ICC: Charge Bashir or Let Taylor go!!!
I have not stopped agonising over International Criminal Court (ICC) partial action in northern Uganda by indicting only the Lord's Resistance Movement / Army (LRM/A) elements, and not also Yoweri Museveni and commanders of his National Resistance Movement / Army AKA UPDF for war crimes and crimes against humanity. And to add insult to injury, of the five indictments besides Joseph Kony and Vincent Otti, the other three are former abducted children who rose through the ranks in the LRM/ A. In any case, at the time of their indictements in 2005, they were not the most senior officers of the insurgents. More senior members of the insurgent group, Brig. Kolo and Brig. Banya, had surrendered to the government barely a year and had since been treated with kid gloves both by the ICC and the Uganda government. The puzzle I have not been able to solve is: why charge Raska Lukwiya, Dominic Ongwen and Charles Odhiambo, but let go scot free, Banya and Kolo, who abducted, trained and deployed these abducted children to commit the crimes they are accused of perpetrating in northern Uganda and beyond?
Had Banya and Kolo not surrendered to the Uganda government, they would have preceded the other three indictees, after Kony and Otti, on the chain of command. Why should their surrender absolve them from serious charges of war crimes and crimes against humanity? Why did the ICC skip those spots in the command and responsibility in the hierarchy of the LRM / A? Even if Lukwiya, Odhiambo and Ongwen were field commanders and may have personally given orders or participated in these crimes themselves, why should more senior commanders in the top hierarchy of their military and political leadership, who must bear the final responsibility and accountability for their activities, be exculpated without any credible evidence other than political declarations attesting to their innoence? Given these unresolved questions, and try as it might, the ICC cannot shake off the suspicion and charges that it has been browbeaten by some powerful international political and diplomatic forces to close one eye and pursue a politcally motivated course of action. Rather than justice, something rotten; stinking partiality in efforts to shield Museveni from his role in the northern genocide, is being perpetrated by the ICC. It is a travesty for Kolo and Banya's sworn politial loyalty to Museveni to absolve them of their roles in war crimes and crimes against humanity in northern Uganda. In our view, the UN Security Council needs to go back to the drawing board, set the ICC indictments in northern Uganda aside and institute a special tribunal for northern Uganda to carry out fresh investigations and let the evidence of war crimes and crimes against humanity lead them to the perpetrators, regardless of which side they belong to and what position they hold. That is the only way justice can be seen to be done in northern Uganda.
Furthermore, the resumption of the trial of Charles Taylor, former Liberian president, should shine another spotlight on northern Uganda and the ICC activity there. The main charge sheet that has landed Taylor in the Hague, is that, he covertly and overtly aided the rebellion in Sierra Leone, that led to Uganda-style rapes, abuses, mutilations, massacres and other war crimes and crimes against humanity. One cannot help but discern with anguish, the parallel between Sierra Leone and northern Uganda. It is heartbreaking to note that victims in the former receive robust justice, while those in the latter are slapped with injustices and indifference at all instances.
While Taylor is accused of suspected backing of the rebellion in Sierra Leone, which the prosecutors in the Hague are trying very hard to prove, Hassan Omar al-Bashir, is a known and an admitted abettor of the northern rebellion and carnage through the LRM / A. If Taylor has been dragged to the docks for his merely suspected role, which is yet to be proven by the prosecutors, why has the ICC not indicted Bashir, whose culpability and admission presents an open and shut case? Does this inaction prove the case that, rather than act morally to vindicate the human rights of victims of war crimes and crimes against humanity anywhere, anytime and against anyone without regard to status and connections, the ICC seems to act on political prompting by powerful international forces who define war crimes and crimes against humanity and its perpetrators based on self-interest and political expediency.
Given ICC inaction against Bashir, while Taylor is fingered for closely parallel crimes; and given ICC selective indictments in northern Uganda, it is plausible to conclude that peace has not come to northern Uganda sooner than it will; and that Bashir and Museveni and their commanders have not also been indictted for their respective roles because there is no international political and diplomatic power strong enough to bat for the victims of their crimes. In other words, both Museveni and Bashir benefit from strong international and diplomatic backings of powerful states atop the global political power structures that obviate rights fraternity coalition ethical voices for justice on behalf of the victims. In these instances, the ICC seems to be a willing broker trading human rights for oil, membership in the coalition of the willing against terror, and other economic, political and strategic favours and patronage. After all, how much is 1.8 million African lives in northern Uganda or even 4.2 million in the jungle of the Democratic Republic of Congo, worth? Not a cent on the New York and London stock exchanges, of course.
Nevertheless, the longer these questions remain unanswered, the more suspicions of ICC credibility and motivations persist. The best course of action is for the ICC to step aside in northern Uganda in favour of an international special tribunal, or plug the gaps it has neglected, by bringing both sides to book. Furthermore, the ICC will enhance its credibility by charging Omar al-Bashir for raising and aiding the LRM/ A in the commission of the crimes they are accused of in northern Uganda. To not do so, cast serious doubts on the veracity and morality of the charges brought against Charles Taylor on his alleged involvement with the Sierra Leone rebellion. While we do not hold our breath on any positive developments on this, there is still a chance for the ICC to break free and redeem itself from the clutches of the international political and diplomatic equivalent of the Mafia that looks at everything as a tradable commodity, human beings and lives not excepted. Otherwise, either it moves to indict Omar al-Bashir or Charles Taylor should be set free on account he has no case to answer.
Had Banya and Kolo not surrendered to the Uganda government, they would have preceded the other three indictees, after Kony and Otti, on the chain of command. Why should their surrender absolve them from serious charges of war crimes and crimes against humanity? Why did the ICC skip those spots in the command and responsibility in the hierarchy of the LRM / A? Even if Lukwiya, Odhiambo and Ongwen were field commanders and may have personally given orders or participated in these crimes themselves, why should more senior commanders in the top hierarchy of their military and political leadership, who must bear the final responsibility and accountability for their activities, be exculpated without any credible evidence other than political declarations attesting to their innoence? Given these unresolved questions, and try as it might, the ICC cannot shake off the suspicion and charges that it has been browbeaten by some powerful international political and diplomatic forces to close one eye and pursue a politcally motivated course of action. Rather than justice, something rotten; stinking partiality in efforts to shield Museveni from his role in the northern genocide, is being perpetrated by the ICC. It is a travesty for Kolo and Banya's sworn politial loyalty to Museveni to absolve them of their roles in war crimes and crimes against humanity in northern Uganda. In our view, the UN Security Council needs to go back to the drawing board, set the ICC indictments in northern Uganda aside and institute a special tribunal for northern Uganda to carry out fresh investigations and let the evidence of war crimes and crimes against humanity lead them to the perpetrators, regardless of which side they belong to and what position they hold. That is the only way justice can be seen to be done in northern Uganda.
Furthermore, the resumption of the trial of Charles Taylor, former Liberian president, should shine another spotlight on northern Uganda and the ICC activity there. The main charge sheet that has landed Taylor in the Hague, is that, he covertly and overtly aided the rebellion in Sierra Leone, that led to Uganda-style rapes, abuses, mutilations, massacres and other war crimes and crimes against humanity. One cannot help but discern with anguish, the parallel between Sierra Leone and northern Uganda. It is heartbreaking to note that victims in the former receive robust justice, while those in the latter are slapped with injustices and indifference at all instances.
While Taylor is accused of suspected backing of the rebellion in Sierra Leone, which the prosecutors in the Hague are trying very hard to prove, Hassan Omar al-Bashir, is a known and an admitted abettor of the northern rebellion and carnage through the LRM / A. If Taylor has been dragged to the docks for his merely suspected role, which is yet to be proven by the prosecutors, why has the ICC not indicted Bashir, whose culpability and admission presents an open and shut case? Does this inaction prove the case that, rather than act morally to vindicate the human rights of victims of war crimes and crimes against humanity anywhere, anytime and against anyone without regard to status and connections, the ICC seems to act on political prompting by powerful international forces who define war crimes and crimes against humanity and its perpetrators based on self-interest and political expediency.
Given ICC inaction against Bashir, while Taylor is fingered for closely parallel crimes; and given ICC selective indictments in northern Uganda, it is plausible to conclude that peace has not come to northern Uganda sooner than it will; and that Bashir and Museveni and their commanders have not also been indictted for their respective roles because there is no international political and diplomatic power strong enough to bat for the victims of their crimes. In other words, both Museveni and Bashir benefit from strong international and diplomatic backings of powerful states atop the global political power structures that obviate rights fraternity coalition ethical voices for justice on behalf of the victims. In these instances, the ICC seems to be a willing broker trading human rights for oil, membership in the coalition of the willing against terror, and other economic, political and strategic favours and patronage. After all, how much is 1.8 million African lives in northern Uganda or even 4.2 million in the jungle of the Democratic Republic of Congo, worth? Not a cent on the New York and London stock exchanges, of course.
Nevertheless, the longer these questions remain unanswered, the more suspicions of ICC credibility and motivations persist. The best course of action is for the ICC to step aside in northern Uganda in favour of an international special tribunal, or plug the gaps it has neglected, by bringing both sides to book. Furthermore, the ICC will enhance its credibility by charging Omar al-Bashir for raising and aiding the LRM/ A in the commission of the crimes they are accused of in northern Uganda. To not do so, cast serious doubts on the veracity and morality of the charges brought against Charles Taylor on his alleged involvement with the Sierra Leone rebellion. While we do not hold our breath on any positive developments on this, there is still a chance for the ICC to break free and redeem itself from the clutches of the international political and diplomatic equivalent of the Mafia that looks at everything as a tradable commodity, human beings and lives not excepted. Otherwise, either it moves to indict Omar al-Bashir or Charles Taylor should be set free on account he has no case to answer.
Comments