 |
| Former child soldiers in DRC (c) L Rose |
Following
the commotion of the Kony
2012 campaign, much of the UK media seem oddly unconcerned that
the International
Criminal Court (ICC) has found Thomas Lubanga, a major protagonist in
the conflict in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), guilty of
using child soldiers.
Next
month, Charles
Taylor is due to find out whether he is guilty of the charges
brought against him. Taylor's case has been heard at the Special
Court for Sierra Leone (SCSL) in The Hague. Like cases held at the
ICC, this case has taken place in a geographical space far removed
from the sphere where crimes were carried out, and where the victims
continue to live.
I
was in Sierra Leone when Taylor was first arrested and transferred to
Freetown. I have also attended and reported on one of the trials (Sam
Hinga Norman) held at SCSL. My own perspective is that at the
local level, justice meted out in this way does not work.
Many
in Freetown expressed their public support for Norman. Despite the
fact that there is a strong relationship, and a lot of goodwill,
between Sierra Leone and the UK, even though the UK was instrumental
in pursuing charges against all accused of war crimes, people argued
that Norman was a hero.
For
them, still shell-shocked at the brutalities waged during the
previous decade, he had helped save (the soul of) Sierra Leone. In
other words, they believed that Norman was a bringer of justice. That
Western powers prosecuted him only divided the notions of Western and
African justice.
The
Foundation
for Law, Justice and Society produced a series of essays on
international justice and Africa written between 2008-2010. In his
essay, 'International Criminal Justice and Non-Western Cultures', Tim
Kelsall alerts us to the following anthropological quirks:
...It is difficult for most of us to imagine how unnerving international trials must be for many African witnesses, who find themselves miles from home, in a courtroom of extraordinary grandeur, confronted with robed judges and lawyers who speak a foreign language, and who subject them to highly unusual communicative practices including frequently hostile cross-examination. It is no wonder that getting clear testimony in such circumstances has often proved difficult (Cryer 2007), a problem compounded in contexts, not uncommon in Africa, where secrecy is prized as a high social ideal...
A
project of the Open Society Justice Initiative, The
Trial of Charles Taylor defendant offers further evidence of the
problems that the international justice system faces, judging by the
comments in several recent posts:
What do these ppl care about SL ppl anyways? Look at the volume of ignorance they’ve shown for human rights in other countries! (TJ, 09/03/2012)
We were told Iraq had WEAPON OF MASS DESTRUCTION……who has been brought to JUSTICE for such MASS KILLINGS??? (Noko4, 10/03/2012)
It is regrettable to be aware of the fact that Mr Taylor was charge for the Sierra Leon civil war that kill thousands and cause thousands to lost body parts that was carry out by the sierra Leoners themselves and Mr Taylor was never charge for the brutal killing of Liberians and the destruction that were carry out by Mr Taylor and his forces in Liberia...Liberia need justice we do not want Taylor back in Liberia. (Samuel King, 03/03/2012)
The
final comment reveals a paradox. On the one hand, the site is
supposed to engage and include Sierra Leoneans in a discussion of the
war as another means of achieving justice, yet it is Liberian voices
that dominate, lamenting their own lack of access to international
justice.
Add to
that, the fact that the vast majority of Sierra Leoneans do not have
access to the web, and those that do receive a cumbersome service,
and it is not a surprise that many of those posting comments seem to
live elsewhere (mainly the U.S.A.).
 |
| A daily news chalkboard in Liberia (c) Lt. Col. Terry VandenDolder |
Although
attempts have been made to reach out to those most affected, the
international justice system still relies too heavily on Westernised
ideas. In his analysis of the success and failures of the SCSL,
Alpha Seesay recognises that Sierra Leonean victims were too far
removed from the process; as well as bring geographically distant,
the court had problems streaming the trial and it made no funds
available for an outreach programme.
The
ICC has been criticised
as imperialist
by various African governments. Several comments on The
Trial of Charles Taylor defendant
also refer to the iniquitous manner in which indictments and
prosecutions only seem applicable to African leaders.
Whilst
some locals may see the the ICC, and the reasons behind it, as a
force for good, they are also frustrated
at a lack of transparency as to whose justice is sought and why it
does not include everyone. In places like Liberia, where traditional
media outlets reach more people in more meaningful ways than the
internet, potentially, this can do serious damage to an international
justice system regardless of any outreach programme.
The
U.S.A., the world's foremost human rights advocate, is not a member
of the ICC. Most significantly, it threatens
military action against the ICC if any of its citizens are
brought before the court. This incompatible approach to human rights
undermines the international criminal justice system.
Just
as Okechukwu Oko posits in 'The
Limits of Prosecutions', I believe that whilst prosecuting some
African leaders might bring about some accountability, any form of
international justice system needs to take into account the social,
political and cultural norms that prevail across Africa. This should
apply equally to leaders from the Americas, Asia or Eastern Europe.
Without
doing so, the current international criminal justice system will fail
to deliver justice to those affected by war crimes and crimes against
humanity.
