PARLIAMENTARY DEBATE REGARDING PRESIDENT AL-BASHIR
18 June 2015
The Office of the Chief Whip of the ANC, has noted the decision of the Speaker of the National Assembly to schedule a snap debate on matters relating to the attendance of the Republic of Sudan President, Omar al-Bashir, at the just ended 25th Summit of the African Union (AU) Heads of State and Government in Johannesburg.
The session will provide parties represented in Parliament with an opportunity to express their views on a matter that has exercised the collective mind of the nation and hopefully enrich our understanding of the complexities and nuances that attach to the practice of international relations and of South Africa’s position and leadership role on the African Continent in particular.
Without pre-empting the debate, we wish briefly to cite some issues which have relevance to the debate. In the first place, it should be recalled that:
(i) President Bashir visited South Africa on the invitation of the AU to fulfil his duties as one of the Heads of State and Government of the AU member states; and,
(ii) In accordance with the Diplomatic Immunities and Privileges Amendment Act 35 of 2008, and in line with our obligations entailed in hosting the Summit, on June 5, the Minister of International Relations and Cooperation, Ms Maite Nkoana-Mashabane, published a gazette granting immunity to all official delegates: diplomats and Heads of State and Government, including President Bashir, attending the AU Summit.
No political party or organ of civil society contested the gazette. It is worth stating and emphasising that the practice of granting immunities to diplomats and Heads of State and Government is not uniquely South African. It is standard international practice between states as well as inter and intra-governmental organisations. Indeed, it is essential for the functioning of inter-governmental organisations and the convening of meetings in particular.
The issues raised by the visit of President Bashir have legal dimensions, but it should not be forgotten that they are also intensely political. South Africa must therefore navigate a path through all the dimensions of our international relations.
In addition to issues of a technical legal nature, it is also important to note and appreciate Sudan’s current political reality and the role that South Africa and the AU are playing to assist the sister people of Sudan in resolving their political challenges.
In this respect, we note that having successfully conducted a referendum in January 2011 which led to the independence of South Sudan in July 9 of that year, the Republic of Sudan is currently engaged in a painstaking and sometimes fluctuating process of negotiations to end the wars in Darfur, South Kordofan and Blue Nile States.
Sudan’s crises are not just legal, but manifest the primary contradiction of the untransformed structure of colonial social relations – the centre-periphery divide, and the failure to manage diversity. It is a challenge that applies to most of post-colonial Africa and has been a conflict-producing factor for many decades across our Continent. South Africa’s response to Sudan reflects this understanding. Our own armed forces serve under UNAMID in Darfur, precisely because we understand the need to make a contribution at all levels, including in the protection of civilians, to resolve the challenges Sudan faces.
Because of their understanding of their domestic challenges, the Sudanese have, on their own, agreed to convene a CODESA-type ‘National Dialogue’ consisting of all political and civil society players to discuss: (a) the ending of armed conflicts; (b) democratising the country; (c) revitalising the economy; (d) Sudanese national identity; and, (e) Sudan’s relations with the rest of the world.
The AU and South Africa have been following and encouraging these important developments. There is no doubt that President Bashir is acknowledged as an important player in his country’s search for lasting political solutions today, just as he was in the emergence of the new state of South Sudan. These considerations weigh on the African Union, and by necessity on South Africa in its engagements with Sudan and its Head of State.
It will be wholly misconceived to suggest that our government has lost perspective on serious crimes. Our fresh scars from the apartheid crime against humanity, perpetuated for decades against our people, mean that the ANC requires no lessons to appreciate the seriousness of what happened in Darfur or has taken place elsewhere in the world.
Today’s post-apartheid South Africa continues to transform along a path chosen by South Africans themselves in painstaking negotiations and deliberations. The logic of Sudan’s internal National Dialogue and other processes,implies that, just as with South Africa in 1994, the question of accountability, justice and national reconciliation for Sudan, must be dealt with fully in a national context, with the Sudanese deciding on their own future.
Contrary to the ‘single issue narrative’ that is being so dramatically propagated in the public domain, the practice of international relations does not lend itself to dichotomies of devils and angels. If this were the case, the world would be a wholly different place. We must deal with our world as we find it, not as we wish it to be, and there is a genuine debate to be had in our increasingly fractious and complex world, about how best to advance the cause of accountability, peace and security globally.
For its part, the ANC will continue to work with the sister people of Sudan, striving to help them to resolve their political challenges, respecting their sovereignty as we must, as well as the painstaking efforts of the AU which has extended the solidarity that it was founded to provide to all African countries. It will also continue to seek realistic solutions to global challenges including the phenomenon of intractable conflicts.
In the meantime, we look forward to the debate in Parliament.
Statement issued by the Office of the ANC Chief Whip, June 18 2015
