Cape Town – Minister of International Relations and Cooperation, Naledi Pandor, has offered a defence of South Africa’s decision to invite Russian President Vladimir Putin to the BRICS summit, despite his warrant for arrest issued by the International Criminal Court (ICC). Her response came in light of a query from ANC MP Desmond Lawrence Moela, who questioned whether the government’s invitation to Putin signified support for his alleged human rights abuses and disregard for international law.
As a member of the ICC, South Africa is obligated to execute the warrant for arrest. Minister Pandor clarified in her written response that the invitation to Putin was issued prior to the ICC warrant being issued. She emphasized South Africa’s non-aligned position in the Russia-Ukraine conflict. Regarding the merits of the charges underlying the warrant, she asserted that a thorough investigation and judicial process would determine their validity.
Pandor stated unequivocally that South Africa neither supports nor condones violations of the laws of war, as outlined in the Rome Statute and the Geneva Conventions. She affirmed that during times of war, all parties involved must respect and adhere to the laws of war and related humanitarian laws. She reiterated South Africa’s stance against breaches of these laws, regardless of the conflict or location.
Minister in the Presidency, Khumbudzo Ntshavheni, recently informed the media that no decision had been made regarding the potential relocation of the BRICS summit to another country.
Legal practitioner and ICC-listed counsel, Michael Donen, SC, opined that South Africa’s failure to arrest and surrender former Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir to the ICC, despite an existing warrant, was deemed unlawful. He suggested that a similar conclusion would apply in the case of the ICC warrant for Putin. Donen further explained that international customary law forms part of South African law, as stipulated by the Constitution, unless contradicted by a South African statute. He argued that since the Nuremberg trials in 1945, international customary law has held that heads of state cannot invoke immunity for crimes of aggression, war crimes, and crimes against humanity. The warrant for Putin appears to cover the latter two categories, suggesting he should not enjoy immunity.
Donen emphasized that the politics surrounding international law are more complex than the law itself. He pointed out that while President George Bush of the USA and Prime Minister Blair of the UK led the invasion of Iraq in 2003, which contravened the UN Charter, they were not issued ICC warrants for their actions. He highlighted that no one has sought to arrest and try them for waging aggressive war, similar to the Nazi High Command’s actions, for which they were hanged. Notably, Blair’s Attorney General warned him, in a confidential memo, that he could face arrest if he ordered the invasion.