War Crimes Prosecution Watch

Cambodian Extraordinary Chambers (ECCC)

Official Website of the Extraordinary Chambers
Official Website of the Khmer Rouge Trial Task Force
Official Website of the United Nations Assistance to the Khmer Rouge Trials (UNAKRT)

Hun Sen's Hand in Genocide Trial Delays?
Inter Press Service News Agency
by Marwaan Macan-Markar
November 27, 2006

The long-delayed special tribunal to prosecute the surviving leaders of the genocidal Khmer Rouge regime has hit a verbal barrage that exposes the murky side of Cambodian politics.

The prime mover, whose actions are being viewed with alarm in some quarters in the country, is Ky Tech, president of the Cambodian Bar Association (CBA). Over a week ago, he demanded that foreign lawyers stop participating in the tribunal -- known officially as the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia (ECCC).

By Wednesday, his demand to make the exercise of legal representation a completely Cambodian one, despite local lawyers being poorly trained or lacking knowledge of international law, had intensified. ‘'We are being violated by foreigners,'' Ky Tech was quoted as having told the English language ‘Cambodian Daily.'

Such animosity resulted Friday in the International Bar Association (IBA) abruptly stopping a training programme that was to be held this week to make Cambodian lawyers sensitive to the scope of justice in cases dealing with crimes against humanity, a charge that the Khmer Rouge leaders face.

The CBA has issued instructions ‘'forbidding lawyers from attending a training programme'' planned by the IBA and the ECCC, states the IBA on its website. ‘'The Bar's president, Ky Tech, has publicly threatened that ‘measures' will be taken against any attendee, and against the IBA's international participants.''

‘'The Bar's actions represent a disturbing development in the functioning of international justice, placing obstacles in the path of bringing those accused of international crimes to trial,'' says Mark Ellis, executive director of the London-based IBA. ‘'The IBA's programme was intended to improve the quality of legal services and the administration of justice in Cambodia, and help educate and inform the Cambodian public about international justice.''

The IBA's involvement in strengthening legal systems faced with the challenge of handling war crimes tribunals is spread across regions where the murder of civilians on a mass scale has occurred. It has trained lawyers, prosecutors and judges involved in special tribunals that dealt with the crimes against humanity in former Yugoslavia and, more recently, training ‘'the judges of the Iraqi High Tribunal.''

So the objections to the IBA's involvement in the Cambodian tribunal has given rise to speculation that Ky Tech's motives may not be his alone, or that of the CBA. After all, the country's justice system is known for its questionable record on upholding human rights, being heavily politicised and even accused of corruption.

‘'The CBA president has become vocal to a degree that it is hard to believe that he is saying these things without political backing,'' Theary Seng, executive director of the Centre for Social Development (CSD), a non-governmental organisation (NGO), said in a telephone interview from Phnom Penh. ‘'It seems to be aimed to either slow the process, or even stall it. This is worrying.''

Cambodian human rights groups are equally alarmed, more so because they are aware of who Ky Tech's political patrons are. ‘'There can be some political influence behind this statement,'' Ny Chakrya, a ranking member of the Cambodian Human Rights and Development Association, a Phnom Penh-based NGO, told IPS. ‘'Some CBA lawyers work closely with the CPP (Cambodian People's Party). Ky Tech is pro-CPP.''

Such allegations directed at the governing CPP, led by Prime Minister Hun Sen, are not the first pointing to its attempts to scupper a legal process that Cambodian civilians have been yearning for. The increasingly authoritarian Hun Sen has been a serial opponent of the special tribunal ever since the United Nations began talks with the Phnom Penh regime over a decade ago to create the ECCC.

Hun Sen's sensitivity towards the ECCC was on display in May, when he lashed out at human rights groups who called into question Cambodia's choice of judges to sit on a tribunal that stands out -- unlike the ones for Rwanda and former Yugoslavia -- in having a combination of local and international jurists to be part of the entire legal process.

He ‘'likened his critics to perverted sex-crazed animals, among other things,'' the Hong Kong-based Asian Human Rights Commission, a regional rights lobby, said on the occasion. Human rights groups were not happy at the choice of Ney Thol, an army general and president of Cambodia's military court, being among the 17 local jurists for the ECCC. He has a record of denying the right for lawyers of the accused to call their own witnesses and to cross-examine the prosecution's witnesses.

What is more, a question still hangs in the air over Hun Sen if his name is dragged into the tribunal's proceedings, which formally got underway this year after years of delay. He was a member of the Khmer Rouge till he defected to join forces with the Vietnamese troops that drove out Pol Pot, the leader of that brutal regime, from power in 1979.

During their reign of terror between 1975-79, this extreme Maoist group, which wanted to create an agrarian utopia, was responsible for the death of close to 1.7 million people, nearly a quarter of this poor South-east Asian country's population at that time. The victims were executed or died of forced labour or famine.

Pol Pot died in 1998, evading justice. But other leaders of the brutal regime have survived, like Kaing Khek Eav, also known as ‘Duch,' who presided over the Toul Sleng interrogation centre in the Cambodian capital, where 14,000 people accused of being traitors died and only 12 inmates survived.

For Cambodian women like Theary Seng, the thought of further delay in the ECCC's work will only add pain to a public deeply traumatised by Khmer Rouge attrocities and still searching for answers as to why it happened. It is reflected in the public meetings her NGO has been running since early this year to prepare the public for this unprecedented trial.

‘'We bring experts from the ECCC to these meetings so that the people from the villages can get direct answers from them,'' she adds. ‘'There are so many questions out there about the KRT (Khmer Rouge Trial).''

At the most recent meeting in a province, an elderly man asked, ‘'I have waited for 30 years. Who ordered people to be killed?'' In that account, which appeared in an edition of the ‘Phnom Penh Post,' another man said, ‘'They murdered six members of my family in Takeo. In Kratie I went to jail with my family. I beg the NGOs to find the power to give me and my family justice.''

Cambodia: Government Interferes in Khmer Rouge Tribunal
Human Rights Watch
December 5, 2006

Donors Should Recognize How Government Tactics Threaten Entire Process

The Cambodian government must end its interference in the mixed national and international tribunal set up to prosecute crimes by senior Khmer Rouge leaders and others most responsible for Khmer Rouge crimes, Human Rights Watch said today.

A recent week-long meeting of Cambodian judges and their United Nations-appointed international counterparts failed to agree on internal rules for the tribunal, which is officially known as the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia (ECCC).

Acting on instructions from government officials, Cambodian personnel participating in the meeting delayed adoption of the draft rules, reversing earlier progress in the drafting process. The result is that the tribunal remains unable to launch investigations or prosecutions in accordance with international standards or even Cambodian law.

“Adopting the internal rules is crucial to ensure that the tribunal adheres to international fair trial standards and an impartial interpretation of Cambodian law,” said Brad Adams, Asia director of Human Rights Watch. “Many of the Khmer Rouge leaders are old and increasingly frail, but until the rules are adopted, prosecutions and trials cannot move forward. Political interference has brought the whole process to a screeching halt.”

In comments submitted to the tribunal on November 17, Human Rights Watch called for changes to the rules to meet international fair trial standards, specifically that there would be no in absentia trials, that defense counsel would be independent and effective, and that all trials would be public.

Cambodian lawyers and nongovernmental organizations have called for provisions to guarantee meaningful participation and protection of victims and witnesses, outreach to rural Cambodians to inform them about the trials and ensure that they can participate as civil parties, and authorization for victims’ associations and human rights NGOs to act as civil parties without having to register their organizations with the government.

Obstructionist tactics at the meeting on the internal rules were reportedly led by ECCC prosecutor Kong Srim, a protege of Deputy Prime Minister Sok An, who is Prime Minister Hun Sen’s most senior and trusted political lieutenant. As a prosecutor at the Appeals Court, Kong Srim developed a reputation for handling cases in a political manner rather than according to the law and the facts: he prosecuted suspects in absentia, played a key role in the release of Hun Sen’s nephew, Nhim Sophea, against whom there was compelling evidence of murder, and was crucial in engineering the imposition of the deputy prime minister’s candidate, Ky Tech, as president of the Cambodian Bar Association.

As documented in numerous reports by the United Nations, international legal organizations and Cambodian NGOs, the Cambodian judiciary and legal system remain under the tight control of the government. The government has ensured the appointment to the ECCC of Cambodian judges, prosecutors and security personnel who are politically loyal to the prime minister, the deputy prime minister and the national police chief, Hok Lundy. Such political control mechanisms are aimed at preventing judges and prosecutors from acting independently and conducting fair trials free from political interference.

Throughout the negotiations with the United Nations to establish the ECCC, Hun Sen and the Cambodian government engaged in a pattern of delay and obstruction, which was set out in detail by UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan in a report to the UN General Assembly. (See UN document A/57/769, “Report of the Secretary-General on Khmer Rouge trials,” at www.un.org.) The government has long tried to bog down efforts at creating the tribunal and, now, at making it functional, through seemingly endless and often fruitless negotiations, which absorb huge amounts of time, funding and expertise, but result in little or no substantive improvements.

“Government control over the Cambodian judiciary in the Khmer Rouge tribunal has always been a grave concern,” said Adams. “The fact that the government is already obstructing the process on ‘technical’ grounds should serve as a wake-up call for donors who have chosen to ignore Cambodian realities.”

Based on past government practices, Human Rights Watch is concerned that the latest wrangling over the internal rules may be a prelude to public attacks on the tribunal’s international staff, both to drive out particular individuals and to discourage others enough to bring about their resignations.

For the past 15 years, the Cambodian government has consistently attempted to silence, dismiss or undermine UN and other international personnel in Cambodia who operate independently and professionally and are seen as a threat to the government’s continued control of the judicial system. Hun Sen has vituperatively attacked all four UN human rights special representatives to Cambodia and the UN human rights office in Phnom Penh for their consistent and well-documented reports on human rights abuses, including extrajudicial killings and unfair trials, as well as the judiciary’s incompetence, corruption and lack of independence. While international donors have often called for reform of the judiciary as one of the highest priorities for Cambodia, the government has failed to adopt meaningful reforms.

“The government has long feigned accommodation with the UN system and international community in order to maintain its control over the judiciary,” said Adams. “The UN and donors must not allow this to happen this time.”

Human Rights Watch also expressed serious concern about the politically controlled Cambodian Bar Association’s attacks on the proposed ECCC Defense Office and plans for the training of Cambodian lawyers by the International Bar Association. The Cambodian Bar Association threatened legal action against Cambodian lawyers planning to attend a training on international standards by the International Bar Association in Singapore, causing it to cancel the training and to issue a strong statement condemning the move. Last year, when an independent candidate was elected president of the Cambodian Bar Association, the government-backed candidate, Ky Tech, used the politically controlled court system to have the election overturned. Ky Tech subsequently was elected as president, and it was he who ordered Cambodian lawyers not to attend the IBA training.

Though some progress has been made over the past decade, Cambodian courts generally give little respect to the right to an effective defense. The Cambodian government has repeatedly given assurances to the United Nations that arrangements would be made to allow full-fledged participation in defense by foreign lawyers, thereby ensuring that defendants would have counsel of their choosing. But the government is now obstructing this.

“The trials will not be credible unless defendants are provided a credible defense,” said Adams. “Given the well-documented problems with trials in Cambodia, the government and Bar Association should be going out of their way to ensure the reality of fair trials, rather than attacking the defense office.”

Future discussions of the internal rules will show whether it is possible for the ECCC to conduct trials that implement Cambodian and international law in an independent and impartial manner. Human Rights Watch urged both Cambodian and international personnel of the ECCC to pursue the objective of fair trials in accordance with international standards, keeping in mind that it is the Cambodian people who are the intended beneficiaries of this process.

“The international community needs to follow the Cambodian tribunal closely,” said Adams. “We want this tribunal to succeed. But if it becomes clear that the process is hopelessly politicized and obstructed, then the UN should withdraw its support to avoid becoming involved in a substandard trial that would be a disservice to itself and to millions of Cambodians.”

Big question mark hangs over Khmer Rouge trial
Reuters
by Ed Cropley
December 7, 2006

The courthouse is finished, a statue of its guardian spirit stands imposingly outside and prosecutors are wading through reams of documents relating to the 1.7 million victims of the "Killing Fields".

Despite all this, efforts to try Pol Pot's top henchmen for the Khmer Rouge atrocities of 30 years ago hang in the balance due to a major disagreement between Cambodian and foreign judges over the nuts and bolts of the joint court.

Last month, a week-long meeting of both sides to hammer out the hundreds of rules and guidelines governing everything from admissibility of evidence to witness protection to the height of the judges' chairs resolved precisely nothing.

A source familiar with the talks said the Cambodian officials -- products of a politicised judiciary described by the United Nations in 1999 as "deficient in most important areas" -- simply refused to negotiate.

"There was a clear attempt to stall it, which is disturbing," the source said.

Court spokesman Peter Foster acknowledged the Cambodians "spoke with a common voice", but said its primary concern was "not to approve anything that violated the Cambodian legal system".

Amid speculation about the hidden hand of Prime Minister Hun Sen -- a former Khmer Rouge commander not linked to any atrocities -- diplomats said the $56 million U.N.-backed process could fall apart before the prosecution names its first suspect.

"If they don't shape up in the next two months, there won't be a trial at all," a Western diplomat in Phnom Penh said.

Foreign lawyers and judges drafted in to ensure the process is just would not compromise on quality, another diplomat said.

"You have people with major reputations and they're not going to take part in something that does not meet international standards," the diplomat said. "They've made that quite plain."

POLITICS OR LOGISTICS?

Critics of Hun Sen jumped on the impasse as evidence he had been spooked by the speed and rigour with which Canadian prosecutor Robert Petit was working and needed to apply the brakes.

The Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia, as the court is named officially, are mandated only to go after Khmer Rouge "senior leaders" and those "most responsible" for the atrocities committed during Pol Pot's 1975-79 reign of terror.

After Pol Pot's death in 1998, that was always assumed to mean "Brother Number Two" Nuon Chea, ex-President Khieu Samphan, ex-Foreign Minister Ieng Sary and a few others, including Duch, head of the Tuol Sleng "S-21" interrogation centre, and military supremo Ta Mok, who died in July.

But, the theory goes, maybe Petit was casting his net a little too wide and a little too close for comfort for a government still laden with ageing Khmer Rouge cadres.

A veteran of genocide tribunals in Rwanda and Sierra Leone, Petit said the slow progress was to be expected.

"Even if you'd put 20 Canadian judges in that room, I'm not sure you would have got any more results," he told Reuters.

"Everybody here is still committed to making this work and to having a good trial," Petit said. "A bad trial would be worse than no trial. It has to be done right, or not at all."

A separate sub-committee is now trying to draw up the rules, a task which court officials hope will be completed by February. If that all goes smoothly, Petit and his Cambodian colleague should be able to launch their first prosecutions in early March.

"We're withholding judgment in the hope that the difficulties encountered turn out to be logistical rather than political," said Heather Ryan of the Open Society Justice Initiative, a legal monitoring organisation.

At the personal level, the two sides do not seem to have got off on the right foot.

"It seems to me that the international lawyers consider the Cambodian lawyers to be incompetent," said Cambodian Bar Association head Ky Tech, embroiled in a related spat with the International Bar Association over external legal training.

For a tragedy whose roots are buried in the murky politics of the Cold War, it is also unsurprising that many see forces working beneath the surface.

Diplomats said China had been lobbying hard for Hun Sen to derail the trial because of the dirt it is sure to rake up on Beijing's support for Pol Pot and its efforts to export revolution to a region where it now has major strategic and economic stakes.

[back to contents]

Democratic Republic of the Congo (ICC)

Official Website of the International Criminal Court
ICC Public Documents - Situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo

The Implications of the Peace Process for the DRC
AllAfrica.com - Fahamu
by Dieu-Donné Wedi Djamba
November 30, 2006

The International Criminal Court (ICC) has indicted LRA leader Joseph Kony and four of his lieutenants for crimes against humanity and war crimes committed during their 20-year-old rebellion. The government has proposed a traditional form of justice, Mato Oput, to replace the ICC indictments. Dieu-Donné WEDI DJAMBA explores the implications such a move will have for the post-conflict Democratic Republic of Congo, where the national judicial system is in collapse, and the only alternative left for victims of war to seek justice from is the ICC. This article is the last installment of a two-part series. The first article, entitled "The Ugandan Peace Process in Perspective" www.pambazuka.org/en/category/comment/38526 was published last week.

The ICC determines whether a State's criminal procedure, including non-party States' criminal procedures, conforms with the principles of "due process" or not. The standard adopted by the ICC for its determination is "the minimum guarantees" provided by the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).[1] And, Mato Oput may not conform to this principle of "due processes".

Furthermore, there is need to improve Mato Oput for it to be suitable as an alternative to the ICC. This raises the question whether still it remains a possibility to see Kony and his senior commanders standing trial under Mato Oput, because the ICC's Rome Statute provision article 17(admissibility principle) [2] provides that a case being investigated or prosecuted by a State member can be admissible to ICC(art.17,(1)a and b) but not reversed.

Indeed, there is jurisprudence for the ICC to prosecute Kony and his senior commanders because the Ugandan government itself referred the case to the international criminal court.

It must be noted that in order for the ICC to drop a case already at the investigation, prosecution or trial phase, and for a State to continue with the same case, this will create an judicial unsafe (delay of process). It would also be important to find out what happens if once again the same case became admissible to the ICC under articles 17(1)a and b after being handed over to a concerned State by ICC under the Complementarity principle.

Therefore, if Mato Oput will apply the international law standard, it will be helpful for the future case. Secondly, Acholi people are asking for Kony and his senior commanders to be prosecuted through Mato Oput. [3] But do they (Kony and other) ask for any prosecution by Mato Oput applying an international law standard? The possibility is they may ask for amnesty in order to avoid prosecutions. I am also of the argument that even if the Mato Oput has an international law standard it would not be the best option for Kony and his senior commanders.

The withdrawal of the warrants of arrest

Another threat faced by the ICC in the Ugandan peace process is the demand to withdraw warrants of arrest against the LRA leaders, which could set an unfortunate precedent for other ICC cases.

The wanted LRA leaders want the warrants of arrest withdrawn before they will emerge from the bush to sign the peace agreement. "The ICC warrants of arrest against the LRA leaders should be dropped, so that a peaceful conclusion to talk can be reach", said the LRA spokesman Obonyo Olweny. [4] Otti Vincent, one of the wanted LRA leaders, said in a call to a Gulu-based radio station that "Kony and I can not attend the peace talks although they wanted one of the top leaders of the LRA to attend. We are afraid of the ICC indictment on us. If you can convince the Uganda government to withdraw the case at the ICC, we are ready to come out of the bush freely".[5] And he warned "there will be no peace deal unless international indictment for the top rebels are dropped".[6]

Uganda has offered the five rebels leaders a blanket amnesty if they agree to a peace deal, and hinted at a possible negotiation with the ICC over the indictment. [7] The Uganda peace talks mediator, Dr Riek Machar, has taken a middle position to the LRA's demand that warrants of arrest be withdrawn, saying "we are not telling the ICC to stop what they are doing....We are just asking them to give the peace process a chance."[8]

Contrary to Machar's view, the ICC's Prosecutor, Luis Moreno Ocampo urged that the best way to finally stop the conflict is to arrest the top leaders. And he added that "Kony will eventually face the trial."[9]

The ICC involvement in northern Uganda is viewed as a complication by all sides. While the ICC prosecutions have been an important factor in bringing the LRA and the government to the table, they now limit the options available to mediation because they and the broad international community are unlikely to accept a deal providing a broad amnesty and lacking strong justice and accountability mechanisms. At the same time, the commanders indicted by the ICC will not be interested in any deal that fails to protect them from ICC prosecution and fails to guarantee their personal safety.[10]

If the warrants of arrest are withdrawn, the question remains: who shall be blamed? Interviewed in February, senior ICC official Phakiso Mochockoko said that "The situation in northern Uganda was referred to the ICC prosecutor ( Argentina lawyer Luis Moreno Ocampo) by the government of Uganda. And as a result of that, the ICC is obliged to exercise its mandate in accordance with the statute".[11] As such it seems that cracks in the Rome Statute would need to be found before any warrants of arrest could be withdrawn.

Under article 53 of the Rome Statute, the prosecutor has the discretion to stop prosecutions that no longer serve 'the interest of justice'. Article 53 can only be used to end, not suspend, a case. An option of last resort subject to serious constraints, it calls for the prosecutor to consider the 'interest of justice', not peace. This is in line with the ICC's stated purpose articulated in the statute's preamble, which is to end impunity and ensure prosecution of those most responsible for the gravest crimes. As such, any decision to stop a case prior to prosecution, except on the most compelling grounds, is contrary to the court's core principles.[12]

Therefore, if for some Ugandan people (including Kony and his senior commanders) the ICC is an obstacle towards peace, the way "to give peace a chance" as Machar says, is to leave any decision to put the prosecutions on hold to the Security Council, as provided by article 16 of the Rome Statute.

This article permits the Security Council to determine that an agreement would be in the interest of peace and to require the ICC by a chapter VII resolution to defer action for renewable one-year periods, thereby suspending and not halting prosecutions.[13]

The time limitation of one year placed on the Security Council by the Rome Statute was both a recognition that article 16 should not become a back door to impunity, and a realization that the threat of not renewing a deferral gives the Security Council a tool for ensuring compliance with an agreement. Thus, even if the Council does intervene, the LRA may not be satisfied.[14]

But the Crisis Group argues that in theory, the Security Council could give de facto amnesty by promising to renew the yearly deferrals for the lives of the indicted, though such a pledge should at least be accompanied by a clear understanding that any violations by the LRA would mean a resumption of prosecutions.[15]

Article 16 of the Rome Statute does not provide any limit in terms of how many times the Security Council should renew a deferral action. This omission is a threat for the ICC as an anti impunity symbol. And any unlimited renewal one-year period in LRA leaders' case will set a precedent for the future ICC case and for international justice.

The Blanket Amnesty

Tina Rosenberg argues that a country's decisions about how to deal with its past should depend on many things: the type of dictatorship or war endured, the type of crimes committed, the level of societal complicity, the national political culture and history, the conditions necessary for dictatorship to occur, the abruptness of the transition, and the new democratic government's power and resources. She added that different countries have chosen widely different strategies to deal with the past.[16]

Among these strategies, is the granting of amnesty. This strategy is used by different countries in order to end conflict or dictatorship regimes. Samuel P. Huntington [17] distinguishes three types of democratization transitions: transformations, replacements and transplacements.

In transformations, those in power in the authoritarian regime take the lead and play the decisive role in ending that regime and changing it into a democratic system. In replacements however, democratization results from the opposition gaining strength and the government losing strength until the government collapses or is overthrown. In transplacements, democratization is produced by the combined actions of government and opposition.

In recent past, many dictatorship regimes used the amnesty strategy during transition to democracy to grant themselves a blanket amnesty such as in Chile with the Pinochet regime.[18] Others used the National Conference Forum such as in Togo with the Etienne Gnassingbé Eyadéma regime [19] , and in the DRC (former Zaire) with the Mobutu regime.[20]

However, in transplacements, the granting of amnesty has also been chosen in many countries. This amnesty could be a broader one, such in Sierra Leone [21] or conditional such as in South Africa.[22]

Thus in order to end a war conflict or a dictatorship and to establish a real democracy, many countries have chosen to grant a amnesty. Uganda is among them.

Indeed, the Ugandan president Yoweri Museveni has offered a blanket amnesty to LRA leaders in order the end the over 19 year long deadly civil war in his country. As noticed the BBC News: "Mr. Museveni clearly feels that for now, the most important thing to achieve is peace. And, in the interest of that peace, the widespread crimes of Joseph Kony's Lord's Resistance Army should be put to one side."[23]

The ICC at The Hague may disagree. The court was founded on the basis that there can be no durable peace without justice, which to some extent satisfies victims that wrong have been addressed.[24]

At a 2002 meeting to mark the fourth anniversary of the adoption of the Rome Statute, Kofi Annan, the Secretary General of the United Nation, said "The date of 17 July 1998 will long be remembered as the world finally united to bring an end to the culture of impunity".[25] But challenging impunity does not only mean ferreting out former dictators from wherever they may be hiding in order to have them stand trial for the crimes they committed. It also means not extending amnesties to people accused of committing crimes against humanity.[26]

However, this point of view is not shared by all Ugandan people. Indeed, as noted IRIN, Ugandans are "...tired of war, most people want the rebels forgiven". According to them, maintaining a tough stance against the rebels and fighting them has only prolonged their suffering. "We are in a mood of forgiveness. Let the International Criminal Court not spoil our party preparations", some Ugandans have said.[27]

The ICC's aim to close "the gap of impunity" is felt by some Ugandan people to be a threat to the peace in Uganda. Some of them do not hesitate to criticize the presence of the ICC in the Uganda peace process. An internally displaced person, Nikson Owinyi, told Jan Egeland that "The international community should tell the ICC that the Acholi people don't like ICC in these affairs because it is holding back the peace process."[28]

Again Peter Onega, has claimed that the decision by the international court has left their work in "total confusion". He stated further, that "the statute establishing the ICC overrides the national laws and the court may decide to issue other warrants of arrest for people they have even issued amnesty to. .....The warrant would scare away willing rebels and frustrate the commission's effort to negotiate for ex-rebels return", he added.[29]

Indeed, in a bid to bring about a cessation of violence, the UAC was set up to offer a blanket amnesty to militia and soldiers. It was hoped that this amnesty would encourage them to lay down their weapons without fear of reprisal. Then in October, 2005, the ICC issued warrants of arrest against five members of the LRA in Uganda and this move effectively undid the work of the UAC.[30]

But Luis Moreno Ocampo, the Chief Prosecutor for the ICC, made himself clear on this issue when he told IRIN, "Domestic amnesties are strictly a matter for national authorities and do not act as bar to an investigation by the ICC". Thus, the message was that at a national level, amnesties may be granted, but they will not be guaranteed at an international level.[31]

The rejection of amnesty for perpetrators of human rights abuses on the basis that such amnesties are incompatible with the principle of international law has been steadily involving the whole world. The International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia observed in 1998 that amnesties covering certain crimes' "would not be accorded international legal recognition" despite having legal force in that country. Spanish and French courts have also lent their backing to this interpretation, and the inter-American court of Human Rights in 2001 stated "All amnesty provisions are inadmissible, because they are intended to prevent the investigation and punishment of those responsible for serious human rights violations, which are non-derogable rights recognized by international human rights law."[32]

The UN holds the understanding that the amnesty provisions of the agreement shall not apply to the "international crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and other serious violations of international humanitarian law."[33]

Indeed, the amnesty issue facing the ICC in the Ugandan peace process is an opportunity for the international justice system to show the international community as a whole that the impunity gap is closed.

Far from spoiling the peace process in Uganda, the ICC could boost it. Its deterrent effect is one of the main explanations for the sudden willingness for the LRA leaders to negotiate. They no longer have anywhere to hide. They have lost support - the southern Sudan is no longer a threat for the government of Khartoum, and they are wanted in DRC by the MONUC, the UN mission in DRC after killing eight Guatemalan peacekeepers in Eastern DRC.[34]

Often, people like Kony and other LRA leaders need to be backed against the wall before one can expect any agreement from them for a negotiated solution. Mobutu, the DRC former president accepted negotiations with Laurant Desiré Kabila, the other former DRC President, (then rebel leader) when almost Â¾ of the country was controlled by the rebel group in 1997 . 'The rebels Lords Resistance Army has called for the resumption of peace talks with the Ugandan government' noted IRIN.[35]

As noted by the Citizens for Global solutions (CGS), Kony is exactly the type of person for whom the ICC was created. [36] Therefore, the blanket amnesty through a peace agreement becomes the last chance for a way out.

The implications of the Ugandan peace process in the Ituri District

As has been said before, DRC is affected by a deadly war which has resulted in over three million deaths and widespread displacement. The killing and other atrocities committed against the population by the national army, foreigners armies, rebel groups, and militias raises the issue of accountability of the perpetrators and reparation for the victims.

But in the DRC, the national judicial system is in collapse. According to Human Rights Watch, the DRC's national justice system is in a state of disarray. It will likely take years to establish a functioning, independent, impartial and fair judiciary.[37] And the Commission Vérité Reconciliation (CVR) - the Congolese truth commission - established by the Pretoria Agreement with the mandate to address reparation has failed to do its work.[38]

Therefore, the ICC becomes the alternative for the thousands of victims wanting to see justice done by holding their perpetrator accountable and getting reparations owed to them.

Among the most affected by the war is the population of Ituri District in northeast DRC bordering with Uganda. This population expects prosecution of the likes of Combra Matata, leader of the Ituri Patriotic Resistence Front (FRPI), one of the active militia groups and responsible for several atrocities including rape, burning houses and killing.[39]

The Ituri people also expect prosecution of Kawa Mandro of PUSIC, an Ituri militia [40], Peter Karim of Front des nationalistes et Integrationnistes (FNI) and Mathieu Ngudjolo of Mouvement des Révolutionnaires Congolais (MRC) [41]. Already there is a concern among the population in Ituri after the government appointed two ex-militia leaders, Peter Karim (FNI) and Mathieu Ngudjolo (MRC) as colonels in the national army [42], in the name of peace.[43]

But for the victims of war in the DRC, especially in Ituri, 'peace' means positive peace, one in which justice is addressed, human rights are respected and people live without any fear (as opposed to a negative peace such as a ceasefire, which is negative because it stops the war but does not address other issues). [44] And this 'peace' has to be based on the concept of justice. There is no peace without justice. But this justice has to be taken into the transitional justice perspective.[45]

Indeed, transitional justice offers a deeper, richer and broader vision which seeks to confront perpetrators, address the need of victims and assists in the start of a process of reconciliation and transformation.[46] Therefore, the Uganda peace process is very important for the people of that country.

The ongoing peace process in Uganda is being followed with interest by both the victims and perpetrators in Ituri District. The success or failure of the ICC in the LRA leaders case will have many implications. Successful prosecution will create an expectation for several victims of similar atrocities in Ituri to see their own perpetrators held accountable for their crimes and to expect reparations. It will produce a deterrent effect to other militias who are still active in the same area. [47] Indeed, the arrest of Thomas Lubanga, one of the militia leaders in Ituri by the ICC in April this year produced a strong deterrent effect. "Many here in the East are afraid the court will come...we all now are thinking twice . We do not what this court can and will do", confessed Xavier Ciribanya, former rebel leader of the RCD-goma and suspected of a range of crimes against civilians in both Kivus and Ituri.[48] Therefore, the ICC remains key in ending the violence and the last hope for the victims to see their perpetrators prosecuted, and to receive reparation after the complete failure of the CVR to address the issue. [49]

But, on other hand, failure will encourage the culture of impunity in Ituri District.

Indeed, the three conditions raised in the Ugandan peace process can be used by the different perpetrators in Ituri: firstly the Mato Oput option will gives people like Combra Matata who still has weapons the opportunity to escape a real trial. Secondly, the withdrawal of the warrants of arrest will give future perpetrators the chance to claim the Ugandan ICC case as jurisprudence. Finally, the blanket amnesty will be an opportunity for those prosecutable in Ituri District to extend the content of the law adopted by the DRC National Assembly which gives the CVR the power to propose amnesty for acts of war, political crimes and crimes of opinion.[50]

Conclusion

The ongoing peace process in Uganda is critical for the Ugandan people. This peace process can finally end the 19 year long deadly war which deeply affected the northern Ugandan people. But at the same time, the peace process in Uganda is critical for the ICC which faces its first test as the symbol to impunity. Furthermore the Ugandan peace process has implications for the Ituri District.

As a symbol for the ending of impunity or the closing of the impunity gap, the ICC has to stand behind its warrants of arrests. Justice has to be done. Not only for the victims in northern Uganda, but for others, including the Ituri.

The ICC is established not only for Uganda and its future will depend on what decision it takes today in order to secure tomorrow in its fight against the impunity. 'Justice for today's crimes supplies the legal foundation needed to deter tomorrow's atrocities. Without justice, there is no peace'.[51]

[back to contents]

Darfur, Sudan (ICC)

Official Website of the International Criminal Court
ICC Public Documents - Situation in Darfur, Sudan

'No one to help them': Rape extends from Darfur into eastern Chad
Amnesty International / Human Rights Watch

"We heard the Janjawid decide to open fire on the mosque and so we decided to run out… They captured the women… The men were holding their throats and sitting on their bodies so they could not move, and they took off their clothes and then used them as women. More than one man would use one woman. I could hear the women crying for help, but there was no one to help them."
A woman speaking to Amnesty International about an attack on Djorlo, Chad, on 7 November 2006.

It is impossible to know how many women have been raped since the armed conflict began in Darfur in 2003. There have certainly been thousands.

The names of 250 women who had been raped, and harrowing information about their cases, were recorded by Amnesty International on a 10-day visit to just three refugee camps in Chad in 2004. Many of the women had been gang raped. There are 173 camps for displaced people in Darfur and 12 refugee camps in Chad.

Over 500 victims of rape were treated at 25 clinics of Médecins sans Frontières in Darfur between October 2004 and mid-February 2005. Most had been raped by members of Janjawid militias as they went about normal daily tasks outside the camp.

Recent months have seen a dramatic increase in the numbers of rapes as Darfur has been plunged into new fighting. In just one camp in Darfur, Kalma camp, the International Rescue Committee reported that rapes of women rose from under four to 200 a month during five weeks in July and August 2006.

Despite the presence of an African Union peacekeeping force (African Union Mission in Sudan, AMIS) and international awareness of what is happening in Darfur, in 2006 rapes and other violence against women and girls have increased, not diminished.

Women rarely report rapes, even to medical staff, and humanitarian organizations have had to pull out of many areas of Darfur. The number of women receiving medical treatment is thus probably only a fraction of those raped or subjected to other forms of sexual violence.

Rape and other forms of sexual violence by fighters are recognized as war crimes and crimes against humanity. The large-scale and often systematic rape of women is the most flagrant example of the violence suffered by women in Darfur. Over and over again Darfuris have expressed this as something out of the ordinary and horrific: "It didn’t happen in any previous war ever fought in Darfur".

At the beginning of the conflict, women would not talk about rape. "Women will not tell you easily if such a thing happens to them. In our culture, it is a shame, and women will hide this in their hearts so that the men do not hear about it", one woman refugee in Chad told Amnesty International in 2003.

Only in the second year of the killings and mass forced displacements, when thousands had been raped, when the children of rapes were being born, and when it was clear that rape could no longer be hidden, did women begin to talk.

Rape as a weapon of war
Rape and other forms of sexual violence in Darfur are not just a consequence of the conflict or of undisciplined troops. Rape is a weapon of war. Its aim is to humiliate, punish, control, instil fear, and to drive women and whole communities from their land. The circumstances in which rapes are committed and their increasing number suggest that rape is often used to terrorize populations, to threaten them, to forcibly displace them.

The vast majority of rapes, abductions, sexual enslavements and other forms of sexual violence have been committed by the government-supported Janjawid militias.

"Suddenly the Janjawid attacked us… The majority [of the girls] managed to escape; me, my cousin and my sister were captured… One of them forced me on the ground and all the time I was resisting them…all the time one of the Janjawid kept his gun pointed at my head… Four of them raped me."
A 16-year-old girl describes an attack to Human Rights Watch, February 2005.

The Sudanese Janjawid have now taken their brutal attacks on civilians across the border into neighbouring Chad. In alliance with armed elements from certain ethnic groups in Chad, their aim appears to be to empty the areas bordering Sudan of a diverse range of ethnic groups who identify themselves and are identified by others as "African" rather than "Arab." They are again raping women as part of this process.

"It was the 8th day of Ramadan [30 September 2006] and eight of us – we are all about the same age between 15 and 16 – were looking for firewood… We then came across three men on horseback wearing jellabiyas... They pointed their guns at us and insulted us, calling us Nawab [plural of Nuba or "Africans", used as an insult] and telling us that the land did not belong to us. They also hit us with their horse whips and ends of their rifles. They then took one of the girls, and one held her by her arms and one by her legs and one raped her, they took turns… Only four of the girls were raped."
A Dajo girl speaking to Amnesty International in Chad, November 2006.

Members of the armed forces, police and reserve police have also committed rape.
"They wore army uniforms and one had a Kalashnikov… They whipped me with two whips, used by three men… I said nothing, I could not scream. I was raped by all five. I did not report the rape because they were government soldiers."
A woman interviewed by Human Rights Watch in North Darfur, July 2004.

Increasing numbers of rapes, by displaced men of displaced women, are reported within the camps for the internally displaced, where hundreds of thousands of Darfuris are often effectively imprisoned by Janjawid militias. Many of those who live or work in the camps say that there is more domestic violence too, by husbands and family members.

There are far fewer reports of rape involving armed opposition groups. However, a number of rapes by members of the Minni Minawi faction of the Sudan Liberation Army – one of the signatories of the Darfur Peace Agreement in May and now operating alongside government forces – were reported in the Tawila area in April 2006 and at the time of attacks and killings in Korma on 5 and 6 July 2006.

Sexual enslavement and attacks near the camps
Some women are kept in sexual slavery. One woman from Darfur described what happened to her when her village was attacked. She had a baby in her arms and said she was two months pregnant when she was raped.

"I was taken away by attackers in khaki and civilian clothes along with dozens of other girls and had to walk for three hours. During the day, we were beaten… We were taken to a place in the bush where we were raped several times at night. For three days, we did not receive food and almost no water. We were surrounded by armed guards. After three days, the Janjawid had to move to another place and set us free."
A woman from Darfur, interviewed by Amnesty International in Chad, 2004.

Such abductions continue in 2006. On 7 October 2006, during an attack on Djimeze Djarma in Chad, a group of women were captured by Janjawid and held for 20 days.

"The men made us cook, fetch water, feed their camels and horses, and cook food for them. They would move between us and if we disobeyed they would beat us with their whips. We suffered a lot. I thought that I would be killed."
A woman interviewed by Amnesty International in Chad, November 2006.

Most of the internally displaced, especially in West Darfur, are virtual prisoners in the camps. The Janjawid occupy the land and those who venture out of the camps face the threat of being killed, beaten or raped. These terror tactics ensure that vast swathes of territory are kept empty of targeted ethnic groups who will not dare to return to their land. Gathering firewood and fetching water are traditionally women’s work, but women who leave the camps for these necessities of life risk rape in 2006 as in 2004.

"In Garsila the women wanted to bring firewood and water, and many were raped by Janjawid."
A man from Garsila district, Darfur, interviewed in 2004.

Impunity for the rapists
Those who rape benefit from almost total impunity. AMIS forces have often tried to protect women, for instance by carrying out firewood patrols, but they lack sufficient numbers of troops. When a woman is raped, they tend to take no action.

"The AU [AMIS] is not interested in the displaced… When girls are raped in the neighbourhood of the camp, the AU’s only action is to bring the girl back to the camp. They do not carry out any investigation into the event".
A Masalit woman from Darfur, speaking to Amnesty International in Chad, 2006.

The police are deeply distrusted, particularly by those who have been raped.

"I cannot complain to the police, they will punish me even more, some Janjawid are in the police and some policemen themselves are Janjawid."
A girl who had been raped, talking in a North Darfur camp for the displaced in 2004.

The police frequently fail to take action to protect civilians under attack. In one case villagers sought shelter at a police station. The police reportedly stood by while Janjawid raped women, and shot and tortured men from their community who tried to protect them.
"They took girls away for long hours and brought them back later. Girls were crying, we knew they raped them. Some of us were raped in front of the crowd… I resisted them… They hit me and decided to rape me in front of others… Some young men tried to protect us…they received shots in both their legs… Others were hanged on the tree naked."
A Fur woman from South Darfur, interviewed by Human Rights Watch, February 2005.

The trauma and the stigma
The perpetrators of rape know very well the effect rape will have on a woman – not only the personal, psychological consequences, but that a married woman might be divorced, an unmarried woman never find a husband.

"Then two of the men raped me… I have not told anyone what happened to me… I do not know how my husband would react if he were to know. Men are different and some get angry with the woman."
A displaced woman near Goz Beida in Chad, speaking to Amnesty International, November 2006.

Even when families arrange a marriage for a daughter who has been raped, the victim remains traumatized and the social stigma can devastate the family.

"My daughter screams at night… I never talk to her about what happened, although she knows that I know what happened to her… Her father became very ill since that time. He never goes out with the rest of the men and he does nothing but staying inside the room… Now my daughter is married to her cousin, but where is he? He does not communicate with her or with us."
The mother of a 16-year-old girl, interviewed by Human Rights Watch, South Darfur, February 2005.

Rape can in some circumstances result in death or lasting injury. Female genital mutilation by infibulation, which occurs among some groups in Darfur and eastern Chad, can increase the severity of injuries incurred during rape, and can contribute to, for example, severe blood loss.

"They beat us and told us that you blacks are not going to stay here, we will finish you all. They then grabbed my half-sister who was only 10 years old… I saw two of them lie with my half-sister and then they went away. When we got there she was very hurt and was bleeding. She continued to bleed for the following two days and then died."
A displaced woman describing an attack by uniformed men near Goz Beida in Chad to Amnesty International, November 2006.

The dilemmas facing women who become pregnant as a result of rape are great. Some leave their families to hide their shame. Others are rejected by their family and give up the child for adoption. Others again stay and raise the child.

"A raped girl comes back to her family, and eventually delivers the baby and raises the child, as infanticide would be haram [forbidden]"
A refugee from Darfur in Chad, interviewed in 2006.

The UN Secretary-General said in March 2005 that he was "very concerned by the disturbing reports of arrests by the police of unmarried women in the Mukjar area ( West Darfur) who have become pregnant as a result of rape." Pregnant unmarried women in Sudan have frequently been charged with adultery and face a flogging if convicted. Adultery is a capital crime for a married woman under the 1991 Penal Code.

Surviving
When Amnesty International delegates tried to discuss the extent of the problem of rape in Darfur with the Sudanese government in 2004, every member of the government they met said that rape could not happen in Sudan. In July 2004 the government set up Rape Committees, composed of a woman judge, prosecutor and policewoman, which travelled to each Darfur State. But women said they did not trust the Committees, which reported that they had found only isolated rape cases.

An overstretched community of humanitarian workers and local non-governmental organizations (NGOs) has difficulty in providing medical services or counselling to most of those who suffer rape or sexual violence. However, some humanitarian agencies and Sudanese NGOs are working with raped women from the camps in particular, and some women from the camps in Darfur are also counselling and helping women. One woman in a displaced camp in South Darfur who was raped in front of her husband – who was killed when he tried to protect her – overcame her grief and anger, and committed herself to provide support to other women who had survived violence.

Time to protect the women of Darfur and Chad The horrific pattern of sexual and other violence against women which has emerged from Darfur is by no means unique. In recent years, hundreds of thousands of women affected by conflict around the world have suffered the same fate.

Violence against women, as defined in international standards, is prohibited at all times, in all its forms, by international and regional treaties, as well as by customary international law. Even in times of armed conflict, women and girls have the right to be free from crimes which constitute violence against women.

Today, there can no longer be any excuse for ignoring the scale of crimes against women in conflict. With almost daily news reports from war zones across the globe, no one can claim that they do not know what is happening. No one can hide behind the excuse that nothing can be done. There is an urgent need to find more effective forms of action proportionate to the scale and gravity of the crimes that are unfolding.

Departing UN official: Darfur situation in `free fall'
Associated Press via Chicago Tribune
by Edith M. Lederer
December 6, 2006

NEW YORK -- The conflict in Darfur has spread to two neighboring countries and is now in a "free fall" with 6 million people facing the prospect of going without food or protection, the departing UN humanitarian chief said Tuesday.

Jan Egeland, who steps down Dec. 12, said in an interview that one of the biggest problems he faced was convincing countries of the dire situation in the western region of Sudan.

"I think some of the Arab countries and Asian countries have not really understood we're in a free fall. It's not a steady deterioration. It's a free fall and it includes Darfur, eastern Chad, northern Central African Republic," he said.

Egeland blamed the Sudanese government, parts of the rebel movement, ethnic leaders in Darfur and the government of Chad for fueling the war, which began in 2003 when rebels from ethnic African tribes rose up against the Arab-led central government. The government in Khartoum, Sudan, is accused of retaliating by unleashing the janjaweed militias of Arab nomads, who are accused of the worst atrocities.

The UN is evacuating its international staff and the assets it can because of the intensifying violence and insecurity, "but we're not protecting the lives of the vulnerable women and children, and there are four times more of them now than when we started in 2004," he said.

Egeland, who was the first to call Darfur the world's worst humanitarian emergency in November 2003, said one of his great regrets is that global leaders did not come together and offer the sticks and carrots to settle the conflict in 2004 when it involved 1 million people.

In a farewell speech Monday to the UN Security Council, Egeland accused world leaders of failing to live up to a pledge made at a UN summit in September 2005 to protect civilians caught in armed conflict from genocide, war crimes and ethnic cleansing. A Security Council resolution adopted in April reaffirmed their agreement.

In late November, Secretary General Kofi Annan said Sudan agreed in principle to a compromise "hybrid mission" from the African Union and the UN, but that Khartoum wanted to discuss the size, the force commander and the head of the overall mission.

"At the moment I think it's more than sad to see that grown men with jackets and ties like me sit and quarrel [over] what is a `hybrid force' ... while women and children are dying," Egeland said.

"I'm happy to note that in nine months we might have this force, but what about the next nine days where it could collapse completely?"

[back to contents]

Uganda (ICC)

Official Website of the International Criminal Court
ICC Public Documents - Situation in Uganda

ICC wants update on Kony case
New Vision
by Henry Mukasa
December 3, 2006

THE International Criminal Court (ICC) has ordered a review of the effects of the peace talks on the LRA indictments.

The presiding judge, Mauro Politi, issued an order from the court headquarters in The Hague on November 30, directing the prosecutor, Luis Moreno Ocampo, to update him on the commitment of Uganda, the Democratic Republic of Congo and Sudan in executing the warrants of arrest against five LRA commanders.

“The chamber hereby requests the prosecutor to provide information on or before Friday 8th December whether and to what extent their statements concerning the continued commitment to executing the warrants of arrest are supported by concrete action and reflect their genuine willingness to cooperate,” the order read.

Moreno is requested to investigate in particular whether the peace negotiations and recent events in the region have affected the level of cooperation by the relevant governments.
The judge also wants to know if there are specific requests for assistance addressed to MONUC or the UN for the purpose of supporting the execution of the warrants.

Peace talks between the government and the LRA, mediated by the Government of Southern Sudan, are in suspense since the LRA delegation walked out last week, citing violations by UPDF.

LRA leader Joseph Kony and his deputy, Vincent Otti, demand that the warrants of arrest against them be withdrawn as a pre-condition for any peace settlement.

Why mato oput system should come before ICC
New Vision (Kampala)
by Fabius Okumu-Alya
December 4, 2006

THERE have been some concerns about mato oput, the Acholi traditional mechanism of conflict resolution, as opposed to prosecution of the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA) commanders by the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague. The issue here is between peace and justice: which one should prevail first? Secondly, whose justice are we talking about?

The ICC is representing the western concept of justice, while mato oput is representing the traditional concept of justice and reconciliation. These are two divergent conceptions, which should be merged in the interest of peace and justice in northern Uganda.

If you go by international standards, and look at the United Nations Charter of 1945, you will find that after realising the horrendous effects of the Second World War (1939-1945), they (UN founding fathers) came up with the preamble which talks about peace first, then justice comes later.

That is why, more than 60 years now, the Nazis are still being tried in the International Court of Justice (ICJ), which is different from ICC although both are based in The Hague, Netherlands. So I look at peace as having been the priority of the United Nations founding fathers.
If you use that parameter, and then translate it locally, then it appears to me that the people’s aspiration (in northern Uganda) is peace first. And that peace should be got within their needs and wishes. The justice should be done in relation to the maintenance or sustenance of the peace.

For instance, if you bring the ICC, they will prosecute the suspects (Kony and his commanders) in The Hague and maybe imprison them for life. The life imprisonment should be interpreted to mean maybe 20 years. So after 20 years, taking the age of Kony (45), he will not be too old by the time he finishes his sentence. How will he fit into the community when he comes back to resettle in northern Uganda? Will that prosecution have resolved the conflict? That is why there is that preference that, locally, we should aim for peace first, then justice will follow on case by case basis.

After mato oput, these people (LRA leaders) can still be arrested. The Acholi are not saying we don’t want Kony to be prosecuted. They are not supporting impunity. But what they want is prioritization: which one should come first – the ICC or mato oput?

At international level, they say ‘there is no peace without justice, and there is no justice without peace’, an argument that is a bit ridiculous to me as an international lawyer. At least there is one of the two which comes first. If you go by what I have told you in the UN Charter of 1945, peace is first. Justice is continuous. Anytime LRA leaders can be prosecuted, because a crime never abets.
Since this is the clamour of the people of northern Uganda, who are themselves the victims, why don’t we respect their views?

The ICC seems to be a consistent intrusion into these traditional views. And sometimes people also make unnecessary sentiments, that ‘you see, the Acholi traditional system of justice is primitive’. What is the parameter for judging civilisation? civilisation in whose eyes? And for whose benefit?

For the people of northern Uganda, they are saying ‘this (mato oput) is our preferred system of justice and reconciliation.’ Why don’t people give it a try first before the ICC comes in? After all, the rebel leaders can still be brought to justice at a later date, probably after the most desired peace has been attained in northern Uganda.

Time up for war criminals
Sunday Vision
by Felix Osike
December 4, 2006

Last week the Government tabled the International Criminal Court Bill in Parliament. With top LRA commanders indicted by the ICC, Felix Osike examines the implications of the Bill...

Time for war criminals is running out in Uganda. The International Criminal Court Bill 2006, tabled in Parliament on Tuesday by the Minister of Justice, Dr. Khiddu Makubuya, sets out how to deal with such offenders.

If passed into law, people alleged to have committed war crimes can be arrested and surrendered to the Hague-based International Criminal Court (ICC).

But the timing of the Bill may be misinterpreted to mean going against the spirit of the Juba peace talks between the Government and the Lord’s Resistance Army rebels.

Former minister and legal expert Owinyi Dollo said Uganda was in a Catch-22 situation, where it has to proceed with the talks, but at the same time show commitment to the world court. “The Bill is an expression of Uganda’s proof of commitment for all perpetrators of war crimes to account for their crimes. But because of the Juba peace talks, it will be mis-interpreted by many people,” he said.

Dollo, however, said that enacting the law would strengthen Uganda’s negotiating power with the ICC incase it requested for the charges against the LRA to be dropped.

“Tabling the Bill is not for the purposes of ICC indictment. We are trying to domesticate the Rome Statute in the laws of Uganda,” said Fred Ruhindi, the Deputy Attorney General.

On the timing, Ruhindi said, “There should not be a misconception because this is a formality. We are including the Rome Statute, which is already in force, in our statute books.”

The Bill also deals with facilitating the appearances of witnesses and search and seizure of property.

The court can also give a freezing order prohibiting the suspects from dealing in a specified property that has relevance to the case. The Bill has provisions for punishment of the individual who commits genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes. These include; identification, tracing and freezing or seizure of proceeds, property and assets of the criminals.

The Lord’s Resistance Army chief, Joseph Kony, is a target for trial at the Hague on 33 counts of crimes against humanity and war crimes committed since July 2002, when the ICC Rome Statute came into effect. His four top commanders face similar charges.

This has become a sticking point in the peace negotiations in Juba. The LRA rebels demand that the charges be dropped before they sign a comprehensive peace agreement.

Under the Bill, Uganda is obliged to co-operate with the ICC in hunting down, investigating and subsequent prosecution of persons accused of having committed the listed offences. It provides for the arrest and surrender to the ICC of the war criminals. The law will also empower Ugandan courts to try, convict and sentence such criminals and enforce penalties and ICC orders. Besides, the law will allow the ICC to conduct proceedings in Uganda.

Section 67 of the Bill also provides that non-Ugandan prisoners sentenced by the ICC can serve their sentences in Uganda if approved by the relevant authorities. On arrival in Uganda the prisoner shall be detained in accordance with Ugandan laws, but he or she may have a right to communicate on a confidential basis with the ICC.

On July 17, 1998, a conference of 160 countries across the world decided to set up the ICC under a document called the Rome Statute. Uganda joined the court in June 2002.

In December 2003, Uganda asked the ICC prosecutor to look into the conflict in northern Uganda. In July 2004, the ICC prosecutor announced there was reasonable basis to carry out the investigation.

Under the law, a police officer is authorised to search and seize property relating to the request from the ICC. The police officer can also stop and search any vehicle in which the item specified in the warrant is located or held at anytime.

The Bill also provides for the discretion of the ICC to refer any matter to the UN Security Council.

The Bill has a strict penalty for the judges handling ICC cases. It says a judge in Uganda or elsewhere who corruptly obtains or attempts to obtain a bribe for himself or herself to do or omit an act is liable on conviction or indictment to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 14 years.

Bribing such judges can earn one seven years imprisonment. Giving false or fabricated evidence before the ICC will also earn witnesses seven years’ imprisonment.

According to the Bill, proceedings for the offences like genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity shall not be instituted in any Uganda court without the consent of the Attorney General.

Uganda is also obliged to co-operate with the ICC in the identification and arrest of the wanted persons, taking evidence and reports, temporal transfer of witnesses, examination of places and sites, including exhumations and examinations of gravesites, protection of victims and witnesses. The ICC while sitting in Uganda can summon and question any person over any subject under investigation by the ICC.

The court can require any person to disclose any information within his or her knowledge relevant to any investigation by the ICC and can commit persons for contempt of its orders.

[back to contents]

International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY)

Official Website of the ICTY

Blagoje Simic's Appeal Partly Granted, Sentence Reduced to Fifteen Years
Press Release of the ICTY
November 28, 2006

In its judgment issued today, the Tribunal's Appeals Chamber reversed the finding of the Trial Chamber that Blagoje Simić participated in a joint criminal enterprise whose aim was persecution of non-Serbs in the Bosanski Šamac municipality in northern Bosnia.

On 17 October 2003, Simić, a local Bosnian Serb politician, was convicted and sentenced to 17 years' imprisonment by the Trial Chamber for persecutions of non-Serb civilians in the municipality of Bosanski Šamac between 17 April 1992 and 31 December 1993. The non-Serb civilians were detained and confined under inhumane conditions, lacking sufficient space, food or water and were subjected to torture including sexual assaults, the extraction of teeth and threat of execution.

The Appeals Chamber found that Simić was not informed that he was being accused of participating in a joint criminal enterprise until the Prosecution had finished presenting its case, which rendered the trial unfair.

The Appeals Chamber also reversed Simić's conviction for persecution due to cruel and inhumane treatment in the form of torture and beating.

However, the Appeals Chamber upheld Simić's conviction for aiding and abetting persecution in the form of the unlawful arrests and detention of non-Serb civilians, confinement of non-Serb prisoners in inhumane conditions, forced labour by Bosnian Croats and Bosnian Muslims, and forced displacement of non-Serb civilians.

The Appeals Chamber reached these findings by majority, with Judges Shahabuddeen and Schomburg dissenting.

The Appeals Chamber found that the re-characterisation of the Simić's criminal conduct and quashing of his conviction for acts of torture and beating required an adjustment of his sentence, reducing it to fifteen years. Judge Liu dissented from this decision.

The full text of the summary of the judgment can be found at the following link:
http://www.un.org/icty/pressreal/2006/p1130e-summary.htm

Stanislav Galic Sentenced to Life Imprisonment by Appeals Chamber for Crime Committed During the Siege of Sarajevo
Press Release of the ICTY
November 30, 2006

The Tribunal's Appeals Chamber today sentenced Stanislav Galić, a former Bosnian Serb Army commander, to life imprisonment for his role in the campaign of sniping and shelling against civilians in Sarajevo from September 1992 to August 1994. This is the first time the maximum penalty has been rendered by the Tribunal's Appeals Chamber.

The Appeals Chamber dismissed all 19 grounds of appeal by Galić, including those which claimed that Trial Chamber wrongly convicted him of the "acts or threats of violence the primary purpose of which was to spread terror among the civilian population" of Sarajevo. The Appeals Chamber allowed the appeal by the Prosecution on the length of sentence, quashing the Trial Chamber sentence of 20 years.

The Appeals Chamber noted that the Trial Chamber relied on a plethora of evidence to demonstrate that terrorisation of the civilian population was the primary purpose of the campaign of sniping and shelling and that Galić, who held the position of commander of the Bosnian Serb Army Sarajevo-Romanija Corps (SRK), had the intent to spread terror among the civilian population.

In the findings upheld by the Appeals Chamber, the Trial Chamber established that the evidence demonstrated beyond reasonable doubt that Sarajevo civilians were indeed made the object of deliberate attack by SRK forces. They were attacked while attending funerals, while in ambulances, trams, and buses, and while cycling. They were attacked while tending gardens, or shopping in markets, or clearing rubbish in the city. Children were targeted while playing or walking in the streets. These attacks were mostly carried out in daylight. They were not in response to any military threat. The attackers could for the most part easily tell that their victims were engaged in everyday civilian activities.

The Appeals Chamber specifically addressed a number of incidents, including that of 5 February 1994 when a mortar shell exploded in the Markale market in downtown Sarajevo, killing some 60 people and injuring more than a hundred. The Appeals Chamber found that the Trial Chamber's finding that the mortar shell came from SRK positions was not one that no reasonable trier of fact could have made. However, it held that the Trial Chamber was "incorrect to find that the shell was deliberately aimed at the Markale market but that, in any case, this shelling incident was an example of shelling that deliberately targeted civilians."

With respect to the Prosecution's appeal on sentence, the Appeals Chamber found that, although the Trial Chamber did not err in its factual findings and correctly noted the principles governing sentencing, "the sentence of only 20 years was so unreasonable and plainly unjust, in that it underestimated the gravity of Galić's criminal conduct."

This decision on Galic's appeal was reached by a majority of judges with Judge Schomburg dissenting with respect to the customary law nature of the crime of acts or threats of violence the primary purpose of which is to spread terror among the civilian population. The decision on the Prosecution's sentence appeal was also reached by a majority of Judges with Judge Pocar partially dissenting and Judge Meron dissenting. Judge Shahabuddeen appended a separate opinion on both issues.

The full text of the summary of the judgment can be found at the following link:
http://www.un.org/icty/pressreal/2006/p1131e-summary.htm

Trio indicted over Vojno camp crimes
Balkan Investigative Reporting Network (BIRN)
December 6, 2006

The Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina has confirmed that three former HVO members are to be charged over the abuse and murder of camp inmates.

The Bosnian court has confirmed an indictment which charges three Bosnian Croats with crimes committed during the dispute between the Croat Defence Council (HVO) and Army of BiH in Herzegovina.

Marko "Maka" Radic, Dragan "Petarda" Sunjic and Damir "Zingi" Brekalo - whose first name used to be Emir - are charged that, as former members of Bijelopoljska bojna Second Brigade of HVO, they formed Vojno detention camp in Mostar municipality and took part the in abuse and murders of Bosniaks from July 1993 to March 1994.

The indictment claims that on June 29, 1993, the Bosnian army attacked Bijelo Polje and detained a few HVO members and some Croat civilians. Radic then ordered the arrest of Bosniaks who continued to live in the western part of then-divided Mostar, and their exchange for Croats.

"As most men were already detained or in war, the detainees were women, children and elderly," the indictment reads.

All of those who were detained were taken to the village of Vojno, six kilometres from Mostar, where a detention camp was formed.

The indictment charges Radic with command and personal responsibility for what took place. It is alleged that he ordered, committed and otherwise assisted in the physical, mental and sexual abuse of civilians.

Damir Brekalo is charged that in August 1993 he took part in the beating of detainees who were on forced labour on the Bijelo Polje front line, after which he killed them. Their bodies were exchanged and identified in April 1994.

Dragan Sunjic, who was deputy warden of Vojno detention camp, is also charged with personal and command responsibility. It is alleged that in August 1993 he had heavily beaten one detainee in Vojno camp jointly with Mario Mihailo, after which the detainee died. His body was exchanged and identified in January 1995.

Sunjic is also charged that in October 1993 jointly with other HVO soldiers he took part in the transfer of around 50 detainees from Heliodrom detention camp to Vojno town. Some of the detainees were killed half way there.

In Vojno camp, with whose operation Radic is charged, it is claimed that detainees were used as forced labour where they were abused in the most brutal of ways - including torture by electricity and beating with wooden bats and axe handles.

According to the indictment, Radic personally also took part in the abuse of women detainees in Vojno camp - including underage girls - and encouraged others to do the same thing, including the other two indictees.

In the explanation of the indictment it stands that there is evidence to prove that rape and sexual abuse took place intentionally and according to a plan. One alleged victim has claimed that of three months she spent in detention, only five days passed where she was not raped. Some of the girls who were allegedly underage victims of the three indictees are expected to appear as witnesses.

It is not known how many persons were detained in Vojno detention camp, which was closed on March 6, 1994.

The joint indictment against the three consists of 19 counts, all of which charge them with crimes against humanity. According to current law, indictees should enter a plea within 15 days from the day of confirmation of indictment.

Vojislav Seselj to Resume Taking Food
Press Release of the ICTY
December 8, 2006

Vojislav Šešelj has informed the Tribunal that he will resume taking foodstuffs and receive medical attention, ending his refusal since 11 November 2006 to do so.

The Tribunal's doctor commenced an examination of Šešelj in order to determine his condition and what immediate steps are required in order to safeguard his health.

Šešelj informed the Tribunal that his decision was made in view of the Appeals Chamber's decision issued today, as well as commitments from the Registry to facilitate many of his requests concerning arrangements for his defence. The Appeals Chamber's decision granted Šešelj's appeal against the Trial Chamber's decision to impose stand by counsel.

The Appeals Chamber ruled that all trial proceedings in this case following the order of the Trial Chamber directing the Registry to appoint standby counsel are set aside. The trial of Šešelj is suspended until such time as he is fit enough to fully participate in the proceeding as a self-represented accused.

In addressing Šešelj's appeal, the Appeals Chamber found that, while appreciating the efforts of the Trial Chamber to ensure the fair and expeditious conduct of this trial, the Trial Chamber abused its discretion by immediately ordering the imposition of standby counsel, without first establishing additional obstructionist behaviour on the part of Šešelj warranting that imposition. By so doing, the Trial Chamber failed to give Šešelj a real opportunity to show to the Trial Chamber that despite his conduct in pre-trial, and the conduct leading up to the imposition of assigned counsel, he now understood that in order to be permitted to conduct his defence, he would have to comply with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence of the Tribunal and that he was willing to do so. It was this opportunity that the Appeals Chamber Decision intended to accord to Šešelj.

The Appeals Chamber reversed the Impugned Decision assigning counsel to Šešelj and directed the Trial Chamber not to impose standby counsel unless Šešelj exhibits obstructionist behaviour fully satisfying the Trial Chamber that, in order to ensure a fair and expeditious trial, Šešelj requires the assistance of standby counsel. The Appeals Chamber ruled that, should a time come when the Trial Chamber felt justified in making such a decision, the Rule 44 list of Counsel should initially be provided to Šešelj and he should be permitted to select standby counsel from that list. The Appeals Chamber placed similar conditions of restraint on the exercise by the Trial Chamber of its discretion to impose assigned counsel in the future should Šešelj fail to abide by the Tribunal's Rules of Procedure and Evidence as a self-represented accused and behave in a way that persistently obstructs the proceedings.

Due to the current health condition of Šešelj, the Appeals Chamber ordered that his trial should not open until such time as he is fully able to participate in the proceeding as a self-represented accused.

The decision can be found at:
http://www.un.org/icty/seselj/appeal/decision-e/061208e.pdf

Dragan loses bid to prevent extradition hearing
AAP via The Sydney Morning Herald
December 8, 2006

Accused Croatian war criminal Dragan Vasiljkovic has lost a bid to prevent his extradition hearing going ahead.

Croatia is seeking Vasiljkovic over his alleged involvement in war crimes between 1991 and 1993.

Vasiljkovic, known to his supporters as Captain Dragan, is accused of killing civilians and instructing others to commit murder during his time as a commander of Serbian paramilitary forces.

He is also alleged to have fired upon a civilian city and kicked a person in the head causing brain bleeding.

In a Sydney magistrate's court today, Vasiljkovic's barrister Bradley Slowgrove failed in a bid to have the extradition hearing dismissed on legal grounds.

Mr Slowgrove argued that normal criminal laws which applied in Croatia and could be held as equivalent in Australia for extradition purposes did not apply in times of war.

"Because we are in war and armed conflict and outside the King's peace it might be lawful to kick somebody, it's not automatically unlawful," Mr Slowgrove told Central Local Court.

He also told Deputy Chief Magistrate Paul Cloran that prisoners of war were "dangerous" persons who required discipline by captors to prevent them from escaping, and there was insufficient evidence to show Vasiljkovic wasn't motivated by such circumstances.

Mr Slowgrove claimed it was also questionable whether the acts were so grave as to constitute a crime under the Geneva Convention.

"It's not every breach that creates criminal responsibility, not every act of physical violence is a breach under the convention," he said

"It's a matter of impression, there's not enough information alleged."

Mr Cloran rejected Mr Slowgrove's arguments and ordered the extradition hearing proceed.

"In my view the provisions of (the Extradition Act) have been fulfilled," he told the court.

Former prosecutor for the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, Grant Niemann, told the court that Vasiljkovic could be considered a protected person under the Geneva Convention, which could determine the events for which he could be punished, and the severity of the penalty.

The forces involved in and funding the conflict were also relevant considerations, Mr Niemann said.

In Vasiljkovic's case, the question of his military rank would be important in considering the question of command responsibility, he said.

Vasiljkovic has been in custody since January when the federal government acted on a provisional extradition request from Croatian authorities.

The 51-year-old had repeatedly denied committing war crimes.

He unsuccessfully challenged his detention in the High Court earlier this year, claiming he was being illegally held because no formal extradition treaty existed between Australia and Croatia.

The hearing continues on Monday.

Mass grave near Brčko contained 258 bodies
B-92
December 8, 2006

BRČKO -- Bosnian forensics exhumed 258 bodies of the victims from a mass grave discovered near the northern district of Brčko.

The Commission on Missing Persons’ Murat Hurtić said Friday that a total of 107 complete and 151 incomplete bodies were exhumed from the mass grave at Gorica location near Brčko.

The victims, he said, were believed to be Bosnian Muslims and Croats, executed after Bosnian Serb troops took control over the wider area of Brčko at the beginning of the 1992-1995 war in Bosnia- Herzegovina.

Already in the first stages of the war more than 500 non-Serb civilians from the Brčko area were killed in the town or in several Bosnian Serb detention camps in the town's vicinity.

Many wartime victims from Brčko remain unaccounted for.

Hurtić said the number of the exhumed victims from the Gorica mass grave was not final as the exhumation was to continue through the next week, with some 20 to 30 bodies expected to be found in the lower layers of the grave.

[back to contents]

International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR)

Official Website of the ICTR

ICTR/Attack - the ICTR Had Aborted Investigation On the Attack Against Habyarimana's Plane
AllAfrica.com - Hirondelle News Agency (Lausanne)
November 29, 2006

Investigators working for the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) have searched and gathered elements of information concerning the attack against the plane of the Rwandan President Juvénal Habiarimana but these inquiries have been interrupted, French judge Jean-Louis Bruguière has confirmed.

According to the magistrate whose investigation was recently released, these elements were gathered in February 1997 by ICTR investigators based in Kigali and working under the authority of Louise Harbour ( Canada) who was the prosecutor at that time. A report was communicated in March 2000 to the president of the tribunal, Mrs. Nawanethem Pillay. Several newspapers have made mention of this investigation since then.

Ten days after the release of the French investigation conducted at the request of the families of the plane crew, the current prosecutor of the ICTR - and in theory only prosecutor concerned by the case - has made no statement. The investigation has drawn heated reaction from the incriminated Rwandan authorities. The country has cut off its diplomatic relations with France.

The ICTR's aborted investigation has been led by an Australian magistrate, Mr. Michael Hourrigan who used to be a prosecutor in his country and now works as a lawyer in the United States. According to him, this investigation was interrupted after he had communicated its results to a person in charge of the Security at the United Nations. Mrs. Harbour had summoned him to The Hague and asked him to renounce all contacts with his informants on this issue and blamed him for having led an investigation external to the Tribunal's jurisdiction.

The issue of these limits to the ICTR's jurisdiction, even though the Tribunal has authority under the article 4 of its status to condemn any violation of the Geneva Accords such as terrorism, have been brought up by the spokesperson and deputy registrar of the international tribunal, Mr. Everard O'Donnell. When Bruguière's investigation was published last week, O'Donnell declared that the ICTR is not capacitated to investigate on this particular attack which concerned only « the assassination of one or several individuals ». On April 6th 1994, the Rwandan president Juvénal Habyarimana and his Burundese counterpart died in the attack against the plane they were traveling in. The plane was shot down by a ground-to-air missile as it neared the airport of Kigali.

Several attorneys, whose association O'Donnell has severely criticized, consider since then that the registrar has lost all neutrality. Some of them note that his statement was made during a press conference the Rwandan delegate at the ICTR was attending.

Talking anonymously, several magistrates working at the ICTR call these debates on the extent of the tribunal's jurisdiction « specious ». They talk about the culpability of the United Nations and its secretary general in the face of the Rwandan genocide and how in turn the government in place at the time « made hostage » the ICTR. As proof of this, one of the anonymous magistrates has highlighted that the first judgments of the ICTR for the year 2001 had made mention of a « plane gunned down » whereas the latest judgments refer to a plane which has « fallen down »

Alleged witness tells radio French judge doctored report
The New Times
December 2, 2006

Text of report by Ignatus Ssuuna entitled "Witness disowns Bruguiere's report" published by Rwandan newspaper The New Times website on 1 December; subheading inserted editorially

Kigali : Emmanuel Ruzigana, a "witness" French magistrate Jean-Louis Bruguiere quotes in his 64-page report in which he claims that the Rwanda Patriotic Front/Army downed Juvenal Habyarimana's plane, has said the report was doctored.

Ruzigana, a former Rwandan Defense Forces (RDF) member wrote to Bruguiere on Thursday, expressing outrage after seeing his name on the Report's page 23 and 25, alleging he was a key source.

Witness ready to tell international court truth

In the two pages, Bruguiere claims Ruzigana belonged to a RPF''s "Network Commando" and that he knows who downed the plane. But speaking on phone from Norway where he now lives, Ruzigana dismissed the Report as baseless and highly inaccurate and said he is ready to travel to the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) in Arusha, Tanzania to set the record straight. "At no time did I say the leadership of RPF/A shot down Habyarimana's Falcon executive presidential jet," Ruzigana, who was demobilized in 2004, said in an interview.

Ruzigana, who was speaking during a live-talk show on Contact FM on1 December, added that he decided to write a protest letter because the Bruguiere report portrayed him as a traitor. "I have decided to write this protest letter because I have never said that President Paul Kagame shot down Habyarimana's plane; that is a lie." Ruzigana said.

Witness did not see shooting down of plane

He said on his way to Europe, he made a stopover in Paris and was invited to see Bruguiere impromptu. Ruzigana said he only told Bruguiere that by the time Habyarimana's plane was destroyed he was not in Kigali and therefore, could not have seen the attackers. "I told him (Bruguiere) point blank that I was based in Umutara province and didn't see who shot down the plane," Rusigana explained. He added: "I think because I kept quiet following the demobilization, they thought I was disgruntled and therefore, a soft target in their machinations." And indeed, some researchers and other experts have cast doubt on the credibility of the magistrate's report, and many websites of some French newspapers have pointed out that the report was hushed and appears to have been written without an independent mind.

Consequently, Bruguiere's claims sparked off anger amongst Rwandans, prompting many in Kigali and other European cities to demonstrate against France for its role in the 1994 genocide and the subsequent political witch-hunt against the current leadership. Also, the claims led to the severing of ties between Rwanda and France. The 1994 genocide was one of the fastest and most well pre-planned mass killings of the twentieth century, in which an estimated one million people were murdered in the space of 100 days.

One Verdict, One Prisonner to Be Released
AllAfrica.com - Hirondelle News Agency
December 4, 2006

One convict at the end of his prison term to be released, one verdict and the conclusion of debates in a major trial: it is going to be an action-packed December at the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) in charge of conducting the most important trials of the alleged perpetrators of the 1994 genocide in Rwanda.

On December 6th and for the very first time in its history, the ICTR will free a prisoner who has completed his prison term. Elizaphan Ntakirutimana, an 82 year old Adventist pastor, had been sentenced to ten years in prison on February 19th 2003.

The man, formerly at the head of the church of Mugonero (west), had been arrested for the first time in September 1996 in the United States and released and rearrested in February 1998.

The ICTR convicted him of genocide crimes and crimes against humanity. His son, Dr Gérard Ntakirutimana, who appeared alongside him before the court, is serving a twenty-five year sentence.

The ICTR has released prisoners before but either they have been acquitted or the prosecutor has dropped the charges against them.

The legal texts of the Tribunal say nothing of the status of released persons especially the question of host countries. Four persons the jurisdiction has acquitted, two years ago in some cases, are still in Arusha waiting for the outcome of the Registrar's tedious negotiations with some foreign governments.

Elizaphan Ntakirutimana's defence lawyer, Mr. Ramsay Clark (USA), was in Arusha at the end of November to discuss the conditions of his client's liberation with the registrar. Father Ntakirutimana's poor health is effectively causing further difficulties.

The other event expected in December is a verdict in the trial of the first Catholic priest to be tried by the ICTR, Father Athanase Seromba. The ruling is expected on December 13th.

Father Seromba, in charge of the parish of Nyange (west), is accused of having ordered the death of about 2.000 of his parishioners who had sheltered in his church in 1994.

He has pleaded not guilty. His trial began on September 20th 2004. The closing arguments were concluded on June, 28th 2006.

Conclusion of « Military I »

The verdict against Seromba, if confirmed, will coincide with the end of the debates in « Military I » which began on April 2nd 2002 and counts among the ICTR's major trials. It regroups four high-ranked officers of the former Rwandan Army, one of them a colonel accused of being « the mastermind of the 1994 genocide »

The prosecutor rested his case in October 2004. The defendants, who have been calling their defence witnesses since April 2005, have until December 13th to conclude their own. The closing arguments will follow in due course.

Other ongoing cases

These three major events aside, the Tribunal will continue the hearings in other ongoing trials. The trials on the ICTR's schedule for December are Butare (six defendants), open since June 2001, "Karemera and others" which has begun in September 2005 and the trial of another Catholic priest, Father Emmanuel Rukundo, which started on November 15th 2006.

On December 15th, all debates will be suspended for the duration of the judicial recess. Finally, the Tribunal will sit for a few days in « Military II » and in former Prefect Zigiranyirazo cases.

In Military II, it will be completing the hearing of General Roméo Dallaire ( Canada), the former commander of the UN forces in Rwanda and last witness for the prosecution in this trial. Military II started in September 2004 and involves four officers among whom two ex-chiefs of the General Staff (Army and Gendarmerie).

Notorious pastor convicted by UN tribunal over Rwandan genocide completes jail term
UN News Service
December 6, 2006

An elderly former pastor today became the first person convicted and jailed by the United Nations war crimes tribunal for the Rwandan genocide to be released after serving his sentence.

Elizaphan Ntakirutimana, 81, a former senior pastor of the Seventh-Day Adventist Church, was sentenced by the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) in February 2003 to 10 years’ imprisonment after being convicted of aiding and abetting the 1994 genocide in the central African country. He was also convicted of aiding and abetting extermination.

Mr. Ntakirutimana was given credit for the time spent in detention before his trial. He was arrested in the United States in September 1996, later released and re-arrested, before being transferred to the ICTR detention centre in Arusha, Tanzania, in March 2000.

At his trial, prosecutors told the ICTR how Mr. Ntakuritimana personally drove armed Hutu attackers to various places where Tutsis had taken refuge and also went to a church in the Bisesero area of western Rwanda in which he was pastor and ordered the removal of its roof so that Tutsis could no longer use it as a shelter.

Several witnesses testified that they believed Mr. Ntakuritimana would use his influence to protect them from attacks, and in April 1994 seven Tutsi pastors wrote a letter to him pleading for his intervention.

“We wish to inform you that we have heard that tomorrow we will be killed with our families,” the letter stated. But in his reply the pastor wrote “there is nothing I can do for you. All you can do is prepare to die, for your time has come.”

His son, Gérard, a medical doctor, was sentenced by the Tribunal to 25 years’ jail for related war crimes.

Some 800,000 Tutsis and moderate Hutus were murdered, mostly by machete, across Rwanda in just 100 days starting in April 1994. The Security Council set up the ICTR in November that year to prosecute people responsible for genocide and other serious violations of international humanitarian law.

French Premier Backed Genocide - Kagame
AllAfrica.com - The New Times (Kigali)
by James Munyaneza
December 7, 2006

President Paul Kagame has singled out the Prime Minister of France Dominique de Villepin as one of the French government officials who supported the 1994 Rwanda Genocide. Kagame, who was speaking on BBC's Hard Talk live show yesterday morning, said.

France took part in the planning and execution of the killings, which saw an estimated one million Rwandans killed in a record spell of 100 days. "The current French prime minister is among the French officials that supported the Genocide. The role of the French government in the killing of Rwandans is public knowledge," Kagame said in the interview with Stephen Sucker.

During the Genocide, de Villepin was the Director of Cabinet in the French Ministry of Foreign Affairs. He becomes the first serving French official to be publicly implicated in the Genocide, which was stopped by the Rwanda Patriotic Front/Army (RPF/A). Kagame also lashed out at France and magistrate, Jean-Louis Bruguiere, for linking RPF to the April 6, 2006 shooting down of a plane carrying former Rwandan president Juvenal Habyarimana.

He said the allegations were intended to cover-up Paris' own involvement in the Genocide.

" France gave the then government of Rwanda money to commit Genocide. If he is credible, why doesn't he (Bruguiere) investigate the role of the French government and officials in the Genocide... Why fabricate stories?" asked Kagame.

"I am surprised that people are still asking this. There is documentary evidence. It is public knowledge that they (French) actively supported the Genocide," Kagame added.

Last month, Bruguiere published a 64-page report in which he claimed that the RPF/A brought down the Falcon Mystere 50 aircraft which killed Habyarimana and former Burundian president, Cyprian Ntiryamira.

The allegations sparked angry protests, with a series of anti-France demonstrations being held both within and outside the country. Also, the government severed ties with the European nation. "There is no evidence whatsoever for Rwandan leaders who stopped the Genocide to be tried and moreover by France which is implicated in the killings. They are wild allegations.

"The report is based on testimonies from people who are wanted by the ICTR for committing genocide crimes. These suspects cannot be accessed by the tribunal, but they are accessed by France," Kagame, who was on a working visit to Britain, said.

Burundi and Uganda have also publicly scoffed at the French allegations, with Uganda's President Yoweri Museveni describing France as 'an African problem which requires an immediate solution'.

Bruguiere's report has also suffered a serious blow with some of the 'witnesses' he quotes in the report, disassociating themselves from the information he attributed to them.

In a letter to the French Magistrate, one of the 'witnesses', Emmanuel Ruzigana, is quoted as writing: "I categorically refute all that was attributed to me. I am bitterly surprised to find that on page 23 of your document you wrongly attributed my association with Network Commando, a group whose existence I did not know.

In the same document ... you even went further to confirm lies that I knew who shot down the plane, yet I told you that I wasn't aware of such a thing'.

The president said Rwanda had absolute rights to sue the government of France based on findings of the ongoing Commission of Inquiry into the French role in the Genocide. The 'Mucyo Commission' is currently gathering evidence against the French government.

Analysts have accused Paris of relentlessly pursuing a 'colonial-like' foreign policy in its former African colonies and in countries where it gained considerable influence in the post-colonial era.

A French soldier at a road block pulls a would-be-victim out of a jeep as the Interahamwe militia and Ex-FAR come to his assistance.

[back to contents]

Iraqi High Tribunal

Official Website of the Iraqi High Tribunal
Grotian Moment: The Saddam Hussein Trial Blog

Search for justice in Saddam trial
BBC News
by Yo Takatsuki
November 29, 2006

Despite facing death threats in court from Saddam Hussein, the chief prosecutor in the former Iraqi leader's trial believes that justice will bring peace to the violence-stricken country.

The former Iraqi leader was found guilty and sentenced to death earlier this month for the killing of 148 Shias in 1982 but now a second trial has resumed.

A second trial concerns Saddam Hussein's role in the killing of Kurds during the notorious Anfal campaign in which thousands perished.

Munquith Takleef al-Firaun heads the team of prosecution lawyers.

Mr Firaun was on the team of prosecutors in the first trial and that is when Saddam gave him the chilling warning.

Death threats

"I was threatened in the courtroom by Saddam Hussein. He said he would follow me inside and outside the court," said Mr Firaun in his first interview.

"I was also threatened by one of his co-defendants, Hussein Rashid. His exact words were: "Where will you escape from us?""

"Also, my family and I have received threatening letters - even our most distant relatives have been threatened - just because I am trying to carry out justice."

Mr Firaun is in the northern Iraqi city of Suleimaniya with fellow prosecutors, defence lawyers and the trial judges, visiting the sites where it is alleged that the atrocities happened.

The dusty mountains that overlook the city saw some of the most horrific events of Saddam Hussein's rule.

Kurdish villages in the region were attacked with chemical weapons.

During the Anfal campaign, which lasted through much of the 1980s, Kurds suffered constant bombardments which led to the deaths of over 100,000 people.

Human history

Mr Firaun says that although Saddam Hussein has been sentenced to death already, it is important that he faces trial for the charges of mass killing and crimes against humanity.

"The co-defendants in Saddam Hussein's first trial are different from the defendants in this trial. Saddam's statements are a key part of the evidence and his presence in the court is very important. This isn't just a trial, this is part of human history," Mr Firaun said.

He adds that even if the former Iraqi leader is executed before the end of the second trial, the case against his co-defendants must still be completed in the interests of justice.

Paradoxically, the self-governing Kurdish region in the north of Iraq is enjoying relative peace and stability now while the rest of the country is suffering from daily bombings and attacks.

Mr Firaun believes that the violence in Iraq may calm down once the death sentence against Saddam Hussein has been carried out.

Created divisions

"I can only give you my personal view, but it should put an end to the violence because the former regime's intelligence and security people are behind much of the trouble that Iraq faces," he said.

"They are hoping that Saddam will come back. They think they will be rewarded for what they have done like before. They think they will get bravery medals from Saddam personally.

"So when they realise that Saddam isn't going to be released, a major incentive to carry on with the campaign will disappear.

"The different communities of Iraq - the Shias, the Sunnis and the Kurds - have lived together for a long time without violence.

"The media tends to describe the killings as sectarian violence, but in many cases it is the former regime which is behind it. This is not a sectarian war. The divisions are being deliberately created."

It's hoped that convicting Saddam Hussein in the Anfal trial will pull the curtain down on a painful saga for the Kurds, who suffered without any intervention from the international community.

Suleimaniya itself is said to have been dubbed the "the head of the snake" by the former Iraqi leader, who saw the city as the symbol of Kurdish resistance.

Mr Firaun hopes that a conviction will send a strong message to all of the world's leaders.

"I want this trial to be an example for every ruler who thinks he is above the law. No matter how long he rules, the law is stronger and will win," he said.

Despite threats against him, he says the fight for justice is more important that his own life.

"The crime was a crime against humanity. The position I have as a prosecutor deserves sacrifice. If you have to pay the price, you will not be forgotten by history."

Saddam appears in court despite boycott threat
Reuters
December 6, 2006

BAGHDAD, Dec 6 (Reuters) - Saddam Hussein appeared at his genocide trial on Wednesday, despite writing to the chief judge to say he would no longer attend court sessions in protest at being repeatedly silenced.

Saddam and six others are on trial for the Anfal -- Spoils of War -- military campaign against ethnic Kurds in northern Iraq in the 1980s in which prosecutors say up to 180,000 people were killed in poison gas attacks and mass executions.

In a letter handed to a defence team lawyer who saw him on Monday, the former Iraqi leader said he had been stopped from "clarifying the truth" over his role in Anfal, which the defence argues was a legitimate operation against Kurdish rebels siding with Iraq's enemy, Iran.

Saddam, who has lodged an appeal against a death sentence from a separate case, was furious when the judge refused to give him an opportunity to deny prosecution allegations he swindled $10 billion of state assets.

"So I tell you I cannot take these continued insults from you and others ... and I ask you to relieve me from attending the sessions of this new farce and you can do whatever you want," Saddam said in the letter released by his lawyers.

But a smiling Saddam turned up in the courtroom to hear a former doctor at a Kurdish rebel hospital testify how he had treated victims of the poison gas attacks.

Dr Faiq Gulpy said one patient had been a young shepherd boy who was admitted with severe burns after playing with the remains of a chemical bomb. He died two days later.

He said the Iraqi military had repeatedly used chemical weapons against villages, mostly delivered from the air.

In one attack, he said aircraft had bombed the area of Qara Dagh, leaving it covered in clouds of thick smoke and the smell of rotten apples, a smell often associated by previous witnesses with poison gas attacks.

The trial was adjourned until Thursday.

Hussein changes tune, attends genocide trial
AP via CNN
December 6, 2006

BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) -- Saddam Hussein appeared at his genocide trial Wednesday, a day after writing the judge that he no longer wanted to attend. The deposed Iraqi leader walked into the courtroom with a broad smile and took a seat alongside his six co-defendants.

The chief judge, Mohammed Oreibi al-Khalifa, called a prosecution witness to the stand, reversing his Monday decision that the court would not hear more witnesses but instead review the evidence.

In a handwritten statement released by Saddam's lawyers Tuesday, the ex-president cited what he claimed were repeated "insults" by al-Khalifa and prosecutors.

"I will not accept being offended continuously by you and others," Saddam wrote to al-Khalifa. "Therefore, I ask to be relieved of attending the hearings in this new comedy and you can do whatever you want."

Saddam and his co-defendants have pleaded innocent to charges of war crimes and crimes against humanity arising from their role in a military crackdown on Iraq's Kurd population. Saddam and one other defendant are also charged with genocide for the campaign, code-named Operation Anfal, in which the prosecution says 180,000 people, mostly civilians, were killed.

Saddam's army allegedly destroyed hundreds of villages and killed or scattered their inhabitants in a scorched earth campaign against separatist guerrillas.

On November 5, Saddam was convicted in a separate trial in the slaying of 148 Shiite Muslims, including children, following an assassination attempt against him in the town of Dujail in 1982. He was sentenced to death by hanging.

A lawyer for Saddam said Tuesday he had appealed to an American court in an attempt to win a stay of execution in the Dujail case, arguing that the deposed leader's rights had been violated by American troops.

But a U.S. district court judge in the District of Columbia rejected the request because the Italian lawyer is not a member of the D.C. bar.

If an Iraqi appeals court upholds the death sentence, Saddam could be hanged early next year, according to Iraq's chief prosecutor.

Even if a U.S. court were to rule in Saddam's favor, there is no indication that the Iraqi judiciary would apply the decision and stay the execution.

On Sunday Saddam's lawyers formally appealed in Iraq the death sentence for the Dujail case, a court spokesman said.

Under Iraqi law, death sentences are automatically appealed before a higher court within 10 days of their passage. But defense lawyers must file a formal appeal within 30 days, detailing the legal grounds for their action and presenting new evidence that could support their clients' claims of innocence. The lawyers could also make a plea for leniency.

Saddam's chief lawyer, Khalil Dulaimi, said two lawyers on the defense team had submitted the papers. He complained that defense lawyers had not received copies of the verdict until November 23, delaying the appeal process.

Saddam Trial Witnesses Recall Gas Attack
Associated Press via The Washington Post
by Bushra Juhi and Jamal Halaby
December 7, 2006

BAGHDAD, Iraq -- A Kurdish doctor told Saddam Hussein's genocide trial Thursday that children vomited blood, people broke out in skin rashes and itching, and animals fell dead after a gas that "smelled like flowers" blanketed his village in a 1987 military offensive.

Another Kurdish doctor said he treated men, women and children for serious body burns and blindness from the alleged chemical attack amid airstrikes and a ground offensive on the village as part of Saddam's 1987-88 campaign against the Kurds known as Operation Anfal.

"I treated a man whose entire body was full of chemical bubbles, but he died a few days later," he said in a brief testimony, recalling one of his April 1987 patients.

Saddam and his six-defendants _ all former members of his regime _ sat silently throughout the hearing, which later adjourned until Dec. 18 after the testimony.

The seven men have pleaded innocent to charges of war crimes and crimes against humanity for their alleged roles in Operation Anfal. Saddam and one other defendant have pleaded innocent to the additional charge of genocide. If convicted, they could all be condemned to death.

The prosecution estimates that 180,000 Kurds were killed when Saddam's army waged a scorched-earth campaign against Kurdish separatist guerrillas, allegedly destroying hundreds of villages, killing or forcing their residents to flee.

The names of the two doctors _ both dressed in Western-style business suits and speaking Kurdish through an Arabic interpreter _ were not announced when they took the stand, as is the court's practice. It was not immediately clear if the court deliberately withheld their names.

In previous hearings, some witnesses who preferred to remain anonymous spoke from behind a curtain.

The first doctor testified that airstrikes preceded the arrival of Saddam's ground forces into his village.

"On April 16, 1987, I saw many planes hovering in the sky as I was standing outside my clinic," said the physician, who added that he also was a Kurdish guerrilla fighter.

"There was a strange smell, some people said it was like garlic or apples," he said. "It was not a bad smell, it smelled like flowers."

Shortly after the chemical attack, "I saw dozens of women and children walking with their eyes red, many were vomiting blood," he said.

"Everything in the village was dead, the birds, the animals, the sheep," he said, adding that he and some villagers fled to nearby mountains to escape Saddam's advancing troops.

Days later, he said he returned to the village to find it "entirely burned, there were no people, only some blind animals who had survived were there."

He said fellow Kurdish fighters told him it was "the first chemical attack on Kurdistan." He insisted that there was another "chemical attack" on his village in 1988, but said he did not see any dead people in both assaults.

"I was infected by the chemicals," he said, describing feeling "a burning sensation" on his skin and coughing up blood. He did not specify when he sustained his chemical injury.

On Nov. 5, Saddam was convicted in a separate trial in the slaying of 148 Shiite Muslims, including children, following an assassination attempt against him in the town of Dujail in 1982. He was sentenced to death by hanging.

[back to contents]

Special Court for Sierra Leone (SCSL) &
Liberian Truth and Reconciliation Commission

Offical Website of the Special Court for Sierra Leone
The Sierra Leone Court Monitoring Programme

New Prosecutor for the Special Court
Press Release of the SCSL
December 7, 2006

The Secretary-General of the United Nations, Kofi Annan, has appointed Mr Stephen Rapp as the new Prosecutor of the Special Court for Sierra Leone.

Mr Rapp succeeds Desmond de Silva, QC, who announced in April this year he would not be seeking to renew his contract after it expired in June 2006. Deputy Prosecutor Dr Christopher Staker has been Acting Prosecutor since Mr de Silva’s departure.

Mr Rapp, an American, has been Chief of Prosecutions at the United Nations-International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) since May 2005. In this position, Mr Rapp has been responsible for supervising the prosecution of military, government and political leaders responsible for the Rwandan genocide in trials at the ICTR in Arusha, Tanzania.

Before his appointment to his present position at the ICTR, Mr Rapp acted as Senior Trial Attorney of what has been called the “Media Trial,” against the principals of RTLM radio and the editor of the Kangura newspaper. In December 2003, the Trial Chamber pronounced each of the defendants guilty of Genocide, Direct and Public Incitement to Commit Genocide, and other crimes.

Prior to his service at the ICTR, Mr Rapp was United States Attorney for the Northern District of Iowa from November 1993 until May 2001. Prior to service as US Attorney he was in private practice of law in Waterloo, Iowa. He also served as a Staff Director and Counsel at the US Senate Judiciary Committee and as an elected member of the Iowa Legislature

At Special Court – Prosecution Submits ‘Norman, Two Others Guilty’
AllAfrica.com - Concord Times (Freetown)
by Tanu Jalloh
November 29, 2006

Acting Prosecutor of the Special Court for Sierra Leone, Christopher Staker Tuesday submitted in his closing arguments, in the matter between the Prosecutor and the three accused of the Civil Defence Forces, that the latter are guilty of all charges brought against them at the Trial Chamber.

The three currently in the Court's detention facilities, Chief Sam Hinga Norman, Moinina Fofana and Alieu Kondewa; first, second and third accused respectively are standing trial allegedly as those bearing the greatest responsibility for crimes committed against humanity during the ten-year rebel war.

"It has been proven beyond reasonable doubt that the accused are guilty of the charges brought against them. As authorities in CDF the three had the option of winning the war at all cost including punishing anyone who did not oppose the rebels. They attacked and unlawfully killed innocent civilians, inflicting violence and collective punishment and used children as soldiers," he argued adding that they also planned, instigated, aided and abetted the said crimes.

Staker argued the question is that "is there any reasonable doubt as to the guilt of the accused given the evidence before the court." He referred to possible arguments as could be submitted subsequently by the defence counsel regarding subordinates who committed crimes out of personal grudge and contrary to orders of the command structure of the CDF to which the accused belonged.

Staker further dismissed arguments on the systematic and widespread attacks on civilians contained in the final trial briefing of the accused as fanciful and unreasonable given the fact that similar attacks had occurred at different locations and time of civilian settlements.

Liberia's Truth Commission Denies Reports of Suspension
Voice of America
by Kari Barber
November 30, 2006

Liberia's Truth and Reconciliation Commission is denying reports that the commission has ceased work because of a lack of funding. A commission spokeswoman told VOA Thursday that a recent halt in field research was previously scheduled. Meanwhile, critics of the commission are continuing to push for a war crimes court. For VOA, Kari Barber reports from Dakar.

The Truth and Reconciliation Commission in Liberia was formed earlier this year to document first-hand accounts of murders, rapes and other crimes committed during years of recently ended conflict.

The commission was designed after South Africa's commission with the aim of giving the opportunity for victims to speak and victimizers to apologize.

After three weeks of operations in the field the commission, known locally as the TRC, has called in its researchers.

Reports came out that the recall was a result of a lack of cash. TRC spokeswoman Juliane Westphal says this is inaccurate.

"It is not the reason it was put on hold," she said. "There is a lack, which will be amended now. But it was always planned to stop the statement taking to look at the prompts, to revise the prompts, and then take it up again."

Westphal says the commission is struggling with a lack of funds because of pledges that have failed to materialize. But the commission is still talking with partners and making proposals to deal with this shortage.

"It is true that there is a constant lack of money flow and funds, and constantly we have to take great care to stick to our plan because of that," she added.

Westphal says pay has been delayed for statement takers. She says the situation will be corrected on Monday.

Some Liberian critics say struggles within the TRC support their position that the country does not need a truth and reconciliation commission. They say it needs a war crimes tribunal with the power to prosecute.

Bodioh Siapoe, a Liberian activist living in America and a former spokesman for rebel groups, says he sees this as a breakdown of the commission. Siapoe says people want to see war criminals tried in court.

"It is what the people want," he noted. "As I said, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission is just a joke. This is what all of us expected that this thing would just break down. It has broken down."

Siapoe says he believes for true reconciliation, the country needs to rid itself of former warlords who are in positions of power and were also elected as lawmakers.

"From day one I would go for a war crimes tribunal, because a lot of people in my country who contributed to this insane war are in top positions," he added. "Because until we can bring those people to court, there is not going to be real peace in our country. So I support a war crimes tribunal over a TRC which is neither clear nor transparent nor accountable to the people."

Boakai Jalerba is secretary general of a group advocating the establishment of a war crimes court in Liberia. He says the truth commission is protecting perpetrators from justice.

"We believe the TRC forum is a crafted forum designed to shield those warlords and those people who have committed crimes against humanity, against the victims," he said.

Spokeswoman Westphal says that there should not be competition between the truth commission and a war crimes tribunal because the two would have different mandates. However, she says, it is best if they do not operate simultaneously.

"It always sounds as if there is a competition with the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and the War Crimes Tribunal," she said. "Of course, two bodies like that influence each other and they can act like in Sierra Leone where special courts actually had a bad influence on TRC work."

Westphal says after revising the questions used by statement takers, the next period of statement gathering will begin in December.

Chuckie Indicted for War Crimes
AllAfrica.com - The Analyst (Monrovia)
December 7, 2006

The US Department of Justice, yesterday, took a major step against impunity for atrocities in bringing its first-ever criminal charges for torture committed outside the United States, a Human Rights Watch statement said.

The Justice Department indicted Charles "Chuckie" Taylor, Jr., son of the former Liberian president who currently in custody in Miami, for torture committed in Liberia.

A federal grand jury said the torture took place in Liberia during the period of 1997 to 2003. According to information and research by Human Rights Watch and other organizations, the Boston-born Chuckie Taylor, who is a US citizen, is linked to torture and war crimes committed in Liberia when he headed a security unit under the presidency of his father, Charles Taylor.

Chuckie Taylor has been in federal custody in Miami since March 30 when he was arrested at Miami International Airport and charged with a passport violation.

"Today's first-ever charges for torture committed abroad are a crucial step by the US government to ensure justice for this crime," said Elise Keppler, counsel with Human Rights Watch's International Justice Program. "It is especially significant for Liberian victims of Chuckie Taylor's alleged abuses. After years of civil war, Liberia's justice system is in no shape to pursue this type of case."

Federal law makes it a crime prosecutable in the United States for a US citizen to commit torture and war crimes abroad (18 USC sections 2340A and 2441), although no one has ever been prosecuted under either of these laws to date.

"We welcome the crucial step taken by the Justice Department in bringing its first-ever charges for torture committed abroad. Given Chuckie Taylor's links to serious human rights abuses in Liberia, this indictment is especially significant for victims there.

After years of civil war, serious human rights abuses in Liberia, this indictment is especially significant for victims there. After years of civil war, the Liberian justice system is in no shape to pursue this type of case," said Elise Keppler, International Justice Counsel.

Chuckie Taylor led the elite Anti-Terrorist Unit (ATU) from approximately 1997 through at least 2002 when information suggests that the unit committed torture, including various violent assaults, rape, beating people to death and burning civilians alive.

Information collected by Human Rights Watch suggests that the ATU, a pro-government military unit, also committed war crimes during Liberia's armed conflict from 1999 to 2003. In the years that Chuckie Taylor headed the unit, these war crimes included extrajudicial killing of civilians and prisoners, rape and other torture, abduction, and the recruitment of child soldiers.

His father, former Liberian President Charles Taylor, is currently facing trial by the United Nations-backed Special Court for Sierra Leone on charges of war crimes and crimes against humanity committed during the conflict in Sierra Leone, which lasted from 1991 until 2002.

"Enforcement of federal laws on torture committed abroad is long overdue," said Keppler. "The question is now whether the federal authorities are willing to apply the law against others. Particularly for the sake of victims, the indictment against Chuckie Taylor on torture should be the first of many cases of this kind."

In May, the United Nations Committee Against Torture expressed concern about the lack of prosecutions under the US federal torture statute. After being taken into US custody in March, Chuckie Taylor was charged with lying about the identity of his father on a US passport application. He pleaded guilty on September 15 to this charge and is scheduled to be sentenced for the offense on December 7.

Human Rights Watch submitted a memorandum to the Department of Justice on serious abuses in which Chuckie Taylor is implicated. The memorandum included Human Rights Watch's research and information from other human rights organizations, along with other open-source material.

Since that time, Human Rights Watch has provided additional information to the Department of Justice to underscore the need for investigation and prosecution of Chuckie Taylor on torture and war crimes under federal law (18 USC sections 2340A and 2441).

Meanwhile several international and local human rights organizations have hailed the indictment of Chuckie Taylor on the war crime charge of torture as a significant milestone in the pursuit of justice.

"The indictment today clearly indicates that there will be no hiding place and refuge for all those who in their vain quest for power, privilege and wealth immorally acquired same at the expense of the blood, sweat and tears of our citizens," said a Green Advocate press release issued late last night.

The Liberian pro-democracy and human rights group said it extended its appreciation to its international civil society partners whose consistent campaign aided with grass root information from many local Liberian activist as well as ordinary citizens help to inform the U.S. grand jury's decision.

"We continue to remind all and sundry that temporary flight is possible but justice will triumph in the long run," the release noted.

Also speaking on the indictment, the Center for Justice & Accountability (CJA) said it applauds the indictment of Charles "Chuckie" Taylor, Jr., on criminal torture charges. "This case is particularly significant because it represents the first time that the U.S. government has filed a prosecution under a criminal torture statute that has been on the books since 1994," a CJA spokesperson said.

CJA has been investigating Taylor since his arrest on passport fraud charges in March and represents an individual who was personally tortured by Chuckie Taylor. CJA client is eager to see Chuckie Taylor successfully prosecuted.

CJA Executive Director, Pamela Merchant, had this to say, "This case is also important because of the long relationship between the US and Liberia. We are encouraged to see the US gov't seeking accountability for the vicious atrocities Chuckie Taylor committed in Liberia; we hope to see similar prosecutions in the future."

CJA is a San Francisco-based non-profit organization that works to deter torture and other severe human rights abuses through impact litigation, education and outreach.

Ex-president’s son denies torture
BBC News
December 8, 2006

The son of ex-Liberian President Charles Taylor has pleaded not guilty to charges of committing torture.

Charles McArthur Emmanuel, a US citizen, became the first person in the US to be charged under a 12-year-old federal anti-torture law.

He is facing trial in a court in the US city of Miami, while another US court has sentenced him to 11 months in prison for passport fraud.

His father is awaiting trial in The Hague for war crimes in Sierra Leone.

The alleged torturing was said to have been carried out in Liberia during his father's rule.

The US was able to charge Mr Emmanuel because he was born there.

'Scalding'

Mr Emmanuel, known as Charles "Chuckie" Taylor, had been arrested in late March in Miami and has pleaded guilty to passport fraud for not declaring his connection to his father.

He was in charge of presidential security when his father was in power in Liberia, and is accused of taking part in the torture of a victim in July 2002.

"The allegations in this case include acts of torture, such as burning flesh with a hot iron, burning flesh with scalding water, and applying electric shocks," a US attorney said in an official statement.

The assistant secretary for immigration and customs enforcement said it was a "clear message the US would not be a safe haven for human rights violators".

[back to contents]

United States

Guantanamo Inmates Turn to Freed Fellows
The Washington Post
by John Heilprin
December 2, 2006

WASHINGTON -- Like more than a hundred enemy combatants held without charges at the Navy's Guantanamo Bay in Cuba, Hamid Al Razak of Afghanistan turned to a fellow prisoner for legal help.

His bid for help unleashed a federal judge's condemnation of the U.S. government's detention policies.

Dozens more held at Guantanamo, cut off from the outside world and lacking English language skills or any knowledge of the justice system, are still seeking representation from other detainees _ who are either free now or have access to an attorney.

"It is often said that 'justice delayed is justice denied.' Nothing could be closer to the truth with reference to the Guantanamo Bay cases," U.S. District Judge Gladys Kessler of Washington D.C. wrote in a ruling Friday, spurning the Pentagon's attempt to deny Bisher Al Rawi, another Afghan man held at Guantanamo, from representing his friend Al Razak.

Al Rawi would represent his friend with the help of the Center for Constitutional Rights, which has aided several hundred Guantanamo detainees, and New York lawyer Alan Sussman.

Al Razak's legal filings say he is not a member of the Taliban, al-Qaida or any terrorist group, but has been kept in isolation, repeatedly interrogated and severely beaten, put in cages without privacy, shackled with heavy chains and irons, exposed to extreme temperatures, sexually humiliated and subjected to violent behavior and psychological abuse.

Kessler wrote that Al Razak has been cut off from family, friends and indeed all of the outside world for more than three years, can't speak English, doesn't know the criminal justice system, lacks access to a law library, and has no criminal charges filed against him.

"He has every reason to distrust his captors and keepers. He has every reason to rely on the friendship of other detainees, who speak his language and suffer the same disabilities. He has every reason to challenge his detainment," Kessler wrote. "He cannot communicate with his attorney, nor does he even know at present that he has an attorney. He has no expectation of release, ever."

The Bush administration has argued that it has made numerous efforts to make lawyers available and that more than 200 of the detainees have filed a petition that allows a civilian judge to consider their cases.

A Pentagon spokesman, Navy Cmdr. Jeffrey D. Gordon, on Saturday defended the detention policies at Guantanamo and said multiple reviews have been conducted for each of the people held there. More than 400 detainees remain at Guantanamo; several hundred were allowed to leave the prison for other countries, according to the Pentagon.

Gordon said that "humane treatment is the standard" at Guantanamo, which represents the culmination of a major undertaking to pick up hundreds of military combatants found in Afghanistan or trying to flee into Pakistan, among other places. A U.S. Army colonel is investigating allegations of prisoner abuse at Guantanamo Bay.

"Now they're going to face justice," said Gordon, who lacked an explanation for why the Pentagon had sought to block the dozens of prisoners from being represented from fellow detainees whom they considered friends.

Not so, according to Kessler, who wrote that just because "some of the unfortunate petitioners who have been detained for many years in the terrible conditions at Guantanamo Bay" were able to file a writ of habeus corpus doesn't show that Al Razak should have been able to do it for himself.

William Goodman, legal director for the center, said the judge's insights are universal for all the detainees, particularly those like Al Razak who need a friend to represent them.

"Many of these people are isolated, they do not know English, they do not know the Western legal system and they are intentionally kept in the dark by the Department of Defense," Goodman said. "There are probably well over 100 who have been in his situation, who have to clear this hurdle."

Fast funding sought for Guantánamo terror-trial site
Miami Herald
by Carol Rosenberg
December 4, 2006

Citing emergency authority, the Defense Department requested funds to build a war-crimes court compound at Guantánamo Bay.

The Pentagon is invoking emergency authority to fast-track funding of a comprehensive war-crimes court compound at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, according to a letter to Congress obtained by The Miami Herald.

Department of Defense spokesmen would not say when -- if ever -- the Pentagon had last invoked similar authority.

Nor would they specify which military construction already approved by Congress would be frozen to fund the courtroom project, which could cost as much as $125 million, according to U.S. government documents.

But, in a Nov. 17 letter to several Republican and Democratic senators and House members, Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon England explains the unusual move this way:

``Due to national security implications and extreme urgency, emergency construction was authorized pursuant to Section 2808 of title 10, United States Code.''

Congressional staff members say the price tag and the funding mechanism have stirred protests among key members of Congress with fiscal and operational oversight of the Department of Defense.

The Pentagon wants to build, in three months, a mini-city on an abandoned airfield to stage the trials -- two new courtrooms with space for two more, dining, housing and work space for up to 1,200 military and civilians working at the trials, and media, conference and classified information centers.

At issue is how swiftly and at what cost the Pentagon will kick-start its on-again, off-again military commissions process at the U.S. Navy base.

The military envisions night-and-day court sessions in at least two courtrooms to allege war crimes against about one-fifth of the so-called enemy combatants held as terror suspects at Guantánamo, some since early 2002.

An internal worksheet for what would be Project 68043 says the Pentagon anticipates trying ''75 to 80'' of the 430 or so detainees under an ``increased operations tempo.''

In a bipartisan move, Sen. John Warner, R-Va., chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, and the man who will succeed him in the next Congress, Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., have filed a letter of protest, say congressional staff members who asked that they not be named because they were not authorized to speak to reporters.

Moreover, Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, wrote England in a two-page letter dated Nov. 29 that, while he understands the need for more facilities, the price tag ''is a little excessive at this point,'' said Hunter spokesman Josh Holly.

LEMON CHICKEN

Hunter has been a key supporter of Bush administration's detention policy, and last year staged a photo opportunity on Capitol Hill -- in which he presented a Guantánamo lemon chicken meal -- to answer critics who contend detainees are abused at the facility in southeast Cuba.

But on the court complex, Duncan ''would urge significant reductions of costs through greater use of temporary portable or modular structures,'' added Holly. ``There's no need to build something that needs to be down there for 30 years.''

The Pentagon would not elaborate, but it appears to be relying on a National Emergency Construction Authority Executive Order, which President Bush signed more than five years ago -- after the Sept. 11, 2001, World Trade Center and Pentagon attacks.

The compound would supplement an existing courtroom, lock-up, office space and security facilities. The Bush administration had held pre-trial hearings there, until the U.S. Supreme Court in June declared them unconstitutional on a challenge by Osama bin Laden's driver.

Now, armed with a new Military Commissions law, the Pentagon is preparing to hold multiple trials in multiple venues -- even as Justice and Defense Department lawyers are still writing new guidelines for new trials.

Moreover, new legislation introduced by Sen. Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., in the lame-duck Congress, seeks to redesign the court system again and, significantly, accelerate civilian court scrutiny of the system's constitutionality.

Unclear is what defense projects will be set aside and put at risk with the extraordinary move.

Defense Department spokesman Bryan Whitman said in a Nov. 28 e-mail to The Miami Herald that ``offsets have been identified.''

Rep. Jim Walsh, R-N.Y., who chairs the House subcommittee on military appropriations, over the weekend declared his opposition to the Pentagon move, too.

MILITARY READINESS

Diverting money ''would affect military readiness, and we're at war,'' the 18-year veteran congressman was quoted as saying in the Post-Standard of Syracuse. ``It sounds like their priorities are skewed.''

In the letter, England asks the Congress members to support a future request to restore the projects that the emergency move would preempt -- an idea that Hunter replied was unlikely to succeed.

Also unclear is the true cost of the project.

A Navy presolicitation notice to would-be builders, dated Nov. 3, with a response deadline of Dec. 20, put the value of the project at $75 million to $125 million, and a fast-track deadline of July 2007. England's Nov. 17 letter put the price tag at $102 million.

U.S. Military Transfers First Detainees to New Prison at Guantanamo Bay
Associated Press via USA Today
December 8, 2006

GUANTANAMO BAY NAVAL BASE, Cuba (AP) — The U.S. military has begun transferring detainees to a new, high-security prison at Guantanamo Bay and will close one of the first detention camps built to hold men swept up in the war on terrorism.

The first 42 prisoners assigned to the $37 million facility arrived Thursday morning, said Navy Cmdr. Robert Durand, a spokesman for detention operations at the remote U.S. naval base in eastern Cuba.

The detainees were moved from Camp 3, which opened in 2002 with walls of thick-gauge, chain-link metal. The others inside that prison were transferred to other camps, allowing it to close, Durand said. Other old camps will remain open.

Along with another maximum-security facility on the same plateau overlooking the Caribbean, the new prison, Camp 6, will hold detainees who are least compliant — an assessment the military says it bases on detainees' adherence to base rules rather than their cooperation with interrogators.

Durand did not say how many more inmates would be transferred to the new prison in addition to the 42, but the facility has 178 cells.

U.N. human rights investigators and foreign governments have called on the United States to close the entire detention center amid reports of prisoner abuse, heavy-handed interrogations, and hunger strikes. The United States has said that those detained at the base are "enemy combatants" to whom normal legal rules do not apply.

About 430 men are currently held at Guantanamo on suspicion of links to al-Qaeda or the Taliban, including about 100 who have been cleared for release and are awaiting transfer to another country. Fewer than a dozen inmates have been charged with crimes.

The concrete-and-steel jailhouse was originally designed as a medium-security facility. But the military made several modifications after it was built, citing concerns raised by three suicides in June and a clash in May between guards and detainees armed with makeshift weapons.

Although some of the cells in the prefabricated prison came with two bunks, the prisoners will be confined alone in the 8-foot-by-12-foot cells. An open-air recreation area has been divided into smaller spaces, which will hold only one detainee at a time.

The areas outside the cells, designed for communal living and dining with metal tables and stools, will now be off-limits to detainees under maximum security.

Shower doors were redesigned to allow guards to shackle prisoners' hands and feet before they leave the stalls, and "anti-jump fencing" was installed on second-tier catwalks and stairways.

The new prison also has air conditioning, an onsite medical center and two rooms where detainees can meet privately with their lawyers, Durand said.

Air conditioning has not been available at all the camps, but the military is now installing it in some prisons after detainees used broken fan blades as weapons in the melee in May. Temperatures typically reach the low 90s here during summer months.

U.S. Navy Cmdr. Kris Winter said the modifications will help make guards safer. In the last year and a half, the military has recorded more than 430 assaults by detainees using "cocktails" of bodily excretions thrown at guards and 225 physical assaults.

"As a commander, I don't like my folks being in danger every day," Winter said this week while leading journalists on a tour of the prison.

Guantanamo officials said the design also makes the prison safer by limiting prisoners' ability to communicate. Officials have said the May 18 ambush inside another facility on the base resulted from a plot hatched by detainees as word spread that guards were searching cells for contraband medication following two suicide attempts.

A defense attorney said the melee was sparked when guards tried to search prisoners' Qurans.

Navy Rear Adm. Harry Harris, commander of the jail, has also described the June 10 suicides at the base as a coordinated protest. Lawyers and human rights activists called the suicides an act of desperation.

To allow each cell block's prayer leader to be heard, guards will open the "beanhole" slot on his door during prayers five times a day. The others' doors will remain sealed, Winter said.

Former Detainees Argue for Right to Sue Rumsfeld Over Torture
The New York Times
by Paul von Zielbauer
December 8, 2006

WASHINGTON, Dec. 8 — Lawyers for former detainees in Iraq and Afghanistan argued in federal court on Friday that Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld was personally responsible, and thus legally liable, for acts of torture inflicted on their clients by American military interrogators.

The nine plaintiffs, Iraqi and Afghan men held at American-run prisons, endured an array of physical and psychological abuse during their confinements in 2003 and 2004, including beatings, mock executions and painful physical restraints, their lawyers said in court papers. All were eventually released without being charged with crimes.

The hearing Friday, before Chief Judge Thomas F. Hogan in Federal District Court in Washington, was the first time a federal court had considered whether top administration officials could be liable for the torture of detainees in Iraq and Afghanistan.

But the hearing concerned only questions of jurisdiction and did not delve into whether Mr. Rumsfeld, because he personally approved certain interrogation techniques in 2002 like the use of “stress positions,” was legally responsible for specific acts of torture committed in overseas military prisons.

Instead, lawyers from each side argued over whether noncitizens confined in prisons outside the United States had legal standing to sue Mr. Rumsfeld and other American military officials for constitutional violations.

The suit, filed on behalf of the nine plaintiffs last year by the American Civil Liberties Union and Human Rights First, also names as defendants three officials responsible for running military prisons in Iraq and Afghanistan: Lt. Gen. Ricardo S. Sanchez, the former top commander in Iraq; Col. Thomas M. Pappas, who was the top military intelligence officer at Abu Ghraib, the American-run prison in Iraq; and a former brigadier general, Col. Janis L. Karpinski, who before her demotion to colonel was the military police commander at Abu Ghraib. She was relieved of her command and demoted after abuses at Abu Ghraib came to light.

During the two-and-a-half-hour hearing, Judge Hogan took turns questioning the lawyers. He repeatedly asked lawyers for the former detainees to cite precedents in law that would allow foreigners to sue American officials for what in the United States would be violations of their civil rights.

“How can this work, this theory that nonresident aliens have a right to sue to prevent being tortured?” Judge Hogan asked Lucas Guttentag, the plaintiffs’ lead lawyer in the case. What would prevent Osama bin Laden, the judge asked Mr. Guttentag, from taking President Bush to court for authorizing the military to kill him?

Mr. Guttentag, citing several Supreme Court decisions, said that American laws prohibiting torture should apply to foreign civilians under exclusively American control and jurisdiction overseas. He also noted that in Iraq, American military personnel were immune from prosecution under Iraqi laws. “Iraqi law cannot govern, and unless the United States does, nothing else applies.”

Rick Beckner, a deputy assistant attorney general representing Mr. Rumsfeld, argued that foreigners held in an American-run prison in foreign territory had no legal standing to sue. “There’s never been any finding that the Constitution applies to these plaintiffs,” he told Judge Hogan.

Judge Hogan, clearly skeptical of the plaintiffs’ attempt to open federal officials to legal liability for actions by troops overseas, said he hoped to make a decision quickly to dismiss the case or allow some or all claims to proceed.

But in his closing remarks, the judge also acknowledged being disturbed by the allegations of detainee abuse and torture. “It is unfortunate, to say the least, that there has to be an argument” about whether the American military tortures foreign citizens.

In Torture Case Against Rumsfeld, Lawyers Cite 'Widespread Pattern' of Abuse, Need for Accountability
Human Rights First
December 8, 2006

Federal court to rule whether top U.S. officials can be held legally accountable for the torture scandal in Iraq and Afghanistan

WASHINGTON - The American Civil Liberties Union and Human Rights First today argued before a federal court that Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld should be held accountable for the torture and abuse of detainees in U.S. military custody.

Today's hearing marked the first time a federal court has considered whether top U.S. officials can be held legally accountable for the torture scandal in Iraq and Afghanistan.

"There must be legal accountability in a court of law for high-ranking government officials who order or allow torture in violation of the most fundamental legal norms that govern our society," said ACLU attorney Lucas Guttentag, who is lead counsel in the case. "Torture is universally prohibited but Secretary Rumsfeld and the other defendants have not been held responsible for the orders they gave and the abuse they permitted."

The ACLU and Human Rights First filed the lawsuit in March 2005 on behalf of nine innocent civilians who were detained by the United States military in Iraq and Afghanistan. While in U.S. custody, the men were subjected to abuse, torture and other cruel and degrading treatment, including severe and repeated beatings, cutting with knives, sexual humiliation and assault, mock executions, death threats, and restraint in contorted and excruciating positions. All of the men were released without charge.

"Our clients' case is about ensuring that there's meaningful accountability, to create an effective deterrent against future violations and to ensure the courts' ongoing role in enforcing the law against torture," said Deborah Pearlstein, director of Human Rights First's Law and Security program. "The Supreme Court has made it clear that wartime does not create a law-free zone."

The ACLU also brought three related lawsuits against Lt. General Ricardo Sanchez, former Brigadier General Janis Karpinski and Colonel Thomas Pappas. The four cases were consolidated and transferred to Chief Judge Thomas F. Hogan of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. All of the defendants have moved to dismiss the suits in their entirety. The lawsuit is seeking compensatory damages for the plaintiffs and a court order declaring that the actions of Secretary Rumsfeld and the other officers violated the U.S. Constitution, federal statutes and international law.

Today's hearing addressed the defendants' claim that they cannot be held legally liable for the torture of civilians in U.S. custody. The ACLU and Human Rights First argued that the Constitution and international law clearly prohibit torture and require commanders to act when they know or should have known of abuses. In addition to the orders they gave directly, Secretary Rumsfeld and the other defendants were repeatedly notified of abuse and torture at detention facilities in Iraq and Afghanistan by military reports, the International Red Cross and other reports and complaints by human rights organizations.

The groups further charge in the lawsuit that Secretary Rumsfeld personally approved brutal and illegal interrogation techniques in December 2002. Those techniques included the use of "stress positions," the removal of clothing, the use of dogs, and isolation and sensory deprivation.

Retired military officers and military legal experts have filed a legal brief in support of the lawsuit. According to the military law experts, "It was the essence of Secretary Rumsfeld and other defendants' scope of employment to educate and train those within their command responsibility to adhere to domestic and international standards and to do everything within their power to prevent and punish deviations from them." The experts urged that allowing the federal case to proceed would not intrude into matters of military decision-making, but would reinforce the military's interest in command responsibility.

Additional attorneys in the case, Ali et al v. Rumsfeld, are Steven R. Shapiro, Cecillia Wang, Jennifer Chang, Monica Ramirez, Amrit Singh, Steven Watt and Omar Jadwat of the ACLU; Michael Posner, Hina Shamsi and Priti Patel of Human Rights First; Bill Lann Lee of Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein LLP; Paul Hoffman of Schonbrun DeSimone Seplow Harris & Hoffman LLP; Erwin Chemerinsky of Duke University School of Law; David Rudovsky of Kairys, Rudovsky, Epstein & Messing LLP; and Art Spitzer of the ACLU of the National Capital Area.

Legal briefs filed in the case, as well as information on the former detainees, are online at www.aclu.org/rumsfeld and www.humanrightsfirst.org/us_law/etn/lawsuit/index.asp.

Official government reports have documented many horrific abuses inflicted on detainees in U.S. custody. The ACLU and other advocacy groups have obtained more than 100,000 pages of documents concerning abuses through a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit, online at www.aclu.org/torturefoia. As these documents indicate, the FBI began to complain about the interrogation techniques used by the military on detainees in Guantánamo as early as 2002, techniques that spread to Afghanistan and Iraq. Media reports have also brought many disturbing incidents to light, including the deaths of detainees in custody.

[back to contents]

Reports

UN Reports

Annan calls on governments to destroy ‘cruel and inhumane’ chemical weapons
UN News Service
December 5, 2006

Describing chemical weapons as “cruel and inhumane,” United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan today called on all States to accede to the global convention banning these arms, as the treaty approaches its 10-year anniversary.

In a message to a high-level conference in The Hague that since entering into force in 1997, the Chemical Weapons Convention has contributed to the steady destruction of stockpiles worldwide. There are now 181 nations – representing about 98 per cent of the world’s population – that are party to this agreement.

“Yet several key actors remain outside its framework. On the eve of the Convention’s tenth anniversary, I once again urge all governments that have not yet done so to ratify or accede to the treaty without delay… I encourage all signatories to destroy these cruel and inhumane weapons within already established deadlines,” he said, in the message.

Mr. Annan urged all States party to the treaty to “enact appropriate national legislation to enforce” the agreement, adding it was also crucial that the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) – a UN-affiliated body – receives full support. Countries automatically become members of the OPCW when they accede to the convention.

“Both OPCW and States Parties can continue to count on the support of the United Nations System. The UN remains deeply concerned about the dangers of chemical weapons – indeed all weapons of mass destruction – and is actively engaged in efforts to counter this threat.”

Highlighting the General Assembly’s adoption in September of the UN’s Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy as being one example of the effort to stamp out weapons of mass destruction, Mr. Annan described them as “one of man’s most terrible inventions.”

But he added that “eliminating them would be one of mankind’s grandest accomplishments” and called for stepped-up efforts to “banish these instruments of death.”

The Conference of States Parties to the Convention, which is holding its eleventh session, runs from today until 8 December.

The Secretary-General’s message was delivered by Tim Caughley, Director of the UN’s Department of Disarmament Affairs. Mr. Annan himself is in New York, from where he will travel later today to Washington, D.C. to attend a dinner in his honour hosted by United States President George W. Bush.

UN Assembly takes steps towards new treaty regulating global conventional arms trade
UN News Service
December 6, 2006

The United Nations General Assembly today adopted a resolution effectively kicking off a diplomatic process aimed at promulgating a new international treaty on the global trade in conventional arms – a move immediately hailed by Secretary-General Kofi Annan – as it acted on a series of resolutions adopted at the recommendation of its Disarmament and International Security (First) Committee.

“The Secretary-General welcomes today’s adoption by the General Assembly of a resolution launching a process that could lead to a treaty regulating international trade in conventional weapons,” his spokesman said in a statement released in New York.

“While there are still many steps to be taken to forge a consensus to this end, the resolution represents the first formal step towards developing common international standards for the import, export and transfer of conventional weapons,” the spokesman said, pointing out that “unregulated trade in these weapons currently contributes to conflict, crime and terrorism, and undermines international efforts for peace and development.”

The resolution, “Towards an arms trade treaty: establishing common international standards for the import, export and transfer of conventional arms,” was adopted by a recorded vote, with the United States alone in opposing the text which was supported by 153 countries. An additional two dozen countries abstained.

Under its terms, the Secretary-General was requested to seek the views of Member States “on the feasibility, scope and draft parameters for a comprehensive, legally binding instrument establishing common international standards for the import, export and transfer of conventional arms” and to report on this at its next session.

He was also asked to establish a group of governmental experts to start examining in 2008 the feasibility, scope and draft parameters for such a treaty. This will be considered by the Assembly’s sixty-third session, which opens in September 2008.

The resolution was one of 52 submitted by the First Committee to the Assembly for action today. The Committee’s measures are traditionally among the most contentious submitted each year, and 2006 was no exception, with dozens of recorded votes on resolutions and their provisions.

Among those were votes on resolutions reaffirming the need for the UN Register of Conventional Arms; condemning the announced nuclear-weapon test by the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK); calling for countries to ratify the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT); calling on Israel to renounce possession of nuclear weapons; voicing concern about an arms race in outer space; and assurances to non-nuclear-weapon States against the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons.

Annan says UN has often failed to deliver on protecting and promoting human rights
UN News Service
December 8, 2006

The United Nations has often failed to live up to its responsibility to promote human rights, with the ongoing killing and displacement of civilians in Darfur only the latest example of how the world has not improved its act, Secretary-General Kofi Annan said today as he urged Member States, organizations and individuals to make the protection of rights a reality in every country.

In an address at the Time Warner Centre in New York to mark International Human Rights Day, which is being staged on Sunday, the outgoing Secretary-General said he had tried to make human rights central to all of the world body’s work during his 10 years at the helm.

“But I’m not sure how far I have succeeded, or how much nearer we are to bringing the reality of the UN in line with my vision of human rights as its ‘third pillar,’ on a par with development and peace and security,” he said.

Despite the adoption by leaders attending last year’s World Summit of the doctrine of a “responsibility to protect” endangered civilians, and the lessons learned from the disasters of Rwanda and Bosnia during the 1990s, he said “reports still pour in of villages being destroyed by the hundred and of brutal treatment of civilians” across the war-torn Sudanese region of Darfur.

“How can an international community which claims to uphold human rights allow this horror to continue?” he asked. “There is more than enough blame to go around. It can be shared among those who value abstract notions of sovereignty more than the lives of real families, those whose reflex of solidarity puts them on the side of governments and not of peoples, and those who fear that action to stop the slaughter would jeopardize their commercial interests.”

Mr. Annan also criticized those governments that have tried to depict the principle of responsibility to protect as an imperialist conspiracy against developing countries.

“This is utterly false. We must do better. We must develop the responsibility to protect into a powerful international norm that is not only quoted but put into practice, whenever and wherever it is needed.”

He urged civil society groups, human rights defenders and individuals to each play their part to ensure that governments and the UN are held to account for their promises on rights. Aside from giving real meaning to “responsibility to protect,” there must be an end to impunity, he said, citing Bosnian Serb leaders Radovan Karadzic and Ratko Mladic and the leaders of the rebel Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA) in Uganda as examples of war criminals still at large.

But the Secretary-General noted there has been some progress in this area, particularly in the creation of the International Criminal Court (ICC), the work of the UN war crimes tribunals for Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia, and the hybrid tribunals in Sierra Leone and Cambodia.

Mr. Annan added that “we need an anti-terrorism strategy that does not merely pay lip service to the defence of human rights, but is built on it,” adding that States which violate human rights in fighting terrorism lose the moral high ground.

“That is why secret prisons have no place in our struggle against terrorism, and why all places where terrorism suspects are detained must be accessible to the International Committee of the Red Cross.”

He concluded by saying the international community must move beyond “grand statements of principle… [and] work to make human rights a reality in each country.”

Mr. Annan on Monday will travel to the Truman Museum and Library at Independence, Missouri, to pay homage to the memory of one of the UN’s founders and to deliver his last speech as Secretary-General to an American audience, a spokesman announced.

“He will spell out five lessons derived from his 10-year experience at the helm of this organization and challenge American leaders of today and tomorrow to live up to Truman's example of enlightened leadership in a multilateral system,” Stephane Dujarric said.

NGO Reports

Iraq: ICRC strongly condemns attacks against civilians
International Committee of the Red Cross
November 30, 2006

Geneva/Baghdad (ICRC) – As scores of civilians continue to be killed on a daily basis in Iraq, the ICRC strongly condemns deliberate attacks against civilians.

Speaking in Geneva today, Georges Comninos, ICRC head of operations for the Middle East and North Africa, said: "Regardless of the complexity of the issues at stake in the Iraqi conflict, it is unacceptable and contrary to the most basic principles of humanity and law to target persons not participating in the hostilities".

The ICRC has constantly reminded all parties to the conflict of their obligations under international humanitarian law, in particular the obligation not to attack the civilian population or civilian infrastructure. Mr Comninos stressed the fact that both State and non-State actors are bound by these rules.

Hundreds have died in recent days as a result of direct attacks against civilians. Car bombs, shootings, abductions and killings have become commonplace. Bodies lie in the streets, often maimed and unidentified.

"We are deeply shocked by these daily attacks, often followed by blind acts of revenge and characterized by an appalling lack of respect for human dignity. Attacks against civilians, more than any other act, fuel the spiral of violence", comments Karl Mattli, head of the ICRC delegation in Iraq.

Working in difficult security conditions, the ICRC has been doing its utmost to support the Iraqi health system, which is under considerable strain owing to the regular and massive influx of civilian casualties.

The ICRC once again calls on all parties to the conflict to respect the rules of international humanitarian law and to spare civilians and civilian property. In addition, it urges all those who can make use of their moral and political influence on the ground to call for respect for human life and dignity.

Sri Lanka: ICRC deplores civilian casualties in Kallar
International Committee of the Red Cross
December 8, 2006

Geneva/Colombo (ICRC) – The ICRC deplores the civilian deaths and injuries caused by an attack yesterday on Kallar village, Trincomalee district, and calls on both parties to the conflict to respect their obligations under international humanitarian law.

The ICRC was deeply distressed to learn that four civilians, including a child, lost their lives and that 10 schoolchildren were wounded, some of them very severely, as a result of a mortar attack that hit the local school and the village centre.

"At around 11 a.m., while passing through Kallar on the way from Kantale to Mutur, we suddenly found ourselves in the middle of artillery shelling", said Roberto Petronio, deputy head of the ICRC sub-delegation in Trincomalee. "We saw black smoke rising from the school compound and students running away. The villagers informed us that some wounded people needed urgent help. At the scene we found several wounded, including a woman teacher, two boys and a little girl whom we managed to evacuate to Kantale hospital".

The ICRC urgently appeals to both parties to ensure that the civilian population and civilian objects are respected and protected in all circumstances. "The ICRC urges both parties to protect the civilian population from the effects of hostilities. We are very concerned about the effects of the fighting on the life of civilians caught up in it", said Toon Vandenhove, head of the ICRC delegation in Colombo.

The ICRC once again urges all those involved in the fighting to respect the rules of international humanitarian law that are applicable in Sri Lanka, including in particular rules contained in Article 3 common to the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and in customary international law. Every feasible precaution must be taken to spare civilians and to ensure that the principles of distinction and proportionality are respected in all military operations.

The ICRC maintains a confidential dialogue with both parties and is closely monitoring the situation on the ground. It stands ready to protect and assist those who are not or no longer taking a direct part in the hostilities by providing them with health care, shelter and other vital necessities.

[back to contents]