Several times, the African Union has voiced concerns regarding the alleged “abuse” of the principle of universal jurisdiction. The Union refers in particular to the prosecution of ‘African leaders’ before European courts which, in the view of the Union, could endanger international law, order and security. Against this background, the author examines the exercise of universal jurisdiction in Africa as well as in Europe over accused from Africa. While there is support for the assumption that so-called low-cost accused are exposed disproportionally to universal jurisdiction, there is no evidence of a geographical or racial bias. The author points to three current trends in the exercise of universal jurisdiction: the decline of universal jurisdiction in Europe, the ‘reversion’ of universal jurisdiction and the regionalization of universal jurisdiction. The latter trend is demonstrated in particular by the prosecution of Hissène Habré ‘on behalf of Africa’ before the Extraordinary African Chambers in Senegal. The author suggests that the regionalization of universal jurisdiction may represent a novel mode of extraterritorial jurisdiction, which has the potential to ease European-African tensions in the area of international criminal justice.