  | You have information to share ?
Or mistakes to correct ?
click here...
|
|
| |  | | Hissène Habré | | | context : | Chad  | | judgement place : | Belgium | | status : | Sought - Arrest warrant | | particulars : | Belgian international arrest warrant issued in September 2005; extradition proceedings unclear in Senegal | | position : | President of Chad |
|
| | | | Even before the decision of the Senegalese Court of Final Appeal, another group of victims had quietly filed a complaint in Belgium against Habré, thus creating the conditions for his possible extradition to that country. The complaint came from 21 victims, three of them having obtained Belgian nationality after several years of residence there. Their complaint is under investigation by Mr. Daniel Fransen, the investigating judge.
The complaints were lodged in Belgium through the application of the so-called Universal Jurisdiction Act, which, in its original version, allowed the opening of criminal proceedings against those responsible for the worst kind of violations of human rights, no matter where the violations had taken place nor what was the nationality of those responsible or their victims. In August 2003, as a result of strong pressure from the American Government, the Belgian parliament repealed this Law of Universal Jurisdiction. Thanks however to certain transitory provisions, this change did not have any effect on the Habré case, since preliminary investigations were already underway and since Belgian victims were amongst those who had filed the complaint.
In April 2001, (soon after the Senegalese courts had dismissed the case) Senegal’s President Abdoulaye Wade made a public declaration that he had given Habré one month to leave Senegal. This surprise announcement was seen as a tribute to the victim’s efforts, but raised the possibility that Habré would take refuge in a country with sparse concern for international law, and so out of the reach of justice. The victims then appealed to the United Nations Committee against Torture (CAT) which called on Senegal to “take all necessary measures to prevent Mr. Hissène Habré from leaving the territory of Senegal except pursuant to a request for extradition.” Following a direct appeal by Kofi Annan, President Wade stated on September 2001 that he had agreed to hold Habré in Senegal until such time as a country like Belgium, capable of organising a fair trial, requested his extradition.
In 2001, during a visit to Chad by Human Rights Watch, the Chadian authorities granted unprecedented access to the files of the DDS in N’Djamena. The AVCRP (Association des Victimes de Crimes et Répressions Politiques au Chad, a victims rights group) has since spent months sorting, classifying and photocopying this mountain of documents which relate in detail how Hissène Habré put the DDS under his direct control and how he planned and organised campaigns of ethnic cleansing against his own people.
From 26 February to 7 March, 2002, Judge Fransen visited Chad as part of an International Criminal Investigation. He was accompanied by the Deputy Public Prosecutor of the King to the Court of Brussels, and four police officers who had expertise in investigating crimes against humanity, war crimes and torture. With total cooperation from the Chadian government, the Judge and his team were able to question plaintiffs, victims of Hissène Habré, witnesses to many atrocities and several DDS agents. The Judge was also able to visit the sites close to N’Djamena where massacres had taken place and all the detention centres connected to the Habré regime in the Chadian capital, including the infamous “Piscine” or underground prison belonging to the DDS. On all of these visits he was accompanied by ex-prisoners who could describe the treatment to which they had been subjected and to point out the location of mass graves. Finally, the Judge had access to the archives of the DDS and was able to review and sequester numerous documents. This visit was first page news in Chad and many of the victims began to feel that “justice was finally beginning to be done”
(Adapted and compiled in large part from Human Rights Watch, The Case Against Hissène Habré, an “African Pinochet”, www.hrw.org/justice/habre/intro_web2.htm )
Dozens of victims and other witnesses also came from Chad and elsewhere to give evidence directly before the Belgian judge in Brussels.
In October 2002, The Chadian Minister of Justice, made a statement in writing to Judge Fransen that “Mr Hissène Habré could not expect immunity of any kind from the Chadian authorities.”
On 19 Septembre 2005, Judge Fransen issued an arrest warrant against Hissène Habré. An extradition request was then forwarded to the Senegalese authorities, Belgium wishing to try the former Chadian dictator based on its universal jurisdiction law.
On 16 November 2005, Hissène Habré was detained in anticipation of the decision on Belgian's extradition request.
At the extradition hearing on 25 November 2005, the Appeals Court in Dakar declared itself "not competent" to rule on Belgium's request for extradition of Hissène Habré.
The Court's reasoning seemed to be based on Habrés "immunity" as a former head of State. This argument was immediately refuted by NGOs, for in international law, immunity is a privilege of States, not of individuals. States therefore may waive the immunity of their former or incumbent officials. In this context, it has to be noted that the State of Chad has affirmed vis-à-vis the Belgian investigating Judge in 2002, that Hissène Habré cannot claim any form of immunity.
It was not immediately clear, whom the decision on the extradition request would fall to after the Appeal Court's decision. Art. 17 of the Senegalese law on extradition states that if the board of indictment denies the extradition request, the extradition cannot take place. Article 18 provides that in the contrary case, the extradition can be autorised by decree. NGOs stated that as the Court has not denied the request, it is now up to President Wade to issue an extradition decree.
On the following day, the Interior minister issued a decree which put Hissène Habré "at the disposal of" the chairman of the African Union, Nigeria's president Olusegun Obasanjo. The latter had reportedly affirmed that the matter will be put to the AU's member countries at their next summit in January 2006. Meanwhile, Habré will remain in Senegal.
On 24 January 2006, the African Union has decided against the extradition of Habré to Belgium. Senegals's president Wade announced that African leaders wanted to refer Habré to a panel of legal experts which will back the use of an African rather than a Belgian court to try him.
In May 2006, Senegal was critized by the United Nations Committee against Torture (CAT) for not prosecuting Habré. The Committee asked the country to either prosecute Habré or extradite him to Belgium or any other State willing to prosecute him.
In July 2006, an AU panel recommended that Habre be tried in Senegal, Chad or another African nation that has adopted the international Convention Against Torture [text], rather than in Belgium.
The AU decided that Senegal should serve as the location of Habré's trial. Senegal's President Wade agreed with this solution, but cautioned, that the necessary legal bases had to be laid first. Wade is further said to have spoken out against the Senegalese prosecutor simply taking over the Belgian prosecution files.
On 31 January 2007, the Senegalese National Assembly adopted a law which permits the country to prosecute cases of genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and torture, even when they are committed outside of Senegal. This development was seen as an important step towards a trial against Hissène Habré. | |    | | Trial Watch would like to remind its users that any person charged by national or international authorities is presumed innocent until proven guilty. | |  |  | | last time seen : | | | Dakar (Senegal) | | | period of charges : | | | 10.1982 - 01.12.1990 | | | charges : | | | Crimes against humanity
Torture | | | profile last modified : | | | 13.07.2007 |
| |
| | |
|
|
