Author:
International Commission of Inquiry for Togo (ordered by United Nations and the
Organization of African Unity)
Date:
26 December 2000. (English version: 22 February 2001)
Title:
Report of the International Commission of Inquiry for Togo
Internal
reference: E/CN.4/2001/134 (UN Commission of Human Rights) Original language: French (translation
by UN Commission of Human Rights) Concerning:
The International Commission of Inquiry for Togo was established on 7 June
2000, under the auspices of the United Nations and the Organization of African
Unity, at the request of the Government of Togo. It was to see into allegations
made by the Amnesty International in its report "Togo:
Rule of Terror" (May 1999), concerning extrajudicial executions by the
Togolese government.
Source:
UN Commission of Human Rights
Report
of the International Commission of Inquiry for Togo
I. INTRODUCTION
A. Mandate
1. On 7 June 2000, Mr. Kofi Annan and Mr. Salim A.
Salim, Secretary-General of the United Nations and Secretary-General of the
Organization of African Unity respectively, issued a joint press release
concerning the establishment, under the auspices of both organizations, of an
international commission of inquiry to verify the truth of allegations
contained in an Amnesty International report of 5 May 1999, that hundreds of
extrajudicial executions had taken place in Togo during 1998, and to report
thereon to the two Secretaries-General.
B. Composition
2. The International Commission of Inquiry for
Togo (hereinafter “the Commission”) is composed of three international experts
appointed through mutual agreement by the Secretaries-General of the United
Nations and the Organization of African Unity: Mr. Mahamat Hassan Abakar
(Chad), Chairman, Mr. Paulo Sergio Pinheiro (Brazil), member, and Mr. Issaka
Souna (Niger), member.
C. Methods of work
3. The Commission conducted its inquiry in
conformity with relevant international norms, in particular the international
human rights instruments in force. The Commission conducted a field mission to
Togo and neighbouring countries for the purpose of verifying the allegations in
question. In that context, it called on institutions and individuals with a
view to collecting the testimony, information and documents needed for the
discharge of its mandate. Before leaving on mission, on 12 September 2000 the
Commission distributed, through the United Nations offices in Togo, Benin and
Ghana, a public information note on its mandate and methods of work, questions
relating to the protection of witnesses and any other information sources, and
the undertaking of the Government of Togo to cooperate with it. The information
note also called on persons wishing to provide the Commission with information,
testimony, recommendations or opinions to do so, either orally (interview or
hearing by the Commission), or in writing, or by any other means they deemed to
be appropriate, adequate and safe. The Commission indicated that such
information might be communicated to it directly during its field inquiries, in
Togo or neighbouring countries or any other countries it might visit, or to its
secretariat at the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human
Rights, Palais Wilson, Geneva. A copy of the Commission’s rules of procedure
was attached to the public information note.
4. The Commission accordingly heard the
representatives of the Governments of Togo and Benin, the heads and members of
several foreign diplomatic missions accredited in both countries,
representatives of international and national human rights organizations,
journalists and more than 60 witnesses, in both Geneva and the field. The
Commission was also given numerous documents, photographs and pieces of
evidence by the persons and institutions concerned.
5. The Commission heard the representatives of
Amnesty International on two occasions, at its first and second meetings, held
in Geneva in August and September 2000. On both occasions, it also held working
meetings with representatives of the Government of Togo. In the field, the
Commission held several working meetings with the National Commission set up by
the Government of Togo to serve as liaison body. Exchanges between the two
Commissions made it possible to clarify certain problems which arose during the
field inquiry.
D. Meetings of the Commission in Geneva
6. The Commission began its work on 31 July, and
held three meetings in Geneva.
7. The Commission held its first meeting from 31
July to 4 August 2000. It adopted its rules of procedure at that meeting. The
rules of procedure contain information relating to its mandate; the solemn
declaration made by its members; their immunities and privileges; the relevant
international norms; confidentiality of information and protection of
witnesses; cooperation with the United Nations, the Organization of African
Unity and the Government of Togo; meetings, powers of the Chairman and
decisions; the Commission’s secretariat and the drafting of its report (see
annex 2). During its first meeting, the Commission held exchanges of views with
several organizations and with permanent missions to the United Nations Office
at Geneva. It heard the delegations of the Government of Togo and Amnesty
International.
8. The Commission held its second meeting in
Geneva from 18 to 22 September 2000, with a view to preparing its field
mission. It took that opportunity to meet with representatives of several
bodies and organizations, such as Amnesty International, the International
Committee of the Red Cross and the Office of the United Nations High
Commissioner for Refugees. It also held a comprehensive dialogue with the
delegation of Togo, relating especially to prior conditions for the field mission.
The Commission took advantage of its stay in Geneva, which was extended to 11
November 2000 pending a satisfactory response from the Government of Togo to
its requests, to settle administrative and logistical problems in abeyance.
9. The Commission held its third meeting in Geneva
from 15 to 22 December 2000. At that meeting it finalized and adopted this
report, which was drafted following a five-week field mission to Togo and
neighbouring countries.
E. Mission to Togo and neighbouring countries
10. The Commission went first to Togo, where it
conducted a first visit from 11 to 19 November. It then went to Benin,
essentially Cotonou (from 19 to 24 November 2000) and the Mono region on the
Togolese border (24 November-2 December 2000), and to Ghana, in the Volta
region on the Togolese border (2-4 December 2000). The Commission ended its
mission with a second visit to Togo, from 4 to 12 December 2000.
11. The Commission wishes to thank the authorities
of Togo, Benin and Ghana for their cooperation. It also wishes to thank the
United Nations offices in Togo, Benin and Ghana for providing it with support
for the proper functioning of its field mission. The mission enabled it to
collect the data and information necessary for the discharge of its mandate.
II. CONTEXT
12. The event which gave rise to the inquiry was
the controversy raised by the Amnesty International report of 5 May 1999 on the
situation of human rights in Togo. In response to the allegations contained on
page 26 of the report, the Government of Togo proposed that an independent
international mission of inquiry should be established to verify the truth of
the allegations; the proposal was endorsed by the Sub-Commission on the
Promotion and Protection of Human Rights and implemented jointly by the United
Nations and Organization of African Unity.
A. Allegations contained in the Amnesty International
report
13. On page 26 of its report of 5 May 1999,
entitled “Togo, Rule of Terror”, Amnesty International stated the following:
“In June 1998, during the Presidential election
campaign, and after the results were announced, hundreds of people, including
members of the military, were extrajudicially executed. Bodies were retrieved
from the beaches of Togo and Benin and corpses were seen at sea for at least
four days around Benin. During its investigative visit, the Amnesty
International delegation was able to question numerous individuals, including
Beninese and Togolese fishermen, as well as Togolese farm workers who were
working in the fields. Those questioned all told of unusual movements of planes
and helicopters sometimes flying at very low altitude out to sea. Former
soldiers, members of the paracommando regiment, who had sought refuge in Benin,
recognized the characteristic sound of Buffalo aircraft. Others questioned also
indicated that bodies had been recovered on the beaches, shortly after planes
had passed over. One of the fishermen told the following story: ‘Eight
kilometres from the beach at Ague [in Benin], hundreds of bodies were floating
out at sea’; other witnesses confirmed that bodies had been seen for three days
at that same place. Another fisherman had filled in the details: ‘When I was
taking in my nets, I found a corpse among the fish; some corpses were shackled
and others were wearing uniforms’. Other fishermen, particularly at Grandpopo
in Benin, gave us the same information and specified that the victims’ bodies
had bullet wounds and that some soldiers were also shackled.”
B. Reactions of the Government of Togo
14. The Government of Togo rejected the Amnesty
International report, which it called a text “rife with gross fabrications,
manipulations and false testimony”. It then brought judicial proceedings
against Mr. Pierre Sané, Secretary-General of Amnesty International, and
against several individuals suspected of having cooperated in the Amnesty
International inquiry, for “offence against honour, dissemination of false
information, incitement to revolt, offence against national security,
complicity to commit an offence against honour, complicity to disseminate false
information, complicity to incite to revolt and complicity to commit an offence
against national security”.
15. The Government of Togo also published a white
paper on the allegations contained in the Amnesty International report, which
it refuted as follows:
“Concerning the hundreds of bodies
[…]
With regard to the events cited, the Government of
Togo does not acknowledge, in any way whatsoever, such an obvious lie, which
does Amnesty International no credit. Does Amnesty International consider the
fact that the Government of Togo possesses a Buffalo aircraft, helicopters and
shackles to be scientific evidence excluding all doubt? For Amnesty
International’s information, during the period mentioned in the report, i.e.
the June 1998 presidential elections, the Buffalo aircraft in question was not
operational. Moreover, how can “executions of hundreds of persons” take place
in so tiny a country as Togo without being widely publicized in the national
media and the international media present in the country, particularly in the
capital, when the accusations of a mere journalist raise such an uproar? How
can hundreds of persons be executed without even one of the alleged victims’
families expressing its grief, without hearses filling the country’s streets?
How does Amnesty International explain the fact that an event such as hundreds
of bodies washing up on the beaches of Benin never drew a reaction by either
the authorities of Benin or the wide range of press organs freely operating in
the country? Finally, how does it explain the fact that no diplomatic mission
was informed of the hundreds of bodies that washed up on our beaches? Can
Amnesty International perform the magic feat of explaining to the Government
what happened to those hundreds of bodies, when, where and how they were
buried?”
16. Finally, the Government of Togo proposed that
an international commission of inquiry should be established to elucidate the
controversy raised by the allegations that several hundred people had been
victims of extrajudicial executions in Togo following the 1998 elections, and
that their bodies had been found by fishermen on the beaches of Togo and Benin
and at sea off the Benin coast.
17. On leaving Lomé, the Commission received from
the Government of Togo a series of four letters attributed to Mr. Gilchrist
Olympio, in support of its conviction that Mr. Olympio and Mr. Pierre Sané had
organized a “plot” to destabilize the Togolese Government. The Commission
transmitted the letters to the Secretary-General of the Union des forces de
changement (UFC) in Lomé, and to Amnesty International, on returning to Geneva.
Before finalizing this report, the Commission was informed by the President and
Secretary-General of UFC and by Amnesty International that they rejected those
allegations as groundless.
C. Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of
Human Rights
18. In the context of the Sub-Commission’s
consideration of the situation of human rights in Togo, its Chairperson made a
statement on its behalf, dated 20 August 1999, in which he took note of the
proposal of the Government of Togo concerning the establishment of an
international commission of inquiry to elucidate the controversy between
Amnesty International and itself.
He recommended that the Secretaries-General of the
United Nations and Organization of African Unity help set up the commission and
provide it with all the assistance it needed to discharge its mandate. He also
asked the Government of Togo to cooperate fully with the Commission in order to
ensure the proper conduct of the inquiry (see annex 1).
D. Joint action by the United Nations and the
Organization of African Unity
19. Pursuant to the proposal of the Government of
Togo and in accordance with the statement by the Chairperson of the
Sub-Commission, the two Secretaries-General proceeded, as mentioned earlier, to
set up the International Commission of Inquiry for Togo. Assistance was
provided from the outset by the competent body of each organization, i.e. the United
Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights and the Legal Division of the
Organization of African Unity, as well as by the permanent mission of the
Organization of African Unity to the United Nations Office at Geneva.
Subsequently, the Office of the High Commissioner made available to the
Commission a support team of four professional staff members, two secretaries
and three security officers, who helped it to discharge its mandate in both
Geneva and the field.
20. The Commission wishes to thank the Office of
the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights for providing it with
assistance in discharging its mandate, particularly with regard to the
provision of a support team. It also wishes to thank the Organization of
African Unity for its contribution to its work. It wishes to stress, however,
that it alone is responsible for the observations and conclusions contained in
this report.
E. Difficulties encountered by the Commission before its
departure for the field
21. As mentioned earlier, the Commission was set
up on 7 June 2000. It held its first meeting in Geneva from 31 July to 4
August. In accordance with the programme of activities adopted at the meeting,
the Commission had planned to travel to Togo on 27 September. It was not able
to do so until 11 November, or 1½ months later, which considerably delayed the
beginning of its field activities.
22. Some difficulties did indeed arise, leading to
a laborious dialogue between the Government of Togo and the Commission.
23. The first difficulties referred to the prior
conditions set by the Commission for the conduct of its field mission. These
related, on the one hand, to the withdrawal of the complaint lodged by the
Togolese authorities against Mr. Pierre Sané and persons suspected of having cooperated
with the Amnesty International inquiry and, on the other, to the provision of
written guarantees by the Togolese authorities concerning the protection of
potential Commission witnesses against any legal proceedings or reprisals
subsequent to the field mission. The provision of such guarantees and the
suspension of the above-mentioned legal proceedings were a necessary condition
for the inquiry to be conducted in a calm, objective and effective manner.
24. Concerning in particular the withdrawal of the
proceedings against
Mr. Pierre Sané, the Commission also based itself
on a letter dated 12 March 2000 from President Gnassingbé Eyadema to the
Secretary-General of the United Nations, undertaking to withdraw the
proceedings against Mr. Sané, “when the Commission starts its investigations on
the field”. The Commission reiterated its request in this connection to the
Government of Togo at its first meetings in August and September 2000 and in
several telephone conversations which its Chairman held with the competent
Togolese authorities, in particular the Prime Minister. The Commission also
referred to its requirements in letters from its Chairman to the Prime Minister
of Togo on 26 and 28 September and 6 October 2000 respectively. The final
replies of the Government of Togo to those letters, regarding the withdrawal of
the proceedings against Mr. Sané “and company” and the guarantee that no one
who testified before the Commission would be prosecuted, did not reach the
Commission until 10 and 16 October 2000. On 23 October 2000, the Government of
Togo wrote to the Chairman of the Commission reiterating its confidence, as
follows:
“We have taken note of the information relating to
a mission of inquiry to Burundi which you conducted during 1994 for Amnesty International.
We wish to express our great satisfaction at
receiving this information from you spontaneously, in a gesture which we
appreciate and one which denotes great intellectual probity and a strong sense
of responsibility on your part.
Given the brief nature of your mission to Burundi
and the fact the mandate involved was a specific and very limited one which did
not make you a staff member of Amnesty International or in any way subordinate
to that body, we would like to confirm that we have no reservations whatsoever
to your presence on this Commission.”
25. Subsequent difficulties concerned reservations
and objections entered by the Government of Togo concerning the composition of
the Commission’s support team. It insisted that a quota of support team members
should be reserved for the Office of the Secretary-General of the Organization
of African Unity in order to “reflect the joint nature of the Commission” and
also demanded that three people chosen for the support team should be rejected.
Concerning the first point, talks held with the Office of the Secretary-General
of Organization of African Unity indicated that the absence of its officials on
the support team would in no way mar the joint nature of the Commission and,
concerning the second point, the Commission was obliged to replace the
“rejected” members of the support team in order to avoid its activities coming
to a standstill. It did so only for that reason, reiterating the principle that
the Commission alone was responsible for choosing its staff.
26. On arriving in Togo, the Commission was given
a document attesting to the suspension of proceedings against Mr. Sané and the
others, i.e. an order dated 10 November 2000 from the senior judge of the Lomé
Court on application of the same date by the Public Prosecutor.
III. FIELD MISSION
27. The field mission enabled the Commission to
have access to several information sources, to collect testimony and documents
concerning the allegations at issue between the Government of Togo and Amnesty
International and to conduct on-site visits.
A. Information sources
28. The information sources basically consisted of
testimony. The Commission did, however, have access to documentary sources and
was able to conduct on-site visits in certain cases.
1. Documentary sources
29. The documents collected consist essentially of
newspapers of the day and of reports by human rights associations and
institutions, journalists’ trade unions, political parties and the Government
of Togo itself. Amnesty International also produced the documentation on which
its report was based.
30. The Commission also collected several
documents consisting of reports by official entities and non-governmental
organizations and by diplomatic missions accredited in Togo and Benin. It also
had access to clippings from the private press concerning the matter under
inquiry. Of the documents in question, mention should be made of those which
were drawn up following a field inquiry into the allegations, namely:
(a) The white paper of the Government of Togo
concerning Amnesty International’s allegations;
(b) The disputed Amnesty International report of 5
May 1999, a subsequent report by the same organization entitled “Togo: Time for
Accountability” (AI: AFR 57/22/99/F, 20 July 1999) and a confidential document
entitled “Togo: rappel de l’exposé oral fait par la delegation d’Amnesty
International devant la Commission d’enquête internationale sur le Togo, le
vendredi 22 septembre 2000 à Genève” (“Togo: Statement delivered by the Amnesty
International delegation before the International Commission of Inquiry for
Togo, Friday, 22 September 2000 in Geneva”) (AI: AFR 57/13/00/F, October 2000);
(c) Report (briefing) on the inquiry conducted by
the Ministry of Defence of Benin (Department of Protection, Security and
Defence), prepared in July 2000.
31. The Commission also consulted numerous
articles from the press, including one from the Togolese newspaper l’Aurore,
dated 18 August 2000, and one from the French daily Le Figaro, dated 1
July 1999.
2. On-site visits
32. As stated earlier, the Amnesty International
report refers to hundreds of bodies found at sea and on the beaches of Togo and
Benin, several of which had allegedly been buried by local fishermen and
villagers. To verify those allegations, the Commission conducted on-site visits
to the sites concerned, as follows:
(a) Lomé, from 13 to 18 November 2000 and 4 to 12
December 2000;
(b) Cotonou, Benin, from 19 to 23 November 2000;
(c) Grand-Popo, Agoué and Ouidah, Benin, from 24
November to 2 December 2000.
The Commission visited several communities
referred to in the allegations. These included the villages of Ayi-Guinnou and
Avlo (25 November), Agonnêkamé (26 November), Zogbedji-Plage (27 November)
Agoué (28 November) and Ayido-Plage (30 November). On those occasions it heard
nearly 30 fishermen in all and visited a few graves located directly on the
beaches;
(d) Agbozume, Ghana, in the Volta region on the
Togolese border, from 2 to 4 December 2000; and
(e) The Togolese communities of Afagnan (6
December 2000), Dokpohoé, in the cantons of Sandomé (7 December 2000), Sokodé
and Kara-Sud (9 December 2000).
33. These visits were supplemented by consultation
of the registers (police diaries) of several gendarmerie brigades with
territorial competence to register accidental deaths (drownings, traffic
accidents, hunting accidents, etc.) occurring in these communities. The
Commission was given access to the registers of the brigades of Grand-Popo (27
November 2000) and Agoué (28 November 2000). Lacking prior authorization from
the Public Prosecutor, the Deputy Commander of the Ouidah brigade did not allow
the Commission to consult its register.
34. As Amnesty International’s allegations also
referred to the use of aircraft, including a Buffalo aircraft, to dump bodies
at sea, the Commission travelled to the Lomé-Tonkoin military airport on 17
November 2000, to visit the military aircraft there and requested and obtained
technical information on their functioning. The information concerned the
aircraft’s operational features, in particular their possibilities of dumping
bodies in flight. To supplement this information, the Commission also travelled
to the premises of the Agency for Air Navigation Safety in Africa and
Madagascar (ASECNA), in Lomé, on 11 December 2000, where it obtained
information concerning flights, including local flights, made by civil and
military aircraft from the Lomé-Tonkoin airport from 1 January to 31 December
1998. This information concerns the aircrafts’ take-off and landing times.
3. Testimony
35. The Commission collected more than 1,000
accounts in all. These accounts may be divided into two categories. The first
consists of testimony from persons who state that they have seen or buried
corpses washed up by the sea, in Benin. These eyewitnesses are basically
fishermen and other villagers living in the communities located along the
adjacent sea coasts of Togo and Benin, from Grand-Popo to Ouidah. The second
category of testimony consists of statements and opinions from persons with
knowledge of the allegations. This category includes diplomats, governmental,
prefectoral and communal leaders, representatives of specialized agencies of
the United Nations system, journalists, teachers, human rights activists,
political activists and any other persons who spoke with the Commission either
spontaneously or at its request.
B. Attempts to bribe witnesses in Benin
36. During its inquiries around Benin,
especially in the sub-prefectures of Grand-Popo and Agoué, the Commission was
confronted with manoeuvres aimed at intimidating and bribing the fishermen whom
it wished to question. To be sure, this was apparently not the first attempt by
the Togolese authorities to cover up the tracks. The documentary sources which
the Commission had to study for 1999 and the testimony in this connection
suggest that the Government of Togo had already tried earlier to bribe Beninese
journalists and Beninese citizens living in the areas where the bodies had been
washed up. Similar incidents had been observed previously in June 1999 -
testimony of district heads and some of the people living in Beninese
localities bordering on Togo - and had led in particular to a protest march by
the people of Grand-Popo.
1. Testimony of district heads and other Beninese nationals
to the Togolese
press
37. Following the publication of the Amnesty
International report in May 1999, some Grand-Popo (Benin) district heads and
other natives of the same region appeared on Togolese television to refute the
claims of the “discovery of dead bodies” out at sea and on some beaches in
Benin. On Saturday, 22 May 1999, four district heads of Grand-Popo commune went
to Lomé, without the knowledge of the local administrative authorities and of
the people they were supposed to represent, to testify on Togolese television
and radio that they had never seen bodies washed up on the beaches. The same
sources report that these district heads were received by President Eyadéma and
were paid by him for their testimony. When they made their statements on Togolese
television, these district heads and the other persons concerned appeared in
traditional costumes normally worn by the Popo community for their main
festivals, especially at Whitsun, during reunions of the members of NONVICHA
(an association founded in 1923, representing all the Popos from Benin and
abroad). Their testimony reportedly caused consternation in the Popo community
and profound indignation among its leaders and prominent figures, who summoned
the persons concerned in order to question them and reprimand them publicly.
Popular discontent was furthermore expressed in a protest march organized at
Grand-Popo on 9 June 1999. This march
ended with the handing in of a petition to the sub-prefect which soundly
condemned these actions and called for the dismissal of the district heads
concerned. Four of the district heads were, in fact, suspended by the
sub-prefect for having gone to Togo without higher authorization.
38. When asked whether these district heads and
other persons were censured for having testified in Togo with the symbols of
the Popo community or for having lied, the prominent figures and witnesses
questioned gave both reasons.
2. The media
39. In 1999, after the publication of the report
of the Beninese Human Rights League on the affair of the “Togolese bodies” (a
report that confirmed the discovery of Togolese bodies, which it estimated as
numbering about 100), the Togolese authorities reportedly approached some
Beninese journalists and asked them to deny the League’s information subject to
remuneration. These attempts to bribe Beninese journalists to discredit the
report of the Beninese Human Rights League apparently failed and were unmasked
by the Beninese newspaper Le Progrès, in its issue 277 of 27 July 1999,
in an article entitled “Eyadéma wants to bribe the Beninese press”. Benin’s
Observatory for Good Practice and Ethics in the Media (ODEM) looked into the
case and took sanctions against the journalists implicated in this affair.
3. The fishermen
40. Some fishermen likely to give evidence to the
Commission were approached by Mr. Philippe Adahoumehé, an agronomist working
for an NGO based in Comé, Benin, who dissuaded them - by bribery (money) or
threats - from cooperating with the Commission. Some witnesses admitted to the Commission
that they had received sums of money amounting to CFAF 3,000 not to give
evidence and others, who had declined the offer, were threatened. Mr.
Adahoumehé reportedly told them: “Be careful, your names are already in the
office of the President of the Republic”, by which he meant “the President of
the Republic of Benin”. On Saturday, 25 November 2000, the Commission went to
the village of Ayi-Guinnou, where it was to hear testimony from a group of
fishermen. Some witnesses revealed at this meeting that, two days before the
Commission’s arrival, Mr. Adahoumehé had given the fishermen money to deny
having seen any dead bodies. Among the fishermen questioned, one witness
admitted having received money from Mr. Adahoumehé, but affirmed that this had
not prevented him from telling the truth about what he had seen.
41. The Commission informed the Grand-Popo
sub-prefect about the actions of this individual, wondering also for whom and
at whose prompting he was acting. The sub-prefect told the Commission that he
had summoned and questioned him, but the man had denied that his actions were
in any way related to the Commission’s inquiry. He stated that the handing out
of the money was part of his work of supervising a group of fishermen. The
Commission is not satisfied with this answer. Indeed, it noted an increasing
lack of cooperation on the part of the people whom it had arranged to meet and
who had promised to cooperate. Most of those not yet questioned had withdrawn
their earlier offers to cooperate with the Commission. The Commission also
observed that its movements in the villages of this area were preceded or
followed by visits from Mr. Adahoumehé. The Commission requested the Beninese
authorities to provide for the safety of the people who had cooperated with it
in this area, especially those who had received threats from Mr. Adahoumehé,
and stated that it would hold him responsible for any incident that might occur
after the mission.
IV. ALLEGATIONS OF EXTRAJUDICIAL EXECUTIONS IN 1998
42. The Amnesty International report of 5 May 1999
(see para. 13) alleges, inter alia, on page 26 that some bodies were
found on the beaches of Togo and Benin and that others were seen at sea off the
coast of Benin for at least four days. The Togolese Government has itself
published a white paper (see para. 15) rejecting these allegations. Since these
allegations concerned the beaches of Benin, the Commission went to that
country, in particular visiting the sub-prefectures of Grand-Popo, which
borders on Togo, and Ouidah. It stayed there from 24 November to 2 December
2000. The members of the Commission visited numerous fishing villages extending
along the shores of the ocean up to the Togolese border to the west.
43. In addition to the fishermen, the Commission
also heard the accounts of Beninese officials and other persons.
44. These many witness accounts, while gathered
from different places, agree on the following points.
A.
Allegations concerning the discovery of bodies on the “high seas”
and
bodies recovered and buried by fishermen
45. The Commission went to the Togolese and
Beninese beaches concerned. Around these beaches, there are fishermen organized
in villages and engaged in small-scale fishing. Some villages have existed for
more than a century. The communities living in these villages generally speak
the same language and have relatives on both sides of the Benin-Togo border.
Some Ghanaian nationals are also to be found in these villages. These
communities all seem to live in harmony. Some Togolese refugees share the fate
of their Beninese “brothers”. Many have returned home, while others have
settled in Benin.
46. In general, the Commission’s arrival was
welcomed and a willingness to cooperate was perceptible, although fear of
reprisals in some cases did not allow everyone wishing to cooperate with the
Commission to do so.
47. Several graves where the fishermen had
reportedly buried some of the dead bodies found were shown to the Commission.
The Commission was unable to exhume the bodies owing to a lack of human and
scientific resources.
1. Bodies discovered on the “high seas”
48. It should be made clear that the term “high
seas” is used by the fishermen to mean an offshore area between 10 and 20 km
from the coast. It does not correspond to the term “high seas” as defined by
the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea concluded on 10 December
1982.
49. The many witness statements gathered are
concordant: during part of 1998, several fishermen reportedly saw a large
number of dead bodies floating while they were fishing on the “high seas”. On
discovering these bodies, some fishermen took fright and for a while reportedly
stopped going out to fish or avoided going onto the “high seas” and simply kept
close to the shore. It would appear from the descriptions given that some
bodies were found almost naked, and others clothed, most of them being in an
advanced state of decomposition. The discovery of these dead bodies at the time
became a subject of conversation and a cause for concern throughout the area.
50. When the Commission raised the problem of the
number of dead bodies, however, the estimates given by the fishermen differed.
When asked by the Commission, “Approximately how many bodies did you see?”,
some answered “many”, others estimated that they had seen about 60 bodies, and
still others spoke of 100 or 150 bodies. No group of fishermen (whose boats
carry 7 to 15) apparently had the courage or presence of mind to make an actual
count of the floating bodies. The first reaction of the fishermen on seeing
this frightening spectacle was reportedly to leave the area and make their way
back to their villages.
51. The discovery of dead bodies on the “high
seas” seems to be corroborated by concordant testimony. However, it would be
risky for the Commission to put forward any figure to determine the exact
number. Furthermore, concerning the allegations of the use of aircraft to dump
bodies at sea, the Commission is unable, with the information currently in its
possession, either to confirm or to dismiss such claims.
2. Bodies recovered and buried by fishermen
52. The Commission gathered numerous concordant
and consistent witness accounts about the unusually large number of unknown
bodies said to have been recovered on the coast and buried by fishermen during
the period of 1998 in question. The fishermen took the Commission to the
various sites where these bodies had reportedly been buried. According to their
accounts, at least two bodies were found with no heads. When asked whether the
heads might have been eaten by fish, the fishermen stated categorically that
the fish do not eat heads but only bite at arms and legs.
53. Some of the fishermen who regularly informed
the local gendarmerie whenever they found a dead body apparently quickly tired
of doing so. The gendarmerie would make a charge of CFAF 3,000 to 5,000 each
time they were called out. Moreover, frequent summonses to the gendarmerie
station are said to have deterred the fishermen from informing the authorities
and they reportedly opted to bury the bodies in a hurry and secretly or else
quite simply pushed them a little further out to sea so that they would wash up
elsewhere.
54. For greater certainty, the Commission asked
the fishermen whether the bodies were not those of inhabitants from neighbouring
areas, i.e. Beninese. The fishermen were almost unanimous in saying that when
there is a natural drowning or a fishing boat capsizes, the coastal dwellers
from Togo to Benin alert one another, and the families concerned come and pick
up the
bodies. In conclusion, according to the fishermen,
the dead bodies found were not victims of natural drowning or the capsizing of
a fishing boat. Since the bodies had been carried from west to east by the sea
current, they could have come, according to these fishermen, only from Togo,
which is situated geographically to the west of Benin.
B. Allegations of extrajudicial executions in the
provinces of Togo
55. The Commission gathered numerous
witness accounts relating to allegations of extrajudicial executions perpetrated
inside Togo. Two cases of executions were, for example, reported to the
Commission at Kara-Sud. Mr. Palanga N’Gamnouwe Germain, a chief forest warden,
was allegedly summoned, with no apparent reason, on 24 April 1998 to the Kara
gendarmerie station, where he is said to have been arrested and tortured
severely for three days; he reportedly died there on 27 April. His arrest was
allegedly due to remarks he had made to the gendarmes about the way in which
they had parked a private vehicle on a bridge with the doors open. During the
same period, Kéléou Pélé, arrested for death threats against his older brother
by the Kara gendarmerie, reportedly died after three days of detention
following the torture allegedly inflicted upon him.
56. The Commission presents below two summary
tables listing the cases brought to its attention:
Table 1
Alleged victims of extrajudicial execution
|
Name
|
Date and place of birth or age
|
Occupation
|
Last known address
|
Date of death
|
Place of death
|
|
POMEAVOR Hoffia Messan
|
1968
|
Lottery ticket seller
|
Akato Avoemé (Lomé commune)
|
March 1998
|
Akato
|
|
TEKO ALLYN Anani
|
24.12.1957
|
Unskilled labourer
|
OTP-Kpeme (Togo)
|
November 1998
|
Reportedly killed outside his home
|
|
AMOUZOU Koffi
|
27 years
|
|
Aflao (Ketu district), Ghana
|
June 1998
|
Azaou
|
|
AHIAKPO Koffi Roger
|
30 years
|
|
Aflao (Ketu district), Ghana
|
June 1998
|
Azaou
|
|
KOSSI Kossi
|
25 years
|
Apprentice tailor
|
Afagnan
|
26.6.1998
|
Afagnan
|
|
KEKGBÉ Koffi Mathieu
|
|
Photographer
|
Dokpohoé village
|
28.9.1998
|
Killed and disembowelled at his home
|
|
PALANGA N’GAMNOUWE Germain
|
31.7.1963, Lomé
|
Deputy forest warden
|
Kara, Chaminade district
|
27.4.1998
|
Died following torture at Kara gendarmerie
station
|
|
KÉLÉOU Pélé
|
32 years
|
|
Kara
|
April 1998
|
Died following torture at Kara gendarmerie
station
|
Table 2
Alleged deaths resulting from torture and ill-treatment
in detention centres
|
Name
|
Date and place of birth or age
|
Occupation
|
Last known address
|
Date of death
|
Place of death
|
|
AHADJI Kodjo
|
35 years
|
Builder
|
Civil prison, Lomé
|
December 1998
|
Lomé
|
|
TENOU Koffi
|
65 years
|
Salesman
|
Civil prison, Lomé
|
June 1998
|
Lomé
|
C. Allegations of enforced disappearances
57. The Commission’s visit to Ghana, close to the
Togolese border, from 2 to 4 December 2000, enabled it to meet the next of kin
of persons reported missing and/or summarily executed. During the various
disturbances and clashes between the political opposition and the Government
which Togo has witnessed in the 1990s, many opposition party members have
sought refuge in neighbouring countries, including Ghana. For the most part, these
refugees are young. Many of them have apparently interrupted their high school
studies; they have no occupational training and no resources to fall back on.
Some of them, in order to survive, are obliged to cross the border between
Ghana and Togo in order to obtain small amounts of money and food from their
families.
58. According to witness reports, young refugees
have apparently been detained by the security forces when entering or leaving
Togo. These arrests take the form of abductions by plain-clothes members of the
security forces who use unmarked vehicles or vehicles without number plates.
They generally operate under the command of Captain Yark.
59. Many people are afraid to try to discover the
whereabouts of their relatives. Others have tried and have reportedly visited
gendarmerie and police stations, to no avail. Many relatives have given up all
hope of finding their kin alive once they have been arrested by the security
forces.
60. The Commission has identified eight
disappearances that took place in 1998. But it should be remembered that fear
of reprisals has dissuaded many relatives from testifying.
Table 3
Missing persons
|
Name
|
Date and place of birth, age and origin
|
Occupation
|
Last known address
|
Date of arrest
|
Comments
|
|
AKAKPOSSA Koffi “Hitler”
|
1970, Lomé
|
Welder
|
Sanzulé refugee camp
|
22.12.1998
|
Not seen since arrest
|
|
ASSIONGBON Nicolas
|
1968, Lomé
|
Dressmaker
|
Avoemé - Lokotomey V/R, Ghana
|
October 1998
|
Not seen since arrest
|
|
DJIEWONE Adrisse “Ringo”
|
1970
|
Car parts salesman
|
Sikakope Denu, Ghana
|
10.8.1998
|
Not seen since arrest
|
|
EDOH Komlan
|
1980, Akato
|
Student
|
CEG Sanguera - Lomé
|
20.8.1998
|
Not seen since arrest
|
|
KOUNI Kodjo
|
1976, Akato
|
Painter
|
Akato Avoemé
|
20.8.1998
|
Not seen since arrest
|
|
HOMAWOO Yao
|
24 years
|
Forwarding agent
|
Gbenyedji district
|
8.2.1998
|
Not seen since arrest
|
|
AKAKPO Kokou
|
39 years, Lomé
|
Driver
|
Aflao - V/R - Ghana
|
7.2.1998
|
Not seen since arrest
|
|
SENYO Eugène
|
47 years, Paline
|
Driver
|
Ghana
|
7.2.1998
|
Arrested while travelling to Togo
|
61. As in the case of the alleged extrajudicial
executions in the provinces, the Commission forwarded the list of arrested and
missing persons to the Togolese authorities in a letter dated 12 December 2000
with a view to eliciting fuller information about the whereabouts of the
individuals in question. As of the adoption of this report, no reply has been
received.
V. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
A. Conclusions
62. The Commission began inquiries at its first
meeting in Geneva, and completed them with its five-week field mission. The
various avenues of inquiry pursued by the Commission have enabled it to draw
the following conclusions.
63. The Commission is convinced that allegations
of extrajudicial executions in Togo should be given due consideration. In the
main, those singled out for execution have been members of opposition parties,
but in some cases persons arrested for offences under ordinary law have also
been executed. As to the perpetrators, various accounts seem to indicate that
they are individuals associated with the security forces, the gendarmerie and
the militias that operate in tandem with the authorities. In addition to
extrajudicial, summary and arbitrary executions, these elements have engaged in
torture and ill-treatment of detainees, and the rape and abduction of women in
certain areas.
64. Moreover, armed militiamen closely linked to
the authorities and often operating in groups, who reportedly enjoy the support
and encouragement of the current Prime Minister, Mr. Agbeyomé Kodjo, are said
to rape rural women in the presence of their husbands. They also abduct women
and hand them over to other men for payment. In the course of these night-time
raids, the militiamen also rob their victims.
65. Although they have been apprised of these
allegations, the gendarmerie and the local authorities have been unable to put
a stop to the crimes. Exasperated by this situation, rural people reported
these incidents to the Ligue Togolaise des Droits de l’Homme (Togolese
League for Human Rights, LTDH). Thus, approximately 12 women aged between 12
and 40 are reported to have been raped in Yoto Prefecture. No judicial
proceedings have been set in motion as a result of the victims’ complaints.
66. Regarding establishment of responsibilities,
the Commission is of the opinion that a judicial inquiry at the national level
is the only means of identifying the individuals responsible for these human
rights violations.
67. Regarding allegations that bodies have been
discovered by fisherman on the “high seas”, the Commission has already stated
that a number of accounts appear to substantiate these reports. However, the
divergent estimates of the number of bodies seen by fishermen do not permit the
Commission either to confirm or to deny an exact number. Nor can it confirm or
deny, on the basis of the information currently available, allegations that
aircraft have been used to dump bodies on the “high seas”.
68. Nevertheless, the above-mentioned facts point
to the existence of a systematic pattern of human rights violations in Togo in
the course of 1998. Accordingly, the Commission wishes to submit the following
recommendations.
B. Recommendations
69. Effective implementation of the Commission’s
recommendations should contribute to the establishment of an environment in
Togo favourable to respect for human rights, the elucidation of the facts which
this inquiry seeks to achieve, and the identification and possible prosecution
of the alleged perpetrators of these violations, especially those involving
extrajudicial executions. These recommendations are addressed, respectively, to
the Secretaries-General of the United Nations and the Organization of African
Unity, to the international community, to the Commission on Human Rights and
the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights and to the Government of
Togo.
1. To the Secretaries-General of the United Nations
and the Organization of African Unity
70. The Commission strongly recommends the
publication of this report.
71. The Commission also recommends the appointment
of another team of experts to be entrusted with the task of verifying the
technical data concerning the operation of aircraft used by the Togolese armed
forces, the computerized records of flights at the Lomé-Tonkoin airport
throughout 1998, and the trajectories of the bodies in the territorial sea
adjacent to the coasts of Togo and Benin.
72. The Commission would have liked to have more
time and facilities to elucidate most of the facts related to its inquiry. As
this was not possible, it recommends that the two Secretaries-General should
appoint a team of forensic scientists to exhume and examine bodies reportedly
buried in Togo and Benin. This expert appraisal should help to determine the
identity of the victims and the causes of their deaths.
2. To the international community
73. Bearing in mind its concerns with regard to
the protection of the witnesses who have cooperated in its inquiries, the
Commission recommends that the States Members of the United Nations and the
relevant international organizations should provide their financial support to
the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights with a view to enabling it
to implement a mechanism of regular follow-up of the situation of these
witnesses.
3. To the Commission on Human Rights and the African
Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights
74. The Commission recommends the appointment of a
special rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Togo. The Commission is
convinced that the creation of such a mandate would
allow for the development of closer cooperation
between the Commission on Human Rights and the Togolese authorities and
Togolese civil society with a view to better protection of human rights in
Togo.
75. The Commission furthermore suggests that the
Special Rapporteurs of the Commission on Human Rights and the African
Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights concerned, respectively, with
extrajudicial, summary and arbitrary executions, torture and violence against
women should make periodic visits to Togo. The Commission is convinced that
such visits and the resulting mission reports would enable the Government of
Togo and Togolese civil society to prevent similar violations from being
perpetrated in the future.
4. To the Government of Togo
76. The Commission recommends that a criminal
inquiry should be commenced as soon as possible through the establishment of a
special team of judges entrusted not only with elucidating the various
allegations of extrajudicial executions, enforced disappearances and other
violations mentioned in this report and in other documents, but also with
prosecuting and punishing, as appropriate, the perpetrators of these
violations. Should such an initiative be undertaken, the Commission would
appreciate the Government informing the United Nations and the Organization of
African Unity about the results of these actions.
77. The Commission furthermore recommends that the
Government of Togo should adopt legislative and other measures to punish and
prevent the perpetration of such violations, in conformity inter alia
with the Principles on the Effective Prevention and Investigation of
Extra-legal, Arbitrary and Summary Executions.