Belgium v. Senegal – Limits of the Interpretation of the Convention against Torture
Abstract
The problem which existed between Belgium and Senegal regarding Senegal avoiding to judge or extradite former Chad president for massive crimes committed during the eight-year governance had an epilogue before the International Court of Justice (ICJ). Decision made by the ICJ in this dispute- Questions Relating to the Obligation to Prosecute or Extradite (Belgium v. Senegal) is very important from the prospective of few aspects. At the first place the ICJ proved once again that its judgments pushing the boundaries of international law. Consequently, the ICJ stressed the importance of respecting the principle stipulated by relevant international agreements, as in this case, the Convention against Torture. Furthemore, the judgement is the first in the history of the ICJ in which it found that a State had standing based on obligations erga omnes partes. This finding opened different questions and one of them is significantly enlargement of the number and types of cases that can be brought before the ICJ.
Besides, the ICJ analized nature and meaning of the obligations laid down in article 7 of the Convention- prosecute or extradite. In their memorials Belgium and Senegal had different interpretation of the principle aut dedere aut judicare. The ICJ resolved the dispute and has held that Article 7 of the Convention requires the State concerned to submit the case to its competent authorities for the purpose of prosecution, irrespective of the existence of a prior request for the extradition of the suspect.
However, if the State in whose territory the suspect is present has received a request for extradition in any of the cases envisaged in the provisions of the Convention, it can relieve itself of its obligation to prosecute by acceding to that request. It follows that the choice between extradition or submission for prosecution, pursuant to the Convention, does not mean that the two alternatives are to be given the same weight.
References
Barcelona Traction, Light and Power Company, Limited, Judgment, (Belgium v. Spain), I.C.J. Reports 1970;
Bassiouni, M.C. „International Crimes: Jus Cogens and Obligatio Erga Omnes”, 59 Law and Contemporary Problems, 1996, str. 63-74;
Bassiouni, M.C., and Wise, E., Aut Dedere Aut Judicare: The Duty to Extradite or Prosecute in International Law, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Dordrecht, 1995, str. 51-57;
Case Concerning the Arrest Warrant of 11 April 2000 (Democratic Republic of Congo v. Belgium) ICJ Reports (2002);
Case Concerning Questions of Interpretation and Application of the 1971 Montreal Convention Arising from the Aerial Incident at Lockerbie (Libyan Arab Jamahiriya v. United Kingdom) ICJ Reports (1992);
Décision de la Cour de Cassation, Senegal (mart 2001);
Goodwin-Gill „Crime in International Law: Obligations Erga Omnes and the Duty to Prosecute”, u Goodwin-Gill i Talmon (eds), The Reality of International Law; Essays in Honour of Ian Brownlie, Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1999, str. 198-223;
Degan Vladimir Đuro, Pavišić Berislav, Beširević Violeta, Međunarodno i transnacionalno krivično pravo, Pravni fakultet Univerziteta Union u Beogradu i Službeni glasnik, Beograd 2011;
Izveštaj Human Rights Watch- http://www.hrw.org/news/2012/03/29/habr-case-qa-belgium-v-senegal;
Kaseze Antonio, Međunarodno krivično pravo, Beogradski centar za ljudska prava, Beograd 2005;
Komitet UN protiv torture- slučaj Guengueng and Others v. Senegal (2006) AHRLR 56 (CAT 2006);
Konvencija UN protiv torture i drugih svirepih, nečovečnih i ponižavajućih kazni ili postupaka (1984);
Mitchell Claire, Aut Dedere, aut Judicare: The Extradite or Prosecute Clause in International Law, http://iheid.revues.org/301;
Questions relating to the obligation to prosecute or extradite (Belgium v. Senegal) (2012);
Statut Međunarodnog suda pravde (1945);
Ustav Senegala (2001)