Hissène Habré, Charles Taylor, Jean-Pierre Bemba…: the list goes on, this list
of dictators, warlords or torturers from the African continent, who are behind
bars or being prosecuted by an international or foreign court. Only a few years
ago, developments in international law gave us hope for the future, and many of
us, including those from Africa, declared loudly and clearly that “fear had
changed sides”. Finally, those victims, who for so long had been ignored and
left to their own devices, would have a chance to bring their cases forward, a
chance to confront their perpetrators and a chance to begin living again.
Yes, but with time, doubt has progressively instilled itself in a large
segment of the African public opinion. Why is this list of Africans so long?
Fuelled by an efficient propaganda campaign in several countries, rumours
quickly turned into suspicions, and suspicions into accusations: international
justice is white justice, a justice that serves only to reproduce neo-colonial
patterns. What’s worse, those fighting nationally or internationally for the
recognition of victims’ rights to justice are stigmatised and accused of
playing into the hands of northern countries.
At this point, we need to re-think some objective facts. International
justice is not focused solely on cases from Africa; the International Criminal
Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia is probably the most obvious example of
this. The same can be said about the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of
Cambodia, whose establishment has resulted in the prosecution and trial of
those former senior Khmers Rouge leaders still alive. Moreover, the Prosecutor
of the International Criminal Court (ICC) also deals with crimes committed in
Colombia, Afghanistan, Georgia…And we mustn’t forget that this year marks the
tenth anniversary of the arrest of Augusto Pinochet in London, a crucial point
in the history of international justice, one that was to open the door to
numerous other national and international legal proceedings.
Finally, and this fact cannot be ignored, the number of arrests and legal
proceedings initiated with respect to Africa also reflects the gravity of the
crimes committed in the continent. Rape, execution, torture and forced
displacement: the worst atrocities, massive and systematic, committed without
fear of punishment. And so, a question arises: should those crimes remain
unpunished? If the perpetrators are African, we must never forget that so, too,
are the victims.
The decision of the ICC Prosecutor to initiate legal proceedings against
Sudanese President al-Bashir did however increase the sense of bias of this
institution, as it was made only a short time after the arrest in Brussels of
former Congolese Vice-President Jean-Pierre Bemba. But, we should remember that
most African States have ratified the ICC Statute, which we are delighted
about. And it was these same States that referred cases to the ICC Prosecutor
to open, requesting that he opened an investigation into the crimes committed
on their territories, thus recognising the lack of capacity of their national
courts. Finally, remember that the Court is composed in large part of judges
coming from the African continent.
Certainly the northern countries – and we will not stop denouncing this –
aim to protect their nationals from legal proceedings for atrocious crimes
committed on various continents. This situation is intolerable. As powerful as
they are, they must not fail to uphold their responsibilities. To try the
crimes of Saddam Hussein without respecting the rules of a fair process and to
absolve from all responsibility the powers that supported him when those crimes
were committed: isn’t this the root of the very real sentiment of
“international in-justice” that prevails in relations between the North and the
South? Once already, during a promotional tour in France in 2007, Donald
Rumsfeld felt the hands of justice closing in. With a torture complaint filed
against him, the former United States Secretary of Defence escaped only by
secretly taking refuge in his country’s embassy. In the same way, records are
kept and cases are built for crimes committed by Westerners in Afghanistan,
Iraq and Guantanamo, and legal proceedings are on occasion initiated. In any
case, it is critical that these northern players be held accountable for their
crimes.
The Rwandan government has also issued a damning report concerning the
alleged responsibilities of the French forces during the 1994 genocide. In
every case, an investigation is based clearly on the evidence of the facts, and
should surely go further than the report of the parliamentary fact-finding
mission. The report, which concluded that France had absolutely no
responsibility in the situation, only served to reinforce the sense of double
standards mentioned above.
Beyond that, this example paradoxically reflects the objective of all those
who, through international justice, work only to permit their own national
justice systems to finally have the power and capacity to try their own
criminals. A prime example is the Fujimori trial, currently underway in Peru,
which would have been unimaginable only ten years ago.
It cannot be denied that, just as with the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights, the 60th anniversary of which we mark this year, international justice
must be applicable on all continents and for all victims. Challenging justice
on the grounds that some resistance will hinder its action is not a good
approach. Rather, we must unite to overcome those obstacles that slow progress,
and to ensure that international criminal justice is finally applied in a
consistent and equitable way.
Sidiki Kaba, Honorary President of the International Federation for
Human Rights (FIDH) (Tribune publiée dans sa version française, dans
l’hebdomadaire "Jeune Afrique" du 08/12/2008)