Matek,
The ICC has demonstrated idiocy on this rather silly case. The war in the
north, just like any war, is a case of both side committing the said crimes if
not more!
Even the NRA committed crimes against humanity and war crimes in this case!
That the so called ICC would rather rashed, in cahort with the imperialist
agent in the region, to indict ONLY the LRA leadership smack of buffoonery that
any right thinking Ugandans should and must wave it off with the back of a
hand.
The so called ICC must list and indict as well, the top leadership of the
NRA/M who committed crimes agaginst humanity and war crimes in the North and
North East of the country, then I am sure there will be something to debate
about. Until then, I personally believe the LRA negiotiators are even wasting
time and indeed being naive in trying to only defend themselves by claiming the
ICC be dropped, as if they are saying the NRA/M committed no crimes whatsoever
in the Northern and North Eastern political saga.
Burning people alive in a train weagon is not crime against humanity; burying
people alive in Bur Coro is not crime against humanity; sodomising men and
raping married women in front of their family is not crime against humanity;
tying someone Kanduya, to the point some men ended up crippled and even dead
out of, is not crime against humanity; bombing children in villages, and
running over lilltle children with army lorries in camps, are all not crimes
against humanity and war crimes!!
Somebody really must stop playing some silly games here.
My two cents worth.
Ocii
Matek Opoko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The so called ICC has been suckered pretty good! we told those stupid
wazungu's..that Museveni is using them for his own political agenda....did they
listen.. hell no!..Now the fact that the ICC can not even touch "kony", is a
total embarrassment to the ICC... it put a great dent in ICC's
Credibility!!!..LMAO!!
MK
Uganda: Making the Peace Process Work for All
Email This Page
Print This Page
The Monitor (Kampala)
OPINION
7 July 2007
Posted to the web 6 July 2007
Ndung'u Wainaina
On June 30, the Uganda government and Lord's Resistance Army, LRA, signed the
third phase of their five-stage peace deal.
Phase one was signed in August 2006. The third phase is meant to set and
outline principles for dealing with criminal responsibility and accountability
on both sides. So far the hostilities cessation deal of August 2006 is still in
force. However, the real test of the final peace deal is unpackaging and fixing
the nuts and bolts of the reconciliation and accountability deal that was
signed in June.
"; document.write (str); //-->
In the June deal, both sides signed an agreement on reconciliation and
accountability under Ugandan law. But the mechanisms are very sensitive for
what was agreed fly in the face of existing international justice process set
in motion by the indictments issued by the International Criminal Court (ICC)
against the LRA's Joseph Kony, Vincent Otti, Raska Lukwiya, Okot Odhiambo and
Dominic Ongwen.
All are accused on 33 charges of crimes against humanity and war crimes.
Uganda government while signing the deal stated that "Uganda has national laws
capable of addressing the human rights violations during the conflict". But it
added a caveat that "the only way for LRA to avoid the ICC arrest warrants is
to sign the deal, undergo national crime tribunals and then approach the
international judges".
This explains clearly the politics that President Museveni has been playing
with the ICC. Uganda government is using the ICC arrest warrants to exert
pressure on the LRA to sign while being non-committal on the fate of LRA
leadership.
LRA responded to government by stating that "we shall go for national
reconciliation only after the indictments have been withdrawn. We shall see
penalties and national courts later". Reconciling these two hardened positions
form the core of the justice and peace dilemma. The June deal did not clearly
state the punishment mechanisms and government only said that it will address
"conscientiously" the question of the ICC arrest warrants.
United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Loiuse Arbour in May 2007
was categorical that those responsible for gross human rights violations
against civilians and children must be held accountable. She stated "any accord
[Uganda peace deal] must reaffirm the commitment of both parties to the core
principles of international law that there can be no amnesty for war crimes,
crimes against humanity, genocide and gross human rights violations".
In 2000, Uganda enacted the Amnesty law with the purpose of enticing LRA to
give up arms. However, in December 2003 President Museveni referred the
conflict to the ICC. Consequently, in July 2005, ICC issued the arrest
warrants. Since then Museveni has been inconsistent on what objectives he hopes
to achieve, at one time promising unilaterally that none of the LRA leaders
would be sent to The Hague.
Justice Richard Goldstone at time describes this behaviour thus: "Museveni is
acting in contravention of international law. His government signed the [ICC's
founding] 1998 Rome Statute, and offers of amnesty violate the letter of the
law". The Rome Statue is solemn and binding such that a country cannot simply
opt out.
Uganda human rights groups, religious organisations and people from the North
have expressed their reservations about the international justice system. The
feeling is that international justice is prolonging the conflict. These groups
assert that "the international justice system is isolated from the moral
consequences of its interventions".
Instead, they are pushing for traditional justice system popularly known as
Mato Oput. But certain human rights groups within and outside Uganda are
vehemently opposed to traditional justice saying that while the ICC has powers
to opt out of prosecuting LRA leadership, such eventuality is dependent on the
existence of a strong local justice system with capacity and competence to
administer justice to the satisfaction of the victims.
Relevant Links East Africa
Uganda
Conflict, Peace and Security
These groups are of the opinion that traditional justice mechanisms are
inadequate to deal with crimes as grave as those carried out by the government
and LRA. That it is discriminative and could entrench impunity.
This complicates matters, the peace process also has to reconcile and come up
with an accountability and reconciliation mechanism acceptable to both the
local and international communities, respectively. This is the challenge. The
answer might come from a hybrid of traditional justice and international
justice systems. Otherwise impunity for heinous crimes is unacceptable.
The writer is Director, International Centre for Policy and Conflict, Kenya
---------------------------------
Fussy? Opinionated? Impossible to please? Perfect. Join Yahoo!'s user panel
and lay it on us. _______________________________________________
Ugandanet mailing list
[email protected]
http://kym.net/mailman/listinfo/ugandanet
% UGANDANET is generously hosted by INFOCOM http://www.infocom.co.ug/
The above comments and data are owned by whoever posted them (including
attachments if any). The List's Host is not responsible for them in any way.
---------------------------------------
---------------------------------
Be smarter than spam. See how smart SpamGuard is at giving junk email the boot
with the All-new Yahoo! Mail _______________________________________________
Ugandanet mailing list
[email protected]
http://kym.net/mailman/listinfo/ugandanet
% UGANDANET is generously hosted by INFOCOM http://www.infocom.co.ug/
The above comments and data are owned by whoever posted them (including
attachments if any). The List's Host is not responsible for them in any way.
---------------------------------------
