South African prosecutors drop case against Zuma/Beshir personality cult grips Khartoum

PRETORIA, South Africa – Prosecutors dropped their corruption case Monday against Jacob Zuma, clearing the way for him to become South Africa's next president but leaving behind questions that could haunt the next government.
Zuma, a colorful character and well-known champion of the poor, is the presidential candidate for the governing African National Congress in April 22 elections. He is almost certain to win given the party's dominance.
Hundreds of Zuma supporters reveled in the streets after prosecutors said they would not pursue — now or in the future — accusations Zuma accepted bribes to thwart an investigation into wrongdoing by a French arms company involved in a massive weapons deal in the late 1990s.
But prosecutors said the withdrawal had nothing to do with Zuma's guilt or innocence. They claimed to have a strong case, and said it was withdrawn because of prosecutorial misconduct. They noted that others could file civil cases, an option that may be pursued by opposition parties who decried Monday's announcement.
Zuma did not comment Monday, but scheduled a news conference for Tuesday in Durban, where he was to appear in court for the charges to be formally dropped.
Reactions to the decision highlighted the issues that remain as the country's fledgling democracy attempts to move forward.
Gwede Mantashe, the ANC's secretary general, called Monday's decision "a victory for the rule of law, decency and common sense," and told reporters that Zuma should now be seen as free of suspicion.
"There are no allegations" against Zuma, Mantashe said at ANC headquarters. "They have been withdrawn this morning by the people who laid the charges."
The presidential candidate for COPE, a recently formed political party that broke away from the ANC, countered saying prosecutors should have gone forward with the case.
"We still have not heard about the merits or the demerits of the case against Mr. Zuma. The South African people want to know: Is he innocent or is he guilty?" COPE's Mvume Dandala said.
Mokotedi Mpshe, acting director of public prosecutions, said Monday that key prosecutors had abused their powers by trying to time the announcement of charges against the 66-year-old former guerrilla leader to a key ANC conference in late 2007, presumably to undermine his bid to become party president.
Zuma won the leadership race at that conference, and two days later Mpshe said he had enough evidence to try Zuma. On Monday, Mpshe said he had been unaware in 2007 of attempts to manipulate the case.
"An intolerable abuse of process has occurred which requires discontinuation of the prosecution," Mpshe said at a packed news conference that was broadcast live nationwide.
Mpshe's decision came after Zuma's legal team brought him taped phone conversations between prosecutors discussing the announcement timing. It was unclear how Zuma's team obtained the recordings, but Mpshe said prosecutors determined they were authentic.
Even before Monday's decision, the accusations that Zuma had taken a $55,600 (500,000-rand) bribe to protect a French arms company had not appeared to hurt Zuma among his base — impoverished black South Africans who embrace him as a man they believe understands their struggle.
Support was not even affected by rape charges in 2006, which ended in Zuma's acquittal. In that case, he outraged AIDS activists by testifying that he had unprotected, consensual sex with the HIV-positive woman and then took a shower in the belief that it would protect him from the virus.
Monday's news was greeted with an outpouring of joy and Zuma supporters danced through the streets of downtown Johannesburg, while car horns blared and whistles shrieked. Hundreds waved ANC flags in a downtown square, dancing and singing "Bring Me My Machine Gun," the anti-apartheid song that has become Zuma's trademark.
"I'm very happy for the decision, hoping that this gives our president what he needs for us to go forward," said Victress Iwabi, an ANC town councilor. "I think under Zuma people will have decent work, free and quality education, quality health care for all. And we are going to defeat crime."
Former President Thabo Mbeki fired Zuma as his deputy because of the corruption scandal, but Zuma bounced back. The Zuma-led ANC forced Mbeki to resign as national president last September.
Prosecutors said Monday they had found no evidence Mbeki was behind the attempt to manipulate the Zuma case. But Zuma allies called for an investigation into the former president's possible involvement. Mbeki had no comment, spokesman Mukoni Ratshitanga said.
Adam Habib, a political analyst at the University of Johannesburg, called on Zuma to "come clean with the nation" about the corruption case.
"If he does not, not only does he taint the image of his own administration, but the image of his country as well," Habib said.
Neren Rau, chief executive of the South African Chamber of Commerce and Industry, said investors needed to have confidence in the rule of law in South Africa, and for that the prosecutors' office "must be perceived as independent, above reproach and free of the perception that it offers political solutions."

Reply:

Zuma is a typical African Politician. He is a Murderer, has murdered entire families, He's a Rapist, and is a ruthless mobster.

How can we have someone like Jacob Zuma run a country, if he has been in court for crimnal cases. If this was anyother country, they wouldn't have a leader like this. This just shows us is that you can get away with crime.

Bashir personality cult grips Khartoum

KHARTOUM (AFP) – Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir beams from billboards, T-shirts and baseball caps as pictures of the defiant African leader wanted for war crimes in Darfur mushroom across Khartoum.
Once rare portraits of the soldier who grabbed power in a bloodless coup 20 years ago have sprouted in the capital since March 4, the day the International Criminal Court issued a warrant for his arrest.
Giant posters showing the 65-year-old leader of Africa's largest country clad in full military regalia can now be seen everywhere since the court accused him of war crimes and crimes against humanity in war-torn Darfur.
And with general and presidential elections due in February 2010, it appears that Bashir has finally succumbed to the traditional temptation of presidential iconography as he bids for political survival.
Since early last month, Bashir has been on the warpath to rally support against the ICC warrant -- the first ever to target a sitting head of state.
He has delivered fiery speeches, made multiple television appearances, gone on trips to the four corners of Sudan and also travelled abroad several times in clear defiance of the international court.
Pictures of the president accompanied by the slogan "All with you, Bashir" are distributed at rallies to which ordinary citizens and supporters of his National Congress Party (NCP) are bused in.
Bashir, who often punctuates his speeches by jabbing the air with his trademark walking stick and doing a little dance, has addressed Darfuris, soldiers, tribal chiefs and even donned a traditional feathered headpiece of Southern Sudanese chiefs.
He began this furious pace more akin to that of a campaigning candidate even before Sudan formally announced on April 2 that it will stage its first general election in 24 years next February.
The elections, which will see Sudanese vote for both their president and the national assembly, will be crucial to Beshir's political future.
"The electoral process starts this April and will finish in February 2010," Abdullah Ahmed Abdullah, deputy head of the electoral commission, told AFP.
Under the 2005 Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) which ended Sudan's decades-long civil war between north and south, the elections should have taken place this year. But they were postponed over delays in census results.
"The president is not campaigning for the next elections. What you see is a response to the decision by the ICC," Mandoor al-Mahdi, NCP political secretary, told AFP.
"But the ICC has created a situation which has made the president more popular... and we feel that the conditions are more favourable than before" for his re-election, Mahdi added.
A defiant Bashir recently even went as far as "thanking" the ICC for accusing him, since the court's move enabled him to bolster his support base.
Sudan does not recognise the ICC and refuses to hand over its citizens, but this policy could change under a new government.
"They (the NCP) would like a quick election and a quick victory" in order to cement Beshir's position after the ICC decision, said one Western diplomat who asked to remain anonymous.
But he also added that despite mass rallies in support of the president, "they would have to cheat to win the elections."
The last general election in April 1986 saw a victory for the Umma party of Sadiq al-Mehdi, whose three-year-old democratically elected government was overthrown in the 1989 coup that brought Beshir to power.
Beshir secured 87 percent of the votes in the 2000 presidential election, which were considered a farce by opposition parties despite promises by the president of "free elections."
In next year's polls, the Sudanese people will also vote for the head of the semi-autonomous south, the South Sudanese parliament and local governors.
Holding the vote in Darfur where a deadly conflict has raged since 2003 will take a great deal of "political will" amid great insecurity, according to a study published last month by the United States Institute of Peace.
The ICC accuses Beshir of criminal responsibility for "exterminating, raping and forcibly transferring large numbers of civilians" in Darfur, where the United Nations says the conflict has cost 300,000 lives.
Sudan puts the death toll from the six-year war at 10,000.
Sudan analyst Alex de Waal has described Beshir, who joined the military at a young age, as "intensely proud."
"When he feels humiliated, he is prone to angry outbursts marked by extreme rhetorical excess. His language becomes replete with exhortations to avenge insult and betrayal, and crush the cowards and traitors."

Reply:

What can I say that I haven't already????

What Exactly Does Michael Kleinman Think We Should Do About Darfur?
by Kevin Jon Heller
Two genocide bloggers at Change.org, Michelle F. and Michael Bear Kleinman, have been engaged for the past couple of weeks in an impassioned debate over the ICC’s arrest warrant for Bashir. (See here and here, for the most recent installments.) Michelle, though certainly not unaware of its dangers, supports the warrant. Kleinman opposes it, blaming the ICC — like many ICC critics — for Bashir’s decision to expel humanitarian aid agencies from Darfur.
The debate ratcheted up a few notches in the past few days, following Kleiman’s particularly nasty attack on Nicholas Kristof for having the temerity to suggest, in an editorial in the New York Times last Wednesday, that Obama should pressure the Chinese to stop selling weapons to the Sudanese government and might even consider destroying a Sudanese military aircraft on the ground the next time the government violates the UN ban on offensive military flights (read: bombings) over Darfur. Kleinman’s post, entitled “Ground Control to Nicholas Kristof” accused Kristof of writing like Jack Handey (of Saturday Night Live fame, soon of the US Senate) and claimed that he “just doesn’t get it.”
Michelle finally had enough of Kleinman’s constant criticism (which included an equally nasty attack on the anti-genocide group ENOUGH). So she issued the following challenge:
Ok, then, what would you have us do? Nothing? You either shoot down or disregard every option presented without coming up with an alternative of your own — and you assume that no one is fleshing out the list of hypothetical consequences for any particular action, but that’s all it is: An assumption. And speaking from the perspective of someone who works on the issues everyday, I can tell you, with authority, that it’s a baseless one.
Kleinman’s response is illuminating. Would he have us do nothing? Actually, yes:
I think the US, the UK and France should work with the Arab League, the AU and China to broker a deal - the Security Council suspends the International Criminal Court’s arrest warrant for Bashir, and Sudan allows the expelled aid agencies to resume work.
That’s it. That is Kleinman’s “solution.”
In the short term, of course, deferring the warrant would be better for a significant number of Darfuris. No one, not even the most fervent defender of the ICC, denies that there are immediate costs — very real, very human costs — to the arrest warrant. But what about in the long-term? As one of the contributors to Alex de Waal’s blog Making Sense of Darfur pointed out yesterday, the massive amount of humanitarian aid poured into Darfur over the past three decades may have alleviated suffering, but it has done nothing to eliminate that suffering’s root causes:
The first impulse of the media and international community has been to focus on the urgent need for aid to continue. But I think many people should consider why aid needs to continue so desperately, despite years of work and billions of dollars invested. How can it be that after 28 years of being there (as one organisation proudly states), 2.2 million people are dependent on international aid agencies for basic needs? For me, this is the real tragedy.
We know, of course, what has caused the suffering of millions of Darfuris for the past 20 years: Bashir’s murderous government. Bashir has never seriously negotiated peace — not even when he knew that an arrest warrant was a very real possibility. Michelle again:
Bashir had over SEVEN MONTHS to show the international community that he was committed to peace, but as he went on an international media charm campaign to push for a suspension of the ICC investigation, he was busy escalating violence in Darfur — from attacking IDP camps to violating his own ceasefire two days after it was announced. This is not a man known for sticking to his word. Even more, the conflict was escalating and the humanitarian situation was deteriorating even before the ICC drama began in July, with no apparent opening for any kind of way out, messy or otherwise.
This recent history explains why Kleinman’s response to Michelle’s question was a non-answer: she was asking him to explain his long-term solution for Darfur, not his short-term solution. And his response was… silence.
That is an unacceptable position for someone who so savagely criticizes anyone who dares support the arrest warrant. Does Kleinman really believe that this time — unlike all the others — Bashir will pursue peace and help the Darfuris if the international community leaves him alone? If so, he should say so openly. But if not — if he doesn’t believe that doing nothing is enough — I think it behooves him to (1) tell us what actions the international community should take instead of pursuing Bashir’s arrest, and (2) explain to us why those actions will be more likely to influence Bashir’s behavior.
I would be very curious to see Kleinman’s answers, especially to the second question. Suggesting that the international community do nothing seems hopelessly naive to me — equivalent to Charlie Brown’s unwavering belief that one day Lucy will stop pulling the football away, to borrow a metaphor from Becky Tinsley, the director of Waging Peace, a human-rights group — but at least it has the virtue of consistency. The same cannot be said, however, of any more aggressive solution. If the international community gives in to Bashir’s blackmail over the arrest warrant because of (understandable) humanitarian concerns, why would Bashir ever take seriously any other threat? All he would have to do is threaten to expel the humanitarian aid agencies again for the chorus to start anew: “keeping the aid flowing is more important than neutralizing or eliminating the regime that makes the aid necessary.” Bashir remains in power, the aid keeps flowing, and nothing ever gets better — it just doesn’t get any worse. Maybe that is enough for Kleinman. It’s not enough for me.
In his attack on Kristof, Kleinman wrote that “what’s delusional — if not dishonest — is the refusal to admit that perhaps [the arrest warrant] wouldn’t work.” I would suggest that what is equally delusional, if not equally dishonest, is for Kleinman to refuse to admit that doing nothing won’t work, either.

Relpy to both Michelle and Michale's blogs.

Great points made Michelle. I agree!!!! We can't sit by and shoot down every idea. We can't wait for someone who is known for lies to stick to his word. We can't not stop making suggestions on what to do. We can NOT give up. Also, I agree that this should have been done a LONG time ago. It makes me sad that people want to just give up and walk away. These people need us more now then ever. Things may look endless right now but we will see things change if we stick together and fight together. I for one will not give up.
Posted by Andrea Mckeeby on 03/06/2009 @ 07:45PM PST

Michelle,

Thanks for this -- will post a response later today, in more detail, but you're right; simply carping from the sidelines isn't particularly constructive. So, my suggestion, bow to Bashir's demands and suspend the prosecution. And yes, I do understand the consequences, but right now I think resuming aid is far more important. Michael

Posted by Michael Bear Kleinman on 03/08/2009 @ 12:38PM PST

Michael, So your suggestion is to "bow to Bashir's demands and suspend the prosecution"? How might I ask will this do any good at all? He's very well known for not keeping his word over and over. What's to say he will if they do "bow to his wishes"? Very unlikely that he would allow Aid Workers back and then where are we???? Worse then ever. So I have to ask is it a matter of either don't do anything at all or do what he wants and hope he keeps his word? Now I have to point to Michelle's blog " If we give Bashir what he wants --- a suspension of the ICC indictment --- what makes you so sure that he will suddenly become more cooperative? Bashir had over SEVEN MONTHS to show the international community that he was committed to peace, but as he went on an international media charm campaign to push for a suspension of the ICC investigation, he was busy escalating violence in Darfur --- from attacking IDP camps to violating his own ceasefire two days after it was announced. This is not a man known for sticking to his word. Even more, the conflict was escalating and the humanitarian situation was deteriorating even before the ICC drama began in July, with no apparent opening for any kind of way out, messy or otherwise".To think he would do otherwise is naive. If we don't remove him now things are going to get far worse (if possible). I personally don't see any other way.
Posted by Andrea Mckeeby on 03/08/2009 @ 07:15PM PST

Andrea and others,Excellent points - I think we're in a situation of weighing and deciding between the least-bad option. For my full response to Michelle, see:http://humanitarianrelief.change.org/blog/view/ahem_-_ground_control_to_michael_kleinmanBest,Michael
Posted by Michael Bear Kleinman on 03/09/2009 @ 09:16AM PST

My latest reply to Michael Post:

As you put it "consequences":
1. But doesn't this mean Bashir wins?
If you want to see it that way, yes.(Hasn't he already and has been for years? He's like a spoiled child. What do you do with a child that is having a temper tantrum? Give them what they want? I don't think so.)
2. But doesn't this undermine - perhaps fatally undermine - the ICC, and make it that much harder to deter genocidaires in the future?
Perhaps. Certainly a possibility.(Not only possible but a guaranty. Let one do this you will let all. Whole new can of worms. Undermining the ICC is the same as saying ok never mind we didn't want you to look into this. The ICC is here for a reason.)3. Why do you think that Bashir would even honor such an agreement? After all, he is a war criminal - not a group noted for keeping their word.
Tough one. A risk I'm willing to take.(So your willing to take a risk that means no Aid, no support, no hopes? We all know what Bashir is and that he's never kept his word. Why would you think he would now? How can you justify willing to take a risk?
"You can't have your cake and eat it, too. "(Is this not what your saying we should give Bashir?) Peace and justice don't always move hand-in-hand.Sometimes you have to make a choice as to which is most important, at least in terms of deciding what to do next.Try looking at this from the other side. What outcome do you want. Work your way back the the problem and see what ideas might just be possible. Sometime when we look at things as overwhelming, scary or feel hopeless its best to step back and look outside of the "box". For me giving into the mad mans fits and actions of (yes I will say it ) Genocide!!!! There is not a chance I'd believe he'd ever allow Aid back in even if we said pretty please with a cherry on-top. While everyone sits around thinking of what to do things grow worse each hour there. We need to act now and not tiptoe around his feelings.
Posted by Andrea Mckeeby on 03/09/2009 @ 08:01PM PST

Court issues war crimes warrant for Sudan's Bashir

Court issues war crimes warrant for Sudan's Bashir

THE HAGUE, Netherlands – The International Criminal Court issued an arrest warrant Wednesday for Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir on charges of war crimes and crimes against humanity in Darfur. He is the first sitting head of state the court has ordered arrested.
Al-Bashir's government denounced the warrant as part of a Western conspiracy aimed at destabilizing the vast oil-rich nation south of Egypt. The U.N. said Sudan had ordered the expulsion of six to 10 humanitarian groups from Darfur including Oxfam, Solidarities and Mercy Corps, and seized assets.
U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon called the move a "serious setback to lifesaving operations in Darfur."
Prosecutor Luis Moreno Ocampo had accused Sudanese troops and the janjaweed Arab militia they support of murdering civilians and preying on them in refugee camps. He said the militia also waged a campaign of rape to drive women into the desert, where they die of starvation.
But the three-judge panel in The Hague said there was insufficient evidence to support charges of genocide in a war in which up to 300,000 people have died and 2.7 million have fled their homes.
"He is suspected of being criminally responsible ... for intentionally directing attacks against an important part of the civilian population of Darfur, Sudan, murdering, exterminating, raping, torturing and forcibly transferring large numbers of civilians, and pillaging their property," court spokeswoman Laurence Blairon said. If al-Bashir is brought to trial and prosecuted, he faces a maximum sentence of life imprisonment.
Blairon rejected accusations that the warrant was part of a political plot and said the decision was made purely on legal grounds.
But African and Arab nations fear the warrant will destabilize the whole region, bring even more conflict in Darfur and threaten the fragile peace deal that ended decades of civil war between northern and southern Sudan. China, which buys two-thirds of Sudan's oil, supports the African and Arab positions.
Some African nations reportedly threatened to pull out of the court in retaliation for a warrant. Thirty African countries are among the court's 108 member states.
In a show of defiance Tuesday in anticipation of the decision, al-Bashir told supporters at a rally, "We are telling them to immerse it in water and drink it," a common Arabic insult meant to show extreme disrespect.
Hundreds of Sudanese waving pictures of the president and denouncing the court quickly turned out in a rally at the Cabinet building in Khartoum. Security was increased around many embassies, and some diplomats and aid workers stayed home amid fears of retaliation against Westerners.
The U.N., which has a joint peacekeeping mission in Darfur with the African Union, will continue to deal with al-Bashir, U.N. spokeswoman Michele Montas said at U.N. headquarters in New York.
"President al-Bashir is the head of state of Sudan, and United Nations officials will continue to deal with president al-Bashir when they need to do so," Montas said.
Al-Bashir denies the war crimes accusations and refuses to deal with the court. Sudan does not recognize its jurisdiction and refuses to arrest suspects and there is currently no international mechanism to arrest al-Bashir. The main tool the court has is diplomatic pressure for countries to hand over suspects.
U.N. peacekeepers and other international agencies operating in Sudan have no mandate to implement the warrant, and Sudanese officials have warned them not to go outside their mandates.
The United States is not a member of the international court, but Susan Rice, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, told The Associated Press, that "the United States supports the ICC action to hold accountable those who are responsible for the heinous crimes in Darfur."
"Those who committed atrocities in Sudan, including genocide, should be brought to justice," she said.
The EU welcomed the court's decision to issue an arrest warrant for al-Bashir and urged Khartoum to cooperate "fully and provide any necessary assistance to the Court."
Ocampo suggested al-Bashir could be arrested if he flies out of Sudan.
"As soon as Mr. al-Bashir travels in international airspace, his plane could be intercepted and he could be arrested. That is what I expect," the prosecutor said.
"Like Slobodan Milosevic or Charles Taylor, Omar al-Bashir's destiny is to face justice," Moreno Ocampo said referring to the former presidents of Yugoslavia and Liberia who were indicted while in office and ended up on trial in The Hague.
Asked why judges, in a 2-1 split decision, did not issue the warrant for genocide, Blairon explained that genocide requires a clear intent to destroy in part or as a whole a specific group.
"In this particular case, the pretrial chamber has not been able to find there were reasonable grounds to establish a genocidal intent," she said.
She said prosecutors could ask again for genocide charges to be added to the warrant if they can produce new evidence. Prosecutor Luis Moreno Ocampo said he would study the ruling before deciding whether to keep pursuing genocide charges.
The war in Sudan's western Darfur region began in 2003, when rebel ethnic African groups, complaining of discrimination and neglect, took up arms against the Arab-dominated government in Khartoum. In 2005, the U.N. Security Council asked Moreno Ocampo to investigate crimes in Darfur.
"With this arrest warrant, the International Criminal Court has made Omar al-Bashir a wanted man," said Richard Dicker, director of the International Justice Program at Human Rights Watch. "Not even presidents are guaranteed a free pass for horrific crimes. By ruling there is a case for President al-Bashir to answer for the horrors of Darfur, the warrant breaks through Khartoum's repeated denials of his responsibility."
The Rome statute that set up the International Criminal Court allows the Security Council to vote to defer or suspend for a year the investigation or prosecution of a case. It also gives the council authority to renew such a resolution.
The 52-member countries of the African Union and 26 states of the Arab League make up about a third of U.N. member states and they have said they would call for such a suspension.
But the council is sharply divided on suspending the case and is unlikely to take any action.

I'll say it again but in more detail:

Somewhat it gives me hope that things will be changing but only time will tell. I'm glad that the ICC and the U.N. has taken steps to establish what they deem to be going on even if it's war crimes and crimes against humanity ( better known as Genocide but deemed to hard to prove ) but it's one thing to talk the talk and another to walk the walk. With other countries turning their backs on what is happening in Darfur we have to make sure we hold the US,UN and ICC accountable for what it has promised and not allow them just to give him a slap on the hand. I truly hope that this is a start to the end of the nightmare these poor people have been living.

Truth be told there has never been a leader that has still been in power that has had these charges brought against him. With a mass of support from peoples this is a matter that will most likely see more terror before he's taken down and even when/if we do detain him the people that stood behind him are still going to rage war and terror. It maybe a start to an end but its far from over. My hope is that we haven't hit a hornets nest with a stone. The backlash could be far worse. "Al-Bashir denies the war crimes accusations and refuses to deal with the court. Sudan does not recognize its jurisdiction and refuses to arrest suspects and there is currently no international mechanism to arrest al-Bashir. The main tool the court has is diplomatic pressure for countries to hand over suspects".

It is a double edge sword here. These people (Darfur) need to see peace and an end to what has happened that never should have been. The fact it took so long to finally do something has made this much worse seeing as how his power got much stronger and his following larger. They are already starting to show that they won't give up power easily. Only time will tell what will happen next. I am glad however that Darfur is being heard now!!!!