International Affairs Journal at UC Davis - The Thin Veil of Indictment

Home

IAJ International Update

Sub-Saharan Africa

The Thin Veil of Indictment

Written by Hayley Morrison

Sunday, 17 June 2007

Crime comes in big and small packages. On the one hand, we have devilish dictators delivering genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity. While on the other, we have the white collar criminals such as the Conrad Blacks committing tax evasion, fraud, and laundering money. Unfortunately, the media has tended exaggerate the injustices committed by these black suit and tie criminals, and lost sight of the bigger wolves that need to be brought to justice. One such “wolf” or “desert fox” (as people called him), is Hissène Habré. Hissène Habré governed Chad from 1982 until he was deposed by Idriss Déby in 1990. In 1992, a Truth Commission was created to investigate the crimes committed by Habré. The commission accused him of carrying out 40,000 political murders (Human Rights Watch, 2005). Habré was also accused of stealing 3.32 billion CFA francs (about 4.26 million dollars) from the national treasury (Brody, 2001). Habré had also targeted ethnic groups such as the Sara, the Hadjerai, and the Zaghawa whenever they posed threats to his regime (Human Rights Watch, 2006). Unfortunately the exact number of his victims remains unknown. In January 2000, Habré’s secret police force known as the Documentation and Security Directorate (DDS) was also implicated in another 97 political killings, 142 torture cases, 100 disappearances and 736 arbitrary arrests.

To avoid prosecution Habré fled to Senegal where he was granted immunity by former Senegalese president Abdou Diouf. Despite several attempts to prosecute Habré, Senegal’s court of appeal decided that Senegalese courts could not pursue crimes committed in other African states. In 2001, The Senegalese High Court upheld this decision, despite the fact that Senegal has ratified the United Nations Convention on Torture (CAT). By ratifying the convention, Senegal is legally bound to prosecute or extradite criminals in their territory. Although Habré’s immunity was lifted in 2002 by the Chadian Justice Minister, Senegal remained hesitant about charging Habré.

Frustrated by Senegal’s irresolution, a coalition of Chadian and Senegalese NGOs filed a case against Habré in Belgium. In Belgium, the high court had universal jurisdiction to prosecute criminals regardless of where the crimes is committed or the perpetrators nationality. Although this law was repealed in 2003, the investigation of Habré’s crimes continued. Finally, on September 19, 2005, Belgian Judge Daniel Fransen issued an international arrest warrant charging Habré with crimes against humanity (Human Rights Watch, 2005). On the same day, Belgium asked for Habré’s extradition from Senegal. This request was supported by former UN General Secretary Kofi Annan and Alpha Oumar Konaré, President of the AU Commission.

In November 2005, in response to Belgian’s request, Senegalese authorities arrested Habré and asked the African Union (AU) to recommend the appropriate jurisdiction to prosecute him. In turn, the AU created the Committee of Eminent African Jurist (CEAJ) to decide how to deal with the dictator. At the July 2006 AU summit the CEAJ recommended that Senegal prosecute Habré “in the name of Africa.” Although Senegalese President Abdoulaye Wade said he would do so, he has refused the AU’s demand to extradite Habré.

Meanwhile, Senegal has proposed creating a new court to try Habre. At a cost of $66 million, the court would include 15 new judges paid at top United Nations salaries (Human Rights Watch, 2007). But for now, Habré remains under house arrest in Dakar, the capital city of Senegal.

Caught in the web of justice, it remains to be seen whether Habré will ever be indicted for crimes he committed almost two decades ago. Presently, it appears that Lord Black’s arraignment will come long before Habré faces the music for his own misdeeds. Regrettably, our society has a greater desire to bring someone like Lord Black to justice rather than a dictator like Habré who has destroyed the lives of many innocent people.

In my opinion, there are two things needed to rectify this paradox. First, we need the media to place attention on the crimes that come in big packages. I don’t deny that the perpetrators of small crimes need to be dealt with. But as outside observers we need to recognize that their dirty deeds pale in comparison to the iniquitous crimes carried out by former African dictators. Secondly and more importantly, we need to establish a functional international criminal court where dictators can no longer evade, or more aptly, dictate the justice system.

Works cited:

Human Rights Watch. The Case against Hissène Habre, an “African Pinochet” Case Summary. 2005. May 14, 2007. <http://www.hrw.org/english/docs/2005/09/30/chad11786.htm>

Human Rights Watch. Senegal: EU Parliament Calls for Support of Hissène Habré Trial.2007. April 26, 2007. <http://allafrica.com/stories/200704260852.html>

Baker, Bruce. Twilight of impunity for Africa’s presidential criminals. Third World Quarterly. 2004. May 14, 2007.

Brody, Reed. The Prosecution of Hissene Habre – An African Pinochet.2001. May 14, 2007. <http://www.nesl.edu/lawrev/vol35/2/brody.PDF.>

Solomon, Aaron.The politics of prosecution under the convention against torture. Chicago Journal of International Law.2001. May 14, 2007.