Gambian Woman to Head The ICC.

According to Colum Lynch and a few other observers, Fatou Bensouda will become the next top Prosecutor at the International Criminal Court.
Earlier this week, the ICC announced that the four short-listed candidates (Robert Petit of Canada; Andrew Cayley of the UK; Mohamed Chande Othman of Tanzania; and Fatou Bensouda of Gambia), had been whittled down to two.
It has become apparent that the ICC’s Assembly of States Parties wanted to avoid an election by deciding on a “consensus candidate.” Kevin Jon Heller, at Opinio Juris, suggested that the ICC likely conducted informal polling which made clear that a consensus had formed around having an African Prosecutor. Othman subsequently decided to step aside, allowing Bensouda to emerge as the sole candidate for the job. In all likelihood, Othman understood his chances were slim-to-none given that the African Union – which had decided to support an African candidate for Prosecutor  endorsed  Bensouda.
Many readers of JiC will know that Bensouda has long been the favoured candidate to replace outgoing Prosecutor, Luis Moreno-Ocampo. Her name was consistently and emphatically mentioned by observers of the Court. This past September, I argued that the stars had aligned for Bensouda – she had the ICC’s top job “in the bag.” Bensouda clearly satisfied all of the political and merit-based criteria to become the ICC’s chief Prosecutor.
The selection of Bensouda as a consensus candidate is important for a number of reasons. Here are a few:
First, the selection of Bensouda, just weeks prior to the day originally set for an election, removes the possibility of a highly political election. Of course, this isn’t necessarily a good thing. An election would have created additional buzz and discussion about key issues surrounding the ICC and its first decade of work.
Second, Bensouda becomes the first African Prosecutor at the ICC. This fact will almost surely garner the most media attention. The African Union has been adamant that an African candidate would be selected, and they got their wish. It will now be very interesting to see how the AU deals with an African Prosecutor. The AU has often expressed frustration and, at times, outright hostility towards the Court for what it, and many of its member states, see as undue bias towards African nations and leaders. Now that the AU has its chosen candidate, will its attitude and rhetoric change?
Third, Bensouda’s ascension to the top job is another remarkable feat for gender parity in international institutions and international politics. The United Nations has never had a female Secretary General. The World Bank has never had a female President.
Fourth, the ICC not only has a lot on its plate, but the number of courses being served is ever-increasing. In the past year alone, two additional situations (Ivory Coast and Libya) were added to the growing list of contexts in which the Court is conducting official investigations and prosecutions. It is not out of the question that others, like Syria, will join Libya, Ivory Coast, Kenya, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Sudan, the Central African Republic, and Uganda, in the near future. It would seem sensible to suggest that, as the Court’s current Deputy Prosecutor, continuity will serve Bensouda well. States didn’t want to mess with the AU on this one.
Fifth, and related to the last point, by all accounts Bensouda is a much more low-key prosecutor than Moreno-Ocampo. Her selection would thus appear to confirm the desire among states parties to select someone who will be more of a ‘secretary’ than a ‘general’ – a prosecutor who won’t ruffle as many feathers.
With Bensouda claiming the single most visible position in the international criminal justice firmament, attention will begin to shift back towards the tenure of the Court’s current Prosecutor. As the ICC’s first Prosecutor, Moreno-Ocampo’s time has been replete with controversy. But he also put the Court on the map and spotlight of international politics, in the face of nay-sayers, critics and a plethora of hostile forces. In the coming weeks, it will be interesting to read and hear retrospectives on a man who, arguably more than anyone else, has shaped the politics and pursuit of international criminal justice.
My heart m,issed a beat when i herad this news. This is an ambush by the international community. Are theyt trying to appease Africans after committing crimes against humanity in Libya? This is a question they would never answer. African leaders must watch out for this might be a Trojan Horse. Beware of the Greeks if they come bearing gifts.

Gbagbo was Abducted, Jerry Rawlings.

Ex-president President John Rawlings has criticized the ongoing prosecution of former Ivorian leader Laurent Gbagbo.

Describing his prosecution as “abduction” the ex-president minced no words in expressing his utter disgust in the prosecution of the deposed Ivorian leader.

In a statement Mr Rawlings called on all Africans to ponder new ways of bringing justice to its own citizens rather than handing them over to the ICC.

Gbagbo was captured after months of disputed election violence in Ivory Coast which left thousands dead and several hundreds fleeing the once peaceful West African Country.

Newly sworn-in president Allasane Quattara promised justice and national reconciliation but shortly after taking over the reigns of power he handed over his adversary to the ICC for prosecution.

This Mr. Rawlings considers unfortunate stating: “This transfer followed a procedure so hasty that it could be rightfully described as abduction.”

“My suspicion grows even more, when the prosecuting attorney claiming to be targeting six officials in Cote d’Ivoire, unduly focuses on Gbagbo, the one who is least likely to escape due to his being already in custody,” he added.

While Mr. Rawlings would not condone any form of arbitrary leadership by any African leader, he said, “No one is trying to evade justice. But when such justice is drenched in a sea of humiliation and abuses, so as to be governed by self-righteous hatred with its untenable logic, it only befits human conscience to stand up against it for the good of all.

He said all well meaning Africans must speak up against this injustice.

The following is the full details of Mr. Rawlings’ statement.


STATEMENT BY H.E. JERRY JOHN RAWLINGS ON THE
TRANSFER OF PRESIDENT LAURENT GBAGBO TO THE
INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT (ICC)

I have learnt with dismay reports that deposed President Gbagbo of Cote d’Ivoire has been transferred to The International Criminal Court (ICC) on Tuesday, November 29th, following a speedy indictment, in total violation of relevant international code of procedures and in total disregard for the demands of peace in Cote d’Ivoire.

This transfer followed a procedure so hasty that it could be rightfully described as abduction.

My suspicion grows even more, when the prosecuting attorney claiming to be targeting six officials in Cote d’Ivoire, unduly focuses on Gbagbo, the one who is least likely to escape due to his being already in custody.

This eagerness to indict and transfer Gbagbo, who did not run in the face of the bombing of his palace like a common criminal, defies logic and the quest for true reconciliation and sustainable peace in Cote d’Ivoire.

After fifty years of independence, Africa should have all the know how to bring justice to its own citizens and do away with imported justice.

What kind of prosecution would rather be in haste to bring to justice the victim of an attack, and be lenient on the perpetrator of the attack?

No one is trying to evade justice. But when such justice is drenched in a sea of humiliation and abuses, so as to be governed by self-righteous hatred with its untenable logic, it only befits human conscience to stand up against it for the good of all.
We will not be silent about this because we must not be silent about it as participating members in this human drama.
From: www.myjoyonline.com

NATO and the BRICS on a Collission Course?

It seems a new world order is emerging and the traditional powers are feeling a bit jittery. It seems their worst fears are about to be confirmed. This new world power is made up of five industrialized countries Brazil, Russia, India, China and just recently South Africa was added (BRICS). These five countries have decided to come together to form a strong union to counter the western powers. The US is feeling so much peeved and she is trying to put in place measures to curb this emerging world power. These five countries have so much wealth in terms of oil and other mineral resources and were able to give the IMF a huge sum of money. BRICS is seriously moving into Africa to make sure that the African economies get favorable terms on the exploitation of their natural resources. This seems to be contrary to what the European Union and their American counterparts are doing in Africa. The American President Barack Obama was in Australia to sign a security agreement with them. In his own words, he said that it was to check the expansion of China in the South Pacific. He is asking the Australians to allow the US to build a military base on Australian territory. The US is afraid of its own shadow. NATO to would follow suit very soon. The BRICS wold not relent in their efforts to expand their economies. These old powers like NATO and the US should know that their time is about to end and a new force in the world would emerge to put a check on them. They should know that the BRICS have come to stay and the traditional powers must give way for them to operate. Right now the Americans and NATO have Iran on their radar. The crux of the matter is that, why cant Iran be allowed to produce its own nuclear weapons if the Americans have also been given the power to do so, Israel has nuclear weapons, why dont the UN tell them to stop and impose sanctions on them. Its an "Animal Farm" situation, two legs bad, four legs good. I have this feeling that if care is not taken, this Iranian nuclear issue would escalate into another full scale war, and i bet you the BRICS would not sit there idle and watch it happen. NATO must accept the fact that the world is fed up with their illegal invasion of countries in the name of protecting civilians. Afghanistan, Yugoslavia, Iraq and just recently Libya where the Libyan leader was murdered in cold blood. Time will surely tell if NATO can continue with this behaviour, its time their bluff is called off and the BRICS is just the emerging power to do that.    

Laurent Gbagbo's Trial at the ICC?

My heart weeps so much for my African brother, the former Ivorian president, Laurent Gbagbo who was sent to the ICC in the Hague. Four charges of crimes against humanity have been proffered against him. We all know that this is just a formality he is going through. They would surely find him guilty as the trial of the former Liberian president Charles Gankey Taylor seems to show the hall marks of a predetermined agenda. These people would make sure that Gbagbo is kept away from Ivory Coast for a long time. I keep on asking this question, was the ICC created for only African Leaders? Why cant the likes of Tony Blair, Bill Clinton, George Bush Snr and Jnr, Gordon Brown and a host of other former western leaders who have committed atrocities in Afghanistan, Vietnam, Somalia, Iraq,  and Libya. Imagine you have a system where the leaders are the judge, jury and prosecutors. The conclusion would be that, the guilty verdict would surely be pronounced on any African president sent to the Hague. Why cant the African Union do something about this invasion of our African continent by these neocolonialists. Now they are threatening us with aid with so many conditions, some of which are that, we should allow homosexuals and lesbians to have their way all in the name of human rights. This is an insult to the African culture. Are these western powers signatories to the ICC Convention? I hope to find out the number of countries that have signed up to this incongruous convention. Sudan's president, Al Bashir is their next target, as to when they would get him to be sent to the ICC, only time will tell. Right now, the ICC has put an international arrest warrant on him. This has brought a big diplomatic row between Sudan and Kenya as they have both expelled their diplomats as a result of a Kenyan court ruling that states that the Sudanese president should be arrested the moment he steps foot on Kenyan soil. Why cant Africans be allowed to decide their own fate and settle their own disputes. Alhassane Outtara's forces also committed  atrocities during the Ivorian crisis, he should also be invited to the ICC to face charges of crimes against humanity. His forces embarked on an ethnic cleansing campaign, and the evidence is so overwhelming, but the ICC Chief Prosecutor, Luis Moreno Ocampo's visit to Ivory Coast was a one sided affair. Gbagbo could have been tried by the African Union's own Judicial body. I would like to end with this question, who is going to pay for the cost involved in Laurent Gbagbo's ICC trial. I know the Ivorian people would be made to compromise on so many fronts for the western powers to have their way. Alhassane Outtara should beware, because Gbagbo's supporters are still alive. A word to the wise they say, is in Ouattara's north. My last question is, will Gbagbo be given a fair trial?