The Darfur criminal trial begins in The Hague

They were known as Janjaweed, an armed militia mounted on camels and horses in the morning to speedily kill and rape, burn hut and destroy another village in Darfur, southwest of Sudan. General Chat Chat Lounge

Their leader, Ali Kashib, stood for his ruthless campaign in a government-led campaign to crush the 2003 uprising in Darfur.

On Tuesday, a defendant by the name went to trial in the International Criminal Court in The Hague, where he is charged with 32 counts of war crimes and crimes against humanity, including cruelty, robbery, murder and rape. Denotes the

Mr Kasheib is the first accused in a bloody campaign to play a leading role in the bloody campaign that took more than 200,000 lives and displaced more than two million people from their homes.

His lawyer said the court was wrong.

But prosecutors say they have evidence that the person at trial is the one who was charged with the crime of more than 300 murders in 2007 and the exodus of 40,000 citizens in 2003 and 2004. The people of Malaysia were under his command and there was a connection between them and the Sudanese government in the country’s capital, Khartoum.

The arrest of Mr Kashib in 2020 surprises the prosecutor. The court said he surrendered to local authorities in a harassed section of the Central African Republic, where he had settled there after leading a violent pirate group.

It is unclear whether Mr Kashib was aware that the United States had offered a reward for his arrest. But questions remain as to why – or what – he has to turn himself.

Others, high-level actors in the oppressive Darfur campaign, are required by the court, most notably Sudan’s former military ruler, Omar Hassan al-Bashir, and two of his senior colleagues, including his defense minister. All three have been charged with crimes against humanity, war crimes and genocide.

Mr al-Bashir always warranted his arrest warrant, arguing that the International Criminal Court, which he called a racial proxy for the West, had no authority over him or Sudan, and he insisted on all African countries He can take it back. Mr Albashir’s three decades in office ended in 2019, raising expectations that he may be sent to The Hague for trial. But those hopes have been shattered when the latest military coup brought back members of the Old Guard last October.

The blood bath in Darfur in the early 2000’s shocked the world. Hard news coverage sparked sympathy and created the international movement Save Darfur. Few people may have known where Darfur is, but action groups have spread pictures of thousands of black Darfurs who have been ousted by the Sudan government and its Arab militia groups, apparently overthrowing several insurgent groups. Intend to do.

A UN commission found that both the government and the rebels were guilty of atrocities, but said that government troops bombed villages with planes and helicopters and that they led a widespread violence, committing crimes. ” No less serious and brutal. From the breed.

In 2005, the United Nations Security Council, led by a public protest, for the first time, asked the International Criminal Court to launch a criminal investigation, and the court issued arrest warrants.

But no arrests had been made at that time.

Some lawyers and human rights activists have welcomed the case, even after several years and dealt with only one suspect.

“Ever since the atrocities started in Darfur, there has been almost no waiver, and in some cases alleged abusers have even been rewarded,” said Alice Kepler, an associate director of Human Rights Watch. Abuse continues to this day in Darfur, no doubt because there is no accountability.

But The Kashib case defines the boundaries of the International Criminal Court. For all its purposes, the founding powers have given the Permanent Court limited powers whose mandate is to seek the worst crimes against humanity, war crimes, genocide, and aggression.

The court relies on the political will and cooperation of the government to allow serious investigations, which require access to the archives and police and public records, and sometimes to work frantic in prisons and cemeteries. And the court doesn’t have the police to enforce his arrest warrant.

Karim Khan, who served as the court’s chief prosecutor last year, joined his predecessor in signing the Security Council to send the Sudan case to court 17 years ago, without the help of any political force or financial support. جي. The investigation in Darfur stopped some eight years ago when a prosecutor said all possible access to Sudan was blocked.

Still, lawyers familiar with the Kashib case contend that this could lead to a conviction because the defendant alleged that he was present in the area where and when the killings took place and that the investigators were seeking refuge in the Sudanese refugees. The camp had access to hundreds of victims. The border in the key. The indictment against Mr Kashib states that he “personally participated in attacks against citizens in at least four cities”.

Experts say, however, that it would be difficult for the former president, Mr. Al-Bashir, and his two top lieutenants to link all the points needed to hold them accountable for their suspected crimes, because of such prosecution, especially on a large scale. Distance from the oppressors, usually requires documents, orders, testimony from inside, intervention and other evidence that can be difficult and time consuming.

Even if Mr. Al-Bashir and his former lieutenant would arrive in court unexpectedly, it would take time for them to go to trial because their cases were stopped.

Mr Kahn, the prosecutor, told the United Nations Security Council in January that he was satisfied with the case against Mr Kashib.

“I think the evidence, especially against Mr al-Bashir and Mr Hussein, needs to be strengthened,” he said.

Leave a Comment