Daily Darfur: Bashir Joins the Club of the World's Most Wanted
Published March 05, 2009 @ 03:43AM PT
"Rape the women, kill the children. Leave nothing," Jaja said.
So in case you haven't heard, the International Criminal Court (ICC) issued an arrest warrant for Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir yesterday, charging him with war crimes and crimes against humanity for his campaign against civilians in Darfur.
The Court did not charge Bashir for genocide, as the Chief Prosecutor requested, though he does stand accused of "“intentionally directing attacks against an important part of the civilian population of Darfur, murdering, exterminating, raping, torturing and forcibly transferring large numbers of civilians and pillaging their property." Exterminating ....sounds a lot like genocide. (Anyone with a legal background care to explain the difference?)
Still, this is by no means the end of the matter: The Court left the door open to reconsider the genocide charge in light of new evidence, or the prosecutor can appeal the pre-trial panel's decision. Kevin at Opinio Juris, for one, hopes that he will:
"I find it very difficult to believe, however, that the evidence of genocide — the murder of the male members of the tribes, the sexual violence and slow-death conditions in the IDP camps, etc. — doesn’t even establish reasonable grounds to believe that genocide occurred."
He goes into more depth on the "reasonable grounds" issue in a follow up post, arguing:
"I do not think it is reasonable, however, to argue that the Prosecution has not established 'reasonable grounds' to believe that Bashir has committed genocide."
Reaction from Sudan
Not surprisingly, Khartoum was quick to denounce the warrants with its usual vitriolic vigor:
"There will be no recognition of or dealing with the white man's court, which has no mandate in Sudan or against any of its people," the Information Ministry said.
Residents of Khartoum poured into the streets shortly after the announcement, in a (government organized) show of support for their beleaguered president. Bashir supporters even started a scuffle with Darfuri refugees demonstrating in New York City (see video):
As Michael reported last night on Change.org's Humanitarian Relief blog, Khartoum also gave 10 humanitarian aid agencies the boot. CARE's assistant country director in Sudan told Voice of America that she hopes Khartoum's decision to revoke the aid agency's lisence can be reversed. In the meantime, security measures have been bolstered for CARE's 650 staffers, most of whom are Sudanese nationals. According to the article:
"But no final decision has yet been reached on what needs to be done, whether to evacuate or bolster protective services in the hope that UN or other outside mediation can convince the Bashir government to rescind its expulsion order from northern Sudan. CARE's Liz McLaughlin says the country director's office has the discretion to make the final call, both in authorizing last-ditch efforts to change government officials mind or enlist UN negotiators' to weigh in with Khartoum, or to abandon the country."
For a round-up of NGO responses to Khartoum's actions against them, see the ENOUGH blog. For my thoughts, see my post from last night.
So what comes next?
"The issue of what to do is reminiscent of the misguided effort to hold off forceful intervention in Bosnia in the early 1990s. After 3 1/2 bloody years in which 100,000 people were killed and millions displaced, we ultimately saw that more vigorous action was needed to end that conflict. The same conclusion holds now for Darfur, where the death toll is at least double that of Bosnia (and may be much greater). The arrest warrant the ICC issued yesterday makes clear Bashir's responsibility as leader of the country and director of the mayhem in the Darfur region. His expulsion of 10 aid organizations in response to the warrant makes his lack of concern for his citizens' welfare abundantly clear."
The enforcement of a no-fly zone over Darfur, they argue, would significantly hamper Khartoum's military campaign in the region and give the international community more leverage in conflict resolution efforts.
[Photo from AP: A Sudanese demonstrator uses a shoe to hit a poster of International Criminal Court prosecutor Luis Moreno Ocampo during a rally protesting against the International Criminal Court arrest warrant, in Khartoum, Sudan, Wednesday, March 4, 2009.]
Share this Post
Facebook
Twitter
Digg
StumbleUpon
Delicious
EmailRelated Posts
-
Daily Darfur: The Sound of a Diplomatic Broken Record
-
Daily Darfur: Proud to be a Criminal of War
-
Bashir to World: Say "Uncle"
Comments (2)
Comments on Change.org are meant for further exploration and evaluation of the ideas covered in the posts. To that end, we welcome constructive comments. However, we reserve the right to delete comments that are offensive, abusive, or off-topic; that contain ad hominem attacks; or that are designed to subvert or hijack comment threads rather than contribute to them. Repeat offenders may be permanently removed from the site at our discretion.
Author
-
Michelle became involved in the anti-genocide cause at a young age, and has been involved in various activist endeavors, including the Teach Against Genocide pilot campaigns, ever since.
From what I understand, a common downfall when it comes to proving genocide is the specific intent requirement. According to the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, acts like killing, raping, forcibly transferring, etc., must be completed with the specific intent "to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group."
While the int'l legal community in general might quickly agree that this intent was absolutely present in Sudan, international courts and other governing bodies seem to be less inclined to easily conclude the same. It appears they are more likely to conclude that yes, horrible attrocities happened, and yes, this person may have deliberately "inflict[ed] on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part...", but we aren't quite satisfied that those actions were done WITH the INTENT to destroy the group in whole or in part. And you simply must have both: the actions and the intent. It's a general principle of criminal law. SO, here, maybe the actions were taken because the group is hated, or because Bashir doesn't care about human life, or maybe he even knew that taking such actions might very well lead to the destruction of the groups, but all of that still may not show that he had the specific intent when he carried out the actions. For the record, this is not my opinion. Just some thoughts on the issue.
Posted by Int'l Law Student on 03/05/2009 @ 06:25AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Dear All, It is very good decision by ICC to issue, arrest warrant of President Basheer.
Same should be done with Israeli government past and present officials. They too should be tried for genocide, war crimes and crime against humanity, and land grabbing.
Justice should be done with poor Palestinians who are suffering since last 60 years.
Posted by Public Welafare Society on 03/07/2009 @ 01:21AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.