Image copyright AFP/Getty Images Image caption Sudan's President Omar al-Bashir was in South Africa for a meeting of African leaders in 2015

South Africa has formally begun the process of withdrawing from the International Criminal Court (ICC), notifying the UN of its decision.

South Africa did not want to execute ICC arrest warrants which would lead to "regime change", a minister said.

Last year, a South African court criticised the government for refusing to arrest Sudan's President Omar al-Bashir.

He is wanted by the ICC on charges of genocide and war crimes.

Mr Bashir was attending an African Union summit in Johannesburg, when the government ignored an ICC request to arrest him.

He denies allegations that he committed atrocities in Sudan's troubled western Darfur region.

Several media outlets say they have obtained a copy of the "Instrument of Withdrawal", signed by South Africa's foreign minister.

"The Republic of South Africa has found that its obligations with respect to the peaceful resolution of conflicts at times are incompatible with the interpretation given by the International Criminal Court," the document says.

'Runaway train'

Justice Minister Michael Masutha said at a press conference that the government would table legislation in parliament to withdraw South Africa from the ICC.

The Rome Statute, under which the ICC was set up, required the arrest of heads of state for whom a warrant was issued.

The consequence of this would be "regime change" and the statute was incompatible with South African legislation which gave heads of state diplomatic immunity, he added.

Analysis: Anna Holligan, BBC ICC correspondent

Image copyright EPA Image caption President Zuma recently met his Kenyan counterpart Uhuru Kenyatta, against whom an ICC prosecution failed

The ICC has a notoriously fractious relationship with the African continent. Despite 34 African nations voluntarily signing up to the court's jurisdiction - in recent years a handful of governments have decided their idea of international justice is incompatible with that set out in the Rome Statute.

When the Kenyan President Uhuru Kenyatta was charged with crimes against humanity, the African Union argued that heads of state should be entitled to immunity for the duration of their term in office, a direct contravention of the ICC's raison d'etre to hold the most powerful to account. The trial against Mr Kenyatta later collapsed because of a lack of evidence.

There were almost farcical scenes when the Sudanese president attended a summit in Johannesburg at the invitation of the African Union, then disappeared during dinner after resounding calls from human rights groups for South Africa to uphold its obligation as a member of the ICC to detain him in line with the outstanding arrest warrant.

It seems this divided loyalty between the competing demands of AU and ICC has driven South Africa to initiate the process of pulling out. Nine out of 10 of the ICC's current investigations are in Africa - leading to allegations of bias against African countries.

So is this the beginning of the end of the world's first permanent war crimes court? The answer will partly depend on whether this withdrawal generates a domino effect.

Human Rights Watch has criticised South Africa's decision.

"South Africa's proposed withdrawal from the International Criminal Court shows startling disregard for justice from a country long seen as a global leader on accountability for victims of the gravest crimes," said Dewa Mavhinga, the NGO's Africa division senior researcher.

"It's important both for South Africa and the region that this runaway train be slowed down and South Africa's hard-won legacy of standing with victims of mass atrocities be restored," Mr Mavhinga said.

Image copyright AFP Image caption The ICC says its focus is on helping victims of conflict achieve justice

Mr Masutha said the government had also decided to drop its appeal against a ruling of South Africa's High Court, that it had violated its international obligations by failing to arrest Mr Bashir.

The appeal was due to have been heard next month.

The move to leave comes a week after the South African President Jacob Zuma visited Kenya, a country that has been highly critical of the ICC ever since the prosecutor charged its President Uhuru Kenyatta with crimes against humanity.

He denied the charges, and the trial later collapsed beceause of a lack of evidence.

The ICC and global justice:

Came into force in 2002

The Rome Statute that set it up has been ratified by 123 countries, but the US is a notable absence

It aims to prosecute and bring to justice those responsible for the worst crimes - genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes

In the court's 14-year history it has only brought charges against Africans.

What is the International Criminal Court?

Two weeks ago Burundi said it would pull out of the ICC - a decision described by the court as "a setback in the fight against impunity". MPs backed the decision and its president signed the measure into law on Tuesday.

Last year, Namibia also said it planned to withdraw from the ICC, describing the court as an an "abomination" which wanted to "dictate" to Africans on how they should be governed.

Previously, the African Union has urged member states not to co-operate with the ICC, accusing it of being racially biased against Africa by failing to prosecute suspected war criminals from other parts of the world.

The ICC denies the allegation, saying it pursues justice on behalf of Africans who are victims of atrocities.

The 124-member ICC opened in 2002. It is the first legal body with permanent international jurisdiction to prosecute genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes.</s>Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir (centre) attended the 2015 African Union Summit in South Africa, despite facing an arrest warrant from the International Criminal Court. By Gianluigi Guercia (AFP/File)

Pretoria (AFP) - South Africa announced Friday that it would withdraw from the International Criminal Court, dealing a major blow to a troubled institution set up to try the world's worst crimes.

The decision followed a dispute last year when Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir visited the country for an African Union summit despite facing an ICC arrest warrant over alleged war crimes.

South Africa refused to arrest him, saying he had immunity as a head of state.

Justice Minister Michael Masutha told reporters in Pretoria that the ICC was "inhibiting South Africa's ability to honour its obligations relating to the granting of diplomatic immunity".

"There is a view in Africa that the ICC in choosing who to prosecute has seemingly preferred to target leaders in Africa," Masutha added to AFP.

The ICC, set up in 2002, is often accused of bias against Africa and has also struggled with a lack of cooperation, including from the United States which has signed the court's treaty but never ratified it.

The withdrawal "shows startling disregard for justice from a country long seen as a global leader," Human Rights Watch said in a statement.

Amnesty International said South Africa was "betraying millions of victims of the gravest human rights violations and undermining the international justice system".

As an ICC signatory, South Africa's failure to arrest Bashir last year led to a wave of condemnation and an early threat from the government to withdraw from The Hague-based court.

Bashir has evaded arrest since his ICC indictment in 2009 for alleged war crimes in Sudan's Darfur conflict in which 300,000 people were killed and two million forced to flee their homes.

Earlier this month Burundi said it would leave the court, and Namibia and Kenya have also raised the possibility.

Welcoming South Africa's decision to withdraw from the ICC, Sudan urged other African member nations to follow suit.

"The presidency of the republic... calls on African leaders and the people of Africa who are still members of the ICC to take a collective step in withdrawing from the ICC," a presidency statement said.

Burundi's foreign minister Alain-Ayme Nyamitwe, meanwhile, said the country expected others to follow, adding that it was important to note that "the ICC is not popular in Africa".

South Africa, which delivered a letter to the United Nations on Wednesday to activate its official withdrawal, is likely to complete the process in one year.

"It could spark a domino effect on other African states," Anton du Plessis, of the Institute for Security Studies think-tank in Pretoria, told AFP.

"South Africa played an important role in developing the ICC and now to see it playing such a destructive role is saddening," he said.

The ICC said Friday it had not received any confirmation of the South African position, adding that it relied on "the international community in Africa and outside Africa... to fulfil its mandate."

In March, South Africa's Supreme Court of Appeal accused President Jacob Zuma's government of "disgraceful conduct" over Bashir's visit and ruled that the failure to arrest Bashir was unlawful.

The government was facing a possible defeat in the Constitutional Court next month over the issue, but said that Friday's decision meant its legal battle would be dropped.

During the summit, an emergency court order was obtained for Bashir's arrest, though government lawyers admitted he had quickly flown out of the country just before the order was issued.

"We were called as a country to arrest and prosecute a sitting head of state and the natural consequence would have been forced regime change in that country by South Africa," Minister Masutha told AFP.

Of the ten ICC probes since 2002, nine have been into African countries and one into Georgia, though most ICC cases have been referred to the court by African governments themselves.

In a major setback, its highest profile case -- over Kenyan President Uhuru Kenyatta's involvement in election violence -- collapsed two years ago.</s>A written notice of South Africa's intention was submitted to the UN secretary general, said Tshililo Michael Masutha, the country's justice minister. The withdrawal from the international court will be formalized one year after the notification.

The court in the Hague, Netherlands, comprises 124 states from around the world. The ICC is the "court of last resort" and tries four types of crimes: genocide, crimes against humanity, crimes of aggression and war crimes. The court was created by the Rome Statute, a treaty first brought before the United Nations.

During the 12 months' notice period, South Africa will remain under the Rome Statute.

The country's department of justice said via Twitter that South Africa was "hindered" by certain parts of the Rome Statute, primarily the one that "compels South Africa to arrest persons who may enjoy diplomatic immunity under customary international law, who are wanted by the ICC for genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, to surrender such persons to the International Criminal Court."

It said the rule forced South Africa to turn over such persons even when the country was "actively involved in promoting peace, stability and dialogue in those countries." SA remains committed to the fight against impunity, to hold those who have committed crimes against humanity, serious crimes accountable. — The DoJ & CD (@DOJCD_ZA) October 21, 2016 During a 2015 visit to South Africa by Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir, the ICC had requested his arrest on charges of war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide stemming from the conflict in the Darfur region in western Sudan. Al-Bashir departed the country without getting arrested. The ICC has come under criticism by African leaders for what they say unfairly targets them. South Africa's justice minister added that the country remains committed to holding those who committed crimes against humanity accountable, and that it intended to work closely with the African Union and other African countries.</s>South Africa announced Friday that it would withdraw from the International Criminal Court, dealing a major blow to a troubled institution set up to try the world’s worst crimes.

The decision followed a dispute last year when Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir visited the country for an African Union summit despite facing an ICC arrest warrant over alleged war crimes. South Africa refused to arrest him, saying he had immunity as a head of state.

Justice Minister Michael Masutha told reporters in Pretoria that the court was “inhibiting South Africa’s ability to honor its obligations relating to the granting of diplomatic immunity.”

“There is a view in Africa that the ICC in choosing who to prosecute has seemingly preferred to target leaders in Africa,” Masutha added to AFP.

The ICC, set up in 2002, is often accused of bias against Africa and has also struggled with a lack of cooperation, including from the United States which has signed the court’s treaty but never ratified it.

South Africa would be the first country to leave the court, though others could soon follow.

The withdrawal “shows startling disregard for justice from a country long seen as a global leader,” Human Rights Watch said in a statement.

Amnesty International said the country was “betraying millions of victims of the gravest human rights violations and undermining the international justice system.”

South Africa’s failure as an ICC signatory to arrest Bashir led to a wave of condemnation, which was met with an early threat from the government to withdraw from The Hague-based court.

Bashir has evaded arrest since his ICC indictment in 2009 for alleged war crimes in Sudan’s Darfur conflict in which 300,000 people were killed and 2 million forced to flee their homes.

Earlier this month Burundi said it would withdraw, and Namibia and Kenya have also raised the possibility.

“It could spark a domino effect on other African states who may also want to pull out,” Anton du Plessis, of the Institute for Security Studies, told AFP.

“South Africa played an important role in developing the ICC and now to see it playing such a destructive role is saddening.”

South Africa, which delivered a letter to the United Nations on Wednesday to activate its formal withdrawal, is likely to complete the process in one year.

The Democratic Alliance, the country’s main opposition party, immediately launched a legal appeal, describing the withdrawal as “irrational and procedurally flawed.”

“The decision . . . shows the depth of impunity and disregard for the rule of law within the ANC (ruling party),” it said.

In March, South Africa’s Supreme Court of Appeal accused President Jacob Zuma’s government of “disgraceful conduct” over Bashir’s visit and ruled that the failure to arrest Bashir was unlawful.

The government was facing a possible defeat in the Constitutional Court next month over the issue, but said that Friday’s decision meant its legal battle would be dropped.

During the summit, an emergency court order was obtained for Bashir’s arrest, but government lawyers admitted he had quickly flown out of the country just before the order was issued.

“We were called as country to arrest and prosecute a sitting head of state and the natural consequence would have been forced regime change in that country by South Africa,” Justice Minister Masutha told AFP.

Of the ten ICC probes since 2002, nine have been into African countries and one into Georgia.

In a major setback, its highest profile case — over Kenyan President Uhuru Kenyatta’s involvement in election violence — collapsed two years ago.

This month, it found former Congolese Vice President Jean-Pierre Bemba and four aides guilty of bribing witnesses.

Its chief prosecutor also recently sent a team to the Democratic Republic of Congo to urge restraint after weeks of deadly unrest.</s>Last year, South Africa refused to arrest Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir, who is wanted by the ICC on charges of genocide and war crimes.

He was attending an African Union summit in Johannesburg.

Mr Bashir denies allegations he committed atrocities in Sudan's troubled western Darfur region.

Several media outlets say they have obtained a copy of the "Instrument of Withdrawal", signed by South Africa's foreign minister.

"The Republic of South Africa has found that its obligations with respect to the peaceful resolution of conflicts at times are incompatible with the interpretation given by the International Criminal Court," the document says.

Neither South Africa nor the UN have officially confirmed the media reports.

There are also conflicting legal opinions as to whether South Africa can leave the ICC without parliamentary approval.

'RUNAWAY TRAIN'

Human Rights Watch criticised the reported move.

"South Africa's proposed withdrawal from the International Criminal Court shows startling disregard for justice from a country long seen as a global leader on accountability for victims of the gravest crimes," said Dewa Mavhinga, the NGO's Africa division senior researcher.

"It's important both for South Africa and the region that this runaway train be slowed down and South Africa's hard-won legacy of standing with victims of mass atrocities be restored," Mr Mavhinga said.

Last week President Zuma met his Kenyan counterpart Uhuru Kenyatta, against whom an ICC prosecution failed

Last year, South African warned it might leave the ICC.

The reported move to leave comes a week after the South African President Jacob Zuma visited Kenya, a country that has been highly critical of the ICC ever since the prosecutor charged its President Uhuru Kenyatta with crimes against humanity.

He denied the charges, and the trial later collapsed due to lack of evidence.

Two weeks ago Burundi became the first country to express its intent to pull out of the ICC - a decision described by the court as "a setback in the fight against impunity".

Previously, the African Union has urged member states not to co-operate with the ICC, accusing it of bias against Africa.

The 124-member ICC opened in 2002. It is the first legal body with permanent international jurisdiction to prosecute genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes.</s>JOHANNESBURG -- South Africa on Friday reversed its early support for the International Criminal Court and said it will withdraw from it, raising concerns of a possible African exodus that would undermine a human-rights tribunal accused by some leaders of unfairly targeting the continent.

The announcement followed a similar decision by Burundi this week and was criticized by human-rights groups that see the court as the best means of pursuing perpetrators of the world's worst atrocities. The treaty creating the court entered into force in 2002 after years of efforts by South Africa's post-apartheid government and others.

No country has ever withdrawn from the International Criminal Court. Now, the debate over a mass African withdrawal is expected to be a "hot issue" at an African Union summit in January, said Oryem Okello, deputy foreign minister of Uganda, a critic of the court.

"We think the matter is best decided as a bloc," Okello said.

Withdrawal takes effect a year after the U.N. secretary-general is formally notified. U.N. spokesman Stephane Dujarric said the countdown for South Africa started Wednesday. Countries have to cooperate with any court proceedings that begin before withdrawal takes effect.

Many African countries were supportive of the court's creation, partly because of the 1994 Rwandan genocide, but grew uneasy over the court's scrutiny of national leaders. Under the Rome Statute that created the court, signatory countries have a legal obligation to arrest anyone sought by the tribunal.

The treaty is "in conflict and inconsistent with" South Africa's diplomatic immunity law, Michael Masutha, the minister of justice, said Friday.

The treaty hinders South Africa's goal of promoting peace talks, which can include hosting adversaries on its soil, Masutha said. South Africa has hosted talks on Zimbabwe, the Democratic Republic of Congo and Madagascar in the past.

Parliament is likely to pass the bill. The ruling African National Congress party holds a majority of seats, and its parliament office welcomed the decision, saying "the [the court] has allowed nonmember states to dictate and interfere with its work to suit their own imperialist agendas."

South Africa's announcement follows a dispute last year over a visit by Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir, who is wanted by the ICC tribunal on war-crimes charges, as well as charges of crimes against humanity and genocide in Darfur. Al-Bashir was allowed to leave South Africa even though a local court ordered authorities to stop him.

Friday's announcement came ahead of a Nov. 22 Constitutional Court hearing in which the government was scheduled to appeal legal rulings against it in the al-Bashir case. Masutha said the state will drop its appeal.

South Africa's main opposition party, the Democratic Alliance, said it would go to court to declare unconstitutional the government's decision to leave the International Criminal Court.

Richard Goldstone, a South African who was an international criminal prosecutor, said the move was demeaning to his countrymen.

"From a moral standpoint, it detracts from the inspiring legacy of the administration of President Nelson Mandela that so strongly supported the [court] and all of the mechanisms of international justice," Goldstone said in a statement.

On Tuesday, President Pierre Nkurunziza of Burundi signed legislation to withdraw from the court, which had said it would investigate political violence that followed Nkurunziza's decision last year to pursue a third term, which some have called unconstitutional.

The court, based in The Hague, had 124 member states before Burundi's move. The United States, China, Russia and Israel are among the countries that are not members.

Court spokesman Fadi El Abdallah said international support "in Africa and beyond" is necessary for the court "to fulfill its independent and impartial mandate" to prosecute perpetrators of genocide and other crimes.

The push among some African countries to withdraw from the court began after it indicted Kenyan President Uhuru Kenyatta on charges of crimes against humanity over 2007 postelection violence in which more than 1,000 died.

The international court prosecutor said threats to witnesses, bribery and lack of cooperation by Kenya's government led to the case's collapse.

Only Africans have been charged in the six cases that are ongoing or about to begin, though preliminary court investigations have been opened elsewhere in the world. The African Union has said it will not compel member states to arrest a leader on behalf of the court.

Masutha, the South African justice minister, said Africa is strengthening its own human-rights institutions.

Handing another country's leader over to the international court would interfere in another nation's sovereignty, he said.

"One cannot think of a more plausible scenario of forced regime change by one country on another," Masutha said.

Information for this article was contributed by Edith M. Lederer and Rodney Muhumuza of The Associated Press.</s>Johannesburg (AFP) - South Africa will withdraw from the Hague-based International Criminal Court (ICC), media reports in Johannesburg said on Friday, sparking rapid criticism from rights bodies.

A document confirming the withdrawal plan, signed by International Relations Minister Maite Nkoana-Mashabane, was published by public broadcaster SABC's United Nations correspondent.

The "Instrument of Withdrawal" letter said South Africa "found that its obligations with respect to the peaceful resolution of conflicts at times are incompatible with the interpretation given by the International Criminal Court".

The decision follows a dispute last year when South Africa allowed Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir to visit the country for an African Union summit, despite him facing an arrest warrant from the ICC.

South Africa said he had immunity as the head of a member state.

South Africa is a signatory of the ICC, which wants Bashir arrested for alleged war crimes related to the conflict in the Darfur region of Sudan.

"South Africa's proposed withdrawal from the International Criminal Court shows startling disregard for justice from a country long seen as a global leader on accountability for victims of the gravest crimes," Human Rights Watch said in a statement.

"It's important both for South Africa and the region that this runaway train be slowed down and South Africa's hard-won legacy of standing with victims of mass atrocities be restored."

Earlier this month Burundi said it would withdraw from the court, and Namibia and Kenya have also raised the possibility.

Some African governments say the ICC, which was established in 2002, has shown a post-colonial bias against the continent's leaders.</s>Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir (centre) attended the 2015 African Union Summit in South Africa, despite facing an arrest warrant from the International Criminal Court. By Gianluigi Guercia (AFP/File)

Pretoria (AFP) - South Africa announced Friday that it would withdraw from the International Criminal Court, dealing a major blow to a troubled institution set up to try the world's worst crimes.

The decision followed a dispute last year when Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir visited the country for an African Union summit despite facing an ICC arrest warrant over alleged war crimes.

South Africa refused to arrest him, saying he had immunity as a head of state.

Justice Minister Michael Masutha told reporters in Pretoria that the ICC was "inhibiting South Africa's ability to honour its obligations relating to the granting of diplomatic immunity".

"There is a view in Africa that the ICC in choosing who to prosecute has seemingly preferred to target leaders in Africa," Masutha added to AFP.

The ICC, set up in 2002, is often accused of bias against Africa and has also struggled with a lack of cooperation, including from the United States which has signed the court's treaty but never ratified it.

The withdrawal "shows startling disregard for justice from a country long seen as a global leader," Human Rights Watch said in a statement.

Amnesty International said South Africa was "betraying millions of victims of the gravest human rights violations and undermining the international justice system".

The US said it was "concerned" by Pretoria's decision.

"We do think that the ICC has made valuable contributions in the service of accountability in a number of situations and we hope that other governments would share that," State Department spokesman John Kirby told reporters.

As an ICC signatory, South Africa's failure to arrest Bashir last year led to a wave of condemnation and an early threat from the government to withdraw from The Hague-based court.

Bashir has evaded arrest since his ICC indictment in 2009 for alleged war crimes in Sudan's Darfur conflict in which 300,000 people were killed and two million forced to flee their homes.

Earlier this month Burundi said it would leave the court, and Namibia and Kenya have also raised the possibility.

Welcoming South Africa's decision to withdraw from the ICC, Sudan urged other African member nations to follow suit.

"The presidency of the republic... calls on African leaders and the people of Africa who are still members of the ICC to take a collective step in withdrawing from the ICC," a presidency statement said.

Burundi's foreign minister Alain-Ayme Nyamitwe, meanwhile, said the country expected others to follow, adding that it was important to note that "the ICC is not popular in Africa".

South Africa, which delivered a letter to the United Nations on Wednesday to activate its official withdrawal, is likely to complete the process in one year.

"It could spark a domino effect on other African states," Anton du Plessis, of the Institute for Security Studies think-tank in Pretoria, told AFP.

"South Africa played an important role in developing the ICC and now to see it playing such a destructive role is saddening," he said.

The ICC said Friday it had not received any confirmation of the South African position, adding that it relied on "the international community in Africa and outside Africa... to fulfil its mandate."

In March, South Africa's Supreme Court of Appeal accused President Jacob Zuma's government of "disgraceful conduct" over Bashir's visit and ruled that the failure to arrest Bashir was unlawful.

The government was facing a possible defeat in the Constitutional Court next month over the issue, but said that Friday's decision meant its legal battle would be dropped.

During the summit, an emergency court order was obtained for Bashir's arrest, though government lawyers admitted he had quickly flown out of the country just before the order was issued.

"We were called as a country to arrest and prosecute a sitting head of state and the natural consequence would have been forced regime change in that country by South Africa," Minister Masutha told AFP.

Of the ten ICC probes since 2002, nine have been into African countries and one into Georgia, though most ICC cases have been referred to the court by African governments themselves.

In a major setback, its highest profile case -- over Kenyan President Uhuru Kenyatta's involvement in election violence -- collapsed two years ago.</s>JOHANNESBURG (AP) — South Africa on Friday reversed its early support for the International Criminal Court and said it will submit a parliamentary bill to withdraw from it, raising concerns of a possible African exodus that would undermine a human rights tribunal accused by some African leaders of unfairly targeting their continent.



The announcement followed a similar decision by Burundi this week and was criticized by human rights groups that see the ICC as the best means of pursuing perpetrators of the world's worst atrocities. The treaty creating the court entered into force in 2002 after years of efforts by South Africa's post-apartheid government and others.



The debate over a mass African withdrawal from the ICC is expected to be a "hot issue" at an African Union summit in January 2017 in Ethiopia, said Oryem Okello, deputy foreign minister of Uganda, a critic of the court.



"We think the matter is best decided as a bloc," Okello said.



South Africa's announcement is "devastating" for the ICC, said Mark Kersten, a Britain-based researcher.



"It is unclear if other states will follow South Africa's lead, but it is clear that states are more likely to follow South Africa's lead than Burundi, with whom many African states have tensions," Kersten wrote in an email to The Associated Press. Kenya, Namibia and Uganda are among the countries that have indicated interest in leaving the court, he said.



The possible departure of more countries "really questions whether or not the court is going to survive because it simply will not have the number of countries that it needs in order to be seen as legitimate and international," said Mark Ellis, executive director of the International Bar Association.



Many African countries were supportive of the court partly because of the 1994 Rwandan genocide, but grew uneasy due to the court's scrutiny of national leaders suspected of war crimes and other violations. Under the Rome Statute that created the court, signatory countries have a legal obligation to arrest anyone sought by the tribunal.



The treaty is "in conflict and inconsistent with" South Africa's diplomatic immunity law, Michael Masutha, the minister of justice, told reporters Friday.



"A difficult choice had to be made," Masutha said. The treaty hinders South Africa's goal of promoting peace talks, which can include hosting adversaries on its soil, he said. South Africa has hosted talks on Zimbabwe, Congo and Madagascar in the past.



Parliament is likely to pass the bill. The ruling African National Congress party holds a majority of seats, and its parliament office welcomed the decision to leave the court, saying "the ICC has allowed non-member states to dictate and interfere with its work to suit their own imperialist agendas."



South Africa's announcement follows a dispute last year over a visit by Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir, who is wanted by the ICC for alleged war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide in Darfur. Al-Bashir was allowed to leave South Africa even though a local court ordered authorities to stop him because of the international order for his arrest.



Friday's announcement came ahead of a Nov. 22 Constitutional Court hearing in which the government was scheduled to appeal legal rulings against it in the al-Bashir case. Masutha said the state will drop its appeal.



South Africa submitted its intention to withdraw from the International Criminal Court in a letter delivered at the United Nations this week. Observers say a withdrawal takes effect a year after the U.N. secretary-general is formally notified. Countries still would have to cooperate with any ICC proceedings that begin before the withdrawal takes effect.



South Africa's main opposition party, the Democratic Alliance, said it would go to court to declare the government's decision unconstitutional. Richard Goldstone, a South African who was an international criminal prosecutor, said the move was demeaning to his countrymen.



"From a moral standpoint, it detracts from the inspiring legacy of the administration of President Nelson Mandela that so strongly supported the ICC and all of the mechanisms of international justice," Goldstone said in a statement.



On Tuesday, President Pierre Nkurunziza of Burundi signed legislation to make his country the first to withdraw from the ICC, which had said it would investigate political violence that followed Nkurunziza's decision last year to pursue a third term, which some have called unconstitutional.



The ICC, based in The Hague, Netherlands, had 124 member states before Burundi's move. The United States, China, Russia and Israel are among non-members.



The push among some African countries to withdraw from the court began after it indicted Kenyan President Uhuru Kenyatta on charges of crimes against humanity for 2007 post-election violence in which more than 1,000 died. The ICC prosecutor said threats to witnesses, bribery and lack of cooperation by Kenya's government led to the case's collapse.



Only Africans have been charged in the six cases that are ongoing or about to begin, though preliminary ICC investigations have been opened elsewhere in the world. The African Union has said it will not compel member states to arrest a leader on behalf of the ICC.



Masutha, the South African justice minister, said Africa is strengthening its own human rights institutions, and that South Africa would work with other countries against impunity.



Subjecting another country's leader to prosecution in South Africa or handing the leader over to the ICC would interfere in another nation's sovereignty, he said.



"One cannot think of a more plausible scenario of forced regime change by one country on another," Masutha said.



___



Associated Press writers Edith M. Lederer at the United Nations and Rodney Muhumuza in Kampala, Uganda, contributed.



___



Follow Christopher Torchia on Twitter at www.twitter.com/torchiachris</s>JOHANNESBURG | South Africa on Friday reversed its early support for the International Criminal Court and said it will submit a parliamentary bill to withdraw from it, raising concerns of a possible African exodus that would undermine a human rights tribunal accused by some African leaders of unfairly targeting their continent.

The announcement followed a similar decision by Burundi this week and was criticized by human rights groups that see the ICC as the best means of pursuing perpetrators of the world’s worst atrocities. The treaty creating the court entered into force in 2002 after years of efforts by South Africa’s post-apartheid government and others.

The debate over a mass African withdrawal from the ICC is expected to be a “hot issue” at an African Union summit in January 2017 in Ethiopia, said Oryem Okello, deputy foreign minister of Uganda, a critic of the court.

“We think the matter is best decided as a bloc,” Okello said.

South Africa’s announcement is “devastating” for the ICC, said Mark Kersten, a Britain-based researcher.

“It is unclear if other states will follow South Africa’s lead, but it is clear that states are more likely to follow South Africa’s lead than Burundi, with whom many African states have tensions,” Kersten wrote in an email to The Associated Press. Kenya, Namibia and Uganda are among the countries that have indicated interest in leaving the court, he said.

The possible departure of more countries “really questions whether or not the court is going to survive because it simply will not have the number of countries that it needs in order to be seen as legitimate and international,” said Mark Ellis, executive director of the International Bar Association.

Many African countries were supportive of the court partly because of the 1994 Rwandan genocide, but grew uneasy due to the court’s scrutiny of national leaders suspected of war crimes and other violations. Under the Rome Statute that created the court, signatory countries have a legal obligation to arrest anyone sought by the tribunal.

The treaty is “in conflict and inconsistent with” South Africa’s diplomatic immunity law, Michael Masutha, the minister of justice, told reporters Friday.

“A difficult choice had to be made,” Masutha said. The treaty hinders South Africa’s goal of promoting peace talks, which can include hosting adversaries on its soil, he said. South Africa has hosted talks on Zimbabwe, Congo and Madagascar in the past.

Parliament is likely to pass the bill. The ruling African National Congress party holds a majority of seats, and its parliament office welcomed the decision to leave the court, saying “the ICC has allowed non-member states to dictate and interfere with its work to suit their own imperialist agendas.”

South Africa’s announcement follows a dispute last year over a visit by Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir, who is wanted by the ICC for alleged war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide in Darfur. Al-Bashir was allowed to leave South Africa even though a local court ordered authorities to stop him because of the international order for his arrest.

Friday’s announcement came ahead of a Nov. 22 Constitutional Court hearing in which the government was scheduled to appeal legal rulings against it in the al-Bashir case. Masutha said the state will drop its appeal.

South Africa submitted its intention to withdraw from the International Criminal Court in a letter delivered at the United Nations this week. Observers say a withdrawal takes effect a year after the U.N. secretary-general is formally notified. Countries still would have to cooperate with any ICC proceedings that begin before the withdrawal takes effect.

South Africa’s main opposition party, the Democratic Alliance, said it would go to court to declare the government’s decision unconstitutional. Richard Goldstone, a South African who was an international criminal prosecutor, said the move was demeaning to his countrymen.

“From a moral standpoint, it detracts from the inspiring legacy of the administration of President Nelson Mandela that so strongly supported the ICC and all of the mechanisms of international justice,” Goldstone said in a statement.

On Tuesday, President Pierre Nkurunziza of Burundi signed legislation to make his country the first to withdraw from the ICC, which had said it would investigate political violence that followed Nkurunziza’s decision last year to pursue a third term, which some have called unconstitutional.

The ICC, based in The Hague, Netherlands, had 124 member states before Burundi’s move. The United States, China, Russia and Israel are among non-members.

The push among some African countries to withdraw from the court began after it indicted Kenyan President Uhuru Kenyatta on charges of crimes against humanity for 2007 post-election violence in which more than 1,000 died. The ICC prosecutor said threats to witnesses, bribery and lack of cooperation by Kenya’s government led to the case’s collapse.

Only Africans have been charged in the six cases that are ongoing or about to begin, though preliminary ICC investigations have been opened elsewhere in the world. The African Union has said it will not compel member states to arrest a leader on behalf of the ICC.

Masutha, the South African justice minister, said Africa is strengthening its own human rights institutions, and that South Africa would work with other countries against impunity.

Subjecting another country’s leader to prosecution in South Africa or handing the leader over to the ICC would interfere in another nation’s sovereignty, he said.

“One cannot think of a more plausible scenario of forced regime change by one country on another,” Masutha said.

Associated Press writers Edith M. Lederer at the United Nations and Rodney Muhumuza in Kampala, Uganda, contributed.
South Africa formally begins the process of withdrawing from the International Criminal Court amid a dispute over the country's refusal to arrest Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir at last year's African Union summit in Johannesburg.