# Jurisprudence map — EAC / CAE Habré

A topic-by-topic map of the EAC's principal holdings. This file is an **index, not a substitute** for the underlying decisions. Use it to locate the decision; then verify through `verification-workflow.md`.

## 1. The Tribunal's establishment and the antecedent jurisprudence

### Belgium v. Senegal — the ICJ judgment of 20 July 2012

**Citation:** *Questions concerning the Obligation to Prosecute or Extradite (Belgium v. Senegal)*, Judgment, ICJ Reports 2012, p. 422.

**Holding:** Senegal had breached its obligations under Article 7 of the Convention against Torture (*aut dedere aut judicare*) and was required, "without further delay, to submit the case of Mr. Habré to its competent authorities for the purpose of prosecution, if it does not extradite him". This judgment **compelled Senegal to act** and led directly to the Accord with the AU of 22 August 2012.

### Habré v. Senegal — the ECOWAS Court judgment of 18 November 2010

**Citation:** *Hissène Habré v. Republic of Senegal*, Case No. ECW/CCJ/JUD/06/10, ECOWAS Community Court of Justice.

**Holding:** held that Habré's prosecution by Senegalese ordinary courts under the retroactive 2007 laws would violate the principle of non-retroactivity. **Authorised prosecution only before an ad hoc court of an "international character"** (para. 61). This judgment **dictated the institutional shape of the future EAC** — internationalised character was a constitutional necessity, not a political choice.

These two judgments together formed the **legal compulsion** (ICJ) and the **institutional constraint** (ECOWAS) that produced the EAC.

## 2. Universal jurisdiction as the EAC's jurisdictional basis

The EAC is **the first universal jurisdiction prosecution in Africa to proceed to trial**. Its jurisdictional basis is anchored in:
- Senegal's obligations under the **Convention against Torture, Article 7** (*aut dedere aut judicare*)
- The **ICJ's confirmation** in *Belgium v. Senegal* of those obligations
- **Senegalese national legislation** (Loi 2007-04 establishing extraterritorial jurisdiction) — with the EAC's "international character" supplying the legitimacy that the ECOWAS Court demanded
- The **Accord UA-Sénégal** providing the institutional framework

This is **universal jurisdiction with treaty anchoring and AU institutional support** — a distinctive configuration in international criminal law.

## 3. The Trial Judgment of 30 May 2016 — substantive holdings

**Citation:** *Ministère Public v. Hissein Habré*, Chambre Africaine Extraordinaire d'Assises, Jugement, 30 mai 2016.

**Conviction for crimes against humanity** (Statute Art. 5):
- Rape and sexual slavery (including direct commission of rape against Khadidja Hassan Zidane — **subsequently reversed on appeal** for this one specific count)
- Murder
- Summary executions
- Kidnapping followed by enforced disappearance
- Torture
- Other inhumane acts (including conditions of detention)

**Conviction for war crimes** (Statute Art. 6):
- Murder
- Torture
- Inhumane treatment
- Unlawful detention
- Applied in the context of the **Chad-Libya armed conflict** (the EAC characterised the period of armed conflict as covering parts of the 1982-1990 period; the analysis of the temporal and material scope of the conflict is one of the doctrinal contributions of the judgment)

**Conviction for torture** (Statute Art. 7) — independent of the crimes against humanity characterisation of torture.

**Modes of liability:**
- **Direct perpetration** (for the one direct rape count of Khadidja Hassan Zidane — reversed on appeal)
- **Command/superior responsibility** for crimes committed by the DDS and other state organs under his effective control
- **Joint criminal enterprise** (the EAC's application of JCE doctrine to an authoritarian state apparatus is a doctrinal innovation — see Sarah Williams, *JICJ* 2013 and subsequent commentary)

**Sentence:** life imprisonment.

## 4. The Reparations Decision of 29 July 2016

**Citation:** *Ministère Public v. Hissein Habré*, Chambre Africaine Extraordinaire d'Assises, Décision sur les Réparations Civiles, 29 juillet 2016.

**Individual reparations by victim category:**
- Victims of **rape and sexual violence**: 20 million CFA francs each (≈ USD 33,880)
- Victims of **arbitrary detention, torture, prisoners of war and survivors**: 15 million CFA francs each (≈ USD 25,410)
- **Indirect victims**: 10 million CFA francs each (≈ USD 16,935)

**Rejection of collective reparations** in favour of individual awards.

**Number of civil parties accredited:** 4,733 in the Trial Chamber decision (subsequently expanded by the Appeals Chamber).

## 5. The Appeals Judgment of 27 April 2017 — substantive holdings

**Citation:** *Procureur Général v. Hissein Habré*, Chambre Africaine Extraordinaire d'Assises d'Appel, Arrêt, 27 avril 2017.

**Confirmation of conviction** for crimes against humanity, war crimes, and torture — life imprisonment upheld.

**Reversal on one count:** Habré **acquitted of the direct commission of rape of Khadidja Hassan Zidane**. The Appeals Chamber found the direct-commission evidence insufficient, while maintaining Habré's command/superior responsibility for sexual violence committed by DDS agents.

**Reparations confirmation:**
- **Total amount fixed at 82.290 milliards de francs CFA** (~125 million EUR / ~145 million USD)
- **7,396 named civil parties** identified (expanded from the Trial Chamber's 4,733)
- An additional **3,489 supplementary applicants** authorised to apply to the Trust Fund for eligibility determination
- **Execution delegated to the African Union Trust Fund for Victims**
- **Rejection of collective reparations** (confirmed)

**Subsequent largest amount of reparations** ever awarded by an international(ised) criminal tribunal at the time of the judgment — significant for both substantive recognition of victim harm and practical challenges of execution.

## 6. Modes of individual criminal responsibility — doctrinal innovation

The EAC applied **command/superior responsibility** and **joint criminal enterprise** to the configuration of an authoritarian state apparatus over an 8-year period (1982-1990). The doctrinal contribution is twofold:

1. **Command responsibility for a head of State** acting through a state apparatus (the DDS as Habré's secret police, but also army, gendarmerie, and territorial administration). The EAC found Habré responsible for crimes committed by DDS agents and other state organs under his effective control.

2. **Joint criminal enterprise** adapted to a state-apparatus configuration. The EAC's construction of JCE is discussed extensively in Sarah Williams, *The Extraordinary African Chambers in the Senegalese Courts: An African Solution to an African Problem?*, JICJ 11 (2013) 1139 — the principal scholarly treatment.

For specific doctrinal findings, verify against the Trial Judgment and Appeals Judgment through the verification workflow.

## 7. No immunity for heads of State

**Statute Art. 9.** Consistent with customary international law and with the ICJ's framework in *Belgium v. Senegal*. The EAC's application is **the first concrete instance of the principle leading to the conviction of a former African Head of State by African institutions**.

The EAC's holding on immunity is **cumulative**, not innovative — it builds on the SCSL's 2004 Decision on Immunity in Taylor, the ICC's framework, and customary international law. But its **practical effect** — actually convicting a former Head of State and sentencing him to life imprisonment — is historic.

## 8. Civil party participation

Robust civil party participation following the **Senegalese civil-law tradition**. The civil party model at the EAC is distinct from:
- **ICC victim participation** (separate from reparations claim; broader procedural participation; mediation through Victims' Counsel)
- **ECCC Civil Parties** (closer model; the ECCC's Civil Party Lead Co-Lawyers were a notable institutional development that the EAC drew upon)
- **STL Victim-Participating-in-Proceedings** (participation but not reparations)

EAC civil parties:
- Joined directly to the criminal proceedings as parties civiles
- Represented by both Senegalese (lead counsel Jacqueline Moudeina) and international counsel (Reed Brody as principal investigator and advocate)
- Eligible for individual reparations awards
- **7,396 named civil parties** ultimately accredited by the Appeals Chamber

## 9. Reparations execution and the Trust Fund

The **Trust Fund for Victims** under African Union management was tasked with execution. As of 2026:
- The Trust Fund has been mandated to **recover Habré's assets** and to **seek voluntary contributions** from AU member States and other partners
- **Recoverable assets are limited** (Habré's frozen assets in Dakar consisted of approximately less than 1 million EUR, including two bank accounts and a property; assets believed to remain unrecovered abroad)
- **Habré died on 24 August 2021** — eliminating prospects of further personal asset recovery
- **Substantial reparations have not been disbursed** despite the judgment of 27 April 2017

The Trust Fund's operational status is a **continuing concern** documented in REDRESS, HRW and JusticeInfo reporting. This is a doctrinal success that has so far produced practical disappointment.

## How to use this map

1. Identify the user's substantive question and locate the relevant section above.
2. For a precise legal finding, identify the chamber and decision in which it lives.
3. Verify the cited passage through `verification-workflow.md` — fetch the actual text (forumchambresafricaines.org or legal-tools.org) and confirm it supports the proposition.
4. Cite using the conventions in `citation-format.md`.

The Statut, the four core decisions, and the antecedent ICJ and ECOWAS judgments are the territory. This file is a map of them. The verified text is what gets cited.