AU doesn’t care about Darfur

Libyan leader Muammar Gaddaffi may be campaigning to be president of a united Africa, but the recently concluded 13th African Union Heads of State and Government Assembly which he hosted only served to send wrong signals about the continent.

The summit resolved not to cooperate with the International Criminal Court in its indictment of Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir for crimes against humanity — murder, torture, rape and expulsions.

Besides, the resolution adopted by the 53-member organ is an insult to the people of Western Darfur, most of who live in dilapidated camps, six years after the conflict escalated.

According to the AU, arresting al-Bashir would lead to an escalation of violence in Darfur, besides leading to the collapse of the January 2005 Comprehensive Peace Agreement.

This is all crap. The world knows that even prior to his indictment, al-Bashir failed to control the violence in Darfur and has been scuttling the Comprehensive Peace Agreement.

As Amnesty put it: “This decision by the AU shows a disdain for those in Darfur who suffered ... and makes a mockery of the AU.

By supporting a wanted person accused of war crimes and crimes against humanity, it undermines the credibility of states that are party to the Rome Statute and the AU as a whole”.

At least Benin and Chad opposed the resolution. Still, there is more than meets the eye in its adoption. Having committed similar crimes in their own countries, many Heads of State live in fear of ICC one day catching up with them. So they want to sit pretty.

But above all, the resolution puts the continent on the spot, given that 30 African states are signatories to the ICC.

The resolution is a flagrant violation of Article 86 of the Rome Statute which compels parties to cooperate in the execution of the arrest warrants.

IT IS IRONICAL THAT AFRICAN LEADers adopted this resolution yet the continent played a decisive role in 1998 in the establishment of the ICC as a court of last resort.

This is where victims of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes receive justice and reparations whenever states are unwilling to investigate and prosecute.

It is against this background that three African states, the Central African Republic, the DRC and Uganda referred cases to the ICC. Côte d’Ivoire has also recognised ICC’s jurisdiction.

President al-Bashir must face the ICC, despite Sudan not being a signatory to the Rome Statute. He is above the law in Sudan and no amount of pressure by human rights watchdogs will make him stop his warmongering.

That al-Bashir is indeed under siege, is easy to tell. At the AU Summit in Libya, he had the largest security detail.

And when Uganda threatened to arrest him should he visit the country for a summit scheduled next month, he promptly cancelled his visit. But for how long will he play these games?

The seven counts for which he has been indicted — five counts of crimes against humanity, namely murder, extermination, forcible transfer, torture and rape and; two counts of war crimes — intentionally directing attacks against a civilian population and pillaging — stand out.

In 2003, he helped create the Janjaweed militias to unleash terror in Darfur. In August 2006, more than 200 women were raped in five weeks in Kalma Camp, South Darfur.

The civilian population comprising mainly the Fur, Masalit and Zaghawa groups bore the heaviest brunt of the Darfur conflict as they were perceived to be linked to groups opposing the government. They were attacked by the Sudanese army and their allied Janjaweed. The victims need justice.

Mr Ochieng is the editor of The Big Issue Kenya. (tbik_zachary@peacelink.info)