-
Bangkok, Thailand 12 – 30 November 2012
STUDY MATERIALS PART III
Codification Division of the United Nations Office of Legal
Affairs
Copyright © United Nations, 2012
-
STUDY MATERIALS PART III
Table of Contents
Law of Treaties
Professor Pierre Bodeau-Livinec
* Outline 8
Legal instruments and documents
1. Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, 1969
For text, see The Work of the International Law Commission, 8th
ed., vol. II, p. 116
2. Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties between States and
International Organizations or between International Organizations,
1986For text, see The Work of the International Law Commission, 8th
ed., vol. II, p. 228
3. Guide to Practice on Reservations to Treaties, 2011
For text, see The Work of the International Law Commission, 8th
ed., vol. II, p. 452
Jurisprudence
4. Legal Consequences for States of the Continued Presence of
South Africa in Namibia(South West Africa) notwithstanding Security
Council Resolution 276 (1970),Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports
1971, p. 16, paras. 19-22
10
5. Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros Project (Hungary/Slovakia), Judgment,
I.C.J. Reports 1997,p. 7, paras. 92-115
14
6. Land and Maritime Boundary between Cameroon and Nigeria
(Cameroon v. Nigeria:Equatorial Guinea intervening), I.C.J. Reports
2002, p. 303, paras. 195-199 and247-268
22
7. Questions relating to the Obligation to Prosecute or
Extradite (Belgium v. Senegal),Judgment of 20 July 2012,
International Court of Justice, paras. 71-117
30
International Organizations
Professor Pierre Bodeau-Livinec
* Outline 40
Legal instruments and documents
1. Charter of the United Nations, 1945For text, see Charter of
the United Nations and Statute of the International Court of
Justice
http://www.un.org/en/documents/charter/http://www.un.org/en/documents/charter/http://untreaty.un.org/cod/avl/Documents/ILC/8th_E/Vol_II.pdfhttp://untreaty.un.org/cod/avl/Documents/ILC/8th_E/Vol_II.pdfhttp://untreaty.un.org/cod/avl/Documents/ILC/8th_E/Vol_II.pdf
-
2. Articles on the Responsibility of International Organizations
(United NationsGeneral Assembly Resolution 66/100 of 9 December
2011, Annex)
For text, see The Work of the International Law Commission, 8th
ed., vol. II, p. 494
3. Application of Palestine for admission to membership in the
United Nations,A/66/371-S/2011/592, 23 September 2011
42
4. Situation in Palestine, Office of the Prosecutor,
International Criminal Court,3 April 2012
46
Jurisprudence
5. Reparation for Injuries Suffered in the Service of the United
Nations, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 1949, p. 174For text, see
Study Materials Part I, Peaceful Settlement of Disputes, p. 110
6. Competence of the General Assembly for the Admission of a
State to theUnited Nations, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 1950,
p. 4
48
7. Difference Relating to Immunity from Legal Process of a
Special Rapporteur of the Commission on Human Rights, Advisory
Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 1999, p. 62For text, see Study Materials
Part II, State Jurisdiction and Immunities, p. 238
8. Judgment No. 2867 of the Administrative Tribunal of the
International LabourOrganization upon a Complaint Filed against the
International Fund for AgriculturalDevelopment, Advisory Opinion of
1 February 2012, International Court of Justice
54
9. Behrami and Behrami v. France and Saramati v. France, Germany
and Norway,Nos. 71412/01 and 78166/01, ECHR, 2 May 2007
76
http://untreaty.un.org/cod/avl/Documents/studymaterials/rcil-thailand/2012/Book1.pdfhttp://untreaty.un.org/cod/avl/Documents/studymaterials/rcil-thailand/2012/Book2.pdf
-
Bangkok, Thailand 15 November 2012
LAW OF TREATIES PROFESSOR PIERRE BODEAU-LIVINEC
Codification Division of the United Nations Office of Legal
Affairs
Copyright © United Nations, 2012
-
LAW OF TREATIES PROFESSOR PIERRE BODEAU-LIVINEC
Outline 8
Legal instruments and documents 1. Vienna Convention on the Law
of Treaties, 1969
For text, see The Work of the International Law Commission, 8th
ed., vol. II, p. 116
2. Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties between States and
International Organizations or between International Organizations,
1986
For text, see The Work of the International Law Commission, 8th
ed., vol. II, p. 228
3. Guide to Practice on Reservations to Treaties, 2011
For text, see The Work of the International Law Commission, 8th
ed., vol. II, p. 452
Jurisprudence
4. Legal Consequences for States of the Continued Presence of
South Africa in Namibia (South West Africa) notwithstanding
Security Council Resolution 276 (1970), Advisory Opinion, I.C.J.
Reports 1971, p. 16, paras. 19-22
10
5. Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros Project (Hungary/Slovakia), Judgment,
I.C.J. Reports 1997, p. 7, paras. 92-115
14
6. Land and Maritime Boundary between Cameroon and Nigeria
(Cameroon v. Nigeria: Equatorial Guinea intervening), I.C.J.
Reports 2002, p. 303, paras. 195-199 and 247-268
22
7. Questions relating to the Obligation to Prosecute or
Extradite (Belgium v. Senegal), Judgment of 20 July 2012,
International Court of Justice, paras. 71-117
30
-
LAW OF TREATIES: COURSE OUTLINE PROFESSOR PIERRE
BODEAU-LIVINEC
Selected issues
1. The Making of Treaties • The capacity to conclude
treaties
The Cameroon-Nigeria Case (2002)
• Formulating reservations to treaties The Guide to Practice on
Reservations to Treaties (ILC, 2011), a brief
overview
2. The Life of Treaties • Treaty interpretation
The Namibia Advisory Opinion (1971)
• Treaty implementation The Belgium-Senegal Case (2012)
3. The End of Treaties
• Causes for suspension or termination of treaties The
Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros Case (1997)
8
-
International Court of Justice
Legal Consequences for States of the Continued Presence of South
Africa in Namibia (South West Africa) notwithstanding
Security Council Resolution 276 (1970) Advisory Opinion
(excerpt)
I.C.J. Reports 1971
-
10
-
11
-
International Court of Justice
Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros Project (Hungary/Slovakia) Judgment
(excerpt)
I.C.J. Reports 1997
-
14
-
15
-
16
-
17
-
18
-
19
-
20
-
International Court of Justice
Land and Maritime Boundary between Cameroon and Nigeria
(Cameroon v. Nigeria: Equatorial Guinea intervening)
Judgment (excerpts)
I.C.J. Reports 2002
-
22
-
23
-
24
-
25
-
26
-
27
-
International Court of Justice
Questions relating to the Obligation to Prosecute or Extradite
(Belgium v. Senegal)
Judgment of 20 July 2012 (excerpt)
-
20 J
UIL
LE
T 2
012
AR
RÊ
T
QU
ES
TIO
NS
CO
NC
ER
NA
NT
LO
BL
IGA
TIO
N D
E P
OU
RS
UIV
RE
O
U D
EX
TR
AD
ER
(BE
LG
IQU
E c
. SÉ
NÉ
GA
L)
____
____
___
QU
ES
TIO
NS
RE
LA
TIN
G T
O T
HE
OB
LIG
AT
ION
TO
PR
OS
EC
UT
E
OR
EX
TR
AD
ITE
(BE
LG
IUMv. S
EN
EG
AL
)
20 J
UL
Y 2
012
JUD
GM
EN
T
- 2
7 -
6
9.
Th
e co
mm
on
in
tere
st i
n c
om
pli
ance
wit
h t
he
rele
van
t o
bli
gat
ion
s u
nd
er t
he
Co
nv
enti
on
agai
nst
To
rtu
re i
mp
lies
th
e en
titl
emen
t o
f ea
ch S
tate
par
ty t
o t
he
Co
nv
enti
on
to
mak
e a
clai
m
conce
rnin
g t
he
cess
atio
n o
f an
all
eged
bre
ach
by
ano
ther
Sta
te p
arty
. I
f a
spec
ial
inte
rest
wer
e
req
uir
ed f
or
that
pu
rpo
se,
in m
any
cas
es n
o S
tate
wo
uld
be
in t
he
po
siti
on
to
mak
e su
ch a
cla
im.
It
foll
ow
s th
at a
ny
Sta
te p
arty
to
th
e C
on
ven
tio
n m
ay i
nv
ok
e th
e re
spo
nsi
bil
ity
of
ano
ther
Sta
te p
arty
wit
h a
vie
w t
o a
scer
tain
ing
th
e al
leg
ed f
ailu
re t
o c
om
ply
wit
h i
ts o
bli
gat
ion
s er
ga
om
nes
pa
rtes
,
such
as
tho
se u
nd
er A
rtic
le 6
, p
arag
rap
h 2
, an
d A
rtic
le 7
, p
arag
rap
h 1
, o
f th
e C
on
ven
tion
, an
d t
o
bri
ng
th
at f
ailu
re t
o a
n e
nd
.
70.
For
thes
e re
ason
s, t
he
Co
urt
co
ncl
ud
es t
hat
Bel
giu
m,
as a
Sta
te p
arty
to
th
e C
on
ven
tio
n
agai
nst
To
rtu
re,
has
sta
nd
ing
to
in
vo
ke
the
resp
on
sib
ilit
y o
f S
eneg
al f
or
the
alle
ged
bre
ach
es o
f it
s
ob
lig
atio
ns
un
der
A
rtic
le 6
, p
arag
rap
h 2
, an
d
Art
icle
7,
par
agra
ph
1,
of
the
Co
nv
enti
on
in
th
e
pre
sent
pro
ceed
ings.
T
her
efo
re,
the
clai
ms
of
Bel
giu
m b
ased
on
th
ese
pro
vis
ion
s ar
e ad
mis
sib
le.
A
s a
con
seq
uen
ce,
ther
e is
no
nee
d f
or
the
Co
urt
to
pro
no
un
ce o
n w
het
her
Bel
giu
m a
lso
has
a sp
ecia
l in
tere
st
wit
h
resp
ect
to
Sen
egal
!s
com
pli
ance
w
ith
th
e re
lev
ant
pro
vis
ion
s o
f th
e
Co
nv
enti
on
in
th
e ca
se o
f M
r. H
abré
.
IV.T
HE
AL
LE
GE
D V
IOL
AT
ION
S O
F T
HE
CO
NV
EN
TIO
N A
GA
INS
T T
OR
TU
RE
7
1.
In i
ts A
pp
lica
tio
n i
nst
itu
tin
g p
roce
edin
gs,
Bel
giu
m r
equ
este
d t
he
Co
urt
to
ad
jud
ge
and
dec
lare
th
at S
eneg
al i
s ob
lig
ed t
o b
rin
g c
rim
inal
pro
ceed
ing
s ag
ain
st M
r. H
abré
an
d,
fail
ing
th
at,
to
extr
adit
e h
im t
o B
elg
ium
. I
n i
ts f
inal
su
bm
issi
on
s, i
t re
qu
este
d t
he
Co
urt
to
ad
jud
ge
and
dec
lare
that
Sen
egal
bre
ach
ed a
nd
co
nti
nu
es t
o b
reac
h i
ts o
bli
gat
ion
s u
nd
er A
rtic
le 6
, p
arag
rap
h 2
, an
d
Art
icle
7,
par
agra
ph
1,
of
the
Co
nv
enti
on
b
y
fail
ing
to
b
rin
g
crim
inal
p
roce
edin
gs
agai
nst
Mr.
Hab
ré,
un
less
it
extr
adit
es h
im.
7
2.
Bel
giu
m h
as p
oin
ted
o
ut
du
rin
g th
e p
roce
edin
gs
that
th
e o
bli
gat
ion
s d
eriv
ing
fr
om
Art
icle
5,
par
agra
ph
2,
Art
icle
6,
par
agra
ph
2,
and A
rtic
le 7
, p
arag
rap
h 1
, ar
e cl
ose
ly l
ink
ed w
ith
each
oth
er i
n t
he
con
tex
t o
f ac
hie
vin
g t
he
ob
ject
an
d p
urp
ose
of
the
Co
nv
enti
on
, w
hic
h a
cco
rdin
g
to i
ts P
ream
ble
is
"to m
ake
mo
re e
ffec
tiv
e th
e st
rug
gle
ag
ain
st t
ort
ure
#.
Hen
ce,
inco
rpo
rati
ng
th
e
app
rop
riat
e le
gis
lati
on
in
to d
om
esti
c la
w (
Art
icle
5,
par
agra
ph
2)
wo
uld
all
ow
th
e S
tate
in
wh
ose
terr
ito
ry a
susp
ect
is p
rese
nt
imm
edia
tely
to m
ake
a p
reli
min
ary
in
qu
iry
in
to t
he
fact
s (A
rtic
le 6
,
par
agra
ph 2
), a
nec
essa
ry s
tep
in
ord
er t
o e
nab
le t
hat
Sta
te,
wit
h k
no
wle
dg
e o
f th
e fa
cts,
to
su
bm
it
the
case
to
its
co
mp
eten
t au
tho
riti
es f
or
the
pu
rpose
of
pro
secu
tio
n (
Art
icle
7,
par
agra
ph
1).
73.
Sen
egal
co
nte
sts
Bel
giu
m!s
al
leg
atio
ns
and
co
nsi
der
s th
at
it
has
n
ot
bre
ach
ed
any
pro
vis
ion
of
the
Co
nv
enti
on
ag
ain
st T
ort
ure
. I
n i
ts v
iew
, th
e C
on
ven
tion
bre
aks
do
wn
th
e a
ut
ded
ere
aut
judic
are
ob
lig
atio
n i
nto
a s
erie
s o
f ac
tio
ns
wh
ich
a S
tate
sh
ou
ld t
ake.
S
eneg
al m
ain
tain
s
that
th
e m
easu
res
it
has
ta
ken
h
ith
erto
sh
ow
th
at
it
has
co
mp
lied
w
ith
it
s in
tern
atio
nal
com
mit
men
ts.
Fir
st,
Sen
egal
ass
erts
th
at i
t h
as r
eso
lved
no
t to
ex
trad
ite
Mr.
Hab
ré b
ut
to o
rgan
ize
his
tr
ial
and
to
tr
y h
im.
It
m
ain
tain
s th
at it
ad
op
ted
co
nst
itu
tio
nal
an
d le
gis
lati
ve
refo
rms
in
20
07
-20
08
, in
acc
ord
ance
wit
h A
rtic
le 5
of
the
Co
nven
tio
n,
to e
nab
le i
t to
ho
ld a
fai
r an
d e
qu
itab
le
tria
l o
f th
e al
leg
ed p
erp
etra
tor
of
the
crim
es i
n q
ues
tio
n r
easo
nab
ly q
uic
kly
. I
t fu
rth
er s
tate
s th
at i
t
30
-
- 2
8 -
has
tak
en m
easu
res
to r
estr
ict
the
lib
erty
of
Mr.
Hab
ré,
pu
rsu
ant
to A
rtic
le 6
of
the
Co
nv
enti
on
, as
wel
l as
mea
sure
s in
pre
par
atio
n f
or
Mr.
Hab
ré!s
tri
al,
con
tem
pla
ted
un
der
th
e ae
gis
of
the
Afr
ican
Un
ion
, w
hic
h m
ust
be
reg
ard
ed a
s co
nst
itu
tin
g t
he
firs
t st
eps
tow
ard
s fu
lfil
lin
g t
he
ob
lig
atio
n t
o
pro
secu
te l
aid
do
wn
in
Art
icle
7 o
f th
e C
on
ven
tio
n.
Sen
egal
ad
ds
that
Bel
giu
m c
ann
ot
dic
tate
pre
cise
ly h
ow
it
sho
uld
fu
lfil
its
co
mm
itm
ents
un
der
th
e C
on
ven
tio
n,
giv
en t
hat
ho
w a
Sta
te f
ulf
ils
an i
nte
rnat
ion
al o
bli
gat
ion
, p
arti
cula
rly
in
a c
ase
wh
ere
the
Sta
te m
ust
tak
e in
tern
al m
easu
res,
is
to
a v
ery
lar
ge
exte
nt
left
to
th
e d
iscr
etio
n o
f th
at S
tate
.
74
. A
lth
ou
gh
, fo
r th
e re
aso
ns
giv
en a
bo
ve,
th
e C
ou
rt h
as n
o j
uri
sdic
tio
n i
n t
his
cas
e o
ver
th
e
alle
ged
vio
lati
on
of
Art
icle
5,
par
agra
ph
2,
of
the
Co
nv
enti
on
, it
note
s th
at t
he
per
form
ance
by
the
Sta
te o
f it
s o
bli
gat
ion
to
est
abli
sh t
he
un
iver
sal
juri
sdic
tio
n o
f it
s co
urt
s o
ver
the
crim
e o
f to
rtu
re i
s
a nec
essa
ry
con
dit
ion
fo
r en
abli
ng
a
pre
lim
inar
y
inq
uir
y
(Art
icle
6,
par
agra
ph
2),
an
d
for
sub
mit
tin
g
the
case
to
it
s co
mp
eten
t au
tho
riti
es
for
the
pu
rpose
of
pro
secu
tion
(Art
icle
7,
par
agra
ph
1).
T
he
pu
rpo
se o
f al
l th
ese
ob
lig
atio
ns
is t
o e
nab
le p
roce
edin
gs
to b
e b
rou
gh
t ag
ain
st
the
susp
ect,
in
th
e ab
sen
ce
of
his
ex
trad
itio
n,
and
to
ach
iev
e th
e ob
ject
an
d
pu
rpo
se
of
the
Co
nv
enti
on
, w
hic
h i
s to
mak
e m
ore
eff
ecti
ve
the
stru
gg
le a
gai
nst
to
rtu
re b
y a
vo
idin
g i
mp
unit
y f
or
the
per
pet
rato
rs o
f su
ch a
cts.
75
. T
he
ob
lig
atio
n f
or
the
Sta
te t
o c
rim
inal
ize
tort
ure
an
d t
o e
stab
lish
its
ju
risd
icti
on
ov
er i
t
fin
ds
its
equiv
alen
t in
th
e p
rov
isio
ns
of
man
y in
tern
atio
nal
co
nv
enti
on
s fo
r th
e co
mb
atin
g o
f
inte
rnat
ion
al c
rim
es.
Th
is o
bli
gat
ion
, w
hic
h h
as t
o b
e im
ple
men
ted
by
th
e S
tate
co
nce
rned
as
soo
n
as i
t is
bo
un
d b
y t
he
Co
nv
enti
on
, h
as i
n p
arti
cula
r a
pre
ven
tiv
e an
d d
eter
ren
t ch
arac
ter,
sin
ce b
y
equip
pin
g t
hem
selv
es w
ith
th
e n
eces
sary
leg
al t
oo
ls t
o p
rose
cute
this
ty
pe
of
off
ence
, th
e S
tate
s
par
ties
en
sure
th
at
thei
r le
gal
sy
stem
s w
ill
op
erat
e to
th
at
effe
ct
and
com
mit
th
emse
lves
to
co-o
rdin
atin
g t
hei
r ef
fort
s to
eli
min
ate
any
ris
k o
f im
pu
nit
y.
This
pre
ven
tive
char
acte
r is
all
th
e
mo
re p
ron
oun
ced
as
the
nu
mb
er o
f S
tate
s p
arti
es i
ncr
ease
s.
Th
e C
on
ven
tio
n a
gai
nst
To
rtu
re t
hu
s
bri
ng
s to
get
her
15
0 S
tate
s w
hic
h h
ave
com
mit
ted
th
emse
lves
to
pro
secu
tin
g s
usp
ects
in
par
ticu
lar
on
th
e b
asis
of
un
iver
sal
juri
sdic
tio
n.
7
6.
Th
e C
ou
rt c
on
sid
ers
that
by
no
t ad
op
tin
g t
he
nec
essa
ry l
egis
lati
on
un
til
20
07
, S
eneg
al
del
ayed
th
e su
bm
issi
on
of
the
case
to
its
co
mp
eten
t au
tho
riti
es f
or
the
purp
ose
of
pro
secu
tion.
Ind
eed
, th
e D
akar
C
ou
rt
of
Ap
pea
l w
as
led
to
co
ncl
ud
e th
at
the
Sen
egal
ese
court
s la
cked
juri
sdic
tio
n t
o e
nte
rtai
n p
roce
edin
gs
agai
nst
Mr.
Hab
ré,
wh
o h
ad b
een i
ndic
ted f
or
crim
es a
gai
nst
hu
man
ity
, ac
ts o
f to
rtu
re a
nd
bar
bar
ity
, in
th
e ab
sen
ce o
f ap
pro
pri
ate
legis
lati
on a
llow
ing s
uch
pro
ceed
ing
s w
ith
in t
he
do
mes
tic
leg
al o
rder
(se
e p
arag
rap
h 1
8 a
bo
ve)
. T
he
Dak
ar C
ourt
of
Ap
pea
l
hel
d t
hat
:
"th
e S
eneg
ales
e le
gis
latu
re s
ho
uld
, in
co
nju
nct
ion
wit
h t
he
refo
rm u
nd
erta
ken
to t
he
Pen
al C
od
e, m
ake
amen
dm
ents
to
Art
icle
66
9 o
f th
e C
od
e o
f C
rim
inal
Pro
ced
ure
by
incl
ud
ing
th
erei
n t
he
off
ence
of
tort
ure
, w
her
eby
it
wo
uld
bri
ng
its
elf
into
co
nfo
rmit
y
wit
h
the
ob
ject
ives
o
f th
e C
on
ven
tio
n#
(Co
urt
o
f A
pp
eal
(Dak
ar),
C
ha
mb
re
da
ccu
sati
on
, P
ub
lic
Pro
secu
tor
s O
ffic
e a
nd
F
ran
çois
D
iouf
v.
His
sène
Habré
,
Jud
gm
ent
No
. 1
35,
4 J
uly
20
00
).
Th
is j
ud
gm
ent
was
su
bse
qu
entl
y u
ph
eld b
y t
he
Sen
egal
ese
Co
urt
of
Cas
sati
on
(C
ou
rt o
f C
assa
tio
n,
pre
miè
re c
ha
mb
re s
tatu
ant
en m
ati
ère
pén
ale
, S
ou
leym
an
e G
uen
gu
eng
et
al.
v.
His
sène
Habré
,
Jud
gm
ent
No
. 1
4, 2
0 M
arch
200
1).
- 2
9 -
7
7.
Th
us,
th
e fa
ct t
hat
th
e re
qu
ired
leg
isla
tio
n h
ad b
een
ad
op
ted
on
ly i
n 2
00
7 n
eces
sari
ly
affe
cted
Sen
egal
!s i
mp
lem
enta
tio
n o
f th
e o
bli
gat
ions
imp
ose
d o
n i
t by
Art
icle
6,
par
agra
ph
2,
and
Art
icle
7,
par
agra
ph
1,
of
the
Co
nv
enti
on
.
7
8.
Th
e C
ou
rt,
bea
rin
g i
n m
ind
th
e li
nk w
hic
h e
xis
ts b
etw
een
th
e d
iffe
ren
t p
rovis
ion
s o
f th
e
Co
nv
enti
on
, w
ill
no
w
anal
yse
th
e al
leg
ed
bre
ach
es
of
Art
icle
6,
par
agra
ph
2,
and
A
rtic
le 7
,
par
agra
ph
1, o
f th
e C
on
ven
tio
n.
A.
Th
e a
lleg
ed b
rea
ch o
f th
e o
bli
ga
tio
n l
aid
do
wn
in
Art
icle
6,
pa
rag
rap
h 2
, o
f th
e C
on
ven
tio
n
7
9.
Un
der
th
e te
rms
of
Art
icle
6,
par
agra
ph
2,
of
the
Co
nv
enti
on
, th
e S
tate
in
wh
ose
ter
rito
ry
a p
erso
n a
lleg
ed t
o h
ave
com
mit
ted
act
s o
f to
rtu
re i
s p
rese
nt
"sh
all
imm
edia
tely
mak
e a
pre
lim
inar
y
inq
uir
y i
nto
th
e fa
cts#
.
8
0.
Bel
giu
m c
on
sid
ers
that
th
is p
roce
du
ral
ob
lig
atio
n i
s o
bv
iou
sly
in
cum
ben
t o
n S
eneg
al,
since
the
latt
er m
ust
hav
e th
e m
ost
co
mp
lete
in
form
atio
n a
vai
lab
le i
n o
rder
to
dec
ide
wh
eth
er t
her
e
are
gro
un
ds
eith
er t
o s
ub
mit
th
e m
atte
r to
its
pro
secu
tin
g a
uth
ori
ties
or,
wh
en p
oss
ible
, to
ex
trad
ite
the
susp
ect.
T
he
Sta
te i
n w
ho
se t
erri
tory
th
e su
spec
t is
pre
sen
t sh
ou
ld t
ake
effe
ctiv
e m
easu
res
to
gat
her
evid
ence
, if
nec
essa
ry t
hro
ug
h m
utu
al j
ud
icia
l as
sist
ance
, b
y a
dd
ress
ing
let
ters
ro
gat
ory
to
cou
ntr
ies
lik
ely
to
be
able
to
ass
ist
it.
Bel
giu
m t
akes
th
e v
iew
th
at S
eneg
al,
by
fai
lin
g t
o t
ake
thes
e
mea
sure
s, b
reac
hed
the
ob
lig
atio
n i
mp
ose
d o
n i
t b
y A
rtic
le 6
, p
arag
rap
h 2
, o
f th
e C
on
ven
tio
n.
It
po
ints
ou
t th
at i
t n
on
eth
eles
s in
vit
ed S
eneg
al t
o i
ssu
e a
lett
er r
og
ato
ry,
in o
rder
to
hav
e ac
cess
to
th
e
evid
ence
in
th
e h
and
s o
f B
elg
ian
ju
dg
es (
see
par
agra
ph
30
ab
ov
e).
8
1.
In a
nsw
er t
o t
he
qu
esti
on
pu
t b
y a
Mem
ber
of
the
Co
urt
co
nce
rnin
g t
he
inte
rpre
tati
on
of
the
ob
lig
atio
n l
aid
do
wn
by
Art
icle
6,
par
agra
ph
2,
of
the
Co
nv
enti
on
, B
elg
ium
has
po
inte
d o
ut
that
the
nat
ure
of
the
inq
uir
y r
equ
ired
by
Art
icle
6,
par
agra
ph
2,
dep
end
s to
so
me
exte
nt
on
th
e le
gal
syst
em c
once
rned
, b
ut
also
on
th
e p
arti
cula
r ci
rcu
mst
ance
s o
f th
e ca
se.
Th
is w
ou
ld b
e th
e in
qu
iry
carr
ied
ou
t b
efo
re t
he
case
was
tra
nsm
itte
d t
o t
he
auth
ori
ties
res
po
nsi
ble
fo
r p
rose
cuti
on
, if
th
e
Sta
te
dec
ided
to
ex
erci
se
its
juri
sdic
tio
n.
L
astl
y,
Bel
giu
m
reca
lls
that
p
arag
rap
h 4
o
f th
is
Art
icle
pro
vid
es t
hat
in
tere
sted
Sta
tes
mu
st b
e in
form
ed o
f th
e fi
nd
ing
s o
f th
e in
qu
iry
, so
th
at t
hey
may
, if
nec
essa
ry,
seek
the
extr
adit
ion
of
the
alle
ged
off
end
er.
Acc
ord
ing
to
Bel
giu
m,
ther
e is
no
info
rmat
ion
bef
ore
th
e C
ou
rt s
ug
ges
tin
g t
hat
a p
reli
min
ary
inq
uir
y h
as b
een
co
nd
uct
ed b
y S
eneg
al,
and
it
con
clud
es f
rom
th
is t
hat
Sen
egal
has
vio
late
d A
rtic
le 6
, p
arag
rap
h 2
, o
f th
e C
on
ven
tion
.
82.
Sen
egal
, in
answ
er t
o t
he
sam
e q
ues
tio
n,
has
mai
nta
ined
th
at t
he
inq
uir
y i
s ai
med
at
esta
bli
shin
g t
he
fact
s, b
ut
that
it
do
es n
ot
nec
essa
rily
lea
d t
o p
rose
cuti
on
, si
nce
th
e p
rose
cuto
r m
ay,
in t
he
lig
ht
of
the
resu
lts,
co
nsi
der
th
at t
her
e ar
e n
o g
rou
nd
s fo
r su
ch p
roce
edin
gs.
S
eneg
al t
akes
the
vie
w t
hat
th
is i
s si
mp
ly a
n o
bli
gat
ion
of
mea
ns,
wh
ich
it
clai
ms
to h
ave
fulf
ille
d.
31
-
- 3
0 -
8
3.
In
the
op
inio
n
of
the
Co
urt
, th
e p
reli
min
ary
in
qu
iry
p
rov
ided
fo
r in
A
rtic
le 6
,
par
agra
ph
2,
is i
nte
nd
ed,
lik
e an
y i
nq
uir
y c
arri
ed o
ut
by
th
e co
mp
eten
t au
tho
riti
es,
to c
orr
ob
ora
te o
r
no
t th
e su
spic
ion
s re
gar
din
g t
he
per
son
in
qu
esti
on.
Th
at i
nq
uir
y i
s co
nd
uct
ed b
y t
ho
se a
uth
ori
ties
wh
ich
hav
e th
e ta
sk o
f d
raw
ing
up
a c
ase
file
an
d c
oll
ecti
ng
fac
ts a
nd
ev
iden
ce;
th
is m
ay c
on
sist
of
do
cum
ents
o
r w
itn
ess
stat
emen
ts re
lati
ng
to
th
e ev
ents
at
is
sue
and to
th
e su
spec
t!s
poss
ible
inv
olv
emen
t in
th
e m
atte
r co
nce
rned
. T
hu
s th
e co
-op
erat
ion
of
the
Ch
adia
n a
uth
ori
ties
sh
ou
ld h
ave
bee
n s
ou
gh
t in
th
is i
nst
ance
, an
d t
hat
of
any
oth
er S
tate
wh
ere
com
pla
ints
hav
e b
een
fil
ed i
n
rela
tio
n t
o t
he
case
, so
as
to e
nab
le t
he
Sta
te t
o f
ulf
il i
ts o
bli
gat
ion t
o m
ake
a p
reli
min
ary
inquir
y.
8
4.
Mo
reo
ver
, th
e C
onv
enti
on
spec
ifie
s th
at,
wh
en
they
ar
e op
erat
ing
on
the
bas
is
of
un
iver
sal
juri
sdic
tio
n,
the
auth
ori
ties
co
nce
rned
mu
st b
e ju
st a
s d
eman
din
g i
n t
erm
s of
evid
ence
as
wh
en t
hey
hav
e ju
risd
icti
on
by
vir
tue
of
a li
nk
wit
h t
he
case
in
ques
tion.
Art
icle
7,
par
agra
ph 2
, of
the
Co
nv
enti
on
thu
s st
ipu
late
s:
"I
n t
he
case
s re
ferr
ed t
o i
n A
rtic
le 5
, p
arag
rap
h 2
, th
e st
and
ard
s o
f ev
iden
ce
req
uir
ed f
or
pro
secu
tio
n a
nd
co
nv
icti
on
sh
all
in n
o w
ay b
e le
ss s
trin
gen
t th
an t
ho
se
wh
ich
ap
ply
in
th
e ca
ses
refe
rred
to i
n A
rtic
le 5
, p
arag
rap
h 1
.#
85
. T
he
Co
urt
ob
serv
es
that
S
eneg
al
has
n
ot
incl
uded
in
th
e ca
se
file
an
y
mat
eria
l
dem
on
stra
tin
g t
hat
th
e la
tter
has
car
ried
ou
t su
ch a
n i
nq
uir
y i
n r
esp
ect
of
Mr.
Hab
ré,
in a
cco
rdan
ce
wit
h A
rtic
le 6
, p
arag
rap
h 2
, o
f th
e C
on
ven
tio
n.
It
is n
ot
suff
icie
nt,
as
Sen
egal
mai
nta
ins,
fo
r a
Sta
te
par
ty
to
the
Co
nv
enti
on
to
hav
e ad
op
ted
al
l th
e le
gis
lati
ve
mea
sure
s re
qu
ired
fo
r it
s
imp
lem
enta
tio
n;
it
mu
st a
lso
ex
erci
se i
ts j
uri
sdic
tio
n o
ver
any
act
of
tort
ure
wh
ich
is
at i
ssu
e,
star
tin
g b
y e
stab
lish
ing
th
e fa
cts.
T
he
qu
esti
on
ing a
t fi
rst
app
eara
nce
wh
ich
th
e in
ves
tig
atin
g j
ud
ge
at t
he
Tri
bu
na
l ré
gio
na
l ho
rs c
lass
e in
Dak
ar c
on
duct
ed i
n o
rder
to
est
abli
sh M
r. H
abré
!s i
den
tity
and
to i
nfo
rm h
im o
f th
e ac
ts o
f w
hic
h h
e w
as a
ccu
sed
can
no
t b
e re
gar
ded
as
per
form
ance
of
the
ob
lig
atio
n l
aid
do
wn
in
Art
icle
6,
par
agra
ph
2,
as i
t d
id n
ot
inv
olv
e an
y i
nq
uir
y i
nto
th
e ch
arg
es
agai
nst
Mr.
Hab
ré.
8
6.
Wh
ile
the
cho
ice
of
mea
ns
for
con
duct
ing
th
e in
qu
iry
rem
ain
s in
th
e h
and
s o
f th
e S
tate
s
par
ties
, ta
kin
g a
cco
un
t o
f th
e ca
se i
n q
ues
tio
n,
Art
icle
6,
par
agra
ph
2,
of
the
Co
nv
enti
on
req
uir
es
that
ste
ps
mu
st b
e ta
ken
as
soo
n a
s th
e su
spec
t is
id
enti
fied
in
th
e te
rrit
ory
of
the
Sta
te,
in o
rder
to
con
du
ct a
n i
nv
esti
gat
ion
of
that
cas
e.
Th
at p
rov
isio
n m
ust
be
inte
rpre
ted
in
th
e li
gh
t o
f th
e ob
ject
and
pu
rpo
se o
f th
e C
on
ven
tio
n,
wh
ich
is
to m
ake
mo
re e
ffec
tiv
e th
e st
rug
gle
ag
ain
st t
ort
ure
. T
he
esta
bli
shm
ent
of
the
fact
s at
iss
ue,
wh
ich
is
an e
ssen
tial
sta
ge
in t
hat
pro
cess
, b
ecam
e im
per
ativ
e in
the
pre
sen
t ca
se at
le
ast
sin
ce th
e y
ear
20
00
, w
hen
a
com
pla
int
was
fi
led
in
S
eneg
al ag
ainst
Mr.
Hab
ré (
see
par
agra
ph
17
ab
ov
e).
87.
Th
e C
ou
rt o
bse
rves
th
at a
fu
rth
er c
om
pla
int
agai
nst
Mr.
Hab
ré w
as f
iled
in D
akar
in
20
08
(se
e p
arag
rap
h 3
2 a
bo
ve)
, af
ter
the
leg
isla
tive
and
co
nst
itu
tio
nal
am
end
men
ts m
ade
in 2
00
7
and
20
08
, re
spec
tiv
ely
, w
hic
h w
ere
enac
ted
in
ord
er t
o c
om
ply
wit
h t
he
req
uir
emen
ts o
f A
rtic
le 5
,
par
agra
ph
2,
of
the
Co
nv
enti
on
(se
e p
arag
rap
hs
28
an
d 3
1 a
bo
ve)
. B
ut
ther
e is
no
thin
g i
n t
he
mat
eria
ls s
ub
mit
ted
to
th
e C
ou
rt t
o i
nd
icat
e th
at a
pre
lim
inar
y i
nq
uir
y w
as o
pen
ed f
oll
ow
ing
th
is
seco
nd
co
mp
lain
t.
Ind
eed
, in
20
10
Sen
egal
sta
ted
bef
ore
th
e E
CO
WA
S C
ou
rt o
f Ju
stic
e th
at n
o
pro
ceed
ing
s w
ere
pen
din
g o
r p
rose
cuti
on
on
go
ing a
gai
nst
Mr.
Hab
ré i
n S
eneg
ales
e co
urt
s.
- 3
1 -
8
8.
Th
e C
ou
rt f
ind
s th
at t
he
Sen
egal
ese
auth
ori
ties
did
no
t im
med
iate
ly i
nit
iate
a p
reli
min
ary
inquir
y a
s so
on a
s th
ey h
ad r
easo
n t
o s
usp
ect
Mr.
Hab
ré,
wh
o w
as i
n t
hei
r te
rrit
ory
, o
f b
ein
g
resp
onsi
ble
for
acts
of
tort
ure
. T
hat
po
int
was
rea
ched
, at
th
e la
test
, w
hen
th
e fi
rst
com
pla
int
was
file
d a
gai
nst
Mr.
Hab
ré i
n 2
00
0.
T
he
Co
urt
th
eref
ore
co
ncl
ud
es th
at S
eneg
al h
as b
reac
hed
it
s o
bli
gat
ion
u
nd
er A
rtic
le 6
,
par
agra
ph
2, o
f th
e C
on
ven
tio
n.
B.
Th
e a
lleg
ed b
rea
ch o
f th
e o
bli
ga
tio
n l
aid
do
wn
in
Art
icle
7,
pa
rag
rap
h 1
, o
f th
e C
on
ven
tio
n
8
9.
Art
icle
7, p
arag
rap
h 1
, o
f th
e C
on
ven
tio
n p
rov
ides
:
"T
he
Sta
te P
arty
in
th
e te
rrit
ory
un
der
wh
ose
ju
risd
icti
on
a p
erso
n a
lleg
ed t
o
hav
e co
mm
itte
d
any
o
ffen
ce
refe
rred
to
in
A
rtic
le 4
is
fo
un
d
shal
l in
th
e ca
ses
conte
mp
late
d i
n A
rtic
le 5
, if
it
do
es n
ot
extr
adit
e h
im,
sub
mit
th
e ca
se t
o i
ts c
om
pet
ent
auth
ori
ties
for
the
purp
ose
of
pro
secu
tio
n.#
90.
As
is a
pp
aren
t fr
om
th
e tr
ava
ux
pré
pa
rato
ires
of
the
Co
nv
enti
on
, A
rtic
le 7
, p
arag
rap
h 1
,
is b
ased
o
n a
sim
ilar
p
rov
isio
n co
nta
ined
in
th
e C
on
ven
tio
n fo
r th
e S
up
pre
ssio
n o
f U
nla
wfu
l
Sei
zure
of
Air
craf
t, s
ign
ed a
t T
he
Hag
ue
on
16
Dec
emb
er 1
97
0.
Th
e o
bli
gat
ion
to
su
bm
it t
he
case
to
the
com
pet
ent
auth
ori
ties
fo
r th
e p
urp
ose
o
f p
rose
cuti
on
(h
erei
naf
ter
the
"ob
lig
atio
n
to
pro
secu
te#)
was
form
ula
ted i
n s
uch
a w
ay a
s to
lea
ve
it t
o t
ho
se a
uth
ori
ties
to
dec
ide
wh
eth
er o
r n
ot
to i
nit
iate
pro
ceed
ing
s, t
hu
s re
spec
tin
g t
he
ind
epen
den
ce o
f S
tate
s p
arti
es!
jud
icia
l sy
stem
s.
Th
ese
two
co
nv
enti
on
s em
ph
asiz
e, m
ore
ov
er,
that
th
e au
thori
ties
sh
all
tak
e th
eir
dec
isio
n i
n t
he
sam
e
man
ner
as
in t
he
case
of
any
ord
inar
y o
ffen
ce o
f a
seri
ou
s n
atu
re u
nd
er t
he
law
of
the
Sta
te
con
cern
ed (
Art
icle
7,
par
agra
ph
2,
of
the
Co
nv
enti
on
ag
ain
st T
ort
ure
an
d A
rtic
le 7
of
the
Hag
ue
Co
nv
enti
on
of
19
70
).
It f
oll
ow
s th
at t
he
com
pet
ent
auth
ori
ties
in
vo
lved
rem
ain
res
po
nsi
ble
fo
r
dec
idin
g o
n w
het
her
to
in
itia
te a
pro
secu
tio
n,
in t
he
lig
ht
of
the
evid
ence
bef
ore
th
em a
nd
th
e
rele
van
t ru
les
of
crim
inal
pro
ced
ure
.
9
1.
Th
e ob
lig
atio
n
to
pro
secu
te
pro
vid
ed
for
in
Art
icle
7,
par
agra
ph
1,
is
no
rmal
ly
imp
lem
ente
d i
n t
he
con
tex
t o
f th
e C
on
ven
tio
n A
gai
nst
To
rtu
re a
fter
th
e S
tate
has
per
form
ed t
he
oth
er
ob
lig
atio
ns
pro
vid
ed
for
in
the
pre
ced
ing
ar
ticl
es,
wh
ich
re
qu
ire
it
to
ado
pt
adeq
uat
e
leg
isla
tio
n t
o e
nab
le i
t to
cri
min
aliz
e to
rtu
re,
giv
e it
s co
urt
s u
niv
ersa
l ju
risd
icti
on
in
th
e m
atte
r an
d
mak
e an
inquir
y i
nto
the
fact
s.
Th
ese
ob
lig
atio
ns,
tak
en a
s a
wh
ole
, m
ay b
e re
gar
ded
as
elem
ents
of
a si
ng
le c
on
ven
tio
nal
mec
han
ism
aim
ed a
t p
rev
enti
ng
su
spec
ts f
rom
esc
apin
g t
he
con
seq
uen
ces
of
thei
r cr
imin
al r
esp
on
sib
ilit
y,
if p
rov
en.
Bel
giu
m!s
cla
im r
elat
ing
to
th
e ap
pli
cati
on
of
Art
icle
7,
par
agra
ph
1,
rais
es
a ce
rtai
n
nu
mb
er
of
qu
esti
on
s re
gar
din
g
the
nat
ure
an
d
mea
nin
g
of
the
ob
lig
atio
n c
on
tain
ed t
her
ein
an
d i
ts t
emp
ora
l sc
op
e, a
s w
ell
as i
ts i
mp
lem
enta
tio
n i
n t
he
pre
sen
t
case
.
1.
Th
e n
atu
re a
nd
mea
nin
g o
f th
e o
bli
ga
tio
n l
aid
do
wn
in
Art
icle
7,
pa
rag
rap
h 1
9
2.
Acc
ord
ing
to
Bel
giu
m,
the
Sta
te i
s re
qu
ired
to p
rose
cute
th
e su
spec
t as
so
on
as
the
latt
er
is p
rese
nt
in i
ts t
erri
tory
, w
het
her
or
no
t h
e h
as b
een
th
e su
bje
ct o
f a
req
ues
t fo
r ex
trad
itio
n t
o o
ne
of
the
cou
ntr
ies
refe
rred
to
in
Art
icle
5,
par
agra
ph
1
th
at i
s, i
f th
e o
ffen
ce w
as c
om
mit
ted
wit
hin
the
terr
itory
of
the
latt
er S
tate
, o
r if
on
e o
f it
s n
atio
nal
s is
eit
her
th
e al
leg
ed p
erp
etra
tor
or
the
vic
tim
o
r in
Art
icle
5,
par
agra
ph
3,
that
is,
an
oth
er S
tate
wit
h c
rim
inal
ju
risd
icti
on
ex
erci
sed
in
32
-
- 3
2 -
acco
rdan
ce w
ith
its
in
tern
al l
aw.
In
th
e ca
ses
pro
vid
ed f
or
in A
rtic
le 5
, th
e S
tate
can
conse
nt
to
extr
adit
ion
. T
his
is
a p
oss
ibil
ity
aff
ord
ed b
y t
he
Co
nv
enti
on
, an
d,
acco
rdin
g t
o B
elg
ium
, th
at i
s th
e
mea
nin
g o
f th
e m
axim
a
ut
ded
ere
au
t ju
dic
are
u
nd
er t
he
Co
nv
enti
on
. T
hu
s, i
f th
e S
tate
do
es n
ot
op
t fo
r ex
trad
itio
n,
its
ob
ligat
ion
to
pro
secu
te r
emai
ns
un
affe
cted
. I
n B
elgiu
m!s
vie
w,
it i
s only
if
for
on
e re
aso
n o
r an
oth
er t
he
Sta
te c
on
cern
ed d
oes
no
t p
rose
cute
, an
d a
req
ues
t fo
r ex
trad
itio
n i
s
rece
ived
, th
at t
hat
Sta
te h
as t
o e
xtr
adit
e if
it
is t
o a
vo
id b
ein
g i
n b
reac
h o
f th
is c
entr
al o
bli
gat
ion
un
der
th
e C
on
ven
tio
n.
93
. F
or
its
par
t, S
eneg
al t
akes
th
e v
iew
th
at t
he
Co
nv
enti
on
cer
tain
ly r
equ
ires
it
to p
rose
cute
Mr.
Hab
ré,
wh
ich
it
clai
ms
it h
as e
nd
eav
ou
red
to d
o b
y f
oll
ow
ing
th
e le
gal
pro
ced
ure
pro
vid
ed f
or
in t
hat
in
stru
men
t, b
ut
that
it
has
no
ob
lig
atio
n t
o B
elg
ium
un
der
th
e C
on
ven
tion
to
ex
trad
ite
him
.
9
4.
Th
e C
ou
rt c
on
sid
ers
that
Art
icle
7,
par
agra
ph
1,
req
uir
es t
he
Sta
te c
on
cern
ed t
o s
ub
mit
the
case
to
its
co
mp
eten
t au
tho
riti
es f
or
the
pu
rpose
of
pro
secu
tio
n,
irre
spec
tive
of
the
exis
tence
of
a p
rio
r re
qu
est
for
the
extr
adit
ion
of
the
susp
ect.
T
hat
is
wh
y A
rtic
le 6
, p
arag
rap
h 2
, ob
lig
es t
he
Sta
te t
o m
ake
a p
reli
min
ary
in
qu
iry
im
med
iate
ly f
rom
th
e ti
me
that
the
susp
ect
is p
rese
nt
in i
ts
terr
ito
ry.
T
he
ob
lig
atio
n
to
sub
mit
th
e ca
se
to
the
com
pet
ent
auth
ori
ties
, u
nd
er
Art
icle
7,
par
agra
ph
1,
may
or
may
no
t re
sult
in
th
e in
stit
uti
on
of
pro
ceed
ing
s, i
n t
he
lig
ht
of
the
evid
ence
bef
ore
th
em,
rela
tin
g t
o t
he
char
ges
ag
ain
st t
he
susp
ect.
95
. H
ow
ever
, if
th
e S
tate
in
wh
ose
ter
rito
ry t
he
susp
ect
is p
rese
nt
has
rec
eived
a r
eques
t fo
r
extr
adit
ion
in a
ny
of
the
case
s en
vis
aged
in
th
e p
rov
isio
ns
of
the
Co
nv
enti
on
, it
can
rel
iev
e it
self
of
its
ob
lig
atio
n
to
pro
secu
te
by
ac
ced
ing
to
th
at
requ
est.
It
foll
ow
s th
at
the
choic
e b
etw
een
extr
adit
ion
or
sub
mis
sio
n f
or
pro
secu
tio
n,
pu
rsu
ant
to t
he
Co
nv
enti
on
, d
oes
no
t m
ean
th
at t
he
two
alte
rnat
ives
are
to
be
giv
en t
he
sam
e w
eig
ht.
E
xtr
adit
ion
is
an o
pti
on o
ffer
ed t
o t
he
Sta
te b
y t
he
Co
nv
enti
on
, w
her
eas
pro
secu
tio
n i
s an
in
tern
atio
nal
ob
lig
atio
n u
nd
er t
he
Co
nv
enti
on
, th
e v
iola
tio
n
of
wh
ich
is
a w
ron
gfu
l ac
t en
gag
ing
th
e re
spo
nsi
bil
ity
of
the
Sta
te.
2.
Th
e te
mp
ora
l sc
op
e o
f th
e o
bli
ga
tion
la
id d
ow
n i
n A
rtic
le 7
, p
ara
gra
ph
1
9
6.
A M
emb
er o
f th
e C
ou
rt a
sked
th
e P
arti
es,
firs
t, w
het
her
th
e o
bli
gat
ion
s in
cum
ben
t up
on
Sen
egal
un
der
Art
icle
7,
par
agra
ph
1,
of
the
Co
nv
enti
on
ap
pli
ed t
o o
ffen
ces
alle
ged
to
hav
e b
een
com
mit
ted
bef
ore
26
Ju
ne
19
87
, th
e d
ate
wh
en t
he
Con
ven
tio
n e
nte
red
in
to f
orc
e fo
r S
eneg
al,
and
,
seco
ndly
, if
, in
th
e ci
rcu
mst
ance
s o
f th
e p
rese
nt
case
, th
ose
ob
lig
atio
ns
exte
nd
ed to
o
ffen
ces
alle
ged
ly c
om
mit
ted
bef
ore
25
Ju
ne
19
99
, th
e d
ate
wh
en t
he
Co
nv
enti
on
en
tere
d i
nto
fo
rce
for
Bel
giu
m (
see
par
agra
ph
19 a
bo
ve)
. T
hose
qu
esti
on
s re
late
to
th
e te
mp
ora
l ap
pli
cati
on
of
Art
icle
7,
par
agra
ph
1,
of
the
Co
nv
enti
on
, ac
cord
ing
to
th
e ti
me
wh
en t
he
off
ence
s ar
e al
leged
to h
ave
bee
n
com
mit
ted
an
d t
he
dat
es o
f en
try
in
to f
orc
e o
f th
e C
on
ven
tio
n f
or
each
of
the
Par
ties
.
97
. In
th
eir
rep
lies
, th
e P
arti
es
agre
e th
at
acts
o
f to
rture
ar
e re
gar
ded
b
y
cust
om
ary
inte
rnat
ion
al l
aw a
s in
tern
atio
nal
cri
mes
, in
dep
enden
tly
of
the
Con
ven
tio
n.
- 3
3 -
98.
As
regar
ds
the
firs
t as
pec
t o
f th
e q
ues
tio
n p
ut
by
th
e M
emb
er o
f th
e C
ou
rt,
nam
ely
whet
her
the
Conven
tio
n a
pp
lies
to
off
ence
s co
mm
itte
d b
efo
re 2
6 J
un
e 1
98
7,
Bel
giu
m c
on
ten
ds
that
the
alle
ged
bre
ach
of
the
ob
lig
atio
n a
ut
ded
ere
au
t ju
dic
are
occ
urr
ed a
fter
th
e en
try
in
to f
orc
e o
f
the
Co
nv
enti
on
fo
r S
eneg
al,
even
th
oug
h t
he
alle
ged
act
s o
ccu
rred
bef
ore
that
dat
e.
Bel
giu
m
furt
her
arg
ues
th
at A
rtic
le 7
, p
arag
rap
h 1
, is
inte
nd
ed t
o s
tren
gth
en t
he
exis
tin
g l
aw b
y l
ayin
g d
ow
n
spec
ific
pro
ced
ura
l ob
lig
atio
ns,
th
e p
urp
ose
of
wh
ich
is
to e
nsu
re t
hat
th
ere
wil
l b
e n
o i
mp
un
ity
an
d
that
, in
th
ese
circ
um
stan
ces,
th
ose
pro
ced
ura
l o
bli
gat
ion
s co
uld
ap
ply
to
cri
mes
co
mm
itte
d b
efo
re
the
entr
y i
nto
fo
rce
of
the
Co
nv
enti
on
fo
r S
eneg
al.
Fo
r it
s p
art,
th
e la
tter
do
es n
ot
den
y t
hat
th
e
ob
lig
atio
n p
rov
ided
fo
r in
Art
icle
7,
par
agra
ph
1,
can
ap
ply
to
off
ence
s al
leg
edly
co
mm
itte
d b
efo
re
26
Ju
ne
19
87.
9
9.
In t
he
Cou
rt!s
op
inio
n,
the
pro
hib
itio
n o
f to
rtu
re i
s p
art
of
cust
om
ary
in
tern
atio
nal
law
and
it
has
bec
om
e a
per
emp
tory
no
rm (
jus
cog
ens)
.
T
hat
pro
hib
itio
n i
s g
roun
ded
in a
wid
esp
read
in
tern
atio
nal
pra
ctic
e an
d o
n t
he
op
inio
ju
ris
of
Sta
tes.
It
ap
pea
rs i
n n
um
ero
us
inte
rnat
ion
al i
nst
rum
ents
of
un
iver
sal
app
lica
tio
n (
in p
arti
cula
r th
e
Un
iver
sal
Dec
lara
tio
n o
f H
um
an R
igh
ts o
f 1
94
8,
the
19
49 G
enev
a C
on
ven
tion
s fo
r th
e p
rote
ctio
n
of
war
v
icti
ms;
the
Inte
rnat
ion
al
Co
ven
ant
on
C
ivil
an
d
Po
liti
cal
Rig
hts
o
f 1
96
6;
G
ener
al
Ass
emb
ly r
eso
luti
on
34
52/3
0 o
f 9
Dec
emb
er 1
97
5 o
n t
he
Pro
tect
ion
of
All
Per
son
s fr
om
Bei
ng
Sub
ject
ed t
o T
ort
ure
an
d O
ther
Cru
el,
Inh
um
an o
r D
egra
din
g T
reat
men
t o
r P
un
ish
men
t),
and
it
has
bee
n i
ntr
od
uce
d i
nto
th
e d
om
esti
c la
w o
f al
mo
st a
ll S
tate
s;
fin
ally
, ac
ts o
f to
rtu
re a
re r
egu
larl
y
den
ou
nce
d w
ith
in n
atio
nal
an
d i
nte
rnat
ion
al f
ora
.
1
00
. H
ow
ever
, th
e ob
lig
atio
n t
o p
rose
cute
th
e al
leg
ed p
erp
etra
tors
of
acts
of
tort
ure
un
der
th
e
Co
nv
enti
on
ap
pli
es o
nly
to f
acts
hav
ing
occ
urr
ed a
fter
its
en
try
in
to f
orc
e fo
r th
e S
tate
co
nce
rned
.
Art
icle
28
of
the
Vie
nn
a C
on
ven
tion
on t
he
Law
of
Tre
atie
s, w
hic
h r
efle
cts
cust
om
ary
law
on
th
e
mat
ter,
pro
vid
es:
"U
nle
ss a
dif
fere
nt
inte
nti
on
ap
pea
rs f
rom
th
e tr
eaty
or
is o
ther
wis
e es
tab
lish
ed,
its
pro
vis
ion
s d
o n
ot
bin
d a
par
ty i
n r
elat
ion
to
an
y a
ct o
r fa
ct w
hic
h t
oo
k p
lace
or
any
situ
atio
n w
hic
h c
ease
d t
o e
xis
t b
efo
re t
he
dat
e o
f th
e en
try
in
to f
orc
e o
f th
at t
reat
y w
ith
resp
ect
to t
hat
par
ty.#
T
he
Co
urt
n
ote
s th
at n
oth
ing
in
th
e C
on
ven
tion
ag
ain
st T
ort
ure
re
vea
ls an
in
ten
tio
n to
req
uir
e a
Sta
te p
arty
to c
rim
inal
ize,
un
der
Art
icle
4,
acts
of
tort
ure
th
at t
ook
pla
ce p
rio
r to
its
entr
y
into
fo
rce
for
that
Sta
te,
or
to e
stab
lish
its
ju
risd
icti
on
ov
er s
uch
act
s in
acc
ord
ance
wit
h A
rtic
le 5
.
Co
nse
qu
entl
y,
in t
he
vie
w o
f th
e C
ou
rt,
the
ob
lig
atio
n t
o p
rose
cute
, u
nd
er A
rtic
le 7
, p
arag
rap
h 1
, o
f
the
Co
nv
enti
on
do
es n
ot
app
ly t
o s
uch
act
s.
1
01
. T
he
Co
mm
itte
e ag
ain
st
To
rtu
re
emp
has
ized
, in
p
arti
cula
r,
in
its
dec
isio
n
of
23
No
vem
ber
19
89
in
th
e ca
se o
f O
.R.,
M.M
. a
nd
M.S
. v
. A
rgen
tina
(C
om
mu
nic
atio
ns
No
s. 1
/19
88,
2/1
988
an
d 3
/19
88,
dec
isio
n o
f 2
3 N
ovem
ber
19
89
, p
ara.
7.5
, O
ffic
ial
Do
cum
ents
of
the
Gen
era
l
Ass
emb
ly,
Fo
rty-
Fif
th
Ses
sio
n,
Su
pp
lem
ent
No
. 4
4
(UN
do
c. A
/45
/44
, A
nn
. V
, p
. 1
12
))
that
33
-
- 3
4 -
"$to
rtu
re!
for
pu
rpo
ses
of
the
Co
nv
enti
on
can
on
ly m
ean
to
rtu
re t
hat
occ
urs
sub
seq
uen
t to
th
e en
try
into
fo
rce
of
the
Co
nv
enti
on
#.
Ho
wev
er,
wh
en t
he
Co
mm
itte
e co
nsi
der
ed M
r. H
abré
!s s
itu
atio
n,
the
qu
esti
on
of
the
tem
po
ral
sco
pe
of
the
ob
lig
atio
ns
con
tain
ed i
n t
he
Co
nv
enti
on
was
no
t ra
ised
,
no
r d
id t
he
Co
mm
itte
e it
self
ad
dre
ss t
hat
qu
esti
on
(G
uen
gu
eng
et
al.
v.
Sen
egal
(Co
mm
un
icat
ion
No
. 1
81
/20
01,
dec
isio
n o
f 1
7 M
ay 2
00
6,
UN
do
c. C
AT
/C/3
6/D
/181
/20
01
)).
1
02
. T
he
Co
urt
co
ncl
ud
es
that
S
eneg
al!s
o
bli
gat
ion
to
pro
secu
te
purs
uan
t to
A
rtic
le 7
,
par
agra
ph
1,
of
the
Co
nv
enti
on
do
es n
ot
app
ly t
o a
cts
alle
ged
to
hav
e b
een
co
mm
itte
d b
efo
re t
he
Co
nv
enti
on
en
tere
d i
nto
forc
e fo
r S
eneg
al o
n 2
6 J
un
e 1
987
. T
he
Co
urt
wo
uld
rec
all,
ho
wev
er,
that
the
com
pla
ints
ag
ain
st M
r. H
abré
in
clu
de
a n
um
ber
of
seri
ou
s o
ffen
ces
alle
ged
ly c
om
mit
ted a
fter
that
dat
e (s
ee p
arag
rap
hs
17
, 1
9-2
1 a
nd
32
ab
ov
e).
Co
nse
qu
entl
y,
Sen
egal
is
un
der
an
ob
lig
atio
n t
o
sub
mit
th
e al
leg
atio
ns
con
cern
ing
th
ose
ac
ts
to
its
com
pet
ent
auth
ori
ties
fo
r th
e p
urp
ose
of
pro
secu
tio
n.
A
lth
ou
gh
S
eneg
al is
n
ot
req
uir
ed u
nd
er th
e C
on
ven
tio
n to
in
stit
ute
p
roce
edin
gs
con
cern
ing
act
s th
at w
ere
com
mit
ted
bef
ore
26
Ju
ne
19
87
, n
oth
ing
in
th
at i
nst
rum
ent
pre
ven
ts i
t
fro
m d
oin
g s
o.
1
03
. T
he
Co
urt
no
w c
om
es t
o t
he
seco
nd
asp
ect
of
the
qu
esti
on
pu
t by
a M
emb
er o
f th
e
Co
urt
, n
amel
y,
wh
at w
as t
he
effe
ct o
f th
e d
ate
of
entr
y i
nto
fo
rce
of
the
Co
nv
enti
on
, fo
r B
elg
ium
,
on
th
e sc
op
e o
f th
e o
bli
gat
ion
to
pro
secu
te.
Bel
giu
m c
on
ten
ds
that
Sen
egal
was
sti
ll b
ou
nd
by
th
e
ob
ligat
ion
to
pro
secu
te M
r. H
abré
aft
er B
elg
ium
had
its
elf
bec
om
e p
arty
to t
he
Conven
tion,
and
that
it
was
th
eref
ore
en
titl
ed t
o i
nv
ok
e b
efo
re t
he
Co
urt
bre
ach
es o
f th
e C
on
ven
tio
n o
ccu
rrin
g a
fter
25
Ju
ly 1
99
9.
Sen
egal
dis
pu
tes
Bel
giu
m!s
rig
ht
to e
ng
age
its
resp
on
sib
ilit
y f
or
acts
all
eged
to
hav
e
occ
urr
ed p
rior
to t
hat
dat
e.
It c
on
sid
ers
that
th
e o
bli
gat
ion
pro
vid
ed f
or
in A
rtic
le 7
, p
arag
rap
h 1
,
bel
on
gs
to "
the
cate
go
ry o
f d
ivis
ible
erg
a o
mn
es o
bli
gat
ion
s#,
in t
hat
on
ly t
he
inju
red
Sta
te c
ou
ld
call
fo
r it
s b
reac
h t
o b
e sa
nct
ion
ed.
Sen
egal
acc
ord
ing
ly c
on
clu
des
that
Bel
giu
m w
as n
ot
enti
tled
to
rely
on
th
e st
atu
s o
f in
jure
d S
tate
in
res
pec
t o
f ac
ts p
rio
r to
25
Ju
ly 1
99
9 a
nd
co
uld
no
t se
ek
retr
oac
tiv
e ap
pli
cati
on
of
the
Co
nv
enti
on
.
10
4.
Th
e C
ou
rt c
on
sid
ers
that
Bel
giu
m h
as b
een
en
titl
ed,
wit
h e
ffec
t fr
om
25
Ju
ly 1
99
9,
the
dat
e w
hen
it
bec
ame
par
ty t
o t
he
Co
nv
enti
on
, to
req
ues
t th
e C
ou
rt t
o r
ule
on
Sen
egal
!s c
om
pli
ance
wit
h i
ts o
bli
gat
ion
un
der
Art
icle
7,
par
agra
ph
1.
In
th
e p
rese
nt
case
, th
e C
ou
rt n
ote
s th
at B
elg
ium
inv
ok
es S
eneg
al!s
res
po
nsi
bil
ity
fo
r th
e la
tter
!s c
on
du
ct s
tart
ing
in
th
e y
ear
20
00
, w
hen
a c
om
pla
int
was
fil
ed a
gai
nst
Mr.
Hab
ré i
n S
eneg
al (
see
par
agra
ph
17
ab
ov
e).
1
05
. T
he
