178. A few months later, the Committee against Torture came out with a ruling on the merits of the case in which it stated that Senegal had violated Articles 5, paragraph 2, and 7 of the Convention and charged the authorities to « hand over the case to competent authorities to proceed with criminal action or, failing that, as long as there exists an extradition request from Belgium, to comply with that request, or where necessary, to any extradition request from another State in line with the provisions of the Convention.62 » 179. In July 2006, following a report by the Committee of Eminent African Legal Experts, the African Union officially « mandated the Republic of Senegal, on behalf of the African Union, to proceed with the prosecution and trial of Hissene Habré, by a competent Senegalese court, and provide guarantees for a fair trial » and requested its organs and institutions to provide this country with «the necessary assistance for the smooth conduct and proper outcome of the trial.63 » 180. On 12 February 2007, the Senegalese National Assembly adopted Laws No. 2007-02 and 2007-05 to amend the Criminal Code and the Criminal Procedure Code respectively to enable Senegalese courts investigate crimes against humanity, war crimes and genocide, thus removing certain legal barriers for the trial of Hissene Habré. 181. But the previous Senegalese authorities made the continuation of the Hissene Habré criminal case contingent upon the provision of the necessary funds for the conduct of the trial and even threatened to expel the accused if nothing was done in that regard. Finally, at the end of a round table meeting of donors, Senegal accepted to organize the trial on condition that an amount of 8.6 million Euros was made available to the country. 182. Looking at the attitude of the Senegalese authorities as a tactic intended not to try Hissene Habré, Belgium requested the International Criminal Court (ICC) on 19 February 2009 to direct Senegal to try Hissene Habré or extradite him. At the request of the ICC, Senegal accepted to prevent Hissene Habré from leaving its territory until the State had taken a final decision on the matter. 183. Meanwhile, Hissene Habré’s lawyers, fearing that the 2007 laws could be used against their client, referred the case to the ECOWAS Court of Justice, which in turn decided that « the mandate received (by Senegal) from the African Union assigned the country the task of designing and suggesting all the specific modalities for the prosecution and trial of Hissene Habré in strict compliance with an ad hoc international special procedure 64». 62 Cf. Paragraph 10 of the ICC Decision of 17 May 2006, Communication 181/2001, Souleymane Guengueng and others vs. the Government of Senegal 63 Cf. paragraphs 2 and 3 of the Decision on the Trial of Hissene Habré and the African Union, Assembly/AU/Dec.127 (VII) 64 See ECOWAS Court of Justice, Order No ECW/CCJ/JUD/06/10 of 18 November 2010, the trial of Hissene Habré vs. the Republic of Senegal, paragraph 61. 42