Belgium's comments on Senegal's response to the question put by Judge Cançado Trindade at the end of the public sitting of 8 April 2009 (translation)

Case concerning Questions relating to the Obligation to Prosecute or Extradite

(Belgium v. Senegal)

Comments of the Kingdom of Belgium on the response of the Republic of Senegal to the
questions put by Judge Cançado Trindade

1. Belgium agrees with Senegal that any St ate Party has the right to secure from another
State Party in which the alleged perpetrator of an act of torture is present the prosecution of that
person and that, failing such prosecution, the first State Party may request that person’s extradition.

However, Belgium considers that a State Party’s rights are broader than as set out by Senegal in its
response to the questions put by Judge CançadoTrindade: it is stating the obvious to say that a
State has the right to request extradition, but the St ate Party’s right is not limited to “requesting” or
“demanding” the extradition of the alleged perpetrato r (Senegal’s response, paras. 5-6). That right

also comprises securing such extradition, subject to the co nditions provided by the law of the
requested State (1984 Convention, Art.8, para. 3), where the latter does not prosecute the alleged
perpetrator (Art. 5, para. 2, and Art. 7, para. 1).

2. In paragraph 5 of its response, Senegal ac knowledges that a State has “the right to secure
compliance with the obligation, for another State, to try the perpetrator of an act of torture who is
present in its territory or, failing that, to request his extradition”. Senegal therefore recognizes that

States parties to the Convention have a twofold ri ght: the right to have the State in which the
alleged perpetrator is present prosecute him, and the right to seek the extradition of the alleged
perpetrator if the requested State fails to brin g such a prosecution. In paragraph6, Senegal
nonetheless states, concerning the “right for a Stat e Party” created by Articles5, paragraph2,

and 7, paragraph 1, that “it can only be the right to demand extradition” of the alleged perpetrator
(emphasis added). Senegal no longer mentions the alternative right of the requesting State either to
have the requested State prosecute the alleged perpetrator or to seek his extradition.

3. Belgium maintains that any State Party to the 1984 Convention possesses the right both to
see the alleged perpetrator of an act of torture prosecuted in the requested State (Art. 7, para. 1) and
to secure his extradition if the requested State does not prosecute the alleged perpetrator (Art.7,

para. 1, and Art. 8, para. 3) (judicare vel dedere).

___________