Kamuhanda Appeal Judgement Final
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
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 Mohamed Shahabuddeen Judge Florence Ndepele Mwachande Mumba Judge Wolfgang Schomburg Judge Inés Mónica Weinberg de Roca Registrar: Mr. Adama Dieng Judgement of: 19 September 2005 JEAN DE DIEU KAMUHANDA (Appellant) v. THE PROSECUTOR (Respondent) Case No. ICTR-99-54A-A JUDGEMENT Counsel for the Appellant: Ms. Aïcha Condé The Office of the Prosecutor: Mr. Hassan Bubacar Jallow Mr. James Stewart Ms. Amanda Reichman Mr. Neville Weston Ms. Inneke Onsea Mr. Abdoulaye Seye CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................1 A. THE APPELLANT .................................................................................................1 B. THE JUDGEMENT AND SENTENCE.............................................................................1 C. THE APPEAL.......................................................................................................2 D. STANDARDS FOR APPELLATE REVIEW.......................................................................2 II. ALLEGED ERRORS CONCERNING THE INDICTMENT (GROUND OF APPEAL 1) ......................................................................................................................4 A. THE EVENTS AT THE GISHAKA CATHOLIC PARISH........................................................4 B. THE DISTRIBUTION OF WEAPONS IN GIKOMERO...........................................................4 1. The Arguments of the Parties..............................................................................4 2. The Trial Chamber’s Findings.............................................................................5 3. The Alleged Defect of the Indictment ...................................................................6 4. Failure to Object..............................................................................................7 5. Prejudicial Effects of the Defective Indictment........................................................8 III. ASSESSMENT OF EVIDENCE: EXHIBITS (GROUND OF APPEAL 2, IN PART)... 10 IV. BURDEN OF PROOF (GROUND OF APPEAL 4)................................................. 13 V. STANDARD OF PROOF (GROUND OF APPEAL 5).............................................. 16 VI. DISTORTION OF THE DEFENCE POSITION: THE ORIGIN OF THE ATTACKERS (GROUND OF APPEAL 7, IN PART)............................................. 19 VII. VERDICT (GROUND OF APPEAL 8)................................................................ 21 A. CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY OF THE APPELLANT UNDER ARTICLE 6(1) OF THE STATUTE...... 21 1. Instigating Others to Commit the Crime .............................................................. 21 2. Aiding and Abetting........................................................................................ 24 3. Ordering ...................................................................................................... 26 4. The Appellant’s Convictions for Ordering and Aiding and Abetting .......................... 28 B. GENOCIDE........................................................................................................ 28 C. EXTERMINATION ............................................................................................... 30 D. CONCLUSION.................................................................................................... 31 VIII. ALLEGED ERRORS IN THE ASSESSMENT OF THE APPELLANT’S TESTIMONY (GROUNDS OF APPEAL 9 AND 6, IN PART)................................. 33 IX. IMPOSSIBILITY OF TRAVEL FROM KIGALI TO GIKOMERO IN APRIL 1994 (GROUNDS OF APPEAL 11, IN ITS ENTIRETY, AND 2, 5, 6, AND 7, IN PART)... 37 A. THE TRIAL CHAMBER ’S FINDINGS ......................................................................... 37 B. FAILURE TO RULE ON THE TESTIMONIES OF WITNESSES VPG, RGG, RGB, AND RGS........ 38 C. HEARSAY EVIDENCE .......................................................................................... 40 D. DISTORTION OF THE DEFENCE POSITION ................................................................. 40 E. ALLEGED ERRORS OF LAW AND FACT..................................................................... 41 1. Failure to Consider the Entire Body of Evidence ................................................... 42 2. The Trial Chamber’s Reliance on Witnesses GPR, GPE, GPF, and GPT.................... 43 3. Witness Laurent Hitimana (Witness RKA)........................................................... 43 4. Witness RGM................................................................................................ 44 5. Witness RKF................................................................................................. 45 F. CONCLUSION .................................................................................................... 47 X. ALLEGED ERRORS OF FACT RELATING TO THE DISTRIBUTION OF WEAPONS (GROUNDS OF APPEAL 12, IN ITS ENTIRETY, AND 2 AND 7, IN PART)............................................................................................................. 48 A. INTERNAL INCONSISTENCIES................................................................................. 50 B. IMPEACHMENT OF WITNESS GEK’S CREDIBILITY BY THE DEFENCE................................ 57 1. Witness GEK was Convicted of Murder .............................................................. 58 2. Witness GEK Allegedly Lied About Being in Gikomero on the Day of the Massacre .... 59 3. Witness GEK’s Testimony that the Appellant Drove His Own Car............................ 61 4. Witness GEK Allegedly Lied About Her Identity .................................................. 62 C. CONTRADICTORY TESTIMONY BY DEFENCE WITNESSES .............................................. 64 1. Three Witnesses in Witness GEK’s Neighbourhood Did Not See the Appellant Distribute Weapons....................................................................................... 64 2. Witness GEK’s Alleged Absence from Gikomero at the Time of the Alleged Weapons Distribution................................................................................................. 65 D. CONCLUSION.................................................................................................... 66 XI. ALLEGED ERRORS RELATING TO THE GIKOMERO PARISH COMPOUND MASSACRE AND THE ASSESSMENT OF ALIBI EVIDENCE (GROUNDS OF APPEAL 3, 10, 13, AND 14, IN THEIR ENTIRETY, AND 2, 4, 5, AND 7, IN PART)68 A. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................. 68 B. ALLEGED ERRORS IN THE ASSESSMENT OF ALIBI EVIDENCE ......................................... 69 C. ALLEGED ERRORS IN DISTORTING THE TESTIMONIES OF WITNESS ALS AND MRS. KAMUHANDA AND IN FINDING THAT THE APPELLANT CONTRADICTED THEIR EVIDENCE... 70 D. ALLEGED ERRORS RELATING TO WITNESS ALR’S EVIDENCE ....................................... 73 E. ALLEGED ERRORS IN DISTORTING THE TESTIMON IES OF WITNESSES ALR AND ALB AND IN FINDING THAT THEIR TESTIMONIES CONTRADICTED EACH OTHER ............................... 75 F. ALLEGED ERROR IN NOTING THAT THE APPELLANT DID NOT FULLY EXPLAIN THE SITUATION AT THE HOUSE OF WITNESS ALS........................................................... 77 G. ALLEGED ERROR IN FINDING THAT WITNESSES ALB AND ALM DID NOT RULE OUT THE POSSIBILITY THAT THE APPELLANT WAS IN GIKOMERO............................................. 78 H. ALLEGED ERROR IN FINDING THAT PATROLS WERE MOUNTED TO PROTECT FAMILIES FROM LOOTERS ............................................................................................... 80 I. ALLEGED ERROR IN FINDING THAT THE ALIBI IS NOT CREDIBLE.................................... 81 J. ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE ....................................................................................... 83 1. Witness GAA................................................................................................ 83 2. Witness GEX ................................................................................................ 86 3. Evidence in Rebuttal ....................................................................................... 88 4. “Additional Information” ................................................................................. 88 5. Conclusion.................................................................................................... 88 K. FINDING THAT THE APPELLANT WAS PRESENT AT THE GIKOMERO PARISH COMPOUND....... 88 1. Alleged Errors of Law Relating to the Identification of the Appellant ........................ 89 (a) Reliability and Credibility...............................................................................89 (b) Corroborative and Circumstantial Evidence .........................................................91 2. Alleged Error in Relying on Witnesses GAF’s, GES’s, and GAA’s Identification of the Accused ..................................................................................................... 93 (a) Courtroom Identification ................................................................................93 (b) Witness GAF ..............................................................................................94 (i) Credibility ...............................................................................................94 (ii) Identification of the Appellant ......................................................................96