By Jan Gerber.
Despite President Cyril Ramaphosa saying South Africa would adhere to international law if Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu enters the country while there is an international arrest warrant against him, the EFF accused Ramaphosa of being “cowardly, indecisive, and fence-sitting”.
The EFF, however, also called Ramaphosa a “coward” last year because South Africa would have had to comply with international law and arrest Russian President Vladimir Putin if he entered South Africa.
Last month, the International Criminal Court (ICC) issued arrest warrants for Netanyahu, his former defence minister Yoav Gallant, and the Hamas leader they say they have already killed, Mohammed Deif.
EFF leader Julius Malema asked the following question of Ramaphosa: “Whether, in light of the warrant of arrest issued by the International Criminal Court (ICC) against the Israeli Prime Minister, Mr Benjamin Netanyahu over war crimes in Gaza, including but not limited to starvation as a method of warfare, persecution, inhumane acts, genocide and crimes against humanity, as a participant in the ICC and a signatory to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court Act, Act 27 of 2002, the government will arrest Mr Netanyahu and surrender him to The Hague in the Netherlands if he enters South African territory; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what are the relevant details?”
Ramaphosa simply answered: “South Africa remains a signatory to the Rome Statute and is bound, as are other countries, by international law.”
In terms of international law, signatories to the Rome Statute, like South Africa, must arrest persons for whom the ICC issued arrest warrants. The South African courts had confirmed this in the aftermath of the Omar Al-Bashir debacle when the South African government refused to arrest Al-Bashir for alleged genocide in South Sudan and concerning the arrest warrant issued for Putin last year.
But this was not enough for the EFF. The party said in a statement on Tuesday that it “noted with disdain the cowardly, indecisive, and fence-sitting response by Cyril Ramaphosa to a parliamentary question posed by the President and Commander-in-Chief (CIC) of the EFF, Julius Malema”.
The statement reads: The question sought clarity on whether South Africa would arrest and surrender the murderous, genocidal, and racist Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, to the International Criminal Court (ICC) should he step onto South African soil.
“In typical fashion, Ramaphosa opted for a feeble response, hiding behind vague commitments to South Africa’s status as a signatory to the Rome Statute. This lack of courage and decisiveness is unsurprising, as Ramaphosa has never demonstrated a spine for principled leadership. Instead, he masks his cowardice with claims of ‘consultation’, all while engaging in backdoor deals to protect his compromised interests.”
“The ongoing genocide and crimes against humanity in Palestine demand clear, unequivocal, and principled action. While courageous nations around the world have boldly severed diplomatic ties with the apartheid state of Israel, Ramaphosa’s government remains silent, indifferent, and fearful of upsetting Western imperialist forces.”
According to the EFF, countries with “leaders of integrity” stood in solidarity with Palestinians even before the ICC issued the arrest warrant for Netanyahu.
“Ramaphosa, however, evades direct questions and refuses to make meaningful commitments, proving once again that he cannot be trusted to lead South Africa in the fight for global justice,” stated the EFF.
In December last year, South Africa brought a case before the International Court of Justice (ICJ), arguing Israel’s war in Gaza breached the 1948 UN Genocide Convention. Israel has strongly denied this.
Last Thursday and on Tuesday, the National Assembly and National Council of Provinces debated the Special Appropriations Bill, which provides R95 million for South Africa’s case at the ICJ. Several EFF MPs lauded the government for instituting the case in the debates on the bill.
The EFF’s stance on Netanyahu’s warrant is in stark contrast to that of Putin.
Putin was invited to attend the BRICS summit in South Africa last year, in which South Africa would have had to arrest him. In the end, he stayed at home, sparing South Africa an uncomfortable diplomatic situation.
Last year, the ICC issued warrants of arrest for Putin and the Commissioner for Children’s Rights in his office, Maria Alekseyevna Lvova-Belova, for alleged war crimes involving the unlawful deportation of children from Ukraine to Russia and the unlawful transfer of children from occupied areas of Ukraine to the Russian Federation.