Main value of Sudan move is in the message
The expected indictment of Sudan's president by the International Criminal Court on charges of crimes against humanity will mark the first time the tribunal has sought the arrest of a head of state who is still in office. That underlines the scale of the humanitarian tragedy that has unfolded during more than five years of ethnic and religious conflict in Sudan's Darfur region.
Sadly, it is unlikely to do anything to ease the suffering of the millions of survivors of massacres, disease, starvation and homelessness, estimated by United Nations officials to have killed up to 300,000. Sudan immediately dismissed the decision. And some diplomats, including China's, fear an international arrest warrant for Lieutenant General Omar al-Beshir will backfire by making Sudan less willing to co-operate in fragile peace talks. There are also fears it could trigger reprisals against civilians and UN peacekeepers.
Such concerns are understandable. But the ICC would have been failing in its duty if it had bowed to pressure to allow more time for negotiations. The court was set up by the UN six years ago in the wake of atrocities in the war in the former Yugoslavia and genocide in Rwanda. It is the world's forum for dealing with the worst international crimes, such as genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes - and bringing to justice those responsible. Its judges represent the ethnic and cultural diversity of the UN. It was the UN Security Council that referred Darfur to the court. Once the official prosecutor sought an arrest warrant for General Beshir, the judges had a responsibility to investigate. Nonetheless, opponents of the proceedings, including Arab and African nations, asked the Security Council to use its powers to suspend them to avoid upsetting Sudan. China's special envoy to Sudan said issuing an arrest warrant would have disastrous consequences for the Darfur issue.
It was right that a majority on the council resisted this pressure. The court deserves the backing of the body that referred the case to it. If it is to maintain credibility and respect for its independence, its reputation must be safeguarded against suggestions of political influence. The Security Council still has the power to postpone any moves against the president for a year. Hopefully it will not use it unless more is done to end serious human-rights violations. The court was established to take on cases of this kind in order to bring justice to victims and better protect human rights.
The warrant is unlikely to be served unless the president is overthrown and forced to flee. Its main value is therefore in the international message it sends. Hopefully Beijing's Sudan envoy, Liu Guijin, is right to predict that despite the warrant Khartoum will continue to co-operate with the international community.
