INTERVIEW: SPLM Secretary General says Bashir should cooperate with Hague court

By Daniel Van Oudenaren

March 29, 2009 (WASHINGTON) — Pa’gan Amum Okiech, the Secretary General of the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM), said Saturday that President Omer Al-Bashir should cooperate with the International Criminal Court, which is seeking the president’s arrest on seven counts of war crimes and crimes against humanity.

Okiech, who holds the highest political post in the SPLM besides that of the chairman, is visiting Washington this week with Foreign Minister Deng Alor.

He is known for having taken hard-line positions against the National Congress Party (NCP) of Al-Bashir, in the past criticizing the party for committing genocide and displacing millions of Sudanese. In January when he told reporters that NCP should cooperate with the ICC on a legal basis, some observers in Khartoum told Sudan Tribune that his remarks implied a division within the SPLM leadership.

Sudan’s government dismisses the ICC as a political institution, not a legal one. But in an interview on Saturday, Okiech contradicted the government position, saying that Sudan should “cooperate legally with the ICC.”

The official also discussed border demarcation, contested legislation and media freedom, describing each as a major concern and suggesting that the forthcoming elections would not be considered credible unless the media improves. He said “the legal framework for ensuring free and fair elections is not yet complete.”

Darfur, where SPLM has played only a marginal role in hosting some discussions among minor rebel factions, presents an opportunity for SPLM to act as a “facilitator,” according to Okiech. Though this appears to be a secondary concern for the delegation, the presence of Abdel Azziz Adam El Hilu, who is tasked with the Darfur file for SPLM, may signal that they anticipate discussion of the issue with US officials.

ST: What do you intend to discuss with the new US administration?

First of all we are here as an SPLM delegation. We intend to establish relations with the new administration as a continuation to SPLM-US relations that have been developing for quite some time now, from the days of President Clinton until now with President Obama. We had long-standing relations with the various institutions of the government of the United States, particularly the Congress and the administration.

With the current administration we are looking to develop relations to seek US support to continue the implementation of the peace agreement, the Sudan peace agreement, the CPA, as well as the implementation of all other agreements that have been signed: the Cairo Agreement, the Eastern Sudan Agreement, the Abuja Agreement. Our aim is to seek the support to end all the civil wars in the Sudan first so that we can have a comprehensive peace in the country covering all over the country, ending wars and achieving a just peace.

Secondly, we also aim to seek US cooperation in supporting the Sudanese people achieve a transition to democracy through the establishment of a system that would guarantee free and fair democratic elections in which the Sudanese people could choose their government.

And thirdly, we seek relations to get US and international support to rehabilitate the country and to rebuild the country after the many wars so that we can achieve a level of development that would be a basis for sustainable development and a basis for a prosperous life for the Sudanese people.

ST: Was it the chairman who decided that this delegation should come here?

Yes, this is a delegation sent by the SPLM leadership. The chairman formed the delegation and he sent us here.

ST: At this stage, what is your assessment of the implementation of the CPA? Specifically, do you still consider that it is defensible, that this is the path forward for SPLM?

Well, we are in the fourth year of the implementation of the CPA. Much of the CPA has been implemented. The war ended in Southern Sudan, Nuba Mountains and southern Blue Nile. We have established governments at the local level, the state level, the level of the Government of Southern Sudan and we are now working also to complete the implementation of the CPA. Still there are areas of the CPA that have not been implemented. We have encountered a lot of difficulties and obstacles created by our partners over the course of the last four years in the implementation of the CPA. Up to now there are outstanding issues like the Abyei Protocol is not implemented, and we have been forced to go to the International Court of Arbitration.

We have also problems still demarcating the borders between the South and the North. It is a serious, major issue. The administration of Abyei is not supported up till now; one can even see the violation of the Abyei Roadmap that we have agreed to implement waiting the outcome of the arbitration.

So there are a number of fundamental aspects of the CPA that have been obstructed and have not been implemented, including the delay in the process in creating the necessary basis for the conduct of elections. The result of the census is not yet out; there have been also serious concerns on how the census was conducted. And the legal framework for ensuring free and fair elections is not yet complete.

We have a number of laws that were supposed to go to the parliament that have not yet been adopted: the media law that ensures freedom of the press and freedom of opinion is not yet adopted in the parliament. Today we have a very dangerous imposition of censorship, so actually we do not have freedom of opinion, we do not have freedom of press in the Sudan today as we speak. That’s a very dangerous development, and this is actually a new development even within the process to the point that the media we have within the country is controlled and censored.

ST: So that’s a concern for the elections?

It is a major concern. If you cannot have freedom to express your opinion, you definitely cannot have the freedom to vote.

ST: So would you say unless the media improves, the elections really …?

Unless the media improves, the elections will not reflect the opinion of the Sudanese people. That is a serious concern that we have. Again we have a major concern that the security forces are given powers that infringe on the freedom of the Sudanese people, citizens, including the power of arbitrary arrest up to 60 days. And this does not augur well with a democratic system. It is a major problems and this is basically one of the areas of disagreement between the SPLM and the National Congress Party.

ST: On a national level, it seems that SPLM has really refrained from interfering in the Darfur conflict. Is that something that you will be discussing with the US administration this week, and what steps will SPLM be looking to take on this issue?

In Darfur the conflict is between the Darfuri movements and the National Congress Party. The SPLM is not a party to the conflict. The SPLM is one of the parties in the Government of National Unity and our role that we see for ourselves is to facilitate an end to the conflict by working with the movements so they can reach and adopt a common single negotiating position and encourage them to negotiate.

On the other hand, we work within the framework of the Government of National Unity to encourage the National Congress Party — the other party to the conflict — to encourage them to reach a peace agreement. So the SPLM is not a party to the conflict. The SPLM sees itself as a facilitator, as a party that can work to bring Sudanese parties to the conflict to the table and encourage them to reach an agreement.

ST: There are certain steps the National Congress has taken, for instance the expulsion of the aid groups, that SPLM wasn’t consulted on at all. Is the aid expulsion something that SPLM has a position on?

Definitely our position, which we have taken back in 2007, is to advise the National Congress to work to help the international community provide unhindered humanitarian assistance to the needy people in Darfur and work with the international community in that direction. Therefore the expulsion of aid agencies does not help the provision of unrestricted humanitarian assistance. But that is a decision taken by the National Congress, as a party to the conflict in Darfur, at the wake of the announcement of the decision of the ICC to indict the president of the Republic and the president of the National Congress on allegation of crimes against humanity and war crimes in Darfur. So that was a decision in which the SPLM was not consulted, it is true. But that was a decision taken by the National Congress. We believe that this was a decision that they have taken in the name of the government but not really the government, but as a party to the conflict in Darfur.

ST: As to the ICC, part of the official position of the SPLM is that Al-Bashir should cooperate with the court, but what specifically does that mean?

Our advice before the indictment was — and that goes back again to the first indictment of Minister Ahmed Haroun and the militia commander called Kosheib — that the best course of action for the Sudan and for the National Congress is to cooperate legally with the ICC, that is to say repute the case and challenge the legality of the jurisdiction of the court itself and deal with this matter legally.

ST: But not actually at The Hague?

Yes — even at The Hague. Send lawyers defending the government of Sudan and the president or whoever is accused. And now just before the indictment decision we advised the president to cooperate with the court but also to deal with the issue of the indictment with restraint and wisdom and avoid any escalation of the situation, avoid confrontation with the international community — that was our advice to them.

ST: Have they taken your advice?

Well, that is to be judged by the Sudanese people and the observers, whether they have taken our advice or not. Of course, the unfortunate development is that with the indictment came the expulsion of the NGOs. We have fears that this may affect the life of the displaced persons in the camps in Darfur negatively. And that is a concern to us. So we advise the National Congress to avoid confrontation and to focus on the search for peace in Darfur. Today the best course of action for us as a country, for the National Congress, is really to work to end the conflict in Darfur, achieve peace; and possibly with that change of the situation that we expect as a result of concentrating the effort to end the conflict, may lead to support by the international community, including deferment of the indictment for a year and a possible extension for other periods into the future.

ST: It seems a lot of these are potentially election issues. For instance, the warrant — is that something that SPLM would address during an election when you contest the National Congress?

These I do note see them as election issues. The election I think is going to be focused on the national agenda. For us as SPLM, our national agenda can be summarized on three main issues: one is to achieve a comprehensive peace in the country through the implementation of the CPA and to work to end the conflict in Darfur through political negotiations, so that we can have peace all over the country. So our first agenda is peace.

Our second agenda is freedom and establishment of a democratic system in the country where the Sudanese people would have freedom to elect their government in free and fair elections.

And our third agenda would be to achieve comprehensive development in the country, even development in the country. With peace and freedom, we believe this will release the creative energies of the Sudanese people to create wealth and develop the country and resources of the country all over. This basically is our agenda. And this is going to be the agenda that the SPLM shall put to the Sudanese people as an alternative in the elections.

ST: Lastly, you are a native of Malakal, so it seems appropriate to ask whether you thought that the recent clashes there were intentionally instigated and whether they fit into a larger political context?

What happened in Malakal, yes, is part of the difficulties that the National Congress has been creating in making the situation in Southern Sudan insecure for the citizens. They have been fomenting tribal conflicts in the South; but these are problems that we face as challenges in building peace after the war in Southern Sudan, including the issue of managing the various militia groups, incorporating them or disarming them.

ST: Was that specifically tied to the meeting of the presidency in Juba, as some have alleged?

These are speculations that are there and I do not want to be part of the speculations. This is something that has happened, it was a violation and it also showed failure of the Joint Integrated Units in terms of becoming a unit or a force that can symbolize the unity of the country, the sovereignty. This failure is a result of the way the National Congress decided to employ militia groups rather than elements from the Sudanese Armed Forces to join elements from the Sudan People’s Liberation Army in forming these Joint Integrated Units.

(ST)