DOCSLIB.ORG

Ruggiu 1 June 2000 1 2 3 4 the International

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Ruggiu 1 June 2000 1 2 3 4 the International RUGGIU 1 JUNE 2000 1 2 3 4 THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL TRIBUNAL FOR RWANDA 5 6 CASE NO: ICTR-97-32-I THE PROSECUTOR OF THE TRIBUNAL 7 AGAINST 8 GEORGES RUGGIU 9 10 JUNE 1, 2000 1000H 11 JUDGMENT 12 Before: 13 Madam Judge Navanethem Pillay, President Judge Eric Møse 14 Judge Pavel Dolenc 15 For the Registry: Ms. Aminatta N'gum 16 Mr. Edward Matemanga 17 For the Prosecution: Mr. Mohamed Othman 18 Mr. William T. Egbe Mr. Elvis Bazawule 19 For the Accused: 20 Mr. Mohamed Aouini Mr. Jean Louis Gilissen 21 Court Reporter: 22 Ms. Noorjahan Pirani-Hirji 23 24 25 ICTR - CHAMBER I 1 RUGGIU 1 JUNE 2000 1 PROCEEDINGS COMMENCING AT 1005H 2 3 JUDGMENT OF THE CHAMBER DELIVERED BY THE HONOURABLE 4 MADAM JUDGE PILLAY: 5 6 MADAM JUDGE PILLAY: 7 This session is open. Will the 8 representative of the Registry call the 9 roll. 10 MS. N'GUM: 11 Thank you, Madam President. 12 13 Trial Chamber 1 of the International 14 Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, composed of 15 Judge Navanethem Pillay, presiding; Judge 16 Erik Møse; and Judge Pavel Dolenc; is now 17 sitting in open session, today, the 1st of 18 June 2000, for the delivery of the 19 Judgment in the matter of the Prosecutor 20 versus Georges Ruggiu, Case Number 21 ICTR-97-32-I. 22 23 Thank you, Your Honours. 24 MADAM PRESIDENT PILLAY: 25 Thank you, Ms N'gum. Noorjahan Pirani-Hirji - OFFICIAL REPORTER ICTR - CHAMBER I 2 RUGGIU 1 JUNE 2000 1 2 I notice the presence of Georges Ruggiu in 3 court; will Counsel place themselves on 4 the record. For the Prosecution? 5 MR. OTHMAN: 6 Thank you, Madam President. The 7 Prosecution is represented by myself, 8 Mohamed Othman and to my right, William 9 Egbe and Mr. Elvis Bazawule. 10 MADAM PRESIDENT PILLAY: 11 Thank you. Defence? 12 MR. AOUINI: 13 Good morning, Madam President. Your 14 Honours, good morning. I am Aouini, 15 Mohamed, lead Counsel. 16 MR. GILISSEN: 17 Madam President, Your Honours, I am Jean 18 Louis Gilissen from Liege, Belgium, 19 co-counsel. 20 MADAM JUDGE PILLAY: 21 This is a session of Trial Chamber 1 22 called for the purpose of delivering the 23 Judgment in the matter of Georges Ruggiu, 24 and I will ask the security then to escort 25 Mr. Ruggiu to the front of the Chamber. Noorjahan Pirani-Hirji - OFFICIAL REPORTER ICTR - CHAMBER I 3 RUGGIU 1 JUNE 2000 1 2 Mr. Ruggiu, you may take your seat. 3 4 Mr. Ruggiu, on the 15th May of this year, 5 having been authorized to change your 6 plea, you pleaded guilty to two counts set 7 forth in the indictment against you. And 8 you confirmed that you signed a Plea 9 Agreement which was also signed by both, 10 your Counsel and the Prosecutor, in which 11 you admitted having committed all the acts 12 to which you pled guilty, as charged in 13 the indictment. 14 15 Under Count 1, the Prosecutor charges you 16 with Direct and Public Incitement to 17 Commit Genocide, a crime punishable under 18 Article 2(3)(c) of this Statute. 19 20 The mens rea required for this crime lies 21 in the intent to directly prompt or 22 provoke another to commit genocide. 23 24 Now, at the time that the Genocide 25 Convention was adopted, the delegates Noorjahan Pirani-Hirji - OFFICIAL REPORTER ICTR - CHAMBER I 4 RUGGIU 1 JUNE 2000 1 agreed to expressly spell out Direct and 2 Public Incitement to Commit Genocide as a 3 specific crime, in particular, because of 4 its critical role in the planning of a 5 genocide. 6 7 In this regard, the delegate from the USSR 8 stated that "it was impossible that 9 hundreds of thousands of people should 10 commit so many crimes unless they had been 11 incited to do so, and unless the crimes 12 had been premeditated and carefully 13 organized." He asked, "how, in those 14 circumstances, the inciters and organizers 15 of the crime could be allowed to escape 16 punishment when they were the ones really 17 responsible for the atrocities committed". 18 19 The Rwandan Penal Code provides that 20 Direct and Public Incitement or 21 Provocation is a form of complicity and 22 that an "accomplice" shall mean a person 23 who, through speeches, shouting or threats 24 uttered in public places, or through the 25 dissemination of printed matter in public Noorjahan Pirani-Hirji - OFFICIAL REPORTER ICTR - CHAMBER I 5 RUGGIU 1 JUNE 2000 1 places, directly incites perpetrators to 2 commit such action. 3 4 And the public element of incitement to 5 commit genocide, in light of the two 6 factors is: The place where the 7 incitement occurred and whether or not 8 assistance was selective or limited. 9 10 According to the International Law 11 Commission, Public Incitement is 12 characterized by a call for criminal 13 action to a number of individuals in a 14 public place or to members of the general 15 public at large by such means as the radio 16 or television. 17 18 In the instant case, your acts constitute 19 Public Incitement, in that, you broadcast 20 messages on the public media forum to 21 members of the general public. 22 23 Under Count 2, you are charged for Crimes 24 Against Humanity (Persecution). 25 Noorjahan Pirani-Hirji - OFFICIAL REPORTER ICTR - CHAMBER I 6 RUGGIU 1 JUNE 2000 1 The Trial Chamber has examined legal 2 precedent related to the crime of 3 persecution, including the Judgment of 4 Julius Streicher in the Neuremberg Trials. 5 And here, the Neuremberg Tribunal held 6 that the publisher of a private 7 anti-semitic weekly newspaper called the 8 Der Sturmer, incited the German population 9 to actively persecute the Jewish people. 10 And the Tribunal found that Streicher's 11 incitement to murder and extermination at 12 the time when Jews in the East were being 13 killed under the most horrible conditions, 14 clearly constitutes persecution on 15 political and racial grounds. And so the 16 Streicher Judgment is particularly 17 relevant to the present case, since you, 18 like Streicher, infected people's minds 19 with ethnic hatred. 20 21 Now the mens rea for Crimes Against 22 Humanity (Persecution), is the intent to 23 commit the underlying offence, combined 24 with knowledge of the broader context in 25 which that offence occurs. Part of what Noorjahan Pirani-Hirji - OFFICIAL REPORTER ICTR - CHAMBER I 7 RUGGIU 1 JUNE 2000 1 transforms an individual's acts into a 2 Crime Against Humanity is the inclusion of 3 the act within a greater dimension of 4 criminal conduct involving widespread or 5 systematic attack on a civilian 6 population. 7 8 The Trial Chamber considers that when 9 examining the acts of persecution, which 10 have been admitted by you, it is possible 11 to discern a common element. Those acts 12 committed by you were direct and public 13 radio broadcasts, all aimed at singling 14 out and attacking the Tutsi ethnic group 15 and Belgians, on discriminatory grounds, 16 by depriving them of the fundamental 17 rights to life, liberty and basic 18 humanity. 19 20 There is no material disagreement between 21 Prosecution and Defence Counsel and you, 22 about the facts in support of the two 23 Counts of the indictment. The Chamber, 24 therefore concludes, that the guilty plea 25 that you tendered is based on sufficient Noorjahan Pirani-Hirji - OFFICIAL REPORTER ICTR - CHAMBER I 8 RUGGIU 1 JUNE 2000 1 facts, firstly, for the crimes charged and 2 secondly, for your participation. 3 4 Accordingly, Mr. Ruggiu, the Court finds 5 you guilty of the crime of Direct and 6 Public Incitement to Commit Genocide and 7 of Crime Against Humanity (Persecution). 8 9 I will now review the principles that the 10 Chamber considered in assessing the 11 penalty that should be meted out to you. 12 13 The only penalty the Tribunal can impose 14 on an accused who pleads guilty or is 15 convicted, is a prison term of 16 imprisonment. The Statute provides for 17 maximum penalty of life imprisonment. 18 19 The Trial Chamber has considered all 20 relevant information submitted by the 21 Prosecutor and by your Counsel, on your 22 behalf. A review of your Plea Agreement 23 reveals that you have made the following 24 admissions about your personal background: 25 Noorjahan Pirani-Hirji - OFFICIAL REPORTER ICTR - CHAMBER I 9 RUGGIU 1 JUNE 2000 1 You admitted that you were a social worker 2 who worked for the Belgian Social Security 3 Administration. On a voluntary basis, you 4 assisted people in need. Your interest in 5 Rwandan politics developed progressively 6 and from about the middle of 1992, you 7 established contacts with the Rwandan 8 nationals living in Belgium, including 9 students, political figures, diplomats and 10 government officials. 11 12 You were one of the founders and an active 13 member of the "Groupe de reflexion 14 rwando-belge", which published several 15 articles about the Arusha Accords and the 16 Rwandan political situation. 17 18 You progressively became one of the key 19 players in the Rwandan community in 20 Belgium and participated in major 21 political debates. In early 1993, you 22 became radically opposed to the Rwandan 23 Patriotic Front, the RPF, and more 24 supportive of the political regime in 25 Rwanda.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • “The Law of Incitement” (PDF)
    THE LAW OF INCITEMENT United States Holocaust Memorial Museum Symposium "Speech, Power and Violence" ∗ by Gregory S. Gordon I. INTRODUCTION This essay will explore the origins and development of the crime of direct and public incitement to commit genocide. It will begin with an historical analysis of the epochal Nuremberg decisions regarding Nazi hate-mongers Julius Streicher, Hans Fritzsche and Otto Dietrich. Although these decisions did not deal explicitly with incitement as a separate crime, they laid the groundwork for future development of incitement as a crime in its own right. The essay will then examine the official birth of the incitement crime with the adoption of the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Genocide ("Genocide Convention"). From that point through the next forty-five years, the crime was not actually applied. But that changed with the creation of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR), which vigorously prosecuted incitement to genocide. Through a series of cases that progressively fleshed out elements of the crime, the ICTR jurisprudence set out the materials necessary to construct a legal framework necessary to analyze incitement. That framework was put to good use in the Canadian immigration context in the case of Rwandan politician Leon Mugesera, who delivered an infamous pre-1994 speech calling for genocide through a series of violent and macabre metaphors. The essay will conclude with an analysis of the most recent ICTR case to apply and develop the incitement framework -- Prosecutor v. Simon Bikindi. Bikindi, a popular songwriter, composed music and lyrics that provoked ethnic hatred toward Tutsis.
    [Show full text]
  • Rwandan Journalists Who Were Living in Uganda Went Back Home and Resumed Working
    Because of this history, the media are no longer trusted by the public and government, and most people are suspicious of the journalism profession generally. Under the new government, a few journalists who had survived the genocide and other Rwandan journalists who were living in Uganda went back home and resumed working. RWANDA 268 MEDIA SUSTAINABILITY INDEX 2006–2007 INTRODUCTION OVERALL SCORE: 2.29 RWANDA Rwanda lost almost all its journalists during the 1994 genocide; they were among the roughly one million Tutsi and moderate Hutu Rwandans who were killed by extremist armed militia known by the name Interehemwa. The genocide came after the death of then-President Juvenile Habyarimana in a plane crash Rsuspected to have been caused by rebels hiding out in Uganda. During this genocide, which lasted for a period of about 100 days, the media stood accused of acting as a tool of hate. Some local radio stations and print media encouraged neighbors to turn against each other. Hutu extremists used the radio to mobilize the Hutu majority, coordinate killings, and try to ensure that the Tutsi were systematically eliminated. Rwandans are still bitter that it occurred with little intervention from Western governments, and it finally ended when the rebel group Rwanda Patriotic Front and the Ugandan Army wrested power away from the perpetrators and stopped the massacres. Some journalists who are believed to have actively participated in the genocide were investigated by international human-rights groups and were arrested and charged by the UN International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda. Other journalists chose to go into exile.
    [Show full text]
  • ORIGINAL: ENGLISH TRIAL CHAMBER I Before: Judge Erik Møse
    International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda Tribunal pénal international pour le Rwanda ORIGINAL: ENGLISH TRIAL CHAMBER I Before: Judge Erik Møse, presiding Judge Jai Ram Reddy Judge Sergei Alekseevich Egorov Registrar: Adama Dieng Date: 18 December 2008 THE PROSECUTOR v. Théoneste BAGOSORA Gratien KABILIGI Aloys NTABAKUZE Anatole NSENGIYUMVA Case No. ICTR-98-41-T JUDGEMENT AND SENTENCE Office of the Prosecutor: Counsel for the Defence: Barbara Mulvaney Raphaël Constant Christine Graham Allison Turner Kartik Murukutla Paul Skolnik Rashid Rashid Frédéric Hivon Gregory Townsend Peter Erlinder Drew White Kennedy Ogetto Gershom Otachi Bw’Omanwa The Prosecutor v. Théoneste Bagosora et al., Case No. ICTR-98-41-T TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION........................................................................................ 1 1. Overview ................................................................................................................... 1 2. The Accused ............................................................................................................. 8 2.1 Théoneste Bagosora ................................................................................................... 8 2.2 Gratien Kabiligi ....................................................................................................... 10 2.3 Aloys Ntabakuze ...................................................................................................... 10 2.4 Anatole Nsengiyumva .............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Judging Stories
    LCB_18_1_Art_2_Novogrodsky (Do Not Delete) 4/25/2014 8:00 AM JUDGING STORIES by Noah Benjamin Novogrodsky This Article uses the confluence of incitement to genocide and hate speech in a single case to explore the power of stories in law. That power defines how we see the world, how we form communities of meaning, and how we speak to one another. Previous commentators have recognized that law is infused with stories, from the narratives of litigants, to the rhetoric of lawyers, to the tales that judges interpret and create in the form of written opinions. “Judging Stories” builds on those insights to address the problems posed by transnational speech and the question of which norms apply to inflammatory publications transmitted across borders. This Article introduces the term “master story” to make three related claims. First, states produce and rely upon master stories—constitutive legal narratives—that define political culture and shape the contours of permitted and forbidden speech. Second, judges play a unique role in constructing master stories. Judicial speech is different than other forms of commentary and serves to join law with communal fables in ways that legitimate some stories at the expense of others. Third, courts and tribunals are beginning to use incitement to genocide—but not hate speech—to write a new master story. As geographically and temporally removed tribunals are called upon to adjudicate hateful expression from outside the master story, a global process is unfolding that may serve to reset the balance between unfettered speech and the threat of dignitary harms posed by incendiary language.
    [Show full text]
  • Music and Genocide: Harmonizing Coherence, Freedom and Nonviolence in Incitement Law Gregory S
    Santa Clara Law Review Volume 50 | Number 3 Article 1 1-1-2010 Music and Genocide: Harmonizing Coherence, Freedom and Nonviolence in Incitement Law Gregory S. Gordon Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.scu.edu/lawreview Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Gregory S. Gordon, Music and Genocide: Harmonizing Coherence, Freedom and Nonviolence in Incitement Law, 50 Santa Clara L. Rev. 607 (2010). Available at: http://digitalcommons.law.scu.edu/lawreview/vol50/iss3/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at Santa Clara Law Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Santa Clara Law Review by an authorized administrator of Santa Clara Law Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. MUSIC AND GENOCIDE: HARMONIZING COHERENCE, FREEDOM AND NONVIOLENCE IN INCITEMENT LAW Gregory S. Gordon* Music can... / Engender fury... /.... When Orpheus strikes the trembling lyre The streams stand still, the stones admire; The listening savages advance... / .... And tigers mingle in the dance. -- Joseph Addison 1 [The] first principles of justice that ultimately define a system of law [are] the principles of uniform application of rules, of consistency, of evenhandedness, of fairness. 2 -United States Supreme Court Justice William Brennan I. INTRODUCTION Can singing a song constitute incitement to genocide? A recent decision by the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) in the prosecution of Rwandan Hutu extremist pop singer Simon Bikindi said that it can.3 But it failed to say precisely why.4 This is problematic because a *Assistant Professor of Law, University of North Dakota, School of Law.
    [Show full text]
  • Jean-Bosco Barayagwiza; Hassan Ngeze
    Tribunal Pénal International pour le Rwanda International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda UNITED NATIONS NATIONS UNIES Or. : Eng. TRIAL CHAMBER I Before Judges: Navanethem Pillay, presiding Erik Møse Asoka de Zoysa Gunawardana Registrar: Adama Dieng Judgement of: 3 December 2003 THE PROSECUTOR V. FERDINAND NAHIMANA JEAN-BOSCO BARAYAGWIZA HASSAN NGEZE Case No. ICTR-99-52-T JUDGEMENT AND SENTENCE Counsel for the Prosecution Mr Stephen Rapp Ms Simone Monasebian Ms Charity Kagwi Mr William Egbe Mr Alphonse Van Counsel for Ferdinand Nahimana Jean-Marie Biju-Duval Diana Ellis, Q.C. Counsel for Jean-Bosco Barayagwiza Mr Giacomo Barletta-Caldarera Counsel for Hassan Ngeze Mr John Floyd III Mr René Martel Prosecutor v. Ferdinand Nahimana, Jean-Bosco Barayagwiza and Hassan Ngeze Case No. ICTR-99-52-T TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION 1 1. International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda 1 2. The Accused 1 3. The Indictments 2 4. Procedural History 3 5. Evidentiary Matters 25 6. Temporal Jurisdiction 26 CHAPTER II: HISTORY OF RWANDA 29 CHAPTER III: FACTUAL FINDINGS 36 1. Violence in Rwanda in 1994 36 2. Kangura 39 2.1 Ownership and Control of Kangura 39 2.2 Content of Kangura 45 2.2.1 The Ten Commandments 45 2.2.2 Cover of Kangura No. 26 53 2.2.3 Editorials and Articles 58 2.2.4 Publication of Lists 63 2.2.5 Cartoons 68 2.2.6 1994 Issues of Kangura 70 2.3 The 1994 Kangura Competition 80 3. CDR 83 3.1 Creation and Party Leadership 83 3.2 CDR Policy 92 3.3 CDR Practice 100 4.
    [Show full text]
  • Kazneni Progon Novinara Na Međunarodnom Kaznenom Sudu (ICC)
    Kazneni progon novinara na Međunarodnom kaznenom sudu (ICC) Radić, Petra Undergraduate thesis / Završni rad 2020 Degree Grantor / Ustanova koja je dodijelila akademski / stručni stupanj: University of Zagreb, Faculty of Croatian Studies / Sveučilište u Zagrebu, Fakultet hrvatskih studija Permanent link / Trajna poveznica: https://urn.nsk.hr/urn:nbn:hr:111:302977 Rights / Prava: In copyright Download date / Datum preuzimanja: 2021-10-02 Repository / Repozitorij: Repository of University of Zagreb, Centre for Croatian Studies UNIVERSITY OF ZAGREB FACULTY OF CROATIAN STUDIES PETRA RADIĆ Prosecution of Journalists by the International Criminal Court (ICC) BACHELOR THESIS Zagreb, 2020 UNIVERSITY OF ZAGREB FACULTY OF CROATIAN STUDIES DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNICATION SCIENCES PETRA RADIĆ Prosecution of Journalists by the International Criminal Court (ICC) BACHELOR THESIS Mentor: Danijel Labaš, PhD, Full Professor Co-mentor: Mijo Beljo, MA History, Assistant Lecturer Zagreb, 2020 Table of contents 1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 1 2. International Criminal Court ................................................................................................. 1 3. ICC and the media ................................................................................................................. 3 4. Case analysis – ICTR ............................................................................................................ 5 4.1. Nahimana et
    [Show full text]
  • United Nations
    MICT-13-38-PT 1385 D1385-D1375 14 May 2021 SF UNITED NATIONS Case No.: MICT-13-38-PT International Residual Mechanism Date: 14 May 2021 for Criminal Tribunals Original : English IN THE TRIAL CHAMBER Before: Judge lain Bonomy, Presiding Judge Graciela Susana Gatti Santana Judge Elizabeth Ibanda-Nahamya Registrar: Mr. Abubacarr Tambadou Decision of: 14 May 2021 PROSECUTOR v. FELICIEN KABUGA PUBLIC DECISION ON DEFENCE PRELIMINARY MOTION Office of the Prosecutor: Counsel for Mr. FeIicien Kabuga: Mr. Serge Brammertz Mr. Emmanuel Altit Mr. Rashid S. Rashid Mr. Rupert Elderkind 1384 1. The Trial Chamber of the International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals ("Trial Chamber" and "Mechanism", respectively)! is seised of a motion filed by Mr. Felicien Kabuga on 29 March 2021 2 alleging defects in the form of the amended indictment filed by the Prosecution on 1 March 2021. 3 The Prosecution filed its response on 12 April 2021. 4 I. BACKGROUND 2. A more detailed recounting of the indictments filed against Kabuga before the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda ("ICTR") is set forth in prior decisions and need not be detailed here.i Notably, on 15 January 2021, the Prosecution sought leave to amend the operative indictment, arguing that it would, inter alia, update the allegations and pleadings in view of developments in case law and available evidence." The Defence did not oppose the request, and the Trial Chamber, on 24 February 2021, granted the Prosecution leave to file the Indictment.7 The Motion, which challenges the form ofthe Indictment under Rule 79 of the Rules, was submitted on 29 March 2021 in compliance with the Trial Chamber's prior instructions.' The Motion requests that the Trial Chamber order the Prosecution to amend the Indictment in order to cure the identified deficiencies and remove charges for which the Prosecution cannot provide further , necessary details.
    [Show full text]
  • CRIMINAL TRIBUNAL for RWANDA Judicial Developments I OR the PREPARATORY COMMISSION
    International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda Tribunal Penal International pour le Rwanda .-,-.·, --or- )· :-3' Cir'nre":«: A.N OVERVIEW OF THE WORK OF THE INTERNATIONA! CRIMINAL TRIBUNAL FOR RWANDA Judicial Developments I OR THE PREPARATORY COMMISSION FOR THE PERMANENT INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/6c78a6/ 4. Georges Ruggiu. a Belgian-Italian, is thus the third person to be convicted following a guilt>' plea. He is also the first non-Rwandan to be sentenced by the ICTR for crimes perpetrated in Rwanda in 1994. He pleaded guilt)· to Direct and Public Incitement to commit Genocide, as covered by Article 2 (3) (c) of the Statute of the Tribunal, and to Crimes Against Humanity (Persecution), as stipulated in Article 3 (h) of the Statute. 5. Each of the judgements represents an important stepping-stone in the development of international criminal law. They have all, in one respect or another, created legal precedence. The Akayesu judgement presented us with the first legal definition of the crimes of genocide . direct and public incitement to commit genocide10 and complicity in genocide." In the same case, a progressive approach was adopted by the Chamber in including rape and sexual violence in the definition of genocide.12 6. In Musema. the Chamber defined the crime of conspiracy to commit genocide and held that an accused cannot be convicted of both genocide and conspiracy to commit genocide.1"' Many dicta can be found in the Kayishema and Ruzindana judgement on the concept of cumulative charges and the overlap of the constitutive elements of genocide and crimes against humanity.
    [Show full text]
  • Simeon Karamaga, a Tutsi Resistor • Jean Kambanda, Hutu
    Lesson Four: What choices did people make in 1994? Stories of: Simeon Karamaga, a Tutsi resistor Jean Kambanda, Hutu Prime Minister of Rwanda Georges Ruggiu, Italian radio journalist who broadcast hate messages Carl Wilkens, an American rescuer Capt. Mbaye Diagne, Sengalese UN soldier who rescued many Athanase Seromba, a Priest who led a massacre of Tutsis Rationale: For pupils to understand the decisions made by people during the genocide and that these decisions had different contexts / repercussions than if they had been made in Britain today. To become aware of breadth of genocide through personal stories. Starter: Pupils are given three envelopes, each containing cards. First, they open Envelope No.1. The cards in this envelope have a name, one line of biographical information and one line about what they did in 1994. After reading each one they have to place the cards on a RIGHT ----WRONG continuum (Resource ) Lower ability pupils might divide the actions into two groups: a group for actions in 1994 that would be seen as ‘RIGHT’ or ‘WRONG’ in Britain today Teacher leads discussion on the above and asks about the potential consequences of the actions described if they had been carried out in Britain today. Main: Pupils then open Envelope No.2 that contains cards with further information on the individuals identified in the Starter activity. Pupils have to match these cards with the appropriate card from Envelope No.1 (there are be clues on both cards that will help them match). Once matched pupils will be asked to reassess their place on the RIGHT ----WRONG continuum (or RIGHT / WRONG categories) – are there now any pairs of cards that should be moved? Plenary: Pupils find out about circumstances of each persons’ actions (use links below) Pupils consider the final position of the cards on the continuum.
    [Show full text]
  • Timeline of the Rwandan History and Genocide
    1 Rwanda is landlocked republic lying south of the Equator in east-central Africa. The capital is Kigali, located in the centre of the country on the Ruganwa River. Rwanda is bordered by Uganda, Tanzania, Burundi and the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Its geography is dominated by mountains in the west and savanna to the east, with numerous lakes throughout the country. 2 1890 The 1890 conference in Brussels gave Rwanda and Burundi to the German Empire as colonial spheres of interest in exchange for renouncing all claims on Uganda. The map shows the teritory of German East Africa, German colony which included present-day Rwanda, Burundi, the continental part of Tanzania and small part of Mozambique. 3 1890 - 1916 Germans established a comprehensive race theory acoording to which the population of Rwanda was divided on Tutsi, Hutu and Twa. The Tutsi with their more ‘European’ appearance (lighter skintone, thiner and taller), were considered elite group of Rwandan society, while Hutus were considered as ordinary mass of people. The Twa were a group of African Pygmy people that formed the smallest component of the Rwandan population. Hutu constituted at least 85%, Tutsi less than 14%, and Twa approximately 1% of the of populatio before the genocide. During their colonial ruling on theritory of Rwanda Germans and Belgiums favored Tutsi dominance over Hutus and granted them ruling positions. 4 1923 The kingdoms of Rwanda and Urundi were conquered by British and Belgian troops during WWI, and became a Belgian mandate in 1923. The Belgian government continued to rely on the Tutsi power structure for administering the country, but they also became more involved in supervision of education and agriculture.
    [Show full text]
  • ICTR Prosecutor V. Ferdinand Nahimana.Pdf
    Or. : Eng. TRIAL CHAMBER I Before Judges: Navanethem Pillay, presiding Erik Møse Asoka de Zoysa Gunawardana Registrar: Adama Dieng Judgement of: 3 December 2003 THE PROSECUTOR V. FERDINAND NAHIMANA JEAN-BOSCO BARAYAGWIZA HASSAN NGEZE Case No. ICTR-99-52-T SUMMARY Counsel for the Prosecution Mr. Stephen Rapp Ms. Simone Monasebian Ms. Charity Kagwi Mr. William Egbe Mr. Alphonse Van Counsel for Ferdinand Nahimana Mr. Jean-Marie Biju-Duval Diana Ellis, Q.C. Counsel for Jean-Bosco Barayagwiza Mr. Giacomo Barletta-Caldarera Counsel for Hassan Ngeze Mr. John Floyd, III Mr. René Martel I. INTRODUCTION 1. Trial Chamber I today delivers its judgement in the trial of three Accused persons: Ferdinand Nahimana, Jean-Bosco Barayagwiza, and Hassan Ngeze. The judgement will be available in written form in English tomorrow and in French upon translation. The Chamber will deliver orally a summary of the judgement. The judgement and not this summary is the authoritative text. 2. Ferdinand Nahimana was born on 15 June 1950, in Gatonde commune, Ruhengeri prefecture, Rwanda. He was a professor of history and Dean of the Faculty of Letters at the National University of Rwanda. In 1990, he was appointed Director of ORINFOR (Rwandan Office of Information) and remained in that post until 1992. He was a founder of RTLM and a member of its comité d’initiative, or Steering Committee. 3. Jean-Bosco Barayagwiza was born in 1950 in Mutura commune, Gisenyi prefecture, Rwanda. A lawyer by training, he held the post of Director of Political Affairs in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. He was a founder of the CDR and of RTLM and a member of the Steering Committee of RTLM.
    [Show full text]