WAR CHILD - THE BOOK: The true story of Sudanese child soldier Emmanuel Jal

Entertainment



War Child: One of Sudan's Lost Boys Found

By FRANCES ROMERO
TIME Thursday, Feb. 05, 2009

War Child: A Child Soldier's Story
By Emmanuel Jal
262 pages; St. Martin's Press

The Gist:

Writing a memoir based on the memories of an entire childhood filled with the savagery of war would certainly be difficult enough. Doing so after having been trained as a tiny soldier to kill Arabs and Muslims, or jallabas, before even reaching puberty, would prove to be an impossible task for some. Stories of the Lost Boys of Sudan — stolen from their homes and sometimes coaxed by the Sudan People's Liberation Army (SPLA) to fight a war the children had little understanding of — have emerged bit by bit since the end of the civil war that raged in the country for nearly two decades killing almost 2 million people and displacing millions more.

Emmanuel Jal is one of those boys; now an adult, he travels the world as a rapper explaining the War Child life he lived; he has starred in a documentary of the same name and released both an album and now this book sharing his feelings on the past and the present of a country in unending distress.

Highlight Reel:

1. War as an everyday lifestyle: With the smell of burning flesh in the air and the memories of bodies lying still on the ground, I'd run as if the devil were chasing me. I became good at war.

2. On the foundation of his desire to entertain: Another favorite was the dissing competitions, in which children threw insults at each other to make others laugh. "Your grandmother is so fat that God won't let her into heaven," one boy would shout at another as the crowd laughed ... In the beginning I'd fall silent when it was my turn. But I started improving ... As well as the insults we had to rap for the older boys—tell stories in chanting rhythms to entertain them—and I found that I enjoyed entertaining people.

3. On becoming inured to the desperation and fear of being a child soldier: As time passed, I learned that a body gets used to fear—I didn't shake so much and my stomach stayed still—but a mind doesn't. I thought about God often, and questions filled me. We were all created by God, but if God knew Satan would make so much trouble, then why hadn't He killed him? And who made God?

4. Upon being taken to Kenya for schooling and reintegrating into regular life: I knew I made mistakes in this strange place. When I was given a cup, I broke it; when I ate food at a table, I threw chicken bones over my shoulder onto the floor; and when I played with white children, I made them cry ... I knew I was different because I was a soldier, and although other children never knew my secret, I think they could sense it. I had dreams at night that made me shake and sweat in fear as the war buried inside me came alive again.

The Lowdown:

Jal's story — that of a a 7-year-old who saw every home he knew destroyed, lost his mother to murderers and his father to the SPLA — fits securely in the history of Sudan's second civil war but also stands on its own. Against a beast of a war that spiraled into battles between all those fighting to survive, Jal who struggles not to become a brutal killer of jallabas, eventually succumbs in order to survive. Unlike many of the Lost Boys, however, Jal finds salvation through the grace of two women who steer him toward education. His subsequent life as a rapper and philanthropist trying to save other children from similar pain and anguish leaves hope for the possibility of redemption.

The Verdict: Read
- - -

Emmanuel Jal's autobiography has been sold to St. Martin’s Press with anticipated release of spring 2009.

WAR CHILD - The Book



War Child: A Child Soldier's Story by Emmanuel Jal (Author), US Version released February 2009 www.macmillan.com (www.amazon.com)



War Child UK Version released March 2009 (Amazon.com)

Further reading

Sudan Watch, February 15, 2009
Former Sudanese child soldier Emmanuel Jal uses rap to deliver peace message

Sudan Watch, February 15, 2009
WAR CHILD - THE FILM: Former Sudanese child soldier uses rap to deliver peace message

Sudan Watch, February 15, 2009
WAR CHILD - THE ALBUM & CD

Prendergast's Enough Project discussing U.S. relations with Sudan

From Enough Project.org
Sudan in the Senate
Posted by Enough Team on Feb 13, 2009:

Enough co-Chair John Prendergast spent yesterday afternoon on Capitol Hill discussing U.S. relations with Sudan during a roundtable discussion with the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Prendergast was joined by Sudan experts Roger Winter, Jerry Fowler, Michael Gerson, and Timothy Carney, as well as by U.S. Senators on the foreign relations committee. Below are a few highlights:

The back and forth between senators and regional experts quickly moved to address the increasingly likely issuance of an arrest warrant for Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir. In particular, the discussion focused on the internal politics of Bashir’s National Congress Party, or NCP, and the stalled progress in the implementation of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement, or CPA.

John Prendergast noted that regional politics in the Arab world—particularly Sudan’s relationship with Egypt, which has been on ice for a while now— as well as tensions within the NCP itself could push Bashir out of power in the wake of an indictment.

All of the experts further underscored the necessity of looking at Sudan holistically and emphasized the fact that the recurrent tensions between the North and South and the crisis in Darfur are symptoms of the same problem: the hoarding of wealth and power by ruling elites in the capital, Khartoum, to the exclusion of everyone else.

Roger Winter stressed that the next six months will be crucial for the implementation of the CPA, which he feels is in dangerous risk of collapse.

Senator Feingold wisely connected the dots, not only between peace in Darfur and throughout Sudan, but between the region’s numerous and interconnected conflicts.

Jerry Fowler of the Save Darfur Coalition noted that UNAMID cannot do what it needs to do unless it is accompanied by a comprehensive peace process to end the Darfur conflict.

Senator Kerry ended the hearing by asking each expert to pull together a summary of what they think the key U.S. policy priorities should be for Sudan.

Carney and Winter discussed the importance of American security interests and the regional dimensions of the crisis respectively.

Prendergast asserted that the bottom line for U.S. policy should be a peaceful and democratic Sudan. Fowler told the group that the United States has a practical interest in “addressing the fundamental disparity between the center and periphery,” in Sudan.

Gerson agreed with Fowler, and noted that whenever there are attempts to change the rules of the game, there are complaints that these steps will destabilize the situation, but such changes to the status quo are necessary when the current situation is “deeply unjust.”

Kerry himself mentioned previous American leadership failures in relation to Sudan policy as well as his and Secretary Clinton’s interests in the no-fly zone and American engagement with Africa generally. He told the assembled group that this is, “a moment for serious people to buckle down and find serious responses,” to Sudan’s crises.

Rebecca Brocato and Maggie Fick contributed to this post.

Sudanese president meets with Egyptian FM and intelligence chief

From Khartoum (Xinhua) February 14, 2009 - excerpt:
Sudanese president meets with Egyptian FM and intelligence chief

Sudanese President Omer al-Bashir held here closed-door talks with visiting Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Abu al-Gheit and intelligence chief Omer Suleiman on Saturday.

The Egyptian foreign minister reiterated his country's support for the Sudanese president and his government on all the current issues.

He told reporters at the end of the meeting that their visit was aimed at confirming Egypt's support for Sudan and helping it handle the current political issues.

"Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak wants to express to Presidental-Bashir his support for all the steps which the Sudanese government has taken to realize the stability and peace," noted the Egyptian foreign minister.

Mahjoub Fadel Badri, the spokesman of the Sudanese president, said that the visit of the Egyptian delegation demonstrated the firm support of Cairo for Sudan's causes.

"Egypt always helps Sudan on all issues, and is exerting efforts for resolving the Darfur crisis," said the Sudanese official.

Badri denied that the Egyptian side had proposed any suggestionon the current crisis between the Sudanese government and the International Criminal Courts (ICC).

"Egypt understood our position and has not put forward any ideas which are not identical with our position," he added.

On Saturday afternoon, the Egyptian delegation left Khartoum, winding up a short visit that lasted only a couple of hours. [...]. Editor: Du

Sudan military says it repelled JEM attack in West Darfur area of Jabal Marra & statements by JEM leader Khalil Ibrahim are “empty propaganda”

Sudan military says it repelled JEM attack as Qatar peace talks continue. Sudan says statements by JEM leader Khalil Ibrahim are “empty propaganda”.

From Sudan Tribune Saturday, 14 February 2009 - excerpt:

Sudan military says it repelled JEM attack as Qatar peace talks continue

February 13, 2009 (KHARTOUM) — The Sudanese army today claimed that it repulsed an attack by the Darfur Justice and Equality Movement (JEM) in West Darfur area of Jabal Marra.



Photo: Sudan army spokesperson Brigadier General Osman Al-Agbash

The army spokesperson Brigadier General Osman Al-Agbash said that they have inflicted heavy casualties on JEM forces and destroyed 14 armed vehicles while they lost 4 soldiers with 3 injured.

He also described statements by JEM leader Khalil Ibrahim as “empty propaganda” that is aimed at strengthening his position at the negotiation underway in the Arab Gulf State of Qatar with the Sudanese government.

This week JEM accused the Sudan Armed Forces of initiating an assault against its troops. But Khartoum said that no truce between the two sides has been signed yet.

“The offensive was easily and summarily defeated, despite use of 2 Antonov planes, 2 MIG 29 fighters and 6 tanks, two captured, three destroyed and one escaped” said Ali Al-Wafi, the JEM military spokesperson.

Al-Wafi further added they captured Col. Hamid Ahmed, the deputy commander of the assailing force.

JEM spokesperson Ahmed Hussein from Doha where the rebel group negotiating with the government denounced the attack saying it demonstrates the lack of government seriousness for peace in Darfur. [...] (ST)

Qatar's prime minister says Sudan gov't and JEM have made "progress" in Doha talks

Sudan's government and Darfur rebel group Justice and Equality Movement have made "progress" in meetings this week in Doha, their first peace contacts since 2007, according to Qatar's prime minister.

The two parties "want positive results and (have expressed) their good intentions. There is progress," Premier Sheikh Hamad bin Jassem al-Thani told a news conference very late Friday after a lengthy day of negotiations between the two parties under Qatari mediation.

Doha talks are preliminary and intended to pave the way for a broader peace conference on Darfur, W. Sudan.

Source: February 13, 2009 report from AFP (DOHA):
'Progress' in talks between Sudan and Darfur rebels: PM -

Sudan's government and Darfur rebel group Justice and Equality Movement have made "progress" in meetings this week in Doha, their first peace contacts since 2007, according to Qatar's prime minister.

The two parties "want positive results and (have expressed) their good intentions. There is progress," Premier Sheikh Hamad bin Jassem al-Thani told a news conference very late Friday after a lengthy day of negotiations between the two parties under Qatari mediation.

"This progress will be reflected in a draft document now in its final stages of preparation (by mediators)," he added.
Once completed, the document would be submitted to the two parties for comment, the prime minister added without elaborating.

He said the talks were due to continue on Saturday.

The meetings, which began in the Qatari capital on Tuesday, are aimed at paving the way for substantive peace negotiations between Khartoum and the Justice and Equality Movement.

JEM leader Khalil Ibrahim and the head of the government delegation, presidential aide Nafie Ali Nafie, on Wednesday held their first face-to-face talks, which were described by parties afterwards as "positive."

The most heavily armed of the Darfur rebel groups, JEM boycotted a largely abortive peace deal signed by one other faction in 2006 and in May last year launched an unprecedented assault on the Sudanese capital.

JEM representative Jibril Ibrahim said at the start of the talks that broader peace negotiations would only be possible if the government was prepared to accept the winding up of allied Arab militias in Darfur and allow high-level rebel representation in the central government.

He said confidence-building measures should include the release of JEM prisoners and the expansion of aid deliveries to rebel-held areas.

He said the rebel group would expect to "retain its fighters during a transition period ahead of a final peace deal which would provide for their integration in the regular army."

JEM also wanted to secure "a reduction in government troop numbers, the dismantling of the militias and high-level participation in the central government in Khartoum."

Government negotiator Nafie for his part renewed "Sudan's determination to continue down the path of peace."

Mediators have stressed that the Doha talks are preliminary and intended to pave the way for a broader peace conference on Darfur.[...]

Photo: Khalil Ibrahim, during the Darfur Peace Talks, in Doha, Feb 11, 2009 (AP via ST)

UN Security Council: Article 16 deferral resolution on Bashir Darfur case unlikely

A Council discussion in response to a decision by the judges of the pre-trial chamber is likely. But it may come in the content of other scheduled meetings.

A formal Council meeting on Sudan is scheduled for 17 February to discuss the latest Secretary-General’s report on AU-UN Hybrid Operation in Darfur (UNAMID).

UN SECURITY COUNCIL UPDATE REPORT NO. 1
SUDAN
13 FEBRUARY 2009
(Sudan Watch Note: I have highlighted text in red, for future reference)

Expected Council Action • Key Recent Developments • Key Issues • Options • UN Documents • Other Relevant Facts • Other SCR Reports on this Issue

Expected Council Action
Council members anticipate that shortly a decision will be issued by the judges of the pre-trial chamber of the International Criminal Court (ICC) concerning the prosecutor’s application of 14 July 2008 for the issuance of an arrest warrant against Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir.

It seems inevitable that any announcement of a warrant will trigger some discussion in Council informal consultations. However, recent private Council discussions suggest that formal Council action is unlikely. Some members may continue to advocate for a resolution suspending Court proceedings, but it seems clear that the votes to pass such a resolution are not there.

A formal Council meeting on Sudan is scheduled for 17 February to discuss the latest Secretary-General’s report on AU-UN Hybrid Operation in Darfur (UNAMID).

Key Recent Developments
The application for a warrant of arrest against Sudanese President Omar Hassan al-Bashir in connection with alleged genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes in Darfur was lodged with the Court by Chief Prosecutor of the ICC Luis Moreno-Ocampo on 14 July 2008. For a detailed background please see our 28 July 2008 Update Report.

The security situation in Darfur deteriorated in January as a result of rebel movements undertaking military offensives, retaliatory attacks by the Sudanese armed forces and continued tribal fighting in southern Darfur. A UNAMID staff member was shot and wounded on 31 January in El Geneina in western Darfur.

On 9 February, a UNAMID helicopter was fired upon near its headquarters in El Fasher in northern Darfur.

On 3 February, the Council received a second briefing in closed consultations from Assistant Secretary-General for Peacekeeping Operations Edmond Mulet on the continued fighting between Justice and Equality Movement (JEM) forces and the Sudanese military in Muhajeriya in southern Darfur. The Council was informed that Sudanese forces had dropped 28 bombs in Muhajeriya that morning (seen by some as a likely breach of the sanctions regime) despite reports JEM was withdrawing its forces from the area. Members were also informed that UNAMID officials had been prevented by the Sudanese government from undertaking an assessment visit to Muhajeria, in violation of the status of forces agreement between UNAMID and the government, which allows unrestricted movement for UNAMID throughout Darfur.

The fighting at Muhajeria appears to have ceased. It led to at least thirty deaths and uprooted some 30,000 people. Sudanese authorities have reportedly prevented aid agencies from accessing more than 100,000 civilians in the affected areas in southern Darfur. The Council initially began work on a presidential statement addressing the situation. While it seems consensus was reached on several elements of the draft statement including deploring JEM’s provocation in Muhajeriya, for all military action, including aerial bombings to cease, for all parties to respect UNAMID’s freedom of movement, and for rebel groups that have not done so to attend peace talks, unanimity was not achieved in part because of the deep division within the Council on the issue of suspending ICC proceedings against al-Bashir. The draft also seemed to be overtaken by events—not least the cessation of the fighting but also the fact that on 10 February a Khartoum government delegation met JEM representatives for the first time since 2007 in Doha, Qatar to begin discussions on a framework agreement for peace talks. Advisor to al-Bashir, Nafie al Nafie and JEM leader, Khalil Ibrahim were present for the talks.

On 9 February, the Arab League Secretary-General Amr Mussa, Organisation of the Islamic Conference Secretary-General Ekmeleddin Ihasanoglu, AU Commission Chairman Jean Ping, Qatar’s State Minister for Foreign Affairs Ahmad bin Abdullah al-Mahmud and UN/AU joint chief negotiator Djibril Bassolè met in Doha to discuss support to the peace talks. Despite the ongoing talks in Doha, a JEM spokesperson in Darfur said JEM forces had clashed with Sudanese forces in Malam southern Darfur on 12 February. JEM also claimed Sudanese army troops attacked JEM forces in Jebel Marra in western Darfur but that JEM had repelled the attack.

The former rebel group, Sudan Liberation Movement led by Minni Minnawi (SLM/MM) who signed the Darfur Peace Agreement with the government in 2006, reportedly asked to join the peace talks but was told by the government they would be part of the government delegation. (Clashes were reported between SLM/MM and the Sudanese Armed Forces on 22 January in Graida in southern Darfur.) The Sudan Liberation Movement faction of Abdel Wahid al-Nur continues to refuse all talks with Khartoum.

During the 12th Ordinary Summit of the AU Heads of State and Government in Addis Ababa from 2 to 4 February, members adopted a decision urging the Security Council to defer ICC proceedings in view of the fact an arrest warrant against al-Bashir would seriously undermine the ongoing efforts to resolve the conflict in Darfur. Members of the AU Peace and Security Council also decided to establish a High-Level Panel of Eminent Personalities under the chairmanship of the former president of South Africa, Thabo Mbeki, to submit recommendations on how best to reconcile the issues of accountability and impunity with reconciliation and healing in Darfur.

During a 14 January meeting of the Arab-African Ministerial Committee for Peace in Darfur in Doha, the Committee mandated a delegation from Qatar, the AU and the Arab League to visit New York to mobilise international support for the peace process in Darfur and to seek a deferral from the Security Council on ICC proceedings. Council members met the delegation, led by AU Commissioner for Peace and Security, Ramtane Lamamra, on 12 February. Council members were told that while the AU and Arab League do not believe in promoting impunity, further time was needed to allow progress in Sudan and that a deferral of ICC proceedings would facilitate progress. The responses of the Council members were divided, but demonstrated that most Council members were unconvinced that a suspension would facilitate progress. The failure of the delegation to bring to the table any credible benchmarks seems to have been a major factor in the firm positions that were articulated. Clearly a suspension resolution could not attract enough votes to pass.

Other related developments include a further deterioration in relations between Sudan and Chad. An agreement on 8 November to resume full diplomatic relations and exchange ambassadors seems to have collapsed, with the Chadian government accusing the Sudanese government of supporting the Chadian armed opposition coalition, Union of Resistance Forces and its aim to destabilise Chad. The Sudanese government has accused Chad of supplying Darfur rebel group JEM and providing protection to the rebels. The AU has expressed serious concern at the current tensions. The AU mission chaired by former Burundian president Pierre Buyoya, which visited the region in October/November 2008 (following the request of the AU Peace and Security Council in June) to examine the root causes of tension between Sudan and Chad is yet to release its recommendations.

The AU-sponsored Dakar Agreement Contact Group failed to meet in Khartoum in January. Following its last meeting in N’Djamena on 15 November the Group indicated a peace and security force comprised of Sudanese and Chadian troops to monitor the common border would be deployed in January 2009. This appears to be delayed.

Key Issues
With the prospects for an ICC article 16 deferral resolution now clarified, Council members are likely to begin to focus on the issue of what in practice an ICC indictment will mean for the peace process in Darfur and for stability in Sudan and the region. One risk is that it may stimulate both sides of the conflict to step back from peaceful negotiations and commence new military offensives. Another risk is possible obstruction, violence or reprisals as a result of any indictment.

A key underlying and persistent issue is getting the government and rebel groups to the negotiating table and for an agreement to be made on a meaningful ceasefire and peace process in Darfur.

Another issue is the division in the Council on sanctions. The Council issued a presidential statement prior to the convening of peace talks in Sirte in October 2007, which underlined its willingness to take action against any party that sought to undermine the peace process. However, no action such as, for example, individually targeted sanctions, has been taken against peace spoilers. And despite resolutions repeatedly demanding there be no aerial bombings in Darfur, the continued use by the government of such a tactic continues and the Council has been unable to reach consensus on a presidential statement condemning these acts. A question which has been increasingly acute for several months is how the Council can regain some sort of relevance in the eyes of the parties.

Options
A Council discussion in response to a decision by the judges of the pre-trial chamber is likely. But it may come in the content of other scheduled meetings.

Given the suspension resolution now seems very unlikely, there are some common themes which the Council unanimously supports including:

the need for all parties to commit to peaceful negotiations;
the cessation of military action;
UNAMID’s freedom of movement;
the need for civilians to be protected; and
the safety of humanitarian workers.

Sudan says ICC rumours are aimed to spoil Darfur peace talks in Doha

Why is the ICC grinding a rumour mill in the run up to, and during, the Darfur peace talks in Doha? And, more to the point, why is the ICC leaking rumours to the New York Times and Sudan Tribune? I'd like to think that maybe the aim is to flush out what the insurgents are thinking, to get a measure of their reactions and single mindedness on the removal of Sudan's President Al-Bashir at any cost.

Over the past four years or so, groups of shadowy insurgents in South Sudan, Darfur and Chad have spun the media and worked hard at discrediting African Union peacekeepers in order to get the UN onside. Now that they have the UN in Darfur, they may view the UN, USA and ICC as being on their side. Some days, I wonder if I am the only person who thinks that the USA, UN and ICC appear, perhaps unwittingly, to be acting like puppets of the forces behind the insurgency. For all we know of those dark forces, the USA, UN and ICC might find themselves playing right into the hands of Al-Qaeda who (the archives of Sudan Watch show) are entrenched in Khartoum. Where's France and Russia in amongst all of this I ask myself.

America's Eric Reeves and the New York Times and its columnist Nicholas Kristof have a lot to answer for. They and the insurgents (Sudan Tribune and savedarfurcrowd included) have made clear in their writings that they want Sudan's president removed. Why should they want the Darfur peace talks to succeed when any progress on the peace front might encourage more members of the UN Security Council to vote for any arrest warrant against Sudan's president to be suspended.

Meanwhile, the terrorists win while playing their deadly waiting game that could go on for many years. None of them seem to really care about how it is affecting the lives of millions of young children growing up in Sudan and Chad. Humanitarians and freedom fighters, my foot. Ambitious, self serving, lowlife parasites, the lot of them. If they truly cared about the children of Sudan and Chad they would have pushed with one voice for peace talks to succeed, long ago.

These days, I imagine that they are all part of the same group and strategy stemming from the civil war days in Southern Sudan in which two million Sudanese people perished. Somewhere amongst all of this is the Ugandan terrorist group Lord's Resistance Army (LRA) that's managed to be on the rampage for more than 20 years. The LRA is a well-ordered fighting force, whose senior officers have been trained by Sudan, Iran and Iraq. Credit where it is due, America has done much to champion the cause of Southern Sudan and is even helping Uganda militarily against the LRA.
- - -

Sudan dismisses Beshir ICC charge as 'rumours'
February 13, 2009 KHARTOUM (AFP):

Sudan has dismissed as "rumours" reports that its president, Omar al-Beshir, would become the first sitting head of state to be indicted by the International Criminal Court in connection with alleged war crimes in Darfur.

The ICC had been expected to make a decision on issuing an arrest warrant as early as this month after chief prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo in July accused Beshir of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes in Darfur.

But after The New York Times reported Wednesday that ICC judges in The Hague had decided to issue an arrest warrant for Beshir, a spokesman for the court retorted Thursday: "At this moment, there is no arrest warrant."

"When we have something to announce, we will announce it. For now, there is nothing to announce," ICC spokeswoman Laurence Blairon told AFP.

"No decision has yet been taken by the judges," the ICC later said in a statement.

"The rumours are aimed to spoil the Doha talks; that is why we don't consider them," Sudanese foreign ministry official Mutrif Siddiq told AFP, referring to Qatari-hosted talks between a Darfur rebel group and the Khartoum government.

In Doha, the head of the Justice and Equality Movement (JEM), the most active rebel group in Darfur, called on Beshir to give himself up.

"I advise Beshir to turn himself in, voluntarily," Khalil Ibrahim said, adding that he would welcome any arrest warrant for the Sudanese president.

"If Beshir does not turn himself in, no doubt, we will arrest him and hand him over to the international court," Ibrahim said.
Ibrahim, whose JEM last year launched an unprecedented but unsuccessful attack on Khartoum, said that a warrant would "not affect the peace process, neither in Darfur nor in Sudan, nor will it affect Sudan's stability."

Sudan has been seeking to garner international support to fight the accusations, with the Arab League and the African Union both saying formal ICC charges will not help the situation in Darfur.

Khartoum has also in recent weeks hosted senior officials from China and Russia, both of which have veto rights as permanent members of the UN Security Council which has the power to defer a Beshir prosecution for one year, renewable.

Thursday, the UN Security Council held an informal session with Arab League and African Union representatives who made a new pitch for a one-year deferral by the 15-member council of the ICC case against Beshir, under Article 16 of the Rome statute that created the court in 2002.

AU envoy Ramdane Lamamra pushed for the 12-month deferral, arguing that this would not undermine justice in Darfur, Japan's UN Ambassador Yukio Takasu, the council chair this month, told reporters.

Several diplomats said after the session that supporters of such an option did not have have the nine votes within the council necessary for adoption of a deferral resolution.

They said only six council members: Burkina Faso, China, Libya, Russia, Uganda and Vietnam backed a deferral.

Sudanese officials, including Beshir, have always insisted they will not cooperate with the ICC, saying that any allegations of crimes in Darfur would be dealt with in Sudanese courts.

"It's clear Sudan is not a party of the ICC. Whatever the ICC does it is not affecting us," Siddiq said, slamming the charges as "politically motivated."

UN chief Ban Ki-moon on Tuesday urged Khartoum to act "very responsibly" if an arrest warrant is issued for Beshir.

The UN chief said that whatever decision the ICC reaches, "it will be very important for President Beshir and the Sudanese government to react very responsibly and ensure the safety and security" of UN peacekeepers in Darfur and protect the human rights of the population.

- - -

From Los Angeles Chronicle
Enough Project Report - ICC Warrant for Bashir
Newswire Services February 12, 2009
WASHINGTON, DC –

A new report by the Enough Project at the Center for American Progress explores the impact of an arrest warrant for Sudan's President on the ruling party, Darfuri rebel groups, the existing north-south peace agreement, and the international community. The decision by the Pre-Trial Chamber of the International Criminal Court, or ICC, to issue an arrest warrant for Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir is both welcome and unsurprising given the long pattern of profound abuses in Sudan directed from the highest echelons of government.

The response of key actors in Sudan to the ICC´s move against Bashir is still obviously a work in progress, but the choices made in the coming weeks by Bashir's National Congress, or NCP, the main rebel groups in Darfur, and the Sudan People´s Liberation Movement, will have profound impact on the country's future. Understanding the calculations of these actors is fundamental to leveraging the arrest warrant into progress toward peace.

Enough Project Executive Director John Norris commented, "As we have learned from earlier indictments of Liberian President Charles Taylor and Serbian President Slobodan Milosevic, these charges can be a catalyst for peace — if the international community stands resolutely behind efforts to promote accountability while simultaneously pursuing a strategic approach to a peace process. The situation in Sudan is no different." Senior officials within Bashir's NCP are deeply concerned about the possibility of further charges by the ICC, and a growing fissure between Bashir´s loyalists and potentially more pragmatic elements of the NCP could lead to the president´s removal.

The international community must now fashion a firm and coordinated peace strategy conditioned on actions rather than words and policies rather than personalities. What should be clear to the international community, including the United States, is that President Bashir should be delivered to the court to face a fair trial on the charges against him. Furthermore, the international community needs to use multilateral diplomacy, well targeted pressures, and judicious incentives to bring both the NCP and Darfur's rebel groups to the negotiating table, while making a major effort to revitalize the 2005 Comprehensive Peace Agreement, or CPA, as part of a broader and more strategic peace effort for all of Sudan.

Enough Project Co-chair John Prendergast observed, "The arrest warrant for President Bashir is the potential game-changer that the Sudanese people have been waiting for, in order to shake up the deadly status quo that has led to millions of deaths in Darfur and Southern Sudan. The warrant offers the Obama administration a chance to lead multilateral efforts to bring about a solution to Sudan´s decades-long cycle of warfare. Working publicly for a peace deal for Darfur and privately for Bashir's resignation will provide the necessary international leadership that has been lacking for some time."

Note, I have highlighted text in red for future reference.
- - -

From Christian Science Monitor
Has the ICC decided to issue an arrest warrant for Sudan’s Bashir?
By Robert Marquand, Staff writer:

PARIS – With an arrest warrant for Sudan’s president Omar al-Bashir possibly days away, according to the New York Times, the UN Security Council faces a moment of truth: Will it allow the International Criminal Court (ICC) to move forward in the prosecution of the alleged “mastermind” of what ICC chief prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo and the US government have both called a “genocide” in Darfur?

Or, will Council members postpone the Bashir case for another 12 months on grounds that Mr. Bashir could inflict terrible revenge on international aid workers, not to mention his own people?

The Security Council, under Chapter 7 of the UN Charter, can decide it is “in the best interest” for the ICC to defer the prosecution of Bashir to preserve stability and peace, which might include a fragile pact in Sudan between north and south.

“The council can come in at any time and defer,” says Mark Ellis of the International Bar Association in London, “but they would have to get all five members to agree, and I’m not sure they can.”

Whether or not judges at the ICC have fully signed off on an arrest warrant for Bashir is unclear. The New York Times published a story Thursday stating that a warrant had been issued. ICC officials insist they have not.

The Times report states flatly that “Judges at the [ICC] decided to issue an arrest warrant for [Bashir], brushing aside requests to allow more time for peace negotiations in the conflict-riddled Darfur region.”

The account prompted a storm of back and forths between the court, Sudan, the media, and the UN – whose chief, Ban Ki Moon, had a shouting match on Feb. 8 with Bashir, according to the Times. The purported arrest warrant isn’t the only issue dogging the ICC in recent days. As the Monitor is reporting today, Mr. Moreno-Ocampo is causing a stir in Israel by suggesting he may investigate alleged war crimes in Gaza.

The Palestinian Authority continues to press the court to do so – with some 200 requests. Yet such an act is widely seen as dubious in legal circles. Neither Israel nor the Gaza entity is a signatory to the ICC. To investigate Israel for the Gaza attacks, the ICC would have to recognize Gaza as a state; moreover, both the prosecutor and the court would have to agree that it has jurisdiction in Gaza by such recognition.

Regarding the Bashir case, Monitor sources and news reports suggest it is virtually certain that the three pre-trial judges at the ICC agree there is enough evidence to try Bashir on war crimes and crimes against humanity. But there may be a disagreement on the fraught charge of genocide.

Proving “genocide” in a court of law is a high hurdle, requiring proof of “specific intent.” This may in fact represent a technical reason why the ICC now claims that no arrest indictments are ready.

Le Monde correspondent Philippe Bolopion, at the UN, citing diplomats there, says the judges “upheld the first two charges but didn’t reach an agreement on the genocide indictment, more complex to prove.” Several sources told Mr. Bolopion that “the ICC judges have not officially made their decision and haven’t transmitted it to the UN yet. They haven’t even mentioned the date in which the announcement will be made public. Several sources inside the ICC confirm that the arrest warrant will be issued in the next days, presumably before the end of the month.

Ironically, perhaps, it was the UN Security Council that approved a Darfur war crimes investigation in Sudan; but members may not have suspected the ICC would go so far as to indict a sitting president. France has suggested, according to German press sources [DPA], that “the ICC should withhold the arrest warrant if al-Bashir would surrender two senior Sudanese officials charged with the killings in Darfur.”

Many other press reports in the past week have cited quotes from the Sudanese ambassador to the UN saying that the ICC arrest warrants were “expected.”

As the Monitor reported recently, the ICC began its first case at the end of January with the trail of Congolese warlord Thomas Lubanga, charged with recruiting 30,000 child soldiers in the Democratic Republic of Congo.

The idea for the court emerged after the relative success of war crimes tribunals in Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia, with experts hoping that stronger concepts of justice would serve as a soft-power deterrent against heinous acts and genocide.

The court has since moved in fits and starts. Moreno-Ocampo made a splash last summer by indicting Bashir, but most of the ICC’s focus so far is on Congo, where little-noticed wars have claimed some 5.5 million lives. Four Congolese alleged warlords are now at The Hague; a joint trial of Germain Katanga and Mathieu Ngudjolo is expected in several months.

Embassy of The Republic of the Sudan: ICC Prosecutor Threatens Peace in Sudan

Statement from Embassy of The Republic of the Sudan:
ICC Prosecutor Threatens Peace in Sudan
WASHINGTON, Feb. 12, 2009 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ --

The following was released today by the Embassy of The Republic of the Sudan, Washington:

In yet another vivid demonstration of the true inspiration behind the Prosecutor's actions, the anticipated issuance of an arrest warrant for President al-Bashir, is preempted by a dubious announcement through the media. New York Times reported on Wednesday evening that some anonymous United Nations' officials confirmed to the Secretary General Ban Ki Moon the approval of an arrest warrant by the judges who allegedly would make an official announcement shortly. If in fact such an announcement is imminent, it's a proceeding that requires a degree of care and some level of professionalism from a prosecutor. It is rather embarrassing for the Court, that it had to release a statement this morning denying having reached a decision let alone issuing an arrest warrant. Still the NYT has disseminated the story again this morning and has widely been reproduced by other media outlets.

This incident is reminiscent of Ocampo's behavior when he initially made his intentions to charge the President public. He first leaked the information to the media and soon after embarked on a political campaign that continues to this day, touring city to city from one country to the next in a desperate bid to elevate his profile internationally. And of course this is all done at the expense of our people in Darfur whose suffering should be the focus of the world, but attention on their plight was suddenly eclipsed and quickly receded into the shadows while spotlight was diverted by the man whose irresponsible actions have only exacerbated their miserable conditions.

It is to be noted that Ocampo and those pulling his strings are fully cognizant of the implications of such a motion and the grave threat it poses to the peace and security of the country. To verify this fact does not require expertise on the matter, the evidence, since the prosecutor concocted the charges in July of 2008 abounds. Violence in Darfur (killing of civilians, attacks on Humanitarian aid workers, ambushes, killing of peacekeepers, attacks on cities) escalated dramatically as the perpetrators of those egregious crimes saw an ally in Ocampo. He ensured their immunity from international scorn as the Government invariably received the blame for all incidents including instances where it was protecting its civilians. He would consolidate impunity for the rebels.

Yet perhaps even more poignant is the timing of this leak. Sudan is at a pivotal moment as the Government and the Rebels began discussions just a day ago. The hopes of all the people of Sudan are pinned on these talks, which have rightly received international support. However, it is clear now that the Prosecutors latest stunt will severely undermine these hopes as the rebels will undoubtedly begin to consider recourse to violence because this indictment is, to them, a green light to continue their atrocities and abandon peace talks. This is an incident preceded by a series of others where the pattern of sabotaging efforts at the decisive moments has been noted. It must be made clear that the Sudanese will hold Ocampo accountable for the fate that may befall them as a consequence of his reckless actions.

Sudan also regrets deeply the deplorable posture assumed by some members of the United Nations Security Council who, in clear grasp of what such a move portends for the peace and security of the country, choose political games in the face of an existential threat to millions of lives. We call on the world to denounce and reprimand the prosecutor for worsening the conditions of an already besieged people who need nothing else but peace. The African Union has made its position clear and does not wish to be the victim or the guinea pig of the ICC. And the Arab League has also voiced its concerns about a court that has already botched its first case against an alleged Congolese warlord. We call on the Security Council to heed to the calls of the vast majority of the world that demands the dismissal of these dubious charges and help with the efforts of peace building in Darfur.

SOURCE Embassy of the Republic of the Sudan

ICC news overshadows Doha talks - Darfur rebels and Sudan officials exchanged blame for undermining three-day-old peace talks

War crimes court overshadows Darfur talks
DOHA, Qatar (AP) 13 February 2009 -

Darfur rebels and Sudan government officials exchanged blame for undermining three-day-old peace talks, which were overshadowed Thursday by fighting over a Darfur town and the prospect of an imminent international arrest warrant against Sudan's president for alleged war crimes. [...]

But the talks were shaken Thursday by reports that the Hague-based International Criminal Court will soon issue a warrant against President Omar al-Bashir, whom court prosecutors accuse of war crimes for allegedly masterminding genocide against Darfur's ethnic Africans. Al-Bashir denies the charges. [...]

The leader of JEM, Khalil Ibrahim, who was attending the Qatar talks this week, welcomed the report and said his group is ready to arrest al-Bashir if he doesn't hand himself in.

"A decision (by the ICC to issue a warrant) won't affect the Doha negotiation track, instead it reinforces the need for negotiations," Ibrahim said.

Some international workers in Darfur fear a warrant could spark a backlash by al-Bashir, leading him to end the peace process. Khartoum worries that the prospect of prosecution could harden rebels' negotiating positions.

The head of the Sudanese government delegation in Qatar, Amin Hassan Omar, railed against the ICC, calling it a "European court with a political character. It was used openly for political pressure," Omar said.

Omar accused JEM delegation of stalling during the negotiations, saying that they came to the talks with a "shopping list," insisting all their demands to be met. "Not everything demanded is to be answered," he said.

Meanwhile, JEM spokesman Ahmed Tugod accused Khartoum of undermining attempts at a political solution after fresh fighting on the ground.

Tugod, speaking from Darfur, said his fighters clashed with government troops who were advancing on Malam, a JEM-held town in central Darfur. Tugod said JEM repulsed the government forces.

"They want to improve their negotiating position," Tugod said in a satellite phone interview. "This clearly indicates that this government of Sudan has not taken yet a strategic decision to solve the problem of Darfur in a political manner. They insist on using military means. This will undermine the whole peace process."

The mediators say there is no set timetable for the talks, which continued with sessions Thursday.

In a related development, the American ambassador to the United Nations, Susan Rice, expressed disappointment at the U.N. Security Council's failure this week to reach consensus on a statement condemning the escalating civilian losses in Darfur.

Libya blocked the 15-nation council from issuing a unanimous presidential statement, objecting to language connecting Sudan's government to the aerial bombing and the proposed calls for it and all other military action to stop.

"We're really quite deeply disappointed that the Security Council after over a week of effort couldn't reach consensus on a clear presidential statement that would have condemned the increased bloodshed in Darfur," Rice told The Associated Press. "We had hoped to have a presidential statement that would have spoken with one voice in condemning the ongoing violence."

AP correspondent John Heilprin at the United Nations contributed to this report.

US, UK, France, Austria, Croatia oppose deferral of ICC indictment of Bashir Darfur case

U.S., France, UK oppose suspending Bashir Darfur case
From Reuters Thursday, February 12, 2009
By Louis Charbonneau

UNITED NATIONS - U.S., British and French diplomats told African Union and Arab League delegates on Thursday that they oppose suspending a war crimes indictment of Sudan's president over atrocities in Darfur, diplomats said. [...]

"At this moment we're not ready to support an initiative that would implement Article 16," French Deputy Ambassador Jean-Pierre Lacroix said, referring to an ICC statute that allows the Security Council to suspend the court's proceedings for up to a year at a time.

Lacroix spoke after a closed-door meeting between U.N. Security Council members and African and Arab delegations.

Council diplomats said the U.S., British, Austrian and Croatian envoys also told the meeting that they opposed deferral of an ICC indictment of Bashir. Russia and China joined the Africans and Arabs in voicing support for a deferral, saying it was in the interests of peace.

Lacroix said the supporters of a suspension appeared to lack a majority in the council. Since Britain, France and the United States are permanent council members with veto powers, they could block any moves to invoke Article 16.

As expected the informal council meeting took no action but diplomats said they would be returning to the issue.

Britain's Africa minister Mark Malloch Brown said earlier this week that it was "completely unlikely that anything is going to happen which could lead to an Article 16 deferral." [...]

China, the African Union and Arab League have all suggested that an indictment of Bashir could destabilize the region, worsen the Darfur conflict and threaten a troubled peace deal between north Sudan and the semi-autonomous south. [...]

(Additional reporting by Aaron Robert Gray-Block and Catherine Hornby in Amsterdam, Andrew Heavens in Khartoum, Skye Wheeler in Juba, South Sudan; Editing by Eric Beech)

No sealed envelope was delivered to UN chief re Bashir case - ICC does not have to inform the UN chief of a decision it takes

In yesterday's noon briefing to the presss, Michèle Montas, Spokesperson for the UN Secretary-General, is quoted as saying that:

"The ICC does not have to inform the Secretary-General of a decision it takes. As you know, the Secretary-General is not informed whenever a decision is taken to indict other people. Will the Secretary-General necessarily get it, when the Secretary-General gets it, if he gets it… This is a decision for the Court, to send it as a courtesy to the Secretary-General or not. But if not, they don’t have to do it. They never do it. So why would they do it this time around? That’s the best answer I can give you."

Source: www.isria 13 February 2009 - UN: Daily Press Briefing, 12 February 2009. The following is a near-verbatim transcript of [12 February 2009] noon briefing by Michèle Montas, Spokesperson for the Secretary-General. Excerpts:

Darfur

The UN Humanitarian Coordinator for Sudan, Ameerah Haq, has called for immediate access to over 100,000 civilians in Muhajariya and two other areas of South Darfur.

International humanitarian agencies have attempted to reach the area four times since 7 February, but are unable to obtain clearance for humanitarian flights.

Ms. Haq said aid agencies need urgent access to the people who are in critical need of assistance. Unless access is immediately granted, the situation for hundreds of thousands of civilians could deteriorate rapidly, she warned.

The UN and NGOs in Nyala stand ready to provide vital food, water, shelter and medical care to vulnerable civilians who were displaced from Muhajariya into the surrounding areas following recent hostilities in the area.

International Criminal Court Clarification

For those of you who have not seen it, I want to draw your attention to a press release by the International Criminal Court (ICC) which says that no arrest warrant has been issued by the ICC against President Omer al-Bashir of Sudan.

The ICC press release also says that no decision has yet been taken by the judges of Pre-Trial Chamber I concerning the Prosecutor’s application of 14 July 2008 for the issuance of such a warrant.

Finally, the ICC says that the decision will be made public once it is reached by the normal way of a press release and publication on the Court’s website.

Child Soldiers

This afternoon, the Secretary-General will attend an event related to the Red Hand Day campaign, whose aim is to highlight the continued use of child soldiers.

The Secretary-General is expected to say that the forced recruitment and use of child soldiers is unacceptable and one of the most appalling human rights abuses in the world today. He will also say that the recruitment and use of children in warfare violates international law, as well as our most basic standards of human decency. Along with the entire UN system, he is determined to stamp out such abuse. We have embargoed copies of his remarks in my office.

UNICEF’s Executive Director, Ann Veneman, and the Secretary-General’s Special Representative for Children and Armed Conflict, Radhika Coomaraswamy, will also address this afternoon’s event, which starts at 4:30 across the street at UNICEF House.

Press Conferences Tomorrow

At 10 a.m. tomorrow, here in 226, the Permanent Mission of Spain is sponsoring a press conference with Joaquín Antuña, President of Peace and Cooperation, and Elvira Sanchez Egual of the World Association of Childhood Educators, to launch the “Peace and Cooperation School Award 2009: Peace and the United Nations”.

Following my briefing tomorrow, at 12:30 p.m., the General Assembly Spokesperson will be joined by Zahir Tanin, Permanent Representative of Afghanistan, to brief you on Security Council reform.

At 1:15 p.m., Christian Wenaweser, Permanent Representative of Liechtenstein and President of the States Parties to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, briefs on the conclusion of the Special Working Group on the Crime of Aggression. This press conference is sponsored by the Permanent Mission of Liechtenstein.

And at 2:15 p.m. tomorrow, John Holmes, Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency Relief Coordinator, will be here to brief you on his recent trip to the Democratic Republic of the Congo. He just came back from there.

This is all I have for you. We’ll take brief questions because I want our guest, Mr. Costa, to come up as soon as possible.

Questions and Answers

Question: I know that the ICC issued a report denying that an arrest warrant was issued about Mr. Bashir. But what about what was mentioned in the rest of the article about the fact that the meeting between Mr. Ban and Mr. Bashir was “stormy”, that they shouted at each other, and that basically it was not a very good meeting? Do you have any reaction to that from the SG?

Spokesperson: No. I will not comment on a conversation of that sort. The Secretary-General did say as much as he could say about it himself during his press conference. He talked about his conversation with [Mr. al-Bashir] during our stay in Addis Ababa.

Question: Are you saying that what’s mentioned in the report is wrong?

Spokesperson: No, I am not saying that. Yes?

Question: Can you please repeat the answer on the sealed envelope?

Spokesperson: His question was, was there a sealed envelope? I said no there was no sealed envelope delivered to the Secretary-General concerning the case of Mr. Bashir.

The other question was why did Mr. [Philippe] Kirsch [President of the International Criminal Court] cancel his meeting with journalists? I said this was a scheduling problem.

The first question was, was [Kirsch’s] meeting with the Secretary-General about the ICC case against Mr. Bashir? I said they discussed matters relating to the ICC. It was just a courtesy call.

Question: My question is related to that. When and how -- not when, sorry. How is the Secretary-General supposed to receive the first information from the ICC? We understand he will not receive it on the Internet with a press release. He’ll have an informing process. How will it be?

The second question is, once he receives that, what kind of obligation does the Secretary-General have to fulfil such an arrest warrant, generally speaking?

Spokesperson: The ICC does not have to inform the Secretary-General of a decision it takes. As you know, the Secretary-General is not informed whenever a decision is taken to indict other people. Will the Secretary-General necessarily get it, when the Secretary-General gets it, if he gets it… This is a decision for the Court, to send it as a courtesy to the Secretary-General or not. But if not, they don’t have to do it. They never do it. So why would they do it this time around? That’s the best answer I can give you.

Question: In general, for other cases as well, the other arrest warrants from the ICC, what is the Secretary-General’s designated role?

Spokesperson: He has no role. He has no role. The ICC is an independent body. It’s an international tribunal. Yes, James?

Question: Although the Court has not formally issued a warrant, Sudanese officials have been quoted speaking as if a warrant has been issued or is at least forthcoming. In this context, is the Secretary-General concerned about the peacekeeping troops stationed in Sudan? And does he reiterate any previous comments to Sudanese officials?

Spokesperson: Well, he has been saying the same thing over and over again. He talked to you at length during his press conference about this conversation with Mr. Bashir, where he mentioned the fact that they did discuss that issue. What else do you want to know?

Question: Is he more concerned now about the safety of the troops?

Spokesperson: He’s always concerned, but as he said over and over again, the ICC decision is a decision by the ICC. The Secretary-General has nothing to do with it. Yes?

Question: Yes, some diplomats are saying -- this is about the same issue -- that the Secretary-General was informed that a warrant against al-Bashir will be issued on the 20th of this month. In fact, this is a day that some diplomats are talking about and they had been informed. Do you have any information about that? And I have another question about…

Spokesperson: I think the first one I’ve already answered. We have not received anything.

Can the ICC stay free of political influence? ICC Definitely, Probably, Maybe, or Possibly Not About to Issue Bashir Warrant

Commentary from Radio Free Europe Radio Liberty
By Hans Koechler February 12, 2009
International Justice Emerges From The Shadow Of Realpolitik

Can the ICC stay free of political influence?

No state that upholds the rule of law can tolerate impunity for violations of the law. In order not to descend into anarchy, every legal system requires mechanisms of enforcement.

While the need for measures of criminal justice is not disputed at the domestic level, international law has for centuries been a domain where "national interests" reigned supreme and transgressions of even the most basic norms remained unpunished. To a considerable extent, this is still the case today.

Further Reading: Is the ICC The Right Means To Punish Crimes?
With the exception of enforcement measures adopted by the United Nations Security Council under Chapter VII of the UN Charter, states cannot be effectively sanctioned for violations of international law. In spite of their obligations under customary international law and an ever-more complex system of intergovernmental treaties they have acceded to, states may still act with impunity in the exercise of their vital interests -- simply because there is no unified system of enforcement.

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) – the "court of the United Nations" -- can only issue advisory opinions on matters that have been brought before it by member states, and it can adjudicate legal disputes only if the concerned member states request that it do so.

The climate of virtual impunity in which states are able to conduct their relations with one another stands in stark contrast to the evolving system of international criminal justice, a set of norms that define personal criminal responsibility of state officials, including heads of state and government, and military personnel for "crimes against international law" such as war crimes, crimes against humanity, genocide, and aggression.

Plans to establish a system of international criminal justice date back to the era of the League of Nations, and were only realized with the creation in 2002 of the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague, the first permanent institution of its kind (and one which is often confused with the International Court of Justice in the same city.) Concerns over national sovereignty -- and in particular the "sovereign immunity" of heads of state -- blocked agreement on a worldwide criminal court for many decades.

Due to these circumstances, only leaders and soldiers of countries that have been defeated in war have been prosecuted for international crimes. It is obvious that tribunals set up by the victorious powers -- that is, by only one party to a conflict -- cannot meet basic requirements of fairness and impartiality. This was also the case with the ad hoc tribunals that were set up by the United Nations Security Council -- the supreme executive organ of the United Nations -- in connection with conflicts in Europe and Africa.

A Historic First

Because it is a political, not a judicial, body, the council's actions, including its decisions on the composition of international criminal courts, will always be dictated by the national interests of its member states, first and foremost the five veto-wielding powers.

Compared to these traditional approaches, the ICC has brought about a paradigm shift in how the most serious international crimes are prosecuted. The court is not a body of the United Nations organization, but is based on an intergovernmental treaty that was concluded in Rome in 1998 (the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court) and -- as of July 2008 -- has been ratified by 108 states.

For the first time in the history of international criminal justice, the prosecution of serious violations of international humanitarian law is not dictated by international realpolitik, but is determined by the statute of a permanent institution. Its officials are not dependent upon national jurisdictions or the UN Security Council.

It is important to note that the court does not operate according to the controversial doctrine of "universal jurisdiction." It exercises its jurisdiction on the basis of complementarity with national jurisdictions, and will only take up cases when a state is either unable or unwilling to prosecute alleged international crimes. According to its statute, the court can investigate and prosecute crimes that have been committed either on the territory of states that have ratified the court's statute or by citizens of such states.

However, for the ICC to be successful in the long term, it will have to become more representative, and major powers will need to join, in particular the three permanent members of the Security Council that have not yet ratified the Rome Statute -- the United States, China, and Russia.

The climate of impunity will effectively be ended only after countries of their weight and influence accept the idea of a permanent court acting on the basis of complementarity. The number of ratifying states -- as impressive as it may be -- does not change the fact that, at the moment, several key countries, all with powerful militaries, are outside the court's jurisdiction and view it with suspicion.

Seeking Independence And Impartiality

As regards the court's future prospects -- and the future of international criminal justice -- a lot will depend on whether the prosecutor and judges will be able to make their decisions in full independence from political and tactical considerations and in a truly impartial manner, so that the court does not get entangled in the web of global power politics.

A special provision in the court's statute makes this task considerably more difficult than it otherwise would be. Although the court is not in any form part of the United Nations system, the Security Council, acting on the basis of Chapter VII of the UN Charter, has the right to refer situations (also in cases where the court does not have jurisdiction of its own) and to defer an investigation or prosecution for a renewable period of one year.

This proviso brings international power politics into the chambers of the court, since Security Council decisions require the consent of the five permanent members (the United States, the United Kingdom, Russia, China, and France).

The consequences of this rather strange connection between the court and the Security Council have already become visible. An investigation has been initiated into the situation in Darfur, Sudan, a country which has not acceded to the court. But no such investigation can be initiated on the situation in Gaza, a territory where, as in Sudan, the court itself has no jurisdiction. But unlike in Sudan, the Security Council cannot refer the situation because of the certain veto of at least one permanent member that is not even a party to the court.

Thus, double standards are imposed on the ICC from outside and countries that are not parties of the Rome Statute may decide whether to refer a case or defer an investigation or prosecution. The prosecutor will have to be circumspect to avoid being used for the political agendas of party states and non-party states alike. He or she would jeopardize the very legitimacy of the court by giving in to political pressures.

Notwithstanding this serious handicap -- the result of the Rome Statute drafters' concession to realpolitik -- the International Criminal Court can, if the key countries ratify the Rome Statute in the foreseeable future, effectively end the era of double standards in international criminal justice and thus contribute to a global order of peace. The deterrent effect of an end to impunity for war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide should not be underestimated.

Hans Koechler is a professor of philosophy at the University of Innsbruck, author of "Global Justice Or Global Revenge?" and president of the International Progress Organization. The views expressed in this commentary are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect those of RFE/RL

- - -

Commentary from Wronging Rights blog 12 February 2009:
ICC Definitely, Probably, Maybe, or Possibly Not About to Issue Bashir Warrant

Kind of a crazy day, huh?

First the New York Times reports this morning that the Pre-Trial Chamber of the ICC has decided to go ahead and approve Chief Prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo's request for a warrant for President Omar Hassan al-Bashir of Sudan. Then hours later the ICC responds with a tersely worded statement to the effect of "Nuh-uh."

This is either hella embarrassing or kind of a mean trick to play on all those media organizations chomping at the bit to bust out some portentous headlines about the first head of state to be indicted by the International Criminal Court. Michelle at Stop Genocide speculates that it might be the latter:

"[B]y leaking the information in the days before the announcement, and then issuing an obligatory denial, someone out there might be trying to soften the blow, test the waters, or at least give a warning to the international community that this is finally coming."

Word on the street (by which I mean the actual streets of the Hague, where international justice rumors flow fast and hot like so much raw sewage) suggests that this may not be far off the mark. The general consensus seems to be that the only question left unsettled is when, not whether, the arrest warrant will be issued.



*Awesome cartoon is from the Montreal Institute for Genocide and Human Rights Studies

- - -

Sirleaf 'sorry' she backed Taylor

Liberian President Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf apologises at a truth and reconciliation commission over her backing for ex-rebel Charles Taylor. Full story: BBC 13 Feb. 2009.

ICC's Ocampo says Bashir has been committing genocide for the last five years- The militias were integrated -- they were not acting alone

From Foreign Policy published on 12 or 13 February 2009
Seven Questions: Luis Moreno-Ocampo

The international prosecutor who's coming after Sudan's Omar al-Bashir says that peace talks in Darfur might have to take a back seat -- justice must be served.

Just hours before FP's Elizabeth Allen spoke with International Criminal Court prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo, the New York Times reported that the court's judges had decided to issue an arrest warrant for Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir -- the first even indictment of a sitting head of state. Bashir would be implicated for his role in the ongoing conflict in Darfur, which many call the first genocide of the 21st century.

While the court denies having made its decision, the suggestion alone has provoked controversy. Advocacy groups worry that indicting the Sudanese president could jeopardize ongoing peace negotiations to end the crisis, or worse: inspire Bashir to tighten his grip and resort to further violence. But in his discussion with Foreign Policy, Moreno-Ocampo argues that the indictment is crucial to ending impunity in Darfur. He told FP, "I'm sorry if I disturb those who are in negotiations, but these are the facts."

Foreign Policy: Was an arrest warrant issued by the court yesterday for the arrest of Bashir?

Luis Moreno-Ocampo: No. The report says the judges decided. I don't know what they know. But it's not official. The judges said today they have not decided.

FP: Tell us about the ICC's involvement in Darfur, and specifically, the case against Bashir. For example, what evidence do you have to implicate him on the intent to commit genocide?

LMO: In February 2007, we presented the first case on Darfur [consisting of] the attacks against the villages mainly inhabited by the Fur, the Masalit and the Zaghawa ethnic groups. The modus operandi was, [government organized militias] would surround villages that had no [Darfuri] rebel presence, helicopters or planes would drop bombs, and the government forces attacked the village.

Since June 2007, and particularly in December, I [was told] to focus my investigation on the crimes committed in the camps. In the camps, the attacks are more subtle. There are two weapons: rape and hunger. It's normal for women [who are] going to look for firewood to be raped, the same way that for you it's normal on Sunday afternoon for you to get a parking place at the supermarket.

You have to understand that Bashir and his government are a very smart people. They're not a failed state. When they saw the reaction [to village attacks,] the method [became] more silent: raping and hunger. They don't need gas chambers; they don't need machetes, because they have the desert to kill them. They are hindering humanitarian assistance. That's a subtle way to commit a genocide today.

FP: Sudan has national elections scheduled for this year, and a referendum in 2011 to allow Southern Sudan to formally secede. How might these events be affected by an ICC arrest warrant?

LMO: My mandate was to end the impunity, in order to prevent future crimes. If the judges issue a warrant against Bashir, it will be the beginning of ending impunity. I'm concerned about the second part: prevent[ing] future crimes. The international community has a three-pronged [approach]: humanitarian assistance, security, and political agreement, ignoring justice. What I saw when we issued a warrant for [Sudan's Minister of State for Humanitarian Affairs] Ahmed Harun was a tendency to ignore reality. This is affecting humanitarian assistance and also security. Mr. Harun is on the committee to deploy UNAMID, and he is of course affecting the deployment. Mr. Haroon was appointed head of a committee to investigate human rights abuses. This is not a joke; this is a way for Mr. Bashir to confirm to other members of his group that if they follow his orders, legal orders, nothing will happen to them.

FP: Could the pursuit of justice result in the exacerbation of atrocities or hardships in Darfur? Could it impede the recently begun peace negotiations between the government and the Darfur rebel group, the Justice and Equality Movement, in Doha?

LMO: No. For people in Darfur, nothing could be worse. We need negotiations, but if Bashir is indicted, he is not the person to negotiate with. Mr. Bashir could not be an option for [negotiations on] Darfur, or, in fact, for the South. I believe negotiators have to learn how to adjust to the reality. The court is a reality.

I think for [the negotiators] it is de facto, it's a reality. They assume that Mr. Bashir is indicted. Maybe [that makes] the negotiation is more difficult, but it's more promising. Bashir has been committing genocide for the last five years, so why do you believe he will change? And the idea that [the same thing] will not happen again in the South? Be careful.

FP: Referring to the specifics of the Bashir case, is a specific genocidal intent on the part of President Bashir necessary to prove a claim of genocide? What qualities of genocidal intent has Bashir shown?

LMO: Even Hitler did not have a document saying "go and destroy the Jews, or the gypsies." You have to prove the intention through facts. Mr. Bashir, in March 2003, ordered publically to attack his people saying, ‘I don't like prisoners or wounded. I just want to see scorched earth.' A few weeks later, his commanders say, ‘We're ready,' and they start a campaign to systematically target the villages inhabited by the Fur and Zaghawa.

He used the state apparatus. It's not just [an] army operation. It's not just the removal of those who refused to commit these crimes and the inclusion of other people -- including militias -- to commit the crimes. It's not just that he created these courts to investigate the crimes, and they investigated nothing. It's also about how he used the diplomatic apparatus and the media to deny the crimes

The militias were integrated -- they were not acting alone. This autonomy of the janjaweed [militia] is an alibi. It's incredible that people can still think of that

FP: There were a number of measures introduced in the 2005 with the Interim National Constitution and the Comprehensive Peace Agreement that constrained the authority and power that President Bashir might need to organize the state to perpetrate crimes in Darfur. What effect did this have

LMO: He never fulfilled [these conditions]. The Security Council passed different resolutions prohibiting the use of military airplanes; he continued bombing, no problem. They forced Mr. Bashir to dismantle the janjaweed militias -- he completely ignored [them].

We're not talking about political responsibility here; we're talking about individual criminal responsibility. Bashir was on top of this operation. He is the president of the country; he is the commander in chief; he's the president of the Congress Party; he has de jure and de facto control of these people. So what we allege is that he has control and he ordered these activities.

[The ongoing] hindering of humanitarian assistance is part of the genocide, because the consequence is that people are dying. Five thousand are dying each month, and we are presenting that as a humanitarian crisis. It's not; it's a crime. I'm sorry if I disturb those who are in negotiations, but these are the facts.

FP: How do you view the role of the United States in securing an ICC arrest warrant for Bashir, given that the country is not a signatory to the Rome Treaty that gives the ICC its mandate?

LMO: The Darfur case was referred to the court by the Security Council. In this case, there's no disagreement between U.S. policy and the Rome Treaty. All countries have to work to stop this crime. It's a challenge for the world. We are witnessing the first massive crime of genocide in the 21st century and for the last five years we did nothing efficient to stop to the crimes. We are providing material assistance, yes. That is great; it's saving the life of 2 million people. But it's not enough. The United States, as a member, has a responsibility also.

Luis Moreno-Ocampo is prosecutor for the International Criminal Court.

- - -

Note from Sudan Watch
If the ICC takes seriously its mandate to end impunity in order to prevent future crimes in Sudan, why, I wonder, are civilians allowed to run amok attacking, murdering and maiming aid worker and peacekeepers whilst being pandered to by the international community?

Where are the charges and arrest warrants for the leaders of all the organised gangs of criminals in Sudan? Why stop at Bashir, why not start on Kiir and charge that genocide, not civil war, went on for over 20 years in Southern Sudan. Why stop at Kiir, one could slap a posthumous charge on the late John Garang and his gang of ex rebels.

My point is, what is justice in the eyes of whom? Where is the justice for the aid workers and 70-80 peacekeepers murdered in Darfur and for the famililies of those slain at Haskanita? And why does France permit Al-Nur to direct the Darfur war from Paris, France? Mr Prosectuor, we've heard enough about Mr Bashir, what about the murderous insurgents and their attempted coup d'etat? When will you end their impunity? And what about the two million victims who perished in South Sudan...

US, France, UK oppose suspending ICC case against President al-Bashir of Sudan

Friday, Feb. 13, 2009 12:45am GMT Reuters report by Louis Charbonneau

U.S., France, UK oppose suspending Bashir Darfur case

UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - U.S., British and French diplomats told African Union and Arab League delegates on Thursday that they oppose suspending a war crimes indictment of Sudan's president over atrocities in Darfur, diplomats said.

U.N. diplomats and officials said on Wednesday the International Criminal Court had decided to issue an arrest warrant for President Omar Hassan al-Bashir, who is accused by the court's chief prosecutor of overseeing genocide in Darfur.

The court, based in The Hague, said on Thursday it had not reached a final decision but U.N. officials said the Sudanese government was already aware that Bashir would be formally indicted later this month.

"At this moment we're not ready to support an initiative that would implement Article 16," French Deputy Ambassador Jean-Pierre Lacroix said, referring to an ICC statute that allows the Security Council to suspend the court's proceedings for up to a year at a time.

Lacroix spoke after a closed-door meeting between U.N. Security Council members and African and Arab delegations.

Council diplomats said the U.S., British, Austrian and Croatian envoys also told the meeting that they opposed deferral of an ICC indictment of Bashir. Russia and China joined the Africans and Arabs in voicing support for a deferral, saying it was in the interests of peace.

Lacroix said the supporters of a suspension appeared to lack a majority in the council. Since Britain, France and the United States are permanent council members with veto powers, they could block any moves to invoke Article 16.

As expected the informal council meeting took no action but diplomats said they would be returning to the issue.

Britain's Africa minister Mark Malloch Brown said earlier this week that it was "completely unlikely that anything is going to happen which could lead to an Article 16 deferral."

'NO ONE GIVES A DAMN'

Bashir is the most senior figure pursued by the court since it was set up in 2002. If the warrant is issued as expected, he will be the first acting head of state indicted.

Sudan rejects the accusations made by chief prosecutor Luis Moreno Ocampo last July and says it will never hand over Bashir or two other Sudanese men already indicted by the court.

"For us this so-called indictment doesn't exist," said Sudan's U.N.

Ambassador Abdalmahmoud Abdalhaleem. "No one will give it a damn in the country. If it has any merit, it has united the whole Sudanese people around our president."

China, the African Union and Arab League have all suggested that an indictment of Bashir could destabilize the region, worsen the Darfur conflict and threaten a troubled peace deal between north Sudan and the semi-autonomous south.

Ocampo accuses Bashir of orchestrating a campaign of genocide in Sudan's western Darfur region, starting in 2003. Ocampo has said this killed 35,000 people outright and at least 100,000 more through starvation and disease.

Khartoum rejects the term genocide and says 10,000 people died in the conflict.

(Additional reporting by Aaron Robert Gray-Block and Catherine Hornby in Amsterdam, Andrew Heavens in Khartoum, Skye Wheeler in Juba, South Sudan)

New York Times was just desperate for a scoop? Gun-jumping by Ocampo alleged, Arab League and African Union meeting with UN Security Council

From Inner City Press at the UN by Matthew Russell Lee February 12, 2009:

Sudan Pre-Indictment Frenzy at UN, Gun-Jumping by Ocampo Alleged, AU in Town

(UNITED NATIONS) - The pending indictment of Sudan's President Omar al-Bashir by the International Criminal Court was the talk of the UN on February 12. The New York Times reported that the decision to indict has been made. The ICC issued a denied. Ban Ki-moon's spokesperson was pelted with questions if the ICC President gave Ban a sealed envelope with the news -- denied -- and whether he last meeting with Bashir was as heated as portrayed in the Times. Inner City Press caught up with Sudan's Ambassador to the UN, walking the UN's second floor in his national dress and cobra shoes, and asked him what he made of the pending indictment.

"They are telling us our country is too big," he said, adding that news of the indictment made "some brothers in Doha say we will arrest the president." Inner City Press asked who had made this threat. "Khalil," he answered, naming the head of the Justice and Equality Movement, which Sudanese troops recently faced down in South Darfur.

The UK's draft presidential statement on that topic is now officially dead: it "did not have unanimity," Security Council president Yukio Takasu said at the stakeout, confirming what Inner City Press wrote two days earlier, quoting a Libyan diplomat that his country would not agree without a paragraph taking note of the African Union's recommendation that the ICC process be suspended for one year.

ICC's Ocampo and UN's Ban in July 2008, Bashir indictment not shown

Inner City Press asked Sudan's Ambassador if it had ideas on who was the New York Times' source?

"I think it was water-testing by the New York Times," he said.

So they are working together?

"They are all conspirators."

Others says the Times was just desperate for a scoop. One wag quipped this is the first instance of Carlos Slim journalism. Others cited Judy Miller and Jason Blair.

But even Sudan's Ambassador conceded the indictment would probably soon issue. He said that ICC Prosecutor Moreno-Ocampo spoke days ago at Yale and said that the pre-trial chamber's work was done, and the indictment would issue in days. Inner City Press asked if this was taped, and the Ambassador promised a transcript.

Ban Ki-moon at his press conference this week expressed satisfaction that Sudan had only bombed the outskirts of the town in South Sudan, and that JEM had left. Sudan's Ambassador opined that Ban "wanted to say, I was advised not to talk to the President but I did, and look at the results I got. He did it for his own sake." He said another phrase, but for diplomacy's sake we leave it out.

There is diplomacy at work. An Arab League (and African Union) diplomat told Inner City Press that despite the ICC denial, the decision has in fact been made, but some countries are pressuring the ICC to hold off on announcing. If the Doha talks between Khartoom and JEM are the reason, expect them to go on and on.

There will be a meeting between the Security Council and the African Union and Arab League at 4 p.m. in the UN's basement. Watch this space.

Update of 4:02 p.m. -- In front of Conference Room 8, Arab League's Samir Hosni says they have 7 votes and maybe Mexico and Turkey to stop the al-Bashir indictment. Meeting begins.

Update of 6:54 p.m. -- meeting breaks up, while Costa Rica's Urbana says they made a good presentation, France's LaCroix says, I don't think they have a majority. That is, for suspending the indictment, Russia and China, Libya, Uganda and Burkina Faso, Vietnam -- and who? Turkey? Mexico? Mexico, it's said, is under pressure in two ways from NAM and G-77. More on this to follow. 10-4.

Sudan blocks aid flights to Muhajiriya, Sheria and Labado in south Darfur

February 12, 2009 Reuters report by Andrew Heavens, Khartoum:

Sudan blocks aid flights to Darfur battle zones-UN

Sudanese authorities have prevented aid agencies from getting food and water to more than 100,000 people in three areas in Darfur, U.N. officials said on Thursday.

The U.N.'s humanitarian coordinator Ameerah Haq called for immediate access to Muhajiriya, Sheria and Labado in south Darfur, where civilians have been caught in the middle of recent clashes between rebels and Sudanese forces. [...]

"We are very concerned about the state and condition of civilians in these areas," said Haq in the statement.

"Unless access is immediately granted, the situation for ... civilians could deteriorate rapidly."

No one from the Sudanese authorities was immediately available for comment.

Aid agencies had tried to get into the areas four times since the weekend but had failed to get clearance for humanitarian flights, said the statement from the U.N.'s Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA).

It did not say who had failed to clear the flights or what had caused the problem.

But a U.N. official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the requests had been held up by Sudan's national security service and the government's Humanitarian Aid Commission despite repeated requests. The commission was not immediately available for comment.

TALKS WITH REBELS

Fighters from Darfur's rebel Justice and Equality Movement seized the key south Darfur town of Muhajiriya in mid January, sparking some of the worst violence Darfur has seen in a year, said analysts.

Fighting and government bombardments around the town forced thousands of civilians to flee, said the U.N.

Over the next three weeks fighting spread to Sheria, Labado and other surrounding areas, as JEM and government forces manoeuvred. Government forces now say they control the whole area after re-taking Muhajiriya.

U.N and other aid groups were waiting in the nearby capital of south Darfur Nyala, with food, water, shelter materials and medical care, said the statement.

Sudan's government has promised to cooperate with U.N. and other agencies who are running the world's largest humanitarian operation in Darfur. But some organisations have complained of harassment from government officials in south Darfur. [...] (Editing by Jon Boyle)

Ex-combatants from Sudan's north and south symbolically relinquish their weapons in return for a DDR I.D. card, cash, non-food items & food rations

From UN.org 12 Feb 2009
Woman fighter first in line in Sudan’s UN-backed demobilization programme

A woman was the first ex-combatant to be demobilized in this week’s historic launch of a United Nations-backed programme aimed at coaxing 180,000 ex-fighters from Sudan’s two-decades long north-south civil war back into civilian life.

Fatima, a former member of the People’s Defence Forces, was first in line when 15 ex-combatants, including four other women, stepped forward yesterday in Ed Damazin in Blue Nile State at the start of the disarmament, demobilization and reintegration (DDR) programme, a significant stage in the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) of 2005 that ended a war, in which at least 2 million people died and 4.5 million others were forced from their homes.

Up to 25 per cent of all DDR candidates in Blue Nile State are women and the Joint Commission and integrated UN DDR unit expects to receive about 900 women from the Damazine area in the coming three months.

“The inclusion of women in the 10 February launch reflects the commitment of both Commissions (north and south) and the UN family to ensure that women, as well as men, equally benefit from the DDR process,” the UN Mission in Sudan (UNMIS) said in a news release.

“Women played key roles in armed groups throughout Sudan during the conflict, both as active combatants and in roles providing essential support to soldiers from all parties,” it added.

During the ceremony, ex-combatants from the north and south symbolically relinquished their weapons and in return received a DDR identification card, cash, non-food items and a coupon for food rations provided by the UN World Food Programme (WFP).

Congratulating the Government of National Unity and the Government of South Sudan on the occasion, Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon’s Deputy Special Representative Ameerah Haq voiced confidence that the north and south DDR commissions were determined to make the programme succeed despite problems in securing funding and meeting the needs of ex-combatants in the South.

Rob Crilly twitters he's all set for Khartoum

robcrilly: Need to change my shillings into dollars, buy cat food and toothpaste, then I'm all set for Khartoum
Twitter / robcrilly 12/2/09 06:05

AndrewHeavens: @robcrilly "Akhir Lahzah's field team has observed the appearance of an unknown substance along the riverbed of the Blue Nile River"
Twitter / AndrewHeavens 11/2/09 05:28

AndrewHeavens: @robcrilly "citizens added that substance's colour was changing between green and white and sometimes it would appear like soap bubbles"
Twitter / AndrewHeavens 11/2/09 05:29

AndrewHeavens: @robcrilly "the Ministry of Irrigation and Water has ruled out that the substance was some sort of seaweed or of fungal nature"
Twitter / AndrewHeavens 11/2/09 05:31

AndrewHeavens: @robcrilly "For their part, citizens expressed concern that the substance might be contaminative or chemical wastes"
Twitter / AndrewHeavens 11/2/09 05:32

Why the ICC Leak?

From UN Dispatch: Notes on UN
By Mark Leon Goldberg, February 12, 2009
Why the ICC Leak?

I woke this morning to find an email from the International Criminal Court's press shop vigorously denying that ICC judges had made a decision to issue the arrest warrant for Sudanese president Omar al Bashir. If the ICC is not ready to make the announcement regarding Bashir, why would officials at the United Nations -- who were the sources for the New York Times scoop--reveal this info?

The UN is pretty leaky place in general. Hundreds of member states have hundreds of different agendas, which sometimes differ from the UN secretariat. There is a very real chance that a diplomat in the know couldn't hold his or her tongue. But, it's also no secret that a number of UN officials are frustrated with the ICC's pursuit of Bashir--not on principal, but because UN officials worry that the arrest warrant could disrupt peace efforts and result in attacks on UN personnel in Sudan.

Don't get me wrong, as a blogger and journalist I'm very pro-leak. I'm just curious as to why "officials at the UN" (which could mean secretariat staff or member state diplomats) would want to jump the gun on this?

UPDATE: On further reading, it seems that the NYT item that broke this story was datelined The Hague, not United Nations. This would suggest that the leak came from ICC, not UN sources, which adds another layer of intrigue.

From what I have gathered here at Sudan Watch, Sudan Tribune appears to be the first to get a leak. To keep an eye on dissemination of misinformation, I've documented several reports on it here at Sudan Watch over past few days. Scroll through past week of posts and see.