controversy given his status as an
individual wanted by the International Criminal Court (ICC) for
allegations related to war crimes, crimes against humanity and
genocide committed in Sudan’s western region of Darfur.
Conflict has raged through Darfur since 2003 when mainly non-Arab
tribes took up arms against the government in Khartoum, accusing it of
economic and political neglect. Khartoum armed Arab tribes to put down
the insurgency.
Human rights groups and the United Nations estimate hundreds of
thousands of people died in the conflict. The government says around
10,000 people were killed.
Sudan has refused to recognize the jurisdiction of the Hague-based
court despite the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) referring the
situation in Darfur to the ICC under a Chapter VII resolution in 2005.
The late Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi has forced the 2009 AU Sirte
summit to adopt a resolution instructing members not to cooperate with
the ICC in arresting Bashir.
Despite not being consulted into drafting this decision, several
African countries that are ICC members used it as an cover to receive
Bashir in spite of their theoretical obligations under the Rome
Statute which is founding treaty of the court.
This included Chad, Djibouti, Malawi, Kenya, and now Nigeria.
Furthermore, African nations and politicians accuse the court of
unfairly targeting the continent in its choice of cases to investigate
and prosecute.
But some experts say while this argument appears true on the surface,
it does not hold water with a close look.
"It’s true all of the court’s current investigations are in Africa,
but 7 out of 8 of them came about because the governments where the
crimes were committed asked for the court’s involvement or the UN
Security Council referred the situation due to the gravity of the
crimes. So CAR [Central African Republic], DRC [Democratic Republic of
the Congo], Uganda, Mali and Cote d’Ivoire asked the court to get
involved", said Elise Keppler, Associate Director, International
Justice Program, at Human Rights Watch (HRW).
"[T]he Council referred Libya and Darfur. How can the court be
targeting if they are responding to direct requests from governments
affected or the council? The prosecutor’s office acted on its own
initiative only in Kenya where there was wide international and
domestic disappointment and frustration that the Kenyan government did
nothing to prosecute heinous post-election crimes", she added.
Ironically the bulk of African states that were in the UNSC at the
time voted in favor of referring the situations in Libya and Darfur to
the ICC.
Bashir’s trip to Nigeria stirred the anger of human rights groups
including the Nigeria Coalition on the International Criminal Court
(NCICC) which condemned Abuja’s decision to receive the Sudanese
leader and went to a local court on Monday with a motion to compel the
government to arrest him in line with its obligations under the Rome
Statute.
Diplomatic sources told Pan-African news agency (PANA) that the move
by NCICC was the "last straw" for Bashir prompting him to cut short
his trip.
HRW welcomed what it perceived as the fruits of civil society pressure
forcing the Sudanese leader to rush home.
"Business as usual is over for this head of state suspected of the
most serious crimes committed in Darfur. Al-Bashir faced intense
pressure for his arrest from local activists when he tried to visit
Nigeria, including court action. Moreover, the examples of former
Liberian president Charles Taylor and Bosnian Serb military commander
Ratko Mladic, who were surrendered for international trial for grave
crimes after years of safe haven, show that the highest-level
fugitives can and do ultimately face justice. But Nigeria and other
governments should better play their part in securing his arrest as
soon as possible. The victims deserve to see justice done and he
belongs in custody" Keppler said.
Nigeria was forced in the past to hand Taylor, the warlord who began
that country’s devastating civil war in 1989.
In 2003, Taylor resigned under pressure and a promise from Nigeria’s
government to give him a safe haven. When democratically elected
leader Ellen Johnson Sirleaf demanded his extradition in 2006, Nigeria
came under huge international pressure and was forced to go back on
its word and hand him over.
SUDAN REGRETS UK REMARKS ON BASHIR VISIT
On Tuesday, Sudan’s foreign ministry expressed regret for the comments
made yesterday by Britain’s Africa minister Mark Simmonds on Bashir
"The UK has a strong and abiding bilateral relationship with Nigeria.
I am therefore disappointed that Nigeria has chosen to host President
Al-Bashir of Sudan at an African Union event, despite International
Criminal Court (ICC) arrest warrants against him for alleged war
crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide. This undermines the work
of the ICC and sends the victims a dismaying message that the
accountability they are waiting for will be delayed further", Simmonds
said in a statement yesterday.
The Sudanese foreign ministry responded in a statement saying that the
remarks of the British official amounts to a despise of the AU which
is the organization that reflects the will of all African countries,
pointing that African leaders in the AU’s Sirte Summit in 2009 decided
not to cooperate with the ICC and renewed their decision in Addis
Ababa’s summit recently.
The statement went on to say that the comments disregard the will of
the African people and their democratic choices, considering it one of
the worst examples of using double standards as well as moral and
political inconsistency.
The foreign ministry further pointed that the British government has
no moral grounds to speak on behalf of the victims of violence in
Darfur, particularly as it harbors the leaders of the Darfur rebel
groups who are responsible for the continuation of violence and
assassination.
The US Embassy has also criticized Nigeria’s decision to welcome
Bashir while the European Union High Representative Catherine Ashton
issued a statement today expressing concern and urging Nigeria “to
respect its obligations under international law to arrest and
surrender those subject to an arrest warrant from the ICC".
But Nigeria brushed aside the international criticism saying that the
event was organized by the AU.
"President Al-Bashir was in Nigeria under the auspices of the AU,
based on the Assembly’s decision to convene the Special Summit in
Abuja to deal with three diseases that together constitute a heavy
burden on member states," the Nigerian foreign ministry said.
"Any attempt to make an issue out of the attendance of President
Al-Bashir at the AU Summit will only amount to unnecessary shift from
the important objectives of the special summit," it added.
"It is, therefore, a matter between the African Union and the
international community," the ministry statement said.
The ICC judges issued an urgent request to Nigeria to arrest and
surrender Bashir and reminded the West African nation of its
obligations.
“Accordingly, it is under the obligation…to execute the pending
Court’s decisions concerning the arrest and surrender of Omar Al
Bashir,” the three-judge chamber said in document made public on
Tuesday.
The row that erupted over Bashir’s trip highlights the increasing
diplomatic difficulty faced by the Sudanese leader since his
indictment.
Many countries have asked Bashir publicly or privately to stay away
from summits it is hosting while other world leaders refuse to meet
with him. At one point in 2011 his plane was forced to return to its
point of origin on his way to China after Turkmenistan and Tajikistan
refused to allow him into their airspace.
In late 2011, a local judge in Nairobi issued a provisional arrest
warrant for Bashir in response for a motion by the Kenyan chapter of
the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) after the government of
then president Mwai Kibaki allowed the Sudanese president to attend
the promulgation of the country’s new constitution in August 2010.
The ruling infuriated Bashir who expelled the Kenyan envoy and gave
Nairobi two weeks to reverse the decision before imposing sanctions.
The government in Nairobi convinced Khartoum that it would appeal the
decision which it did a few weeks later. The appellate court refused a
request by the government to suspend the warrant against Bashir and
ordered that it stays in effect until the appeal is fully heard.
It is not clear when a decision might be made on the case.
Ironically the current Kenyan president Uhuru Kenyatta himself is
awaiting trial at the ICC for his alleged role in the post-election
violence of 2007. However, unlike Bashir he has cooperated with the
court throughout the process which likely allowed him to avoid the
isolation imposed on his Sudanese peer.
Another irony is the fact that Bashir was accompanied by his health
minister Bahr Idriss Abu Garda, a former Darfur rebel leader, who
stood before the ICC voluntarily after being charged in the 2007
killing of African peacekeeper.
ICC judges acquitted him saying that the prosecution failed to prove
that ABu Garda played a role in the deadly assault that left 12
soldiers dead and wounded eight others.
(ST)
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"South Sudan Info - The Kob" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/SouthSudanKob/CAJb14orZ2UYYnAbyNXUhOATg8z4KoTPdXqSiOFAbfuygdwcpGQ%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
