The “immunities and privileges” granted by South Africa’s foreign minister, Maite Nkoana-Mashabane, towards Zimbabwean first lady Grace Mugabe confuse diplomatic immunity, and the nature of political impunity, a legal expert told Huffpost SA.
“I think the grant of immunity was improperly done,” Nicole Fritz, executive officer of Freedom Under Law told HuffPost SA. “It’s not a grant of impunity to persons so they can come and engage in grievous assault and then be beyond the reach of the law,” Fritz said.
Mugabe flew back to Zimbabwe on Sunday night after she was granted immunity from the assault charges laid against her by model Gabriella Engels. The 20-year old Engels, a model, claims Mugabe beat her with an extension cord in her sons’ flat in Sandton.
“I think the way we have handled the situation is hamfisted. I don’t think there was a whole lot of strategic thought that went into it. But this sort of situation is unprecedented in the South African context, and I’m sure in many countries around the world,” Fritz said.
But, Fritz says, South Africans in Zimbabwe could’ve faced prosecution if Mugabe wasn’t granted immunity.
“All sorts of retaliatory actions could’ve been taken against South Africa if Grace wasn’t granted immunity. It could’ve potentially affected the lives of South African nationals kept in Zimbabwe. If Zimbabwe wanted to show its displeasure, they could’ve simply expelled South African diplomats, as well,” Fritz explained.
Professor Hennie Strydom, who holds the South African Research Chair in International Law at the University of Johannesburg, explained to Africa Check how Diplomatic immunity in South Africa works.
“Diplomatic immunity refers to the protection and privileges extended to certain foreigners, such as members of diplomatic missions, consuls, ministers of foreign affairs and heads of state,” he said.
The South African government, Africa Check states can also extend this protection to people on an ad hoc basis by publishing their names in the government gazette. It also applies to family members of diplomats and their personnel. But, this cannot be done posthumously, many legal experts said today.
Post published in: Featured
This confirms my article elsewhere in “The Zimbabwean”: that SA’s decision to allow Grace Mugabe’s claim of diplomatic immunity, was based on expediency, not law.
However, the reason given in this article (SA is frightened of what Zimbabwe might do to SA citizens in Zimbabwe), is utterly pathetic.
It is imperative for all nations not to give in to threats otherwise the world will soon descend into chaos. The USA faces a far bigger threat from North Korea, but is it backing down? No, and it is vital for the world that it does not.
For a nation to back down in front of a stronger one might be
understandable (but still not laudable). But for SA to back down to Zimbabwe is like a buffalo backing down to a chiwawa.