A list of items that the Arab League’s Envoy to Sudan gave me on Sunday night (to show me the progress Sudan has been making) included the recent incorporation of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes into Sudanese criminal law. I was caught out. I prepare thoroughly for interviews, but this was news to me.
Checking with some Sudanese friends yesterday it seems that the Criminal Act has indeed been amended to incorporate these international crimes. How come you didn’t mention it before? I asked. I should have been able to predict the response. In essence, a tired shrug.
Sudan has ratified 11 international human rights treaties already – all of which are automatically incorporated into their national law through a provision of the Interim Constitution. And what has that meant in practice for the human rights of its citizens? How to say . . . Nothing. Still, for advocates, every time a law is added to the books it offers a new hook – a new way to try and demand a connection between promises and practice. For that reason at least, it seems like something that should have attracted some media coverage.
Yesterday I was bemoaning there was no such reporting to be found – but I wake up today to this article in the Sudan Tribune. What is interesting about the article is that while it says that last month Sudan did indeed add genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes into its penal code, it also reports that yesterday Sudan rejected further changes proposed by Arab League Secretary General, Amr Moussa, to bring these changes in line with the Rome Statute of the ICC. So what I now want to know is what the loophole is between the changes Sudan has already made and the proposed changes that would bring their law in line with the Rome Statute.
As soon as I get a copy of last month’s changes I’ll let you know. If, in the meantime, any of you know already where the gap is, please tell me in the Comments. Thanks!
Speak Your Mind