All of the court’s current eight cases are against Africans, prompting the AU to accuse the ICC of “hunting” Africans, even though four of those cases were referred to the court by the countries themselves.
But several African nations, including Botswana, South Africa, Nigeria and Ghana, have expressed support for the ICC in the past, and are seen as unlikely to withdraw now.
“I do not expect much out of the meeting other than a bit of moral support and expressions of sympathy for the Kenyan government’s position,” Peter J. Pham, director for the Africa Centre at the Atlantic Council, told AFP.
But Pham said the ICC’s refusal to transfer or defer the Kenyan cases, particularly after Islamist gunmen massacred at least 67 people in a Nairobi shopping mall last month, has demonstrated the “apparent tone deafness of the ICC to public perception” in Africa.
“By refusing even that reasonable accommodation, the court confirms the worst fears of its critics and does little to reassure ordinary Africans, thus further undermining its political legitimacy,” Pham added.
Last month, Kenyan lawmakers backed a motion to withdraw from the ICC. If successful, Kenya would be the first country to pull out of the court.
While the AU is not mandated to ask countries to withdraw from the treaty that established the ICC, diplomats said Kenya’s lobbying campaign urging countries to pull out could gain some success
ICC accused of ‘hunting Africans’
Analysts warn a widespread pull out from the ICC is a dangerous move for many African countries that lack the judicial capacity, political will or funding to try suspected criminals on their own soil.
“The impact of these developments for international criminal justice, and especially the victims of grave crimes in Africa, are dire,” South Africa’s Institute for Security Studies warned.
Among the 122 countries that are party to the Rome Statute, the ICC’s binding treaty, 34 are African the largest regional representation within the court.
“It would undermine the whole project, it would be a very unwise decision,” said Misa Zgonec, an international law fellow at Britain’s Chatham House.
“If the states have a commitment to diffuse the impunity gap, then they should definitely stick with the International Criminal Court.”
About The Author
