Advertisement

Conclusion

  • Pietro SulloEmail author
Chapter
  • 349 Downloads
Part of the International Criminal Justice Series book series (ICJS, volume 20)

Abstract

The simultaneous pursuit by gacaca courts of a diverse set of goals such as emptying prisons; providing justice according to local culture; speeding up the genocide-related trials; providing Rwandans with a shared record of the genocide events and achieving reconciliation appears to have been overambitious. Despite this concern, the attempt to strictly abide by the principle of duty to prosecute (all) the perpetrators of genocide-related crimes as well as its participatory, community-based approach, made gacaca the most courageous effort ever in the search for post-genocide justice.

Keywords

Gacaca Rwandan Post-genocide Justice Genocide-related Crimes Transitional justiceTransitional Justice 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Agamben G (1999) Remnants of Auschwitz: The Witness and the Archive. Zone Books, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  2. Drumbl M (2007) Atrocity, Punishment, and International Law. Cambridge University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  3. Haveman RH, Muleefu A (2011) The Fairness of Gacaca. In: Rothe DL, Mullins CW (eds) State Crime: Current Perspectives. Rutgers University Press, New Brunswick, pp 219–230Google Scholar
  4. Ingelaere B (2016) Inside Rwanda’s Gacaca Courts. The University of Wisconsin Press, MadisonGoogle Scholar
  5. Mamdani M (2002) When Victims Become Killers: Colonialism, Nativism, and the Genocide in Rwanda. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  6. Orentlicher DF (2007) ‘Settling Accounts’ Revisited: Reconciling Global Norms with Local Agency. The International Journal of Transitional Justice, 1(1):10–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (1996) Gacaca: Le Droit Coutumier au Rwanda, UNHCHR, RwandaGoogle Scholar
  8. UN Human Rights Committee (2009) Consideration of reports submitted by States parties under article 40 of the Covenant: International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights: concluding observations of the Human Rights Committee: Australia, CCPR/C/AUS/CO/5Google Scholar
  9. Uvin P (2003a) The gacaca tribunals in Rwanda. Reconciliation after violent conflict: A handbook. International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance, Stockholm, pp 116–121Google Scholar
  10. Uvin P (2003b) Wake Up! Some Policy Proposals for the International Community in Rwanda. Unpublished report, Tufts UniversityGoogle Scholar
  11. Waldorf L (2006a) Mass justice for mass atrocity: Rethinking local justice as transitional justice. Temp. L. Rev., 79:1Google Scholar

Copyright information

© T.M.C. Asser Press and the author 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Brussels School of International StudiesUniversity of KentBrusselsBelgium

Personalised recommendations