Keir Starmer MP, Labour’s Shadow Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union, commenting on the Government’s announcement that they will publish a White Paper, said:
“This is a significant and welcome U-turn from the Prime Minister.
“Labour has repeatedly called for the Government to publish a plan for Brexit before Article 50 is triggered and we made clear Labour would table amendments on this to the Article 50 Bill.
“This U-turn comes just 24 hours after David Davis seemed to rule out a White Paper, and failed to answer repeated questions from MPs on all sides of the House.
“The Prime Minister now needs to confirm that this White Paper will be published in time to inform the Article 50 process, and that it will clear up the inconsistencies, gaps and risks outlined in her speech.”
I am sure today that Yes Minister is fitting as the quotes in Parliament and the previous uttering words of Boris Johnson about free-movement that counter all the work of the Brexiteers during campaigning for the cause. The work that we’re to pretend that the separation from the continent would be peaceful and jolly; but the Brexiteers didn’t know and the Tories still doesn’t know.
Therefore I begin with this a re-cap of TV in 1981:
“Sir Humphrey Appleby: Well, Minister, I’m afraid that is the penalty we have to pay for trying to pretend that we’re Europeans. Believe me, I fully understand your hostility to Europe.
James Hacker: I’m not like you, Humphrey. I’m pro-Europe, I’m just anti-Brussels. I sometimes think you’re anti-Europe and pro-Brussels” (Yes Minister – ‘The Devil You Know (#2.5)” (1981).
Today the Brexit-Minister Hon. Davis Davis uttered these wonderful words in Parliament:
“The simple answer we have given to this before is, and it’s very important because there is a distinction between picking off an individual policy and setting out a major criteria, and the major criteria here is that we get the best possible access for goods and services to the European market. If that is included in what you are talking about then of course we would consider it.” (Watts, 2016).
So the ones leaving is now changing terms, they want to set standards that opens the market. While still being outside the Union, so the Brexiteers wants now to get the full benefit while being outside. This doesn’t fit with the hazardous statements from Martin Schulz and Jean-Claude Juncker who has said their peace about an easy transition!
Certainly the European Union wants to make an example of the United Kingdom and their markets; they have to pay dearly to be part of it, while wanting to secure their borders and movement. Now, the Davis Davis wants its simplified.
Irish Central Bank sees this already:
“He said the Central Bank’s workforce planning for next year reflects the additional resource needed to deal with applications and contingency has been built in as it is expected that the financial sector will grow materially” (…) “Mr Roux told reporters after the Dublin event today that the Central Bank was seeing applications for new business and the licensing of firms who are not present here” (…) “He also said it was seeing very significant indications from “regulated firms that are small today but want to be big tomorrow” (…) “We see the whole gamut of firms enquiring for establishing or growing in Ireland, it is MIFID (markets in financial instruments directive) firms, insurance companies, CSDs (central securities depositories) and payments institutions,” he added” (Rte, 2016).
So when businesses are looking towards Dublin, which is in EU and already part of the European Single Market; the London based firms might move to Dublin to secure their profit-lines and such. Even the Central Bank of Ireland is seeing this. This must really hurt the Brexiteers who fought well, but didn’t think of the implications. Davis Davis sees this now and wants to be able to go out of being EU Member State, but still being part of EU Single Market.
That is really the Norwegian EFTA model, but they will have hard time and pay lots of funds to get what they have now and would also betray the democratic values of majority vote that wanted a true separation, which this isn’t. Then the Tories will do the same trick as the Norwegian Government did to their public, when they signed the EFTA and made agreements to join the EU Single Market, but not having the EU Member State privileges. Something the United Kingdom is losing with triggering the Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty.
This is so special and so weird. That Hon. Davis Davis are acting and flip-flopping like this. Surely the warning from Ofcom must say something as well:
“Chief executive Sharon White said that the industries her organisation oversees are “inextricably European” and could be badly hit if they are not taken into consideration when arranging the UK’s exit for the EU” (…) “Making Brexit a success matters for communications – because these services are fundamental to our lives,” she told the Institute for Government in London” (…) “She said: “The country of origin rule is a good example of an EU law that benefits member states and supports broadcasters – providing a mass audience, and promoting cultural exchange by transcending borders” (…) “But keeping this principle after Brexit will demand constructive discussions with European neighbours. Country of origin cannot endure merely by virtue of existing in UK law.” (Sky News, 2016).
So with this the broadcasters like Ofcom and Central Bank of Ireland sees the implications of the Brexit with their bare eyes. The indications are not put in light of joy and positive future, as the Irish might get more business, this means that corporations moving to Dublin instead London, because of the safety of EU Single Market that the Hon. Davis Davis wish to keep and pay Brussels, but if the EU will accept it is mere speculation.
The Tories government has decides as the Prime Minister Theresa May has to make decisions that makes the Brexit successful. But early November 2016 a leaked memo showed that the government hadn’t done due diligence or check and balance for the industries. Which is evident with the corporations planning to move and Ofcom are sceptic to the Brexit itself.
Therefore the reactions to the Brexit will continue to come for businesses and for the Parliament; the House of Commons would surely be a bit shocked by the proposition from the Brexit Minister. We all are, not like Irish paying for Welsh roads, but still spectacular thinking about how the Brexit Campaign celebrated the idea of total freedom from EU. Now they want the perks, as long as the EU accepts the fixed payments for the entry to the Single Market. Peace.
Rte – ‘Central Bank not seeking to dissuade UK financial firms from moving to Ireland – Roux’ (01.12.2016) link: http://www.rte.ie/news/business/2016/1201/835805-central-bank-says-not-dissuading-brexit-moves/
Sky News – ‘Ofcom boss warns of Brexit impact on UK communications sector’ (01.12.2016) link: http://news.sky.com/story/ofcom-boss-warns-of-brexit-impact-on-uk-communications-sector-10679371
Watts, Joe – ‘Brexit: David Davis says UK Government could pay money to EU for single market access’ (01.12.2016) link: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-single-market-access-david-davis-eu-money-uk-a7449416.html
“Ukip has asked the Welsh government to seek EU funding from the Irish government to help upgrade a motorway between London and south Wales. The M4 motorway is the main artery between the main cities of Wales and the rest of the UK – but it also carries a large amount of Irish goods exported and sold there. Ukip assembly member David Rowlands made the appeal to the Welsh National Assembly this afternoon. He says that Irish exporters also rely on the M4 to transport goods to other EU countries on the continent – and told TheJournal.ie that it is “quite a reasonable idea to explore”: http://jrnl.ie/3109404” (TheJournal.ie, 2016)
There is clearly a need in the aftermath of Brexit for there to be a degree of reassurance given to Africa that Brexit doesn’t mean that the United Kingdom is going to turn its back on Africa.
ADDIS ABABA, Ethiopia, November 29, 2016 -Brexit does not mean that the British government will turn its back on Africa, Lord Paul Boateng, a Member of the United Kingdom’s House of Lords said Monday.
Speaking at the first ever Africa Trade Forum which is being hosted by the Economic Commission for Africa and the African Union, Mr. Boateng said Brexit presents Africa and the UK with an opportunity to “put development at the heart of our trading relationship with Africa in a way frankly that it has not always been in relation to the EPAs, let’s be frank about it”.
“The UK recognizes that and we will seek every opportunity to minimize the disruption in our trading relationship and take every opportunity to seize this chance to re-fashion the relationship between the UK and Africa in terms of trade so intra-African trade becomes an opportunity which we can seize together,” he said.
Contributing to debate on Africa-E.U. Economic and Trade Cooperation and Brexit implications for Africa, Mr. Boateng assured participants, including African Ministers of Trade, Finance and Transportation as well as senior government officials, heads of Regional Economic Communities (RECs), African CEOs and executives, representatives of international development agencies, civil society and others, that trade relations between the UK and Africa will not be affected following Brexit.
“There is clearly a need in the aftermath of Brexit for there to be a degree of reassurance given to Africa that Brexit doesn’t mean that the United Kingdom is going to turn its back on Africa and I’m able to assure you that right across the political divide in the UK, in both Houses, Africa and the UK’s historic link with Africa remains central to our thinking,” he said.
“Yes there’s uncertainty at this time, that is inevitable, when such a momentous decision is made,” SAID Mr. Boateng.
“Yes there is a hazard always when you think about the scale of the task that lies ahead in terms of mapping out the future of the trading relationship between the UK and Africa but I think I can give the absolute assurance that we see this in the UK as an opportunity to be seized.”
He said he was concerned by the issue of infrastructure in most African countries. Mr. Boateng was born and brought up in the Gold Coast in Ghana.
“I am the grandson of cocoa and cassava farmers. My grandmother grew cassava, my grandfather grew cocoa and when I look at our village in Tafo in the eastern region of Ghana, two things strike me, first of all, that in the 1950s there was a direct rail link between Tafo, a heart of cocoa growing region and Takoradi, which at that time was our main port,” he told participants.
“That rail link no longer exists and that has had a damaging effect on agriculture in Ghana but Ghana is not alone in seeing the deterioration of its infrastructure so the United Kingdom recognizes the importance of infrastructure in terms of promoting intra-African trade.”
“The second matter which I can’t but help notice, he said, is that right next door to my grandmother’s farm was a West African Cocoa Research Institute and that was a major resource for West Africa in terms of agricultural support and extension and research at the highest level so it produced every year a handful of PhDs now sadly due to decades of neglect and the impact of the structural adjustment of the 70s and the 80s, that emphasis on higher education and the link between higher education, science, technology and innovation and agriculture simply went now we are seeking to revisit that but I would argue that that too is a very important part of our struggle in order to increase agricultural productivity of Africa.”
“Without that we are going to be in difficulties but the good news is it seems to me that is changing and the UK and our department of international development is making its contribution to that,” Mr. Boateng said.
Participants will be in Addis Ababa for the week attending the first ever Africa Trade Week, a multi-stakeholder platform for the advancement of the Continental Free Trade Area (CFTA). And intra-African Trade.
Its days after and just two weeks after leaked Memo that said how little plans the Conservative Party or Tories Government had. So this report is a answer to that. Like the certain quote of the memo:
“The divisions within the Cabinet are between the three Brexiteers on one side and Philip Hammond/Greg Clark on the other side. The Prime Minister is rapidly acquiring the reputation of drawing in decisions and details to settle matters herself – which is unlikely to be sustainable. Overall, it appears best to judge who is winning the debate by assuming that the noisiest individuals have lost the intra-Government debate and are stirring up external supporters” (Sky News, 2016).
When the matter comes into the light like this; it’s fruitful to see that the major Opposition Party have now showed alternative path or at-least thought things through where they have propositions to a counter-party that doesn’t care for fulfilling their mandate and exercising the vote of the people.
Theresa May, was voted into the Parliament to be MP and not a PM. Therefore she might forget how to get the popular vote and get consensus. Here is one set of ideas and suggestions to how to make amends of the Brexit. This is worth listening to and also reading to get ideas of how to fix the problems of the European Union and the United Kingdom. Take a look!
“So what should be done? Brexit offers British policy-makers the opportunity to step back and examine the future direction of infrastructure and housing policy. The Autumn Statement should be used signal a change in direction towards an economic strategy which uses infrastructure and housing policy as a tool to boost growth and productivity in regions that have suffered a lack of investment” (Moving On, P: 12, 2016). “Ignore this problem and it is clear that unity in our divided country will be even further away. Accept the challenge, take steps to rebalance investment, and the United Kingdom has half a chance at sticking together“ (Moving On, P: 14, 2016).
“First, he should do all that he can to stimulate investment in innovation. Coming up with new ideas, products and services which the rest of the world wants to buy is the best way we can remain internationally competitive post Brexit without seeking to pursue an alternative strategy, advocated by those on the Right, of making our labour markets ever more flexible and embarking on a race to the bottom on people’s terms and conditions of work. Innovation will also help improve UK productivity which is 18% below the G7 average, the largest gap since 1991 when the ONS started collecting such data” (Moving On, P: 19, 2016). “Limited digital connectivity is one of the biggest barriers to business and Ofcom estimates that 1 in 5 small business premises will still not be able to access superfast broadband without further action from government. The Universal Service Obligation – which sets a target of all homes having 10MB per second speeds by 2020 is nowhere near ambitious enough – a more ambitious target and timeframe for delivery should be set if Britain is to be at the forefront of the fourth industrial revolution” (Moving on, P: 22, 2016). “The biggest boost he could provide is by declaring that the Government’s goal during the Brexit negotiations is to continue with the UK’s membership – not just access to – the European Single Market, as I set out in my speech to the Centre for Progressive Capitalism last month” (Moving on, P: 24, 2016).
“The National Audit Office for instance has recommended that the Department of Education should set out the planned overall impact of its apprenticeships policy on productivity and growth, along with short-term key performance indicators to measure the programme’s success. The Government must also adequately fund welfare-to-work in the Autumn Statement, get a grip on inclusive regional growth and ensure that welfare-to-work helps those in areas with high unemployment and not just those who find it easiest to get back into work. As the Science and Technology Select Committee has said, the Government should now publish its Digital Strategy policy without further delay and include goals for developing better basic digital skills and increasing digital apprenticeships as well as providing a framework through which the private sector can more readily collaborate with communities and local authorities to raise digital skills in local SMEs” (Moving On, P: 30, 2016).
“The ‘digital skills gap’ meanwhile has been estimated as costing the economy £63 billion a year in lost additional GDP. Also holding us back from the high tech economy of the future is the lack of new engineering and technology recruits meeting employers’ expectations. We are also facing an engineering ‘retirement cliff’ with the average engineer currently in their fifties.18 According to the Engineering UK 2016 report, engineering employers have the potential to generate an additional £27 billion per year from 2022 but only if we can meet the forecasted demand for 257 000 new engineering vacancies.19 And these are exactly the type of professions we need to build our industries and export to the world after we leave the European Union” (Moving On, P: 28, 2016).
“Firstly, he must reverse cuts to Universal Credit (UC) and restore confidence after the programme’s chaotic introduction so it genuinely provides an incentive to work. Secondly, the Chancellor has to do more to help parents join or re-join the workforce and give every child the best start in life. We should move towards a system of universal free childcare for all working parents of pre-school children, starting with free childcare for all two year olds” (…) “There is also a worrying picture on pay progression too. Universal Credit was intended to help workers move onto higher pay levels, as well as get a job in the first place. But as the Resolution Foundation has said “implementation realities scuppered the ambition of the design”. The likely result is that UC will leave an increasing number of workers stuck on the minimum wage when they should be looking to earn more” (Moving On, P: 32-34, 2016).
Championing Key Sector:
“Because Brexit austerity could last beyond a conventional economic cycle, it will require fundamental policy change and supply-side efforts to counteract. Take, for example, the risks now hanging over the financial services sector – which represents 12% of our economic output, nearly two million jobs in the UK and which generates £67billion of revenues for the public purse. It’s not simply a case of having an ‘industrial strategy’ to play to this core comparative advantage for the UK. We will need to negotiate long term access to EU markets where a whole series of product lines face the prospect of being banned and outlawed. Should this turn out to be the case, and the cluster of specialisms in UK financial centres erode with core competences like clearing relocating to Frankfurt or to New York, then we lose a vital skills infrastructure as well as year by year corporation and income tax revenues” (Moving On, P: 38, 2016).
“So we should test the Autumn Statement for whether it counteracts the looming Brexit austerity and whether it can deliver access and opportunities for sectors under threat, like financial services. Yes, there are reforms still needed to many of the tax regimes in which the financial services sector operate. Some lucrative practices need loopholes closing – for instance in the taxation of financial spread betting or old Osborne legacies such as the wasteful ‘shares for rights’ dodge that is rife for abuse” (Moving On, P: 2016).
This here shows the proofs that the Labour Party can have things that works for the nation, if they get people to believe it, but the simplistic dogma of the Tories is sold to the commoners like coke and cheddar cheese, while the Labour Party message is a rock to hit your head instead of being served feasible to the public. Therefore the Labour has to change their ways of sending their message and make sense to the ones blinded by the PM May and her deceptive tone of arrogance from White Hall. Peace.
Alison McGovern MP, Chuka Umunna MP, Shabana Mahmood MP, Rachel Reeves MP & Chris Leslie MP – ‘Moving on – A Labour approach to the post-Brexit economy’ (November 2016)
Sky News – ‘Leaked memo shows Government’s lack of Brexit plans’ (15.11.2016) link: http://news.sky.com/story/leaked-memo-shows-governments-lack-of-brexit-plans-10658063/revision/1479197701
There are some days that just have to grow upon you, as the news we’re coming on the matter, Davis Davis, the Member of Parliament who was named and appointed to be the Brexit Minister of Davis Michael Davis. As long as you have loudmouth Foreign Secretary for the United Kingdom Boris Johnson, another Brexiteer who hasn’t delivered anything that matter on the Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty or anything else.
So the Conservative Party under Prime Minister Theresa May has a Cabinet that doesn’t even consider the Brexit vote and the public wish to leave the European Union. Something the backbenchers of the Conservative Party didn’t fight for anyway. Except for the ones who renegaded against the than PM David Cameron.
So the months has gone, and September there we’re even reports that Brexit Minister Davis Davis we’re living the life of lavish MP, but not acting upon the election that offered him the job in the government.
So he has been a ghost and undetermined person. As shown with the words of the leaked memo yesterday: “The divisions within the Cabinet are between the three Brexiteers on one side and Philip Hammond/Greg Clark on the other side. The Prime Minister is rapidly acquiring the reputation of drawing in decisions and details to settle matters herself – which is unlikely to be sustainable. Overall, it appears best to judge who is winning the debate by assuming that the noisiest individuals have lost the intra-Government debate and are stirring up external supporters” (SkyNews, 2016).
The PM May has to sort out her house and make sure the dishes is washed inside the kitchen before the food is served. Brexiteers hasn’t seemed to pushed hard if the dishes are just staying dirty and not worked on. And the PM May doesn’t seem interested in change the state of affairs, because she want to steer the ship herself without listening to the cabinet, that will be a good leader, but a selfish one it seem.
“Individual Departments have been busily developing their projects to implement Brexit, resulting in well over 500 projects, which are beyond the capacity and capability of Government to execute quickly. One Department estimates that it needs a 40% increase in staff to cope with its Brexit projects. In other words, every Department has developed a “bottom up” plan of what the impact of Brexit could be – and its plan to cope with the “worst case”. Although necessary, this falls considerably short of having a “Government plan for Brexit” because it has no prioritisation and no link to the overall negotiation strategy” (SkyNews, 2016).
So there is no distinctive negotiation strategy for the Brexit, as the Prime Minister Theresa May already proven to be selfish and wanting to take the decisions on her own, instead of listening to the ones she has appointed for her cabinet. This proves the little value the PM has in her own as she doesn’t care for listening to Secretary for Brexit Davis or anybody else.
“Departments are struggling to come up to speed on the potential Brexit effects on industry. This is due to starting from a relatively low base of insight and also due to fragmentation – Treasury “owning” financial services, DH-BEIS both covering life sciences, DCMS for telecoms, BEIS most other industries, DIT building parallel capability focused on trade etc” (SkyNews, 2016).
Another one of the nonsense that the Departments are not focused or working together to know the effects of an actual leaves the European Union and the trading with the Member States of the EU. How the Departments are effected by Brexit that should be checked and made sure by the Ministers and through the back-channels to make sure the Industry are getting a good as possible place with their trade. Instead of finding out the real potential of the industrial production and the needed changes that might be there after the actual Brexit.
“Industry has two unpleasant realisations – first, that the Government’s priority remains its political survival, not the economy – second, that there will be no clear economic-Brexit strategy any time soon because it is being developed on a case-by-case basis as specific decisions are forced on Government” (SkyNews, 2016).
So another statement showing the disgraceful attempt of silencing internal movement of the Brexit; they didn’t show any clear economic-Brexit strategy, but the decisions are not made as there is apparently no will for the Cabinet and Conservative Party Government and the PM May. That shows the disrespect the Government that been made after the PM David Cameron showed grace and stepped down. Because he had no real plan to leave the Union he had cooperated so well with during his years in Cabinet and in Parliament.
Sky News – ‘Leaked memo shows Government’s lack of Brexit plans’ (15.11.2016) link: http://news.sky.com/story/leaked-memo-shows-governments-lack-of-brexit-plans-10658063/revision/1479197701
“A founding signatory of the Rome Statute, on ICC: Yes we should be out of the ICC. ICC is not serious. It is partisan. There are so many people who should have been tried if they were serious. The way to go is to have our own African Criminal Court. Trying to work with ICC was a mistake” – President Yoweri Kaguta Museveni [at the Second #UGDebate on the 13th February 2016]
As Washington is shocked by the recent events, that the International Criminal Court which is stationed in The Hague and the Netherlands; where they ironically are closing down prisons because of lacks of criminals. The International Community and the African Nations are triggering the Article 127 of the Rome Statute of 1997 to Withdraw from the honourable justice chambers of this so-called earth. There is certain reflections and vivid reasons for why this is happing. And I will try to sort it out, the Westerns and Europeans, even some Americans might be offend, but still carry it and take it for what it is.
“In June 2009, Comoros, Djibouti, and Senegal called on African States Parties to withdraw en mass from the Statute in protest against allegations that the ICC was targeting Africans. This declaration was specifically in reference to Sudanese Pres. Omar al-Bashir’s indictment” (Mbaku, Weber State University).
The ICC is not a pre-historic relic of the European Colonial past, still the actions of is of a seemingly imperialistic affair where the smaller newer nations and less resourceful have been targeted at much higher extent than the ones of more sophisticated countries who are not former colonialized. That is a fact and not NRM fiction. Just a certainty that the further hurt the African sovereign nations that they even has Executives under the microscope for their actions while Tony Blair and George W. Bush walks around like Kings on this earth. It’s not like the powers to be, touches the big-men from there, but around the corner they get taken away quicker than ice-cream on a hot-summer-day.
Not that the men and woman who has been questioned and been under investigations has been involved in crimes and activity against the humanity. They have and many using child-soldiers, used ethnicity to win power and even some killings to the level of genocide.
United Nations, withdraw from this Statute. The withdrawal shall take effect one year after the date of receipt of the notification, unless the notification specifies a later date.
“President Pierre Nkurunziza, who critics accuse of human rights abuses, signed a decree late on Tuesday that paves the way for his east African nation’s departure from the court. His decision comes at time when the ICC is conducting a preliminary investigation into politically motivated violence in Burundi in which several hundred people died” (Alionby, 2016).
South Africa withdraws:
“Under the Rome Statute, the 2002 treaty that established the court, countries are obligated to arrest anyone sought by the tribunal. “Legal uncertainty” around the statute blocks South Africa from resolving conflicts through dialogue, including inviting adversaries for visits, Justice Minister Michael Masutha said, and handing over a foreign leader to the court would have amounted to an infringement of South Africa’s sovereignty” (…) “The Rome Statute “is in conflict and inconsistent with” South Africa’s law giving sitting leaders diplomatic immunity, Mr. Masutha said at a news conference on Friday. The question is before the country’s high court” (…) “Foreign Minister Maite Nkoana-Mashabane this week formally notified the United Nations secretary general, Ban Ki-moon, of South Africa’s intention to withdraw from the international court. Leaving the body would take about a year, during which South Africa would still have to cooperate with the court’s proceedings” (Chan & Marlise, 2016).
This is happening while the ICC has asked for Nations who has signed up for the Rome Statute and the ICC. This has been South Africa, Rwanda, Burundi and Kenya. The Non-compliance documents of Djibouti and Uganda has even come in 11th July 2016. The Arrest Warrant on President Omar Al-Bashir we’re set on 4th March 2009. There has gone 7 years has passed and his still roaming around with countries willingly delivering “non-compliance” documentations to the ICC for their non-cooperation towards them.
There are more running cases on the continent… some of them are:
“The ICC Prosecutor has opened cases against 26 individuals in connection with five African countries. Twenty-five of these remain open; the 26th, against Darfur rebel leader Bahar Idriss Abu Garda, was dismissed by judges, though the prosecutor may attempt to submit new evidence in an attempt to re-open it. The cases stem from investigations into violence in Libya, Kenya’s post-election unrest in 2007-2008, rebellion and counter-insurgency in the Darfur region of Sudan, the Lord’s Resistance Army insurgency in central Africa, civil conflict in eastern Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), and a 2002-2003 conflict in the Central African Republic. The Prosecutor is also examining 2010-2011 violence in Côte d’Ivoire, a 2009 military crackdown on opposition supporters in Guinea, and inter-communal violence in central Nigeria, but has not opened formal investigations or opened cases with regard to these situations. Uganda, DRC, CAR, Kenya, Nigeria, and Guinea are states parties to the ICC. Sudan, Libya, and Côte d’Ivoire are not. ICC jurisdiction in Sudan and Libya stems from U.N. Security Council actions, while jurisdiction in Côte d’Ivoire was granted by virtue of a declaration submitted by the Ivorian Government on October 1, 2003, which accepted the jurisdiction of the Court as of September 19, 2002.25 Five suspects—four Congolese nationals and one Rwandan—are currently in ICC custody. The ICC Prosecutor has sought summonses, rather than arrest warrants, in connection with attempted prosecutions of Darfur rebel commanders and of Kenyan suspects. The Prosecutor has not secured any convictions to date” (Congressional Reaserch Service, 2011).
The Kenyan case we’re like the Prosecutor said wasn’t done, but for now there wasn’t able to follow through on evidence and make a case worth living. That is me translating the jurors lingo. The IGAD communique on the 6th April 2016: “The Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) joins Kenyans of all walks of life to rejoice the collapse of cases against the Deputy President, H.E. William Samoei Ruto and his co-accused, radio journalist, Joshua Arap Sang at the International Criminal Court in The Hague yesterday” (…) “It would be recalled that IGAD had condemned the way the ICC had handled the Kenyan cases from the beginning. During a press conference held in Nairobi on 22nd March 2011, Amb Mahboub stated clearly IGAD’s position on the deferral request of the ICC cases by Kenya pointing out that the trials would “weaken the country and weaken the region” (IGAD, 06.04.2016).
The Kenyan government President Kenyatta the day before on the 5th April 2016:
“Earlier today, Trial Chamber V (a) of the International Criminal Court acquitted my Deputy President, Honourable William Ruto, and Mr. Joshua Arap Sang. I welcome the aforementioned decision, which reaffirms my strong conviction from the beginning about the innocence of my Deputy President. From the start of this case, I have believed that this case was ill-conceived and never grounded on the proper examination of our experience of 2007/2008 as a nation” (…) “Each and every Kenyan was touched by the tragedy that befell our nation in 2007-2008. Each and every victim of this unfortunate happening matters. Not one of them has been forgotten. Their suffering demanded of us as leadership to seek reconciliation. My Deputy and I campaigned and were elected on a platform to unite and reconcile our motherland. When you entrusted the leadership of the country to our administration, you made us responsible for the healing and reconciliation of our people” (Kenyatta, Uhuru – ‘H.E. Uhuru Kenyatta Statement on ICC verdict on the Ruto and Sang Case’ 05.04.2016).
So with this in mind, the Kenyan Government have been thoroughly investigated by the ICC recently over time since the ICC charged people close connected to the current leadership and government. They even at some point had a case against the Kenyan President Kenyatta, but they let it slide because they got no witness angle on him. The Jubilee has fought back and has done their duty towards Courts. Still the wound of charges, the appearance and the trial has hurt.
The newest ICC cases into Africa is the post-election violence where even the Parliament we’re put on fire. “In the letter of referral to the ICC signed by Gabon’s Justice Minister Denise Mekamne Edzidzie, the government accuses Ping and his supporters of incitement to genocide and crimes against humanity” (…) “It highlights a speech which Ping gave during his electoral campaign, in which he allegedly called on his supporters to “get rid of the cockroaches.” (…) “These words were an incitement to commit the crime of genocide,” the letter says” (France24, 2016). The Gabonese Authorities tries to pin it on the Opposition as the election rigging made the public mad and not just the supporters of Jean Ping. If the ICC uses this opportunity not to pin it on themselves as the Second Generation for life President Bongo!
African Union Letter to the ICC on the 29th January 2014:
So the long-stemming grievances are now coming into effect. The feeling of being targets while others walk scotch-free. The inaccurate acts of being the main ones, even as the violence, genocides and crimes against humanity happen; the leaders don’t want a hanging gallows over their heads. Still, the acts of many current Presidents and their Regimes are using armies like Ethiopia against civilians. If they weren’t a strong ally of the United States, they would have a cherry to pick at the courts. President Museveni fears for place, the same should President Mugabe that never been for the Gukurahundi massacres we’re Zimbabwean Republican Police killed 20,000 people. These are men who fear the ICC and would do what they can to not be touched by their current sins and the ones of old.
Sudan, the country of President Omar Al-Bashir has said this in the recent our about the matter:
“This wise decision is established by the Republic of Burundi on objective grounds that the so-called International Criminal Court has become a tool of pressure and instability in the under-development countries. Further, the opening of investigations against some leaders is a result of pressures exercised by the western force,” the statement cited by the Sudan Tribune said” (Akwei, 2016).
So the country who has the Executive under charges, the other one of late has been forces away from power, but still men who was in charge of their respectable nations President Laurent Gbagbo who have now recently been in trial at ICC:
“On Thursday, Mr. Gbagbo, the former president of Ivory Coast, will go on trial at the International Criminal Court in The Hague, facing four counts of crimes against humanity stemming from the violence surrounding the 2010 presidential election. He was narrowly defeated in a runoff, but he insisted that he had won and refused to cede power, leading to months of turmoil and the deaths of more than 3,000 people before his arrest in April 2011” (…) “The trial of Mr. Gbagbo is an important challenge for the International Criminal Court. He is the first former president to reach trial at the tribunal, which has been in operation for a decade with a mandate to deal with war crimes and genocide. Also on trial with him will be Charles Blé Goudé, one of Mr. Gbagbo’s militia leaders in the 2011 upheaval, which followed more than a decade of ethnic political violence in Ivory Coast” (Rothschild, 2016).
So with this in mind, he isn’t a guerrilla fighting with child-soldiers like the ones charged by the ICC when coming to Lord Resistance Army and others who has been charged for violations against humanity in the ICC. These being Bosco the Terminator from the Democratic Republic of Congo, also that the former Vice President of Pierre Bemba of the MLC has been charged for his crimes, while his President Joseph Kabila walks free for his sins. This proves the neglect and the handpicked cases of the ICC. Reasons why the African Union and others are claiming so, partly righteous, partly wrong! The key to this, if the ICC want to be serious as an International legal institution… it needs cases and probes into states in Europe, America and Asia; not only War-Lords in Africa. That is just Neo-Colonialism and proves the questionable attributes to the character of the laws and big-man politics of the world. Peace.
Akwei, Ismail – ‘Sudan urges mass African withdrawal from the ICC’ (21.10.2016) link: http://www.africanews.com/2016/10/21/sudan-urges-mass-african-withdrawal-from-the-icc/
Alionby, John – ‘Burundi becomes first nation to quit International Criminal Court’ (19.10.2016) link: https://www.ft.com/content/ce408588-95bf-11e6-a1dc-bdf38d484582
Chan, Sewell & Simons, Marlise – ‘South Africa to Withdraw From International Criminal Court’ (21.10.2016) link: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/22/world/africa/south-africa-international-criminal-court.html?_r=0
Congressional Research Service – ‘International Criminal Court Cases in Africa: Status and Policy Issues’ (22.07.2011) link: https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/RL34665.pdf
France24 – ‘ICC opens preliminary probe into Gabon unrest’ (29.09.2016) link: http://www.france24.com/en/20160929-icc-opens-preliminary-probe-situation-gabon
Mbaku, John Mukum – ‘Africa’s Case Against the ICC’, Weber State University
Rothschild, Saskia de – ‘Trial of Ivory Coast’s Laurent Gbagbo Will Test International Criminal Court’ (27.01.2016) link: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/28/world/africa/ivory-coast-laurent-gbagbo-hague-trial.html
International Criminal Court – Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (17.07.1998 in force on 01.07.2002) Copyrighted 2011