“Impunity is a cancer that prevents us from realizing our true potential” [1]

December 6, 2011
Jacqueline Moudeina, a leader in the fight to bring former Chadian dictator Hissène Habré to justice receives Right Livelihood Award

Jacqueline Moudeina, a leader in the fight to bring former Chadian dictator Hissène Habré to justice receives Right Livelihood Award

Jacqueline Moudeina is president of the Chadian Association for the Promotion and Defense of Human Rights (ATPDH) and has been the lawyer for the victims of the former dictator Hissène Habré since 2000. In 2001, Ms. Moudeina was seriously injured by a grenade thrown by security forces commanded by a former officer in Hissène Habré’s political police.
On December 5, 2011, Ms. Moudeina received the Right Livelihood Award 2011, which is considered to be the “Alternative Nobel Prize,” “for her tireless efforts at great personal risk to win justice for the victims of the former dictatorship in Chad and to increase awareness and observance of human rights in Africa” (http://www.rightlivelihood.org [4]).

This is her acceptance speech delivered at the Swedish parliament in Stockholm on December 5, 2011.

*****

Jacqueline Moudeina’s Remarks for the “Right Livelihood Award”

Honorable Ladies and Gentlemen,

Allow me to begin by sincerely thanking you for the distinguished honor that you are bestowing upon me through the “Right Livelihood Award.” This award recognizes me specifically but, beyond that, rewards all the human rights defenders in the world, and particularly in Africa.

Rest assured that it is a deeply encouraging sign for us, the human rights defenders, and especially for us, the women, who fight on a daily basis, in very difficult conditions, sometimes at the risk of our own lives, in a world where power is generally held by men. This award gives us the courage to continue our different struggles on a road fraught with pitfalls.

Fighting for victims is in my genes. I am a rebel who from an early age has been indignant in the face of abuse, and I cannot bear injustice. I have always felt this way and always will, as long as those who suffer injustice are ignored by their leaders and as long as justice is selective. Many have tried to prevent me from doing my work; many have tried to intimidate me, to psychologically and physically threaten me. But I have come to understand, as Alexis Voinov said in Albert Camus’ The Just Assassins, that “it isnot enough to speak out against injustice. You have to dedicate your life to fighting it.” Until now, no one has managed to discourage me or get the better of me. I will continue my fight.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

I will seize this occasion to tell you about one aspect of our struggle for human rights: the fight against impunity.

In the past twenty years, the international community has undeniably made major strides in the fight against impunity for the worst criminals. But in Africa, much remains to be done. On this continent, impunity is a cancer that, with its corollary disease corruption, has infected our body politic and prevents us from realizing our true potential. We, the members of civil society, are fighting against this cancer, from Tunis to Harare, from Dakar to Khartoum, and in other places like Abidjan, Tripoli, and N’Djamena.

And yet, this justice that I am speaking about is not a science in the making. It isn’t a utopia. It is the most fundamental form of justice: criminal justice that allows victims to wash away the worst horrors, that gives back dignity to men who were tortured, and that gives back courage to women who have lost hope.

You only need to look at our struggle to bring to justice the former dictator of my country, Hissène Habré, to understand that today, in the twenty-first century, more than sixty years after the Nuremberg trials, it is sometimes easier to resort to oppression than to abide by the law, easier to commit violence than to deliver justice!

Habré ruled Chad from 1982 to 1990 until his overthrow and exile in Senegal. During his reign, atrocities were committed on a large scale, waves of ethnic cleansing crashed down on individual groups, and torture was institutionalized. In 1992, a national Commission of Inquiry estimated that his regime was responsible for the death of more than 40,000 people and the disappearance of thousands of individuals, leaving in its wake innumerable widows and orphans.

The victims of the Habré regime, whom I represent, have fought tirelessly for justice for twenty-one years. But to date their struggle remains unfinished. Before leaving power, Hissène Habré emptied out Chad’s national coffers and has skillfully used these funds in Senegal to weave himself a powerful network of protection. And so, instead of allowing the victims’ case to be heard, Senegal and the African Union have subjected them to what Archbishop Desmond Tutu and 117 organizations from twenty-five African countries rightly denounced as an “interminable political and legal soap opera.” I would say even more: a true stations of the cross for the victims.

In January 2000, we filed a complaint against Hissène Habré in Senegal where he now lives. One month later, the decision by a Senegalese judge to indict Habré gave us real hope.

However, following political inference, denounced by the United Nations, the Senegalese courts declared that they lacked jurisdiction.

The victims then turned toward Belgium which offered them a path to justice. After a four-year investigation, a Belgian judge issued an international arrest warrant against Habré in 2005. The victims once again felt real hope that they might see Hissène Habré brought to justice for his alleged crimes.

But once again, the victims were disappointed when Senegal refused to extradite Habré to Belgium.

In May 2006, the UN Committee against Torture condemned Senegal for its failure to act and enjoined Senegal to prosecute or extradite the former Chadian dictator.

In July 2006, the heads of state and government leaders of the African Union gave Senegal a mandate to prosecute Habré “in the name of Africa.” It was another step forward.

But our renewed hope to see Habré tried was short-lived. For four years, Senegal conditioned the start of investigations on the up-front payment by the international community of all the costs of the trial. When the international community committed to such payment, President Abdoulaye Wade of Senegal suddenly refused to execute the mandate conferred by the African Union and, in June 2011, finally declared that Senegal would not prosecute Hissène Habré.

Since then, Belgium, a country to which I express thanks on behalf of all the victims, has renewed its extradition request.

But now, the African Union now talks of sending Habré to Rwanda and starting everything all over again. What an outrage! What a loss of time, when the surviving victims are dying one after the other! More than a dozen victims have passed away this year alone. A request to transfer Habré to Rwanda would entail many more years of waiting, the time that it would take for Rwanda to create an adequate legislative framework, to conduct an investigation, and to issue an extradition request, whereas a trial in Belgium could take place quickly.

This is yet another dilatory tactic by the African Union, and calls into question the institution’s commitment to the fight against impunity. With a few exceptions, African leaders, who say that they want to free themselves of the tutelage of international tribunals and the extradition requests of Western countries, are revealing that they form nothing more than a club of heads of states ensuring their own impunity.

It is time for Senegal to grant victims the justice that they have demanded by extraditing Habré to Belgium where he can be tried. The victims cannot wait any longer. Psychologically and physically, they have suffered severe trauma that has taken a heavy toll over the years.

The Chadian government itself, last July, requested, and I quote, that the “option to extradite Habré to Belgium to face trial be given priority.” Why is President Wade denying us justice? Why is the African Union failing to listen to the victims? Why do Senegal and the African Union not support the position of Chad, the country most directly concerned by this case, which is to see Habré tried in Belgium?

I would like to seize this opportunity today to voice the victims’ plea, and to call on Senegal to extradite Habré to Belgium, to enable them at last to obtain justice.

This case isn’t just about one man, however, but rather it is about one of the most tyrannical regimes of the last century.This regime is usually identified with one man, Habré, but we have not forgotten about his accomplices, the executioners and torturers who carried out the former dictator’s orders. These ex-agents of Habré’s terrifying political police, known as the “Documentation and Security Directorate,” must also face justice before the Chadian courts and must be removed from public service. This was already one of the main recommendations of the National Commission of Inquiry in 1992.

Some of these accomplices continue to haunt us by taunting and threatening us in our daily lives. But we will not drop this fight. I myself was targeted in 2001 for my involvement in the Habré case. During a peaceful march in favor of democracy, a police squad attempted to assassinate me with a grenade. Its commander was none other than a former torturer against whom the victims had initiated a judicial procedure in Chad.

This event illustrates the educational value of a trial: how could this former torturer still believe that a dictator’s weapon is more powerful than a judge’s gavel? Despite this attempted assassination, I have never relented, and I will continue my efforts until Habré and the other executioners are brought to justice.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

The challenge of our struggle, above and beyond the trial of one individual, is that of national union for a lasting peace in my country. Today, the trial of Hissène Habré and his accomplices would allow the Chadian people to begin, at last, the reconstruction of their country. And it is only at the end of this process that the Chadian people will be able to truly come together and enjoy a rebirth.

In the struggle to end the impunity of some powerful leaders, justice has so far been an elusive dream. But this award which you bestow on me today is a tribute to the thousands of victims, widows, and orphans.

And it is to these individuals that I dedicate this award. We will not give up.This award reaffirms that we are right and encourages us to continue our fight against impunity.

Thank you for your attention.

Source URL: http://www.hrw.org/news/2011/12/06/impunity-cancer-prevents-us-realizing-our-true-potential
Links:
[1] http://www.hrw.org/news/2011/12/06/impunity-cancer-prevents-us-realizing-our-true-potential
[2] http://twitter.com/share?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.hrw.org%2Fnews%2F2011%2F12%2F06%2Fimpunity-cancer-prevents-us-realizing-our-true-potential&count=horizontal&via=&text=%E2%80%9CImpunity%20is%20a%20cancer%20that%20prevents%20us%20from%20realizing%20our%20true%20potential%E2%80%9D&counturl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.hrw.org%2Fnews%2F2011%2F12%2F06%2Fimpunity-cancer-prevents-us-realizing-our-true-potential
[3] http://www.facebook.com/plugins/like.php?href=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.hrw.org%2Fnews%2F2011%2F12%2F06%2Fimpunity-cancer-prevents-us-realizing-our-true-potential&layout=button_count&show_faces=false&action=recommend&colorscheme=light&width=100&height=21&font=&locale=
[4] http://www.rightlivelihood.org


Senegal/Chad: Nobel Winners, African Activists Seek Progress in Habré Trial

July 21, 2011

African Union, Which Sought Senegal Trial 4 Years Ago, Should Take Action

(Dakar) – The Nobel Peace Prize winners Bishop Desmond Tutu and Shirin Ebadi, as well as 117 African human rights groups from 25 countries, called today for the government of Senegal and the African Union to move forward with the trial of  Hissène Habré.  The exiled former dictator of Chad is accused of thousands of political killings and systematic torture.

African heads of state will come together in Kampala from July 25 to 27, 2010, for an AU summit, four years after the AU mandated Senegal “to prosecute and ensure that Hissène Habré is tried, on behalf of Africa.” Senegal has not yet begun proceedings against Habré, however, claiming that it is still waiting for international funding.

“The victims of Mr. Habré’s regime have been working tirelessly for 20 years to bring him to justice, and many of the survivors have already died,” says a petition to Senegal and the AU signed by the groups, the Nobel winners, and other prominent figures. “Instead of justice, the victims have been treated to an interminable political and legal soap opera.”

Habré ruled Chad from 1982 until he was deposed in 1990 by President Idriss Déby Itno and fled to Senegal. His one-party regime was marked by widespread atrocities, including waves of ethnic campaigns. Files of Habré’s political police reveal the names of 1,208 people who were killed or died in detention. A total of 12,321 victims of human rights violations were mentioned in the files.

Habré was first indicted in Senegal in 2000, but after political interference denounced by two United Nations rapporteurs, Senegalese courts said they had no jurisdiction to try the case. His victims then turned to Belgium and, after a four-year investigation, a Belgian judge charged Habré in September 2005 with crimes against humanity, war crimes, and torture.  After Senegal rejected a Belgian extradition request,  President Abdoulaye Wade accepted an AU request to put  Habré on trial in Senegal.

On July 1, after years of discussions on the budget, the AU and the European Union announced that a donors’ meeting had been set for sometime in October. Agreement has not been reached yet on the final budget, however.

Among the signatories of the petition are Richard Goldstone of South Africa, the first prosecutor of the UN war crimes tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and for Rwanda and head of the Gaza fact-finding commission, as well as the leading human rights organizations in Chad and Senegal, the Foundation for Human Rights of South Africa, the Egyptian Organization for Human Rights, the Kenya Human Rights Commission, and the Association Africaine pour la Défense des Droits de l’Homme (DRC).


Senegal: Accept AU Plan for Hissène Habré Case

March 22, 2011

African Union Proposed Special Court for Long-Awaited Trial of Chad’s Ex-Dictator
March 22, 2011
(Dakar) – Senegal should accept an African Union (AU) plan for the trial of Hissène Habré during discussions set for March 23 and 24, 2011, in Addis Ababa, a coalition of human rights organizations said today in a letter to Senegal’s president.

The African Union, which called at its summit in January for an “expeditious” start to a long-delayed trial, invited Senegal to the Ethiopian capital to discuss an AU proposal to try the former Chadian dictator before a special court within the Senegalese justice system whose president and appeals chamber president would be appointed by the AU.  The Senegalese delegation to the talks will be led by Justice Minister Cheikh Tidiane Sy.

Habré is accused of thousands of political killings and systematic torture when he ruled Chad, from 1982 to 1990, before fleeing to Senegal. Senegal has raised one objection after another to bringing him to trial, while refusing to send him to Belgium, which sought his extradition in 2005.

“Senegal has two choices,” said Assane Dioma Ndiaye, Président of the Senegalese League for Human Rights. “Either it accepts the African Union plan and begins proceedings against Habré right away, or it extradites Habré to Belgium. It would be a shame if Africa could not meet this challenge when everything is set for an African country to provide a fair trial for any crimes committed in Africa.”

President Abdoulaye Wade of Senegal said recently that he was “returning” the case to the AU, and Foreign Minister Madické Niang has called for the establishment of an international tribunal to prosecute Habré.

The letter to President Wade was signed by  the Association of Victims of Hissène Habré’s Regime, the Senegalese League for Human Rights, the African Assembly for the Defense of Human Rights, Acting Together for Human Rights (Agir Ensemble pour les Droits de l’Homme), and Human Rights Watch. The letter warned that it would be impossible to finance  an international tribunal,and that any attempt to create an ad hoc tribunal along the Sierra Leone or Rwanda models, or to add  significant international staff to the AU proposal, would be seen as a way of ” burying the case.”

Last Friday, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay, also told President Wade that the Habré trial should begin “as soon as possible,” and that if Senegal could not begin the case quickly, it should extradite Habré to Belgium.

Background
Habré ruled Chad from 1982 until he was deposed in 1990 by President Idriss Déby Itno and fled to Senegal. His one-party regime was marked by widespread atrocities, including waves of campaigns against various ethnic groups.  Files of Habré’s political police, the Documentation and Security Board (Direction de la Documentation et de la Sécurité, DDS), which were discovered by Human Rights Watch in 2001, reveal the names of 1,208 people who were killed or died in detention. A total of 12,321 victims of human rights violations were mentioned in the files.

Habre was first indicted in Senegal in 2000, but then Senegalese courts ruled that he could not be tried there. His victims then turned to Belgium, and after a four-year investigation, a Belgian judge in September 2005 issued an arrest warrant charging Habré with crimes against humanity, war crimes, and torture, and requested his extradition.

Senegal then asked the African Union to recommend a course of action. On July 2, 2006, the AU called on Senegal to prosecute Habré. Wade accepted, but refused to proceed for several years, until Senegal was provided with money to finance the trial. On November 24, 2010, international donors met in Dakar and agreed to fund the US$11.7 million budget for the trial.

Before the donors’ meeting, the Court of Justice of the Economic Community of West African States said that Habré’s trial should be carried out by “a special ad hoc procedure of an international character.” That decision has been severely criticized by the Journal of International Criminal Justice, the American Society of International Law , and the President of the Irish Section of the  International Law Association.

The AU responded to that decision by proposing the creation of a special court within the Senegalese justice system with the presidents of the trial court and the appeals court appointed by the AU.  The court would prosecute the person or persons “who bear the greatest responsibility” for genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and torture committed in Chad from June 1982 to December 1990.

In July 2010, Archbishop Desmond Tutu and 117 groups from 25 African countries denounced the “interminable political and legal soap opera” to which the victims had been subjected over 20 years.


Chad’s Habre Said to Know of Prison Deaths

February 3, 2010
Former Chadian dictator Hissene Habre

Former Chadian President Hissène Habré (file), Photo: AFP

A new study shows that former Chadian President Hissene Habre knew about hundreds of deaths in prisons operated by his political police.


Mr. Habre has been under house arrest in Senegal since 2000.  He fled to Senegal after being deposed in 1990 and has since been accused of thousands of political killings and cases of torture during his eight years in power.

An international coalition of human-rights organizations has announced a new study of abandoned files from the state security force that operated prisons under President Habre shows he was well-informed of its actions.

Demba Cire Bathily, a Dakar-based lawyer for the victims, says these findings could be critical for the case against Mr. Habre.

He says this study looked at 2,700 administrative reports and established a direct link between Hissene Habre and the state security force, responsible for acts of torture.  He says the evidence shows Mr. Habre was aware of what was going on and received reports of deaths.

More than 12,000 victims are mentioned in the documents, including 1,208 who died in detention.  Analysts also say the study confirms reports of deplorable conditions in the prisons.

Under international law, individuals can be found criminally responsible for human-rights violations, if they knew or should have known that forces under their control were committing crimes and failed to act to prevent them or punish those responsible.

In 2006, the African Union called for Senegal to try Mr. Habre on behalf of Africa.  Since then, Senegal has adopted laws that would allow it to do so, but the case is at a standstill.

Senegal has said it wants all $38 million of a trial’s proposed three-year budget up front, a demand the international community is reluctant to agree to, especially because Senegal has not offered a clear plan on how it will conduct the trial.

Wednesday marks the 10-year anniversary of the first Habre’s indictment in Senegal.  In those 10 years, many of the the victims have died.  And, human-rights advocates worry that Senegal does not have the political will to try him.

Bathily says Habre’s victims have also become victims of time and Senegal’s inertia.

He says those victims who have already died will never receive justice.  It is a deplorable situation, he says, that is made even worse by the fact that Senegal has all the judicial measures in place to prosecute someone for these serious crimes but still does nothing.  He says Chad’s former president is charged with war crimes, crimes against humanity and acts of torture, but he walks free and Senegal says it will not judge him until it receives the money.

In October 2008, Mr. Habre filed a complaint with the court of the Economic Community of West African States to block his trial for crimes against humanity in Senegal, citing violations of his rights.  The ECOWAS court ruled in November 2009 that victims may not take part in those proceedings, but has not yet determined whether it has jurisdiction to hear the Habre case.

European Union and African Union representatives visited Senegal in December, 2009 and are expected to propose a revised budget for bringing Mr. Habre to trial in Senegal.

Human-rights advocates have called on the African Union to take this week’s AU summit in Ethiopia as a chance to prod Senegal to move forward.

source: voanews.com


Dakar challenges regional court’s power to try Habre: official

January 14, 2010

LAGOS — Senegal Thursday challenged the competence of west Africa’s regional court to hear Chad’s former president Hissene Habre’s suit against Dakar’s efforts to try him for alleged rights violations, a court spokesman said.

At the court session in Abuja, Dakar government lawyers filed an objection against the hearing of Habre’s suit, arguing that their country, a sovereign state, was at liberty to make its laws, amend them and try offenders, Felicien Hounkarin told AFP.

They confirmed that they amended their laws, including those dealing with torture, to allow them to conform with UN international conventions and in order to enable Dakar to try cases of rights violations and torture, he said.

Habre’s lawyers argued that Senegal’s decision to amend its laws specifically targeted Habre and that his rights could be violated if he was tried in the west African country, he also said.

They urged the court of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) to stop Habre’s trial in Senegal, he added.

“If he is tried in Senegal, he will be the sole person to be so treated and this trial will amount to selective justice. He is not going to get justice and a fair hearing in Senegal,” Habre’s leading lawyer, Francois Serres, told AFP by telephone from Abuja.

“Even now, a lot of rights violations are going on in Senegal in Dakar’s preparation of this case. We are worried that he might be indicted if tried in Senegal,” Serres said.

Habre, accused of “crimes against humanity” which Senegal is charged with the responsibility of trying, has alleged the violation of some of his rights by Dakar. He has lived in exile in the Senegalese capital since 1990.

Habre has been blamed for killing and torturing thousands during his 1982-90 rule when he was toppled and fled.

An official truth commission report in 1992 accused Habre’s regime of committing some 40,000 political murders.

Habre’s lawyers in October filed a suit in Senegal against the violation of his rights under various articles of the African Charter on Human Rights.

Awa Daboya Nana, president of the ECOWAS court, adjourned until March 17 his ruling on whether or not the tribunal was competent to hear Habre’s suit, Serres said.

The court on November 17 rejected attempts by victims of Habre to take part in the rights violation suit the ex-dictator filed against Senegal.

The request of the victims was represented by the global rights lobby, Human Rights Watch (HRW).

The judge had said the “application for intervention is inadmissible” because the interveners had already “initiated many proceedings before jurisdictions that can offer the protection of their rights”.HRW lawyer Clement Nwankwo said that the victims wanted to be part of the suit because it “seems to exclude a review of the case of extradition and other trials that are pending outside of the jurisdiction of ECOWAS court”.

source: AFP


Court unable to hear Habre trial

December 16, 2009
Habre

Former Chadian dictator, Hissene Habre (file)

Arusha, Tanzania -The African human rights court, in its first ever case on Tuesday, ruled itself incompetent to decide whether charges against Chad’s former president Hissene Habre should be dropped.

The Tanzania-based African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights was hearing a petition lodged in 2008 by a Chadian national, Michelot Yogogombaye, seeking to have Habre’s planned trial in Senegal quashed.

The African Union, which established the court in 2006, had in the same year called for Habre’s case to be heard in Senegal, where he has been exiled since his toppling in 1990.

The former Chadian dictator is facing crimes against humanity charges stemming from accusations of killing and torturing tens of thousands during his rule between 1982 and 1990.

“The court unanimously declares that it is incompetent to decide on the petition by Mr Yogogombaye against Senegal,” read a ruling.

It added that Senegal had not made any official communication acknowledging the court’s competence to hear petitions filed directly by individuals or non-governmental groups.

Yogogombaye had asked the judges to “take note, in the current case made for the inculpation and judgement of Hissein Habre, of the political character, the financial motive and the abusive use of the principle of universal jurisdiction.”

Yogogombaye, who lives in Switzerland and who was absent during Tuesday’s ruling, had suggested a South African-style truth and reconciliation commission to deal with crimes committed in Chad between 1962 and 2008.

- AFP

source: News24.com


Sale temps pour l’ancien dictateur Tchadien Hissène Habré !

December 16, 2009

Sale temps pour l’ancien dictateur Tchadien Hissène Habré ! Alors que le Sénégal attend encore des sous pour ouvrir son procès, une gifle est tombée hier sur sa joue. Pour ceux qui ne se souviennent pas, Michelot Yogombaye, un citoyen tchadien résidant en Suisse avait introduit le 11 août 2008 une requête devant la Cour africaine des droits de l’homme et des peuples, pour demander à ce que les poursuites engagées contre Hissène Habré soient abandonnées. Le gars, sans doute activé, n’a pas eu gain de cause puisque la Cour, basée à Arusha, vient de rendre son verdict.

Habré (bis)

En effet, hier la Cour africaine des droits de l’homme, présidée par Jean Mutsinzi, un juge Rwandais, a rejeté la requête. Selon lui : « La Cour, à l’unanimité, déclare qu’elle n’a pas compétence pour connaître de la requête introduite par M. Yogogombaye contre le Sénégal ». Surtout que pour le moment, la Cour n’a pas autorité pour se prononcer sur les affaires qui concernent les dignitaires sénégalais.

source: Xalimasn.com


AU Should Stand with Victims, Not Abusers

August 29, 2009

by Param-Preet Singh, Counsel, International Justice Program (Published in: The New African)

Respect for the rule of law is one of the founding principles of the African Union (AU). It should therefore come as no surprise that African states make up the largest regional membership bloc of the International Criminal Court (ICC), whose mission is to tackle the worst crimes known to humankind when national courts cannot or will not do so.

What is surprising, however, is the recent assault on the ICC from within the African Union, despite, as outlined in a recent communiqué of its Peace and Security Council, its “unflinching commitment to combating impunity.”  Several of the AU’s North African members – who are not, incidentally, parties to the ICC – are trying to undercut its support on the continent. This assault follows the court’s decision earlier this year to issue an arrest warrant for President Omar al-Bashir of Sudan for war crimes and crimes against humanity. Critics claim that because of its exclusive focus to date on Africa, the ICC is an “instrument of colonialism” that is unfairly targeting leaders on the continent while crimes committed by more powerful states remain unaddressed. As several Darfurian civil society activists I met in Banjul recently rightly noted, though, this criticism conveniently forgets the thousands of victims who would be without redress for their unspeakable suffering if not for the ICC. These activists are not alone. From Cape Town to Addis Ababa, in addition to Banjul, over a hundred civil society groups have voiced their support for the court and have urged the AU to do the same.

The New African magazine has called for a debate on why international non-governmental organizations such as Human Rights Watch “often appear to pick on African personalities.” Certainly we have to recognize that part of the criticism of efforts to ensure justice for crimes in Africa is rooted in the fact that international justice currently operates on an uneven playing field. More powerful states are in a better position to shield their leaders from the arm of justice. The veto power of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council – the United States, Russia, China, the United Kingdom, and France – means that referral of situations to the ICC by the council is currently far less likely for crimes committed by these countries and their close allies than for states without such support.

There is no question that this playing field should be leveled. Human Rights Watch consistently presses for justice for serious international crimes regardless of where they are committed, including through prosecutions of Bush administration officials implicated in torture, and Russian and Israeli commanders responsible for war crimes. In the meantime, however, the solution is to work for more inclusive justice, not less. To advocate otherwise has the practical consequence of abandoning the victims for whom justice is available. Such an approach feeds, rather than combats, the culture in which abusers think they will suffer no consequences for their actions.

This is a view widely shared by many African states and civil society organizations that have recently taken important steps to stand up for both victims and the ICC. At a meeting convened by the AU Commission in Addis Ababa in June, for example, South Africa and a number of states in the Southern Africa Development Community (SADC) – including Botswana, Lesotho and Zambia – led the charge in firmly rejecting efforts by ICC opponents to manipulate them into muting their support for the court. The strength of their collective action should be commended.

Unfortunately, support for the ICC in Africa suffered a setback at the AU summit in early July. Under pressure from its host, Libya – one of the ICC’s main opponents – the AU adopted a decision that its members should not cooperate with the ICC in the arrest of President al-Bashir, despite the strong objections of Botswana and Chad.

Significantly, since then Botswana and Uganda have reaffirmed their commitment to the Rome Statute establishing the ICC and their support for court. Botswana in particular has made it clear that it would arrest and transfer al-Bashir to the ICC, as “the people of Africa, including the people of Sudan deserve to be protected from the perpetrators of such crimes.” We look to other African ICC states parties to make similar public statements. In doing so, they would be aligning themselves with the victims of horrific atrocities instead of their abusers.

As the New African continues to look at questions of justice, we believe it could make an important contribution by focusing its debate on what African states can do to strengthen justice for the worst crimes wherever they are committed. This would serve victims of abuses in Africa and elsewhere.

source: HRW.org


African Civil Society Urges African States Parties to the Rome Statute to Reaffirm Their Commitment to the ICC

June 30, 2009

On 3 July 2009 the African Union (AU) agreed that its members should withhold cooperation from the International Criminal Court (ICC) in the arrest and surrender of Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir. The court issued its arrest warrant for President al-Bashir on 4 March 2009 for alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity committed in Darfur.

The AU’s decision threatens to block justice for victims of the worst crimes committed on the continent. It is inconsistent with article 4 of the AU’s constitutive act that rejects impunity, as well as the treaty obligations of the 30 African governments that ratified the Rome Statute of the ICC. The decision also undermines the consensus reached by African ICC States Parties at a meeting in Addis Ababa in June 2009.

Recognizing our obligation to help protect human rights and uphold the rule of law, we, the undersigned civil society organizations, appeal to African ICC States Parties to reaffirm their support for the ICC and their commitment to abide by their obligations under the Rome Statute, particularly in relation to the arrest and transfer of the President of Sudan to the ICC.

The ICC was created to bring accountability for the most serious crimes of international concern: genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity. African governments, together with civil society, played an active role in establishing the court and African governments were among the founding ratifiers of the Rome Statute.

A majority of African countries are now Parties to the ICC: Benin, Botswana, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros, Republic of Congo, Democratic Republic of Congo, Djibouti, Gabon, Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Kenya, Lesotho, Liberia, Madagascar, Malawi, Mali, Mauritius, Namibia, Niger, Nigeria, Senegal, Sierra Leone, South Africa, Tanzania, Uganda, and Zambia. In ratifying the Rome Statute, these states signaled their dedication to cooperate with the ICC to defend the rights of victims and to ensure that the perpetrators of the most serious crimes known to humankind, whoever they might be, are brought to justice.

In Addis Ababa in June, those states underscored their continued support for the court. Proposals to consider making recommendations in relation to possible withdrawal from the ICC or withholding cooperation from the court failed to win a consensus.

The decision adopted at the AU summit just three weeks later is a backward step. The basis provided by the AU for withholding cooperation with the ICC is the UN Security Council’s lack of response to the AU’s request for a deferral of the ICC’s case against President al-Bashir. Consistent with States Parties’ obligations under the Rome Statute, this is a matter to direct to the Security Council and does not warrant withholding cooperation from the ICC.

Following the AU summit, the governments of Botswana and Uganda issued statements reiterating their commitment to cooperating with the ICC. These statements are important.

Civil society across the continent has expressed concern about the AU decision. Ensuring that the determined steps to end impunity on our continent are not undermined requires a collective effort by all Africans. Instead of retreating from important achievements to date, we look to our governments to remain steadfast in their support for justice for victims of the worst crimes, including by reaffirming their commitment to cooperate with the ICC.

Organizations supporting the statement:

1. Action des Chrétiens Activistes des Droits de l’Homme à Shabunda (ACADHOSHA), South Kivu, DRC
2. Action des Chrétiens pour l’Abolition de la Torture (ACAT), Bujumbura, Burundi
3. Adala Association, Rabat, Morocco
4. Advocates for Public International Law Uganda (APILU), Kampala
5. Africa Internally Displaced Persons Voice (Africa IDP Voice), Lusaka, Zambia
6. Africa Legal Aid, Accra, Ghana
7. Africa Talks, Accra, Ghana
8. African Centre on Justice and Peace Studies, Kampala, Uganda
9. African Development and Peace Initiative (ADPI), Adjumani, Uganda
10. AIDS Consortium, Johannesburg, South Africa
11. Amnesty International Burkina Faso
12. Amnesty International-Morocco, Rabat
13. Amnesty International Senegal
14. Amnesty International South Africa
15. Amnesty International Zimbabwe
16. Antenne Social Alert Burkina (ASAB), Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso
17. Anti-Corruption Trust of Southern Africa, Windhoek, Namibia
18. Arab Center for the Independence of Judiciary and Legal Profession (ACIJLP), Cairo, Egypt
19. Arche d’Alliance, Bukavu, DRC
20. Article 19, Nairobi, Kenya
21. Association ACAT (Action des Chrétiens pour l’abolition de la torture), Madagascar
22. Association Africaine de Défense des Droits de l’Homme (ASADHO), DRC
23. Association Africaine de Défense des Droits de l’Homme, section du Sud-Kivu (ASADHO/SUD-KIVU), DRC
24. Association Capverdienne des Femmes Juristes, Praia, Cape Verde
25. Association des Animateurs sur le Lac Kivu, Bukavu, DRC
26. Association des Victimes de Crimes et Répressions Politiques au Tchad (AVCRP), N’Djamena, Chad
27. Association des Volontaires du Congo Asvoco-Fondation Dufina, Goma, DRC
28. Association Marocaine des Droits Humains (AMDH), Rabat, Morocco
29. Association of Environmental Lawyers of Liberia (Green Advocates), Monrovia, Liberia
30. Association pour la promotion et la défense de la dignité des victimes (APRODIVI), Ituri, DRC
31. Association pour la renaissance des droits humains au Congo (ARC-ONDH), Kinshasa, DRC
32. Association pour les Droits de l’Homme et l’Univers Carcéral (ADHUC), Moungali, Brazzaville – Congo
33. Association Tchadienne pour la Promotion et la Défense et des Droits de l’Homme, N’Djamena, Chad
34. Breaking The Wall of Silence, Windhoek, Namibia
35. Bureau de Coordination Société Civile du Sud Kivu, Bukavu, DRC
36. Bushenyi District CSO Forum, Bushenyi, Uganda
37. Carrefour d’Idées pour le Développement Intégral (CIDI), Nord-Kivu, DRC
38. Catholic Justice and Peace Commission (JPC), Monrovia, Liberia
39. Centre d’études sur la Justice et la Résolution 1325, Kinshasa, DRC
40. Centre for Applied Legal Studies (CALS), Johannesburg, South Africa
41. Centre for Constitutional Rights, Cape Town, South Africa
42. Centre for Coordination of Youth Activities (CCYA), Freetown, Sierra Leone
43. Centre for Democracy and Development, Abuja, Nigeria
44. Centre for Human Rights, Faculty of Law, University of Pretoria, South Africa
45. Center for Human Rights and Rehabilitation (CHRR), Lilongwe, Malawi
46. Centre for Justice and Crime Prevention (CJCP), Cape Town, South Africa
47. Center for Justice for Accused Persons, Kampala, Uganda
48. Center for Research and Development, Mutare, Zimbabwe
49. Centre for the Study of Violence and Reconciliation (CSVR), Johannesburg, South Africa
50. Center for Trauma Counseling and Conflict Resolution (CETCCOR), Monrovia, Liberia
51. Children Education Society (CHESO), Dar Es Salaam, Tanzania
52. Cite des Droits de l’Homme et de Paix (CIDHOP), Bukavu, DRC
53. Civic Initiative, Monrovia, Liberia
54. Civil Resource Development and Documentation Centre (CIRDDOC), Enugu, Nigeria
55. Civil Society Alternative Process of Sierra Leone (CSAP-SL), Freetown
56. Coalition Congolaise pour la Justice Transitionnelle (CCJT), Bukavu, DRC
57. Coalition Ivoirienne pour la Cour Pénale Internationale, Abidjan, Côte d’Ivoire
58. Coalition of Eastern NGOs (CENGOS), Nigeria
59. Coalition of Justice and Accountability, Sierra Leone
60. Collectif des Organisations des Jeunes Solidaires du Congo-Kinshasa (COJESKI-RDC), North Kivu, DRC
61. Conseil Régional des ONG de Développement (CRONGD NK), North Kivu, DRC
62. Coordonnateur de la Coalition nationale pour la CPI, Kinshasa, DRC
63. Counselling Services Unit, Harare, Zimbabwe
64. Crisis in Zimbabwe Coalition, Harare
65. Culture pour la Paix et la Justice (CPJ), Kinshasa, DRC
66. Darfur Democratic Forum (DDF), Khartoum, Sudan
67. Dauphins Munzihirwa-Kataliko (DMK), Bukavu, DRC
68. Démocratie et les Droits de l’Homme (CREDDHO), Goma, DRC
69. DITSHWANELO – The Botswana Centre for Human Rights, Gaborone
70. Dynamique des Femmes Juristes, Goma, DRC
71. Duport Rd Union for Community Empowerment and Development, Monrovia, Liberia
72. East Africa Law Society (EALS)
73. East and Horn of Africa Human Rights Defenders Project, Kampala, Uganda
74. Federation of Women Lawyers (FIDA), Nairobi, Kenya
75. Foundation for Human Rights & Democracy (FOHRD), Monrovia, Liberia
76. Foundation for Human Rights Initiative (FHRI), Kampala, Uganda
77. Greater Northern Uganda Transitional Justice Working Group (GNTJWG), Gulu, Uganda
78. Group JEREMIE, Bukavu, DRC
79. Group of Actions Against Marginalisation (GRAM-Kivu), Bukavu, DRC
80. Groupe Lufalanga Pour La Justice et La Paix, Makiso, DRC
81. Gulu NGO Forum, Uganda
82. Héritiers de la justice, Bukavu, DRC
83. Human Rights and Documentation Centre (HRDC), Windhoek, Namibia
84. Human Rights and Protection Forum (HRPF), Monrovia, Liberia
85. Human Rights Concern – Eritrea
86. Human Rights First Association for Rwanda (HRFA-R)
87. Human Rights Institute of South Africa, Johannesburg
88. Human Rights Media Centre, Cape Town, South Africa
89. Human Rights Network, Uganda (HURINET (U))
90. Human Rights Watch, Johannesburg, South Africa
91. Initiative Congolaise pour la Justice et la Paix (ICJP), Bukavu, DRC
92. Institute for Accountability in Southern Africa, Cape Town, South Africa
93. Institute for African Integration (iAi), Harare, Zimbabwe
94. Institute for Human Rights and Development in Africa, Banjul, The Gambia
95. International Center for Policy and Conflict (ICPC), Nairobi, Kenya
96. International Centre for Transitional Justice (ICTJ), Cape Town, South Africa
97. International Crime in Africa Programme, Institute for Security Studies, Pretoria, South Africa
98. International Society for Civil Liberties and the Rule of Law (Intersociety), Anambra state, Nigeria
99. Justice and Peace Commision (JPC), Northern Uganda Arch diocese, Gulu, Uganda
100. Justice and Reconciliation Project (JRP), Gulu, Uganda
101. Kenya Human Rights Commission (KHRC), Nairobi
102. Kenyan Section of the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ-Kenya), Nairobi
103. Khartoum Center for Human Rights & Environmental Development, Sudan
104. Khulumani Support Group, Pretoria, South Africa
105. Kituo Cha Katiba, Kampala, Uganda
106. La coalition Centrafricaine pour la CPI, Central Africa Republic
107. La Ligue Algérienne pour la Décence des Droits de L’Homme, Algiers, Algeria
108. La Ligue des Electeurs (LE), DRC
109. La Maison des Droits de l’Homme du Cameroun, Douala, Cameroon
110. La Solidarité pour la Promotion sociale et la Paix (SOPROP), DRC and Rwanda
111. Lawyers for Human Rights (LHR), Pretoria, South Africa
112. Legal Assistance Centre, Windhoek, Namibia
113. Liberia Media Center, Monrovia
114. Lutheran Church Massacre Survival and Victims’ Association (LUMASA), Monrovia, Liberia
115. Malawi Law Society, Blantyre
116. Manifesto99, Freetown, Sierra Leone
117. Mouvement Ivoirien des Droits Humains (MIDH), Côte d’Ivoire
118. Muslim Human Rights Forum (MHRF), Nairobi, Kenya
119. National Coalition on Affirmative Action (NCAA), Nigeria
120. National Society for Human Rights (NSHR), Namibia
121. Network Movement for Democracy and Human Rights (NMDHR), Freetown, Sierra Leone
122. Nigeria Coalition for the ICC (NCICC), Abuja
123. Observatoire congolais des droits de l’Homme (OCDH), Brazzaville – Congo
124. Œuvre communautaire pour l’éducation pour tous (OCET), Bukavu, DRC
125. Open Society Foundation for South Africa, Cape Town
126. Open Society Initiative for Southern Africa, Johannesburg, South Africa
127. Ordem dos Advogados de Moçambique, Maputo
128. Organisation dénommée Action Sociale pour la Paix et le Développement (ASPD), DRC
129. Organisation Marocaine des Droits Humains (OMDH), Rabat, Morocco
130. Peace Pen Communications, Nairobi, Kenya
131. Peace Youth Association (PYA), Khartoum, Sudan
132. Prepared Society, Mombasa, Kenya
133. Promotion de la Démocratie et protection des Droits Humains (PDH), Goma, DRC
134. Rencontre Africaine pour la Défense des Droits de l’Homme (RADDHO) Guinee
135. Rencontre Africaine pour la Défense des Droits de l’Homme (RADDHO) Senegal
136. Research and Advocacy Unit, Harare, Zimbabwe
137. Réseau Africain pour le Développement Intégré (RADI), Dakar, Senegal
138. Réseau des Associations des Droits de l’Homme du Sud Kivu (RADHOSKI), Bukavu, DRC
139. Réseau d’Initiatives locales pour le Développement durable (REID), Goma, DRC
140. Réseaux Provincial des ONGDH en RDC, North Kivu, DRC
141. Rights and Rice Foundation (RRF), Monrovia, Liberia
142. SADC Lawyers Association, Gaborone, Botswana
143. Samotalis Coalition of Human Rights, Hargeisa, Republic of Somaliland
144. Securitas Congo, Kinshasa, DRC
145. Sierra Leone Coalition for the International Criminal Court (SLCICC), Freetown
146. Sierra Leone Court Monitoring Programme, Freetown, Sierra Leone
147. Society Against Poverty and Hunger, Lagos, Nigeria
148. Society of Law Teachers of Southern Africa, Pretoria, South Africa
149. Socio-Economic Rights & Accountability Project (SERAP), Lagos, Nigeria
150. Solidarité des familles pour le développement (SOFADE), Bukavu, DRC
151. Solidarité féminine pour la paix et le développement intégral, Beni, DRC
152. Solidarité Paysanne pour la Santé et le Développement Communautaire (SPSDC), Bukavu, DRC
153. Sonke Gender Justice Network, Cape Town, South Africa
154. South African History Archive (SAHA), Johannesburg, South Africa
155. Southern African Centre for Survivors of Torture (SACST), Johannesburg, South Africa
156. Southern African Litigation Centre (SALC), Johannesburg, South Africa
157. Synergie des Femmes pour le Victimes des Violences sexuelles (SFVS), Goma, DRC
158. Uganda Coalitionforthe International Criminal Court (UCICC)
159. Uganda National NGO Forum, Kampala
160. Union des femmes Paysannes du Sud-Kivu (UWAKI Sud-Kivu), Bukavu, DRC
161. West Africa Bar Association (WABA), Nigeria
162. Zimbabwe Exiles Forum, Pretoria, South Africa
163. Zimbabwe Human Rights NGO Forum, Harare
164. Zimbabwe Lawyers for Human Rights (ZLHR), Harare

Updated August 19, 2009

Also available in:


Senegal: Government Amends Constitution to Pave Way for Hissène Habré Trial

July 23, 2008

Prosecutors and Judges Named to Work on Case

(Brussels, July 23, 2008)  – Senegal’s adoption today of a constitutional amendment confirming that Senegalese courts can

40,000 + people killed under Habre

40,000 + people killed under Habre

prosecute past crimes against humanity lifts any legal obstacles to the trial of former Chadian dictator Hissène Habré, Human Rights Watch said today.

Habré is accused of massive crimes during his 1982-1990 rule before he fled to Senegal. In July 2006, the African Union mandated Senegal to “prosecute and ensure that Hissène Habré is tried, on behalf of Africa, by a competent Senegalese court.” Senegal has yet to initiate a prosecution, however.

In February 2007, Senegal passed legislation permitting it to prosecute cases of genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and torture, even when they are committed outside of Senegal. Today’s amendment makes clear that the law applies to such crimes even when they were committed before the law was passed.

“Senegal now has one of the world’s strongest laws for prosecuting atrocities,” said Reed Brody, Human Rights Watch’s counsel who works with Habré’s victims. “Now it’s time to get down to the real business and start investigating Habré’s alleged crimes so that, after 18 years, his victims can finally see justice done.”

Also today, Senegal’s justice minister M. Madické Niang, announced that three judges and two prosecutors had been named to work on the Habré case.

Human Rights Watch welcomed the constitutional amendment and the naming of the judges, but pointed out that it has been two years since the African Union mandate was given and more than eight years since Habré was first indicted in Senegal

The constitutional amendment says that the principle of the non-retroactivity of criminal law does not bar the prosecution of acts “which, when they were committed, were criminal according to the rules of international law relating to genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes.” This amendment is in harmony with article 15 (2) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, ratified by Senegal, which states that the non-retroactivity principal does not bar the prosecution of an act “which, at the time when it was committed, was criminal according to the general principles of law recognized by the community of nations.”

In January 2008, at Senegal’s request, European Union experts visited Senegal to evaluate its financial and technical needs. The experts called on Senegal to define a prosecution strategy and set forth a precise calendar and a reasonable budget, none of which has been done.

Background

Hissène Habré ruled Chad from 1982 until he was deposed in 1990 by President Idriss Déby Itno and fled to Senegal. His one-party regime was marked by widespread atrocities, including waves of ethnic campaigns. Files of Habré’s political police, the DDS (Direction de la Documentation et de la Sécurité), which were discovered by Human Rights Watch in 2001, (http://www.hrw.org/justice/habre/habre-police.htm) reveal the names of 1,208 persons who were killed or died in detention. A total of 12,321 victims of human rights violations were mentioned in the files.

Habré was first indicted in Senegal in 2000 before courts ruled that he could not be tried there. His victims then turned to Belgium and, after a four-year investigation, a Belgian judge in September 2005 charged Habré with crimes against humanity, war crimes, and torture.

Following a Belgian extradition request, Senegalese authorities arrested Habré in November 2005. The Senegalese government then asked the African Union to recommend how to try Habré. On July 2, 2006, the African Union, following the recommendation of a Committee of Eminent African Jurists, called on Senegal to prosecute Habré “in the name of Africa,” and Senegalese President Abdoulaye Wade declared that Dakar would do so.

To view an April 2008 letter to the international and African communities from the International Committee for the Fair Trial of Hissène Habré, please visit:
http://hrw.org/english/docs/2008/04/29/africa18666.htm

For additional background on the case against Hissène Habré, please visit:
http://www.hrw.org/justice/habre/


Related MaterialOpen letter to the international and African communities from the International Committee for the Fair Trial of Hissène Habré
Letter

The Case against Hissène Habré


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 44 other followers