No fairness in SA’s hasty ICC decision

The upside of being a citizen of this polyglot rainbow nation is an inherent pride in our very South African-ness; the downside is that we tend to ignore the fact that we are a small – and in the eyes of the world, fairly insignificant – country perched on the bottom end of Africa.

In simple language, a country with a gross national product smaller than Texas would do well to follow the example led by other nations and without reverting to bowing and scraping to the established world powers, or adopting a lickspittle acceptance of what these powers believe, work towards coexistence, rather than confrontation.

Such is surely the case with the South African government’s decision to withdraw from the International Criminal Court (ICC). Many observers have typified this as a kneejerk reaction after facing criticism for ignoring a court order to arrest Sudanese President Omar Hassan al-Bashir – accused of genocide and war crimes in Darfur – when he visited the country in June 2015 for an African Union meeting. He was prohibited from leaving the country while a court decided whether he should be handed over to the ICC for war crimes but, nevertheless, was allowed to leave South Africa soon afterward.

It is this which sparked the document pulling this country out of the Rome Accord, signed by Minister of International Relations and Cooperation Maite Nkoana-Mashabane, dated last October 19.

“The Republic of South Africa has found that its obligations with respect to the peaceful resolution of conflicts at times are incompatible with the interpretation given by the International Criminal Court,” according to the document, smacking like: “You’re not playing fair and I’m taking my ball and going home”.

But, according to the UN, this has now been revoked under a South African court order, with Minister of Justice and Correctional Services Michael Masutha left to explain.

For more news your way, follow The Citizen on Facebook and Twitter.