Minister Michael Masutha on the matter of International Criminal Court and Sudanese President Omar Al Bashir

first_imgPresident Jacob Zuma and President Omar Al-Bashir of Sudan discuss strengthening relations between South Africa and Sudan, 2 September 2015. (Photo: GCIS)We have called this press conference to announce the decision taken by Cabinet on Wednesday, 19 October 2016 in relation to the country’s membership to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court and the pending appeal regarding Sudanese President Al Bashir.The Republic of South Africa is a founder member of the African Union and plays an important role in resolving conflicts on the African continent and in encouraging the peaceful resolution of conflicts wherever they occur anywhere else in the world.In exercising its international relations with foreign countries, particularly with countries in which serious conflicts occur or have occurred, South Africa is hindered by the Implementation of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court Act, 2 (Act No 27 of 2002). This Act and the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court compel South Africa to arrest persons who may enjoy diplomatic immunity under customary international law but who are wanted by the International Criminal Court for genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes and to surrender such persons to the International Criminal Court. South Africa has to do so, even under circumstances where we are actively involved in promoting peace, stability and dialogue in those countries.We wish to give effect to the rule of customary international law which recognises the diplomatic immunity of heads of state and others in order to effectively promote dialogue and the peaceful resolution of conflicts wherever they may occur, particularly on the African continent. South Africa enacted the Diplomatic Immunities and Privileges Act,  (Act No. 37 of 2001), which provides for the immunities and privileges of diplomatic missions and consular posts and their members, of heads of states, special envoys and certain representatives of the United Nations and its specialised agencies, other international organisations and certain other persons.However, the Implementation of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court Act, 2002, is in conflict and inconsistent with the provisions of the Diplomatic Immunities and Privileges Act, 2001. In order to ensure South Africa’s continued ability to conduct active diplomatic relations, a bill proposing the repeal of the Implementation of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court Act, 2002 will soon be tabled in parliament. We have already in writing informed the Speaker of the National Assembly and the Chairperson of the NCOP of this Executive decision.In the matter of the Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development v The Southern African Litigation Centre (867/15) [2016] ZASCA 17 (15 March 2016), the Supreme Court of Appeal confirmed that in terms of customary international law, heads of state enjoy immunity against arrest. However, the Supreme Court of Appeal found that in enacting the Implementation of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court Act, 2002, South Africa had expressly waived the immunity of such heads of state and that South Africa was obliged to arrest persons wanted for crimes committed against humanity.In essence, the Supreme Court of Appeal identified the problem which needs to be addressed. The effect of withdrawal from the Rome Statute as well as the repeal of the Implementation Act thus completes the removal of all legal impediments inhibiting South Africa’s ability to honour its obligations relating to the granting of diplomatic immunity under international law as provided for under our domestic legislation. This therefore removes the necessity at least in so far as this aspect is concerned of continuing with the appeal.Written notice to withdraw from the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court has been submitted to the Secretary-General of the United Nations in accordance with Article 127(1) of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. The withdrawal will take effect one year after the Secretary-General has received the notification. South African will remain obligated under the Rome Statute for the duration of the 12 months’ notice period.An application for leave to appeal the decision of the Supreme Court of Appeal set down for hearing at the Constitutional Court on 22 November 2016, will now be withdrawn. This is so, especially as the Supreme Court of Appeal has removed the uncertainty around customary international law in relation to diplomatic immunity in so far as it affects heads of states and others who may be wanted for serious violations of human rights and other serious crimes but who enjoy diplomatic immunity under international customary law.South Africa remains committed to the fight against impunity and to hold those who have committed crimes against humanity and other serious crimes accountable. Our unwavering commitment to the promotion and protection of human rights throughout Africa and elsewhere in the world is further demonstrated by our continued participation in various international and continental human rights instruments.For this reason, South Africa will work closely with the African Union and with other countries in Africa to strengthen continental bodies, such as the African Court on Human and People’s Rights, created to deal with such crimes and to prosecute the perpetrators, whilst at the same time continuing to participate and honour its commitments under international human rights instruments. South Africa will continue to actively promote dialogue and the peaceful resolution of conflicts on the African continent and elsewhere.Enquiries:Mthunzi MhagaSpokesperson for the Ministry of Justice and Correctional servicesCell: 083 641 8141E-mail: [email protected] by:Department of Justice and Constitutional Developmentlast_img read more

DieMuggels – Genesis (A rough night) – Geocache of the Week

first_imgTo get the treasure, a band of heroes must consist of four brave adventurers. They must brave the terrifying darkness of a foreboding forest on their quest to find the castle. To succeed they need to be equipped with a torch that burns brighter than a campfire, a device that shines black fire, a piece of rope of a precise length — and a special password!This Mystery Cache is located in Switzerland, south-east of Zürich. It is so popular that you need to register your team in advance to secure a spot. After you master the outside stages of this night cache, you will face multiple challenges that require the knowledge of different coordinate systems, logical thinking, intuition, and good team communication.It usually takes a couple of hours to finish this cache and you must solve 15 puzzles in total to sign the logbook. You will face the undead, creatures from ancient times, and you may even encounter a life-size knight!If you are a fan of escape rooms you will definitely enjoy this cache. One ton of gravel, half a ton of wood, multiple electronic devices, and a selection of books were used in the creation of the final.Do you have what it takes to solve the mystery of DieMuggles – Genesis?Continue to explore some of the most amazing geocaches around the world.Check out all of the Geocaches of the Week on the Geocaching blog. If you would like to nominate a Geocache of the Week, fill out this form.Share with your Friends:More Mystery CacheGC6TF2Gby El abnorgollums724 Difficulty:3.5Terrain:2.5 In medieval times, four lords met under the cover of night to devise a plan to hide their treasures from the peasants of the land. One of them used dark magic to transfer all his wealth into the future, where only the most daring adventurers would ever have a chance to find it.center_img Location:Region Zuerich (ZH), SwitzerlandN 47° 23.102 E 008° 41.570 SharePrint RelatedGroundspeak Weekly Newsletter – April 4, 2012April 4, 2012In “Groundspeak’s Weekly Newsletter”Be a better hiderAugust 21, 2018In “News”Enigma #1 – GC448A – GEOCACHE OF THE WEEK – November 8, 2012November 8, 2012In “Community”last_img read more

Six reasons why Shoaib Malik is India’s son-in-law

first_imgShoaib MalikA day after India’s tennis star Sania Mirza was appointed the brand ambassador of the new Telangana state,  BJP leader A Laxman termed the tennis star as a “daughter-in-law of Pakistan”. The leader said that Mirza did not participate in agitations that led to the creation of the new sate, and should not be the face of Telangana.Laxman’s argument is flawed, because the rest of the nation has already accepted Pakistani cricketer Shoaib Malik as their son-in-law. Here are seven reasons why Malik is India’s son-in-law.1. He fell in love with and married his sweetheart, the tennis champion of India. The BJP leader may or may not have given his consent on the marriage.2. He married Mirza despite knowing that the alliance will create controversy in both nations that have bled through history since the Partition.3. He was brave enough not to bother about Hindu or Telangana sensibilities when he fell in love with and married Mirza.4. He knew he was not living in the times of actress Reena Roy and Pakistan cricketer Mohsin Khan, whose matrimonial alliance in 1983 created no acrimonious fuss.5. He happens to play cricket, a sport in which Indians are the current world champions.6. He had agreed to settle in Hyderabad to make his bride happy even before marriage. A classmate and friend of Mirza disclosed then of the tennis star’s love for Hyderabad and how Dubai (where the couple live now) was definitely not her choice for setting up home.last_img read more