The War Crimes Charges Against Al Bashir

[Kubwajinga]

Wakuu hebu tuliangalie bara letu kwa mapana kidogo.

Bwan Al BASHIR, Rais wa Sudan, leo ameshtakiwa Rasmi kama "war criminal" na mwendesha mashtaka wa mahakama ya kimataifa (ICC) ya The Hague bwana Luis Moreno Ocampo.

Kifupi kama majaji wataridhia hiyo application ya Ocampo, basi Rais wa Sudan atakuwa on wanted list kama Marehemu Milosevic na Charles Taylor. Na most likely watakubali..evidence are overwhelming!

Swala langu ni je, sisi kama waafrika hiki kitendo cha hii mahakama ku-deal na RAIS ALIYEKO MADARAKANI..bila longo longo tuliyozoea ya "UN DIPLOMACY" tukichukulieje? inaweza kuwa mwanzo mzuri kwamba hawa viongozi wetu wa kiafrika ambao wamekataa kuwasikiliza na kuwahudumia raia wao waende wakakae huko The Hague, sisi tuhangaike na mustakabali wa bara letu au vipi?

Maana kweli waafrika tumenyanyasika na hawa viongozi ndugu zetu kuliko hata wazungu walivyotunyanyasa. Je wakipelekwa The Hague itasaidia viongozi wengine kuamka na kuwa responsible?

Personally nimeshindwa kutoa msimamo wangu...maana viongozi wa Afrika watasema tunaingiliwa na wazungu, lakini nikiangalia Darfur inavyowaka moto, sina budi kusema, Al BASHIR AENDE AKAOZEE HUKO THE HAGUE.

Watakao sema kwamba ashtakiwe Sudan, asipelekwe The Hague, naomba waangalie uwezo wa mahakama za kiafrika kuwashtaki "wakulu wetu'. IT IS IMPOSSIBLE.

So is it the right decision for Al BASHIR to be indicted by the ICC?

Mkuu Masanja,
Umeliweka hili suala vizuri sana. Binafsi hupenda sana kuangalia kwa undani nia za wenzetu wa magharibi wanapochukua hatua hasa pale matamko yao yanapoonyesha 'nia' ya kutusaidia. Ni mara chache sana haya mataifa makubwa yanafanya mambo bila kuangalia maslahi yao kwanza. Hili la Daffur nalo kama tujuavyo kuwa lina maslahi ya wote, wa magharibi na wa mashariki, kwa hiyo ni muhimu kuwa makini kusoma matamko yao vizuri.

Hata hivyo, kila ninachoangalia cha kumkingia Bashir kwenye hili sikioni maana karibu kila kitu kibaya kinaelekea kuhusishwa na utawala wake. Ushahidi wa wazi tu ndio unaotakiwa kuhitimisha kesi.

Kwa hiyo ingawa ni precedence mbaya kwa Africa, kwani siasa zinaweza kutumiwa kuwatingisha maraisi wa Africa watakaokuwa tofauti na wakuu kwa kuwatisha kuwapeleka ICC, k.m. Mugabe, lakini nafikiri ni vema tu Bashi akawajibika kwa aliyopandikiza. Ninashangaa kwa TZ kuikandia Zim na kumtetea Bashir. Kwa kweli tumeishiwa.

 

[Mtu Mzima]

Every crisis in the African continent can only be solved by outsiders, specifically the West. The Darfur crisis is no different. The solution to the Darfur crisis will not come from the Sudanese government nor from the African Union. The solution will come from the West. Perhaps this indictment of President Bashir is the first step towards that solution, I don't know. But one thing I know for sure is Africans can not solve and are incapable of solving this Darfur crisis. As my good European friend used to say, Africa is a White man's burden. Oh, how true those words were and still are today.

Mimi sipingi mtu yeyote anayesababisha mateso kwa binadamu wenzake asiadhibiwe,ila tatizo hii ICC utendaji wake wa kazi ni sawa TAKURU inavyofanya kazi,ikikutana na rushwa za watu hohehahe inakamata,zikija za akina Vijisenti inaufyta.Kama kweli inatenda haki kwa nini akina Nkunda,Bwana Kichaka na wengine wameua maelfu kwa mamilioni lakini hata kukemea tu hakuna,achilia mbali mashtaka.Juzijuzi tu ndo waliandika-andika kuhusu Guantanamo baada ya kugundulika kuwa baadhi ya waliokuwa wanateswa bila mashtaka wamo raia wao wenyewe,lakini hadi sasa nani amesimama na kutoa karipio kali?.


Mwisho naungana na wachangiaji wengine kuwa ingawa hoja ya ICC ina mantiki lakini sababu halisi si kuwasaidia wasudani bali lengo ni 'Regime change' ili kuondoa ushawishi wa Wachina, ili kudhibiti mafuta vinginevyo hiyo miaka yote waliyowekeza kumfadhili John Garang na Kiir itakuwa ni bure

 

[Sam GM]

Jana sudan imeenda kumlilia Museveni awakingie kifua Bashir asikamatwe, kumbe na wao wanajua joto ya jiwe iko karibu.

 

[Richard]

Wakuu,

Nimefuatilia sana mjadala huu ingawa nimeona angalau nami nitoe dukuduku langu.

Kuna wale wanaosema kwamba hili ni suala la kiafrika na hata wale wanaojaribu kulinganisha masuala ya dini.

Pia wengine wameuliza kama kuna kufanana kwa hayo yanayotokea huko Sudan na kule Afrika Kusini au tu ni simple intelligence kama anavyosema mkuu Mushi.

Mimi nakwenda na masuala ya "intelligence" zaidi katika hili kwa kuangalia msimamo wa wanaojiita jumuia ya kimataifa.

Hii yote ni geo-politics na propaganda za wamarekani dhidi ya utawala wa Khartoum kwa miaka mingi juu ya Darfur.

Utawala wa raisi Bush umekuwa na bado unadai kwamba kuna "genocide". Nazo nchi za magharibi zimekuwa zikisaidia kampeni za mahakama ya kimataifa(ICC) dhidi ya serikali ya Sudan.

Huyu jamaa wa ICC Luis Moreno-Ocampo yeye anatoa madai na ni mpaka pale yatapothibitishwa. Sasa Sudan haimo katika orodha ya nchi ambazo kiongozi wake anaweza kufikishwa huko the Hague. Kwa hio haiwezekani kuingia Sudan na kumkamata Al-Bashir kwani kutazuka songombingo la mwaka.

Wakati huohuo taarifa za kijasusi zinasema kwamba Sudan imekuwa ikiisaidia Marekani kule Iraq kwa shughuli za "intelligence gathering" tena kwa baraka za serikali ya Al-Bashir.

Ukisoma gazeti la Los Angeles Times la mwezi juni mwaka huu, kwenye article ya anonymous writer inadaiwa kwamba CIA wanawatumia "Mukhabarat"-idara ya ujasusi ya Sudan kwa kutafuta taarifa za "insurgency" inchini humo operation ambayo imefanikiwa kwa kiasi kikubwa, hali inyoonesha kwamba nchini Iraq kuna informats wengi wa kutoka Sudan.

Pia inadaiwa kwamba majasusi wa Sudan wamekuwa wakisaidia sana shughuli za kijasusi za nchi za magharibi.

Kwa ujumla kumekuwa na mikutano ya siri kati ya serikali za Sudan na Marekani juu ya kurudi na kufanya kazi pamoja na hasa za kijasusi. Lakini wakati huohuo Sudan kwa kutaka kieleweke inadai marekani iwatoe katika orodha ya nchi zinazofadhili ugaidi duniani.

Sasa pamoja na kwamba Sudan imewakaribisha China, bado Maerkani nao wanahitaji kuwa na msemo katika kila jambo ambalo linatokea nchini humo. Marekani inataka Sudan iruhusu makampuni ya kimarekani ili yaingie nchini humo na yashindane na China kuchimba mafuta.

Kwa sasa mazungumzo bado yanasuasua na marekani inataka kwamba Sudan iruhusu majeshi yasiyo waafrika ili yaingie sehemu ya Darfur, iache kusaidia shughuli za Janjaweed, na iache kusaidia harakati za waasi wa kutoka Chad.

Nayo serikali ya Sudan imejibu kwamba ina haki kama nchi ya kulinda mipaka yake na kwamba marekani iache kufundisha namna ya kufanya kazi hiyo na pia iache kushirikiana na vikundi vya waasi wa Darfur.

Kwa hio wandugu tutizame suala hili kwa mapana na kona nyingi-ukoloni mamboleo, uzandiki na ufisadi wa baadhi ya viongozi wa Afrika, je kwanini China ndio inapewa nafasi na nchi za Afrika kwa sasa na mwisho ni kwanini nchi za magharibi na marekani hazifurahii jambo hili.

 

[Lizy]

Pia kuna wale wanaofikia kuwa mahakama ina double standards, kwa sababu watu kama Bush ndio walitakiwa wafikishwe The Hague kwanza! Swali ni kwamba kwa kumkamata Mr Bashir na kumuacha George Bush mahakama inakuwa fair?

Ni kwa sababu marekani siyo mwanachama/hai-itambui ICC/haikusign mkataba na hiyo mahakama (ICC - The hague). Na Bush ni Mmarekani kama Wamarekani wengine, hawezi kushtakiwa katika hiyo mahakama. Sina hakika nchi ngapi siyo wanachama wa Mahakama hiyo ila nina hakika na Marekani na Nepal hawaitambui/siyo wanachama. So no matter how wakifanya makosa yanayotambuliwa na mahakama hiyo, Mahakama hiyo haina uwezo wa kuwachukulia sheria/kuwashtaki.

Kwa upande wa Sudan kama ilivyo Tanzania na baadhi ya nchi duniani ambao ni wanachama/wanaitambua/wamesign mkataba na ICC, hivyo kupatikana na makosa yanayotambulika na hiyo mahakama ambayo mtu huyo (kama wanavyodai Rais wa Sudan, Mr. Bashir), kutenda hayo makosa anayokabiliwa nayo BAADA ya kujiunga/kuitambua na kukubaliana na vifungu vya Mahakama hiyo, mtu huyo atashtakiwa.

Sina hakika ni kwa nini Marekani na baadhi ya nchi hawataki kusign/kuwa wanachama wa ICC.

 

[Masanja]

Yaani sijawahi kuona viongozi wanafiki kama Afrika yetu. wanalalamika kwamba haya mashtaka yata affect upatikanaji wa amani Sudan, lakini kweli kila mtu akiiangalia nafsi yake, kuna amani yoyote Sudan ambayo inahatarishwa? Iko wapi hiyo amani inayohatarishwa? Tangu 2003 leo ni miaka mitano..raia wanakufa kama nzi na Bashir anaendelea kuwafadhili majanjaweed!

Mi kwanza namsifu huyo Prosecutor wa The Hague...amewatega UN Security Council..walimtuma kazi huko Darfur..sasa wakishindwa kutekeleza sehemu yao ya makubaliano kudeal na Bashir basi hawatakuwa na longo longo tena kutudanganya..., itaexpose unafiki wa mataifa ya magharibi.

Ila inasikitisha kweli kuona waafrika tunaua watu wetu, mpaka mkoloni aliyetutawala aingilie kati.

Harafu na sisi raia ni kama tumesharogwa..hatuoni...mabaya ya watawala wetu ingawa tunaishi kwenye umaskini wa kutupwa.....ndo maana unakuta sisi raia na njaa zetu ndo tunakuwa mstari wa mbele kuandamana kupinga :"ukoloni mambo leo"

Kwa nini, hawa viongozi wetu wanatutumia kama wajinga na hatuhoji chochote? does it mean kweli we are that much stupid? Labda niulize..hivi hata wazungu kabla hawajaendelea..raia wao walikuwa wajinga kama sisi? maana siamini kwamba ni jukumu la serikali tuu, kurekebisha mambo, hata sisi raia tuna mchango wetu muhimu...lakini ni vipi tutaufanikisha huo mchango katika harakati za kujikomboa? Maana naamini hakuna serikali yoyote duniani inayoweza kuwapa haki wananchi wake, bila wananchi kuibana. Only in Africa..haki hatupewi, na bado tunasupport hizo serikali!

 

[Sam GM]

Ni kwa sababu marekani siyo mwanachama/hai-itambui ICC/haikusign mkataba na hiyo mahakama (ICC - The hague). Na Bush ni Mmarekani kama Wamarekani wengine, hawezi kushtakiwa katika hiyo mahakama. Sina hakika nchi ngapi siyo wanachama wa Mahakama hiyo ila nina hakika na Marekani na Nepal hawaitambui/siyo wanachama. So no matter how wakifanya makosa yanayotambuliwa na mahakama hiyo, Mahakama hiyo haina uwezo wa kuwachukulia sheria/kuwashtaki.

Kwa upande wa Sudan kama ilivyo Tanzania na baadhi ya nchi duniani ambao ni wanachama/wanaitambua/wamesign mkataba na ICC, hivyo kupatikana na makosa yanayotambulika na hiyo mahakama ambayo mtu huyo (kama wanavyodai Rais wa Sudan, Mr. Bashir), kutenda hayo makosa anayokabiliwa nayo BAADA ya kujiunga/kuitambua na kukubaliana na vifungu vya Mahakama hiyo, mtu huyo atashtakiwa.

Sina hakika ni kwa nini Marekani na baadhi ya nchi hawataki kusign/kuwa wanachama wa ICC.

Lucy shukrani kwa hizi info, ila juzi nilisikia BBC wanasema kuwa Sudan pia hakusaini mkataba, swali langu ni hili, ukiweka sahihi inakubana kiasi gani, na inawezekana kujitoa ukiamua kama nchi kutoka kwenye hii ICC?

 

[Lizy]

Lucy shukrani kwa hizi info, ila juzi nilisikia BBC wanasema kuwa Sudan pia hakusaini mkataba, swali langu ni hili, ukiweka sahihi inakubana kiasi gani, na inawezekana kujitoa ukiamua kama nchi kutoka kwenye hii ICC?

gm,
Kwa ufahamu wangu mdogo nitakujibu ifuatavyo. Unaposign mkataba ni kwamba umeusoma, ukauelewa na ukaridhia/kubali kwa 100% mkataba huo ikiwa ni pamoja na adhabu zilizotaja kwenye huo mkataba endapo itatokea ukiukwaji wowote (kwenda ndivyo sivyo na mkataba uliosign).

Nchi kujitoa kwenye ICC sina jibu sahihi na naomba nisi comment katika hili kwa sasa, nikipata jibu nitakuletea soon.

Asante

 

[Sam GM]

gm,
Kwa ufahamu wangu mdogo nitakujibu ifuatavyo. Unaposign mkataba ni kwamba umeusoma, ukauelewa na ukaridhia/kubali kwa 100% mkataba huo ikiwa ni pamoja na adhabu zilizotaja kwenye huo mkataba endapo itatokea ukiukwaji wowote (kwenda ndivyo sivyo na mkataba uliosign).

Nchi kujitoa kwenye ICC sina jibu sahihi na naomba nisi comment katika hili kwa sasa, nikipata jibu nitakuletea soon.

Asante

Shukrani Lizy pamoja na kwamba nimekuita Lucy, sijui nilikuwa naota nini hapa, mawenge wenge yangu tu, I sincerely do apologize!!!

 

[Lizy]

Shukrani Lizy pamoja na kwamba nimekuita Lucy, sijui nilikuwa naota nini hapa, mawenge wenge yangu tu, I sincerely do apologize!!!

No worries gm.

 

[The Truth]

Truth,
I think you are wrong about Africans not being able to solve their crisisses. Africans sorted out Burundi conflict, Uganda tyrany, Commoro cessation etc.

It is only when a conflict sabsumes foreign interests that's when it become difficult for Africans to deal with. Daffur, Zimbabwe are the perfect examples.

However, as difficult as it might seem, if we don't end up pessimistic as you , we have enough leverages and capabilities among ourselves that we can use to clear our messes.

Come on, if you believe those conflicts were sorted out by Africans without outside help then you are naive. If you read between the lines you will find outside help just not as obvious sometimes.

 

[Lizy]

Lucy shukrani kwa hizi info, ila juzi nilisikia BBC wanasema kuwa Sudan pia hakusaini mkataba, swali langu ni hili, ukiweka sahihi inakubana kiasi gani, na inawezekana kujitoa ukiamua kama nchi kutoka kwenye hii ICC?

gm,
I agree with BBC kwamba Sudan hakusign mkataba na ICC. ICC member parties, hakuna Sudan as of 01 June 2008. So binafsi nashindwa kuelewa inakuwaje ICC kumfungulia mashtaka Bashir.

As of 1rst June 2008, 106 countries are States Parties to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Out of them 30 are African States, 13 are Asian States, 16 are from Eastern Europe, 22 are from Latin America and the Caribbean, and 25 are from Western Europe and other States.

Countries

A
Afghanistan
Albania
Andorra
Antigua and Barbuda
Argentina
Australia
Austria


B
Barbados
Belgium
Belize
Benin
Bolivia
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Botswana
Brazil
Bulgaria
Burkina Faso
Burundi


C
Cambodia
Canada
Central African Republic
Chad
Colombia
Comoros
Congo
Costa Rica
Croatia
Cyprus


D
Democratic Republic of the Congo
Denmark
Djibouti
Dominica
Dominican Republic


E
Ecuador
Estonia


F
Fiji
Finland
France

G
Gabon
Gambia
Georgia
Germany
Ghana
Greece
Guinea
Guyana


H
Honduras
Hungary


I
Iceland
Ireland
Italy


J
Japan
Jordan


K
Kenya


L
Latvia
Lesotho
Liberia
Liechtenstein
Lithuania
Luxembourg


M
Madagascar
Malawi
Mali
Malta
Marshall Islands
Mauritius
Mexico
Mongolia
Montenegro


N
Namibia
Nauru
Netherlands
New Zealand
Niger
Nigeria
Norway

P
Panama
Paraguay
Peru
Poland
Portugal


R
Republic of Korea
Romania


S
Saint Kitts and Nevis
Saint Vincent and the Grenadines
Samoa
San Marino
Senegal
Serbia
Sierra Leone
Slovakia
Slovenia
South Africa
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland


T
Tajikistan
The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia
Timor-Leste
Trinidad and Tobago


U
Uganda
United Kingdom
United Republic of Tanzania
Uruguay


V
Venezuela


Z
Zambia



Swali lako, "ukiweka sahihi inakubana kiasi gani, na inawezekana kujitoa ukiamua kama nchi kutoka kwenye hii ICC"?

See below article 126 (Entry into force) and Article 127 (Withdraw). Nimepata/nimecopy kutoka Rome statute of the ICC:

Article 126
Entry into force
1. This Statute shall enter into force on the first day of the month after the 60th day
following the date of the deposit of the 60th instrument of ratification, acceptance,
approval or accession with the Secretary-General of the United Nations.
2. For each State ratifying, accepting, approving or acceding to this Statute after the
deposit of the 60th instrument of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession,
the Statute shall enter into force on the first day of the month after the 60th day
following the deposit by such State of its instrument of ratification, acceptance,
approval or accession.

Article 127
Withdrawal
1. A State Party may, by written notification addressed to the Secretary-General of
the United Nations, withdraw from this Statute. The withdrawal shall take effect
one year after the date of receipt of the notification, unless the notification
specifies a later date.


Lizy.

 

[Masanja]

Lizy et al tuwekane sawa kidogo hapa.

Sudan ILISIGN mkataba wa kuanzisha hiyo Mahakama mnamo September 2000 Kitu ambacho Sudan haijafanya Ni KURATIFY huo mkataba. KUNA TOFAUTI KUBWA KATI YA HIVI VITU VIWILI SIGNATURE NA RATIFICATION.

Sudan has signed but has not ratified the Rome Statute establishing the ICC. Kwa kukubali kusign huo mkataba ni kwamba Sudan ilikuwa inakubaliana na malengo ya ICC na ilikuwa ni njia mojawapo ya kuonyesha nia yake ya kuridhia huo mkataba kwa kuupeleka bungeni upitishwe na wabunge. Ndo maana members walioratify mkataba wa ICC ni 106 lakini waliosaini ni 139! Bush hawezi kushatakiwa na ICC, unless kesi yake ipelekwe na UN security Council ambako US wana VETO..HAPO JIBU UNALO...WALE WALIORAFTIFY MKATABA WA ICC (106 COUNTRIES) NDO WANA WAJIBU WA KUSHIRIKIANA NA ICC..KAMA WAKISHINDWA..WANAKUWA REPORTED KWENYE CHOMBO CHA ICC KINAITWA ASSEMBLY OF STATE PARTIES (Kama General Assembly ya UN). Huko ndo wanaweza kuamua kuweka vikwazo...kukunyima haki ya kupiga kura kwenye maamuzi muhimu...au raia wako wasipewe kazi huko..etc..)

Athari za kusaini mkataba tuu bila ku-ratify ni kwamba you can not do anything to defeat the purpose or essence of that treaty. Na hii imo kwenye Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (Art. 18 ...) ambayo Sudan ameridhia. Hivyo basi kwa vile Sudan amesaini huo mkataba wa ICC lakini hajauratify au kuupeleka mbele ya bunge, basi kisheria hana wajibu wa kutoa ushirikiano kwa hiyo mahakama lakini vile vile anawajibika kutofanya jambo lolote la kukwamisha kazi za hiyo mahakama kama upelelezi au jambo lolote lile kama kuwanyima visa investigators wa ICC, kuwazuia mashahidi kuongea na ICC etc.... Ndiyo implication ya signature.

Swali ni vipi Mahakama ya ICC imeingia Sudan? Mkataba wa ICC unaipa mamlaka UN kupitia baraza la USALAMA LA UMOJA WA MATAIFA kuingilia kati kazi za ICC either kusitisha kesi au kupeleka kesi mbele ya hiyo mahakama kama jambo linahatarisha usalama wa dunia (Article 13 and 16 of the ICC Statute). Mfano nchi zote ulimwenguni kwa namna moja au nyingine ni members wa UN kwa hiyo UN ikiona kwamba hali fulani sehemu yoyote ile duniani inatishia usalama wa dunia inaweza kulipeleka jambo hilo mbele ya ICC (ingawa ICC haiwajibiki kukubali..bali itaridhia maombi ya Security Council kama ikiona kweli kuna ushahidi wa kujenga kesi). Kwa sababu ICC ingawa imeanzishwa kwa juhudi za UN..lakini ni independent..UN haina mamlaka yoyote juu yake zaidi ya hivyo vifungu viwili hapo juu.

Kwa hiyo kisheria ICC isingeweza kuingia Sudan, lakini baada ya ile tume ya Koffi Anna iliyoongozwa na Cassese (mwanasheria maarufu wa Italy) kuhusu Darfur, ilishauri Baraza la usalama la umoja wa mataifa litumie mamlaka zake kwenye mkataba wa ICC kuipeleka Sudan mbele ya ICC. USA ilikuwa haitaki (kwa sababu mpaka leo US haitaki kukubali mamlaka ya hiyo mahakama kwa sababu zake). Lakini kwa Vile US ndo ilikuwa nchi ya kwanza kusema kwamba Darfur kuna Genocide mwaka 2004, basi wakaridhia kwa shingo upande Darfur kwenda ICC (Infact US walitaka kesi ya Darfur ianzishiwe mahakama kama ile ya Rwanda pale Arusha, na walikuwa tayari wamejitolea kutoa millions of $$. na walitaka hiyo mahakama iwe Arusha...Ofcourse Europe ndo supporters wa ICC wakakataa..thats the way Darfur ended up in the Hague-as a compromise between Europe and USA.

Sasa je Sudan anawajibu wa kushirikiana na ICC? Kisheria Sudan iko fully responsible kushirikiana na ICC kwa sababu ile kesi ilipelekwa na UN Security Council, infact kila UN member ana wajibu wa kushirikiana na ICC-ndo resolution invyosema..

Je itakuwaje kama Sudan akikataa kushirikiana na mahakama? Well, ICC haina jeshi wala polisi..kwa hiyo itarudi New York pale kwenye UN wawambie waliowapa kazi..kuhusu kukataa kwa Sudan..Security Council..ndo itaamua ichukue hatua gani..kama vikwazo nk...Lakini tukumbuke hili swala liko divisive sana..maana China ana veto na Russia...na wanaitetea Sudan wakati France, Britain na US..wako kambi nyingine..kwa hiyo tusubiri tuone unafiki wa dunia unavyozidi kujionyesha.

Vile vile..UN Security Council, inweza kuamua kupiga kura (inabidi kuwena kura tisa na isiwemo veto hata moja-at any time Security Council ina members 15). Wakipiga kura wanaweza kususpend investigation kwa mwaka mmoja (renewable)..kama kufanya hivyo kutaonekana in the best interests of peace and security of the world. Lakini je inawezekana ukapata P5 wote wakakubaliana kususpend investigations? maana France and Britain ni supporters wa ICC na wameshasema kabisa lazima Bashir aende the Hague. Itakuwa ni jukumu la China na Russia rafiki zake Bashiri kuwaconvince France na Britain kususpend hiyo kesi kwa mwaka mmoja. A mamoth task.

Na tukumbuke kwamba kwa sasa Bashiri mpaka kifo chake ni war criminal. Kwa hiyo hata kama akiamua kuresist, anaweza kuwa arrested hata baada ya miaka ishirini..ameshastaafu yuko uraiani..maana war crimes hazina mda maalumu..ndo maana mpaka leo Nazi collaborators bado wanashtakiwa kwa crime zilizofanywa 50 years ago!

Na kwa nini USA haikubaliani na ICC? well kifupi ni kwa sababu US hana veto kwenye ICC..US walitaka ile mahakama iwe chini ya UN Security Council..yaani UN ndo iamue nani ashtakiwe...na kwa vile US wana veto..basi wangecontrol nani wa kushtakiwa nani wa kuwa huru..kitu ambacho wale wasio na veto kama Germanay, India, nk waligoma kata kata....wakasema we have had enough with the UN...ICC inabidi iwe independent...ndo hivyo mpaka kesho kutwa US haikubaliani na ICC si kwa lingine but simply because it cant influence who is likely to stand in the courtroom!

Anyhow, hii issue ni ngumu, lakini what we can be sure of, sasa hivi Bashiri anatoka jasho maana hakutegemea kwamba ICC ingekuwa na courage ya kudeal na yeye directly.

Maelezo marefu, but I just wanted to share what I know about this court,

Masanja.

 

[Lizy]

Lizy et al tuwekane sawa kidogo hapa.

Sudan ILISIGN mkataba wa kuanzisha hiyo Mahakama mnamo September 2000Kitu ambacho Sudan haijafanya Ni KURATIFY huo mkataba. KUNA TOFAUTI KUBWA KATI YA HIVI VITU VIWILI SIGNATURE NA RATIFICATION.

Sudan has signed but has not ratified the Rome Statute establishing the ICC. Kwa kukubali kusign huo mkataba ni kwamba Sudan ilikuwa inakubaliana na malengo ya ICC na ilikuwa ni njia mojawapo ya kuonyesha nia yake ya kuridhia huo mkataba kwa kuupeleka bungeni upitishwe na wabunge. Ndo maana members walioratify mkataba wa ICC ni 106 lakini waliosaini ni 139! Bush hawezi kushatakiwa na ICC, unless kesi yake ipelekwe na UN security Council ambako US wana VETO..HAPO JIBU UNALO...

Athari za kusaini mkataba tuu bila ku-ratify ni kwamba you can not do anything to defeat the purpose or essence of that treaty. Na hii imo kwenye Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (Art. 18 ...) ambayo Sudan ameridhia. Hivyo basi kwa vile Sudan amesaini huo mkataba wa ICC lakini hajauratify au kuupeleka mbele ya bunge, basi kisheria hana wajibu wa kutoa ushirikiano kwa hiyo mahakama lakini vile vile anawajibika kutofanya jambo lolote la kukwamisha kazi za hiyo mahakama kama upelelezi au jambo lolote lile kama kuwanyima visa investigators wa ICC, kuwazuia mashahidi kuongea na ICC etc.... Ndiyo implication ya signature.

Swali ni vipi Mahakama ya ICC imeingia Sudan? Mkataba wa ICC unaipa mamlaka UN kupitia baraza la USALAMA LA UMOJA WA MATAIFA kuingilia kati kazi za ICC either kusitisha kesi au kupeleka kesi mbele ya hiyo mahakama kama jambo linahatarisha usalama wa dunia (Article 13 and 16 of the ICC Statute). Mfano nchi zote ulimwenguni kwa namna moja au nyingine ni members wa UN kwa hiyo UN ikiona kwamba hali fulani sehemu yoyote ile duniani inatishia usalama wa dunia inaweza kulipeleka jambo hilo mbele ya ICC (ingawa ICC haiwajibiki kukubali..bali itaridhia maombi ya Security Council kama ikiona kweli kuna ushahidi wa kujenga kesi). Kwa sababu ICC ingawa imeanzishwa kwa juhudi za UN..lakini ni independent..UN haina mamlaka yoyote juu yake zaidi ya hivyo vifungu viwili hapo juu.

Kwa hiyo kisheria ICC isingeweza kuingia Sudan, lakini baada ya ile tume ya Koffi Anna iliyoongozwa na Cassese (mwanasheria maarufu wa Italy) kuhusu Darfur, ilishauri Baraza la usalama la umoja wa mataifa litumie mamlaka zake kwenye mkataba wa ICC kuipeleka Sudan mbele ya ICC. USA ilikuwa haitaki (kwa sababu mpaka leo US haitaki kukubali mamlaka ya hiyo mahakama kwa sababu zake). Lakini kwa Vile US ndo ilikuwa nchi ya kwanza kusema kwamba Darfur kuna Genocide mwaka 2004, basi wakaridhia kwa shingo upande Darfur kwenda ICC (Infact US walitaka kesi ya Darfur ianzishiwe mahakama kama ile ya Rwanda pale Arusha, na walikuwa tayari wamejitolea kutoa millions of $$. na walitaka hiyo mahakama iwe Arusha...Ofcourse Europe ndo supporters wa ICC wakakataa..thats the way Darfur ended up in the Hague-as a compromise between Europe and USA.

Sasa je Sudana anawajibu wa kushirikiana na ICC? Kisheria Sudan iko fully responsible kushirikiana na ICC kwa sababu ile kesi ilipelekwa na US Security Council, infact kila UN member ana wajibu wa kushirikiana na ICC-ndo resolution invyosema..

Je itakuwaje kama Sudan akikataa kushirikiana na mahakama? Well, ICC haina jeshi wala polisi..kwa hiyo itarudi New York pale kwenye UN wawambie waliowapa kazi..kuhusu kukataa kwa Sudan..Security Council..ndo itaamua ichukue hatua gani..kama vikwazo nk...Lakini tukumbuke hili swala liko divisive sana..maana China ana veto na Russia...na wanaitetea Sudan wakati France, Britain na US..wako kambi nyingine..kwa hiyo tusubiri tuone unafiki wa dunia unavyozidi kujionyesha.

Vile vile..UN Security Council, inweza kuamua kupiga kura (inabidi kuwena kura tisa na isiwemo veto hata moja-at any time Security Council ina members 15). Wakipiga kura wanaweza kususpend investigation kwa mwaka mmoja (renewable)..kama kufanya hivyo kutaonekana in the best interests of peace and security of the world. Lakini je inawezekana ukapata P5 wote wakakubaliana kususpend investigations? maana France and Britain ni supporters wa ICC na wameshasema kabisa lazima Bashir aende the Hague. Itakuwa ni jukumu la China na Russia rafiki zake Bashiri kuwaconvince France na Britain kususpend hiyo kesi kwa mwaka mmoja. A mamoth task.

Na tukumbuke kwamba kwa sasa Bashiri mpaka kifo chake ni war criminal. Kwa hiyo hata kama akiamua kuresist, anaweza kuwa arrested hata baada ya miaka ishirini..ameshastaafu yuko uraiani..maana war crimes hazina mda maalumu..ndo maana mpaka leo Nazi collaborators bado wanashtakiwa kwa crime zilizofanywa 50 years ago!

Na kwa nini USA haikubaliani na ICC? well kifupi ni kwa sababu US hana veto kwenye ICC..US walitaka ile mahakama iwe chini ya UN Security Council..yaani UN ndo iamue nani ashtakiwe...na kwa vile US wana veto..basi wangecontrol nani wa kushtakiwa nani wa kuwa huru..kitu ambacho wale wasio na veto kama Germanay, India, nk waligoma kata kata....wakasema we have had enough with the UN...ICC inabidi iwe independent...ndo hivyo mpaka kesho kutwa US haikubaliani na ICC si kwa lingine but simply because it cant influence who is likely to stand in the courtroom!

Anyhow, hii issue ni ngumu, lakini what we can be sure of, sasa hivi Bashiri anatoka jasho maana hakutegemea kwamba ICC ingekuwa na courage ya kudeal na yeye directly.

Maelezo marefu, but I just wanted to share what I know about this court,

Masanja.

Thanks Masanja.

Nimesoma wakara wako nimeelewa na imenisaidia kwani I was a little bit lost. Sikuwa najua Sudan ilisign lini mkataba (though I knew a person can not be prosecuted by ICC unless his/her country is a member state).

Once again, asante kwa maelezo.

Swali moja kama hutajali, vipi kuhusu Zimbabwe? Simuoni katika nchi zilizoorodheshwa as of 01 June 2008, kesi yake ni kama Sudan (signed ila hajaratify) ama yeye hata hakusign kabisa? I mean, what is Zimbabwe's kwa ICC?

Lizy

 

[Masanja]

Zimbabwe ni kama Sudan walisign lakini hawaja ratify. Kwa hiyo ni UN Security Council peke yake inaweza kuipeleka Zimbabwe mbele ya ICC.

Lakini kama nilivyoelezea awali. China na Russia ndo wanawalinda madikteta wetu kwa sasa (ofcourse zamani walilindwa na hawa "watakatifu" wa leo kama US na wenzake)..sijui kama inawezekana Security Council ikakubaliana kwa kauli moja kuipekela Zim kule The Hague. maana najua kabisa China na Russia wata veto hiyo resolution.

Ila mfano Uganda..kwa sababu yeye ni full member wa ICC...anawajibika kushirikiana na ICC, na kama ICC hairidhiki na ushirikiano wake..wataireport Uganda kwenye kikao cha Assembly of State Parties...kinachofanyika mara mbili kwa mwaka nadhani...

Na kitu cha kushangaza hii mahakama, imeshabikiwa sana na nchi zinazoendelea kama Africa (so far tuna full members 30! wa ICC including Kenya!), Asia na LATIN AMERICA KULIKO MATAIFA MAKUBWA kama US, China, Russia, India..etc....Kwa sababu ya ile feeling kwamba ICC itatusaidia kudeal na madikteta wetu tulionao.

Ndo maana argument za kina Bashir kwamba hii ni tricky ya US kumtoa madarakani..wale tulio na uelewa wetu mdogo tunaona ni maneno ya mfa maji...maana US yenyewe haiikubali ICC...Ila what I can say..miaka ishirini ijayo..kama ICC itacheza karata zake vyema..inaweza badilisha mwelekeo wa Kibaki na Mugabe wa leo tulio nao Africa.

Masanja,

 

[Lizy]

Masanja,

Thanks again. As you said, baada ya miaka kadhaa, kuwepo kwa ICC kutasaidia kwa namna moja ama nyingine.

Kitu kimoja kinanichanganya, mbali na kuwepo kwa ICC The-Hague, pia kuna ICJ (huko huko The-Hague), swali langu ni kama ilikuwepo ICJ, then kulikuwa na umuhimu gani kuanzisha mahakama ingine? I mean, kwa nini ICJ isingedeal na hizi issue ambazo ICC imeanzishwa kudeal nazo as ICJ was there before ICC?

Lizy

 

[Atanaye]

Nimefurahi tu-na Mwendesha Mashitaka!- Hii itaweza kuleta vuta ni-kuvute ya U es of A na Xinhua! Hatima yake yaweza kubadilisha maadili ya Uongozi usoni!