Can There be Peace Without Justice in Darfur?

On October 29, 2009, the African Union High Level Implementation Panel, chaired by former South African President Thabo Mbeki, was tasked to facilitate the implementation of the AU High Level Panel on Darfur’s recommendations for one year.

Nompumelelo Sibalukhulu, Junior Researcher, International Crime in Africa Programme, ISS Pretoria

On October 29, 2009, the African Union High Level Implementation Panel, chaired by former South African President Thabo Mbeki, was tasked to facilitate the implementation of the AU High Level Panel on Darfur’s recommendations for one year. The AU High Level Panel on Darfur has described the conflict in Darfur as symptomatic of the broader injustices and divisions that have characterised Sudan’s past. Therefore the resolution of ‘Sudan’s crisis in Darfur’ cannot be considered in isolation to the national challenge of establishing a lasting peace and reconciliation. Even so, justice for the heinous crimes committed against the people of Darfur in the past years of conflict must not be denied.

The AU High Level Panel on Darfur (AUPD) recommended an integrated justice and reconciliation response to the crisis in Darfur and determined that this response should form a part of the broader national efforts and processes to establish lasting peace in Sudan.

The Panel’s assessment and analysis of the crisis in Darfur revealed that its roots lie in the historical legacy of ‘inequitable governance’. It is a conflict that has arisen from the marginalisation and neglect of the Sudanese periphery in general and a consequence of poor governance and selective development in the subsidiary parts of the country.

As logic would have it, if the government in Khartoum were evidently the cause or source of Sudan’s troubles, rooting it out seems the most plausible thing to do to remedy the situation. However, as the Panel report rightly points out, it is important to recognize that Khartoum’s cooperation is indispensible to resolving the crisis. Reconciliation requires the participation of all parties to the conflict if it is to yield the desired outcome.

The fundamental task facing Sudan is to overcome the failure of governments since independence to transform Sudan into an equal inclusive society by equalizing the distribution of wealth and share in the benefits of political power. The government however cannot achieve this goal alone. The aggrieved parties, including the people of Darfur, must also be engaged in this process and be allowed to make a contribution to the construction of a new Sudan.

However the government must act in good faith and be fully committed to fulfill its obligations to all citizens, including the Darfurians, at every stage of the process.

As part of the integrated response to ‘Sudan’s crisis in Darfur’, the AUPD recommended the establishment of the Special Criminal Court on the Events in Darfur as the principal forum for delivering criminal justice for crimes relating to the conflict in Darfur. It also recommended that the government create a Hybrid Criminal Court to try those who appear to bear particular responsibility for the gravest crimes committed in Darfur, as well as for the government to institute reconciliation and truth telling mechanisms.

As the African Union High Level Implementation Panel’s mandate came to an end on 31 October 2010, human rights groups and experts who are monitoring the situation closely have reported the Sudanese government’s failure to institute any of these justice measures. The government’s inactivity in this regard does not bode well for the purpose of building a lasting peace and winning the confidence of Darfurians.

To borrow from Kofi Annan: “...peace is not true and lasting if brought at any cost; only peace with justice can honour victims of war and violence”.

If Khartoum is to convince the people of Darfur, and indeed all citizens Sudan as well as the international community that it is in fact committed to overcoming the legacy of the past and building a united, peaceful Sudan; it cannot continue to allow impunity for the atrocities committed against Darfurians.

It is also important to acknowledge that the efforts to resolve the Darfur crisis are taking place against the backdrop of Sudan’s historic political crossroads. The first of which was the April general election - the first democratic election in over 20 years. The next momentous event is the upcoming referendum scheduled for January 2011. Both of these events are landmarks in the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) brokered between the north and the south, bringing the 20-year civil war to an end.

The ideal would have been for these events of such great national import to take place in the context of a peaceful, stable Darfur so as to enable Darfurians to participate fully.

However for Darfurians the CPA process has not been an inclusive one. In their view it has not been ‘an opportunity to contribute to a national process of democratization, with a responsibility to make unity attractive, but a ceiling on their aspirations’. The Darfur conflict has yet to be resolved and many of the people have yet to be restored to their homes.

It is true that Sudan’s history of political turmoil and conflict especially between the north and the south has had a great bearing on the people of Darfur and that its successful resolution will have a positive spin off for the entire country, including Darfurians.

Making unity attractive is key to securing peace, justice and reconciliation in the long-term, but the government cannot achieve this goal by ignoring the plight of victims of international crimes who are integral to the success of the nation-building process.

The government must promote peace without prejudicing the interests of justice. For lasting peace, reconciliation and unity to become a reality, there must be a credible threat of prosecution for those who are implicated in the crimes committed against the people of Darfur.

 

Related content