South Africa’s President Cyril Ramaphosa said that any attempt to arrest Russian President Vladimir Putin when he visits the country next month would be a declaration of war with Russia.
Ramaphosa said in court papers that were released on Tuesday that “Russia has made it clear that arresting its sitting President would be a declaration of war.”
Putin has been invited to a BRICS summit in Johannesburg next month but is the target of an International Criminal Court arrest warrant – a provision that Pretoria as an ICC member would be expected to implement were he to attend.
South Africa’s diplomatic dilemma is playing out in court, where the leading opposition party, the Democratic Alliance (DA), is trying to force the government’s hand and ensure the Kremlin leader is held and handed over to the ICC if he steps foot in the country.
In his response, Ramaphosa described the DA’s application as “irresponsible” and said national security was at stake. According to the president, South Africa is seeking an exemption under ICC rules based on the fact that enacting the arrest could threaten the “security, peace and order of the state”.
“It would be inconsistent with our constitution to risk engaging in war with Russia,” he said, adding that this would go against his duty to protect the country.
The arrest would also undermine a South African-led mission to end the war in Ukraine and “foreclose any peaceful solution”, Ramaphosa wrote.
The ICC treaty states that a member country should consult the court when it identifies problems that may impede the execution of a request, and that the court may not proceed with requesting an arrest if this would require a state to break international rules on diplomatic immunity.
South Africa is the current chair of the BRICS group, a gathering of economic heavyweights that also includes Brazil, Russia, India and China, which sees itself as a counter-balance to Western economic domination.
Putin is sought by the ICC over accusations that Russia unlawfully deported Ukrainian children.
South African Deputy President Paul Mashatile has said in recent interviews with local media the government has been trying to persuade Putin not to come – but so far unsuccessfully.
Signed in June and initially marked as “confidential”, Ramaphosa’s affidavit was published on Tuesday, after the court ruled it be made public.
Shame on South Africa for supporting that terrorist.
No kidding.
I’m feeling eerily nostalgic for the (objectively terrible) Bush-era doctrine: “You’re either with us, or we’ll declare your nation a state-sponsor of terrorism”
So is invading Ukraine.
No, that’s a declaration of Special Military Operation, which is completely and entirely different in an unclear way. No further questions.
As a South African currently abroad I have my popcorn at hand waiting for more drama to come.
Yeaaah, not enjoying seeing the little bit of money I have stuck in RSA go up and down like a roller-coaster.
Paying attention to only the silver lining Is the the South African way I’m sad to say _
South Africa is on a fast track to become a failed state, it’s tragic to see…
Here is an alternative Piped link(s): https://piped.video/Q2XRRKjCHhU
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source, check me out at GitHub.
that russian cunt is way to afraid to come to africa…
They will have to consider calling off the summit probably.
They’re literally just scared of Putin? As if he would even show up if they made it clear he will be arrested. Is he even leaving the Kremlin as of late?
Yeah, Vladimir I-will-take-Ukraine-over-in-a-week Putin will come and declare war on South Africa. If they’re afraid, why not ask the west for help in case Poopin indeed does declare war? This sounds more like choosing sides than protecting his own country.
They are reliant on agriculture from Russia. They don’t want to damage that trade relationship. Climate change has made Africa less than ideal for many crops.
No, that’s just bollocks. It’s of course a refusal to choose sides. Stop making Putin’s point for him, the whole “if you’re not with us, you’re against us” mindset reeks of coming straight from the Führerbunker.
Why exactly should the global south have any appetite to get involved and thereby legitimize warfare by sanctions, when precisely that method has been applied against many nations in the developing world quite arbitrarily, when they didn’t cave in to Western demands? Clear case of what goes around comes around.
Now, let’s be clear here, Putin is still the far bigger dick and the aggressor, but by how much is a question of perspective. Uncomfortable as it may be, but from most not distinctly Western perspectives the difference is barely even noticeable. Yes, maybe one is worse, but preferably you want to keep both at arms bay and, come to think of it, you don’t really mind when they keep each other busy somewhere far away. At all.
You may dislike that all you want, but dislike probably won’t convert people to your simplistic black and white view when they know better from their own experience.
As someone from the global south, thank you. You perfectly put into words exactly how a very many people around me are feeling.
This us vs you mentality is really rubbing a lot of people the wrong way, and telling us that our neutrality means that we’re supporting the global west/ north’s enemy is frankly insulting, considering what the global west/ north has done in the past and is still doing now.
If ICC is ordering them to arrest Putin and they are refusing then why are they member of ICC? It means nothing.
Also stop defending Putin with whataboutism. He illegally invaded another nation. Full stop. Doesn’t matter that other terrible things in human history happened.
Not choosing a side is the same as choosing the aggressor’s side. If you can’t see that I’m glad you’re not in charge of foreign policy. This isn’t some disagreement between nations.
There are lot of people saying that in charge of foreign policy somewhere. And not a single one actually thinking it.
Does anyone want to tell Russia that South Africa is in fact in the south of Africa, a continent which Russia is not next to? No? Ok…
I hate being this guy, but they are far from the only country denying lawful order from the ICC and the Hague. It’s even debatable wether this is lawful, since Russia quit that contract in I think 2015
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Service-Members%27_Protection_Act
It would be no change then if Ukraine swooped in and arrested him in a special operation of their own?
It seems like Putin should have diplomatic immunity.
Why would he have immunity if he’s got an arrest warrant out from the ICC?
Diplomatic immunity trumps arrest warrants in countries. The worst the host country’s can do is kick out the offending diplomat.
Based on the article, the ICC does not want members going against this common practice.
Diplomatic immunity is granted by the visited country, not declared by the originating country. They’re free to refuse the request for diplomatic immunity (just not simply take the status away once it has been granted).
The ICC issued the warrant, there’s no immunity. South Africa is seeking an exemption from the requirement to enforce the warrant.
In other words, under current international law, South Africa is required to arrest Putin.
What you seem to be thinking of is diplomatic law, like ambassadors and shit. That’s a different thing entirely and does not apply here.
Just to go a bit further… there isn’t really an “international law” so much as there was a treaty that over 100 countries signed on to for war crimes declarations. South Africa is a signatory of it. If I recall Russia might be as well, but the US isn’t for example and so as such the “law” doesn’t apply to us since we never signed the treaty.
Russia is also not a signatory. Not anymore… They quit in 2014 after the ICC started looking into their initial invasion of Ukraine.
Ukraine is also not a signatory, but has accepted jurisdiction.
South Africa signaled that they would quit the treaty in 2016, but rescinded that in 2017 so are still members.
I mean, international law is just a bunch of treaties and some uncodified norms about how nations should behave. It’s not like there’s really a full-fledge international legal system with its own ability to arrest and prosecute.
There is actually a full-fledged international legal system with its own ability to issue arrest warrants and does prosecute. 123 nations are signed to it and they have a section dedicated to reading about criminal cases they have tried and repercussions. The problem for South Africa is they are a signatory of the Rome Statute, which would mean that they should arrest someone charged with a crime by the ICC.
deleted by creator
Putin should have Zelensky’s foot up his ass.
I didn’t say “should” as it is the right thing, but “should” as in it is something that would likely happen.
Putin is a war criminal, but the war criminal will likely have diplomatic immunity when attending a diplomatic summit.
Diplomatic immunity is a legal fiction. On whose authority does he have diplomatic immunity? It’s not some magical construct, it describes the pressure that can be exacted by the diplomat’s country were that diplomat to be detained or run afoul of some law in the host country. It’s not like there is some central overarching authority handing out Diplomatic Immunity cards. It’s based upon ad-hoc agreements between nations. South Africa can do as they please. They will have to face any potential consequences from either Russia for enforcing the ICC arrest warrant, or from the ICC for not enforcing the warrant.
The ICC doesn’t have nukes. All that said, hard to give the launch order when you are dead so lets hope for misadventure.
Perhaps you meant to say ‘likely’ and not ‘should’.
LOL
Can South African troops even exit the country without having their tanks stolen?
