CAT/C/36/D/181/2001
page 4
to be reopened. They maintained that the ruling of the Indictment Division was contrary to the
Convention against Torture and that a domestic law could not be invoked to justify failure to
apply the Convention.
2.7
On 20 March 2001, the Senegalese Court of Cassation confirmed the ruling of the
Indictment Division, stating inter alia that “no procedural text confers on Senegalese courts a
universal jurisdiction to prosecute and judge, if they are found on the territory of the Republic,
presumed perpetrators of or accomplices in acts [of torture] … when these acts have been
committed outside Senegal by foreigners; the presence in Senegal of Hissène Habré cannot in
itself justify the proceedings brought against him”.
2.8
On 19 September 2005, after four years of investigation, a Belgian judge issued an
international arrest warrant against Hissène Habré, charging him with genocide, crimes against
humanity, war crimes, torture and other serious violations of international humanitarian law. On
the same date, Belgium made an extradition request to Senegal, citing, inter alia, the Convention
against Torture.
2.9
In response to the extradition request, the Senegalese authorities arrested Hissène Habré
on 15 November 2005.
2.10 On 25 November 2005, the Indictment Division of the Dakar Court of Appeal stated that
it lacked jurisdiction to rule on the extradition request. Nevertheless, on 26 November, the
Senegalese Minister of the Interior placed Hissène Habré “at the disposal of the President of the
African Union” and announced that Hissène Habré would be expelled to Nigeria within
48 hours. On 27 November, the Senegalese Minister for Foreign Affairs stated that
Hissène Habré would remain in Senegal and that, following a discussion between the Presidents
of Senegal and Nigeria, it had been agreed that the case would be brought to the attention of the
next Summit of Heads of State and Government of the African Union, which would be held in
Khartoum on 23 and 24 January 2006.
2.11 At its Sixth Ordinary Session, held on 24 January 2006, the Assembly of the African
Union decided to set up a committee of eminent African jurists, who would be appointed by
the Chairman of the African Union in consultation with the Chairman of the African Union
Commission, to consider all aspects and implications of the Hissène Habré case and the
possible options for his trial, and report to the African Union at its next ordinary session in
June 2006.
The complaint
3.1 The complainants allege a violation by Senegal of article 5, paragraph 2, and article 7 of
the Convention and seek in this regard various forms of compensation.
Violation of article 5, paragraph 2, of the Convention
3.2
The complainants point out that, in its ruling of 20 March 2001, the Court of Cassation
stated that “article 79 of the Constitution [which stipulates that international treaties are directly
applicable within the Senegalese legal order and can accordingly be invoked directly before
Senegalese courts] cannot apply when compliance with the Convention requires prior legislative