Is Africa Turning Its Back on the International Criminal Court?

On wednesday, Gambia withdrawn from the International Criminal Court (ICC) — along with Burundi and South Africa . This further established the practical irrelevance of the court. The countries are the first three signatory members to begin the process to formally leave the institution, which has long struggled to enforce its actions. That the countries are all pulling out of the ICC at the same time is not surprising and can be attributed to several factors.

1. There is the general perception that the institution is an imperialist tool of the West to pursue its interests. Moreover, African leaders are more likely to face prosecution by the court than leaders in other regions.
2. Even those countries unlikely to be targeted are hesitant to support its actions for fear of disrupting regional economic and political ties.

That Burundi and Gambia would opt to withdraw from the ICC should come as no surprise: Both are the target of ICC actions. Burundian President Pierre Nkurunziza forcing his way into an unconstitutional third term in July 2015, his government cracked down, widespread allegations of human rights abuses, including torture, have provoked international sanctions against Burundi along with regional diplomatic efforts to prevent more bloodshed.

Gambia has also come under international scrutiny for its human rights abuses. Those deemed dissidents in the tiny West African country are routinely arrested and subjected to arbitrary detention, and often much worse. Gambia has a history of taking symbolic stands against international organizations. The country in 2013, pulled out of the Commonwealth of Nations  on the grounds that it was a neocolonial institution. It is making similar claims this time. Gambian leaders may one day be vulnerable to ICC prosecution regardless of membership status, but by leaving the organization, they are able to take a symbolic stand against a court that they feel unduly targets African leaders while ignoring African input.

Lastly, South Africa has other reasons. Its government which is completely different to Burundi's and Gambia's, is a maturing multiparty democracy that generally upholds human rights. Thus, South Africa's government exit from the ICC is much more significant. According to South African leaders, two factors influenced the decision.

1. The ICC's jurisdiction clashes with South Africa's commitment to respect the immunity afforded to African heads of state.
2. Membership in the international body at times conflicted with the country's goal to promote peace and stability on the African continent.

So many episodes demonstrated the ICC's impotence to actually enforce its demands without the support of national governments. This is the ICC's biggest weakness: its total reliance on national governments for enforcement. The common factor in the departure of all three countries is the underlying perception that the ICC is an outside institution imposing its will on African nations without their input, perpetuating a history of Western intervention and African oppression.

Given the inherent weaknesses of the African states, African leaders and citizens have become the most likely to be tried by the ICC. 

Furthermore, the types of crimes the ICC was created to combat are much more likely to occur in Africa than they are in other continents. And since 2002, these crimes and charges have been reoccurring in the continent. Beyond any reasonable doubt, there is also a history of African rulers clinging to power for long periods of time and several leaders have pushed to extend their mandates recently. This has caused significant social unrest and violence in some African countries, giving the ICC an opportunity to investigate abuses. So why won't Africa be the focus of the court? Consequently, African leaders as Kagame will be even more opposed to the ICC.

Someone wrote, " the turn against the ICC by some African states is intuitive, but it will not necessarily "weaken" the already feeble institution. Instead, it merely exposes the problems inherent in the court's enforcement mechanism and the animosity that it has engendered across the African continent."