Allexer Namundjembo
Namibia does not need the International Criminal Court (ICC), political analyst Sackaria Johannes has said in support of a motion for the country to withdraw from the court.
Johannes’ comments came after Affirmative Repositioning (AR) leader and member of parliament Job Amupanda tabled a motion in the National Assembly on Tuesday calling for Namibia’s withdrawal from the ICC.
“Bearing in mind that, for me, the ICC is a biased institution. If you look at history, most of the people who were prosecuted there and found guilty are Africans. But we have some world leaders who have committed war crimes and atrocities, but they are free. But when it is an African leader, they are quick to act. It is really not a court of justice but a biased court,” Johannes said.
He added that Namibia does not need the court in its current form.
“The consequences might include people claiming that Namibia is isolating itself, which could be viewed as a negative move leading to further repercussions, such as cuts in aid; however, we believe the advantages outweigh the disadvantages,” he said.
Amupanda argued that the court is a Western-driven instrument undermining Africa’s sovereignty and interests.
He said Namibia spends millions each year to “legitimise a system that does not serve the continent’s objective or subjective interests.”
He added that pulling out would confirm Namibia’s commitment to Pan-Africanism and self-reliance.
“The ICC has for decades been used to legitimise programmes that are not in Africa’s interest. Remaining in the ICC is not in Namibia’s best interest,” Amupanda told parliament.
However, political analyst Ndumba Kamwanyah cautioned against withdrawal.
He acknowledged concerns about the ICC’s bias but stressed that reforms, not withdrawal, should be the focus.
“Withdrawing from the International Criminal Court (ICC) is a serious step, and in my opinion, it may not be the right move for Namibia at this stage. The ICC plays an important role in holding individuals accountable for serious crimes like genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity,” Kamwanyah said.
He warned that withdrawing from the ICC could weaken Namibia’s human rights standing.
“It might also weaken the international legal safety net that protects citizens from abuses when national systems fail. There could be diplomatic consequences too, such as strained relations with countries that strongly support the ICC and a possible loss of credibility in international human rights discussions,” he said.
Kamwanyah suggested Namibia should instead join other African states in pressing for fairness within the court.
“Namibia should work with other African states to demand reforms within the ICC to address issues of fairness and balance,” he said.
Several African countries have already challenged their membership in the International Criminal Court (ICC).
In September 2025, Mali, Burkina Faso, and Niger jointly announced their withdrawal, calling the court an “instrument of neocolonial repression” that targets Africa.
Their exit will take effect a year after formal notification.
South Africa attempted a similar withdrawal in 2016, but its High Court blocked this action in 2017, ruling that Parliament had not been consulted.
Rwanda’s President Paul Kagame and other African leaders have accused the ICC of bias, while others insist reform is the better path.
