In August, the BRICS countries, Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa will meet in South Africa. And Russian President Vladimir Putin is one of the invitees. At the same time, South Africa is a member of the International Criminal Court in The Hague (ICC). In March, the ICC issued an arrest warrant for Putin, for being responsible for war crimes in Ukraine. Putin is indicted together with Maria Belova, the Russian children’s ombudsman who is accused of abducting thousands of children from Ukraine to Russia. The Criminal Court has the task of prosecuting persons and heads of state who are accused of war crimes, genocide and crimes against humanity. This means that member states – such as South Africa – have a duty to arrest and extradite Putin. Now a full-blown argument has broken out among the country’s top politicians about what will happen if or when the Russian president arrives. It was during a press conference with Finnish President Sauli Niinistö last week that President Cyril Ramaphosa refused to answer whether Vladimir Putin will be arrested if he travels to South Africa. And where he claimed that the country would withdraw from the International Criminal Court. Photo: PHILL MAGAKOE / AFP To arrest or not to arrest? State Minister Alan Winde in the province of Wes-Kaap is ready: – If the Russian president sets foot in Wes-Kaap, we as the provincial government will have him arrested, Winde states in a statement. – And if the South African police service is not instructed to act, then we will, writes Winde. He represents the Democratic Alliance party. The South African government and the ruling party ANC do not agree that the matter is so simple. – The question is now being considered, President Cyril Ramaphosa answered evasively last week. The president’s chief of staff is clearer. He says Winde can only dream of Putin being arrested. – If President Putin is in South Africa, he is protected by the presidential security service, Khumbudzo Ntshavheni told the TV channel eNCA. Alan Winde, the state minister of the West-Kaap province, promises to comply with the country’s obligations to the International Criminal Court should the Russian president appear in Cape Town. Photo: RODGER BOSCH / AFP The leader of the communist Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) goes even further. – If he wants to meet his maker prematurely, he can try to touch Putin. No one can. Not even the President of the United States. President Putin is more than welcome here and no one wants to arrest him, says Malema, according to TimesLIVE newspaper. Malema now leads the country’s third largest party. The last time the BRICS leaders met physically was in the Brazilian capital Brasília in November 2019. From left, Russian President Vladimir Putin, Chinese President Xi Jinping, Brazil’s departed President Jair Bolsonaro, South African President Cyril Ramaphosa and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi. Photo: SERGIO LIMA / AFP Thus there is a dispute between two of South Africa’s three capitals. In Cape Town, where Alan Winde governs, the National Assembly is located. While the government and the presidential office are based in Pretoria. South Africa holds the chairmanship of BRICS this year. U-turn on the criminal court South Africa has declared itself neutral in the conflict between Russia and Ukraine. Massive criticism from Western allies has not made President Cyril Ramaphosa change his mind. During the apartheid era, the Soviet Union was one of the ANC’s closest allies. The bonds are still strong. In contrast, Ramaphosa has changed his mind about the International Criminal Court, ICC. – The ruling party has decided that South Africa should withdraw from the ICC, Ramaphosa said in his evasive answer about Putin. South Africa believes the ICC is not acting fairly. Since its creation in 2002, the Court has been accused of going after African leaders and politicians the most. – We want the issue of unfair treatment to be discussed properly, but in the meantime the ruling party has once again decided that South Africa will be pulled out, said Ramaphosa. The International Criminal Court is based in The Hague in the Netherlands. Photo: Peter Dejong / AP A few hours later came the complete reversal. According to the presidential staff, it was all due to a communication error. – The President wishes to clarify that South Africa still adheres to the Rome Statute. This clarification follows an error in a comment made during a press conference held by the ANC, the statement said. The Rome Statute is the name of the treaty that was signed in Rome in 1998 and which is the legal basis for the International Criminal Court. news’s correspondent Vegard Tjørhom writes this about South Africa’s line in the Ukraine issue and about the relationship with the International Court of Justice: South Africa’s difficult balancing act Photo: Ole Kaland / news In South Africa, the tug of war continued. The country would like to cooperate with both the USA, the EU, China and Russia. The ongoing Ukraine war has led to increased attention to South Africa’s position in the world superpower struggle. The South Africans have not taken a clear position on what is happening in Ukraine, not even when the matter has been raised in the UN system. Through the BRICS cooperation, South Africa has forged closer ties with Russia and China in recent decades, and for an aspiring great power on the African continent, the BRICS cooperation is important. But closer cooperation with China and Russia challenges South Africa in several ways. Especially in the face of the West. And when the country must follow up on its duties as a member of the International Criminal Court. South Africa has been among the countries that have criticized the International Criminal Court (ICC). In 2017, the African Union went out and encouraged member countries to opt out of the ICC, because the court too largely went after Africans, and rarely held Westerners and other leaders to account. The year before, it had caused debate that South Africa received a visit from Sudan’s former dictator and genocide suspect, Omar al-Bashir, without the dictator being handed over to the ICC. In South Africa, there was a debate about withdrawal, but even with the country remaining in the ICC. Because it is also the case that membership of the International Criminal Court has been seen as important by many in South Africa. The country joined in 1998, a few years after the apartheid regime ended, and democracy came to South Africa. For South Africa, it was important to find a way forward that was not open to similar violations of human rights as during apartheid. The new constitution stated that the country should find its place “among the world’s family of sovereign countries and states”. At the time, membership in the ICC was a clear signal that South Africa was a country that based its own rule of law on international law. Therefore, a statement from the ICC will be interpreted as a signal that South Africa is going in a new and different direction, where they seek closer cooperation with China and Russia. Many western countries will see this in connection with the fact that South Africa does not condemn the war in Ukraine, and both criticism and skepticism of South Africa may thus grow. For a country that would most like to strike a balance between the various great powers, and not fall on one side or the other, the ICC obligations create problems that they would rather not have. Refused to arrest Sudan’s president It is not the first time South Africa has faced an arrest warrant from the International Criminal Court. In 2016, Sudan’s then president Omar al-Bashir visited. Al-Bashir was indicted for war crimes in Darfur, but South Africa refused to arrest him. Read also: The bird has flown South Africa then also decided to withdraw from the ICC. The decision at the time was halted by the South African judiciary, which ruled that leaving the court would be unconstitutional. Listen to the podcast:
ttn-69
Should he be arrested when he gets to the summit? – news Urix – Foreign news and documentaries
