South Africa had failed the victims of Sudan, failed justice and had sacrificed its moral and human rights responsibilities on the altar of political expediency when it refused to arrest Sudanese president Omar al-Bashir.
This was said by internationally respected lawyer and CEO of the Thabo Mbeki Foundation Max Boqwana.
Delivering a public lecture at Rhodes University, Boqwana said that although the International Criminal Court could legitimately be criticised, there was no justification for South Africa to dishonour its obligations to the ICC or an order of its own court.
He said SA had signed, rectified and domesticated the Rome Statute.
“It did so because of subscription to particular principle and values.”
One could not subscribe to these values part time.
The responsibility for South Africa to act against al-Bashir did not only stem from its international obligation or because it should champion a culture of human rights but from its own legislation requiring it to cooperate fully with the ICC.
Boqwana, a visiting lecturer at Rhodes University’s law faculty and former chair of the Law Society of South Africa (LSSA), said South Africans were correct to be outraged by the stance taken by the South African government in the al-Bashir matter.
It had placed South Africa in an impossible situation in terms of influencing the way the ICC acted in other matters and to correct what Africa might find repugnant about the court.
He said South Africa had been instrumental in convincing the ICC to investigate the atrocities in Palestine.
“But what moral authority would we have in trying to push it further? What moral standing would we now have … if we also act in a manner that undermines it?”
He said that attacks on domestic courts and the ICC showed an ignorance of the rule of law and political bankruptcy
If Africa and South Africa withdrew from the ICC it would send a clear message that impunity of leaders should prevail and that the African masses did not matter.
“We would be sending out a message that the victims of genocide, war crimes and ethnic cleansing have no protection.”
He said there was an onus on SA in particular to play a greater role in assisting the ICC to ensure it became a bastion of progressive international jurisprudence.
He suggested that another option for African states was to give more power and capacity to regional tribunals such as the SA Development Community tribunal.
Instead, the SADC tribunal had been decapitated with the decision to take away tenure of judges and to cancel individual rights to access the tribunal if they felt that the justice system in their home countries had failed.
Boqwana was instrumental in the LSSA’s court challenge in which it sought to have President Jacob Zuma’s signing of the protocol diminishing the tribunal’s role declared unconstitutional. He said the ICC and the tribunals were essential.
“Those to whom we mortgage power must take care using it, knowing full well that they will be held accountable for abuse and transgressions.” He also warned that the “discourse of colonialism” needed to change.
Colonialism should not be blamed when African leadership was attacked.
“Must we blame colonialism when our own leaders treat us the same way that our colonial masters did?”
Bashir bungle failed Sudan and SA
This was said by internationally respected lawyer and CEO of the Thabo Mbeki Foundation Max Boqwana.
Delivering a public lecture at Rhodes University, Boqwana said that although the International Criminal Court could legitimately be criticised, there was no justification for South Africa to dishonour its obligations to the ICC or an order of its own court.
He said SA had signed, rectified and domesticated the Rome Statute.
“It did so because of subscription to particular principle and values.”
One could not subscribe to these values part time.
The responsibility for South Africa to act against al-Bashir did not only stem from its international obligation or because it should champion a culture of human rights but from its own legislation requiring it to cooperate fully with the ICC.
Boqwana, a visiting lecturer at Rhodes University’s law faculty and former chair of the Law Society of South Africa (LSSA), said South Africans were correct to be outraged by the stance taken by the South African government in the al-Bashir matter.
It had placed South Africa in an impossible situation in terms of influencing the way the ICC acted in other matters and to correct what Africa might find repugnant about the court.
He said South Africa had been instrumental in convincing the ICC to investigate the atrocities in Palestine.
“But what moral authority would we have in trying to push it further? What moral standing would we now have … if we also act in a manner that undermines it?”
He said that attacks on domestic courts and the ICC showed an ignorance of the rule of law and political bankruptcy
If Africa and South Africa withdrew from the ICC it would send a clear message that impunity of leaders should prevail and that the African masses did not matter.
“We would be sending out a message that the victims of genocide, war crimes and ethnic cleansing have no protection.”
He said there was an onus on SA in particular to play a greater role in assisting the ICC to ensure it became a bastion of progressive international jurisprudence.
He suggested that another option for African states was to give more power and capacity to regional tribunals such as the SA Development Community tribunal.
Instead, the SADC tribunal had been decapitated with the decision to take away tenure of judges and to cancel individual rights to access the tribunal if they felt that the justice system in their home countries had failed.
Boqwana was instrumental in the LSSA’s court challenge in which it sought to have President Jacob Zuma’s signing of the protocol diminishing the tribunal’s role declared unconstitutional. He said the ICC and the tribunals were essential.
“Those to whom we mortgage power must take care using it, knowing full well that they will be held accountable for abuse and transgressions.” He also warned that the “discourse of colonialism” needed to change.
Colonialism should not be blamed when African leadership was attacked.
“Must we blame colonialism when our own leaders treat us the same way that our colonial masters did?”
Would you like to comment on this article?
Register (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.
Trending Now
Latest Videos