After four months of costly schoolboy blunders by the government, this has turned out to be a good week for the rule of law and our commitment to a human rights-based foreign policy.
Last Wednesday, the presidency announced that Vladimir Putin, Russia’s president, will, after all, not be coming to SA in August. Putin, who has waged an illegal war against Ukraine, was due to attend a leaders’ summit of Brazil, India, China and SA (Brics) — a club in which Russia is a founding member.
Coming just a month after an embarrassing aborted mutiny by Wagner fighters, this is a significant blow to the ego of the Kremlin’s strongman. It’s another reminder that he is not as immortal as he sometimes projects.
Similarly, he is reminded of growing intolerance towards impunity.
Putin has been charged by the International Criminal Court (ICC) with human rights abuses after ordering the forceful relocation of thousands of women and children from their native Ukraine. An arrest warrant was issued by the court. As a signatory to the Rome Statute, the law that set up the ICC, SA is obliged to arrest him and hand him over to the global court.
For months, the government has been wringing its hands, sending mixed signals about what is a plain issue: arrest him (unlikely) or do the obvious and uninvite him. Besides, Putin has much on his plate. His war is not going according to plan, and his grip on power is loosening.
At last, common sense prevailed. The presidency, not our diplomats, secured the deal that would see Putin stay at home. Instead, Sergei Lavrov, his ally and foreign minister, will represent Russia at the summit.
Simultaneously, two other developments were unfolding. First, the DA asked the high court to bind the government to honour its international obligations, especially the Rome Statute, which has been domesticated; and, grudgingly, the justice department asked the National Prosecuting Authority to issue an arrest warrant.
This is a victory for the rule of law and a much-needed boost to the ICC’s stature. This, however, is not without cost. Putin is an unforgiving man. For as long as he remains in charge, he will remember not to count Cyril Ramaphosa as his ally.
The ICC is not without faults. Its critical weakness is the absence of superpowers from the Rome Statute. Without the US, China, Russia and the exceptions by some of the West, it remains effectively a developing-world court.
But the benefits of its continued existence far outweigh its collapse. Together with African countries, it now needs to seize this opportunity to shore up its legitimacy. To its credit, Africa has played a greater part to ensure its relevance to date. Charles Taylor, Liberia’s former ruthless ruler, is serving a jail term after he was handed over to the ICC for war crimes.
William Ruto, Kenya’s embattled president, and his estranged predecessor, Uhuru Kenyatta, were handed over to the court for orchestrating the violence that accompanied the election that swept them to power. The charges were dropped.
So Africa, more than any other region, owns the moral high ground in the discourse about how to strengthen the legitimacy of the ICC. It needs to lead this cause.
As well as the ritual call for a seat on the UN Security Council, Africa needs to invest in getting as many superpowers as possible, especially China and the West, aboard the ICC. Then the world will cease to be a jungle where only the strong survive.
Getting many African judges to serve on the court is but one step towards legitimacy. Instead of opting out, Africans need to stay and transform the court from within. Also, the court can — and should — exist alongside the mooted African Criminal Court. The latter can act as a referral court if the legitimacy issues are sorted out.
Ramaphosa has done relatively well in getting this Putin issue over the line, even though there is a personal cost to his global stock and the country’s.
However, this newspaper is concerned about what will happen in a year given his recent flip-flops. Will he still make this sensible decision? Even more worrying is whether his party, the ANC, believes in, and is bound by, the decision to get Putin to stay at home.
Only a binding ruling by the high court will guarantee us that the next president or even Ramaphosa will not walk us back and reverse these important gains.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.