African states urged to reaffirm support for international justice

In a letter to Foreign Ministers of African states parties to the International Criminal Court (ICC), more than 30 African civil society organizations and international organizations with a presence in Africa urged African states parties to the ICC to reaffirm support for international justice. The letter, signed by 34 organizations, was written ahead of the 18th Ordinary Session of the Assembly of the African Union (AU), which ends on 30 January 2012.

The letter to Foreign Ministers of African states parties to the ICC came less than a week after the Executive Director of Human Rights Watch, Kenneth Roth, said during the launching of the organization's World Report 2012 in Cairo, that the AU was founded to promote democracy but has acted in the last year as if it is a "dictators' support club" that backs authoritarians and ignores the democratic interests of the people. It is hard to disagree with this assertion.

The AU consists of Heads of States who cling to power through controversial elections and constitutional amendments that tamper with presidential term limits. President Abdoulaye Wade of Senegal, for instance, recently amended the Constitution so as to be eligible to run for (re-)election. This is similar to what happened in Cameroon in 2008 - when President Paul Biya's government eliminated presidential term limits from the Constitution.

With more similarities than differences, such Heads of States are bound to support each other, even if it means turning a blind eye on blatant rights violations or providing safe haven for ousted dictators and their cronies.

Besides failing to take a tough stance against dictators during the "Arab Spring", African states failed to protect the rights of Sub-Saharan Africans who were systematically targeted in Libya during pro-democracy demonstrations in 2011 on accusations of working as mercenaries for the Gaddafi regime. During the conflict, Sub-Saharan Africans in Libya were considered a vulnerable group in desperate need of evacuation, but they were abandoned by their governments and the AU. Many African states turned a blind eye on human rights and democratic interests in Libya, and were preoccupied with blaming western democracies for interfering in the "internal affairs" of Libya.

The ICC is committed to ending impunity for international crimes such as crimes committed in Libya during the 2011 revolution that toppled a 42-year-old regime. African governments should support the ICC and do more to protect the interests of victims of rights violations and oppression, not the interests of dictators and perpetrators of crimes under the jurisdiction of the court.

Impunity for grave crimes is not an option. Perpetrators of crimes under the jurisdiction of the ICC should be brought to justice at the Hague - especially in cases where a fair trial is not guaranteed in a national court.

Share

Tweet

Egypt: Don't forget Khaled Mohammed Said

Photo: We're all Khaled Said Facebook page.

A 28-year-old Egyptian - Khaled Mohammed Said, allegedly brutalised to death by Egyptian police in June is yet to be forgotten.

The death of Khaled Mohammed Said, on 6 June 2010, sparked widespread protests in Egypt, with thousands of Egyptians demanding justice for Khaled Said, and an end to police brutality. Surprisingly (because there's reportedly a culture of impunity for police brutality in Egypt), two police officers were arrested and charged in relation to Khaled Said's death. This, no doubt, is good news. The arrests were celebrated as a milestone in Egypt and abroad.

The bad news is that a postponed trial of the policemen in question, originally scheduled for 25 September 2010, was further postponed to 23 October 2010.

Despite the postponement and delays, rights activists and police brutality protesters are undeterred. Many have urged rights advocates worldwide not to forget Khaled Mohammed Said (even if the trial is postponed for a few years) because justice for Said would mean a great blow to what has been described as "systematic torture" in Egypt.

Amnesty International recently released a video demanding justice for Khaled Mohammed Said, as well as an end to torture in Egypt. WATCH...



According to Human Rights Now, the 25 September trial was marred by protests and police intimidation.

Khaled Mohammed Said is clearly not forgotten. People of conscience in Egypt and abroad have fought a good fight so far, and continue to fight to secure justice for Khaled, and end police brutality in Egypt.

It remains to be seen whether justice would be served.

Share

Tweet

Michael Anthony Green: Wrongful Conviction for Rape in Texas

I'm a jurist. But, with due respect for the law, sometimes I wonder whether some court verdicts represent justice or mere courtroom victories. The case of the wrongful conviction of Texas man - Michael Anthony Green for rape leaves me with no doubt that a good number of court verdicts, are arguably mere courtroom victories.

Michael A. Green, now 44 years old, is an African American male who was wrongfully convicted of rape, and spent 27 years of his life in jail, for a crime he did not commit.

Today, while reading the story of Michael A. Green, it dawned on me that this could happen to anyone. You could be wrongfully accused and wrongfully convicted by a well-constituted court for a crime you did not commit, especially in the U.S criminal justice system where the law allows victims of crime to identify suspects in a lineup or photographs. According to Innocence Project, most of the 258 wrongful convictions in the U.S. stem from flaws in the the justice system like misidentification. Michael A. Green is one of the many innocent people convicted by a flawed criminal justice system.

In 1983, Michael A. Green was arrested and wrongfully convicted by a well-constituted court for abducting and raping a white girl. Pictures of suspects were shown to the victim and behold - she identified an innocent man - Michael A. Green - as one of her four attackers in a lineup of suspects.

Following the misidentification, Michael A. Green refused to plead guilty and was sentenced to 75 years behind bars.

After spending 27 years in prison, Michael A. Green was released a few weeks ago after DNA testing exonerated him. It is worth mentioning that the DNA testing was in line with a law passed in 2001 in Texas - granting convicts the right to request DNA tests to prove innocence.

Michael A. Green was exonerated of rape and walked out of jail a free man on 30 July 2010, but many innocent people are still behind bars.

What are your thoughts? Did the conviction of Michael A. Green represent justice for the victim or a mere courtroom victory?

Many innocent men and women are victims of courtroom victories and remind incarcerated in jails all around the world for crimes they did not commit. Reviewing cases to prove innocence is worthwhile in the administration of justice. More importantly, the process of identifying suspects in lineups or mug shots should be reviewed. Commonsense tell you that victims of rape are more often than not traumatised, and in the quest for justice, could pick a wrong person as the assailant.

Read more about the circumstances surrounding the wrongful conviction of Michael Anthony Green for rape in Texas, here.

Share

Tweet

Jungle Justice in Cameroon

In Cameroon, it is not uncommon to see a criminal striped naked - mercilessly pounded with sticks, stones, metals, et cetera - bleeding profusely and set ablaze by an angry crowd. This is "jungle justice."

"Jungle law" applies to criminals of all ranks - from pick pockets to armed robbers and murderers. Many "criminals" have even been killed for attempted thievery. Civil offenders also face jungle justice in Cameroon. I vividly remember the case of an exiled traditional ruler - Vugah Simon II of Kedjom Keku, a village in the North West Province, who was beaten to death and set ablaze. What was his crime? He was accused of selling village farmlands and destroying the tradition of the village he once ruled.

In Cameroon, it is common to see jungle law applied in the presence of police officers - many of whom are either in favor of the practice or are powerless in the face of an angry crowd. In many instances, jungle justice is served to "suspects" - long before the police arrive on the crime scene. There have been shocking instances where criminals in police or gendarme custody have been seized by an angry crowd and beaten to death.

WATCH a shocking video footage of the application of jungle justice in the economic capital of Cameroon - Douala ...



What law sanctioned the above case? Who was the judge? Who was the defence counsel?

Is Cameroon a lawless state where angry citizens take the law into their own hands and sentence criminals to death on the streets?

Proponents of jungle justice have attempted to justify this inhumane practice. Many argue that the police force is corrupt and criminals bribe their way out. No doubt, it is true that the police force is corrupt but does this justify carnage and barbarism?

The government of Cameroon has failed - and continues to fail - in its [legal] obligation to protect victims of jungle justice. The Preamble of the Constitution of the Republic states that all accused persons are entitled to the rights of defence and are innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. It also provides that every person has the right to humane treatment under all circumstances. It is worth mentioning that the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the African Charter on Human and Peoples Rights are incorporated into the Constitution.

Cameroon is party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and other international conventions that prohibit torture, cruel or degrading treatment and uphold the right to life. Article 6(1) of the ICCPR guarantees every individual's "inherent right to life". This article stipulates that no one shall be arbitrarily deprived of life and that the right to life shall be protected by law. Article 7 provides that no one shall be subjected to cruel, inhuman, degrading treatment or punishment.

The state must fulfill its obligation under international and national law to protect and promote civil and constitutional rights of all individuals. To achieve this, the state should move quickly to put an end to such abysmal violation of rights.

Citizens of Cameroon seem to be unaware of the fact that they, as citizens of a democratic state, have a constitutional duty to respect the rights of other people. It is not uncommon to hear citizens complain about violation of their rights. What about the rights of others?

Many people mistakenly think that criminals do not have rights. The truth is all natural persons have rights by virtue of being human and every individual has a duty to respect the rights of others.

Jungle justice is unlawful, inhumane and a violation of constitutional and fundamental rights of countless victims. The government of Cameroon should end impunity and hold perpetrators of jungle justice accountable.

*Photos courtesy - AfricaNews.com and abantu.blogspot.com

Share

Tweet