Africa

August 31, 2015 (KHARTOUM) – Four Sudanese female students have secretly flown to Turkey to join the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS), according to local media reports

FILE - Two ISIS supporters hold flag (ABC News)

Khartoum newspapers reported that the group which includes twin sisters have left the country to join ISIS while other media reports claimed that there five in this group.

ISIS presence in Sudan has made the headlines last March after British media outlets confirmed that nine medical students from Sudanese origins entered Syria via Turkey to work in hospitals under the control of ISIS.

Also, last June 18 college students ran off to join ISIS in Syria including the daughter of senior diplomat.

Security cameras at Khartoum airport have captured images of Aya al-Laythi al-Hag Youssef, a third year medical student at the University of Medical Sciences and Technology (UMST) besides the twin sisters Manar Abdel-Salam, a UMST graduate and medical doctor at Garash Hospital in Khartoum and Ibrar Abdel-Salam, a medical student at the National College.

Cameras also captured images of a fourth female student by the name of Thoraya or Sumaia Salah Hamid.

However, aAl-Sudani daily newspaper on Monday quoted the student affairs official at the UMST as saying the two students are not enrolled at his college.

According to the reports, names of the female students were among the list of the departing passengers on the al-Arabiya airlines heading to Istanbul via Sharjah in the United Arab Emirates, saying that security officers at Sharjah airport sought to stop them but to no avail.

It has been reported that the students might have used Somali travel documents.

Meanwhile, Turkey has pledged to intensify efforts to prevent the flow of ISIS sympathizers crossing its border into Syria.

Turkish deputy undersecretary for foreign affairs, Ali Kamal, stressed importance of the international cooperation to fight against this security threat.

“In order to ensure success of Turkey's efforts to prevent flow of people from 100 countries seeking [to join ISIS], we need the support of the international community by providing information and close coordination,” he told reporters in Khartoum Monday.

Kamal further urged the Sudanese authorities to take the necessary measures to curb activities of those extremists groups.

Earlier this month, Sudan's National Intelligence and Security Services (NISS) re-arrested the Salafist Jihadist preacher and supporter of ISIS, Masa'ad al-Sidairah along with several of his disciples.

Also, On 30 June NISS arrested the general coordinator of the far-right One Nation Movement group and the openly supporter of ISIS, Mohamed Ali al-Gizouli.

Last May, Sudan's minister of Higher Education Sumaya Abu-Kushawa accused unnamed circles of actively recruiting students to join ISIS.

At the time, Sudanese second vice-president Hassabo Abdel-Rahman blamed internal and external parties as well as international intelligence agencies for the phenomenon of extremism in the Arab and African communities.

Last Month, Abdul-Ilah, the son of the late leader of Jamaat Ansar al Sunnah, Abu Zaid Mohamed Hamzah, was killed in armed clashes in the ISIS stronghold of Sirte in Libya.

One week earlier, a Sudanese Jihadist nicknamed Abu Ja'afar al-Sudani blew himself up in a car bomb in the Libyan city of Derna last week, killing 9 people and injuring dozens others.

Also, in June ISIS announced that one of its Sudanese fighters nicknamed Abu al-Fida al-Sudani was killed in their stronghold of al-Riqa.

(ST)

By Tesfa-Alem Tekle

August 31, 2015 (ADDIS ABABA/KAMPALA) – Leader of the armed opposition faction of the Sudan Peoples' Liberation Movement (SPLM-IO), Riek Machar, on Monday commended Ugandan president Yoweri Museveni, saying he has noticed positive approach to ensuring peace in South Sudan.

Riek Machar prepares to address a news conference during the peace signing meeting in Ethiopia's capital Addis Ababa, August 17, 2015. (Photo Reuters/Tiksa Negeri)

“When president Museveni was here during the summit I saw a shift in his attitude and his commitment to support the peace agreement,” said former vice president, Machar in a press conference he held in Addis Ababa on Monday.

He said he had dispatched a high level delegation of 11 members to Kampala who met president Museveni last Saturday in a bid to engage the authorities in Uganda on the implementation of the peace agreement he signed with president Salva Kiir to end the 20-month long civil war in the world's youngest country.

“We want to read the mood in Kampala on the implementation of the peace agreement,” said Machar.

“We are satisfied that the Ugandan government is behind the peace agreement which is very important to us because it is part of the conflict and they have troops which they will have to withdraw,” he said.

The Ugandan troops were deployed in South Sudan in December 2013 at the invitation of president Kiir shortly after fighting broke out between forces loyal to Kiir and those allied to Machar.

The latest peace agreement signed between the two rival leaders in general states that the troops of the Uganda People's Defence Forces (UPDF) must pullout from South Sudan with the exception of those in western equatoria state who came under a different arrangement to hunt for the Uganda rebels of the Lord's Resistance Army (LRA).

According to the peace agreement, UPDF will withdraw from all locations in South Sudan including Bor and Juba, but a number of their troops will remain in Western Equatoria start per the arrangement made with the African Union (AU) as a regional task force to battle the LRA rebels.

Earlier, Ugandan minister of foreign affairs, Henry Oryem Okello, said on Saturday that the UPDF will not withdraw from the South Sudan despite the internationally backed and Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) mediated peace agreement which demanded their withdrawal.

“We are not pulling out. Uganda is not part of the agreement. We have a bilateral arrangement with South Sudan government like U.S. has troops stationed in Japan,” Oryem was quoted as saying by a number of regional media outlets.

Following Saturday's statement by the Ugandan foreign minister the rebels have requested explanation and other Ugandan officials including from the ministry of defense said their deputy foreign minister was misquoted, saying their troops will withdraw within 45 days in accordance with the peace deal.

“When we heard of it we inquired and we were told that the minister was misquoted,” said Machar.

NO GRUDGE AGAINST UGANDA

The spokesperson of the rebel delegation to Kampala, Stephen Kuol told Sudan Tribune he was optimistic of Uganda's positive contributions in implementing the peace agreement.

"Let is be known that the SPLM/SPLA under the able leadership of Dr. Riek Machar does not hold any grudges against the Republic of Uganda and its leadership. We are saying for us to implement this peace agreement, we must everything behind us," said Kuol.

"Let bygones be bygones," stressed the armed opposition official on Monday.

The main focus, Kuol further said, was on how to effectively implement the new peace accord.

"We need the support of the Ugandan leadership, the leadership of the region, African Union, United Nations, the Trioka and all people of goodwill who made it possible for us to get another opportunity for peace in the country," said the rebel delegation spokesperson.

Rival forces in South Sudan conflict have issued statements counter-accusing each other of violations of the permanent ceasefire hours after it came into effect on Saturday midnight as declared by president Kiir and armed opposition leader, Machar.

Meanwhile the rebels accused government forces of continued attacks despite the signed peace agreement which calls on both warring factions to take into effect a permanent ceasefire.

In a separate interview with Sudan Tribune, acting spokesperson of SPLM-IO army, Colonel William Gatjiath Deng, alleged that government forces have launched bombardments on Saturday in Unity state's Leer, Koch, Mayiandit, and Rupkotni counties.

“They are today on their way going to Jonglei state in Fangak county in the river. They have also started bombardments on the river bank in our controlled territories,” he said.

Deng added that the rebel forces did not retaliate but remained standing in their defence positions.

The military official further alleged that the Ugandan troops were fighting against them along side the government even after the peace deal was signed.

The spokesperson of the government forces, Colonel Philip Aguer, on Saturday and Sunday similarly accused the rebels of launching attacks at government controlled territories in Malakal town in what he said was to gain more territories.

“Their intention is to gain more territories. This is the purpose of these attacks. That was why they attacked the positions of our forces in Malakal yesterday (Saturday) and again today (Sunday),” said Aguer.

“For us, our forces will not attack them but they have the right for self-defence,” he added.

(ST)

August 31, 2015 (JUBA) – The newly appointed caretaker governor of the oil-rich Upper Nile state, Chol Thon, has announced readiness of his administration to support president Salva Kiir in the implementation of the peace agreement he signed with former vice president, Riek Machar, the leader of the armed opposition faction of the Sudan People's Liberation Movement (SPLM-IO).

Troops from the South Sudanese army (SPLA) have been engaged in an armed struggle with rebel forces loyal to former vice-president Riek Machar since mid-December last year (Photo: Reuters)

Governor Thon, according to Upper Nile state's information minister, Peter Hoth Tuach, was the first senior official in the state to welcome the signing of the agreement and sent his congratulatory messages to the head of state on behalf of the people of the state.

“The new governor and the government of Upper Nile state was the first to welcome and sent congratulatory message to the president on the signing of the peace [agreement]. The governor on behalf of the people of Upper Nile state affirmed readiness of the leadership of the state to stand behind the decision of the president and pledged unwavering support in the implementation because signing the peace is one thing and the implementation is another thing,” minister Tuach told Sudan Tribune on Monday.

He accused the opposition forces of allegedly launching attack on the position held by government in and around Malakal in violation of the permanent ceasefire which the rival leaders declared and came into force midnight, Saturday.

“The rebels are claiming that they were attacked by our forces. It is not true. It is just propaganda to cover their behaviours. You know that rebels are always very fast to come out and accuse our forces even when they are known to have carried out the attack,” he further claimed.

The question remains, is Malakal under whose control, the government or the rebels? Malakal has been in the hand of the government and it is being known by IGAD. The rebel claim is baseless and unfounded because if Malakal is being attacked, who is attacking it? Can the government attack itself,” asked Tuach.

Rebels however dismissed claims that their forces attacked Malakal town, saying it was the government forces in Malakal that shelled their positions on the west bank of the River Nile.

South Sudan's military spokesman, Colonel Philip Aguer, told reporters that government forces were attacked by opposition fighters on Monday in Unity and Upper Nile states.

SPLA-IO REFUTES ALLEGATION

Opposition forces under the leadership of Machar refuted allegations by the government and said they were only fighting in self-defence, blaming the government for violations of the permanent ceasefire.

The newly appointed military spokesperson for the rebels, Colonel William Gatjiath Deng, in a press statement extended to Sudan Tribune on Monday said the opposition forces came under separate attacks in Upper Nile and Unity states.

He also claimed that one of the government's barges carrying troops and mounted with heavy weapons has been destroyed by the opposition fighters.

“The government troops have attacked our forces in Tonga county [Upper Nile state] this late afternoon [Monday]. One of the government's barges has been burned by our forces and the fighting is still going on now,” Deng said in the statement.

He said in Unity state, government troops moving in the river with three barges and 7 gunboats shelled Wathkech payam, accusing the government of carrying out offensive despite peace deal.

“We want to inform the people of South Sudan that government is sabotaging the implementation of the peace deal,” he said.

Deng called upon the IGAD Plus, AU and international community to take action by investigating what was going on as the government continued to violate the ceasefire.

(ST)

Somalia’s humanitarian situation remains “alarming” four years after a devastating famine with the number of people requiring emergency aid rising 17 per cent to more than 850,000 and those in “food-stressed” situations still at 2.3 million, according to the latest United Nations-managed food assessment study released today.

Le 20 juillet 2015, le procès de l’ancien dictateur du Tchad, Hissène Habré, a commencé devant les Chambres africaines extraordinaires au sein des juridictions sénégalaises. Il est jugé pour crimes contre l’humanité, crimes de guerre et torture. Les Chambres ont été inaugurées par le Sénégal et l’Union africaine en février 2013 pour poursuivre « le ou les principaux responsables » des crimes internationaux commis au Tchad entre 1982 et 1990, quand Hissène Habré était au pouvoir au Tchad. Ap rès deux jours d’audience, le procès a été suspendu quand les avocats de Habré ont refusé de se présenter à la barre. La Cour a nommé d’office trois avocats pour représenter Habré et leur a donné 45 jours pour préparer la défense. Le procès reprend le 7 septembre. 

Avec le procès de Hissène Habré, pour la première fois, les tribunaux d’un Etat jugent l’ancien dirigeant d’un autre Etat pour des supposées violations des droits de l'Homme. C'est aussi la première fois que l’utilisation de la compétence universelle aboutit à un procès sur le continent africain. La « compétence universelle » est un concept de droit international qui permet à des tribunaux nationaux de poursuivre l’auteur ou les auteurs des crimes les plus graves commis à l’étranger, quelle que soit sa nationalité ou celle des victimes. Le journal Le Monde a décrit l’affaire comme un «  tournant pour la justice en Afrique ».

Les questions et réponses suivantes fournissent de plus amples informations sur cette affaire et sur les étapes à venir. 

1. Qui est Hissène Habré ?
2. Quels sont les chefs d’accusation contre Habré ?
3. Quels crimes relèvent de la compétence de la Cour ?
4. Pourquoi les efforts pour traduire Habré en justice ont duré si longtemps ?
5. Quel a été le rôle du gouvernement tchadien dans le déclenchement des poursuites contre Habré ?
6. Comment les Chambres africaines extraordinaires mènent-elles leurs enquêtes ?
7. Quelles ont été les conclusions des experts désignés par la Cour ?
8. Pourquoi Hissène Habré est-il le seul à faire l’objet de poursuites par les Chambres africaines extraordinaires ?
9. Qu’en est-il de l’actuel président du Tchad Idriss Déby Itno ?
10. Quels sont les droits de l’accusé ? 
11. Habré refuse de coopérer avec les Chambres. Quelles en seront les conséquences ?
12. Les avocats de Habré disent que leur client ne comparaitra pas. Que peut-il se passer ?
13. La Cour a commis trois avocats d'office pour défendre Habré, et ce contre sa volonté. Etait-ce approprié ? Que va-t-il se passer si Habré cherche à les révoquer ? 
14. Quelle est la peine maximale à laquelle Habré pourrait être condamné ? 
15. Comment les Chambres africaines extraordinaires sont-elles structurées et administrées ?
16. Comment les Procureurs et les juges ont-ils été nommés ? 
17. Comment se déroulera le procès ?
18. Combien de temps durera le procès ?
19. Quel sera le rôle des victimes durant le procès et percevront-elles des réparations ?
20. Quelles dispositions seront prises pour rendre le procès accessible au peuple tchadien ?
21. Qu'en est-il du procès des agents de la police politique du régime Habré ? 
22. Comment les Chambres sont-elles financées ? 
23. Quelles ont été les étapes clés dans la campagne pour traduire Habré en justice ?
24. Quelle est l'importance du procès de Habré pour la compétence universelle ?
25. Comment ce procès repond-t-il aux critiques qui dénoncent le rôle de la justice internationale en Afrique et affirment que les recours à la compétence universelle ciblent les Africains ?
26. Pourquoi était-il nécessaire de créer des chambres spéciales avec un élément international ?
27. Pourquoi Hissène Habré n'est-il pas jugé au Tchad ?
28. Pourquoi la Cour pénale internationale ne peut-elle pas poursuivre Habré ?

 

1. Qui est Hissène Habré ?

Hissène Habré était le président du Tchad, de 1982 jusqu'à ce qu’il soit renversé en 1990 par Idriss Déby Itno, le président actuel. Habré s’est réfugié au Sénégal en 1990 où il vit en exil depuis lors.

Une étude de 714 pages de Human Rights Watch établit que le régime de Habré s’est rendu responsable de milliers d’assassinats politiques et d’arrestations arbitraires et d’un usage systématique de la torture. Ce régime prit régulièrement pour cible les populations civiles, notamment au Sud (1983-1985), et différents groupes ethniques, comme les Hadjeraïs (1987) et les Zaghawas (1989-90), tuant et arrêtant en masse des membres de ces groupes lorsque leurs leaders étaient perçus comme des menaces au régime de Habré.

Une Commission d'Enquête tchadienne a accusé en 1992 le régime de Habré de quelque 40 000 assassinats politiques et de l’usage systématique de la torture. La plupart des exactions furent commises par sa redoutable police politique, la Direction de la Documentation et de la Sécurité (DDS), dont les directeurs rendaient des comptes exclusivement à Habré. Tous appartenaient au cercle étroit des proches de Habré et certains étaient issus de la même ethnie (Gorane anakaza), voire de la même famille.

Les États-Unis et la France ont soutenu Habré, le considérant comme un rempart contre la Libye de Mouammar Kadhafi qui avait des visées expansionnistes sur le nord du Tchad. Sous Ronald Reagan, les Etats-Unis apportèrent en secret, par le biais de la CIA, un soutien paramilitaire à Habré lors de sa prise du pouvoir en 1982. Ils fournirent ensuite à son régime une aide militaire massive. À la fin des années 1980, les États-Unis utilisèrent également une base clandestine au Tchad pour organiser une force anti-Kadhafi composée de soldats libyens capturés. Malgré l'enlèvement par Habré et ses hommes de l'anthropologue française Françoise Claustre en 1974 et le meurtre du Capitaine Pierre Galopin venu négocier sa libération en 1975, la France soutint également Habré avant et après son arrivée au pouvoir, en lui procurant armes, soutien logistique et renseignements, et en lançant les opérations militaires « Manta » (1983) et « Épervier » (1986) afin d’aider le Tchad à repousser les forces libyennes.

2. Quels sont les chefs d’accusation contre Habré ?

Habré a été inculpé le 2 juillet 2013 par les quatre juges d’instruction des Chambres africaines extraordinaires pour crimes contre l’humanité, crimes de torture et crimes de guerre puis placé sous mandat de dépôt. Le 13 février 2015, après une instruction de 19 mois, les juges ont conclu qu’il y avait suffisamment de preuves pour que Habré soit jugé pour crimes contre l’humanité et torture en sa qualité de membre d’une « entreprise criminelle commune » et crimes de guerre sur le fondement de sa responsabilité en tant que supérieur hiérarchique.

Habré a été spécifiquement renvoyé pour :

• homicides volontaires, pratique massive et systématique d’exécutions sommaires, enlèvement de personnes suivi de disparition et torture constitutifs de crimes contre l’humanité commis sur les populations civiles, les Hadjeraï, les Zaghawa, les opposants et les populations  du sud du Tchad ;
• torture ; et
• crimes de guerre d’homicide volontaire, de torture et traitements inhumains, de transfert illégal et détention illégale, d’atteinte à la vie et à l’intégrité physique. 

​3. Quels crimes relèvent de la compétence de la Cour ?

En vertu du Statut des Chambres, ces dernières sont compétentes pour traiter des crimes de génocide, des crimes contre l’humanité, des crimes de guerre et de torture tels que définis dans le Statut. Ces définitions reprennent généralement celles utilisées dans les statuts de la Cour pénale internationale et des autres tribunaux internationaux. Les crimes doivent avoir été commis sur le territoire tchadien entre le 7 juin 1982 et le 1erdécembre 1990, période où Hissène Habré était au pouvoir.

4. Pourquoi les efforts pour traduire Habré en justice ont duré si longtemps ?

L’avènement du procès, près de 25 ans après la chute de Hissène Habré, est entièrement dû à la persévérance des victimes du régime de Habré et de leurs partenaires au sein d’organisations non-gouvernementales. Lorsque Habré a été arrêté en juillet 2013, le Toronto Globe and Mail a salué « une des campagnes les plus patientes et tenaces au monde en faveur de la justice ». Le New York Times a écrit que « l’affaire [Habré] s’est révélée inhabituelle du fait de la ténacité de ses victimes, et de Human Rights Watch, pour tenter de l’amener devant la justice ». Habré a été inculpé une première fois par un juge sénégalais en 2000, mais pendant 12 ans, le gouvernement sénégalais de l’ancien président Abdoulaye Wade a soumis les victimes à ce que l’archevêque Desmond Tutu, lauréat du Prix Nobel de la Paix, et 117 groupes de 25 pays africains ont appelé un « interminable feuilleton politico-judiciaire ». Peu de progrès a été réalisé dans l’affaire jusqu’en 2012 et la victoire de Macky Sall face à Abdoulaye Wade lors de l’élection présidentielle et  la décision de la Cour internationale de Justice ordonnant au Sénégal de poursuivre ou extrader Habré en justice.

5. Quel a été le rôle du gouvernement tchadien dans le déclenchement des poursuites contre Habré ?

Les avocats de Habré affirment que l’actuel gouvernement tchadien d’Idriss Déby Itno est derrière les efforts visant à poursuivre Habré. Cependant, depuis la première plainte des victimes en 2000, ce sont les victimes et leurs défenseurs qui ont fait avancer le dossier, surmontant les obstacles les uns après les autres. Le gouvernement tchadien a depuis longtemps exprimé son soutien à la poursuite de Habré et en 2002 a levé l’immunité de poursuite à l’étranger de Habré, mais il n’a pas participé à l’avancement du dossier avant de contribuer au budget des Chambres et de coopérer avec les juges d’instruction durant leurs quatre commissions rogatoires au Tchad. Récemment, le gouvernement tchadien s’est de toute évidence montré plus réservé à l’égard des Chambres, particulièrement en refusant de transférer deux autres suspects.

6. Comment les Chambres africaines extraordinaires mènent-elles leurs enquêtes ?

Les juges d’instruction ont eu accès à un nombre considérable d’éléments de preuve rassemblés par différentes sources durant les années qui suivirent la chute de Habré, notamment les résultats des enquêtes belge et tchadienne.

En 1992, une Commission nationale d'enquête au Tchad a accusé le régime de Habré d’usage systématique de la torture, a estimé à 40 000 le nombre d’assassinats politiques  et a documenté les méthodes de torture employées. L’un des premiers témoins entendus par les juges d’instruction était le président de la Commission nationale d’enquête, un éminent juriste tchadien. De plus, les juges ont eu accès au dossier préparé par les juges d’instruction belges durant quatre ans, comprenant des témoignages de témoins et « d’insiders » qui travaillaient avec Habré, et des documents de la DDS.

Les quatre juges d’instruction ont surtout mené leur propre enquête approfondie durant 19  mois,  et se sont basés principalement sur des preuves qu’ils ont eux-mêmes recueillies.

Le 3 mai 2013, le Sénégal et le Tchad ont signé un « Accord de coopération judiciaire » pour faciliter l’enquête des Chambres au Tchad.

Les juges d’instruction ont effectué quatre commissions rogatoires au Tchad en août-septembre 2013, décembre 2013 et mars 2014 et mai-juin 2014. Ils étaient accompagnés par le Procureur général et ses adjoints, ainsi que par des officiers de la Police judiciaire. Pendant leurs visites, les juges ont entendu près de 2 500 victimes directes et indirectes et des témoins-clefs comme des anciens membres du régime de Habré. Bien que l’Accord de coopération judiciaire permettait aux juges d’instruction sénégalais de procéder à des auditions en l’absence de représentants des autorités tchadiennes, les juges ont choisi de ne pas le faire.

Les juges ont pris possession des archives de la DDS retrouvées en 2001 par Human Rights Watch, et en ont fait des copies. Parmi les dizaines de milliers de documents trouvés figurent des listes journalières de prisonniers et des décès en détention, des comptes rendus d’interrogatoires, des rapports de surveillance et des certificats de décès. Les dossiers détaillent comment Habré a placé la DDS sous son contrôle direct et comment il maintenait un contrôle étroit sur les opérations de la DDS. Une analyse des données pour Human Rights Watch, a révélé les noms de 1 208 personnes exécutées ou décédées en détention, et de 12 321 victimes de violations des droits humains. Rien que dans ces fichiers, Habré a reçu 1 265 communications directes de la DDS l’informant de la condition de 898 détenus.

Les juges ont également nommé des experts en analyse de données, en anthropologie médico-légale, en graphologie, sur le contexte historique du régime de Habré et sur la structure de fonctionnement et de commandement de son armée.

7. Quelles ont été les conclusions des experts désignés par la Cour ?    

Patrick Ball du Human Rights Data Analysis Group a mené une étude sur la mortalité dans les prisons du régime de Habré. Selon ses conclusions, la mortalité dans les prisons pour la période étudiée était « des centaines de fois plus élevée que la mortalité normale des hommes adultes au Tchad pendant la même période » et « substantiellement plus élevée que celles des pires contextes du vingtième siècle de prisonniers de guerre » tels que les prisonniers de guerre allemands détenus dans les geôles soviétiques et les prisonniers de guerre détenus au Japon.

Les experts de l’équipe argentine d’anthropologie médico-légale ont mené des exhumations sur un certain nombre de sites susceptibles d’abriter des charniers. A Déli par exemple, au sud du Tchad, lieu d’un supposé massacre de rebelles non armés en septembre 1984, les experts ont localisé 21 corps, presque tous des hommes en âge d’être des militaires, majoritairement tués par balle. A Mongo, au centre du Tchad, les experts ont découvert 14 corps résultant d’un autre massacre survenu en 1984.

Un graphologue désigné par les juges a analysé les documents supposément écrits ou signés par Habré. Il a par exemple confirmé que c’est bien Habré qui a répondu à la demande du Comité International de la Croix Rouge de procéder à l’hospitalisation de certains prisonniers de guerre, en écrivant « Désormais, aucun prisonnier de guerre ne doit quitter la Maison d’arrêt  sauf en cas de décès. »

8. Pourquoi Hissène Habré est-il le seul à faire l’objet de poursuites par les Chambres africaines extraordinaires ?

L’objectif des victimes tchadiennes dans leur quête de justice au Sénégal depuis 2000 a toujours été le procès de Hissène Habré, le chef de l'Etat, principal responsable des actions de son administration et qui contrôlait directement l'appareil de sécurité. Les victimes ont également porté plainte au Tchad en 2000 contre d'autres fonctionnaires du régime de Habré qui y vivaient encore.

En vertu de l’article 3 du Statut des Chambres, les Chambres africaines extraordinaires sont « habilitées à poursuivre et juger le ou les principaux responsables des crimes et violations graves du droit international » commis au Tchad pendant la période du régime Habré. En juillet 2013, le Procureur a requis l’inculpation de cinq autres officiels de l’administration de Habré suspectés d’être responsables de crimes ou de violations graves du droit international. Ces personnes sont :

• Saleh Younous et Guihini Korei, deux anciens directeurs de la Direction de la Documentation et de la Sécurité. Guihini Korei est le neveu de Hissène Habré.
• Abakar Torbo, ancien directeur du service pénitencier.
• Mahamat Djibrine dit « El Djonto », l’un des « tortionnaires les plus redoutés du Tchad » selon la Commission d’Enquête nationale.
• Zakaria Berdei, ancien conseiller spécial à la sécurité de la présidence et l’un des responsables présumés de la répression dans le sud du Tchad en 1984.

Aucun d’entre eux n’a cependant comparu devant la Cour. Saleh Younous et Mahamat Djibrine ont été jugés au Tchad sur la base de plaintes déposées par les victimes devant les tribunaux tchadiens (voir ci-dessous), le Tchad ayant refusé de les extrader au Sénégal. Zakaria Berdei semble également être au Tchad, bien qu’il ne se trouve pas en détention. Abakar Torbo et Guihini Korei sont toujours recherchés et ils n’ont pas été arrêtés suite aux inculpations formulées par les Chambres. Par conséquent, seul Hissène Habré a été renvoyé pour jugement.

9. Qu’en est-il de l’actuel président du Tchad Idriss Déby Itno ?

Idriss Déby Itno était le Commandant en Chef des forces armées de Habré pendant la période connue sous le nom de « Septembre Noir », au cours de laquelle une vague de répression meurtrière se déchaîna pour intégrer le Sud au gouvernement central. En 1985, Déby fut remplacé et, après une période d’études en France à l’Ecole militaire, il revint en tant que conseiller à la Défense avant de fuir le Tchad en avril 1989.

Il est important de souligner que l’article 10 du Statut des Chambres dispose que « La qualité officielle d’un accusé, soit comme Chef d’État ou de Gouvernement, soit comme haut fonctionnaire, ne l’exonère en aucun cas de sa responsabilité pénale […] ». Les juges d’instruction étaient ainsi libres de poursuivre le président Déby pour des crimes internationaux présumés avoir été commis entre 1982 et 1990, mais ne l’ont pas fait.

10. Quels sont les droits de l’accusé ?

Hissène Habré bénéficie du droit à un procès équitable tel que garanti par le droit international. Il est actuellement représenté par des avocats qu’il a choisis. Le Pacte international relatif aux droits civils et politiques ainsi que la Charte africaine des droits de l’Homme et des Peuples définissent les garanties minimales dont doivent bénéficier les accusés dans le cadre de procédures criminelles.

En accord avec ces standards, le Statut des Chambres prévoit expressément un certain nombre de droits à la Défense :

• Le droit d’être présent lors de son procès
• La présomption d’innocence
• Le droit à une audience publique
• Le droit de préparer sa défense dans des conditions de temps et de moyens acceptables
• Le droit à un avocat et à l’assistance juridique
• Le droit d’être jugé dans un délai raisonnable
• Le droit d’interroger et d’appeler des témoins.

11. Habré refuse de coopérer avec les Chambres. Quelles en seront les conséquences ?

Beaucoup d’accusés faisant face à un procès relevant du droit pénal international – comme Slobodan Milošević, Radovan Karadžić et Charles Taylor – ont commencé par déclarer qu’ils ne reconnaissaient pas l’autorité du tribunal ou qu’ils ne coopéreraient pas. En pratique, ils ont voulu utiliser le procès comme une tribune pour présenter leur propre version des faits.

Quoi qu’il arrive, la non-coopération ne modifie pas les garanties de procès équitable et les règles gouvernant l’administration de la preuve, en particulier le fait que la charge de la preuve pèse sur l’accusation qui doit prouver la culpabilité de Habré. La Cour ne pourra condamner Habré que si elle a l’intime conviction qu’il est coupable des faits qui lui sont reprochés par l’accusation. Néanmoins, lorsqu’un accusé adopte une position de non-coopération, il compromet inévitablement sa propre capacité à contester les éléments à charge retenus contre lui et l’opportunité de remettre en cause les arguments du Procureur quant à sa culpabilité.

Les juges des Chambres ont la responsabilité de s’assurer que le procès de Habré se déroule en conformité avec ses droits à un procès équitable, mais aussi que la justice soit rendue avec diligence et sans manipulation, y compris de la part de l’accusé.

12. Les avocats de Habré disent que leur client ne compaitra pas. Que peut-il se passer ?

Selon le code de procédure pénale sénégalais, qui est appliqué par les Chambres, si Habré refuse volontairement de comparaitre, le Président de la Cour peut soit continuer les audiences sans sa présence, soit ordonner qu’il soit amené par la force. Lors de son audience préliminaire le 3 juin, la présence de Habré était exigée par la Cour. 

13. La Cour a commis trois avocats d'office pour défendre Habré, et ce contre sa volonté. Etait-ce approprié ? Que va-t-il se passer si Habré cherche à les révoquer ?

Selon le droit sénégalais, la présence d’un avocat pour défendre l’accusé est nécessaire. Quand les avocats de Habré ont refusé de se présenter à la barre, la Chambre d’Assises a nommé des avocats pour défendre les intérêts de Habré et ainsi garantir un procès équitable.

Des juridictions nationales et internationales ont déjà nommé des avocats d’office contre la volonté des accusés pour représenter les intérêts de la défense pendant le procès. Dans le cas de Jean-Bosco Barayagwiza devant le Tribunal pénal international pour le Rwanda (TPIR), l’accusé refusait de donner des instructions aux avocats commis d’office considérant que le tribunal était politiquement biaisé. Le TPIR, rejetant la demande des avocats commis d’office de se retirer, avait considéré que « le conseil a pour obligation de défendre activement son client, à l’effet de préserver au mieux ses intérêts ». La Cour avait ajouté que l’avocat « étant commis d’office et non pas nommé, il en résulte non seulement une obligation vis-vis du client, mais également vis-à-vis du Tribunal, dont l’intérêt est d’assurer à l’accusé un procès équitable ». Le but est que « la défense soit efficace et la procédure contradictoire ». Devant le Tribunal spécial pour la Sierra Leone, l’accusé Augustine Gbao demandait que son avocat commis d’office soit révoqué car il considérait que la Cour était illégitime. La Cour avait refusé en relevant que « les intérêts de la justice ne seraient pas servis si elle laissait M. Gbao ne pas être représenté devant la Cour ». Cette dernière considérait qu’elle devait « protéger les droits de l’accusé et l’intégrité de la procédure ».

Il est fort possible que Habré cherche à récuser ses avocats commis d’office, mais selon le droit sénégalais, seulement le président du Tribunal peut les révoquer. Les avocats commis d’office qui refuse de coopérer encourent des sanctions disciplinaires.  

14. Quelle est la peine maximale à laquelle Habré pourrait être condamné ?

Si elles reconnaissent la culpabilité de Habré, les Chambres peuvent le condamner à une peine de prison allant jusqu’à la perpétuité selon les circonstances et la gravité du ou des crimes. Elles peuvent également lui ordonner de s’acquitter d’une amende ou elles peuvent confisquer toute propriété ou avoirs qui proviendraient directement ou indirectement du ou des crimes. 

15. Comment les Chambres africaines extraordinaires sont-elles structurées et administrées ?

Les Chambres africaines extraordinaires ont été créées au sein des juridictions sénégalaises, à savoir le Tribunal régional hors classe de Dakar et la Cour d’appel de Dakar. Les Chambres sont divisées en quatre niveaux : une Chambre d’instruction composée de quatre juges d’instruction sénégalais, une Chambre d’accusation composée de trois juges sénégalais, une Chambre d’assises et une Chambre d’appel. La Chambre d’assises et la Chambre d’appel sont toutes deux composées de deux juges sénégalais et d’un président ressortissant d’un autre pays membre de l’Union africaine. 

Le Procureur général est Mbacké Fall. Les Chambres ont un administrateur – Aly Ciré Ba – chargé de garantir le bon fonctionnement des activités des Chambres et superviser tous les aspects non-judiciaires de leurs activités. Les responsabilités de l’Administrateur comprennent la gestion financière du personnel, le travail de sensibilisation et l’information des médias, la protection et l’assistance aux témoins et la coopération judiciaire entre le Sénégal et les autres pays, comme le Tchad. 

16. Comment les Procureurs et les juges ont-ils été nommés ?

Les Procureurs et les juges d’instructions ont été nommés par le ministre de la Justice du Sénégal et par le Président de la Commission de l’Union africaine. Le Président de la Chambre africaine extraordinaires d’Assises est Gberdao Gustave Kam du Burkina Faso.  

17. Comment se déroulera le procès ?

Le procès sera mené conformément au Code de procédure pénale sénégalais qui s’inspire essentiellement de la procédure « inquisitoire» du droit civil français, plutôt que de la procédure « accusatoire » utilisée par les juridictions anglo-saxonnes de droit coutumier (« common law »). Le Président de la Cour a un rôle direct en interrogeant lui-même les accusés et les témoins. Le Procureur et les avocats de la défense et ceux des parties civiles peuvent également poser des questions aux accusés et aux témoins, par l’intermédiaire du Président. Le mode d’administration de la preuve est libre à l’inverse des systèmes de droit coutumier où il existe des règles strictes de la preuve. Les plaidoiries finales des avocats revêtent une importance particulière dans ce modèle. 

18. Combien de temps durera le procès ?

Selon un calendrier provisoire, la première étape du procès durera environ deux mois (jusqu’au 30 octobre). Pendant cette période se tiendront les audiences au fond qui détermineront de la culpabilité ou non de Habré. Si Habré est condamné, il y aura une deuxième étape pendant laquelle la Cour se penchera sur les questions liées aux parties civiles et aux réparations.  Le budget des Chambres prévoit le transport de 100 témoins et parties civiles en provenance du Tchad. 

19. Quel sera le rôle des victimes durant le procès et percevront-elles des réparations ?

Les victimes sont autorisées à participer à la procédure en qualité de parties civiles, représentées par un ou des avocats. Plus de 4 000 victimes se sont constituées parties civiles.

Le droit procédural sénégalais régit la participation des victimes. Les avocats des victimes ont participé à l’enquête préliminaire et à l’instruction y compris aux confrontations avec Habré. Durant le procès, les avocats des victimes seront en mesure de poser des questions aux témoins ou à l'accusé et de demander réparation. Il est peu probable, cependant, qu’un grand nombre de victimes témoignent pendant le procès.

En vertu de leur Statut, dans le cas d’une condamnation, les Chambres peuvent ordonner que l’indemnité accordée à titre de réparation soit versée par l’intermédiaire d’un fond qui peut également être alimenté par des contributions volontaires de gouvernements étrangers, d’institutions internationales et d’organisations non gouvernementales. Les indemnités provenant du fonds peuvent être attribuées aux victimes individuellement ou collectivement, qu’elles aient ou non participé au procès de Hissène Habré. Ce fond n’a cependant toujours pas été créé par les Chambres.

La Commission d’Enquête nationale du Tchad a accusé Habré d’avoir vidé les caisses de l’Etat dans les jours précédant sa fuite au Sénégal, et il est largement admis qu’il détient des millions de dollars. Les Chambres ont gelé deux petits comptes bancaires lui appartenant ainsi qu’une propriété dans un quartier chic de Dakar.

En juillet 2013, après l’arrestation de Hissène Habré par les Chambres, le président Déby a déclaré que le gouvernement tchadien indemniserait les survivants et les familles des victimes décédées. Au regard du droit international, la responsabilité du Tchad d’apporter réparation aux victimes de violations flagrantes de droits de l’Homme est séparée et distincte des réparations incombant à l’accusé.

20. Quelles dispositions seront prises pour rendre le procès accessible au peuple tchadien ?

Le Statut des Chambres prévoit que les audiences seront enregistrées et filmées aux fins de diffusion, comme ce fut le cas dans les autres procès internationalisés. L’accès public au procès pour les journalistes et les organisations non-gouvernementales est aussi garanti. L’Accord de coopération judiciaire de 2013 engage le Tchad à autoriser la diffusion des enregistrements des audiences par les radios publiques et la télévision, et à autoriser les médias privés à faire de même. Les ministres de la Justice des deux pays se sont accordés en novembre 2013 pour que le procès soit retransmis.

Les deux premiers jours du procès ont été enregistrés et diffusés en streaming, et retransmis au Tchad. Les enregistrements sont disponibles sur le site des Chambres africaines extraordinaires. 

Human Rights Watch estime que l’enregistrement de la totalité du procès est essentiel pour sa valeur historique. En outre, la retransmission du procès, au Tchad en particulier - soumise aux  mesures appropriées qui pourraient être nécessaires pour assurer la sécurité des témoins -  ainsi que la préparation de résumés du procès et de vidéos, poursuivent un objectif primordial : s’assurer que le procès soit suivi et compris par le peuple tchadien et qu’il participe à la construction de l’Etat de droit, au Tchad comme au Sénégal.

Etant donné le caractère jurisprudentiel de ce procès, il est d'autant plus important de le rendre disponible au plus large public possible. Cela signifie que les images et le son doivent être librement disponibles pour les médias, les cinéastes et le public.

Par l’intermédiaire d’un consortium d’organisations non gouvernementales venant du Sénégal, de la Belgique et du Tchad, les Chambres ont mis en place des programmes de sensibilisation au Tchad et au Sénégal. Le consortium a formé des journalistes dans les deux pays, a organisé des débats publics, a créé un site internet et a produit des documents expliquant le procès.

Le Tchad et le Sénégal ont également accepté de coopérer afin de faciliter à la fois les déplacements des journalistes tchadiens au Sénégal et les déplacements au Tchad de toute personne impliquée dans le déroulement du procès. 

21. Qu’en est-il du procès des agents de la police politique du régime de Habré ?

Le 25 mars 2015, une Cour criminelle tchadienne a reconnu coupables de meurtre, torture, enlèvements, détention arbitraire, coups et blessures et actes de barbarie, 20 anciens agents de la police politique du régime de Habré, à la suite de la plainte déposée par les victimes en 2000 mais qui se trouvait dans une impasse avant la création des Chambres par le Sénégal.

La Cour a condamné sept anciens agents à la perpétuité parmi lesquels figurent Saleh Younous, un ancien directeur de la DDS et Mahamat Djibrine dit « El-Djonto » qui était, selon la Commission nationale d’enquête de 1992, l’un des « tortionnaires les plus redoutés » du Tchad. Ils étaient tous les deux également visés par les Chambres africaines extraordinaires, mais les autorités tchadiennes avaient refusé de les transférer.

La majorité des 20 inculpés avait témoigné devant les juges sénégalais lors de leurs visites au Tchad, et il est probable que les Chambres cherchent à les faire venir au procès à Dakar, ce qui est permis par l’Accord de coopération judiciaire de 2013. La Cour tchadienne a acquitté quatre autres inculpés et a ordonné que les condamnés et l'État versent 75 milliards de francs CFA (environ 125 millions de dollars ou 114 millions d’euros) en réparation aux 7 000  parties civiles. La Cour a également ordonné que le gouvernement édifie un monument pour les victimes du régime Habré et que l’ancien siège de la DDS soit transformé en musée. Ces deux mesures faisaient parties des revendications de longues dates des associations de victimes.

Au cours du procès au Tchad, quelque cinquante victimes ont décrit les actes de torture et de mauvais traitements perpétrés par des agents de la DDS.

22. Comment les Chambres sont-elles financées ?

Les Chambres sont financées en grande partie par des pays donateurs.

En novembre 2012, le Sénégal et un certain nombre de pays donateursse sont mis d’accord autour d’un budget de 8,6 millions d’euros (11,4 millions de dollars à l’époque) pour financer le procès de Habré. Des promesses avaient été faites par : le Tchad (2 milliards de francs CFA ou 3  743 000 dollars), l’Union européenne (2 millions d’euros), les Pays-Bas (1 million d’euros), l’Union africaine (1 million de dollars), les Etats-Unis (1 million de dollars), la Belgique (500 000 euros), l’Allemagne (500 000 euros), la France (300 000 euros) et le Luxembourg (100 000 euros). De plus, le Canada, la Suisse, et le Comité International de la Croix-Rouge ont  fourni une assistance technique. Un Comité de pilotage composé du Sénégal, de pays donateurs et d’institutions, reçoit et approuve les rapports périodiques soumis par l’Administrateur des Chambres.

23. Quelles ont été les étapes clés dans la campagne pour traduire Habré en justice ?

En janvier 2000, un groupe de victimes tchadiennes a porté plainte contre Habré au Sénégal. En février de la même année, un juge sénégalais a inculpé Habré pour torture, crimes contre l’humanité et actes de barbarie. Cependant, suite à des immixtions du nouveau gouvernement sénégalais d’Abdoulaye Wade dénoncées par deux rapporteurs des Nations unies pour les droits de l’Homme, des juridictions d’appel ont annulé les poursuites sur le fondement de l’incompétence des tribunaux sénégalais à juger des crimes commis à l’étranger.

D’autres victimes de Habré, dont trois ressortissants belges d’origine tchadienne, ont alors déposé une plainte contre lui en Belgique en novembre 2000. Les autorités belges ont enquêté pendant quatre ans avant de l’inculper pour crimes contre l’humanité, crimes de guerre et torture, et ont demandé son extradition en 2005. Un tribunal sénégalais s'est déclaré incompétent pour statuer sur la demande d’extradition.

Le Sénégal s’est alors tourné vers l’Union africaine (UA) qui, en juillet 2006, a appelé le Sénégal à poursuivre Habré « au nom de l’Afrique ». Le président Wade a accepté le mandat de l’UA et fait amender le droit sénégalais afin d’investir expressément les tribunaux nationaux de la compétence extraterritoriale nécessaire pour juger les crimes internationaux. Toutefois, le gouvernement sénégalais exigeait le versement d’un budget de 27,4 millions d’euros (36,5 millions de dollars) de la part de la communauté internationale avant d’ordonner le commencement de toute enquête ou poursuite. Trois ans de négociations pointilleuses s’en sont suivis au sujet du budget du procès jusqu’à ce qu’en novembre 2010, le Sénégal et les pays donateurs s’accordent finalement sur un budget de 8,6 millions d’euros (11,4 millions de dollars) pour le procès de Habré.

Quelques jours avant l’accord sur le budget, la Cour de Justice de la Communauté économique des États de l’Afrique de l’Ouest (CEDEAO) a décidé que Habré devrait être jugé par « une juridiction spéciale ad hoc à caractère international ». (La décision de la CEDEAO est examinée plus en détail ci-dessous). En janvier 2011, l’UA a répondu à l’arrêt de la CEDEAO en proposant un projet pour des chambres spéciales au sein du système judiciaire sénégalais comprenant des juges nommés par l’UA. Le Sénégal a rejeté le projet et en mai 2011, s'est retiré des négociations avec l’UA sur la création du tribunal.

En juillet 2011, le ministre des Affaires étrangères sénégalais a exclu l’option de juger Habré au Sénégal. Le gouvernement tchadien a alors annoncé son soutien pour l’extradition de Habré vers la Belgique afin d’y être jugé.

En août 2011 et en janvier 2012, une cour d’appel sénégalaise a refusé de statuer sur deux autres demandes d’extradition de la Belgique, concluant que les documents joints à la demande n’étaient juridiquement pas conformes. Dans ces deux cas, le gouvernement sénégalais n’avait apparemment pas transmis les documents juridiques belges intacts au tribunal. La Belgique a soumis une quatrième demande d’extradition aux autorités sénégalaises en janvier 2012.

Le 20 juillet 2012, la Cour internationale de Justice, dans l’affaire « Questions concernant l’obligation de poursuivre ou d’extrader (Belgique c. Sénégal) » a statué que le Sénégal avait manqué à ses obligations découlant de la Convention des Nations unies contre la torture et autres peines ou traitements cruels, inhumains ou dégradants et a ordonné au Sénégal de poursuivre Habré « sans autre délai » à défaut de l’extrader.

Aucun progrès n’a été réalisé dans l’affaire jusqu’à la victoire de Macky Sall face à Abdoulaye Wade lors de l’élection présidentielle en mars 2012. Le nouveau gouvernement sénégalais a indiqué rapidement qu’il projetait de poursuivre Habré au Sénégal plutôt que de l’extrader vers la Belgique. Les négociations reprises entre le Sénégal et l’Union africaine ont finalement conduit à un accord pour créer les Chambres africaines extraordinaires chargées de mener le procès au sein du système judiciaire sénégalais. Le 17 décembre, l’Assemblée nationale sénégalaise a adopté la loi établissant les Chambres spéciales. Le 8 février 2013, les Chambres africaines extraordinaires ont été inaugurées à Dakar. 

24. Quelle est l’importance du procès de Habré pour la compétence universelle ?

Comme l'a démontré l'affaire Habré, la compétence universelle est un important filet de sécurité pour s’assurer que les personnes suspectées d'atrocités ne puissent jouir de l’impunité dans un Etat tiers quand ils ne peuvent être poursuivis devant les tribunaux du pays où les crimes auraient été commis ou devant un tribunal international.

Au cours des 20 dernières années, l’usage de la compétence universelle, notamment – mais pas exclusivement - par les juridictions de pays européens, est en progrès. Pour renforcer la lutte contre l'impunité pour les crimes les plus graves, il est essentiel que des tribunaux de tous les continents aient recours à la compétence universelle. L'Union africaine a encouragé ses Etats membres à adopter une législation donnant à leurs tribunaux nationaux une compétence universelle pour les crimes de guerre, les crimes contre l'humanité et le génocide et a pris des mesures pour initier un réseau de procureurs nationaux travaillant sur des cas de crimes de guerre. Plusieurs enquêtes ont été ouvertes en Afrique du Sud et au Sénégal sur le fondement de la compétence universelle.

25. Comment ce procès répond-t-il aux critiques qui dénoncent le rôle de la justice internationale en Afrique et affirment que les recours à la compétence universelle ciblent les Africains ?

Le procès de Habré est une avancée cruciale dans la démarche de pays africains prenant la responsabilité de poursuivre les crimes internationaux les plus graves. Toutefois, le procès Habré ne dénigre pas l'importance de la CPI ainsi que  l'utilisation de la compétence universelle par les États non-africains, y compris par les tribunaux européens, pour juger des crimes commis en Afrique. Ces outils sont souvent le seul espoir dont disposent les victimes africaines demandant justice.

Il est vrai que la justice internationale a été appliquée de façon inégale. Les Etats puissants et leurs alliés ont souvent pu échapper à la justice alors même que des crimes graves sont commis sur leur territoire, notamment en s’abstenant de ratifier le traité de la CPI et en jouant de leur influence politique au Conseil de sécurité des Nations unies.

Les organisations non gouvernementales ont activement fait campagne pour que les gouvernements africains travaillent pour améliorer la justice internationale et sa portée – et non pour la saper - afin de limiter l'impunité lorsque des atrocités sont commises.

26. Pourquoi était-il nécessaire de créer des chambres spéciales avec un élément international ?

Habré a déposé une plainte auprès de la Cour de Justice de la CEDEAO en octobre 2008, affirmant que son procès au Sénégal, sur la base des changements législatifs opérés au Sénégal en 2007-08, constituerait une violation du principe de non-rétroactivité du droit pénal.

Le 18 novembre 2010, la Cour de Justice de la CEDEAO a rendu son arrêt dans lequel elle déclare que, afin d’éviter de violer le principe de non-rétroactivité, Habré devrait être jugé devant « une juridiction spéciale ad hoc à caractère international ». Des experts en droit international ont mis en doute cette décision car le principe de non-rétroactivité ne s’applique pas à des actes qui, au moment de leur commission, étaient déjà interdits par le droit international conventionnel et coutumier (comme, dans le cas présent, la torture, les crimes de guerre et les crimes contre l’humanité). Dans sa décision de 2012, la Cour internationale de Justice a précisé que le Sénégal, qui a ratifié la Convention des Nations Unies contre la torture en 1987, était dans l'obligation d'enquêter et de poursuivre les allégations de torture contre Habré.

Néanmoins, le Sénégal s’est conformé aux prescriptions de la Cour de Justice de la CEDEAO en mettant en place les Chambres africaines extraordinaires, « juridiction spéciale ad hoc à caractère international ».

En avril 2013, les avocats de Habré ont déposé une nouvelle requête devant la Cour de Justice de la CEDEAO, afin d’obtenir la suspension des activités des Chambres. Dans une décision du 5 novembre 2013, la Cour a jugé que les Chambres africaines extraordinaires étaient un tribunal à caractère international et qu’elle n’était pas compétente pour statuer sur la requête de Habré car les Chambres furent créées sur la base d’un accord conclu entre l’Union africaine et le Sénégal.

27. Pourquoi Hissène Habré n’est-il pas jugé au Tchad ?

Le Tchad n’a jamais cherché à extrader Habré et il existe de sérieux doutes quant à la possibilité pour lui d’avoir un procès équitable au Tchad, où il a déjà été condamné à mort par contumace pour son rôle supposé dans la rébellion de 2008. En juillet 2011, le président Wade a menacé de renvoyer Habré au Tchad avant de se rétracter, quelques jours plus tard, face au tollé international qu’aurait entrainé le risque que Habré puisse y  subir de mauvais traitements ou même y être tué.

28. Pourquoi la Cour pénale internationale ne peut-elle pas poursuivre Habré ?

La Cour pénale internationale a une compétence temporelle limitée aux crimes commis après le 1er juillet 2002, date à laquelle son Statut est entré en vigueur. Or les crimes reprochés à Hissène Habré auraient été commis entre 1982 et 1990.

Topic

• International Justice
• Torture

• English

Questions and Answers

On July 20, 2015, the former dictator of Chad, Hissène Habré, will stand trial on charges of crimes against humanity, torture and war crimes before the Extraordinary African Chambers in the Senegal court system. The chambers were inaugurated by Senegal and the African Union in February 2013 to prosecute the “person or persons” most responsible for international crimes committed in Chad between 1982 and 1990, the period when Habré ruled Chad. After two days, the trial was adjourned when Habré’s lawyers refused to appear and the court appointed three lawyers to represent him and gave them 45 days to prepare the case.  The trial will resume on September 7.

Habré’s trial is the first in the world in which the courts of one country prosecute the former ruler of another for alleged human rights crimes. It is also the first universal jurisdiction case to proceed to trial in Africa. Universal jurisdiction is a concept under international law that allows national courts to prosecute the most serious crimes even when committed abroad, by a foreigner and against foreign victims. The New York Times has called the case “a Milestone for Justice in Africa.”

The following questions and answers provide more information on the case and what lies ahead.

1. Who is Hissène Habré?
2. What are the charges against Habré?
3. What crimes fall within the jurisdiction of the court?
4. Why has it taken so long to bring Habré to justice?
5. What has been the role of the Chadian government in bringing about Habré’s prosecution?
6. How did the chambers carry out their investigation?
7. What did the court-appointed experts find?
8. Why is Hissène Habré the only person standing trial?
9. What about Déby, Chad’s current president?
10. What are the accused’s rights?
11. Habré is refusing to cooperate with the chambers. What effect will that have?
12. Habré says he will not appear in court. What will happen?
13. The Court has appointed counsel to represent Habré against his wishes. Was this proper? What will happen if Habré objects to the lawyers?
14. What is the maximum punishment Habré could receive? 
15. How are the Extraordinary Chambers structured and administered?
16. How are the prosecutors and judges assigned?
17. How will the trial be conducted?
18. How long will the trial last? 
19. Will victims have a role in the trial, and will they receive reparations?
20. How will people in Chad know about the trial?
21. What about the trial in Chad of Habré-era security agents?
22. How are the chambers funded?
23. What were the key steps in the campaign to bring Habré to justice? 
24. What is the significance of Habré’s prosecution under universal jurisdiction?
25. How does this trial fit into critiques of the role of international justice in Africa and claims that universal jurisdiction cases target Africans?
26. Why was it necessary to create special chambers with an international element?
27. Why isn’t Habré prosecuted in Chad?
28. Why can’t the International Criminal Court prosecute Habre?

 

1. Who is Hissène Habré?

Habré was president of the former French colony of Chad from 1982 until he was deposed in 1990 by Idriss Déby Itno, the current president. Habré has been living in exile in Senegal ever since.

A 714-page study by Human Rights Watch found that Habré’s government was responsible for widespread political killings, systematic torture, and thousands of arbitrary arrests. The government periodically targeted civil populations, including in the south (1983-1985), and various ethnic groups such as Chadian Arabs, the Hadjerai (1987) and the Zaghawa (1989-90), killing and arresting group members en masse when it was perceived that their leaders posed a threat to Habré’s rule.

A 1992 Chadian Truth Commission accused Habré's government of 40,000 political murders and systematic torture. Most abuses were carried out by his dreaded political police, the Documentation and Security Directorate (DDS), whose directors reported directly to Habré. The directors all belonged to Habré’s inner circle, and some belonged to the same ethnic group, Gorane anakaza, or even the same family as Habré.

The United States and France supported Habré, seeing him as a bulwark against Libya's Muammar Gaddafi, who had expansionist designs on northern Chad. Under President Ronald Reagan, the United States gave covert CIA paramilitary support to help Habré take power in 1982 and then provided his government with massive military aid. The United States also used a clandestine base in Chad to organize captured Libyan soldiers into an anti-Gaddafi force in the late 1980s. Despite Habré’s abduction of the French anthropologist Françoise Claustre in 1974 and the murder of Captain Pierre Galopin, who went to Chad to negotiate her release in 1975, France also supported Habré after he arrived in power, providing him with arms, logistical support and information, and carrying out military operations “Manta” (1983) and “Hawk” (1986) to help Chad push back Libyan forces.

2. What are the charges against Habré?

Habré was indicted for crimes against humanity, torture and war crimes by the chambers’ four investigating judges on July 2, 2013. On February 13, 2015, after a 19-month investigation, the judges found sufficient evidence for Habré to face charges of crimes against humanity and torture as a member of a “joint criminal enterprise” and of war crimes on the basis of his superior responsibility. Specifically, they charged Habré with:

• The massive practice of murder, summary executions, kidnapping  followed by enforced disappearance and torture, amounting to crimes against humanity, against the Hadjerai and Zaghawa ethnic groups, the people of southern Chad and political opponents;
• Torture; and
• The war crimes of murder, torture, unlawful transfer and unlawful confinement, and violence to life and physical well-being. 

3. What crimes fall within the jurisdiction of the court?

The chamber’s statute gives it competence over the crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and torture as defined in the statute. The definitions generally track those used in the statutes of the International Criminal Court and other international tribunals. The crimes must have taken place in Chad between June 7, 1982, and December 1, 1990, which corresponds to the dates of Habré’s rule. 

4. Why has it taken so long to bring Habré to justice?

The advent of the trial, almost 25 years after Habré’s fall, is entirely due to the perseverance of Habré’s victims and their allies in nongovernmental groups.  When Habré was arrested in July 2013, the Toronto Globe and Mail  lauded “one of the world’s most patient and tenacious campaigns for justice.” The New York Times wrote that the “case has proved unusual for the tenacity of his victims, and of Human Rights Watch, in seeking to bring him to justice.”  Habré was first indicted by a Senegalese judge in 2000, but for the next 12 years the Senegalese government of former President Abdoulaye Wade subjected the victims to what the Nobel Peace Prize winner Archbishop Desmond Tutu and 117 groups from 25 African countries described as an “interminable political and legal soap opera.” It was only in 2012, when Macky Sall became president of Senegal and the International Court of Justice ordered Senegal to prosecute or extradite Habré that progress was made toward the trial. 

5. What has been the role of the Chadian government in bringing about Habré’s prosecution?

Habré’s lawyers claim that Deby’s government is behind the effort to prosecute him.  However, since the victims’ first complaint in 2000, it has been the victims and their supporters who have pressed the case forward, overcoming one obstacle after another. The Chadian government has long expressed its support for Habré’s prosecution, and in 2002 it waived Habré's immunity from prosecution abroad, but it did not otherwise contribute to advancing the case in a meaningful way until it agreed to help finance the court and cooperated with the investigating judges during their four missions to Chad. More recently, the Chadian government has seemingly cooled toward the chambers, particularly in its refusal to transfer additional suspects.

6. How did the chambers carry out their investigation?

The investigating judges began with access to a considerable amount of evidence collected in the years since Habré’s fall, including prior Belgian and Chadian investigations into Habré’s alleged crimes.

A 1992 National Truth Commission in Chad accused Habré’s government of systemic torture and an estimated 40,000 political assassinations, and documented the methods used to carry out torture. One of the first witnesses the chambers’ investigating judges interviewed was the former Truth Commission president, a leading Chadian lawyer. In addition, the chambers’ judges obtained the extensive file Belgian investigators prepared on Habré during four years, which contains interviews with witnesses and “insiders” who worked alongside Habré, as well as DDS documents.

Most important, the chambers’ four investigating judges conducted their own thorough 19-month investigation, and for the most part relied on evidence they developed themselves. 

On May 3, 2013, Senegal and Chad signed a “Judicial cooperation agreement” to facilitate the chambers’ investigation in Chad.

The investigative judges conducted four missions (“commissions rogatoires”) to Chad - in August - September 2013, December 2013, March 2014, and May - June 2014. They were accompanied by the chief prosecutor and his deputies as well as police officers. During their visits, the judges gathered statements from 2,500 direct and indirect victims and key witnesses, including former officials of the Habré government. Although the Judicial cooperation agreement allowed the Senegalese investigative judges to interview people with Chadian authorities not present, the judges chose not to.

The judges took copies of DDS files that Human Rights Watch had uncovered  in 2001. Among the tens of thousands of documents were daily lists of prisoners and deaths in detention, interrogation reports, surveillance reports, and death certificates. The files detail how Habré placed the DDS under his direct control and kept tight control over DDS operations.  Analysis of the data for Human Rights Watch revealed the names of 1,208 people who were killed or died in detention and 12,321 victims of human rights violations. In these files alone, Habré received 1,265 direct communications from the DDS about the status of 898 detainees. 

The judges also appointed experts on data analysis, forensic anthropology, handwriting, the historical context of Habré’s government and the functioning and command structure of Habré’s military.

7. What did the court-appointed experts find?

Patrick Ball of the Human Rights Data Analysis Group conducted a study of mortality in Habré’s prisons.  His conclusion was that, for the period he studied, prison mortality was “hundreds of times higher than normal mortality for adult men in Chad during the same period” and “substantially higher than some of the twentieth century’s worst POW contexts” such as German prisoners of war in Soviet custody and US prisoners of war in Japanese custody.

Experts from the Argentine Forensic Anthropology Team carried out exhumations at a number of potential mass grave sites. In Deli, in southern Chad, for instance, the site of an alleged killing of unarmed rebels in September 1984, the experts located 21 bodies, almost all military-age men, most of whom were killed by gunshot. In Mongo, in the center of Chad, the experts uncovered 14 bodies from another 1984 massacre.

A handwriting expert appointed by the judges looked at documents allegedly written or signed by Habré. He confirmed, for instance, that it was Habré who responded to a request by the International Committee of the Red Cross for the hospitalization of certain prisoners of war by writing “From now on, no prisoner of war can leave the Detention Center except in case of death.”

8. Why is Hissène Habré the only person standing trial?

The Chadian victims’ goal in seeking justice in Senegal since 2000 has been a trial of Habré, the head of state who directly controlled the security apparatus and had primary responsibility for his government’s actions. The victims also filed cases in 2000 in Chad against other officials of Habré’s government who were still in Chad.

Under article 3 of the chambers’ statute, the Extraordinary African Chambers can prosecute “the person or persons most responsible” for international crimes committed in Chad during Habré’s rule. In July 2013, the chief prosecutor requested the indictment of five additional officials from Habré’s administration suspected of being responsible for international crimes. These are:

• Saleh Younous and Guihini Korei, two former directors of the DDS, Habré’s political police.  Korei is Habré’s nephew;
• Abakar Torbo, former director of the DDS prison service;
• Mahamat Djibrine, also known as “El Djonto,” one of the “most feared torturers in Chad,” according to the National Truth Commission; and
• Zakaria Berdei, former special security adviser to the presidency and one of those suspected of responsibility in the repression in the south in 1984.

None of them have been brought before the court, however. Younous and Djibrine were convicted in Chad on charges stemming from the complaints filed by victims in the Chadian courts, and Chad has refused to extradite them to Senegal.  Berdei is also believed to be in Chad, though he is not in custody. The location of Torbo and Korei is unknown, and they have not been arrested under the chambers’ indictments. As a result, only Habré was committed to trial.

9. What about Déby, Chad’s current president?

President Déby was commander in chief of Habré’s forces during the period known as “Black September,” in 1984, when a murderous wave of repression was unleashed to bring southern Chad back into the fold of the central government. In 1985, Déby was removed from this post, and after a period of study in a military school in France, was appointed a defense adviser until he left Chad in 1989.

It is important to note that Article 10 of the chambers’ statute provides that “[t]he official position of an accused, whether as Head of State or Government, or as a responsible government official, shall not relieve him or her of criminal responsibility….” The chambers were thus free to pursue charges against President Déby even though he is currently a head of state, but they did not.

10. What are the accused’s rights?

Habré is entitled to the right to a fair trial in accordance with international law. He is represented by legal counsel of his own choosing. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights outline the minimum guarantees that must be afforded to defendants in criminal proceedings. 

In accordance with those standards, the chambers’ Statute provides a number of rights to defendants, including:

• the right to be present during trial;
• the presumption of innocence;
• the right to a public hearing;
• the right to have adequate time and facilities for the preparation of the defense;
• the right to counsel and legal assistance;
• the right to be tried without undue delay; and
• the right to examine and call witnesses.

11. Habré is refusing to cooperate with the chambers. What effect will that have?

Many defendants facing trial before tribunals for alleged crimes under international criminal law – such as Slobodan Milošević, Radovan Karadžić and Charles Taylor– asserted that they did not recognize the authority of the tribunal or that they would not cooperate, or have sought to use the trial as a platform to present their version of events. 

The burden always remains on the prosecution to prove Habré’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. However, if an accused decides to not cooperate in his own trial, he inevitably undermines the exercise of his right to an effective defense, which includes the ability to challenge the evidence against him and his opportunity to call into question the prosecution’s case.

The judges of the chambers have the responsibility to ensure that the trial against Habre proceeds in accordance with his rights to a fair hearing, but also that justice is dispensed expeditiously and without manipulations, including by the accused.  

12. Habré says he will not appear in count. What will happen? 

Under Senegalese procedural law, which is applied by the Chambers, if Habré refuses to appear willingly, the court president has the choice of either going forward with the trial in his absence or of ordering that he be brought to court by force. At his preliminary hearing on June 3, and at the trial itself Habré’s presence was ordered by the court.  

13. The Court has appointed counsel to represent Habré against his wishes. Was this proper? What will happen if Habré objects to the lawyers?

Under Senegalese law, the presence of defense counsel at trial is necessary.  When Habré’s lawyers refused to appear, the Chambers appointed counsel to act on his behalf to ensure a fair trial.

Both national courts and international criminal tribunals have appointed counsel against the will of defendants to represent the interests of the defense during trial. In the case of Jean-Bosco Barayagwiza at the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR), the defendant refused to give instructions to the appointed defense lawyers, claiming that the tribunal was politically biased. The ICTR refused the appointed counsel’s request to withdraw, stating that “Counsel are under an obligation to mount an active defence in the best interest of the Accused,” and that the lawyers also “represents the interest of the Tribunal to ensure that the Accused receives a fair trial. The aim is to obtain efficient representation and adversarial proceedings.”  The  Special Court for Sierra Leone refused a similar request by Augustine Gbao to have his appointed counsel dismissed because he considered the court illegitimate, noting that “the interest of justice would not be served by allowing Mr. Gbao to be unrepresented before this Court. ... [The court] must safeguard the rights of the accused and the integrity of the proceedings.”

It is possible that Habré may seek to recuse his court-appointed lawyers but under Senegalese law only the presiding judge can remove a court-appointed lawyer. Appointed lawyers risk disciplinary sanctions under Senegalese law if they refuse to cooperate.

14. What is the maximum punishment Habré could receive?

If Habré is found guilty, the chambers could impose a sentence of up to life in prison, depending on the circumstances and the gravity of the crime(s). They could also order him to pay a fine or forfeit any of the proceeds, property or assets derived directly or indirectly from the crime(s).

15. How are the Extraordinary Chambers structured and administered? 

The Extraordinary African Chambers have been created inside the existing Senegalese court structure in Dakar, namely the Dakar District Court and the Appeals Court in Dakar. The chambers have four levels: an Investigative Chamber with four Senegalese investigative judges, an Indicting Chamber of three Senegalese judges, a Trial Chamber, and an Appeals Chamber. The Trial Chamber and the Appeals Chamber each have two Senegalese judges and a president from another African Union member state. 

The chief prosecutor is Mbacké Fall. The chambers have an administrator – Aly Ciré Ba – to ensure the smooth functioning of their activities and to handle all non-judicial aspects of the work. The administrator’s responsibilities include financial management of personnel, outreach and media information, witness protection and assistance, and judicial cooperation between Senegal and other countries, such as Chad. 

16. How are the prosecutors and judges assigned?

The prosecutors and investigative judges were nominated by Senegal’s justice minister and appointed by the chairperson of the AU Commission. The President of the Trial Chamber is Gberdao Gustave Kam of Burkina Faso.

17. How will the trial be conducted?

The trial will be conducted in accordance with the Senegalese Code of Criminal Procedure, which essentially follows the French civil law “inquisitorial” model rather than the “adversarial” model used in Anglo-Saxon common-law systems. The presiding judge assumes a direct role, examining the accused and witnesses. The prosecutor and the lawyers for the defendants and the victims may also have questions put to the accused and witnesses. There are no strict rules of evidence as in common-law systems. The lawyers’ final summations, or plaidoiries, assume a particular importance in this model.

18. How long will the trial last?

A provisional calendar envisages that the first stage of the trial, to determine Habre’s guilt, will last approximately two months, until October 30. If Habré is found guilty, there would be a second stage to look at the question of civil parties and reparations. The Chambers’ budget provides for transportation from Chad of 100 witnesses. 

19. Will victims have a role in the trial, and will they receive reparations?

Victims are permitted to participate in proceedings as civil parties, represented by legal counsel. More than 4,000 victims have registered as civil parties.

Senegalese procedural law governs participation by the victims. The victims’ lawyers participated in pre-trial proceedings, as when victims’ accounts were contrasted with Habré’s. At trial, the victims’ lawyers will be able to have questions put to witnesses or the accused, and to seek reparations.  It is unlikely, however, that more than a small number of victims will testify during the trial.

Under its statute in the event of a conviction, the chambers may order reparations against the accused to be paid into a victims’ fund, which can also receive voluntary contributions by foreign governments, international institutions, and non-governmental organizations. Reparations from the victims’ fund will be open to all victims, individually or collectively, whether or not they participated in Habré’s trial. The chambers have not yet created such a fund, however.

Chad’s truth commission accused Habré of emptying out the national treasury in the days before his flight to Senegal, and it is widely believed that he has millions of dollars. The chambers have frozen two small bank accounts belonging to him and a property in an upscale Dakar neighborhood.

In July 2013, after the chambers arrested Habré, President Déby said that the Chadian government would compensate survivors and relatives of those who died. Chad’s responsibility under international law to provide reparations to victims of gross human rights violations is separate and distinct from reparations against the accused.

20. How will people in Chad know about the trial?

The chambers’ Statute provides for filming and recording trial proceedings for broadcasting purposes, as with other internationalized trials, and for public access to the trial by journalists and non-governmental organizations. The Judicial Cooperation Agreement commits Chad to broadcast the recordings of proceedings on public radio and television and to allow private media entities to do the same. The justice ministers of both countries agreed in November 2013 that the trial would be broadcast.

The first two days of the trial were recorded and streamed, broadcast in Chad and are available on the Chambers’ web-site.

Human Rights Watch believes that filming the entire trial is critical for the historical record. In addition, subject to appropriate measures that may be necessary to ensure security of witnesses, retransmission of the trial, to Chad in particular, as well as the preparation of abstracts of the trial and video summaries, serves the key purposes of ensuring that the trial is meaningful to, and understood by, the people of Chad and helps to build the rule of law in both Chad and Senegal. The landmark nature of this trial makes it all the more important to make it available for viewing by the widest possible audience. This means that the footage and sound should be freely available, to media, filmmakers and the public.

The chambers, through a consortium of non-governmental organizations from Senegal, Belgium and Chad who received a contract from the court, have undertaken outreach programs to both Chad and Senegal. The consortium has trained journalists in both countries, organized public debates, created a website and produced materials to explain the trial.

Chad and Senegal have also agreed to cooperate to facilitate both the travel of Chadian journalists to Senegal and the travel to Chad for all those involved in the trial proceedings.

21. What about the trial in Chad of Habré-era security agents?

On March 25, 2015, a Chadian criminal court convicted 20 Habré-era security agents on charges of murder, torture, kidnapping and arbitrary detention, based on complaints filed by the victims in 2000 but that were stalled until the Senegal created the chambers. The court sentenced seven men to life in prison including Younous, a former director of the DDS, and Djibrine, described as one of the “most feared torturers in Chad” by the Truth Commission. Both men were also wanted by the chambers, but Chad declined to transfer them.  Most of the 20 gave their testimony to the chambers when they visited Chad, and it is likely that the chambers will seek to have them come to Dakar for the trial.  The Chadian court acquitted four others and ordered that the Chadian government and the convicted persons each pay half of US$125 million in reparations to over 7,000 victims. The court also ordered that the government within a year erect a monument to those who were killed under Habré and that the former DDS headquarters be turned into a museum. These were both among the long-standing demands of the victims’ associations. During the Chad trial, about 50 victims described their torture and mistreatment at the hands of DDS agents.

22. How are the chambers funded?

The chambers are funded in large part by donor countries. In November 2012, Senegal and a number of donor countries agreed to a budget of €8.6million (US$11.4 million at the time) to cover Habré’s trial. Commitments were  made by: Chad (2 billion CFA francs or US$3,743,000), the European Union (€2 million), the Netherlands (€1 million), the African Union (US$1 million), the United States (US$1 million), Belgium (€500,000), Germany (€500,000), France (€300,000), and Luxembourg (€100,000). In addition, Canada, Switzerland, and the International Committee of the Red Cross have provided technical assistance. A Steering Committee consisting of Senegal and the donor countries and institutions receives and approves periodic reports from the administrator.

23. What were the key steps in the campaign to bring Habré to justice?

In January 2000, a group of Chadian victims filed a complaint against Habré in Senegal. In February of the same year, a Senegalese judge indicted Habré on charges of torture, crimes against humanity, and “barbaric acts”. However, after political interference by the new Senegalese government of President Abdoulaye Wade, which was denounced by two UN human rights rapporteurs, appellate courts  dismissed  the case on the ground that Senegalese courts lacked jurisdiction to try crimes committed abroad.

Other Habré victims, including three Belgian citizens of Chadian origin, then filed a case against him in Belgium in November 2000. The Belgian authorities investigated the case for four years, then indicted Habré in 2005 and sought his extradition. A Senegalese court ruled that it lacked jurisdiction to decide on the extradition request.

Senegal then turned to the African Union (AU), which in July 2006 called on Senegal to prosecute Habré “on behalf of Africa” before its own national judicial system. President Wade accepted the AU mandate and Senegalese law was amended to give the country’s courts explicit universal jurisdiction over international crimes, including torture and crimes against humanity. However, Wade contended that Senegal needed full up-front international funding of €27.4 million (US$36.5 million) before beginning any prosecution. Three years of halting negotiations over the trial budget ensued, until Senegal and donor countries finally agreed in November 2010 to a budget of €8.6 million (US$11.4 million) for Habré’s trial.

Just days before the budget agreement, the Court of Justice of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) ruled that Habré should be tried before a “special ad hoc procedure of an international character.” In January 2011, the AU responded to the ECOWAS court ruling by proposing a plan for special chambers within the Senegalese justice system with some judges appointed by the AU. Senegal rejected the plan, and in May 2011, withdrew from negotiations with the AU over creation of the tribunal.

In July 2011, Senegal’s foreign minister ruled out holding Habré's trial in Senegal. The Chadian government then announced its support for extraditing Habré to Belgium to face trial.

In 2011 and 2012, Belgium issued three more extradition requests, which were not properly transmitted to the courts by the Senegalese authorities.

On July 20, 2012, in response to a suit brought by Belgium, the International Court of Justice (ICJ), the UN’s highest judicial organ, found that Senegal had failed to meet its obligations under the UN Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment and ordered Senegal to prosecute Habré “without further delay” if it did not extradite him.

The new Senegalese government of Macky Sall reacted quickly to the ICJ decision, expressing regret that Habré’s trial had not taken place sooner and reaffirming its commitment to begin proceedings quickly. Negotiations resumed between Senegal and the AU, which ultimately led to an agreement to create the Extraordinary African Chambers to conduct proceedings within the Senegalese judicial system. On December 17, the Senegalese National Assembly adopted a law establishing the special chambers. On February 8, 2013, the Extraordinary African Chambers were inaugurated in Dakar.

24. What is the significance of Habré’s prosecution under universal jurisdiction?

As demonstrated by the Habré case, universal jurisdiction is an important safety net to ensure that suspects of atrocities do not enjoy impunity in a third state when they cannot be prosecuted before the courts of the country where the crimes were allegedly committed or before an international court. There has been an increase in the use of universal jurisdiction over the past 20 years, notably but not exclusively by courts in European countries. To strengthen the fight against impunity for the most serious crimes, it is critical for courts on all continents to use universal jurisdiction. The African Union has encouraged its member states to adopt legislation to give their national courts universal jurisdiction over war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide and has taken steps to initiate a network of national prosecutors working on war crimes cases.  Several investigations have been open in South Africa and Senegal on the basis of universal jurisdiction.

25. How does this trial fit into critiques of the role of international justice in Africa and claims that universal jurisdiction cases target Africans?

Habré’s trial is an important step forward in African states taking responsibility to prosecute serious international crimes. However, the Habré trial does not negate the importance of the ICC and the use of universal jurisdiction by non-African states, including European courts, for crimes committed in Africa. These tools are often the only available hope for justice for African victims.

It is a reality that international justice has been applied unevenly. Powerful countries and their allies have often been able to avoid justice when serious crimes are committed on their territories, notably by failing to ratify the ICC treaty and wielding their political influence at the UN Security Council.

Nongovernmental organizations have actively campaigned for African governments to work to improve international justice and its reach —as opposed to undermining it— to limit impunity for atrocities.

26. Why was it necessary to create special chambers with an international element?

Habré’s complaint with the ECOWAS Court of Justice in October 2008, contended that his trial in Senegal, on the basis of Senegal’s 2007-08 legislative changes, would violate the prohibition against retroactive application of criminal law.

On November 18, 2010, the ECOWAS court ruled that to avoid violating the principle of non-retroactivity, Habré would have to be tried before a “special ad hoc procedure of an international character.” International law experts have questioned the ECOWAS court decision because the prosecution of acts that, at the time of their commission, were already prohibited by international conventions and customary law does not violate the principle of non-retroactivity. In this case, examples include torture, war crimes and crimes against humanity. In its 2012 decision, the ICJ made clear that Senegal was under an obligation to investigate and prosecute torture allegations against Habré since it had ratified the UN Convention on Torture in 1987.

Nonetheless, Senegal complied with the ECOWAS court ruling by creating the Extraordinary African Chambers, a “special ad hoc procedure of an international character.” 

In April 2013, Habré’s lawyers filed a new application with the ECOWAS court seeking the suspension of the chambers’ activities. In a November 5, 2013 decision, the court held that it did not have jurisdiction to rule on the application because the chambers were established under a treaty between Senegal and the African Union. 

27. Why isn’t Habré prosecuted in Chad?

Chad never sought Habré’s extradition, and there are serious doubts that Habré could get a fair trial in Chad, where he has already been sentenced to death in absentia for his alleged role in a 2008 rebellion. In July 2011, President Wade threatened to expel Habré to Chad but, days later, retracted his decision in the face of an international outcry over the risk that Habré would be mistreated or even killed.

28. Why can’t the International Criminal Court prosecute Habre?

The International Criminal Court only has jurisdiction over crimes committed after July 1, 2002, when its statute entered into effect. The crimes of which Hissène Habré is accused took place between 1982 and 1990.

Topic

• International Justice

• Français

August 30, 2015 (JUBA) – The Japanese ambassador to South Sudan, Kiya Masahiko, concluded a visit to South Sudan's Upper Nile state last week to show solidarity with the refugees and appreciate the impact of Japan's aid contribution to their living conditions.

Sudanese refugees wait to board a truck heading to Batil refugee camp in South Sudan's Upper Nile state on 15 July 2012 (Photo: Paula Bronstein/Getty Images)

A delegation of local authorities and partner organisations, including the country representative of the United Nations refugee agency (UNHCR), Ahmed Warsame accompanied Masahiko.

During the trip, the Japanese envoy reportedly visited some of the projects funded by the government of Japan in Doro camp, including classrooms at the Nur primary school, a solar-power borehole and the mud-plastered transitional shelters for vulnerable refugees.

Masahiko, UNHCR said, also visited Maban county hospital, which has been equipped with a X-ray room, two operating theatres, three paediatric wards and a pharmacy over the last two years, courtesy of funding from donors, including Japan.

"This hospital serves more than 200,000 people from the refugee and host communities and remains the only functioning hospital in the entirety of Upper Nile State since the start of the conflict in December 2013," UNHCR said in a statement.

Japan, UNHCR's second largest donor globally has reportedly contributed more than $16 million since 2014 to support UN refugee agency's efforts to protect and assist refugees and extend a helping hand to host communities in the world's youngest nation.

"Japan's support has been key in improving the living conditions of tens of thousands of Sudanese refugees who have found shelter in camps in Upper Nile and Unity states as well as many South Sudanese living within and around Maban camps," said Warsame.

"We were able to build better shelters for families and ensure higher standards in health, water, sanitation and education," he added.

The Japanese envoy reportedly met the refugee leaders to hear the concerns of their community. Access to higher education, health care, food and shelters were said to be top priorities for the refugees as do Internet connectivity for education and access to labor-saving modern farm technologies like tractors to increase agricultural production.

"Resources are limited, but we are committed to continue our support for refugees and host communities in South Sudan," said ambassador Masahiko.

"It is important that the contribution of the people of Japan reaches the most needy refugees and makes substantive improvements in their livelihoods," he stressed.

Currently, South Sudan reportedly has some 265,000 refugees of which nearly 90% are from South Kordofan and Blue Niles states and live in Unity and Upper Nile state camps. The remaining 10% are refugees from the Democratic Republic of Congo, the Central African Republic and Ethiopia who live mostly in Central and Western Equatoria state.

(ST)

August 30, 2015 (RUMBEK) – Two former Members of Parliament (MPs) in South Sudan's Lakes state, called for peace and reconciliation among rival communities after they were released last week in the state capital, Rumbek, after 10 months in prison without charges.

Marik Nanga Marik at the right and Isaac Makur Buoc Apac at the left speaking to press at Rumbek airstrip upon their arrival from Yirol west on 25 August 2015 (Photo ST)

Thousands of people including relatives and friends on Sunday gathered in the house of Isaac Makur Buoc, one of the released MPs, to thank South Sudan's president Salva Kiir for having instructed state authorities for their release.

MP Isaac Makur Buoc, representing Rumbek East county constituency number 13, was released with his colleague, Marik Nanga Marik, representing constituency number 2, on 22 August, 2015 in the county.

The two lawmakers spent over 300 days in jail and released without charges after president Kiir intervened late.

Speaking during the thanksgiving event, Buoc urged Rumbek East population to advocate for peace and reconciliation within their family members. Buoc He said talking for peace was the best tool to wed for peaceful future.

He encouraged his supporters to work hard for putting platform for peace instead of allow revenge and counter-revenge in the community.

Marik Nanga Marik, flanked his colleague and urged residents to be valiant in putting peace first than supporting personal interests that divide state inhabitants.

He described his arrest as normal and urged his supporters to support national government to implement the peace deal signed by South Sudan's president Kiir and the armed opposition leader, Riek Machar.

“Work in support [of the] recent peace signed by president Kiir – your goal now must be to build peace if you really supported me- supported national government with your heart and soul. We need peace so that our children could harvest nice future,” he said.

The thanksgiving ceremony was attended by top government officials.
Lakes state has been in cycle of revenge killings and unlawful arrests of civil activists and politicians with public losing interest in the current state administration led by military caretaker governor, Major General Matur Chut Dhoal, who also survived the recent reshuffle.

(ST)

August 30, 2015 (KHARTOUM) - Sudanese president Omer al-Bashir on Sunday issued a decision to form a fact-finding committee to investigate the circumstances of a brawl between members of two factions of a former rebel group signatory of the Doha Document for Peace in Darfur (DDPD).

The chairman of Darfur Regional Authority and NLJP leader Tijani El-Sissi (Reuters)

On Wednesday 26 August members of the Liberation and Justice Party (LJP), led by Bahar Idriss Abu Garda fought with members of National Liberation and Justice Movement (NLJP) led by Tijani al-Sissi during the launch ceremony for Phase II of development projects in Darfur in the Sudanese capital.

The LJP supporters came to contest the legitimacy of the attribution of 640 development projects and reiterated accusations of corruption for the NLJP led Darfur Regional Authority (DRA).

The presidential decree provides that the committee should investigate with the official and non-official persons involved in the incident, the circumstances and motivations of this unprecedented development in the conflict between the two parties.

LJP and the Justice and Equality Movement -Dabajo (JEM-Dabajo) call on president Bashir to appoint a new chairman for the regional authority and to be equally represented in the DRA which controlled by al-Sissi's pary.

The decree appointed the minister of justice Hassan Awad, as chairman of the committee and the minister of the federal affairs Faisal Hassan Ibrahim, and the deputy chief justice Idris Awad al-Majid as members.

The three member investigation body had to submit its findings to the president within a week from the date of the presidential decision.

BOYCOTT OF RDA

In a related development, LJP and the JEM-Dabajo ministers in the DRA decided to boycott the meetings of the regional body till an expected reshuffle takes place.

The two political groups are expected to hold a press conference to explain their decision.

The DRA chairman Sissi on Sunday headed a meeting of the regional authority at its headquarters in Khartoum with the participation of the five governors of Darfur states.

DRA information minister Abdel Karim Musa told reporters that the meeting stressed the government's determination to enforce all the 1071 development projects in Darfur.

Musa disclosed that the federal finance ministry approved 900 million pounds for the implementation of the second phase of recovery and development projects.

(ST)

August 30, 2015 (JUBA) - A group of defected rebel officials in South Sudan conflict have rejected a recently signed peace deal between the government of President Salva Kiir and the rebel faction under former vice president, Riek Machar, demanding that peace renegotiations between warring parties should take place inclusive of their group.

Gabriel Changson Chang (ST Photo)

The group calling itself Federal Democratic Party (FDP) with it military wing South Sudan Armed Forces (SSAF), an army pending name they borrowed from the South Sudan's transitional constitution is led by former national minister of youth, culture and sports, Gabriel Changson Chang.

The group called upon the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) to adopt a new strategy in the peace negotiation.

“We in the federal democratic [party] and South Sudan armed forces believe that the IGAD must adopt a new strategy in the peace negotiation. We believe that in order to bring a lasting peace to South Sudan, all parties and stakeholders in the conflict must be included in the peace talks so that any agreement reached by [parties] must [be] owned by South Sudanese,” the statement dated August 29, 2015 reads in part.

The statement criticized IGAD, an east African bloc, which mediated the end to more than 20 months conflict in the country, for allegedly restricting negotiations “to a few favoured clients are contrary to the spirit of peace.”

IGAD, according to the statement, must allow open discussion of the root causes that triggered the conflict. It expressed doubt whether president Salva Kiir and opposition leader Riek Machar will be able to work together after “failing to gain trust despite working for eight years in the same government.”

“Both president and Dr. Riek Machar worked with each other for eight years and could not trust each other. It is doubtful whether these leaders will invent or generate any trust between them in the short period of transitional period,” he Changson said.

“Due to this mistrust between the two leaders, it remains to be seen whether the Juba massacre will not repeat itself,” he further predicted.

He claimed that the peace agreement between Kiir and Machar failed to recognize the Juba massacre and this “is very disappointing to the Nuer ethnic group in general and the families of the massacred people in particular.”

However, the peace agreement provided for compensation and reparation of the victims of the massacre in Juba and in other areas. A report by the African Union's Peace and Security Council also addressed the Juba massacre and to hold those responsible to account once it is released during the implementation of the peace deal.

But Changson further predicted that rivalry between the two major communities of Dinka and Nuer may continue.

“This shows lack of respect for the dead and this can heighten the sentiments that can threaten reconciliation and healing between the Nuer and the Dinka ethnic groups,” he argued.

The statement further added that imposed peace hardly changes the attitude and behaviours of people involved in the conflict, thus demanding the need to involve all the stakeholders in negotiations.

“In condemning this agreement, we are aware and convinced that this imposed peace will not alleviate the suffering of our people. We have learnt from the history that imposed agreement do not change attitude and behaviours of people previously in conflict. It is only when agreement and reconciliation are concluded through free wills of the people that commitment and respect for those agreement is upheld,” he added.

(ST)

August 30, 2015 (ADDIS ABABA) – President Yowerei Museveni of Uganda has held unexpected high profile meeting with a high level delegation from the South Sudan's armed opposition faction under the leadership of former vice president, Riek Machar, days after a peace deal was signed by two warring parties in South Sudan.

Ugandan president Yoweri Museveni chairs a meeting with SPLM-IO delegation (R) in Kampala, August 29, 2015 (Photo ST)

The SPLM-IO said the meeting took place in the Ugandan capital, Kampala, on Saturday following an invitation extended to the former rebel group after signing of a final peace agreement with president Salva Kiir, which was brokered by the East African regional bloc, IGAD, and its international partners.

“Our Chairman and Commander-in-Chief, Comrade Dr. Riek Machar Teny-Dhurgon, dispatched a high level delegation to Kampala and met with President Yoweri Museveni,” Machar's spokesman, James Gatdet Dak, told Sudan Tribune on Sunday.

“They met President Museveni on Saturday and the meeting was cordial,” Dak said, but declined to provide details of the outcome of the meeting.

He however said the high profile interaction discussed a wide range of issues on implementation of the peace agreement and relations between Kampala and the opposition group.

South Sudan's opposition has since last year opened an office in the Ugandan capital and dispatched a representative based in Kampala to deal with humanitarian issues and build on mending relations between the two.

The 10-member opposition delegation was led by the deputy chairman and deputy commander-in-chief of the Sudan Peoples' Liberation Movement/Army in opposition, General Alfred Ladu Gore.

(ST)

August 30, 2015 (RUMBEK) – A renowned youth activists have been killed in Rumbek East county of South Sudan's Lakes state, relatives and officials told Sudan Tribune.

Map detail showing South Sudan's Lakes state in red

Makuer Bol was reportedly killed last Saturday night in Cueicok payam.

A Criminal Investigation Department said a team was dispatched to probe the incident

“Although Makuer was the most influential youth member, he never took sides in all cycles of revenge occurring in Lakes state,” the officer, who preferred anonymity, said.

Meanwhile, unknown gunmen reportedly killed a primary eight pupil along with his father in Mabui village near Rumbek airstrip on Friday night.

Dut Makat's father, Makat Moon was a soldier in the army's division six headquarters.

The state government has intensified the search for the suspected gunmen believed to be from Rup section of Rumbek Central county.

Lakes state has experienced waves of violence following the unsolved murder of paramount chief Apareer Chut Dhuol, an elder brother of the embattled caretaker governor, Matur Chut Dhoul.

There have been growing demands among Lakes state residents for Dhuol's removal, but President Salva Kiir has overlooked these calls.

Local police say state authorities have become increasingly isolated, with the public refusing to share information with law enforcement officers, making it difficult to maintain law and order in the region.

(ST)

By Tesfa-Alem Tekle

August 30, 2015 (ADDIS ABABA) – South Sudanese musicians in Ethiopia stage a concert in the Ethiopian capital, Addis Ababa to celebrate the final peace agreement signed by the two warring factions in the world's youngest nation.

South Sudan's President Salva Kiir (seated) signs a peace agreement in Juba, August 26, 2015. (Photo Reuters/Jok Solomu)

South Sudan peace ambassador, Gatwech Koak Nyuon, who chief guest, opened the concert held on Saturday at Gerji community hall in Addis Ababa.

Gatwech made presentations on truth, reconciliation and healing and also awarded top artists.

The Chairperson for South Sudan Artists Association in Ethiopia (SSAAE), Khor Deng Jang, welcomed the signed peace accord to end 20 months long conflict in South Sudan.

"I welcome the peace signed by the president [Salva Kiir] and Dr. [Riek] Machar" Jang elaborated at the closed ceremony.

Khor urged the IGAD-Plus and the international community to help implement the peace process.

In a joint communiqué, the South Sudanese called on IGAD-Plus, the international community as well as on all South Sudanese in the diasporas and at home to keep working together and help the leaders of the parties on implementation process.

They also urged leaders of the two South Sudanese warring factions to quickly establish truth, healing and reconciliation commission as it was done in South Africa.

The musicians further stressed a need for the religious communities to preach for peace and love to bring all South Sudanese communities together as one united family.

The South Sudanese artists planned to compose new songs which are noble to peace so that war affected South Sudanese hurt in this ongoing crisis are healed from trauma.

Over 800 people attended the concert organised by South Sudanese artists in Ethiopia.

Although the two rivals inked a final peace deal which brought hope for permanent ceasefire, some South Sudanese in Addis Ababa, however, still doubt on its implementation citing at least seven ceasefire agreements which were broken quickly.

But thousands of South Sudanese residing at refugee camps in Ethiopia are still hoping to return back home soon to rejoin their families. Since conflict in South Sudan erupted in December 2013, over 200,000 South Sudanese crossed borders into Ethiopia.

The international community has threatened to impose tougher measures on any party that fails to implement the peace agreement initiated by the IGAD-Plus mediators.

(ST)

August 30, 2015 (KHARTOUM) -Sudan's president Omer Hassan al-Bashir has officially rejected the call of the African Union (AU) to hold a pre-dialogue meeting in Addis Ababa, saying he wants the dialogue to be an exclusive Sudanese process.

Sudanese president Omer Hassan al-Bashir (TIKSA NEGERI/REUTERS)

Last week, the AU Peace and Security Council (AUPSC) reiterated its call for an urgent pre-national dialogue meeting of all Sudan's relevant parties, at the AU headquarters in Addis Ababa, to discuss and agree on procedural matters relating to the dialogue.

Bashir, who addressed the army officers, non-commissioned officers and soldiers at the Wadi Siedna military compound on Sunday, said his government refuses to hold the dialogue abroad, stressing that the AU, United Nations and the United States can't force the Sudanese government to hold the national dialogue abroad.

He said that doors are open for all parties to discuss ways for resolving Sudan's problems without foreign tutelage, warning rebels groups against insistence on resorting to arms to resolve outstanding issues.

Bashir said the coming year would be the year for achieving a decisive peace, pointing they offer the full opportunity for all parties to engage in the dialogue.

“We are authorized to wage war against those who refuse to engage in the dialogue,” he added.

In the same context, Sudan's foreign minister, Ibrahim Ghandour, told the Swedish ambassador to Khartoum, Mette Sunnergren, that his government would not accept to hold any dialogue conference abroad.

In a meeting held on Sunday, Ghandour informed the Swedish diplomat that his government wants the dialogue to be "an exclusive Sudanese process", pointing that Sudan coordinates with the AUPSC and the AU High Implementation Panel (AUHIP) only as partners who offer opinion and efforts to ensure the success of the process.

In September 2014, the peace and security body endorsed a roadmap aiming to facilitate the national dialogue. It provides to hold a national dialogue preparatory meeting in Addis to agree on issues related to the process.

But before they have to negotiate a cessation of hostilities immediately followed by security arrangements.

Bashir launched the national dialogue initiative more than a year and a half ago in which he urged opposition parties and rebels alike to join the dialogue table to discuss all the pressing issues.

But the initiative faced serious setbacks in wake of the government's refusal to create suitable atmosphere in the country leading several major participants to pull out.

OPPOSITION CONDEMNS GOVERNMENT STANCE

RNM leader Ghazi Salah Eddin Attabani speaks in a press conference held in Khartoum on 30 August 2015 (Photo ST)

Meanwhile, the leader of the opposition Reform Now Movement (RNM), Ghazi al-Attabani, described the government refusal to participate in the pre-dialogue meeting as “irrational and unsustainable”.

Attabani, who spoke in a press conference held by the Alliance of National Forces (ANF) including the political forces which withdrew from the government-led dialogue on Sunday, said the government would be forced to change its position sooner or later, wondering why it drags its feet on accepting the pre-dialogue meeting while it engages in external negotiations on its entire affairs.

He called on the Sudanese government to stop political manoeuvring on the issue of holding the dialogue inside Sudan, accusing it of trying to portray the opposition forces as seeking to hold the dialogue abroad.

“On the contrary, all political forces are committed to hold an exclusive Sudanese dialogue inside the Sudan”, he added.

RNM leader pointed that some opposition forces agreed to initiate the dialogue by holding a preparatory meeting abroad, describing the AUPSC call for the dialogue as “historic and unprecedented”.

He said the government will be the losing party if it insists on rejecting the AUPSC call for holding the pre-dialogue meeting, warning against underestimating the African support for Sudan.

Attabani further pointed if Africa withdrew its support for Sudan, the government would be exposed to international pressures and would be forced to engage in the dialogue at a higher cost than any genuine dialogue among the sons of Sudan.

He pointed that the recent AUPSC communiqué shows that the regional body was visibly irritated by the procrastination of the Sudanese government in taking the right steps to conduct a genuine and comprehensive dialogue.

“[The AUPSC] is standing one step away from declaring that the ongoing dialogue is worthless because it doesn't meet the minimum standards of political dialogue that have been implemented in similar experiences,” he said.

Attabani demanded the government to immediately respond to calls made by the “Sudan Call” forces for stopping the war, urging it to engage in serious talks to achieve a cessation of hostilities that leads to a comprehensive ceasefire.

“It would be futile to talk about political reform or national dialogue or to address Sudan's economic or regional and international relations crises while the war is ongoing,” he added.

ANF spokesperson, Taha Abdallah Yassin, for his part, said that failure of the government to put the dialogue in the right track would force them to resort the alternative dialogue project which they had agreed to launch with the rebel umbrella Sudan Revolutionary Forces (SRF).

He added the alternative dialogue will be based on the consensus of the entire Sudanese people, saying its outcome would form the basis of the national constitution.

NFC CALLS FOR UPRISING

In a related development, the opposition alliance National Consensus Forces (NCF) issued a statement saying that past and current developments prove they prove right their long-standing position that the government is not serious in its call for a negotiated solution for the country's issues.

"As the regime has rejected all the requirements and objective conditions for dialogue, the choice of the National Consensus Forces (...) is to overthrow the regime through a popular uprising, political strike and civil disobedience, and total rejection of any settlement aiming to maintain this system," the alliance of the left forces said.

The statement underscored that in line with Berlin Declaration, the opposition forces have to stop seeking a negotiated solution and to work altogether in a popular uprising to topple down the regime of President Omer al-Bashir.

RNM DENIES CONTACTS

RNM deputy chairman Hassan Rizq denied they were being contacted by the ruling National Congress Party (NCP) to resume participation in the ongoing dialogue, accusing NCP leaders of turning a deaf ear to other political forces.

It is worth mentioning that the RNM pulled out of the dialogue last year blaming the NCP for its refusal to implement a number of confidence building measures aimed at creating a conducive environment before the start of the process.

Rizq called on the Sudanese government to listen to the voice of reason and avoid any confrontation with the AUPSC in order not to prevent transfer of the dossier to the UN Security Council.

“It is the duty of the wise men (within the government) to rein in those who seek to drag Sudan to this confrontation (with the AUPSC) ,” he added.

(ST)

August 30, 2015 (KHARTOUM) - At the end of a five-day visit to Khartoum, the United States Special Envoy to Sudan and South Sudan, Donald E. Booth, has expressed regret for not being able to visit Darfur, saying he hopes to visit the restive region soon.

Sudan's FM Ibrahim Ghandour (R- center) meets with the visiting U.S. special envoy Donald Booth in Khartoum on 26 August 2015 (Photo ST)

“I was regrettably unable to make my planned visit to Darfur, but look forward to re-scheduling that visit soon”, Booth said in a statement released on Sunday at the conclusion of his first visit to Sudan since nearly two years ago.

“Instead we engaged with leaders of the United Nations-African Union Mission in Darfur (UNAMID), humanitarian actors, and other Darfuri officials on issues of security, inter-communal conflict, and crime, as well as delivery of life-saving assistance, and reconciliation efforts”, he added.

The American envoy didn't mention the reasons that have prevented him from visiting Darfur and whether the Sudanese authorities refused to allow him to visit the region which has been the scene of a deadly conflict between the government and rebel groups since 2003.

Following his arrival in Khartoum on Tuesday, Booth held talks with Sudan's foreign minister, Ibrahim Ghandour, on Saturday but a wall of secrecy has been dropped around it.

The American envoy welcomed the government of Sudan's stated intent to implement a two-month cessation of hostilities and encouraged it “to extend the timeframe and couple it with a negotiated and mutually acceptable mechanism for humanitarian access in order to develop confidence in, and an environment conducive to, an inclusive political dialogue process”.

He further said they will likewise engage opposition actors on these critical issues.

The US envoy pointed they engaged the government of Sudan on the full range of issues that frame the bilateral relationship , adding that the visit also included constructive discussions with civil society representatives, business leaders, political parties, humanitarian actors, and other Sudanese citizens.

He said that discussions with the Sudanese government addressed the need for an open national political dialogue to address the root causes of Sudan's persistent internal conflicts, and to realize more inclusive governance arrangements.

“We exchanged views on security concerns, protection of civilians, and improving humanitarian access to conflict-affected populations,” he added.

Booth pointed out that discussions also covered economic issues such as Sudan's outstanding debt, sanctions, and ways of utilizing the important sanctions exemptions that have been granted for the benefit of the Sudanese people.

The American envoy expressed hope to return to Sudan to advance dialogue on issues of mutual interest and concern.

Sudan has been on the U.S. list of states that sponsor terrorism since 1993, even though the two countries have strengthened their counter-terrorism cooperation since the September 2001 attacks on Washington and New York.

Washington also imposed economic and trade sanctions on Sudan in 1997 in response to its alleged connection to terror networks and human rights abuses. In 2007, it strengthened the embargo, citing abuses in Darfur which it says constitutes genocide.

The resumption of dialogue between the two countries come after an agreement reached last February with the then presidential assistant Ibrahim Ghandour on the framework of discussion over normalisation of bilateral relations.

Khartoum in the past said talks should be based on mutual interests and refused Washington's approach linking between the resolution of internal conflicts and lift of sanctions.

DISCUSSIONS WITH BUSINESSPERSON ON SANCTIONS' EFFECTS

One of the events that marked the visit was a meeting held on Thursday 27 August by an American technical team accompanying the U.S. special envoy with Sudanese business community to discuss the negative impact of sanctions on the goods exempted from sanctions.

The vice-president of Sudanese Businessmen and Employers Federation (SBEF) Youssef Ahmed Youssef who took part in the workshop told reporters that the meeting comes in line with the dialogue that Sudanese private sector engaged since several years with American embassy to consider ways to relieve them from the impact of the embargo.

"The workshop discussed the complexities inherent to financial and banking transactions in the sectors exempted from the American sanctions, which now impact the banking dealings with Asian and European banks that were dealing with Sudan," he said.

Sudanese businessmen say that international banks systematically block their transactions because they fear to be prohibited by trade embargoes and sanctions rules. They add that the foreign and even American banks ignore the list of exemptions granted by the OFAC during the past years.

The members of the visiting technical team vowed to exert the necessary efforts to facilitate the implementation of exemptions decided for the benefit of Sudanese people.

In 1997 when the American Administration decide to punish the Sudanese regime for its support of terrorism. The original bill terminated all commercial activities with Sudan but it exempted only one product, Gum Arabic as result of pressures exerted by American industrial groups who wanted to secure their access to this natural product .

Ten years later in 2007 , Washington strengthened the embargo, citing abuses in Darfur which it labelled as genocide. However to ease its negative impact on the ordinary people, the United States Office of Foreign Asset Control (OFAC) since 2010 amended the bill several times and added more exemptions to the list, including agriculture equipment, educational exchange programs and scholarships, personal communications hardware and software including smart phones and laptops.

August 30, 2015 (ADDIS ABABA) – South Sudanese opposition faction of the Sudan Peoples' Liberation Movement (SPLM-IO) said their leader, Riek Machar, who is a designated first vice president in accordance with peace deal with president Salva Kiir, will have bodyguards in the capital, Juba, contrary to what some media outlets said to the contrary.

Riek Machar gestures as he speaks to rebel General Peter Gatdet Yaka (not seen) in a rebel controlled territory in Jonglei on February 1, 2014. (Photo Reuters/Goran Tomasevic)

Machar's spokesman, James Gatdet Dak, said what was reported in the media was a misinterpretation of Article 5 of the Transitional Security Arrangements in the accord which the two leaders signed on 17 and 26 August 2015, to end the 20-month long civil war in the country.

“That is a misinterpretation of Article 5.1.1. of the Peace Agreement. Presidential guards which are provided for in the Transitional Security Arrangement means guards for top leaders of the two parties,” he told Sudan Tribune on Sunday.

Article 5 of the Transitional Security Arrangements stipulates that forces shall be redeployed by a radius of 25km outside Juba, but with exception of presidential guards and forces to protect military barracks, bases and warehouses as well as joint integrated police drawn from the two sides.

This was a revision from the first IGAD Plus peace compromise proposal of 25 July which gave president Kiir 265 bodyguards and Machar with 195 bodyguards in the capital.

But Dak explained that Article 5.1.1. which provides for presidential guards in the capital meant the combined guards for the two rival leaders and not exclusively for president Kiir.

He further said the IGAD Plus compromise agreement removed the proposed size and composition of the presidential guards for the two leaders and left it to the two parties to determine it in a workshop that will be organized in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, in September in implementation of the security arrangements.

He also said the two parties will determine the size and composition of military forces that will remain in Juba to protect military barracks, bases and warehouses as well as joint integrated police to be deployed in Juba, Malakal, Bor and Bentiu in addition to other unspecified areas.

(ST)

August 30, 2015 (JUBA) - Rival forces in South Sudan conflict have issued statements counter-accusing each other of violations of the permanent ceasefire hours after it came into effect on Saturday midnight as declared by president Salva Kiir and armed opposition leader, Riek Machar.

Soldiers from the South Sudan army (SPLA) patrol the streets in the Upper Nile state capital, Malakal, on 21 January 2014 (Photo: AFP/Charles Lomodong)

The spokesperson of the government forces, Colonel Phillip Aguer, issued a series of statements on Saturday evening and again on Sunday, accusing forces loyal to the former vice president, Riek Machar, to have carried out attack on positions held by forces allied to president Kiir in Malakal town.

The intention of the rebels attack on the government forces, according to Aguer, was to gain more territories which they were seeking to use as assembling points in the event peace deal is implemented.

“Their intention is to gain more territories. This is the purpose of these attacks. That was why they attacked the positions of our forces in Malakal yesterday (Saturday) and again today (Sunday),” said Aguer.

“For us, our forces will not attack them but they have the right for self-defense,” he added.

However, the military officer revealed that the government had dispatched troops using river transports for delivery of military supplies to Malakal town, capital of the remaining oil producing Upper Nile state.

Spokesman of the leader of the armed opposition leader, Machar, on Saturday and Sunday said government forces moving with barges and gunboats from Juba to Malakal along the river Nile have been attacking their bases.

“Government forces have been attacking our bases along the river Nile. They attacked Tayer port on 26 August, the day President Kiir signed the peace Agreement. They attacked our base at Adok port on Friday as they continue to move northwards towards Malakal. Government forces in Malakal also shelled our base on the west bank,” said Machar's spokesman, James Gatdet Dak.

Government spokesman, Philip Aguer, admitted that government forces were moving along the river Nile through territories controlled by the rebels, warning that they will fire back in self-defense should they come under attack from the rebel forces.

Peter Adwok Nyaba, one of the leading figures in the armed opposition faction led by Machar confirmed separately that government forces on Sunday shot at one of their speed boats while traveling between Wau Shilluk and Watbajwok around Malakal, wounding one passenger.

“The information we have is that the government forces continued shelling Ditang, Bukieny, Obuwa and Lelo. Our forces did not return fire respecting the orders of the commander-in-chief Dr. Riek Machar to cease fire,” said Nyaba.

Dak also said their forces came under separate attacks on Sunday morning in their bases in Koch, Leer and Mayiandit counties, just hours after the ceasefire went into force.

NEW ACTING SPOKESMAN FOR SPLA-IO

Machar's spokesman, James Gatdet Dak, who has been handling both political and military issues as spokesman after defection of military spokesman, Brigadier General Lul Ruai Koang, to government, said there is now an acting military spokesman to handle military issues.

“I want to take this opportunity to introduce to you my colleague, Colonel William Gatjiath Deng, who has become our acting military spokesperson,” Dak said on Sunday while distributing to the media Colonel Deng's first press statement on the military situation after violation of the permanent ceasefire.

Brigadier General Lul Ruai Koang, who was military spokesperson for the rebels' military defected to the government this year. His deputy, Colonel James L. Thichot Ngundeng, who became the acting military spokesperson also defected from Machar with the group of Major General Peter Gatdet Yak and Major General Gathoth Gatkuoth.

Dak urged journalists to also establish contacts with the acting military spokesman, Deng, as he may be dealing mainly with political issues.

(ST)

August 29, 2015 (KHARTOUM) - The Speaker of the National Assembly and his parliamentary delegation have got their visas for the United States to attend the Fourth World Conference of Speakers of Parliament from next Monday.

The Conference will be held from Monday 31 August to Wednesday, 2 September 2015 at United Nations Headquarters in New York. It is convened by the Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU).

A member of the Sudanese parliament from the ruling National Congress Party Mohamed al-Hassan al-Amin, on Friday complained that there was a delay in their visa, pointing that the U.S embassy in Khartoum told them that their application was under process in Washington.

However the head of external relations committee at the National Assembly Mohamed Mustafa al-Daw confirmed on Saturday that the eight members of the Sudanese delegation have obtained their visas denying reports that Washington declined to issue it.

Daw said the U.S. embassy in Khartoum attributed the delay in the visa issuance to the complicated procedures used by the American authorities. He said there is a positive change in the bilateral relations and ruled out that there was a political decision to deny them the visa.

The parliamentary official was alluding to the presence since last Tuesday of the U.S. special envoy Donald Booth in Khartoum where he is conducting discussions with the Sudanese officials on bilateral relations.

He said that the Sudanese Parliamentary delegation will leave for the United States on Saturday evening.

The delegation is headed by the speaker Ibrahim Ahmed Omer, and includes former speaker Ahmed Ibrahim al-Taher, deputy speaker of the State Council Ibrahim Habani, three other MPs and administrative staff members.

The world speakers conference will be will be opened by UN chief Ban Ki-moon and Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU) president Saber Chowdhury.

The three-day conference is expected to adopt a draft declaration, titled "Placing democracy at the service of peace and sustainable development: Building the world the people want".

The conference will call to deploy greater efforts "in solving conflicts through political dialogue and negotiations, with full respect for international law"

SST)

August 29, 2015 (JUBA) - An alleged threat by the former governor of South Sudan's Warrap state, Nyandeng Malek against a local political commentator has drawn lots of criticisms from opponents and those opposed to the latter's leadership capabilities.

Ex-Warrap state governor Nyandeng Malek addresing SPLM members in Kwajok April 15, 2013 (ST)

Simon Yel Yel, currently a columnist with MordernGhana, an Accra-based website, told Sudan Tribune Malek threatened him through a phone call and demanded that he should prepare evidences of all corruption allegations labelled against her.

“She [Malek] called me on phone at 12:44 pm today and said be ready for me. I am normal citizen like you. I am no longer a governor. You will bring your papers to proof that corruption you claimed in investigations. You have been writing a lot of bad things about me in print and online media but this time I am no longer a governor and hence be ready for me. I was ignoring your article because I was a governor Nyandeng Malek," he said.

Yel said the former governor's action constituted a clear case of intimidation and threat to his life, stressing that she would be held responsible in case anything happen to him.

“To me, this is a threat because I don't know what she will do to me next. I don't apprehend what she really meant by saying be ready for me. This is act of intimidation".

The commentator said he didn't mean that Malek had stolen money in Warrap, but that his article was entirely about how local politicians in Warrap viewed the border state.

"I don't know why she is sensitive to hear corruption? I am ready if she wants to take me to court. My article was purely advice to caretaker governor of Warrap state and challenges ahead of him. If there is anything that happened to me then Nyandeng Malek will be responsible because being killed by unknown gunmen has become culture of smart killing in Juba now”, he said.

Yel, in a letter to the caretaker governor of Warrap, Akech Tong Aleu, claimed Malek had “arguably created a great gap of distrust between government, Warrap populations, state assembly and the SPLM party in the state. There is no link and trust between them at all".

"They see themselves as enemies and each work against the other”, he says in his letter.

“Mr. Governor, it is now your task to reunite the government with the SPLM party, state assembly and Warrap populations and build trust and teamwork among them once more”, it adds.

Yel further claimed many politicians in Warrap have totally misunderstood the meaning of Warrap and reasons why General Konggor Arop gave that name to the border state.

"Our local politicians have different version of Warrap state as they wrongly assume that Warrap state is War(pond or river) that is full of rap anyanjang(grain) where every constitutional post holder can fill his or her basket (gac) with rap anyanjang(grain) and goes away with it without being hold to account. They have got it totally wrong”, said Yel.

He also suggested, in his letter, that the present name of the border state be changed from Warrap to War alel in order to lessen rapid robbery of public funds because local politicians will not eat aleel(stones) again like the way they are eating rap now.

“Hon, don't bring us local politicians that see Warrap state as “ War rap” where they can fill their bellies and gaac (baskets) and go away without doing their constitutional obligations to the citizens. We need some things tangible to be done in Warrap in these three years”, emphasised Yel in his letter to the caretaker governor.

He said the former governor and her supporters simply misunderstood his writing to mean she corrupted the state government, leading to eventual failure to deliver services to the people thus contributing to her removal from the governorship, earlier this month.

(ST)

August 29, 2015 (KHARTOUM) – The Yemeni President Abd-Rabbuh Mansour Hadi began a two-day visit to Khartoum on Saturday for talks with his Sudanese counterpart Omer Hassan al-Bashir on the latest developments in Yemen and ways by which Khartoum can provide humanitarian assistance to the conflict-wrecked nation.

Yemen's President Abd-Rabbu Mansour Hadi interacts with Sudan's President Omer Hassan al-Bashir (R) at Khartoum August 29, 2015 (REUTERS/Mohamed Nureldin Abdallah)

Bashir underscored his government's support for Yemen in all fields "so that it can overcome this critical stage…and in order to bring security and peace for Yemenis".

At a joint news conference following their talks, Bashir said that Hadi "assured us on the status legitimacy in Yemen and their control over many areas and their steady advances".

For his part, Hadi said that the Yemeni people will not accept the transfer of Iranian Shiite rule to Yemen.

"The Yemeni people patiently endured 50 years of failed governments and Houthis want to import the failed experience of Iran,” he said.

“I already informed Abdul-Malik al-Houthi [their leader] that this cannot happen in Yemen," Hadi said before stressing that that Houthis are supported by only 10% of the population.

The Yemeni president said that his forces are progressing to regain control over all Yemeni provinces and will not allow the country to end up like Iraq, Syria, and Libya.

He said that he came to Sudan to thanks its leadership on being a "supporter of the constitutional legitimacy in Yemen".

Sudan is a member of the Saudi-led military coalition dubbed as “Operation Firmness Storm” against the Iranian-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen.

The operation which started last March aims to reinstate Hadi, who fled to Saudi Arabia, as president and flush rebels from main cities in Yemen.

After an apparent stalemate on the battlefield since the start of the military campaign, supporters of the Hadi managed to eject Houthi rebels from strategic city of Aden and four other southern provinces.

(ST)