Back to Index
Who
shall speak for Africa’s victims
Tanonoka
Joseph Whande
October 14, 2013
http://www.swradioafrica.com/2013/10/14/who-shall-speak-for-africas-victims
Some years ago,
the United Nations came under scrutiny and heavy criticism after
it had been revealed that its staff that was in the DR Congo to
protect civilians when a war was in full swing had themselves sexually
exploited women and young girls they were supposed to protect.
It turned out
that this sex scandal involving UN personnel was not limited to
DR Congo only but was worldwide.
The world was
shocked and asked: who then will guard the guardians?
Africa has a
plethora of organisations such as the African Union, the Economic
Community of West African States, the Southern Africa Development
Community, the East African Community and many others.
We have enough
of them to protect the citizens across the continent but these organisations,
particularly the AU and SADC, do not appear to have been created
to serve the interests of the continent or region as they always
side with ruling governments even when they are abusing their own
citizens.
Our African
organisations seem eager to protect the interests of African Heads
of State and sitting presidents and care less about the citizens
under duress.
Based on their
underperformance and depth of negligence, SADC and the African Union
are disgraceful existences that should be disbanded because they
don’t seem able or willing to protect African people.
Their obligations
are with the ruling elite regardless of how those leaders abuse
their citizens. Both have disgraced us on Zimbabwe and continue
being party to the oppression, subjugation and abuse of African
people.
The world is
unfortunate enough to get some of mankind’s most sadistic
leaders who bully, abuse and kill the very people they are supposed
to be protecting. History is littered with such human beasts that
get away with their crimes.
On July 17th,
1998 at a diplomatic conference in Rome, the countries of the world,
having recognised the continuing killing and abuse of people around
the world, adopted the Rome Statute of the International Criminal
Court, which was a treaty that established the International Criminal
Court (ICC).
It was empowered
to deal with four international crimes, namely genocide, crimes
against humanity, war crimes and the crime of aggression.
“Under
the Rome Statute, the ICC can only investigate and prosecute these
four core international crimes in situations where states are “unable”
or “unwilling” to do so themselves.”
Needless to
say, by their sheer character and demonic behaviour, an awkward
number of African leaders suddenly became prime candidates for appearances
at the ICC.
The ICC is not,
as Zimbabwe’s Robert Mugabe claims, targeting African leaders,
per se. Even if it were, why should an African leader behave in
such a way that satisfies the requirements of an ICC indictment?
Mugabe, himself
a prime candidate for an ICC appearance, should maybe tell the world
which of the African leaders the ICC indicted is innocent of killing
his own citizens.
Mugabe has been
agitating and pushing fellow African countries to pull out of the
ICC, citing the fact that the ICC targets Africans and is biased.
Indeed, the
majority of ICC indictees are Africans but that should not be used
as reason to exonerate African leaders who murder their own people.
If the ICC cooks
up accusations of genocide against African leaders, then that is
an issue that needs to be looked into and pronto.
But if the accusations
are true, then what is the problem?
Who would deny
that Liberia’s Charles Taylor, Côte d’Ivoire’s
Laurent Gbagbo, Sudan’s Omar al-Bashir, Jean-Pierre Bemba,
Joseph Kony, Robert Mugabe and some of all these people’s
deputies must stand trial? We should not set a murderer free just
because another murderer elsewhere has not been arrested.
What Mugabe
is trying to say is that, ‘even if we did it so and so also
did the same’. The issue is to determine guilt or innocence.
Period.
What does it
say for the African Union when it says that, guilty or not, the
AU will not let African leaders to be prosecuted by an international
tribunal when half of the eight cases it is prosecuting were referred
by African governments?
The heart of
the matter is that because of the worsening sadistic and murderous
tendencies of African rulers towards their subjects, there is greatest
of needs to protect African people from their own leaders across
the continent simply because African leaders support those among
themselves who murder their citizens.
Africans must
be protected from their own leaders. To that extent, therefore,
the International Criminal Court is an essential entity, particularly
for those who cannot speak for themselves or defend themselves from
their own governments.
The African
Union, the Economic Community of West African States, the Southern
Africa Development Community, the East African Community all seem
“unable” or “unwilling” to bring errant
Heads of State in line.
These organisations
appear to be more of Public Relations arms of African governments.
I do not care
whether or not the ICC has indicted George W Bush and Tony Blair,
as Mugabe is always yapping about, but I damn well care about the
person who has killed thousands of my compatriots.
Indicting Bush
and Blair will not bring closure to me as a citizen of Zimbabwe
but indicting Mugabe and his goons who massacred our compatriots
for no reason other than to stay in power would, in a way, appease
those who lost their loved ones in what Mugabe himself conceded
was “a moment of madness”.
We are sick
and ashamed of foreign governments, organisations and individuals
always having to intervene in Africa to save Africans from being
slaughtered by their own leaders.
It is appalling
when African leaders turn a blind eye to massacres being perpetrated
by fellow African presidents. If African leaders like Mugabe want
foreigners to stay away from their affairs, they should behave in
a manner that makes foreigners’ intervention redundant.
Surely, the
civilised world cannot be expected to watch while our leaders slaughter
their citizens.
I agree with
former UN Secretary General, Kofi Annan, who does not accept the
view that the ICC is anti-African.
“The ICC
is not putting Africa on trial. The ICC is fighting impunity and
individuals who are accused of crimes; this point cannot be made
strongly enough,” said Annan this past week.
There is absolutely
nothing wrong with African leaders demanding that a leader in Europe,
America or elsewhere be brought before the ICC. As our leaders,
they belong to an exclusive and elite group of people who have some
say on what and how world affairs are handled.
My point is
that the failure, for whatever reason, to prosecute the leader of
some country does not exonerate those accused of genocide elsewhere.
For its part,
the ICC must and should spread its wings if it is to be believable,
respected and considered a serious champion of fairness, law and
order. It must not be seen to exist to punish and humiliate Africans
only. It must be there to provide, to serve justice and to protect
citizens of the world.
Accusations
of targeting Africans only are disturbing and that must be corrected
as a matter of urgency because the world needs the ICC.
Said Annan:
“The question I cannot ask often enough is: who speaks for
the victims? How do they get justice? Who’s in their corner?”
The answer to that, I am afraid to say, is that Africans are finding
no sympathy from Africans; no one is in our corner but some strangers
from faraway places.
There is a very
good reason why African leaders have to be hunted down, arrested
and taken away, kicking and screaming, to be tried in Europe for
what they did to their African brethren in Africa?
There is a very
good reason why Charles Taylor, who butchered his compatriots in
Liberia, is now serving his sentence in England and not in Liberia
or Ethiopia.
Please credit www.kubatana.net if you make use of material from this website.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License unless stated otherwise.
TOP
|