On Friday November 25, the Senegalese Court of
Appeal declined a jurisdiction on the request of extradition launched on
September 19 by Belgium against the former dictator of Chad, Hissène Habré.
Habré has been a political refugee in Senegal since his overthrow 15 years ago.
He was arrested on November 15 to appear before the Senegalese Court of Appeal.
After the decision of the latter, he was released. But on Sunday 26, he was
taken back into custody for a few hours, in accordance with a decree of the Senegalese
Interior Minister, Ousmane Ngom, which
placed him “at the disposal of the President of the African Union”, Olusegun
Obasanjo. But actually, Hissène Habré will stay in Dakar, awaiting the decision
of the AU at its next summit expected in January 2006 in Sudan, announced on
Sunday November 27 the Senegalese Minister of Foreign Affairs, Cheikh Tidiane
Gadio.
The sinister reign of Habré
Hissène Habré is accused by Belgian justice of
“serious violations” of human rights during his presidency, “collective and
arbitrary arrests, mass murders and systematic acts of torture against members
of some ethnic groups of the country”. The “African Pinochet”, as he is
nicknamed by the defenders of Human Rights, allegedly launched attacks against
ethnic groups frome the south in 1984, but also against Hadjeraï (“dwellers” as
they are called by Arabs, living in the centre of Chad) in 1987 and Zaghawas
(who also live in Sudan, in the notorious region of Darfour) in 1989, arresting
and killing leaders and their families, even sometimes entire communities, in
retaliations against what he felt as hostility against his regime. Acts of
torture notably occurred at that time in the presidential Palace, in a
subterranean jail, which was christened “The Swimming Pool”. In 1992, a Chadian
independent commission accused M. Habré of being responsible for the
assassination of at least 40,000 people. Before and during his presidency,
Habré could rely on the support of the United States of America but also of
France. Indeed, at that time, he was considered as a rampart against the former
enemy of the West, the president of Libya, which shares frontiers with Chad,
Muammar Khadafi. France had besides helped Habré to overthrow president
Goukouni Weddeye, a Chadian from the North backed by Libya.
Belgium accused of partiality
Despite all the accusations made against him, is it
possible that Hissène Habré will still escape justice, as he did five years
ago ? At that time, the former Nordist warlord had been charged with
complicity of “crimes against humanity, acts of torture and barbarity” by a
Senegalese court, after Chadian people and organizations for Human Rights had
lodged a complaint against him. But at the beginning of 2001, the Dakar Court
of Cassation considered that Senegalese courts did not have the jurisdiction to
judge crimes committed by a foreigner in any other country than Senegal. Five
years later, the scenario seems to be being repeated and Hissène Habré could
still enjoy impunity. This time, the legal action against M. Habré is based on
the Belgian law of “Universal Jurisdiction” which gives (even if it has been
partly abrogated) to the courts of the realm the right of judging the alleged
perpetrators of “genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity”, whatever
the nationality of these people and the place where it has been committed may
be. Whereas the extradition petition is based on the complaint of Belgians
originating from Chad for massive violations of Human Rights, a lot of voices
have been raised in Africa, notably in Senegal, to criticize Belgium which is accused of showing partiality, or even
racism, in its treatment of the Habré case. For instance, Mr Ndoye, one of the
lawyers who is defending M. Habré, has asked with insinuation why the Belgian
justice wanted the former president of Chad to be handed over, while the
murderers of Patrice Lumumba, the former Prime minister of the Belgian
Congo (now the Democratic Republic of Congo) in 1960 (he was killed the
following year), were still free. The responsibility of the Belgian realm in
this case is well established and in 2002, Belgium apologized for the role it
played in this murder. Accusations of neo-colonialism have also been uttered by
those who consider that the former president of Chad should be judged by an African
court, and not in Europe. But this argument seems to be specious. Indeed, as
Senegal declined a jurisdiction on the Habré case, why would other African
countries behave differently ? It seems to be the responsibility of Chad
to judge M. Habré, as the accusations against him concern crimes he must have
committed in this country. Therefore, up till now in this case the behaviour of
the Chadian Authorities, following the example of Senegal, has tended to
demonstrate that such a prospect does not seem to be thinkable, hence the
importance of the legal action launched by Belgian justice.
During the 15 years that he has been a
political refugee in Senegal, Hissène Habré has created networks of influence
in this country. Politicians but also religious chiefs, gathered for some of
them within a Defence Committee for Hissène Habré, have taken turns in
declaring out loud their opposition to the extradition of the former Nordist
warlord to Belgium. For instance, Hissène Habré can count on the support of
Tidjanes, who represent the second most important muslim brotherhood in
Senegal, a country which is officially secular, but where religious chiefs have
an undeniable political influence and where 95% of the population are Muslims.
Hissène Habré can also rely on the kindness of some of the official medias. On
the other hand, the stance of the Senegalese president, Abdoulaye Wade, has
seemed rather evasive. He has only indicated on many occasions that he would
not oppose the extradition of the former Head of the Chadian State to a country
where a fair trial would be possible. During the World Summit on Information
Society (WSIS), in Tunis, he added that he was seeking advice from the AU about
this case. But his lack of real implication in the Habré case has a little bit
tarnished his image and that of Senegal. Moreover, Wade has felt constrained to
justify himself. “Senegal takes no responsibility for what is reproched to
M. Hissène Habré” he has for instance declared. Notwithstanding internal
pressures, his indecisiveness can also be explained by the fact that many
African rulers fear that the Habré case would create a precedent and that they
might face justice in the coming years. So, certainly did they put pressure on
Wade behind the scenes.
Chad’s stance in this case seems strange too.
N'Djamena has never charged Habré nor seized Senegal concerning his
extradition. But as his case has been recently reopened, Chad has been more
enterprising. Thus, Chad’s authorities have accepted to withdraw the diplomatic
immunity which the former president of Chad has enjoyed up till now. On
Thursday November 24, Idriss Deby, the current president of Chad, who overthrew
Habré in 1990, asked Wade from Brussels to extradite the former Head of Chad
State to Belgium. Many high dignitaries of Deby’s government have been
implicated in Habré’s crimes. Former members of the DDS, the security services
of Chad which were responsible for acts of torture and others crimes during
Habré’s presidency, are today occupying key posts in Chad’s security system.
Maybe they think that if Habré is tried and sentenced in Belgium, he will be
the only one to pay for the crimes they themselves have taken part in. So it
must be understood that Habré’s trial should only constitute a first step. And
if this occurs, justice will still have to get right to the bottom of what
happened in Chad between 1982 and 1990.
In the
meantime, “It is up to the AU’s leaders to indicate the competent jurisdiction
to judge this case” as has been indicated by Cheikh Tidiane Gadio. Even if this
decision is questionable, it has the virtue of giving more resonance to the
Habré case, as finally it will have to be the whole African continent and not only
Senegal which will be called on to hand out a ruling on it. But the main goal
in this politico-judiciary serial should not be lost sight of : impunity must
end for Habré and justice must be done for his numerous victims. Indeed, as
Raymond Depardon, the famous French documentarist who worked in Chad in the
70’s and was close to Habré at that time, said recently on France Inter, the
latter “deserves to be punished for what he did”
Xavier Moroni