International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda

1. Introduction

2. Rwandan Genocide

3. Structure And Proceedings of ICTR

The International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda was an international court established in
November 1994 by the United Nations Security Council in Resolution 955 in order to judge
people responsible for the Rwandan genocide and other serious violations of international law in
Rwanda, or by Rwandan citizens in nearby states, between 1 January and 31 December 1994.
The court eventually convicted 85 individuals at a cost of $1.3 billion.1

The ICTR was international in composition and was located in Arusha, Tanz. The tribunal was
not empowered to impose capital punishment; it could impose only terms of imprisonment. The
governing statute of the ICTR defined war crimes broadly. Murder, torture, deportation, and
enslavement were subject to prosecution, but the ICTR also stated that genocide included
“subjecting a group of people to a subsistence diet, systematic expulsion from homes and the
reduction of essential medical services below minimum requirement.” In addition, it ruled that
“rape and sexual violence constitute genocide…as long as they were committed with the specific
intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a particular group, targeted as such”—as was the case in the
Rwandan conflict, where the Hutu-dominated interim government organized the mass rape of
Tutsi women by HIV-infected men. The tribunal thus was among the first international bodies to
formally recognize sexual violence as a war crime.2

The statute of the ICTR limited the jurisdiction of the tribunal to Rwandan leaders, while lower-
level defendants were to be tried in domestic courts. The ICTR statute did not consider the
official position of an individual, including his position as head of state, to be a sufficient basis
for avoiding or evading criminal culpability. Military and civilian leaders who had known or
should have known that their subordinates were committing war crimes were subject to
prosecution under the doctrine of command or superior responsibility. Individuals who had
committed war crimes pursuant to government or military orders were not thereby relieved of
criminal liability, though the existence of the orders could be used as a mitigating factor.3
1
Klaus Bachmann, Thomas Sparrow-Botero, Peter Lambertz: When justice meets politics. Independence and
Autonomy of ad hoc international criminal tribunals, Peter Lang Int 2013
2
Office of the Prosecutor". International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda.
3
Peskin, Victor (2005). "Beyond Victor's Justice? The Challenge of Prosecuting the Winners at the International
Criminal Tribunals for the Former Yugoslavia and Rwanda". Journal of Human Rights.
After extensive administrative and logistic delays, the ICTR completed its first cases in 1998. In
May former Rwandan prime minister Jean Kambanda pleaded guilty to six charges of genocide
and was sentenced to life imprisonment on September 4. Several key perpetrators were sentenced
to life imprisonment in 2009, including former justice minister Agnes Ntamabyariro, former
Kigali prefect Tharcisse Renzaho, and former speaker of the parliament Alfred Mukezamfura.

2. Rwandan Genocide

The “Rwandan Genocide” refers to the 1994 mass slaughter in Rwanda of the ethnic Tutsi and
politically moderate Hutu peoples. The killings began in early April of 1994 and continued for
approximately one hundred days until the “Hutu Power” movement’s defeat in mid-July. The
genocide was carried out primarily by Hutu supremacist militia groups, co-perpetrated by the state
government of Rwanda, the Rwandan Army, and Rwandan civilians in compliance with the “Hutu
Power” movement. By its conclusion, at least 500,000 ethnic Tutsis were murdered, along with
thousands of Tutsi sympathizers, moderate Hutus, and other victims of atrocity. Some estimates
claim anywhere between 800,000- 1,000,000 killed, with another 2 million refugees (mostly Hutus
fearing the retribution of the newly-empowered Tutsi rebel government) packed in disease-ridden
refugee camps of neighboring Burundi, Tanzania, Uganda, and former Zaire. 4

Hutu nationalist group Parmehutu led a social revolution in 1959, which overthrew the Tutsi ruling
class, resulting in the death of around 20,000 Tutsis and the exile of another 200,000 to neighboring
countries. Rwandan independence from Belgium would follow in 1961, marking the establishment of
a Hutu-led Rwandan government. The Tutsis remaining in Rwanda, mostly due to intermarriage or
other family ties, would be discriminated against as racially “lesser” citizens by the new Hutu
government. The RPF (Rwandan Patriotic Front) was formed in as a political group of Tutsi
nationalist exiles who demanded the right to return to their homeland as citizens and an end to
social discrimination against the Tutsi in Rwanda. The RPF rebels invaded Rwanda from neighboring
Uganda in October of 1990. This act of Tutsi aggression, coupled with decades of discrimination and
fear for a loss of power, paved the way to genocide. During the 1994 genocide, thousands of Tutsi
were killed, along with moderate Hutus who sympathized with their Tutsi neighbors and resisted by
defending, hiding, or providing aid to their Tutsi neighbors. 5

The Rwandan genocide took place over a time span of only 100 days, between April and July 1994.
4
"Rwanda Genocide: 100 days of slaughter". BBC News. 7 April 2014. Retrieved 5 July 2017.
5
“Leave None to Tell the Story: Genocide in Rwanda – The Genocide,” Human Rights Watch,
https://www.hrw.org/reports/1999/rwanda/Geno1-3-02.htm (18 August 2018)
Unlike other genocides of the 20th century, the Rwandan genocide unfolded before the eyes of the
national media. Journalists, radio broadcasters, and TV news reporters covered the events live from
Rwanda, until the violence escalated to fanatical levels and all foreigners were encouraged to
evacuate.6

UNAMIR, the UN peacekeeping force in Rwanda, was present on the ground throughout the course
of the genocide. With disregard to the violence portrayed in the national media, France, Belgium,
and the United States declined to send additional support, despite UNAMIR’s specific warnings to the
UN Security Council in early 1994, describing the Hutu militias plan for extermination. The Security
Council denied UNAMIR’s request to intervene, and in early April, the Belgian contingency of
UNAMIR’s force were pulled out, due to the murder of ten Belgian soldiers. Almost overnight, 4500
UNAMIR peacekeepers on the ground were reduced to a mere 260. Not until mid-May (approx.
500,000 Rwandans had already been killed) did the UN recognize that “acts of genocide may have
been committed,” at which point the UN pledged to send in 5,500 troops and 50 armored personal
carriers. This force, however, was further delayed due to continuing arguments between the UN and
the U.S. army over the cost of the Armored Personnel Carriers. 7 The genocide would be ended by
the RPF overthrow of the Hutu Regime in July; the UN intervention never occurred. The state
support for the genocide in Rwanda was no doubt one of its primary engines. The Hutu-led
government provided arms, planning, and leadership for the militias. It also funded the RTLM “Hutu
Power” radio broadcast, the primary source of “brainwashing” for the Rwandan civilians who also
took part in the genocide. 

3. Structure And Proceedings of ICTR

The tribunal consisted of 16 judges in four "chambers" – three to hear trials, and one to hear
appeals. In addition, there were 9 ad litem judges, making 25 in all. All 9 ad litem judges were
assigned to Chambers II and III. There was an additional pool of 9 further ad literim judges who
would be called on in the case of a judge being absent.8

The Case of Jean-Paul Akayesu9-

6
Scott Straus, The Order of Genocide: Race, Power, and War in Rwanda (New York: Cornell University Press, 2006).
7
“Rwanda: Aftermath,” United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, https://www.ushmm.org/confront-
genocide/cases/rwanda/rwanda-aftermath (19 August 2018)
8
International Criminal Tribunal For Rwanda (ICTR)", PiCT(Project on International Courts and Tribunals) 24
September 2013
9
The Prosecutor v. Jean-Paul Akayesu (Trial Judgement), ICTR-96-4-T, International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda
(ICTR), 2 September 1998
After an intense and precisely targeted campaign of a number of international non-governmental
organizations, which aimed at raising awareness of gendered violence at the ICTR,[29] the trial
of Jean-Paul Akayesu established the legal precedent that genocidal rape falls within the act of
genocide. "...the [Trial] Chamber finds that in most cases, the rapes of Tutsi women in Taba,
were accompanied with the intent to kill those women. ... In this respect, it appears clearly to the
chamber that the acts of rape and sexual violence, as other acts of serious bodily and mental
harm committed against the Tutsi, reflected the determination to make Tutsi women suffer and to
mutilate them even before killing them, the intent being to destroy the Tutsi group while
inflicting acute suffering on its members in the process." Presiding judge Navanethem Pillay said
in a statement after the verdict: "From time immemorial, rape has been regarded as spoils of war.
Now it will be considered a war crime. We want to send out a strong message that rape is no
longer a trophy of war."

Media Case-

The trial against "hate media" began on 23 October 2000. It was charged with the prosecution of
the media which encouraged the genocide of 1994.

On 19 August 2003, at the tribunal in Arusha, life sentences were requested for Ferdinand
Nahimana, and Jean-Bosco Barayagwiza, persons in charge for the Radio Télévision Libre des
Mille Collines, as well as Hassan Ngeze, director and editor of the Kangura newspaper. They
were charged with genocide, incitement to genocide, and crimes against humanity, before and
during the period of the genocides of 1994. On 3 December 2003, the court found all three
defendants guilty and sentenced Nahimana and Ngeze to life imprisonment and Barayagwiza to
imprisonment for 35 years. On 28 November 2007, the Appeals Chamber partially allowed
appeals against conviction from all three men, reducing their sentences to 30 years' imprisonment
for Nahimana, 32 years' imprisonment for Barayagwiza and 35 years' imprisonment for Ngeze.10

4. Conclusion

The most intense genocide since World War II was unleashed upon an unprepared world.
Starting in Kigali, the Rwanda capital, the systematic slaughter of an ethnic group, the Tutsis,

10
Grunfeld, Fred; Anke Huijboom (2007). The Failure to Prevent Genocide in Rwanda: The Role of Bystanders. Brill.
pp. 21–22
spread with a ferocity that even its sinister organizers could not have hoped for. In 100 days it
consigned about 800,000 Rwandans to their deaths. The perpetrators, high within government
circles, had made meticulous plans. Secret arms caches were kept ready for use by government
soldiers and the party militia, the core cadre of which had been trained in the tactics of slaughter.
Lists of Tutsis and their Hutu sympathizers had been compiled for targeting. Only a trigger was
needed. It was provided in a fashion as unexpected as the genocide itself: the killing of the
Rwandan government leader under whom the genocidaires had worked. As the wave of death
spread across the country, the international community stood by in a stupor, and even sought to
avoid its moral and legal responsibilities to mitigate this immense human and humanitarian
tragedy.

The key international leaders have admitted that they should have acted. In a news conference on
4 May 1998, Secretary-General Kofi Annan, who was under secretary-general for peacekeeping
at the time of the genocide, said: "I agree with [UNAMIR Force Commander] General Dallaire
when he says, 'If I had had one reinforced brigade - 5,000 men - well trained and well equipped, I
could have saved thousands of lives'."

Many believe that the international community could have acted even earlier, to prevent the
genocide before it started, or to nip it in the bud in the first few days.

21 years after its inception, the ICTR ceased its work. Total 61 were convicted and 14 were
acquitted. But it also failed in completing the provided task no action or even enquiry has been
conducted against any Tutsi rebel. Not a single RPF crime was investigated; it is even very
problematic that this other side of the genocide has not been dealt with by the court.

Another point of criticism of the ICTR is that the criminal proceedings proved to be extremely
costly. The tribunal is said to have devoured about 2 billion US dollars. In the past, the court,
which employed more than 1,200 people, was repeatedly criticized for inefficiency, lack of
professionalism, and corruption. The ICTR failed in its duty to dispense justice. "How many
people were convicted, to what extent and based on what? Less than 70 people were tried in
almost 20 years. That was not satisfactory to Rwanda as a society. That's not justice. I think it
was a big failure." called Martin Semukanya, a veteran journalist who covered the ICTR
proceedings for two years.