Research Notes on African Moves to Decolonize International Criminal Law: A Façade or a Reality?

This paper dissects the feasibility of African endeavors to decolonize international justice by prosecuting international crimes on the continent, utilising local remedies. By adopting a qualitative research methodology, the paper seeks to examine the practicability of African states withdrawing from the International Criminal Court and resorting to home-grown legal remedies. African states established the African Court of Justice and Human Rights to outwit imported International Criminal Court justice by developing homegrown legal solutions. Such a move sprang from allegations surrounding International Criminal Court justice, including double standards (an exclusive focus on Africa), the United Nations Security Council’s Veto of prosecution, controversy over the interpretation of Articles 16 and 98 of the Rome Statute, and the peace-versus-justice dichotomy. African states' vociferous concerns have led some to withdraw, attempt to withdraw, withdraw and rejoin, threaten to withdraw, or form reactionary courts. The conclusion is that African machinations will ultimately culminate in the disintegration of international criminal law in Africa.