Post-Genocide Justice in Rwanda: Ordinary Courts
Chapter
First Online:
- 1 Citations
- 364 Downloads
Abstract
This chapter deals with the challenges that Rwanda faced in the immediate aftermath of the genocide focusing on the role of ordinary justice. The first Organic Law on domestic prosecution of the génocidaires (Organic Law 8/1996) is scrutinized paying due attention to its categorization mechanism. This is of particular relevance because the first gacaca law relied on the same criteria for the categorization of genocide-related crimes. The penalties and procedural measures provided for by Organic Law 8/1996 are also described and assessed. The reform of the code of criminal procedure and Law 9/1996 are also analysed with particular regard to the issue of abuse of pre-trial detention, a dramatic issue in the aftermath of the genocide. Finally, the sentencing rationale and practice of ordinary courts is considered and conclusions regarding their penological aim and logic are drawn.
Keywords
Pre-trial detention Organic Law 9/1996 cachots categorization of offences Rwandan Criminal Procedure Code ICCPR length of detention sentencingReferences
- African Rights, Redress (2008) Survivors and Post-genocide Justice in Rwanda: Their Experience, Perspectives and Hopes. Kigali, LondonGoogle Scholar
- Amnesty International (2002) Rwanda: Gacaca: A Question of Justice. https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/afr47/007/2002/en/. Last accessed 27 February 2018
- Avocats Sans Frontières (1999) Justice pour Tous au Rwanda. Rapport Semestriel. 1er Semestre 1999, Brussels-KigaliGoogle Scholar
- Degni-Segui R (1996) Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Rwanda. Special Rapporteur, under paragraph 20 of resolution S-3/1 of 25 May 1994 E/CN.4/1996/7Google Scholar
- Drumbl M (2007) Atrocity, Punishment, and International Law. Cambridge University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- Ergec R (1987) Les droits de l’homme à l’épreuve des circonstances exceptionnelles, Study on Article 15 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Bruylant, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
- Fierens J (2005) Gacaca Courts: Between Fantasy and Reality. Journal of International Criminal Justice, 3(4):896–919CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Haile D (2008) Rwanda’s Experiment in People’s Courts (gacaca) and the Tragedy of Unexamined Humanitarianism: A Normative/Ethical Perspective. Institute of Development Policy and Management, University of AntwerpGoogle Scholar
- Hayner PB (1994) Fifteen Truth Commissions-1974 to 1994: A Comparative Study, Human Rights Quarterly 16(4):597–655CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Human Rights Watch (1994) Rwanda: A New Catastrophe? Increased International Efforts Required to Punish Genocide and Prevent Further Bloodshed, Human Rights Watch/Africa 6(12):2Google Scholar
- Human Rights Watch (2008) Law and Reality, Progress in Judicial Reforms in Rwanda, https://www.hrw.org/report/2008/07/25/law-and-reality/progress-judicial-reform-rwanda. Last accessed 28 February 2018
- Ibuka et al (2012) Right to Reparation for Survivors: Recommendations for Reparation for Survivors of the 1994 Genocide Against Tutsi. Survivors Fund and Redress, LondonGoogle Scholar
- Moussali M (1998) Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Rwanda E/CN.4/1998/60Google Scholar
- Moussali M (1999) Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Rwanda pursuant to resolution 1998/69 E/CN.4/1999/33Google Scholar
- Palmer N (2015) Courts in Conflict: Interpreting the Layers of Justice in Post-Genocide Rwanda. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
- Schabas W (1996) Justice, democracy, and impunity in post-genocide Rwanda: Searching for solutions to impossible problems. Criminal Law Forum (Vol. 7, No. 3, pp. 523–560). Kluwer Academic Publishers, Alphen aan den RijnGoogle Scholar
- Schabas W (2002) The Rwanda Case: Sometimes It’s Impossible’. Bassiouni M (ed) Post-Conflict Justice. Transnational Publishers, ArdsleyGoogle Scholar
- Schabas W (2005) Genocide Trials and Gacaca Courts. Journal of International Criminal Justice 3:879–895CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Schabas W, Imbleau M (1997) Introduction to Rwandan law. Éditions Y. Blais. Quebec, CanadaGoogle Scholar
- Sibomana A (1999) Hope for Rwanda: Conversations with Laure Guilbert and Hervé Deguine. Pluto Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
- Tully LD (2003) Human Rights Compliance and the Gacaca Jurisdictions in Rwanda. Boston College International & Comparative Law Review, 26:385Google Scholar
- United Nations (1998) Special Rapporteur on Violence Against Women, Report of the Mission to Rwanda on the Issues of Violence Against Women in Situations of Armed Conflict E/CN.4/1998/38/Add.1Google Scholar
- UN Commission on Human Rights (1997) Report on the situation of human rights in Rwanda, E/CN.4/1997/66Google Scholar
- UN Commission on Human Rights (1998) Report on the situation of human rights in Rwanda, E/CN.4/1998/61Google Scholar
- UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (1996) Human Rights Field Operation in Rwanda E/CN.4/1996/111Google Scholar
- Uvin P (2003) The gacaca tribunals in Rwanda. Reconciliation after violent conflict: A handbook. International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance, Stockholm, 116–121Google Scholar
- Vandeginste S (1999) Justice, Reconciliation and Reparation after Genocide and Crimes against Humanity: The Proposed Establishment of Popular Gacaca Tribunals in Rwanda, All-Africa Conference on African Principles of Conflict Resolution and Reconciliation. United Nations Conference Centre, Addis AbabaGoogle Scholar
- Waldorf L (2009c) Goats & Graves: Reparations in Rwanda’s Community Courts. Ferstman C et al (eds) Reparations for victims of genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity: systems in place and systems in the making. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Leiden-BostonGoogle Scholar
- Wibabara C (2014) Gacaca Courts versus the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda and National Courts. Lessons to Learn from the Rwandan Justice Approaches to Genocide. Nomos, Baden-BadenGoogle Scholar
Copyright information
© T.M.C. Asser Press and the author 2018