Abstract
The pursuit of international criminal justice in Africa through the International Criminal Court (ICC) platform has not been without hitches. There is a rift between the African Union (AU), as a continental body, and the ICC owing to the AU’s perception that the ICC is pursuing selective justice and the AU’s misgivings about the ICC’s indictment/trial of some sitting heads of states in Africa. This article argues that the claim of selective justice cannot be dismissed because it undermines the regime of international criminal justice. The indictment/trial of serving heads of states also has serious constitutional and political implications for the countries involved, but this has been ignored in the literature. Further, the hitches arise both from the failure of the ICC to pay attention to the domestic contexts in order to harmonize its operations in the places of its interventions and from the inherent weakness of the ICC as a criminal justice system. The ICC, on its part, insists that any consideration given to the domestic contexts of its operations would undermine it. Yet the ICC’s interventions in Africa have had serious political, legal and social implications for the communities involved, jeopardizing the peaceful equilibrium in some cases. This should not be ignored. Using the law to stop and prevent international crimes in African societies would require a concerted effort by all concerned to harmonize the demand for justice with the imperatives on the ground.
Highlights
The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC) recognizes “that dur‐ ing this century millions of children, women and men have been victims of unim‐ aginable atrocities that deeply shock the conscience of humanity” owing to armed conflicts
The pursuit of international criminal justice in Africa through the International Criminal Court (ICC) platform has not been without hitches
There is a rift between the African Union (AU), as a continental body, and the ICC owing to the AU’s perception that the ICC is pursuing selective justice and the AU’s misgivings about the ICC’s indictment /trial of some sitting heads of states in Africa
Summary
The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC) recognizes “that dur‐ ing this century millions of children, women and men have been victims of unim‐ aginable atrocities that deeply shock the conscience of humanity” owing to armed conflicts. Supporters of the ICC and in particular those in favour of the indictment of the Sudanese president maintained that the ICC’s intervention is a right step towards the realization of human dignity, addressing impunity, facili‐ tating democracy and peace, and for ensuring justice for the victims.[14] That the indictment will serve as a deterrence against future abuses and prevent further killings.[15] Against this background, this article argues that aside from the refusal or fail‐ ure of the AU and some African States Parties to cooperate with the ICC, part of the problem is due to the failure of the ICC to pay attention to the local contexts in order to harmonize its operations in the places of its intervention. In terms of its organization, the article discusses the impasse that the inter‐ ventions have created, analyses the domestic contexts of the ICC’s interventions and their implications and draws conclusions and makes recommendations
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
