DOCSLIB.ORG

THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL TRIBUNAL for RWANDA CASE NO.: ICTR-00-56-T the PROSECUTOR CHAMBER II of the TRIBUNAL V. AUGUSTIN NDIN

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL TRIBUNAL for RWANDA CASE NO.: ICTR-00-56-T the PROSECUTOR CHAMBER II of the TRIBUNAL V. AUGUSTIN NDIN THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL TRIBUNAL FOR RWANDA CASE NO.: ICTR-00-56-T THE PROSECUTOR CHAMBER II OF THE TRIBUNAL v. AUGUSTIN NDINDILIYIMANA FRANÇOIS-XAVIER NZUWONEMEYE INNOCENT SAGAHUTU AUGUSTIN BIZIMUNGU TUESDAY, 11 OCTOBER 2005 0910H CONTINUED TRIAL Before the Judges: Joseph Asoka de Silva, Presiding Taghrid Hikmet Seon Ki Park For the Registry: Mr. Roger Kouambo Mr. Abraham Koshopa For the Prosecution: Mr. Ciré Aly Bâ Mr. Alphonse Van Ms. Ifeoma Ojemeni Okali Mr. Segun Jegede Mr. Moussa Sefon Mr. Abubacarr Tambadou For the Accused Augustin Ndindiliyimana: Mr. Christopher Black For the Accused François-Xavier Nzuwonemeye: Mr. Charles Taku For the Accused Innocent Sagahutu: Mr. Fabien Segatwa Mr. Seydou Doumbia For the Accused Augustin Bizimungu: Mr. Gilles St-Laurent Mr. Ronnie MacDonald Court Reporters: Ms. Sithembiso Moyo Ms. Regina Limula Ms. Verna Butler Ms. Karen Holm NDINDILIYIMANA ET AL TUESDAY, 11 OCTOBER 2005 I N D E X WITNESS For the Prosecution: FRANK CLAEYS Examination-in-chief by Mr. Bâ …. ................................................................................................................ 8 Cross-examination by Mr. Black ................................................................................................................ 66 EXHIBITS Exhibit No. P. 66 …. ...................................................................................................................................... 9 Exhibit No. P. 67 ........................................................................................................................................ 66 Exhibit No. D. 67A [Ndindiliyimana] and D. 67B [Ndindiliyimana] .............................................................. 67 For identification: Exhibit No. ID. 10 [Ndindiliyimana] ............................................................................................................. 86 SITHEMBISO MOYO - TRIAL CHAMBER II - page i NDINDILIYIMANA ET AL TUESDAY, 11 OCTOBER 2005 1 P R O C E E D I N G S 2 MR. PRESIDENT: 3 Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. The session is now on. The appearances are as before. 4 5 Yes, Mr. Prosecutor, you can lead your next witness. 6 7 Yes, Counsel. 8 MR. ST-LAURENT: 9 I am sorry, Mr. President. Just before the witness comes on, I have a small -- a rather minor application 10 to make with regard to yesterday's witness, LBC. Would you allow me to make the short application? 11 MR. PRESIDENT: 12 Yes. 13 MR. ST-LAURENT: 14 Mr. President, Your Honours, my application will definitely take into consideration Witness LBC, who 15 was heard yesterday, and my application is that you dismiss her testimony. Very briefly, I will give you 16 the reasons for my application. You are well aware, as I am, that all the investigators of the Tribunal, in 17 executing their duties, seek evidence as contained in the statements given by witnesses which may be 18 used in the Prosecution case. In the case of Witness LBC, we had none other than Mr. Segun Jegede 19 as an investigator. These testimonies are put on in writing, Mr. President, and I reread to the witness 20 so that the witness would confirm that they contain the truth. 21 22 The written statements by the witnesses also bear the signature not only of the witness, but also of the 23 investigators who took the statement. In addition, the translator, this is Ms. Gaudence Mukatigeli, 24 certifies – orally translated the statement from the English language into a Kinyarwanda language in the 25 presence of the witness will show me that she had heard and understood my translation of her 26 statement. The translator's certification also indicates that the witness -- the facts and matters set out 27 in her statement as translated by me, reflects the most faithfully possible what she had seen and what 28 she had heard concerning the matter at hand, and has accordingly appended her signature where 29 indicated. 30 31 Based on this pre-trial statement collected by investigators of the Tribunal as certified by them, and also 32 the translator and the witness herself, given that they are a reflection of what she said and heard, that 33 the Prosecutor then draws up his indictment and briefs. This statement is also provided to the Accused 34 as the Prosecutor is compelled to divulge his evidence – to disclose it, and this would allow the 35 Accused to take note of what accusations are levelled by the witness, so that he can prepare his 36 cross-examination of the witness. The witness's out-of-court statement is therefore a very important 37 document. And, unfortunately, this seems to run counter to the impression we get in this Court. SITHEMBISO MOYO - ICTR - TRIAL CHAMBER II - page 1 NDINDILIYIMANA ET AL TUESDAY, 11 OCTOBER 2005 1 Although we are aware that the witness does not testify based on his statement but rather on his 2 testimony before you, Your Honours, we submit that such testimony cannot be examined without taking 3 into account what the witness has already declared and attested to before the investigators and the 4 Court assigned interpreter. This is a very important part of the Prosecutor's duty. 5 6 We would like the Judges of this Court to be aware of the contradictions, omissions, the implausibility, 7 the discrepancies between the witness's testimony and the statement given to this Court, and this 8 should be taken in light of your need to examine the credibility of her testimony, but we submit that 9 there is much more than this at stake. What is at stake is the probative value of a pre-trial statement 10 made by the witness through representatives of the Prosecutor's office. If the statements were merely 11 intended to enable us to assess the credibility of the testimony, we must ensure that such a statement 12 must be a faithful reflection of the witness's remarks, vis-à-vis all the personnel involved in taking that 13 statement. There is no assurance that the witness will testify based on what his previous statement 14 contained. Then why use the statements in preparing the cross-examination? 15 16 As a matter of fact, we wonder whether it would not be best for the Defence counsel to be made aware, 17 first of all, of the content of the examination-in-chief so that he will therefore be in a better position to 18 prepare himself between the end of the cross-examination-in-chief (sic) and the beginning of the 19 cross-examination. 20 21 Mr. President, it is important for the Defence of the Accused to take note of what the witness has said, 22 the events and fact she has related in her statement, and given that these are incompatible with the 23 testimony she provides in Court, we feel that this places -- or, rather, places some doubt on the content 24 of the witness's remarks in Court. We, the Defence of the Accused, have a right to be made aware, 25 provided with all elements to be used in examination-in-chief of the witness for use in 26 cross-examination. 27 28 Now LBC told you -- first of all, at some point that the investigators had made additions, then she made 29 statements in contradiction to elements of her written statement, or she puts in new facts which are not 30 to be found in her statement, or she reveals that some statements she had made in her written 31 statement actually amounted to deductions on her part. 32 33 My learned friend the Prosecutor had reread her statement to the witness during their preparatory 34 meeting, but this, she said, did not correspond to the text I was reading from when quoting her 35 statement. As a matter of fact, Mr. President, Witness LBC merely came to tell you that you should not 36 really consider what she had declared to the investigators of the Tribunal. However, if we were to 37 sanction such a situation or appear to be sanctioning such a situation, would that not send a message SITHEMBISO MOYO - ICTR - TRIAL CHAMBER II - page 2 NDINDILIYIMANA ET AL TUESDAY, 11 OCTOBER 2005 1 to the international community; that it would not send a negative image of the administration and the 2 process of the justice being dispensed here? 3 4 Mr. President, we trust in you – we trust that you will ensure that justice prevails, that there is also the 5 appearance of justice prevailing for justice to be rendered. We are therefore convinced that your ruling 6 in this matter will be favourable to us. It appears though, Mr. President, that we should not just ensure 7 that a witness comes to testify and throwing a black beret and attests that a reprehensible act was -- 8 could be attributed to the superior responsibility of our Accused. But we should also ensure that when 9 a witness comes to confirm that he gave a truthful account to representatives of the Prosecutor's office, 10 we should also ensure that when a witness confirms his statement to investigators of the Tribunal, that 11 he should not thereafter be allowed to deny such statement without the Tribunal intervening. This is not 12 just about the credibility of the witness, Mr. President; it was also about the credibility of the Tribunal. 13 14 Now these remarks necessarily entail that we should dismiss the testimony of LBC, and that is the 15 ruling I am asking you to make now. Thank you. 16 MR. PRESIDENT: 17 I think, Counsel, you made this application yesterday and we gave a ruling on this. So why are you 18 relaying that again, Counsel? 19 20 Counsel, Mr. St-Laurent, you made this application at the beginning even before the witness was heard. 21 MR. ST-LAURENT: 22 Mr. President, you are now in possession of the witness's testimony, and, therefore, you are in a better 23 position to consider the elements I have presented to you. 24 MR. PRESIDENT: 25 And then if we adopt that procedure, every witness, when they come, we have to take a decision and 26 then finally there would be nothing for us to consider at the end.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • ICTR-00-56-A AUGUSTIN NDINDILIYIMANA APPEALS CHAMBER FRANÇOIS-XAVIER NZUWONEMEYE INNOCENT SAGAHUTU V
    THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL TRIBUNAL FOR RWANDA CASE NO.: ICTR-00-56-A AUGUSTIN NDINDILIYIMANA APPEALS CHAMBER FRANÇOIS-XAVIER NZUWONEMEYE INNOCENT SAGAHUTU v. THE PROSECUTOR OF THE TRIBUNAL TUESDAY, 11 FEBRUARY 2014 1402H APPEAL JUDGEMENT Before the Judges: Judge Theodor Meron, Presiding Judge Liu Daqun Judge Carmel Agius Judge Khalida Rachid Khan Judge Bakhtiyar Tuzmukhamedov For the Registry: Mr. Douglass Hansen Mr. John Tumati For the Prosecution: Mr. Hassan Bubacar Jallow Mr. James Arguin Mr. Abubacarr Tambadou Ms. Thembile M. Segoete Mr. Takeh Sendze Ms. Christiana Fomenky Ms. Sunkarie Ballah-Conteh Ms. Betty Mbabazi Mr. Deo Mbuto For the Accused Augustin Ndindiliyimana: Mr. Christopher Black Mr. Vincent Lurquin For the Accused François-Xavier Nzuwonemeye: Mr. Charles Taku Ms. Beth Lyons For the Accused Innocent Sagahutu: Mr. Fabien Segatwa Mr. Scott Martin Court Reporter: Deirdre O'Mahony NDINDILIYIMANA ET AL TUESDAY, 11 FEBRUARY 2014 1 P R O C E E D I N G S 2 3 MR. PRESIDENT: 4 Good afternoon to everybody. 5 6 Registrar, would you please call the case. 7 MR HANSEN: 8 Thank you, Your Honour. 9 10 The Appeals Chamber of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, composed of Judge Meron, 11 presiding; Judge Liu, Judge Agius, Judge Khan, and Judge Tuzmukhamedov is now sitting in open 12 session today, Tuesday, the 11th of February 2014 for the delivery of the appeal judgement in the 13 matter of Augustin Ndindiliyimana, François-Xavier Nzuwonemeye and Innocent Sagahutu verses the 14 Prosecutor, Case No. ICTR-00-56-A. 15 MR. PRESIDENT: 16 Mr. Ndindiliyimana, can you follow the proceedings in a language you understand? 17 APPELLANT NDINDILIMANA: 18 Yes, sir, I can follow the proceedings in French.
    [Show full text]
  • Press Clippings
    SPECIAL COURT FOR SIERRA LEONE OUTREACH AND PUBLIC AFFAIRS OFFICE A downtown view of central Freetown from above Hill Cot Road. PRESS CLIPPINGS Enclosed are clippings of local and international press on the Special Court and related issues obtained by the Outreach and Public Affairs Office as at: Friday, 20 May 2011 Press clips are produced Monday through Friday. Any omission, comment or suggestion, please contact Martin Royston-Wright Ext 7217 2 International News Ouattara Asks ICC to Investigate Post-Poll Violence / RFI Page 3 ICTR Prosecutor Welcomes Ex-Army Chief's Sentence / The New Times Page 4 Military Officers Convicted of Killing of Premier / Hirondelle News Agency Page 5 State Seeks to Reply to Ocampo's Claims / The Standard Page 6 3 Thursday, 19 May 2011 Ouattara Asks ICC to Investigate Post-Poll Violence Côte d'Ivoire's President Alassane Ouattara has asked the International Criminal Court (ICC) to open an investigation into the violence that swept the country following the disputed November election. Ouattara sent a letter, dated 3 May, to ICC President Luis Moreno-Ocampo asking the court to investigate "the most serious crimes committed since 28 November 2010 throughout the Ivorian territory". ICC Chief Prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo has said his office is preparing to launch a formal investigation into mass killings which allegedly took place in the west African country. There were reports of a massacre of several hundred people in Duékoué, in the west of the country, in the fighting that followed November's presidential election. The UN, the African Union and the European Union all recognised Ouattara as the rightful winner.
    [Show full text]
  • We Are Going to Rape You and Taste Tutsi Women”: Rape During the 1994 Rwandan Genocide
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by OpenSIUC “We are going to rape you and taste Tutsi women”: Rape During the 1994 Rwandan Genocide Christopher W. Mullins Center for the Study of Crime, Delinquency and Corrections Southern Illinois University Carbondale Word count: 8883 This paper was made possible by the author’s receipt of the Charles Hill Research Excellence Award given by the University of Northern Iowa’s College of Social and Behavioral Science. I gratefully acknowledge the assistance of Jessica Braccio for helping organize the data and Robin M. Cardwell-Mullins for helpful comments on an earlier draft. Please direct all correspondence to Christopher W. Mullins, Faner Hall 4226 Mail Code 4504 Southern Illinois University Carbondale, Carbondale IL 62901 USA, 618-453-6368, fax 618-453-6377, email: [email protected] Abstract Over the past decades, scholars have paid greater attention to sexual violence, in both theorization and empirical analysis. One area which has been largely ignored, however, is the sexual violence during times of armed conflict. This paper examines the nature and dynamics of sexual violence as it occurred during the 1994 Rwandan genocide. Drawing upon testimonies given to the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR), descriptions of rapes--both singular and mass—were qualitatively analyzed. In general, three broad types of assaults were identified: opportunistic, assaults which seemed to be a product of the disorder inherent within the conflict; episodes of sexual enslavement; and genocidal rapes, which were framed by the broader genocidal endeavors occurring at the time.
    [Show full text]
  • Genocide in Rwanda: the Search for Justice 15 Years On
    Genocide in Rwanda: The search for justice 15 years on. An overview of the horrific 100 days of violence, the events leading to them and the ongoing search for justice after 15 years. 6 April 2009 | The Hague On the fifteenth anniversary of the plane crash killing former President Habyarimana which sparked one-hundred days of Genocide in Rwanda slaughtering over 800,000 Tutsis and moderate Hutus, the Hague Justice Portal reflects on some of the important decisions, notable cases and remaining gaps in the ICTR’s ongoing search for justice. On 8 November 1994, seven months after the passenger plane carrying President Juvénil Habyarimana was shot out of the sky on the evening of April 6 1994 triggering Genocide in the little-known central African state of Rwanda, the United Nations Security Council adopted Resolution 955 (1994) establishing the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR). The tribunal is mandated to prosecute “persons responsible for genocide and other serious violations of international humanitarian law”1, with its inaugural trial commencing on January 9 1997. According to Trial Chamber I, delivering its Judgment in this first case against a suspected génocidaire, “there is no doubt that considering their undeniable scale, their systematic nature and their atrociousness” the events of the 100 days subsequent to April 6, “were aimed at exterminating the group that was targeted.”2 Indeed, given the nature and extent of the violence between April and July 1994, it is unsurprising that the ICTR has been confronted with genocide charges in nearly every case before it. Within hours of the attack on the President’s plane roadblocks had sprung up throughout Kigali and the killings began; the Hutu Power radio station, RTLM, rife with conspiracy, goading listeners with anti-Tutsi propaganda.
    [Show full text]
  • Ndindilyimana Et
    INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL TRIBUNAL FOR RWANDA TRIAL CHAMBER II Before: Judge Asoka de Silva, Presiding Judge Judge Taghrid Hikmet Judge Seon Ki Park Registrar: Adama Dieng Date: 17 May 2011 PROSECUTOR Against Augustin NDINDILIYIMANA Augustin BIZIMUNGU François-Xavier NZUWONEMEYE Innocent SAGAHUTU Case No. ICTR-00-56-T SUMMARY OF JUDGEMENT AND SENTENCE Office of the Counsel for the Defence Prosecutor: Mr. Alphonse Van Mr. Christopher Black & Mr. Vincent Mr. Moussa Sefon Lurquin for Augustin Ndindiliyimana Mr. Lloyd Strickland Mr. Gilles St. Laurent & Mr. Benoît Mr.Abubacarr Tambadou Henry for Augustin Bizimungu Ms. Faria Rekkas Mr. Charles Taku & Ms. Beth Lyons for F. X. Nzuwonemeye Mr. Fabian Segatwa & Mr. Saidou Doumbia for Innocent Sagahutu 17 May 2011 The Prosecutor v. Ndindiliyimana et al, ICTR-00-56-T CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 2 II. EVENTS IN RWANDA AFTER 6 APRIL 1994 ........................................................................ 2 III. PRELIMINARY ISSUES ........................................................................................................... 3 IV. FACTUAL FINDINGS ............................................................................................................... 3 A. COUNT 1: CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT GENOCIDE ........................................................................... 3 B. COUNTS 2 AND 3: GENOCIDE AND COMPLICITY IN GENOCIDE IN THE ALTERNATIVE ..................
    [Show full text]
  • Dr Hannah Tonkin
    Dr Hannah Tonkin YEAR OF CALL: 2013 Hannah is dual qualified in Australia (New South Wales) and in England and Wales. Dr Hannah Tonkin is an experienced international lawyer specialising in international humanitarian law and policy, international human rights law and international criminal law. If you would like to get in touch with Hannah please contact the clerking team: [email protected] | +44 (0)20 7993 7600 INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS Dr Hannah Tonkin is currently the Principal Legal Officer (International Law) at the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine and Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA). She leads the programme of work on all issues related to international law across UNRWA's five fields of operation (Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, West Bank and Gaza) and provides strategic and technical leadership for the Agency's lawyers with a view to ensuring legally sound, timely, politically sensitive and consistent advice. Before commencing her current position, Hannah was the Director of Disability Rights at the Australian Human Rights Commission in Sydney. In that role she worked collaboratively with the disability sector and the Australian Government to remove discrimination and promote the rights of people with disability in Australia and around the world. Previously Hannah worked for 10 years at the UN and other international organisations around the world. She was the Head of UNRWA's Legal Office in Gaza from 2017 to 2019, where she managed a large team responsible for ensuring the provision of politically sensitive legal advice on a wide range of matters relating to UNRWA's operations in Gaza.
    [Show full text]
  • Rwanda Assessment
    RWANDA ASSESSMENT October 2001 Country Information and Policy Unit CONTENTS I SCOPE OF DOCUMENT 1.1 - 1.4 II GEOGRAPHY A Location and Climate 2.1 - 2.5 B Population 2.6 - 2.8 2.9 C Language III HISTORY A Military and Political Conflict, 1990 - 1994 3.1 - 3.4 B Genocide, April-July 1994 3.5 - 3.10 C The Aftermath, 1994-2001 3.11 - 3.30 D International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda 3.31 - 3.40 3.41 - 3.51 E The Economy IV INSTRUMENTS OF THE STATE A Government 4.1 - 4.11 B Judicial System 4.12 - 4.20 C Prisons 4.21 - 4.24 D Security 4.25 - 4.33 4.34 - 4.35 E International Instruments and General Practice V HUMAN RIGHTS A GENERAL ASSESSMENT 5.1 - 5.8 1 B SPECIFIC CONSIDERATION Freedom of Assembly and Political Association 5.9 - 5.13 Freedom of Religion 5.14 - 5.20 Freedom of Speech and of the Press 5.21 – 5.25 Ethnicity 5.26 - 5.31 Women and Children 5.32 - 5.47 C OTHER ISSUES Refugees, Freedom of Movement, Exit & Return 5.48 - 5.57 International Involvement 5.58 - 5.65 Regional Issues and Foreign Relations 5.66 - 5.71 5.72 - 5.73 Medical VI ANNEXES A CHRONOLOGY OF MAJOR EVENTS, 1899-2001 B PROMINENT PEOPLE C COMMON ABBREVIATIONS / POLITICAL GROUPS D BIBLIOGRAPHY I. SCOPE OF DOCUMENT 1.1 This assessment has been produced by the Country Information and Policy Unit, Immigration and Nationality Directorate of the Home Office, from information obtained from a variety of sources.
    [Show full text]
  • General Assembly Security Council
    United Nations A/69/206–S/2014/546 General Assembly Distr.: General 1 August 2014 Security Council Original: English General Assembly Security Council Sixty-ninth session Sixty-ninth year Item 72 of the provisional agenda* Report of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Prosecution of Persons Responsible for Genocide and Other Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law Committed in the Territory of Rwanda and Rwandan Citizens Responsible for Genocide and Other Such Violations Committed in the Territory of Neighbouring States between 1 January and 31 December 1994 Report of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda Note by the Secretary-General The Secretary-General has the honour to transmit to the members of the General Assembly and to the members of the Security Council the nineteenth annual report of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, submitted by the President of the International Tribunal for Rwanda in accordance with article 32 of its statute (see Security Council resolution 955 (1994), annex), which states: The President of the International Tribunal for Rwanda shall submit an annual report of the International Tribunal for Rwanda to the Security Council and to the General Assembly. * A/69/150. 14-57957 (E) 140814 *1457957* A/69/206 S/2014/546 Letter of transmittal 1 August 2014 Excellencies, I have the honour to submit the nineteenth annual report of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Prosecution of Persons Responsible for Genocide and Other Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law Committed in the Territory of Rwanda and Rwandan Citizens Responsible for Genocide and Other Such Violations Committed in the Territory of Neighbouring States between 1 January and 31 December 1994, dated 1 August 2014, to the General Assembly and the Security Council, pursuant to article 32 of the statute of the International Tribunal.
    [Show full text]
  • The Leadership of Rwandan Armed Groups Abroad with a Focus on the Fdlr and Rud/Urunana
    RAKIYA OMAAR, CONSULTANT TO THE RWANDA DEMOBILISATION AND REINTEGRATION COMMISSION THE LEADERSHIP OF RWANDAN ARMED GROUPS ABROAD WITH A FOCUS ON THE FDLR AND RUD/URUNANA DECEMBER 2008 TABLE OF CONTENTS ACRONYMS AND GLOSSARY………………………….…………………………………………………………….6 PREFACE……………………………………………………………..………………………………………………………8 INTRODUCTION……………………………………………………….……………………………………………….10 1. THE OBSTACLES TO REPATRIATION: THE EXPERIENCES AND PERSPECTIVES OF RETURNEES………………………………………………………………………………………..…………………….17 THE INTERESTS OF LEADERS IN DISCOURAGING REPATRIATION…………………………… ..17 Economic Self Interest…………………………………………………………………………………..17 Fear of Justice……………………………………………………………………………………………20 THE IMPEDIMENTS FACED BY POTENTIAL RETURNEES……………………………………….21 The Lack of Information and the Power of Misinformation………………………………………..21 False Information from Relatives in Rwanda………………………………………………………..23 The Threat and Reality of Violent Reprisals…………………………………………………………24 A Security Deterrent: The Long Distance to MONUC Stations…………………………………...27 2. WHO ARE THE LEADERS? THE PROCESS OF ESTABLISHING THEIR IDENTITY……………………………………………………………………............................................29 IDENTITY AND BACKGROUND…………………………………………………………………29 Reshuffle After Reshuffle ……………………………………………………….................................29 The Use of Cover Names………………………………………………………………………………..29 Life in Rwanda and in Exile: A Time-Consuming Process…………………………………………30 The “Unofficial” Influence of Well-Known Genocide Suspects Who Are Kept Out of the Public Limelight………………………………………………………………………………………………….31
    [Show full text]
  • THE AD HOC TRIBUNALS ORAL HISTORY PROJECT an Interview
    THE AD HOC TRIBUNALS ORAL HISTORY PROJECT An Interview with Beth S. Lyons International Center for Ethics, Justice and Public Life Brandeis University 2016 ! Interviewee: Beth S. Lyons Location: New Jersey, USA Interviewers: David P. Briand (Q1) and Date: 19 February 2015 Leigh Swigart (Q2) Q1: This is an interview with Beth S. Lyons for the Ad Hoc Tribunals Oral History Project at Brandeis University's International Center for Ethics, Justice and Public Life. The interview takes place in New Jersey on February 19, 2015. The interviewers are Leigh Swigart and David Briand. Q2: It's clear from your CV [curriculum vitae] and things you've written about that you worked in Legal Aid in New York. Maybe you could tell us how you made this transition to the ICTR [International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda]. Lyons: Okay. Legal Aid was my second career; I went to law school when I was thirty- five. Prior to that I was involved in the student movement and trade union movement in the 1960s and 1970s and early 1980s, both in plants and also union staff. When I decided to go to law school I wanted to have a job where I could talk to juries because I was an organizer. Little did I know that at Legal Aid in New York City it's "plea bargain city," so there are very few trials. Anyway, I went to Legal Aid because I wanted to do trial work, I wanted to talk to juries. I worked at Legal Aid for too long. It was a place where, despite our huge case loads!there were over a hundred cases on our individual dockets.
    [Show full text]
  • Report of the Investigation Into the Causes and Circumstances of And
    REPUBLIC OF RWANDA INDEPENDENT COMMITTEE OF EXPERTS CHARGED WITH THE INVESTIGATION INTO THE CRASH ON 06/04/1994 OF FALCON 50 AEROPLANE, REGISTRATION NUMBER 9XR-NN. REPORT OF THE INVESTIGATION INTO THE CAUSES AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF AND RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE ATTACK OF 06/04/1994 AGAINST THE FALCON 50 RWANDAN PRESIDENTIAL AEROPLANE, REGISTRATION NUMBER 9XR-NN 1 MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS GENERAL INTRODUCTION 5 History and Mandate of the Committee 5 Methodology used 6 Political context prior to the attack of 06 April 1994 9 SECTION ONE: THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE PLANNED ATTACK 17 AND ITS EXECUTION The revelation of a plot targeting the imminent assassination of President 18 Habyarimana before the attack against his aeroplane Intelligence announced by the leaders of Hutu Power 18 Intelligence known by Rwandan military circles 22 Intelligence known by president Habyarimana and foreign sources 25 The organisation and issues of the Dar es Salaam Summit 28 Settlement of the political deadlock prevailing in Rwanda 28 Pressure on president Habyarimana before the Summit 28 Instability in Burundi: the main subject of the Dar es Salaam Summit 29 Questions surrounding the journey of the chief of staff of the Rwandan army 30 The proceedings of the Summit and circumstances of the return flight of the Falcon 50 35 Execution of the attack and its repercussions 29 The absence of an investigation into the attack 40 Questions about the voice recorder known as the “Black Box” 42 Information published soon after the attack: the black box in France
    [Show full text]
  • Mil.II.Summary of the Judgement
    Tribunal Pénal International pour le Rwanda International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda UNITED NATIONS NATIONS UNIES IN THE APPEALS CHAMBER Before: Judge Theodor Meron, Presiding Judge Liu Daqun Judge Carmel Agius Judge Khalida Rachid Khan Judge Bakhtiyar Tuzmukhamedov Registrar: Mr. Bongani Majola Judgement of: 11 February 2014 AUGUSTIN NDINDILIYIMANA FRANÇOIS-XAVIER NZUWONEMEYE INNOCENT SAGAHUTU v. THE PROSECUTOR Case No. ICTR-00-56-A ________________________________________________________________________________ SUMMARY OF THE JUDGEMENT ________________________________________________________________________________ Counsel for Augustin Ndindiliyimana: The Office of the Prosecutor : Mr. Christopher Black Mr. Hassan Bubacar Jallow Mr. Vincent Lurquin Mr. James J. Arguin Mr. Abdoulaye Seye Counsel for François-Xavier Nzuwonemeye: Mr. Abubacarr Tambadou Mr. Charles A. Taku Ms. Thembile M. Segoete Ms. Beth S. Lyons Ms. Florida Kabasinga Mr. Takeh Sendze Counsel for Innocent Sagahutu: Ms. Christiana Fomenky Mr. Fabien Segatwa Ms. Sunkarie Ballah-Conteh Mr. Scott Martin Ms. Betty Mbabazi Mr. Wayne Jordash Mr. Deo Mbuto 1. The Appeals Chamber is sitting today in accordance with Rule 118 of the Tribunal’s Rules of Procedure and Evidence in the case of The Prosecutor v. Augustin Ndindiliyimana, François- Xavier Nzuwonemeye, and Innocent Sagahutu . All parties, including the Prosecution, appealed against the Trial Judgement rendered in this case by Trial Chamber II of the Tribunal on 17 May 2011 and issued in writing on 17 June 2011. In accordance with the Scheduling Order of 15 November 2013, the Appeals Chamber will presently deliver the judgement in this case. 2. On 7 February 2014, the Appeals Chamber issued an order severing the case of Augustin Bizimungu, who had been tried with Ndindiliyimana, Nzuwonemeye, and Sagahutu, and whose appeal was heard with theirs.
    [Show full text]