Welcome to Eureka Street

back to site

INTERNATIONAL

Africa and US worry the frayed edges of international criminal justice

  • 06 November 2013

Two key developments in the past month have once more called into question whether the International Criminal Court (ICC) can end impunity for the most serious international crimes.

First, the African Union's (AU) request to the United Nations Security Council to suspend the trials of sittings Kenyan heads of state. Emerging from a special meeting of the AU in Addis Ababa on 11-12 October, the request comes on the back of perceptions of ICC bias in prosecuting Africans.

Secondly, recently released Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch reports raise the real possibility that any killing of civilians by United States' drones violate the laws of war.

The United States has signed but not ratified the Rome Statute, the international law instrument that enables membership of the ICC. This means Unites States citizens involved in the use of drones that leads to the death of civilians in an armed conflict cannot be brought before the court.

Both situations threaten the mandate of the ICC to end impunity for serious international crimes, and with it threaten the project of international criminal justice.

The International Criminal Court

The ICC came into operation in 2002 with a mandate to bring to justice individual perpetrators of the most serious international crimes: genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and the crime of aggression.

Following the Court's establishment, then UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan said 'Impunity has been dealt a decisive blow ... a missing link in the international justice system is now in place ... Humanity will be able to defend itself — responding to the worst of human nature with one of the greatest achievements: the rule of law.'

One hundred and twenty-two states have now acceded to the Rome Statute, including 32 African nations. China, Russia and the United States, all permanent members of the Unites Nations Security Council, have not signed on to the ICC, as well as regional powers India and Indonesia.

In its 11 years of operation, 20 cases from eight situations have been brought to trial, with just one case completed (Thomas Lubanga of the Democratic Republic of Congo was convicted for war crimes in 2012). The AU's claims of Afro-centrism seem particularly well founded when one considers that all eight situations are African, though four were referred to the ICC by the countries themselves.

African frustrations and sovereign immunity

The AU request seeks a one-year suspension of the ICC cases against Kenya's President Uhuru Kenyatta and Vice-President William Ruto. Both

Join the conversation. Sign up for our free weekly newsletter  Subscribe