OPINION

By Amb. Henry Mayega

The actualisation of the International Criminal Court (ICC) on July 1, 2002 was largely embraced by most African countries because its objectives were well-intentioned, ethical as well as splendid; it was to tame impunity without discriminating perpetrators — so we thought. Relatedly, African countries not only played a pivotal role during the negotiation process and framing of the Rome Statute, but also championed the establishment of the court by ratifying the statute; Senegal became the first state party to sign up on February 2, 1999.

Currently, 34 African countries, including Uganda are state parties to the Rome Statute. That convincingly makes Africa the largest regional grouping of the ICC. Analogously, the first Review Conference of the Rome Statute was hosted by Uganda, in 2010, thanks to the far-sighted Yoweri Museveni administration — that put us at the pedestal of that court’s future workings as well as its momentousness to us as a country. Arguably, it can be guardedly said that ICC garnered colossal support from the African continent during its infancy.

However, that initial support and co-operation by African countries started waning gallopingly following the weaponisation of the court against small states by the “Uncle Sams”; one, they unscrupulously instigated the issuance of an arrest warrant against the former president of Sudan, Omar Al Bashir; two, the ICC also ebbed and suffered tanking polls on the continent when it summoned the sitting President of Kenya, Uhuru Muigai Kenyatta, and his deputy then, William Samoei Ruto, who is currently Kenya’s President. Both cases still-birthed anyway due to that court’s weird, if not suspicious work methods.

In May 2013, the chairperson of the AU and Prime Minister of Ethiopia, Hailemariam Desalegn, opined that ICC processes in Africa were “flawed” — essentially driving the second last nail into that court’s casket.

The AU assembly of October 2013 discussed the future of Africa’s relationship with the ICC and stoutly decided that “no charges shall be commenced or continued before any international court... against any serving African Union head of state or government or anybody acting or entitled to act in such capacity during their term of office”.

The Assembly also demanded the suspension of the Kenyatta and Ruto cases and instructed the duo not to appear before the court until the UNSC responded to the deferral request. Those last two AU decisions embodied the last nail to be driven into the court’s casket.

Was/is the ICC targeting Africa?

Arguably, the judicial mechanism of the ICC had become a hard-wired instrument by the collective west to instigate “regime changes” in countries considered “hostile”.

Since the founding of the ICC, there has, for instance, never been any high-profile western political “Uncle Sam” paraded in The Hague despite the glaring commission of war crimes during the most recent Balkan wars and elsewhere. Why? Because might is right.

To the Uncle Sams, those who commit heinous crimes and crimes against humanity are located in the political south. Could it be that the ICC’s being headquartered in the West makes the latter call the shots?

Despite the fact that the US supports the decisions by the ICC, it is not a state party to the Rome Statute. The US has even sanctioned a number of high-ranking ICC officials (namely Fatou Bensouda and Phakiso Mochochoko) over their calling out US alleged crimes wherever the latter has put boots on the ground.

The others like Muammar Gadaffi of Libya and Laurent Gbagbo of Ivory Coast were not spared the antics of the collective west through the ICC. Such cases seemingly indicate that the ICC acts at the behest of Washington and Brussels. All the African pack of leaders mentioned above had variously contradicted the West’s interests and had to pay the ultimate price. The West conducted senseless wars in the Balkans, Libya, Iraq and Afghanistan; leaving a trail of carnage and gore plus igniting a mass exodus of people from some of those troubled areas to Europe and now the US.

As part of its 25th anniversary celebrations, the ICC organised events that included the ministerial meeting at UN headquarters in July and a hybrid conference at Syracuse International University of Criminal Justice and Human Rights in October 2023 in Italy. The aim of these events were to adopt its strategy going forward up to 2033.

Those events were ostensibly planned to portray ICC as a key player in the global justice system. Hopefully, the West will not be seen to have instead increased the weaponisation of the ICC against small states as it were; if so, then the court will lose its salt and taste for eternity because sovereign states won’t accept interference in their internal affairs by the mighty Uncle Sams.

The writer is the Consul General of Uganda Consulate General in Dubai, United Arab Emirates