In its Application, Djibouti alleged that "the refusal by the French governmental and judicial authorities to execute an international letter rogatory regarding the transmission to the judicial authorities in Djibouti of the record relating to the investigation in the 'Case against X for the murder of Bernard Borrel'" constituted a breach of France's international obligations under the Treaty of Friendship and Co-operation signed by the two States on June 27, 1977 and the Convention on Mutual Assistance on Criminal Matters between France and Djibouti, dated September 27, 1986. Djibouti also alleged that, by summoning certain Djibouti nationals (including its President, Public Prosecutor, and Head of National Security) in connection with the criminal proceedings in the Borrel case, France breached its international obligations concerning the immunities of Heads of State and State officials. France consented to the Court's jurisdiction, pursuant to Article 38, paragraph 5, of the Rules of Court. Public hearings concluded on January 29.
In today's judgment, the Court found that France, by failing to give Djibouti the reasons for its refusal to execute Djibouti's November 3, 2004, letter rogatory, failed to comply with its international obligation under Article 17 of the 1986 Convention on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters. As for reparation, the Court decided that this finding of noncompliance constituted appropriate satisfaction. The Court rejected all of the other claims raised by Djibouti in its final submissions.
Here's the dispositif:
THE COURT,
(1) As regards the jurisdiction of the Court,
Finds that it has jurisdiction to adjudicate upon the dispute concerning the execution of the letter rogatory addressed by the Republic of Djibouti to the French Republic on 3 November 2004;(a) Unanimously,
(b) By fifteen votes to one,
Finds that it has jurisdiction to adjudicate upon the dispute concerning the summons as witness addressed to the President of the Republic of Djibouti on 17 May 2005, and the summonses as "témoins assistés" (legally assisted witnesses) addressed to two senior Djiboutian officials on 3 and 4 November 2004 and 17 June 2005;
IN FAVOUR: President Higgins; Vice-President Al-Khasawneh; Judges Ranjeva, Shi, Koroma, Buergenthal, Owada, Simma, Tomka, Keith, Sepúlveda-Amor, Bennouna, Skotnikov; Judges ad hoc Guillaume, Yusuf;
AGAINST: Judge Parra-Aranguren;
(c) By twelve votes to four,
Finds that it has jurisdiction to adjudicate upon the dispute concerning the summons as witness addressed to the President of the Republic of Djibouti on 14 February 2007;
IN FAVOUR: President Higgins; Vice-President Al-Khasawneh; Judges Shi, Koroma, Buergenthal, Owada, Simma, Keith, Sepúlveda-Amor, Bennouna, Skotnikov; Judge ad hoc Yusuf;
AGAINST: Judges Ranjeva, Parra-Aranguren, Tomka; Judge ad hoc Guillaume;
(d) By thirteen votes to three,
Finds that it has no jurisdiction to adjudicate upon the dispute concerning the arrest warrants issued against two senior Djiboutian officials on 27 September 2006;
IN FAVOUR: President Higgins; Vice-President Al-Khasawneh; Judges Ranjeva, Shi, Koroma, Parra-Aranguren, Buergenthal, Simma, Tomka, Keith, Sepúlveda-Amor, Bennouna; Judge ad hoc Guillaume;
AGAINST: Judges Owada, Skotnikov; Judge ad hoc Yusuf;
Judges Ranjeva, Koroma, and Parra-Aranguren appended separate opinions to the Judgment of the Court; Judge Owada appended a declaration; Judge Tomka appended a separate opinion; Judges Keith and Skotnikov appended declarations; Judge ad hoc Guillaume appended a declaration; and Judge ad hoc Yusef appended a separate opinion.(2) As regards the final submissions of the Republic of Djibouti on the merits,
Finds that the French Republic, by not giving the Republic of Djibouti the reasons for its refusal to execute the letter rogatory presented by the latter on 3 November 2004, failed to comply with its international obligation under Article 17 of the Convention on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters between the two Parties, signed in Djibouti on 27 September 1986, and that its finding of this violation constitutes appropriate satisfaction;(a) Unanimously,
(b) By fifteen votes to one,
Rejects all other final submissions presented by the Republic of Djibouti.
IN FAVOUR: President Higgins; Vice-President Al-Khasawneh; Judges Ranjeva, Shi, Koroma, Parra-Aranguren, Buergenthal, Owada, Simma, Tomka, Keith, Sepúlveda-Amor, Bennouna, Skotnikov; Judge ad hoc Guillaume;
AGAINST: Judge ad hoc Yusuf.
