Johannesburg – The African Union (AU) has suspended a debate on whether to withdraw Israel’s accreditation. Israel was granted AU accreditation last year by Moussa Faki Mahamat, chair of the AU Commission, move that member nations, such as South Africa, say they had not been properly consulted about.
The AU has set up a committee with the goal of consulting with member states and building a consensus on the matter and then providing its recommendations at the next summit. The committee is made up of eight heads of states and governments which include South Africa and Algeria with Cameroon also being asked to join and South Africa requesting the inclusion of Nigeria.
Although the debate was suspended, Israel’s accreditation has not. This is a major problem says Na’eem Jeenah, Executive Director of the Afro-Middle East Centre (AMEC).
“It means that they [Israel] can attend all opening and closing sessions of AU meetings which in itself sounds just ceremonial but it’s not, because the most important influence in the AU, we know, doesn’t take place in the opening and closing sessions or even in the closed sessions but in the corridors and Israel being admitted to the corridors is a big step. It’s also a big symbolic step for Israel. It’s also a very significant victory in that they managed to, in a sense, split the AU.”
The AU had suspended both the debate and Israel’s accreditation, but hours later, the suspension was lifted. Senior Research Fellow at Africa Asia Dialogues (Afrasid), Ayesha Kajee, says this inconsistency in suspension proves Jeenah’s point.
“The initial decision over the weekend to suspend Israel’s observer status while this commission that’s been set up does its work and lobbies member states and polls member state opinions, that decision to suspend Israel’s observer status was then retracted largely because of behind the scenes lobbying which is why it is so imperative that Israel should not be allowed this because it is that type of behind the scenes lobbying that could change member states views.”
Jeenah clarified that Israel does not have observer status as it is a non-African country and only African countries can have an observer status. Rather, they have accreditation, which is slightly different from an observer status, but it is different, nonetheless.
Israel having an accreditation could be very problematic when it comes to the AU voting as a bloc. The AU votes as a bloc during the United Nations General Assembly so, “if you had a resolution in the GA condemning Israeli settlements you knew that there would be 54 votes from Africa that would support that resolution,” explains Jeenah. Making Israel an accredited non-African state in the AU means “…the Israel supporting states in the African Union can now argue in the prelude to such discussions at the GA for example, that the AU has accepted Israel as accredited to the AU, and therefore it’s not correct that they vote in that kind of way and this potentially, not only at the GA but at the Human Rights Council and other places, could be a problem and could break the vote in support of the Palestinians.”
Attorney and human rights activist, Stanley Cohen, emphasised that even though accreditation has been given, NGO’s and organisations can still bring up litigations and sue Israel for their actions.
“What we will continue to do is to bring actions wherever we can, wherever we find violations that are recognizable under universal jurisdiction. South Africa has universal jurisdiction, other states have universal jurisdiction and the more actions we bring and the more the light of air shines upon Israeli violence and violation of human rights and international law.”
Some AU members were criticised for wanting the debate to end quickly so they could watch the Africa Cup of Nations. Senegal’s President Macky Sall called for the debate to end quickly more than once because he wanted to watch the finals in which Senegal was playing. This was seen by many as choosing football over the lives of the Palestinians.
Listen to the interview here:
