basis of these international instruments is proven, that it must therefore to rectify. 58. However, the extent and the main purpose of this case stems from the mandate given by the African Union, Senegal to judge "on behalf of Africa by a competent court with guarantees of a fair trial " , the Court must find the equation or the balance between the bottom of the mandate and methods typically borrow international law in such situations. The Court noted that the bottom of the mandate of the African Union expressed that the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights has devoted its article 15 where the text provides: 1. "No one shall be condemned for é or omission which did not constitute a criminal offense under national or international level at the time they were committed.Similarly, there shall be imposed no greater sentence than the one that was applicable at the time the offense was committed. If subsequent to this offense, the law provides for a lighter penalty, the offender shall benefit thereby. 2. Nothing in this section does s precludes the trial and conviction of any person for any act or omission which, when they were committed, was criminal, according to general principles of law recognized by all nations. " The first paragraph of this text, the Court noted that if the factual basis of the intention to try the applicant did not constitute criminal acts under national law of Senegal (in Senegal or violates the principle of non retroactivity enshrined in the text) they are under the international law obligation as such. However, it is to avoid impunity for acts considered, according to international law as criminal that paragraph 2 of Article 15 of the Covenant provides for the possibility to judge or condemn "any person for any acts or omission which, when they were committed, was criminal, according to general principles of law recognized by all nations . "