Topic: Universal Jurisdiction in Crimes against Humanity
Country: South Africa
Delegate Name: Emma Holcomb
School: Royal Oak High School
Topic page: background guide and all position papers All South Africa position papers GLIMUN 2011 committees
As a member of the African Union, the Republic of South Africa supports the principles of universal jurisdiction, particularly in the case of crimes against humanity and other such atrocities. When there are no other means of bringing an alleged criminal to trial, universal jurisdiction is an excellent tool to have. South Africa advocates regional rather than immediate international involvement in such cases, and hopes that eventually all nations will have the resources and systems necessary to bring such criminals to trial on their own.
When crimes against humanity occur, the international community usually rushes to bring those accused of committing these crimes to trial. How to bring the accused to trial and ensure that they receive a fair trial is something that the international community has struggled with, considering the power those who are accused often wield. Universal jurisdiction has been used in several cases as a way to hopefully try these people in a fair manner, particularly when the home nation of the accused is unable to bring him or her to trial. When faced with such situations, the world needs an agreement regarding when and how these trials can occur.
Many non-African nations have recently tried Africans accused of committing crimes against humanity in African nations, without gaining the consent of the accuseds’ nation of origin or the nation where the crimes were committed. South Africa is deeply troubled by this. If a state wishes to claim the application of universal jurisdiction, should the state not first consult with these nations? Additionally, the fact that these cases were dealt with by nations so disconnected from the crime itself is an issue. When regional bodies like the African Union exist, they should be the first to consider such cases- not nations without the understanding that comes from those of the same region. Those are some of the primary reasons why South Africa advocates for dialog between those seeking to use universal jurisdiction and the nation of the accused and the nation where the crime was committed, and for regional solutions first.
One of the most important tools we have is dialog. When a nation cannot bring an accused criminal to trial, for whatever the reason, one of the first avenues it should take is dialog with regional bodies, in order to find a solution. South Africa hopes that, in most situations, the region will have the resources available to assist the nation in some way. However, when the region agrees that something more must be done, it could become necessary to bring in international bodies, such as the International Criminal Court. South Africa, as a signatory of the Rome Statute, supports the ICC and its goals. However, concerns have been raised that the ICC may be taking the cases of a disproportionate number of Africans. South Africa hopes to see this addressed in debate, so that the ICC, still a young institution, can continue to grow as an important international institution.
Of course, even when including international bodies such as the ICC, it is important to continue dialog with the nations involved in the case and the region. As a nation committed to human rights, peace, and stability all over the world, South Africa hopes that such dialog would address these issues, considering that they are so often disrupted by crimes against humanity. Crimes against humanity are often so horrendous that they leave lasting negative impacts on nations. Any discussion of crimes against humanity in any context must include the dialog that is necessary in such situations.
The issue of national sovereignty has been raised before in such discussions. South Africa believes that we must respect the sovereignty of all nations involved when addressing crimes against humanity. However, sovereignty is never a reason to allow crimes against humanity to occur without any legal action. This is an issue of particular importance when such crimes are committed by those in who exert large amounts of influence over a nation. The fine line between respecting sovereignty and not tolerating any such crime lies only in regional action and dialog.
Universal jurisdiction in crimes against humanity is an intrinsic issue with many complicating points, but clear action must be taken by this committee. South Africa hopes that, through debate and compromise, the committee will pass a resolution that emphasizes the importance of regional bodies in such issues and the assistance that dialog can lend.
