Ensuring ICTR Prosecutions for RPF War Crimes
June 1, 2009
Mr. Ban Ki-moon
Secretary-General
United Nations
New York, NY 10017
President Barack Obama
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington , DC 20500
Prime Minister Gordon Brown
10 Downing Street
London
SW1A 2AA
Re: Ensuring ICTR Prosecutions for RPF War Crimes
Dear Secretary General, President, and Prime Minister,
We the undersigned scholars and human rights defenders are writing to express our grave concern at the ongoing failure of Prosecutor Hassan Jallow to fulfil the mandate of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) by bringing indictments against those soldiers of the Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF) who committed crimes against humanity and war crimes in Rwanda in 1994.
While we commend the ICTR for vigorously prosecuting numerous perpetrators of the 1994 genocide, we are deeply concerned that the failure to indict a single RPF soldier for killing civilians causes the Tribunal to be dismissed as “victor’s justice,” sets a dangerous precedent for future international prosecutions, and undermines efforts at achieving peace, security, and reconciliation in Rwanda and the Great Lakes region as a whole.
We certainly recognize that the RPF’s crimes against humanity and war crimes are not comparable to the genocide, either in scope or intent. Yet, that is no argument for granting impunity for those crimes. As Alison Des Forges, the historian and human rights defender, eloquently wrote before her untimely death earlier this year:
To insist on the right to justice for all victims, as did the [1994] UN Commission of Experts, is not to deny the genocide, nor does such an insistence equate war crimes with genocide; it simply asserts that all victims, regardless of their affiliation, regardless of the nature of the crime committed against them, and regardless of the affiliation of the perpetrator, must have equal opportunity to seek redress for the wrongs done them.
Indeed, today’s international war crimes tribunals, unlike their predecessors at Nuremberg and Tokyo , are founded on the principle of even-handed justice for all victims of serious violations of international humanitarian law.
The UN has repeatedly insisted on impartial justice for all international crimes committed in Rwanda in 1994. According to experts working for the UN High Commissioner for Refugees, RPF soldiers killed an estimated 25,000 to 45,000 civilians in 1994. A UN Commission of Experts, set up by the UN Security Council in 1994, “strongly recommend[ed]” prosecuting the perpetrators of those crimes. Following that recommendation, the Security Council established the ICTR with a clear mandate to prosecute not only the génocidaires, but also those responsible for “other serious violations of international humanitarian law” in order to achieve both justice and “national reconciliation.”
The Security Council reaffirmed this commitment to impartial justice with Resolutions in 2003 and 2004 that called “on all States, especially Rwanda . . . to intensify cooperation with and render all necessary assistance to the ICTR, including on investigations of the Rwandan Patriotic Army . . . .”
Prosecutor Jallow’s evident reluctance to prosecute RPF crimes is clearly the result of intimidation and obstructionism by the RPF, which now rules Rwanda.
Several years ago, after the Prosecutor’s predecessor announced a timetable for issuing RPF indictments, the Rwandan government brought the ICTR to a grinding halt by preventing prosecution witnesses from travelling to the Tribunal to testify in genocide trials. That action blatantly violated Rwanda ’s legal obligation to cooperate with the ICTR, directly defied the Security Council, and strongly suggested that the RPF-led government puts impunity for RPF crimes ahead of justice for the genocide.
By capitulating to this continuing threat of non-cooperation, Prosecutor Jallow has severely compromised his prosecutorial independence and the Tribunal’s integrity. Indeed, the ICTR’s one-sided justice stands in sharp contrast to the impartial justice achieved by the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia and the Special Court for Sierra Leone , which have resolutely prosecuted all sides of those conflicts.
Last year, Prosecutor Jallow ceded the Tribunal’s primacy over RPF crimes by striking a deal with the RPF-led government whereby they would try four RPF officers for the notorious June 5, 1994 massacre of the Catholic Archbishop of Kigali , three bishops, nine clergy, and two other civilians who had been taken into the RPF’s supposedly protective custody. Flawed proceedings resulted in five-year prison sentences for two lower-ranking officers (who confessed to the killings) and acquittals for the two commanding officers.
This domestic case was a completely inappropriate substitute for ICTR prosecutions. For the past 15 years, the RPF-led government has shown that it is neither willing nor able to deliver justice for such politically sensitive crimes.
First, the RPF never prosecuted any of its soldiers for war crimes in 1994 until this 2008 case. Second, the two acquittals and two light sentences handed down in this case do not reflect the gravity of the crimes committed. Third, in the past year, several ICTR trial chambers, the ICTR appeals chamber, and England ’s High Court of Justice have ruled that Rwanda cannot even provide fair trials in high-profile genocide cases. The English High Court, in particular, expressed serious concerns about the Rwandan judiciary’s independence and impartiality.
Prosecutor Jallow promised to assess the Rwandan proceedings and reassert jurisdiction over the case if they did not meet international standards. Although the appeal process concluded in late February, Prosecutor Jallow has remained silent on the integrity of Rwanda ’s RPF trial. He should take back jurisdiction over that case.
In conclusion, we call on you to ensure that the ICTR prosecutes RPF crimes. This issue should be raised when Prosecutor Jallow addresses the United Nations Security Council about his completion strategy on June 4, 2009. Under the current strategy, the ICTR is supposed to complete all trials in 2009 and all appeals in 2011. Unless the Prosecutor acts swiftly, the ICTR will squander not only its last chance to provide accountability for those serious crimes, but also its legitimacy.
cc:
Patricia O’Brien, Under-Secretary- General, The Legal Counsel, Office of Legal Affairs
Judge Charles Michael Dennis Byron, President, International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda
Prosecutor Hassan Jallow, Office of the Prosecutor, International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda
Hillary Clinton, US Secretary of State
Johnnie Carson, Assistant Secretary of State for Africa
HE Dr. Susan Rice, US Ambassador to the United Nations
HE Clint Williamson , US Ambassador-at- Large for War Crimes Issues
Michelle Gavin, Senior Director for African Affairs at the National Security Council
James B. Donovan, Deputy Legal Adviser, United States Mission to the United Nations
David Miliband, UK Foreign Secretary
Lord Malloch-Brown, Minister with responsibility for Africa in the Foreign Office
Douglas Alexander, Secretary of State for International Development
HE Sir John Sawers, UK Permanent Representative to the United Nations
Cathy Adams, Legal Counsellor, United Kingdom Mission to the United Nations
Signatories
Professor Erin Baines, University of British Columbia , Vancouver , Canada
Elizabeth Barad
Larissa Begley, University of Sussex , UK
Professor David Black, Dalhousie University , Halifax , Canada
Professor Stephen Brown, University of Ottawa
Professor Anuradha Chakravarty, University of South Carolina
Professor Christina Clark-Kazak, York University , Toronto , Canada
Professor Roger Des Forges, University at Buffalo
Professor Nigel Eltringham, University of Sussex
Conor Foley, International housing, land and property rights expert
Professor Paul Gready, Centre for Applied Human Rights, University of York
Professor Sarah Freedman, University of California at Berkeley
Dr. Ann Griffiths, Dalhousie University , Halifax , Canada
Aloys Habimana, University of Wisconsin-Madison
Professor Rhoda Howard-Hassman, FRSC, Canada Research Chair in International Human Rights, Wilfred Laurier University , Waterloo , Canada
Chris Huggins, Specialist, Conflicts over Land and Natural Resources Rights
Catharine Jenkins, Chair, Centre for Law & Conflict, SOAS, London
Professor Emeritus René Lemarchand, University of Florida
Professor Elizabeth Levy Paluck, Princeton University
Professor Timothy Longman, Director, African Studies Center , Boston University
Dr. J. Paul Martin, Director, Human Rights Studies, Barnard College , Columbia University
Constance Morrill, Human rights advocate
Professor Rosemary Nagy, Nipissing University , Thunder Bay , Canada
Professor Catharine Newbury, Smith College
Professor David Newbury, Smith College
Dr. Scott Newton, School of Law , SOAS
Professor Victor Peskin, School of Politics and Global Studies, Arizona State University
Tiamoyo Peterson, M.A., University of California , Irvine , USA
Professor Vern Neufeld Redekop, Saint Paul University , Ottawa , Canada
Dr. Luc Reydams, University of Notre Dame
Professor Filip Reyntjens, University of Antwerp , Belgium .
Samantha A. Smith, University of California , Irvine , USA
Professor Chandra Lekha Sriram, Director, Centre on Human Rights in Conflict, University of East London
Karen Stauss, Former Human Rights Watch researcher for the Democratic Republic of Congo
Professor Scott Straus, University of Wisconsin-Madison
Tony Tate, Former Human Rights Watch researcher for Burundi
Carina Tertsakian, Former Amnesty International researcher on Rwanda
Dr. Susan Thomson, University of Ottawa , Canada
Alana Tiemessen, PhD Candidate, University of British Columbia , Vancouver , Canada
Professor Kathryn Trevenen, Institute of Women's Studies , University of Ottawa , Canada
Noel Twagiramungu, Tufts University
Professor Jan Vansina, University of Wisconsin-Madison
Michele D. Wagner, former professor, University of Minnesota
Lars Waldorf, Director, Centre for International Human Rights, University of London
Peter Webster
Professor Harvey M. Weinstein, University of California at Berkeley
Professor Richard A. Wilson, Director, Human Rights Institute, University of Connecticut
Eugenia Zorbas, Former staff, UNHCR-Rwanda
The dictator Kagame at UN
Dictators like Kagame who have changed their national constitutions to remain indefinitely on power should not be involved in UN high level and global activities including chairing UN meetings
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Thousands of Hutu murdered by Kagame inside Rwanda, e.g. Kibeho massacres
Kagame killed 200,000 Hutus from all regions of the country, the elderly and children who were left by their relatives, the disabled were burned alive. Other thousands of people were killed in several camps of displaced persons including Kibeho camp. All these war crimes remain unpunished.The British news reporters were accompanying Kagame’s fighters on day-by-day basis and witnessed these massacres, but they never reported on this.
25,000 Hutu bodies floated down River Akagera into Lake Victoria in Uganda.
The British irrational, extremist, partisan,biased, one-sided media and politicians have disregarded Kagame war crimes e.g. the Kibeho camp massacres, massacres of innocents Hutu refugees in DR. Congo. The British media have been supporting Kagame since he invaded Rwanda by organising the propaganda against the French over the Rwandan genocide, suppressing the truth about the genocide and promoting the impunity of Kagame and his cronies in the African Great Lakes Region. For the British, Rwanda does not need democracy, Rwanda is the African Israel; and Kagame and his guerilla fighters are heroes.The extremist British news reporters including Fergal Keane, Chris Simpson, Chris McGreal, Mark Doyle, etc. continue to hate the Hutus communities and to polarise the Rwandan society.
Kagame political ambitions triggered the genocide.
Kagame’s guerrilla war was aimed at accessing to power at any cost. He rejected all attempts and advice that could stop his military adventures including the cease-fire, political negotiations and cohabitation, and UN peacekeeping interventions. He ignored all warnings that could have helped him to manage the war without tragic consequences. Either you supported Kagame’ s wars and you are now his friend, or you were against his wars and you are his enemy. Therefore, Kagame as the Rwandan strong man now, you have to apologise to him for having been against his war and condemned his war crimes, or accept to be labelled as having been involved in the genocide. All key Kagame’s fighters who committed war crimes and crimes against humanity are the ones who hold key positions in Rwandan army and government for the last 15 years. They continue to be supported and advised by the British including Tony Blair, Andrew Mitchell MP, and the British army senior officials.
Aid that kills: The British Budget Support financed Museveni and Kagame’s wars in Rwanda and DRC.
Genocide propaganda and fabrications are used by the so-called British scholars, news reporters and investigative journalists to promote their CVs and to get income out of the genocide through the selling of their books, providing testimonies against the French, access to consultancy contracts from the UN and Kagame, and participation in conferences and lectures in Rwanda, UK and internationally about genocide. Genocide propaganda has become a lucrative business for Kagame and the British. Anyone who condemned or did not support Kagame’s war is now in jail in Rwanda under the gacaca courts system suuported by British tax payer's money, or his/she is on arrest warrant if he/she managed to flee the Kagame’s regime. Others have fled the country and are still fleeing now. Many others Rwandans are being persecuted in their own country. Kagame is waiting indefinitely for the apologies from other players who warn him or who wanted to help to ensure that political negotiations take place between Kagame and the former government he was fighting against. Britain continues to supply foreign aid to Kagame and his cronies with media reports highlighting economic successes of Rwanda. Such reports are flawed and are aimed at misleading the British public to justify the use of British taxpayers’ money. Kagame and his cronies continue to milk British taxpayers’ money under the British budget support. This started from 1986 through the British budget support to Uganda until now.
Dictator Kagame: No remorse for his unwise actions and ambitions that led to the Rwandan genocide.
No apologies yet to the Rwandan people. The assassination of President Juvenal Habyarimana by Kagame was the only gateway for Kagame to access power in Rwanda. The British media, politicians, and the so-called British scholars took the role of obstructing the search for the truth and justice; and of denying this assassination on behalf of General Kagame. General Paul Kagame has been obliging the whole world to apologise for his mistakes and war crimes. The UK’s way to apologise has been pumping massive aid into Rwanda's crony government and parliement; and supporting Kagame though media campaigns.
Fanatical, partisan, suspicious, childish and fawning relations between UK and Kagame
Kagame receives the British massive aid through the budget support, British excessive consultancy, sector wide programmes, the Tutsi-dominated parliament, British and Tutsi-owned NGOs; for political, economic and English language expansion to Rwanda. The British aid to Rwanda is not for all Rwandans. It is for Kagame himself and his Tutsi cronies.
Paul Kagame' actvities as former rebel
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.