provision into the Constitution which reinforced the « ivoirité » concept by
stipulating that « Every Presidential candidate … should never have held
another nationality ». Based on the said provision, the Supreme Court of Côte
d’Ivoire rejected the candidacy of Mr. Ouattara on the grounds that he had
held burkinabè nationality. Following the boycott of the election by Mr.
Ouattara’s party, the Rassemblement des Républicains (RDR), Mr. Laurent
Gbagbo won the election under the banner of the Front Populaire Ivoirien
(FPI).
6. The discontent which remained unresolved brought in its wake a new coup
d’état on 19 September 2002 initiated by junior officers of the old militia of
President Guéi who was assassinated during the subsequent events while
Mr. Ouattara escaped execution by a death squad. The attempted coup
triggered the division of the country into two parts, with the North under the
control of the rebels and the South by forces loyal to the Government of
President Gbagbo, with the support of the French army.
7. The Complainant alleges that President Gbagbo’s regime took advantage of
the rebellion to treat people from the North as terrorists who enjoyed the
support of Mr. Ouattara. The position of the new Government encouraged
the continuation of the notion of « ivoirité », which was worsened by a
xenophobic nationalism in the form of discrimination on the part of the
Ivorian authorities against the Dioulas from the North. The abuses arising
from the phenomenon were perpetrated in several State institutions,
particularly the intelligence apparatus, the police service, the gendarmerie
and the courts. Under the Governments of Presidents Guéi and Gbagbo, a lot
of violations were committed in particular during the elections.
8. These violations included extrajudicial killings of persons alleged to be of the
Dioula ethnic group or people affiliated to the Muslim religion. Similarly,
people were discriminated against by the police forces solely based on their
name, accent, physical appearance or their clothing as proof of their northern
origin. Thus, these persons were arrested in the streets or in their homes and
detained by the police. The victims identified government officials as
perpetrators of the said violations, including rape.
9. The Complainant reports that even when their nationality was attested to,
some Dioulas were denied certain benefits and services by the government,
including acquisition of passports, birth certificates and national identity
cards. Furthermore, the authorities extorted monies from the same victims in
return for their papers. Finally, the Complainant submits that, during the
2000 presidential elections, the Supreme Court enforced the « ivoirité »
2