‘To be or not to be?’ The African Union and its Member States Parties' Participation as High Contracting States Parties to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (1998)

Abstract

This article examines, under the light of international law, African States’ fascination and fall-out with the ICC. It examines the challenge to international institutions and to international justice for high crimes posed by the quasi-supranational African Union’s (AU) emergent practice of ordering its Member States Parties not to co-operate with ICC Arrest Warrants against African Heads of States/Governments. The legal substance of AU claims and the AU’s own interpretations of the standards of sovereign immunity and universal jurisdiction are also examined. The article shows that emergent AU recalcitrance to ICC orders is difficult to dismiss even though it may be contrary to current international law on the Law of Treaties which nullifies resort to domestic local law as a justification for breach of the strictures of international law. In particular, AU claims that universal jurisdiction and sovereign immunity should be redefined to suit their concerns contradict recent international efforts to combat impunity for international crimes.