Impunity on trial

Now that former Liberian President Charles Taylor has been flown off the continent to face charges of war crimes at The Hague, West Africans are turning their attention to another African leader who could face prosecution away from home.

Ex Chadian President Hissene Habre, who has been living in exile in Senegal since 1990, is waiting for the African Union (AU) to determine his fate during its annual summit next month in the Gambian capital Banjul.

Alleged victims of Habre’s eight-year regime filed charges of war crimes against him in Senegal and he was indicted in 2000. But then Senegalese courts ruled that he must be tried elsewhere. Habre’s alleged victims then turned to Belgium, where some of them lived, and Belgium indicted him last September.

But a Senegalese court early this year said it was not competent to rule on the case and turned the decision over to the AU.

Western nations and international donors are increasingly conditioning aid on respect for human rights and good governance. Analysts consider impunity to be a major impediment to development. They say without justice, there is no security, no rule of law, no transparency and little respect for human rights.

Governments, including those in Africa, appear to have taken note.

“I think there has been a real sea change,” said Reed Brody, special counsel for New York-based Human Rights Watch. “There’s no doubt that around the world justice is on the march.”

He pointed to Charles Taylor as an example of leaders facing justice. Others include former Iraqi ruler Saddam Hussein, Yugoslavia’s Slobodan Milosevich and Chile’s Augusto Pinochet.

Some have dubbed Habre the “Pinochet of Africa.” Pinochet presided over a military dictatorship for nearly 20 years, during which time thousands of government opponents were killed or disappeared. Habre is accused of murder, torture and other atrocities inflicted on thousands of people.

“I think the days when tyrants could brutalize their people and pillage their treasury and then meet up with their bank accounts in some other country is gone,” Brody said. “The question of justice is always on the table. One of the big resistances has been that of African leaders.”

But Brody said that the decision by Nigerian President Olusegun Obasanjo and Liberian President Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf to hand Taylor over to the Special Court for Sierra Leone last year might have broken a psychological barrier in terms of impunity for African leaders. Taylor had been living in exile in Nigeria since he was deposed in August 2003.

Local human rights advocates are more cynical.

“For the moment we can’t say that things have changed regarding the violation of human rights in Africa. There has been no court decision yet regarding Charles Taylor and the case of Hissene Habre is still being discussed,” said Fatou Kama, a lawyer with the Dakar-based African Meeting for the Defense of Human Rights (RADDHO).

“We can say there is an awareness - at least there is that. Today, African leaders know that they might appear in court and answer to accusations of human rights abuses,” Kama said.

The momentum for ending impunity in Africa began in 1994 with two pivotal events: the Rwandan genocide and the end of apartheid in South Africa.

South Africans established the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, which in 1996 began hearing cases of racial crimes committed by all sectors of society during the period of white minority rule. There were no prosecutions in an effort to promote reconciliation.

Rwanda and the United Nations formed the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda to try suspected perpetrators of the genocide.

Other nations followed.

Nigeria, Ghana, Liberia and Sierra Leone are among countries that established truth commissions to either heal the wounds inflicted under military regimes or during civil wars. With the backing of the United Nations, the Special Court for Sierra Leone was established. It indicted Charles Taylor and retains jurisdiction, but the trial will be held at The Hague because of fears that Taylor might attempt to destabilize the West African sub-region from his jail cell.

Although Taylor and Habre have recently grabbed headlines because of the international angle to their cases, they are not the only African leaders to face the courts.

Others have been summoned to tribunals in their own countries. They include Moussa Traore of Mali and Jean-Bedel Bokassa of the Central African Republic.

Traore was jailed for 11 years with his wife, Mariam, on corruption charges. They had been sentenced to death but those sentences were commuted to life imprisonment. They were pardoned in 2002.

Bokassa was arrested in 1986 and tried for treason, murder and embezzlement. He was sentenced to death, but the sentence was later commuted to life imprisonment and then to 20 years. Bokassa was released in 1993 under a general amnesty.

Ethiopia has been trying former leader Mengistu Haile Mariam in absentia on charges of genocide. A verdict has been postponed until next year. Mengistu has been living in exile in Zimbabwe since 1991.

Other long-serving African leaders repeatedly accused of human rights abuse include Uganda’s Idi Amin, who died in exile in Saudi Arabia in 2003, Zaire’s Mobutu Sese Seko, who died in exile in Morocco in 1997, and Togo’s Gnassingbe Eyadema, who died last year after nearly four decades in power.

As the reformed Organization of African Unity, the AU has sought to distance itself from its post-colonial predecessor’s reputation as a “dictators club.”

The AU is currently establishing an African Court on Human and People’s Rights, based in Arusha, Tanzania, comprised of 11 judges from around the continent. They will be sworn in during the AU summit in July. The court is not designed to try criminal cases or hold individuals accountable; its aim is to address human rights complaints against governments.

The AU chose seven jurists in June to study the Habre case and present recommendations at the AU summit. African heads of state will then determine Habre’s fate. Possible outcomes include a trial in Belgium, Senegal or another African country. Or, Habre could escape facing court altogether. Human Rights Watch says Habre would unlikely get a fair trial in Chad because the judiciary is weak and subject to executive influence. In addition, Habre's security could not be guaranteed.

“I think this is a chance for the AU to speak up for justice and against impunity,” said Brody. “Obviously, there is a reluctance by African leaders to send a former leader to Europe” to be tried, he said, alluding to Europe’s colonial legacy in Africa. “We think that if the African Union insists that Habre be tried in Africa that the best solution is to request Senegal to reverse itself and allow Habre to be tried there.”

But, he said, that is no guarantee that justice will be served. Brody said Habre has used millions of dollars that he allegedly took from the Chadian treasury to create a shield of protection in Senegal.

“It’s unfortunate because Senegal is a country that in many respects is the avant-garde in terms of democracy and human rights and it would be an honor for Senegal, it would be to Senegal’s credit, to hold the trial of Hissene Habre,” he said.

cs/ccr