Assembly/AU/11 (XIII) Annex II Page 17   26. Proceedings on the basis of universal jurisdiction been instituted to date in only eight of the twenty-seven Member States of the EU, namely Austria, Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Spain and the UK. The number of cases brought in these eight states pursuant to universal jurisdiction has been relatively small. Such proceedings have been instituted or sought against nationals of a variety of states, namely Afghanistan,123 Argentina,124 BosniaHerzegovina,125 the Central African Republic,126 Chile,127 China,128 Côte d’Ivoire,129 Cuba,130 the Democratic Republic of the Congo,131 El Salvador,132 Equatorial Guinea,133 Iran,134 Iraq,135 Israel,136 Guatemala,137 Mauritania,138                                                              123 Zardad, 19 July 2005, Central Criminal Court (England, UK); Public Prosecutor v H, ILDC 636 (NE 2007), 29 January 2007, Court of Appeal of The Hague (Netherlands); Public Prosecutor v Hesam and Jalalzoy, 8 July 2008, Supreme Court (Netherlands); Public Prosecutor v F, ILDC 797 (NE 2007), 25 June 2007, District Court of The Hague (Netherlands). 124 Cavallo, 1 September 2000, Audiencia Nacional (Central Examining Magistrate No 5) and order of 14 March 2008, Audiencia Nacional (Plenary) (Spain); Scilingo, 1 October 2007, Supreme Court (Spain). 125 See e.g. Public Prosecutor v Tadić, 13 February 1994, Federal Supreme Court (Germany); Javor et al. v X, 127 ILR 126, 132, 26 March 1996, Court of Cassation (France); Public Prosecutor v Cvjetković, 13 July 1994, Supreme Court/31 May 1995, Landesgericht Salburg (Austria); Public Prosecutor v Knesević, 11 November 1997, Supreme Court (Netherlands); Public Prosecutor v Djajić, 23 May 1997, Bavarian Supreme Court (Germany); Public Prosecutor v Jorgić, 30 April 1999, Federal Supreme Court (Germany); X v SB and DB, 11 December 1998, Federal Supreme Court (Germany); Public Prosecutor v Sokolović, 21 February 2001, Federal Supreme Court (Germany); Public Prosecutor v Kusljić, 21 February 2001, Federal Supreme Court (Germany). 126 See above, note 115, for the complaint in Belgium against President Ange-Félix Patasse. 127 Chili Komitee Nederland v Pinochet, 4 January 1995, Court of Appeal of Amsterdam (Netherlands); Unión Progresista de Fiscales de España et al. v Pinochet, 5 November 1998, Audiencia Nacional (Plenary) (Spain); Aguilar Diaz et al. v Pinochet, order of 6 November 1998, Tribunal of First Instance of Brussels (Belgium); R v Bow Street Metropolitan Stipendiary Magistrate, Ex parte Pinochet Ugarte (No 3) [2000] 1 AC 147, 24 March 1999, House of Lords (England, UK). 128 See e.g. above, note 121, for the refusal of the German Federal Prosecutor to investigate former President Jiang Zemin. See also Re Bo Xilai, 128 ILR 713, 8 November 2005, Bow Street Magistrates’ Court (England, UK); Tibet, order of 10 January 2006, Audiencia Nacional (Plenary) (Spain); Falun Gong, 22 October 2007, Constitutional Court (Spain). 129 See above, note 115, for the complaint in Belgium against President Laurent Gbagbo. 130 See above, note 115, for the complaint in Belgium against President Fidel Castro. See also Castro, 4 March 1999, Audiencia Nacional (Plenary) and 13 December 2007, Audiencia Nacional (Plenary) (Spain). 131 Public Prosecutor v Ndombasi, 16 April 2002, Court of Appeal of Brussels (Belgium). 132 El Salvador, 13 January 2009, Audiencia Nacional (Central Examining Magistrate No 6) (Spain). 133 Obiang Nguema et al., 23 December 1998, Audiencia Nacional (Central Examining Magistrate No 5) (Spain). 134 A complaint filed in Belgium by private parties, before the Sharon case in the Court of Cassation and the 5 August 2003 legislative amendments, against former President Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani did not go forward. 135 See above, note 115, for the complaint in Belgium against President Saddam Hussein. See also the case report to the Public Prosecutor of Vienna concerning Izzat Ibrahim Khalil Al Doori, submitted by Peter Pilz on 13 August 1999 (Austria). 136 See e.g. above, note 119, for the application for the prosecution of Ambassador Carmi Gillon in Denmark. See also Abbas Hijazi et al. v Sharon et al., 127 ILR 110, 121, 12 February 2003, Court of Cassation (Belgium); Re Mofaz, 128 ILR 709, 12 February 2004, Bow Street Magistrates’ Court (England, UK); Ben-Eliezer et al., 29 January 2009, Audiencia Nacional (Central Examining Magistrate No 4) (Spain). In September 2005, an arrest warrant was issued in the UK for Major General Doron Almog, suspected of responsibility for grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, but General Almog fled the jurisdiction to avoid arrest. In May 2008, an application was made in the Netherlands for the arrest of Ami Ayalon, Minister Without Portfolio in the Israeli government, in relation to allegations of torture committed while he was the Director of the GSS; he too managed to leave the jurisdiction. 137 Menchú Tum et al. v Ríos Montt et al., ILDC 137 (ES 2005), 26 September 2005, Constitutional Court (Spain). 138 See above, note 115, for the complaint in Belgium against President Maaouya Ould Sid’Ahmed Taya. See also Fédération Internationale des Ligues des Droits de l’Homme et al. v Ould Dah, 8 July 2002, Court of Appeal of Nîmes/1 July 2005, Nîmes Assize Court (France). This last case was taken to the European Court of Human Rights, which on 17 March 2009 declared the application inadmissible for lack of breach of article 7 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The Court, however, upheld recourse to universal jurisdiction for acts of torture. See Ould Dah v France, Application No 13113/03, decision on admissibility, 17 March 2009. Version 31 March 09(FINAL)