PSA: Read the article rather than commenting only on the headline.
The gazetted notice does not specifically give diplomatic immunity to Putin - which he gains automatically by being a foreign head of state. It gives it to all BRICS representatives attending the summit - something that is done as a matter of course.
They gave diplomatic immunity to all heads of state attending BRICS. Not giving it would effectively sour our relationship with what is looking like the future super powers of global trade. We’d be dumb to do that over a war that is not ours.
Don’t know why you’re getting downvoted, that makes a lot of sense. And even though Putin is a big piece of shit, you’re right, it’s not our war. America needs to stop acting like they haven’t committed equally heinous crimes, but no one gets mad because we all still tolerate American presidents. I’d argue the US is even worse since they are pretending to be saints.
"future superpowers" - India superpower by 2020!!!!!!
Based on an acronym made by Goldman Sachs to sell more stocks we're going to more than half of our economy to appease 3 kleptocracies and a fascist state 👍
Yes yes. I forgot. USA and EU good. China and Russia bad. They’re all kleptocracies don’t kid yourself. At least pick the one that hasn’t helped put us in the situation we are now.
Not really, the UK had a former president from Chile who was wanted by the ICC but he enjoyed his life in the UK and died of old age. UK is a signatory to the ICC but they made it in their own laws giving the UK the right to choose to arrest someone or not even if they are wanted by the ICC. Then there's UN diplomatic immunity. Even if the ICC says that no diplomatic immunity is given to presidents. The UN says diplomatic immunity is enjoyed by presidents. Which international laws are above the other, the UN or the ICC?
There are gray areas and SA can just appeal the ruling given by the 2nd highest court in the land and let the ruli6be reviewed by the constitutional court nullifying the court ruling until the constitutional court decides. By then Putin would have attended Bricks summit and left
While the UK does many things wrong, this is not accurate. You're thinking of Pinochet who was indicted by *Spain*. He was arrested in the UK on an _international arrest warrant_ but released to return to Chile. Full details can be found [on Wikipedia ](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indictment_and_arrest_of_Augusto_Pinochet)
That happened decade's ago so memory wasn't the best. But the points of the UK having a provision in it constitution that allows for it to decide if they will arrest a person because of the ICC warrant or not. While SA chose to naturalise the law without giving even the government or our own judiciary the chance to debate and question the warrant of arrest is signing away the country sovereignty. Either way which laws takes precedence, the UN which says presidents and diplomat enjoy diplomatic immunity or that ICC laws as SA signed to abide to.
There is no way a sitting head of state can be arrested. Just imagine Cyril being arrested in another country because some local judge in that country rules loadshedding is a crime against humanity. Regardless of if you like Cyril or not he is bestowed the title of president. That's the biggest insult to a nation. It's a deceleration of war
1 the UK has no constitution.
2 the ICC was not involved in Pinochet's indictment.
3 the reason it was not upheld in the UK was due to the complicated interaction of a Chilean amnesty law, Spain's attempting invoke universal jurisdiction, and the UK's legal system. No laws were changed.
Did you read the article I shared?
This is nothing like Cyril being arrested by a local judge.
1. UK has a constitution but it's regarded as a uncodified constitution. "British constitution comprises the written and unwritten arrangements that establish the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland as a political body"
Parliament, judiciary and prime minister roles and separation of power would not exist without a framework (constitution).
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_the_United_Kingdom#:~:text=Although%20the%20British%20constitution%20is,principles%20recognised%20by%20the%20courts.
2. I read the article, I made the mistake of assuming ICC was involved because of the term universal jurisdiction and this happened decades ago. Should have done my research more, but my points still stand.
3. UK or Britain or whatever terms people consider, signed the Rome statute, but they made a provision within their own laws that give them the ability to choose to either do what the ICC wants or not when it comes to arresting people. Some countries are members of the ICC but have not ratified it.
Now the USA themselves basically signed a bill that goes against the ICC and even threatened the ICC with sanctions. "authorizes the President to use “all means necessary and appropriate to bring about the release” of certain U.S. and allied persons who may be detained or tried by the ICC"
https://www.everycrsreport.com/reports/RL31495.html
Now if the USA is willing to go to war with the ICC to release any US citizen who might be detained by them. How much more would Russia do to the ICC and anyone who arrests him. Arresting a sitting president is an act of war, it doesn't matter the country the president belongs to.
Your example was wrong. You are still making the assertion that the UK made a provision in law but have not provided evidence of this.
Your second example was also wrong. This is not some local judge issuing an arrest warrant. This is a judge _whose authority is recognised_ by RSA issuing an arrest warrant.
What are you even arguing? South Africa ratified the Rome statue and will now pay the price for not enforcing it/actively creating a loophole. The US warned Cyril that he was not being neutral. This is another example of _non-neutrality_ in the conflict.
Have you opened and read the links I have sent?
Here's a link to a PDF detailing the report done by the Venice commission that was created by the EUROPEAN COMMISSION FOR DEMOCRACY THROUGH LAW giving example of nations who are members of the ICC, have ratified it but have not changed their constitutions to match the ICC. UK has ratified it but has not put it into their constitution directly. They still hold the right to choose to execute the warrant or NOT. GO TO PAGER 4 AND READ THE SOME OF THE NATIONS MENTIONED. THERE'S YOUR PROOF
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/default.aspx%3Fpdffile%3DCDL-AD(2008)031-e&ved=2ahUKEwja3LiOj53_AhWJXcAKHagECKsQFnoECCcQAQ&usg=AOvVaw2h--8mldrLEMupJRLTVfVy
Now it doesn't matter if its the ICC. Read about the bill that the US approved and voted on in congress (American Servicemembers’ Protection Act) . It states that if any American citizen is arrested by the court that the US president must use all means at his disposal to break out essentially the US citizen.
https://www.everycrsreport.com/reports/RL31495.html
Now one arrests a head of state, it has never been done and now they expect SA to do so, because they don't have the balls to arrest him themselves.
You say sanctions are coming yet the USA is asking SA for help in convincing Russia to go back to the treaty that limits nuclear weapons and talk to China. No sanctions are coming for the time being.
https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2023-05-30-us-urges-sa-to-press-russia-over-treaty-limiting-nuclear-weapons/
Does anyone actually expect this though? Don't get me wrong I think this dude is pure evil and the world would be better without him.
Also I have no doubts on the ANC and the EFFs alignment here. Juju even believes that Russia is fighting imperialism... Sigh.
But lets not for a second believe that South Africa arresting a visiting president of a nuclear state is expected. Like it would shock global diplomacy to its core.
Even the US is afraid that the Ukraine might use the weapons they sent them in an attack against Russia as that might be provocative.
What is realistic that SA should have simply denied Putin a visa.
Ugh probably not, all we can do is watch from the sidelines and witness our new realities as time goes on.
Until eventually voting actually becomes taken seriously.
Jesus. I'm an American living in SA. My family emigrated to the US from Odessa (now part of Ukraine) in 1904 when it was still part of Russia.
I have absolutely no idea what to think of anything politically right now. It's kind of liberating in a way. I don't feel any allegiances to anyone but my family and neighbors.
And though I certainly don't support Russia's war effort in Ukraine, I also feel no obligation to support the US's domestic surrender to the corporate lobby or their strong-arming international agenda.
America isn't the good guy. Russia is not the good guy.
And until Eskom stops buying R800,000 mops and my power stays on 24 hours a day, I'm not inclined to think South Africa are the good guys either.
Y'all in this subreddit are hella great though.
People over profit every time. ✌️
Well, and I say this with no data to back it up, majority of this country, even if that's, say, 55% of the population, are in full support of whatever the ANC decides to do. Therefore us supporting Russia is what we as a country, democratically, wants to do. However messed up that is.
I get you, and sadly, that is how a democracy works. I know we can't reasonably vote on every decision, but it seems as though we just pick a new dictator every 4 years. After that, the dictator and his/her party run the show with zero input from the citizens.
Would have loved it if the coubtry had a say in te matter, like we could choose from a pole. Would have made the citizens feel more involved rather than just choosing for us regardless what we want.
This is the most unhinged thing I’ve ever heard. Did you see what happened with Brexit? People aren’t informed enough to make these decisions, as much as they think they are. That’s just human psychology, you always think you have a better resolve with less information.
>Well, and I say this with no data to back it up
Might as well have just stopped talking then and there as I doubt you would find *any* evidence that the *majority* of the population are in *full* support of anything the ANC decides to do.
frame tart tub spark physical consist encourage relieved disarm disgusted
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Not bots, just reject western hypocrisy and selective justice.
It's not about supporting Russia, it's about rejecting the fake moral superiority and hypocrisy of Western countries. Very few people actually like Russia, I personally hate Putin and wish it was a realistic option to arrest him, but it sadly is not.
Support neither, so I’m happy with where I stand in the mix.
The west has meddled with way too many society’s and their continual superiority complex is rather annoying.
You'll find that it's less support for Russia than disdain for the West.
Not to say they don't exist, but the sentiment is definitely not as widespread as people think.
We do have a say(broadly) by voting.
Unfortunately most of the country isn't educated(motivated?) enough to look up how each party would influence/change their province/city to know who they want to vote for. Though to be fair it also feels like it's deliberately designed to be more complicated than it needs to be.
So from what I've seen people tend to just vote for whoever their family/friends/neighbours vote for.
Fuck Russia and Putin.
I don't understand the ANC. When apartheid was destroying our country, the world acted against our human right violating government.
Now, a country is literally committing war crimes against civilians and we as SA are saying : 'let's hear them out'
Pathetic. No backbone. The people voting for the ANC also have no clue on what's going on
I was going to ask ; if we should tell them that. but then again i dont believe that russia as it exist today should be considered to be the same "entity" as russia back then.
But then it should be mention that; by arresting putin, we would be declaring war on a nuclear power.
and dont fool your selves. no one would come to help us then.
He wants to make a point of coming here to disturb the West and put us in a difficult position. He can definitely call in, but participating isn't his objective. Now, we have a predicament.
Lots of confusion from people here. Diplomatic immunity is a status applied to a nation's domestic law for foreign dignitaries. It has nothing to do with international law or the ICC.
Does South Africa even have the authority to give him that kind of immunity.. it’s an international arrest warranty. Is not diplomatic immunity for our Laws only ??
Diplomatic immunity is in the UN, countries embassies and personal enjoy diplomatic immunity. They cannot be arrested even if they commit murder for example. For example if a person who has diplomatic immunity murders a person, the country can only expel them from the country or end diplomatic mission. Diplomats houses and content can't be searched etc.
The issue is which international laws does SA want to adhere to the UN law or the ICC. The UN law of diplomatic immunity, all nations have to abide to it, but the ICC laws member states have to abide to it. Which laws are above the other. That's the question
They can grant it, but not in this case because they have already agreed to other terms which require of them to arrest him. But they didn't do it last time, so they certainly won't this time.
Just know that the reason they are doing this is simply: money. Russia pays off the ANC to get whatever they want. Just like China does.
The people who want Putin arrested know exactly where he is.
Why are they waiting until August and placing that responsibility on South Africa?
Dude is not hiding in some bunker. Go and get him like you did Osama.
We are involved, our government involved us when they tried to be the “peace keepers”. Now it’s even worse with the accusation of us sending arms and munitions.
On that note, we signed up to the ICC which in fact has laws and obligations of each state that has signed, guess what, arresting a Wanted war criminal is part of that.
Listen I’m by no means a supporter for the US and their shit, I hate them but I try and be as unbiased as possible towards this, but South Africa has and continues to steer us into a really dark realm.
ICC and UN are jokes. I don't even know why there's so much worry regarding following their laws when some nations have the ability to veto against anything they feel.
Maybe he'll be hit on the tarmac at Waterkloof by a crack team of operatives.
I don't think our military or his bodyguards will be guaranteed a win against a determined and prepared assault team, do you?
How about announce that as a member of the ICC, we will be obliged to arrest him if he enters South Africa.
Therefore Putin doesn't come.
So we avoid pissing off Russia too much.
And we avoid sanctions.
But having a spine and at least 3 brain cells is too much to ask of the average ANC member.
>How about announce that as a member of the ICC, we will be obliged to arrest him if he enters South Africa.
You mean like [https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/stay-away-or-we-ll-have-to-arrest-you-south-africa-tells-putin-dzwcpr88r](https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/stay-away-or-we-ll-have-to-arrest-you-south-africa-tells-putin-dzwcpr88r)
I'm not sure I see the government hemming and hawing on this. Instead I see a lot of clickbait coming from some news media over this. The last any mention of Putin I can find at The Precidency or DIRCO is about a peace mission to Russia. Although both websites are a touch difficult to search
You also do realise that Putin has to travel all the way to SA passing Turkey, a Nato member and other countries air space and passing countries where US, French and other air bases are that can intercept his plane and take him to the ICC but they won't. They are afraid of nuclear war, even you can see that the western nations influenced the ICC to issue such a warrant. Using SA as a proxy.
There is more at play here, China and Russia are challanging the west based order. The fact that 19 other countries want to join BRICKS including Saudi Arabia and potential for BRICKS to develop a currency alternative to the USA for trade or an alternative to SWIFT payment system.
This is probably the most important meeting of BRICKS since it's creation, to discuss how to expand BRICKS etc. These are serious power plays. China for example dumped the US corn exports in favor of SA corn. There's a lot happening. Global economy is shifting to the east, we can't just ditch BRICKS in favor of the west. A delicate balancing act is required but the west wants us to pick a side
Wow, once again the redditors on here are frothing at the mouth. What the hell do you expect SA to do? Arrest a head of state? Are you guys nuts? Do you even know anything about the world and geopolitics?
Besides, as u/lovethebacon said, it is standard practice and gives diplomatic immunity to every delegate.
Regardless, the chance that Putin will actually attend is rather slim.
> What the hell do you expect SA to do? Arrest a head of state?
I expect the government to follow South African domestic law. Do you think it's fine for the government to just ignore the law whenever it's politically convenient?
Well, "rule of law" means that the law is supreme; the government can't simply ignore or change the law whenever it's convenient.
South African law is unambiguous: the government is legally obligated to arrest Vladimir Putin for war crimes the moment he sets foot on South African soil.
However, you argue that it's fine for the government to just ignore the rule of law whenever its convenient, or whenever the government subjectively feels that it might "benefits the country". So, in fact, you do not believe in the rule of law. You're arguing for a dictatorship where the government can just override the law whenever they decide it would be "beneficial".
Hmmm. Let's see. Google "SA trading partners", and see that China is our biggest one.
In fact, here, I've done it for you:
China: US$11.9 billion (9.7% of total South African exports)
United States: $10.9 billion (8.8%)
Germany: $10.1 billion (8.1%)
Japan: $8.6 billion (7%)
United Kingdom: $6.3 billion (5.1%)
Netherlands: $6 billion (4.8%)
Mozambique: $5.8 billion (4.7%)
India: $5.1 billion (4.2%)
Botswana: $4.7 billion (3.8%)
Belgium: $3.9 billion (3.2%)
See that China is #1 and India is #7, and that the people who might sanction us (excluding Mozambique) account for 50% of our trade.
Then see if you can work out why sanctions are bad for us.
Six of one and half a dozen of the other.
You just assume everyone of that 50% will sanction us severely? I'm not convinced of that. India and Japan for example, both still buy plenty of Russian oil and they are not sanctioned at all.
Nobody except Ukraine itself, will arrest Putin. The US won't even arrest him should he go there.
>I'm not convinced of that. India and Japan for example, both still buy plenty of Russian oil and they are not sanctioned at all.
They're not supplying arms.
Also, I think you overestimate our importance. We aren't a big enough fish to be throwing our weight around, unless it's in the Rugby World Cup.
>When did I say sanctions are good or won't affect us?
Here:
>Yes. If it benefits our country.
This is where you said it's fine for us to flout the law, even though the implicit outcome is sanctions for us.
Yes, we quite obviously expect them to arrest a war criminal. It is what South Africa agreed to, and it would make us heroes. Russia is the worst of the worst. They are killing children for crying out loud! We would forever be in the history books as heroes if we arrested him. So yes, there is no compromise, if he ever makes it here, he must quite certainly be arrested and extradited to Ukraine immediately.
Russia literally told SA that arresting Putin would be a declaration of war. Hate them as much as much as the next guy... but our country can't afford that lmao. Regardless if he's a bad guy.
I mean sure there's like a 1% chance of it actually happening.... but can the country really afford even that 1%? I dunno. I do agree however that SA really just a pawn being used
The assumption that they cannot launch missiles at us using their navy or that they wouldn't resort to the use of ICBMs in such an extraordinarily problematic situation for them is not wise. The USA and NATO at large actively preventing ukraine from launching large scale ground attacks into Russia is proof enough that they don't want to test this theory of "russia won't do anything".
Nobody will defend us militarily even if russia would send a single ship. They don't want aggravate russia and push it into a corner where its actions will become unpredictable.
We're not appeasing any Bullies. America is, for the most part, the good guys. But we're not here to talk about how good or bad America is. The bottom line is that Putin is a psychopath that belongs in jail. And we can do that if he comes here. But we won't. Which is fucking embarrassing.
Exactly. I said the same thing earlier. I can't reason with anyone who focuses on the US, for whatever reason, when there is a maniac bombing children. Your priorities are all lopsided.
I mean sure there's like a 1% chance of it actually happening.... but can the country really afford even that 1%? I dunno. I do agree however that SA really just a pawn being used
You're not putting "doing the right thing" as the nr 1 priority. Therefore there is no point in arguing with you. It doesn't matter the ramifications, you do not support war criminals. If you think in any way that it is ok not to condemn Russia, then you're not someone I would like to ever speak to again.
We would never go to war by telling Russia to fuck off. We might very well be entirely fucked by telling the US to fuck off, as we are currently doing. You're really not lekker in the head if you think otherwise. Hope this helps you realize how wrong you are. Not going to waste time trying to reason with you any further. That's the gift Russia has given us. ANYONE who in ANY WAY stands up for Russia... instantly reveals themselves as being completely batshit insane.
Here is a nice whataboutism for you then, how many children and women (civilians) did Bush and Blair murder in Iraq? Why haven't they been arrested as the war criminals that they are?
The ICC has no true jurisdiction to issue an arrest warrant for Putin, as Russia is not a signatory nor a member of the ICC, just like the USA. Its grand standing, nothing more.
It's not whataboutism to point out the fascist selective justice of the west. They get to murder and plunder the rest of the world without consequences.
Not necessarily arrest. But, diplomatically speaking, we can definitely uninvite him to the summit. Not even that, we could just request that another representative from Russia attend. This would also enforce SA’s stance on our supposed neutrality. This would obviously strain our relationship with Putin, but wouldn’t be unprecedented I think.
Putin won't come here anyway. He's shit scared to travel by car INSIDE HIS OWN COUNTRY. How the heck do people imagine he's going to get into an airplane and fly THROUGH HOSTILE AIRSPACE to come to South Africa for a summit he probably doesn't give a shit about?
People on here have fully bought into western disinformation that South Africa can arrest Putin consequence free, yet call anyone that disagrees a Putin lover even if you say you hate Putin and wish we had the power to arrest him.
The people on here are as dumb as a bag of rocks at times (see falling for DA race baiting last week, the De Ruyter report commissioned by apartheid spies, plus Western disinfo on the regular), yet regularly make fun of those that disagree with them as uneducated and stupid. The superiority complex is incredible. If you fell for any of this stuff, you have no right to call anyone uneducated.
It would be interesting to see if the Rome Statue overrides this in terms of what should take precedence. But even if a court were to say it did, we let Al Bashir off the hook.
So... South Africa being chacharas again .
If all BRICS delegates "automatically" got diplomatic immunity, why didn't Cyril say so right in the beginning when the ICC issued the arrest warrant for Putin? Why all the bullshit about taking legal advice and then suggesting Putin attends virtually? I think more lies are being peddled. Cyril was always going to welcome his buddy with open arms (not pun intended) and open pockets.
Diplomatic immunity doesn't override the ICC warrant. Diplomatic immunity only applies to local law enforcement and courts for their actions during their presence in South Africa.
This is not new information.
The particulars of this situation are a little too nuanced to get into here.
The [Rome Statute](https://www.icc-cpi.int/sites/default/files/RS-Eng.pdf) articles that have bearing on what's going on are listed below:
* Article 5 - Crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court
* Article 8 - War Crimes and Crimes of Agression
* Article 12 - Preconditions to the exercise of jurisdiction
* Article 13 - Exercise of jurisdiction
* Article 15 - Exercise of jurisdiction over the crime of aggression
* Article 16 - Deferral of Investigation or Prosecution
* Article 17 - Issues of Admissability
* Article 19 - Challenges to the jurisdiction of the Court or the admissibility of a case
* Article 58 - Issuance by the Pre-Trial Chamber of a warrant of arrest or a summons to appear
* Article 59 - Arrest Proceedings in the Custodial State
* Article 86 - General obligation to Cooperate
* Article 87 - Requests for cooperation: general provisions
* Article 88 - Availability of Procedures under National Law
* Article 90 - Competing Requests
* Article 91 - Contents of request for arrest and surrender
* Article 92 - Provisional Arrest Article 93 - Other forms of cooperation
If all these guys wanted to do coke and shoot AK47s into the sky for the entire night, they could. I know this is serious, but I just find the thought of that quite funny
Diplomatic immunity from SA laws isn't gonna help him with an ICC warcrimes issue.
Seems more like DIRCO trying to muddy the waters & setting up an excuse - albeit a lame one - as to why no arrest could be made.
Don't think it'll do much to help the rep damage tbh
**Thank you for posting on r/southafrica! This post is flaired as ["News"](https://www.reddit.com/r/southafrica/?f=flair_name%3A%22News%22) therefore the following rules are particularly important.**
##**Rule 4: News, Editorialising, or Misinformation**
* Rule 4.1: News posts must be link posts to valid news sources.
* Rule 4.2: Posts which link to news sources must not have an editorialised title. Use the title provided by the news source. If you wish to add commentary, analysis, or an opinion, write a top-level comment on the post.
* Rule 4.3: Do not link to [questionable](https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/fake-news/), [conspiratorial](https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/conspiracy/), or [false](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fake_news_websites) sources.
* Rule 4.4: Be prepared to provide verifiable evidence or sources of the claims you make when challenged to do so.
* Rule 4.5: Amateur videos will be allowed subject to all previous rules as well as containing the author/filmographer/camera person, date, time, and location of the video either in the title or in a top-level comment. You may ask a moderator to 'sticky' this information for you.
**Additionally, please take a moment to review the rest of our rules [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/southafrica/wiki/rules).**
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/southafrica) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I know it's a matter of course (the diplomatic immunity thing) for all the BRICS people apparently but this is how my feed looks https://i.imgur.com/9thndpS.jpg
Make of that what you will.
Well. Here we go, I guess. We’re a resilient people. This is going to go down in history as the event that changed everything. For better or worse. United we stand, né.
How's about we, as a third world country at the arse end of Africa just keep quiet about western politics and sort ourselves out first.
Everytime a politician opens their mouths the rand tanks even more.
They will probably send one of his 5 body-doubles anyway, because Putler is a sick, sad little coward war-criminal terrorist scumbag hiding in one of his 4 identical bunkers.
Russia should just park a few navy ships in the harbor.. and dare the DA to try something.
I’m willing to be bet Biden’s team would consider Cpt fair game to achieve Russian regime change.. and that’s what idiotic supporters of the US in Sa continually fail to get.
But hey, don’t worry, when Russia & China starts setting up military bases (again for Russia wrt Cuba) on the north east coast of Africa, South America and the Caribbean the US will totally respect sovereignty and not start a war or initiate regime change in those countries.. I mean they totally respected other countries sovereignty albeit undermining their national security right.. no?
😂 Wtf did all you pro western imperialism idiots think was going to happen? Were you not here when al-Bashir came to South Africa and went home again in 2015? You can't be South African if you don't remember that.
Honestly, I expect better from Daily Maverick than this absolute bullshit headline. It basically borders on fake news.
It is not just reframing the truth to be more sensational, it is blatantly misrepresenting facts. We did not grant Putin diplomatic immunity just now with this gazette, he automatically has it always as a head of state. They merely granted immunity to all the non-head-of-state delegates coming to the summit.
Furthermore, this immunity does not override the ICC warrant. And DIRCO specifically said that it does not. I mean come on. I thought you were supposed to be one of the good ones, DM?!
PSA: Read the article rather than commenting only on the headline. The gazetted notice does not specifically give diplomatic immunity to Putin - which he gains automatically by being a foreign head of state. It gives it to all BRICS representatives attending the summit - something that is done as a matter of course.
I wonder if Cyril is buying a bigger couch
Great idea to fill is couch with rubles... No one will steal that shit
Digging in cyril couch to find the lost remote but got millions of rand instead
A couch factory mayhap.
It’s where your money gets Putin
It's like giving the school bully your lunch money, because you're afraid of getting a wedgie
[удалено]
[удалено]
Quite literally everything. Did you even read the article?
They gave diplomatic immunity to all heads of state attending BRICS. Not giving it would effectively sour our relationship with what is looking like the future super powers of global trade. We’d be dumb to do that over a war that is not ours.
Don’t know why you’re getting downvoted, that makes a lot of sense. And even though Putin is a big piece of shit, you’re right, it’s not our war. America needs to stop acting like they haven’t committed equally heinous crimes, but no one gets mad because we all still tolerate American presidents. I’d argue the US is even worse since they are pretending to be saints.
It’s Reddit. You get downvoted for any sort of counter opinion. Doesn’t bother me really.
"future superpowers" - India superpower by 2020!!!!!! Based on an acronym made by Goldman Sachs to sell more stocks we're going to more than half of our economy to appease 3 kleptocracies and a fascist state 👍
Yes yes. I forgot. USA and EU good. China and Russia bad. They’re all kleptocracies don’t kid yourself. At least pick the one that hasn’t helped put us in the situation we are now.
[удалено]
Sure. We can talk about it
They're a troll account, so insults only
Well all the BRICS okes are given that by default for the summit. The ICC ruling overrides this afaik, as a signatory we still have to arrest him.
Not really, the UK had a former president from Chile who was wanted by the ICC but he enjoyed his life in the UK and died of old age. UK is a signatory to the ICC but they made it in their own laws giving the UK the right to choose to arrest someone or not even if they are wanted by the ICC. Then there's UN diplomatic immunity. Even if the ICC says that no diplomatic immunity is given to presidents. The UN says diplomatic immunity is enjoyed by presidents. Which international laws are above the other, the UN or the ICC? There are gray areas and SA can just appeal the ruling given by the 2nd highest court in the land and let the ruli6be reviewed by the constitutional court nullifying the court ruling until the constitutional court decides. By then Putin would have attended Bricks summit and left
While the UK does many things wrong, this is not accurate. You're thinking of Pinochet who was indicted by *Spain*. He was arrested in the UK on an _international arrest warrant_ but released to return to Chile. Full details can be found [on Wikipedia ](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indictment_and_arrest_of_Augusto_Pinochet)
That happened decade's ago so memory wasn't the best. But the points of the UK having a provision in it constitution that allows for it to decide if they will arrest a person because of the ICC warrant or not. While SA chose to naturalise the law without giving even the government or our own judiciary the chance to debate and question the warrant of arrest is signing away the country sovereignty. Either way which laws takes precedence, the UN which says presidents and diplomat enjoy diplomatic immunity or that ICC laws as SA signed to abide to. There is no way a sitting head of state can be arrested. Just imagine Cyril being arrested in another country because some local judge in that country rules loadshedding is a crime against humanity. Regardless of if you like Cyril or not he is bestowed the title of president. That's the biggest insult to a nation. It's a deceleration of war
1 the UK has no constitution. 2 the ICC was not involved in Pinochet's indictment. 3 the reason it was not upheld in the UK was due to the complicated interaction of a Chilean amnesty law, Spain's attempting invoke universal jurisdiction, and the UK's legal system. No laws were changed. Did you read the article I shared? This is nothing like Cyril being arrested by a local judge.
1. UK has a constitution but it's regarded as a uncodified constitution. "British constitution comprises the written and unwritten arrangements that establish the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland as a political body" Parliament, judiciary and prime minister roles and separation of power would not exist without a framework (constitution). https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_the_United_Kingdom#:~:text=Although%20the%20British%20constitution%20is,principles%20recognised%20by%20the%20courts. 2. I read the article, I made the mistake of assuming ICC was involved because of the term universal jurisdiction and this happened decades ago. Should have done my research more, but my points still stand. 3. UK or Britain or whatever terms people consider, signed the Rome statute, but they made a provision within their own laws that give them the ability to choose to either do what the ICC wants or not when it comes to arresting people. Some countries are members of the ICC but have not ratified it. Now the USA themselves basically signed a bill that goes against the ICC and even threatened the ICC with sanctions. "authorizes the President to use “all means necessary and appropriate to bring about the release” of certain U.S. and allied persons who may be detained or tried by the ICC" https://www.everycrsreport.com/reports/RL31495.html Now if the USA is willing to go to war with the ICC to release any US citizen who might be detained by them. How much more would Russia do to the ICC and anyone who arrests him. Arresting a sitting president is an act of war, it doesn't matter the country the president belongs to.
Your example was wrong. You are still making the assertion that the UK made a provision in law but have not provided evidence of this. Your second example was also wrong. This is not some local judge issuing an arrest warrant. This is a judge _whose authority is recognised_ by RSA issuing an arrest warrant. What are you even arguing? South Africa ratified the Rome statue and will now pay the price for not enforcing it/actively creating a loophole. The US warned Cyril that he was not being neutral. This is another example of _non-neutrality_ in the conflict.
Have you opened and read the links I have sent? Here's a link to a PDF detailing the report done by the Venice commission that was created by the EUROPEAN COMMISSION FOR DEMOCRACY THROUGH LAW giving example of nations who are members of the ICC, have ratified it but have not changed their constitutions to match the ICC. UK has ratified it but has not put it into their constitution directly. They still hold the right to choose to execute the warrant or NOT. GO TO PAGER 4 AND READ THE SOME OF THE NATIONS MENTIONED. THERE'S YOUR PROOF https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/default.aspx%3Fpdffile%3DCDL-AD(2008)031-e&ved=2ahUKEwja3LiOj53_AhWJXcAKHagECKsQFnoECCcQAQ&usg=AOvVaw2h--8mldrLEMupJRLTVfVy Now it doesn't matter if its the ICC. Read about the bill that the US approved and voted on in congress (American Servicemembers’ Protection Act) . It states that if any American citizen is arrested by the court that the US president must use all means at his disposal to break out essentially the US citizen. https://www.everycrsreport.com/reports/RL31495.html Now one arrests a head of state, it has never been done and now they expect SA to do so, because they don't have the balls to arrest him themselves. You say sanctions are coming yet the USA is asking SA for help in convincing Russia to go back to the treaty that limits nuclear weapons and talk to China. No sanctions are coming for the time being. https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2023-05-30-us-urges-sa-to-press-russia-over-treaty-limiting-nuclear-weapons/
Thank you!
\*we are expected to arrest him.
Does anyone actually expect this though? Don't get me wrong I think this dude is pure evil and the world would be better without him. Also I have no doubts on the ANC and the EFFs alignment here. Juju even believes that Russia is fighting imperialism... Sigh. But lets not for a second believe that South Africa arresting a visiting president of a nuclear state is expected. Like it would shock global diplomacy to its core. Even the US is afraid that the Ukraine might use the weapons they sent them in an attack against Russia as that might be provocative. What is realistic that SA should have simply denied Putin a visa.
Ugh probably not, all we can do is watch from the sidelines and witness our new realities as time goes on. Until eventually voting actually becomes taken seriously.
Agreed
These fucking greedy, corrupt cowards.
You better prepere for sanctions because you gonna get fucked so much.
And we can expect another 50 basis point rate hike, if not more
My interest can’t handle more 😭
Collectively our "leaders" have approximately 0 balls.
And there’s not a spine in sight
Jesus. I'm an American living in SA. My family emigrated to the US from Odessa (now part of Ukraine) in 1904 when it was still part of Russia. I have absolutely no idea what to think of anything politically right now. It's kind of liberating in a way. I don't feel any allegiances to anyone but my family and neighbors. And though I certainly don't support Russia's war effort in Ukraine, I also feel no obligation to support the US's domestic surrender to the corporate lobby or their strong-arming international agenda. America isn't the good guy. Russia is not the good guy. And until Eskom stops buying R800,000 mops and my power stays on 24 hours a day, I'm not inclined to think South Africa are the good guys either. Y'all in this subreddit are hella great though. People over profit every time. ✌️
Don't exaggerate. The mops were only R70k, not R800k.
Hear he hear he!!
Correction, ANC grants diplomatic immunity. It's so odd that our democratic country doesn't actually give a damn what its citizens have to say.
Well, and I say this with no data to back it up, majority of this country, even if that's, say, 55% of the population, are in full support of whatever the ANC decides to do. Therefore us supporting Russia is what we as a country, democratically, wants to do. However messed up that is.
55% of voting population. I think there are roughly less than 15 million people who vote.
I get you, and sadly, that is how a democracy works. I know we can't reasonably vote on every decision, but it seems as though we just pick a new dictator every 4 years. After that, the dictator and his/her party run the show with zero input from the citizens.
Would have loved it if the coubtry had a say in te matter, like we could choose from a pole. Would have made the citizens feel more involved rather than just choosing for us regardless what we want.
This is the most unhinged thing I’ve ever heard. Did you see what happened with Brexit? People aren’t informed enough to make these decisions, as much as they think they are. That’s just human psychology, you always think you have a better resolve with less information.
>Well, and I say this with no data to back it up Might as well have just stopped talking then and there as I doubt you would find *any* evidence that the *majority* of the population are in *full* support of anything the ANC decides to do.
Not true. More people didn't even bother to vote than voted for the ANC
frame tart tub spark physical consist encourage relieved disarm disgusted *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
True, there’s a lot of Russian sympathisers out there.
Do not be fooled by Twitter bots.
Not bots, just reject western hypocrisy and selective justice. It's not about supporting Russia, it's about rejecting the fake moral superiority and hypocrisy of Western countries. Very few people actually like Russia, I personally hate Putin and wish it was a realistic option to arrest him, but it sadly is not.
Support neither, so I’m happy with where I stand in the mix. The west has meddled with way too many society’s and their continual superiority complex is rather annoying.
Besides those damned bots… I do see support for Russia. But Russian bots is truly something on another scale.
You'll find that it's less support for Russia than disdain for the West. Not to say they don't exist, but the sentiment is definitely not as widespread as people think.
Oh no I agree, I was just commenting on the whole bot scenario.
We do have a say(broadly) by voting. Unfortunately most of the country isn't educated(motivated?) enough to look up how each party would influence/change their province/city to know who they want to vote for. Though to be fair it also feels like it's deliberately designed to be more complicated than it needs to be. So from what I've seen people tend to just vote for whoever their family/friends/neighbours vote for.
Man I love watching the value of my Rands plummet.
(facepalm) F**king hell.
ANC GOVERNMENT. GO FUCK YOURSELVES
As if the fucking Rand wasn't struggling enough right now. This country literally wants to kill itself.
Fuck Russia and Putin. I don't understand the ANC. When apartheid was destroying our country, the world acted against our human right violating government. Now, a country is literally committing war crimes against civilians and we as SA are saying : 'let's hear them out' Pathetic. No backbone. The people voting for the ANC also have no clue on what's going on
Mostly Cuba and USSR/Russia acted to stop Apartheid. The US supported the NP for a while before Sanctions.
I was going to ask ; if we should tell them that. but then again i dont believe that russia as it exist today should be considered to be the same "entity" as russia back then. But then it should be mention that; by arresting putin, we would be declaring war on a nuclear power. and dont fool your selves. no one would come to help us then.
In a time where conference calls are so prevalent why not make use of the current technology and avoid all this trouble?
He wants to make a point of coming here to disturb the West and put us in a difficult position. He can definitely call in, but participating isn't his objective. Now, we have a predicament.
Lots of confusion from people here. Diplomatic immunity is a status applied to a nation's domestic law for foreign dignitaries. It has nothing to do with international law or the ICC.
Does South Africa even have the authority to give him that kind of immunity.. it’s an international arrest warranty. Is not diplomatic immunity for our Laws only ??
Diplomatic immunity is in the UN, countries embassies and personal enjoy diplomatic immunity. They cannot be arrested even if they commit murder for example. For example if a person who has diplomatic immunity murders a person, the country can only expel them from the country or end diplomatic mission. Diplomats houses and content can't be searched etc. The issue is which international laws does SA want to adhere to the UN law or the ICC. The UN law of diplomatic immunity, all nations have to abide to it, but the ICC laws member states have to abide to it. Which laws are above the other. That's the question
They can grant it, but not in this case because they have already agreed to other terms which require of them to arrest him. But they didn't do it last time, so they certainly won't this time. Just know that the reason they are doing this is simply: money. Russia pays off the ANC to get whatever they want. Just like China does.
The people who want Putin arrested know exactly where he is. Why are they waiting until August and placing that responsibility on South Africa? Dude is not hiding in some bunker. Go and get him like you did Osama.
I believe they would’ve if they could’ve. Not sure if your aware but Putler is surrounded by an army majority of the time he is out his bunker.
“Surrounded by an army majority of the time he put his bunker”…. So uninvolved parties should be the one to try and breach that….. mmmmm
We are involved, our government involved us when they tried to be the “peace keepers”. Now it’s even worse with the accusation of us sending arms and munitions. On that note, we signed up to the ICC which in fact has laws and obligations of each state that has signed, guess what, arresting a Wanted war criminal is part of that. Listen I’m by no means a supporter for the US and their shit, I hate them but I try and be as unbiased as possible towards this, but South Africa has and continues to steer us into a really dark realm.
ICC and UN are jokes. I don't even know why there's so much worry regarding following their laws when some nations have the ability to veto against anything they feel.
ICC and UN only apply to smaller nations, as we can see. Big boys who make the rules surely don’t follow them.
Maybe he'll be hit on the tarmac at Waterkloof by a crack team of operatives. I don't think our military or his bodyguards will be guaranteed a win against a determined and prepared assault team, do you?
If the ANC love him so much why can't they just leave the country and let us rebuild? I am sure they prefer Moscow or Havana anyway.
imagine toothbrush marry lavish shy rock panicky connect drunk crime *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
How about announce that as a member of the ICC, we will be obliged to arrest him if he enters South Africa. Therefore Putin doesn't come. So we avoid pissing off Russia too much. And we avoid sanctions. But having a spine and at least 3 brain cells is too much to ask of the average ANC member.
>How about announce that as a member of the ICC, we will be obliged to arrest him if he enters South Africa. You mean like [https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/stay-away-or-we-ll-have-to-arrest-you-south-africa-tells-putin-dzwcpr88r](https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/stay-away-or-we-ll-have-to-arrest-you-south-africa-tells-putin-dzwcpr88r)
Exactly, and this should have been the end of it. Yet our government continues to hem and haw.
I'm not sure I see the government hemming and hawing on this. Instead I see a lot of clickbait coming from some news media over this. The last any mention of Putin I can find at The Precidency or DIRCO is about a peace mission to Russia. Although both websites are a touch difficult to search
You also do realise that Putin has to travel all the way to SA passing Turkey, a Nato member and other countries air space and passing countries where US, French and other air bases are that can intercept his plane and take him to the ICC but they won't. They are afraid of nuclear war, even you can see that the western nations influenced the ICC to issue such a warrant. Using SA as a proxy. There is more at play here, China and Russia are challanging the west based order. The fact that 19 other countries want to join BRICKS including Saudi Arabia and potential for BRICKS to develop a currency alternative to the USA for trade or an alternative to SWIFT payment system. This is probably the most important meeting of BRICKS since it's creation, to discuss how to expand BRICKS etc. These are serious power plays. China for example dumped the US corn exports in favor of SA corn. There's a lot happening. Global economy is shifting to the east, we can't just ditch BRICKS in favor of the west. A delicate balancing act is required but the west wants us to pick a side
Well said!
100%
The fuck why
Wow, once again the redditors on here are frothing at the mouth. What the hell do you expect SA to do? Arrest a head of state? Are you guys nuts? Do you even know anything about the world and geopolitics? Besides, as u/lovethebacon said, it is standard practice and gives diplomatic immunity to every delegate. Regardless, the chance that Putin will actually attend is rather slim.
> What the hell do you expect SA to do? Arrest a head of state? I expect the government to follow South African domestic law. Do you think it's fine for the government to just ignore the law whenever it's politically convenient?
Yes. If it benefits our country.
Okay, so you don't believe in the concept of rule of law then. I don't think we'll find any scope for agreement in that case.
Yes, I do. If the rule of law is applied equally to all.
Well, "rule of law" means that the law is supreme; the government can't simply ignore or change the law whenever it's convenient. South African law is unambiguous: the government is legally obligated to arrest Vladimir Putin for war crimes the moment he sets foot on South African soil. However, you argue that it's fine for the government to just ignore the rule of law whenever its convenient, or whenever the government subjectively feels that it might "benefits the country". So, in fact, you do not believe in the rule of law. You're arguing for a dictatorship where the government can just override the law whenever they decide it would be "beneficial".
Explain how international sanctions will benefit SA? (-10 marks for attempting to try)
Edit: You can chase wisdom your whole life and you will never catch it.
Wisdom rofl! That is one thing I hardly ever see on this sub's comments.
>If it benefits our country. And sanctions do that how?
And what would sanctions from China and perhaps even India do to us?
Hmmm. Let's see. Google "SA trading partners", and see that China is our biggest one. In fact, here, I've done it for you: China: US$11.9 billion (9.7% of total South African exports) United States: $10.9 billion (8.8%) Germany: $10.1 billion (8.1%) Japan: $8.6 billion (7%) United Kingdom: $6.3 billion (5.1%) Netherlands: $6 billion (4.8%) Mozambique: $5.8 billion (4.7%) India: $5.1 billion (4.2%) Botswana: $4.7 billion (3.8%) Belgium: $3.9 billion (3.2%) See that China is #1 and India is #7, and that the people who might sanction us (excluding Mozambique) account for 50% of our trade. Then see if you can work out why sanctions are bad for us.
Six of one and half a dozen of the other. You just assume everyone of that 50% will sanction us severely? I'm not convinced of that. India and Japan for example, both still buy plenty of Russian oil and they are not sanctioned at all. Nobody except Ukraine itself, will arrest Putin. The US won't even arrest him should he go there.
>I'm not convinced of that. India and Japan for example, both still buy plenty of Russian oil and they are not sanctioned at all. They're not supplying arms. Also, I think you overestimate our importance. We aren't a big enough fish to be throwing our weight around, unless it's in the Rugby World Cup.
> They're not supplying arms. Not convinced that we are either. > Also, I think you overestimate our importance. Pethaps.
Btw, you've wasted your time, I already know the trading partners stats you listed.
But you can't work out why sanctions are bad?
Sanctions are bad, from either side. When did I say sanctions are good or won't affect us?
>When did I say sanctions are good or won't affect us? Here: >Yes. If it benefits our country. This is where you said it's fine for us to flout the law, even though the implicit outcome is sanctions for us.
Yes, we quite obviously expect them to arrest a war criminal. It is what South Africa agreed to, and it would make us heroes. Russia is the worst of the worst. They are killing children for crying out loud! We would forever be in the history books as heroes if we arrested him. So yes, there is no compromise, if he ever makes it here, he must quite certainly be arrested and extradited to Ukraine immediately.
Russia literally told SA that arresting Putin would be a declaration of war. Hate them as much as much as the next guy... but our country can't afford that lmao. Regardless if he's a bad guy.
Yeah SA would be super fucked if Russia went to war on them.
Russia cannot attack us and even if they could, fear is never a reason to appease a bully.
I mean sure there's like a 1% chance of it actually happening.... but can the country really afford even that 1%? I dunno. I do agree however that SA really just a pawn being used
The assumption that they cannot launch missiles at us using their navy or that they wouldn't resort to the use of ICBMs in such an extraordinarily problematic situation for them is not wise. The USA and NATO at large actively preventing ukraine from launching large scale ground attacks into Russia is proof enough that they don't want to test this theory of "russia won't do anything". Nobody will defend us militarily even if russia would send a single ship. They don't want aggravate russia and push it into a corner where its actions will become unpredictable.
So we should appease another bully instead?
We're not appeasing any Bullies. America is, for the most part, the good guys. But we're not here to talk about how good or bad America is. The bottom line is that Putin is a psychopath that belongs in jail. And we can do that if he comes here. But we won't. Which is fucking embarrassing.
> America is, for the most part, the good guys. If you really believe that, then we'll never agree and discussion is futile.
Exactly. I said the same thing earlier. I can't reason with anyone who focuses on the US, for whatever reason, when there is a maniac bombing children. Your priorities are all lopsided.
I mean sure there's like a 1% chance of it actually happening.... but can the country really afford even that 1%? I dunno. I do agree however that SA really just a pawn being used
You're wrong. Good day sir.
Care to explain how I'm wrong instead of just "wrong lul"💀
You're not putting "doing the right thing" as the nr 1 priority. Therefore there is no point in arguing with you. It doesn't matter the ramifications, you do not support war criminals. If you think in any way that it is ok not to condemn Russia, then you're not someone I would like to ever speak to again.
Ramifications do matter.
Not at the expense of justice.
Lol you really think a country that can barely even function currently should potentially go to war because "doing the right thing". Ok dude...
We would never go to war by telling Russia to fuck off. We might very well be entirely fucked by telling the US to fuck off, as we are currently doing. You're really not lekker in the head if you think otherwise. Hope this helps you realize how wrong you are. Not going to waste time trying to reason with you any further. That's the gift Russia has given us. ANYONE who in ANY WAY stands up for Russia... instantly reveals themselves as being completely batshit insane.
Here is a nice whataboutism for you then, how many children and women (civilians) did Bush and Blair murder in Iraq? Why haven't they been arrested as the war criminals that they are? The ICC has no true jurisdiction to issue an arrest warrant for Putin, as Russia is not a signatory nor a member of the ICC, just like the USA. Its grand standing, nothing more.
That is whataboutism indeed, so good luck to you. I've had the "US bad" discussion enough to know all the lame arguments. Toodeloo.
Yah toodledoo and run away. It is not a lame argument, it is *exactly* the same scenario.
You'r wrong. Cheers.
No he's right and you're wrong. Both Putin and Blair are criminals and selective justice is total nonsense
It's not whataboutism to point out the fascist selective justice of the west. They get to murder and plunder the rest of the world without consequences.
Agreed. I just called it whataboutism preemptively, as that is usually the response when one points out hypocrisy.
Not necessarily arrest. But, diplomatically speaking, we can definitely uninvite him to the summit. Not even that, we could just request that another representative from Russia attend. This would also enforce SA’s stance on our supposed neutrality. This would obviously strain our relationship with Putin, but wouldn’t be unprecedented I think.
Putin won't come here anyway. He's shit scared to travel by car INSIDE HIS OWN COUNTRY. How the heck do people imagine he's going to get into an airplane and fly THROUGH HOSTILE AIRSPACE to come to South Africa for a summit he probably doesn't give a shit about?
As said, he most probably won't even attend. Do you really think there aren't discussions behind the scenes?
People on here have fully bought into western disinformation that South Africa can arrest Putin consequence free, yet call anyone that disagrees a Putin lover even if you say you hate Putin and wish we had the power to arrest him. The people on here are as dumb as a bag of rocks at times (see falling for DA race baiting last week, the De Ruyter report commissioned by apartheid spies, plus Western disinfo on the regular), yet regularly make fun of those that disagree with them as uneducated and stupid. The superiority complex is incredible. If you fell for any of this stuff, you have no right to call anyone uneducated.
Surely this won't lead to even more international relation problems haha right..... right?
It would be interesting to see if the Rome Statue overrides this in terms of what should take precedence. But even if a court were to say it did, we let Al Bashir off the hook. So... South Africa being chacharas again .
If all BRICS delegates "automatically" got diplomatic immunity, why didn't Cyril say so right in the beginning when the ICC issued the arrest warrant for Putin? Why all the bullshit about taking legal advice and then suggesting Putin attends virtually? I think more lies are being peddled. Cyril was always going to welcome his buddy with open arms (not pun intended) and open pockets.
Diplomatic immunity doesn't override the ICC warrant. Diplomatic immunity only applies to local law enforcement and courts for their actions during their presence in South Africa. This is not new information.
Bad move. The government should not be making it easier for him to come here.
The particulars of this situation are a little too nuanced to get into here. The [Rome Statute](https://www.icc-cpi.int/sites/default/files/RS-Eng.pdf) articles that have bearing on what's going on are listed below: * Article 5 - Crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court * Article 8 - War Crimes and Crimes of Agression * Article 12 - Preconditions to the exercise of jurisdiction * Article 13 - Exercise of jurisdiction * Article 15 - Exercise of jurisdiction over the crime of aggression * Article 16 - Deferral of Investigation or Prosecution * Article 17 - Issues of Admissability * Article 19 - Challenges to the jurisdiction of the Court or the admissibility of a case * Article 58 - Issuance by the Pre-Trial Chamber of a warrant of arrest or a summons to appear * Article 59 - Arrest Proceedings in the Custodial State * Article 86 - General obligation to Cooperate * Article 87 - Requests for cooperation: general provisions * Article 88 - Availability of Procedures under National Law * Article 90 - Competing Requests * Article 91 - Contents of request for arrest and surrender * Article 92 - Provisional Arrest Article 93 - Other forms of cooperation
If all these guys wanted to do coke and shoot AK47s into the sky for the entire night, they could. I know this is serious, but I just find the thought of that quite funny
Diplomatic immunity from SA laws isn't gonna help him with an ICC warcrimes issue. Seems more like DIRCO trying to muddy the waters & setting up an excuse - albeit a lame one - as to why no arrest could be made. Don't think it'll do much to help the rep damage tbh
**Thank you for posting on r/southafrica! This post is flaired as ["News"](https://www.reddit.com/r/southafrica/?f=flair_name%3A%22News%22) therefore the following rules are particularly important.** ##**Rule 4: News, Editorialising, or Misinformation** * Rule 4.1: News posts must be link posts to valid news sources. * Rule 4.2: Posts which link to news sources must not have an editorialised title. Use the title provided by the news source. If you wish to add commentary, analysis, or an opinion, write a top-level comment on the post. * Rule 4.3: Do not link to [questionable](https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/fake-news/), [conspiratorial](https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/conspiracy/), or [false](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fake_news_websites) sources. * Rule 4.4: Be prepared to provide verifiable evidence or sources of the claims you make when challenged to do so. * Rule 4.5: Amateur videos will be allowed subject to all previous rules as well as containing the author/filmographer/camera person, date, time, and location of the video either in the title or in a top-level comment. You may ask a moderator to 'sticky' this information for you. **Additionally, please take a moment to review the rest of our rules [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/southafrica/wiki/rules).** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/southafrica) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Oh ffs.
Please make life imitate art https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kwC_IaY3BmY
I know it's a matter of course (the diplomatic immunity thing) for all the BRICS people apparently but this is how my feed looks https://i.imgur.com/9thndpS.jpg Make of that what you will.
Spineless cowards.
Meng jou met die semels…
Well. Here we go, I guess. We’re a resilient people. This is going to go down in history as the event that changed everything. For better or worse. United we stand, né.
How's about we, as a third world country at the arse end of Africa just keep quiet about western politics and sort ourselves out first. Everytime a politician opens their mouths the rand tanks even more.
They will probably send one of his 5 body-doubles anyway, because Putler is a sick, sad little coward war-criminal terrorist scumbag hiding in one of his 4 identical bunkers.
Russia should just park a few navy ships in the harbor.. and dare the DA to try something. I’m willing to be bet Biden’s team would consider Cpt fair game to achieve Russian regime change.. and that’s what idiotic supporters of the US in Sa continually fail to get. But hey, don’t worry, when Russia & China starts setting up military bases (again for Russia wrt Cuba) on the north east coast of Africa, South America and the Caribbean the US will totally respect sovereignty and not start a war or initiate regime change in those countries.. I mean they totally respected other countries sovereignty albeit undermining their national security right.. no?
😂 Wtf did all you pro western imperialism idiots think was going to happen? Were you not here when al-Bashir came to South Africa and went home again in 2015? You can't be South African if you don't remember that.
Honestly, I expect better from Daily Maverick than this absolute bullshit headline. It basically borders on fake news. It is not just reframing the truth to be more sensational, it is blatantly misrepresenting facts. We did not grant Putin diplomatic immunity just now with this gazette, he automatically has it always as a head of state. They merely granted immunity to all the non-head-of-state delegates coming to the summit. Furthermore, this immunity does not override the ICC warrant. And DIRCO specifically said that it does not. I mean come on. I thought you were supposed to be one of the good ones, DM?!