War Crimes Prosecution Watch

The Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina, War Crimes Chamber

Appellate Panel pronounced the Verdict in the Nikola Andrun case
State Court of BiH
August 20, 2008

The Appellate Panel of Section I for War Crimes of the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH) granted the appeals filed by the Prosecutor’s Office of BiH and the Defense Counsel for the Accused Nikola Andrun and revoked the first-instance Verdict by which the Accused Andrun was found guilty of the criminal offense of War Crimes against Civilians and sentenced to 13 years of imprisonment, and on 19 August 2008 delivered the second-instance Verdict by which the Accused Nikola Andrun was found guilty of the criminal offense of War Crimes against Civilians and sentenced to 18 years of imprisonment.

In the operative part of the Verdict, the Appellate Panel stated that Nikola Andrun, as the Deputy Camp Commander, during the period from June to September 1993, in the Gabela Camp, together with SIS investigators and Camp guards, participated in killings, tortured and participated in the torture of the detained civilians and subjected them to inhumane treatment.

The Court, inter alia, established that the Accused, together with another person, in late September or early October 1993, took out a detainee from the Gabela Camp and took him to the Police Station in Čapljina, where he himself participated in his mental and physical abuse. It was further established that the Accused Nikola Andrun, on an unspecified date in September 1993, in the afternoon hours, came to one of the hangars in the Gabela Camp, and took one of the detainees out of there, and he had been unaccounted for until his mortal remains were exhumed and identified in 1996. The Court established that the Accused Andrun on an unidentified date in October 1993, in the evening hours, in the Gabela Camp, after a detainee refused to comply with his order, he entered the hangar together with an HVO soldier known to him, took the detainee out of the hangar, whereupon several unknown members of the HVO, in the presence of Nikola Andrun, beat the detainee all over his body, whereupon the detainee died.

Further on, on two occasions, in August and September 1993, together with the Camp Commander, Nikola Andrun removed a group of Bosniaks from the Gabela Camp to the Silos Camp near Čapljina, with the aim to prevent the employees of the International Committee of the Red Cross to make a list of the detainees.

The Accused Nikola Andrun is acquitted of the charge that in early July 1993 he took part in the inhumane treatment of a group of detainees whom he had taken out from one of the hangars and driven to the Police Station in Čitluk.

Lazarevic et al: Prosecution completes evidence presentation
BIRN Justice Report
August 21, 2008

The State Prosecution presents material evidence thus completing its evidence presentation at the trial of Sreten Lazarevic, Dragan Stanojevic, Mile Markovic and Slobodan Ostojic.

The Prosecution of Bosnia and Herzegovina completed the evidence presentation process at the trial for Zvornik crimes by presenting its material evidence.

Earlier on the Prosecution examined all witnesses and asked for permission to present its material evidence at a later stage, when the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, ICTY, provided it with endorsements and certificates related to the presented documents.

In the meantime the Defense started presenting evidence. The process is nearing an end.

The Prosecution charges Sreten Lazarevic, Dragan Stanojevic, Mile Markovic and Slobodan Ostojic, as members of reserve police forces with the Public Safety Station in Zvornik, with having participated in the detention and beating of civilians, who were detained in the prison, offence court and "Novi izvor" buildings in Zvornik. The indictment alleges that Sreten Lazarevic was manager of the detention camp, in which civilians were held, while Stanojevic, Markovic and Ostojic were detention camp guards. The documents, presented by the Prosecution, mainly contain evidence of the existence of an armed conflict in the Zvornik area in the period covered by the indictment. The Prosecution presented a list of reserve police members from Zvornik, who were employed in the prison in August 1992. The mentioned list contains the names of the four indictees.

At the hearing held on August 21 the Defense examined its witness Milos Batic, who said that he worked with Sreten Lazarevic in the period from 1992 to 1993, adding that they were tasked with the maintenance and servicing of vehicles belonging to "the Internal Affairs Service in Zvornik".

"I was a car mechanic, while Sreten was a tin man. He used to perform minor repairs in the workshop and the major ones at his house," Batic said. The witness said that he did not consider Lazarevic as his close friend, but he knew that Sreten was a reserve policeman. He said that he "did not know that he worked in the prison". Batic identified Slobodan Ostojic in the courtroom. He said he had known him since 1992, adding that he had "a very good opinion about him". "He is a good man and a hard worker. I have never heard anyone say any bad words about him. Not one returnee had ever complained about him," Batic said, concluding his testimony.

Kujundzic: Witness examination postponed
BIRN Justice Report
August 22, 2008

Following the Trial Chamber's intervention, the Prosecution postpones the examination of witness Mirsad Tokaca.

Due to the fact that the Prosecution was not able to examine its witness Mirsad Tokaca in the manner requested by the Trial Chamber, it decided to postpone his examination. The new date will be set at a later stage.

Mirsad Tokaca, who introduced himself as "war crimes investigator", is president of the Research and Documentation Centre, RDC, from Sarajevo. This NGO was behind the project on "Population loss in Bosnia and Herzegovina, 1991 to 1992". The Prosecution invited him to testify at the trial of Predrag Kujundzic. The indictment alleges that Kujundzic was commander of "Predini vukovi" ("Predo's Wolves") Paramilitary Unit. He is charged with crimes in the Doboj area.

The Defense objected Tokaca's examination in the first place, claiming that he could not be considered as a representative of some formal authority and adding that it was not clear how the RDC obtained the data that Tokaca was going to present in the courtroom.

The Chamber rejected the Defense’s objection, adding that it would treat the evidence "in the same way as all other pieces of evidence", after the completion of his examination.

The Prosecution tried to examine Tokaca by asking him about the broad context of the war and number of victims in Doboj area, but the Chamber intervened.

"The factual description contained in the indictment does not cover the entire area of Doboj municipality. It mentions specific locations and we therefore have to concentrate on concrete names and data," Trial Chamber Chairman Saban Maksumic said.

The database compiled by the RDC, on the basis of collected documents and research activities, contains names of individual persons and information about how those persons died during the course of the war.

The Chamber allowed the Prosecution to prepare the witness again and examine him in a different way, which will be adjusted to the Court's proposal.

The Chamber mentioned that protected Prosecution witness 14 refused to cooperate and receive the summons. It informed the Prosecution that it might issue an apprehension order, unless the Prosecution decided not to examine this witness at all.

The Chamber asked the Prosecution to provide it with the recent documents that would show whether protected witness 18 was capable of appearing in the courtroom. The Prosecution filed a motion, asking to read the witness' statement in the courtroom, as he was allegedly not able to appear before the court due to health reasons.

Lelek: State Prosecution appeals verdict
BIRN Justice Report
August 23, 2007

The State Prosecution files an appeal complaining about the acquitting part of the verdict against Zeljko Lelek and the duration of the criminal and legal sanctions.

The Prosecution of Bosnia and Herzegovina filed appealed the first instance verdict against Zeljko Lelek, sentencing him to 13 years' imprisonment for crime against humanity in the Visegrad area. As per the announcement made by the State Prosecution, the appeal referred to the acquitting part of the verdict and the duration of the sentence.

The Prosecution considers that "certain criminal procedure and criminal law provisions" have been violated, while "the factual status has been incorrectly determined".

The Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina pronounced the first instance verdict on May 23 this year. It found Lelek guilty, as member of reserve police forces, of having participated in the deportation, rape, sexual abuse and unlawful detention of Bosniaks from the Visegrad area in the course of 1992.

As stated in the verdict Lelek was sentenced for having participated in taking away of Hasan Ahmetspahic and Nail Osmanbegovic from Crnca village, as well as the sexual abuse of Zejneba Osmanbegovic. Besides that he was found guilty of having raped two witnesses in the course of June 1992. The two women were detained in "Vilina vlas" spa, which was turned into a detention camp for women in the course of the war.

Lelek was found guilty of unlawful detention of civilians in the premises of the Police Station in Visegrad. He was acquitted of the sub-charges that he abused one of the prisoners. By the first instance verdict Lelek was acquitted of the charges that he participated in the taking away and killing of a group of men on the Drina riverbanks and the deportation of the Tabakovic, Cocalic and Memisevic families.

The Prosecution's appeal has been forwarded to the Appellate Chamber of the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina.

Kondic et al: Objective problems
BIRN Justice Report
August 25, 2008

It is still not known when the trial of three indictees who are charged with crimes committed in the Kljuc area, will start.

After medical experts determined that Vinko Kondic was capable of following the trial for "about two hours per day", the Trial Chamber called upon the Prosecution and Defense to present "constructive proposals" on how the proceeding could be conducted.

"At this moment we are facing an objective problem related to the manner in which the trial is to be conducted bearing in mind Kondic's health state. I think it is in everyone's best interest to conduct the trial in an expeditious manner," Trial Chamber Chairwoman Jasmina Kosovic said.

The start of the trial of Kondic has already been postponed several times due to his bad health and inability to attend hearings. The Prosecution of Bosnia and Herzegovina charges Vinko Kondic, Bosko Lukic and Marko Adamovic with having participated in organizing a group of people and abetting them to commit genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes in Kljuc municipality in 1992.

Acting on a request made by the Trial Chamber, a team of medical experts examined Kondic in late July 2008. The team reviewed the medical reports made by the Clinical Centre of the Sarajevo University. It determined that the indictee was capable of following the trial, under certain restrictions. "We have determined that Kondic is capable of following the trial for two or two and a half hours, including a 15 to 30 minutes break, every day, if he continues taking his therapy," court expert Erna Mehmedika-Suljic, neurologist, said. "It has been noticed that Kondic has symptoms of Parkinson's disease, which has led to progression of the disease. However, we cannot claim for sure that he suffers from the Parkinson's disease," Mehmedika-Suljic said.

During the cross-examination of the court experts, Defense attorney Predrag Radulovic asked if air conditioners might have affected Kondic's health. "Air conditioners cannot influence the course of his disease, but he should not be staying in an overheated or too cold room," the court expert responded.

The trial is due to continue on September 2.

Indictment confirmed in the Zoran Tomić case
State Court of BiH
August 26, 2008

On 25 August 2008, the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina confirmed the Indictment against Zoran Tomić, who is charged with the criminal offense of Genocide.

The Indictment alleges that the Accused Tomić, intending to exterminate in part a group of Bosniaks, as a member of the Special Police Force, together with a number of other members of the 2nd Šekovići Special Police Detachment, in the period from 10 July to 19 July 1995, participated in the forcible transfer of the Bosniak population with the aim to execute more than 7,000 Bosniak men aged between 13 and 70.

On 12 July 1995, the Accused Tomić participated in the search of the Bosniak-populated villages in the UN safe area of Srebrenica, in the vicinity of Potočari. The Indictment also alleges that, on 13 July 1995, the Accused Tomić participated in the reconnaissance operation and the small arms attacks in the area above Kamenica, thus forcing the Bosniak men to surrender. The Accused Tomić is alleged to have thus participated in the capturing of several thousand Bosniak men who were attempting to escape from the safe area and who were taken to warehouse of the Kravica Farming Cooperative where they were later executed.

Pincic: Trial to start on September 8
BIRN Justice Report
August 26, 2008

The Prosecution of Bosnia and Herzegovina announces that it will examine seven witnesses and one court expert in an attempt to prove guilt of the indictee, who is charged with crimes against Bosnian Serbs from the Konjic area.

The trial of Zrinko Pincic is due to start on September 8, when the Prosecution will present its introductory arguments, read the indictment and examine protected witness A, who is an injured party in this case.

Zrinko Pincic, former member of the Croatian Defense Council, HVO, is charged with crimes against civilians in Konjic in 1992 and 1993. The Prosecution considers that the indictee, who was "armed and dressed in military uniform", took out witness A from a house in Donje selo village, where Serbian civilians were detained, and sexually abused her several times.

In the course of presenting evidence, the State Prosecution will examine seven witnesses and one court expert and it will present 25 pieces of material evidence.

Defense attorney Velimir Maric announced that he would invite about 15 witnesses. While he was reading their names at a public session, he breached witness A's protection measures by disclosing a name of her family member, who will testify as a Defense witness.

Trial Chamber Chairwoman Minka Kreho warned Maric, telling him that disclosing protected witnesses' names was considered a criminal offence. She ordered him to take this into consideration in the future.

Kujundzic: Hearing closed to public
BIRN Justice Report
August 27, 2008

At the trial of Predrag Kujundzic the Prosecution of Bosnia and Herzegovina examines protected witness 2, a rape victim, with no presence of the public.

The Trial Chamber, sitting in the case of Predrag Kujundzic, approved the Prosecution's motion, requesting the examination of protected witness 2 with no presence of the public.

Predrag Kujundzic, former commander of the "Predini vukovi" ("Predo's Wolves") paramilitary unit, is charged, under eight counts contained in the indictment, with crimes against humanity in Doboj municipality in 1992 and 1993. The indictment alleges that Kujundzic sexually abused protected witness 2 and kept her in slavery from June to December 1992, intimidating her by telling her that he would kill her mother and sister. The indictment further alleges that he imposed restrictions on the freedom of movement on witness 2, that he raped her and allowed other soldiers to rape her. According to the indictment witness 2 was a minor at that time.

At the beginning of the hearing the Trial Chamber announced that the indictee filed a motion, asking for the disqualification of Trial Chamber Chairman Saban Maksumic, because he "distrusted his objectivity in this case" due to the fact that he was a judge with the Regional Military Court in Sarajevo in the course of the war.

The Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina declined the motion. DRC

[back to contents]

Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia (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)

Not All Tribunal Complaints Valid: Official
VOA Khmer
By Sok Khemara
August 15, 2008

The Victims Unit of the Khmer Rouge tribunal has received around 1,800 complaints from purported victims of the regime, but not all of them are within the jurisdiction of the special courts, tribunal officials said Thursday.

"Those who want to file a complaint must make a charge for the period between April 1975 and January 1979," said Keat Bophal, chief of the Victims Unit, as a guest on "Hello VOA." "That is the jurisdiction of the court."

Tribunal spokesman Reach Sambath, who was also a guest, said some of the complaints were not valid, such as a complaint that France had cut Cambodian land from neighboring countries.

Keat Bophal said those with complaints about the regime, within the jurisdiction of the courts, could call the unit, at 023 214 290.

The tribunal was designed to help facilitate reconciliation, in part by providing a means by which victims of the regime could file against defendants, five of whom are so far in jail.

Cambodia's UN tribunal launches internal graft watchdog
Radio Australia
August 16, 2008

Cambodia's UN-backed Khmer Rouge tribunal has launched a new "ethics monitor" to grapple with ongoing claims of corruption within the court.

The new watchdog comes after the UN Development Programme raised fresh allegations of kickbacks on the Cambodian side of the court in late June, forcing international donors to withhold funding for July.

The anti-corruption committee headed by one of the court's top judges, Kong Srim, and tribunal spokeswoman Helen Jarvis, will field complaints from tribunal staffers and look into any graft claims within the joint Cambodian-UN court.

Tribunal Recounts Regime's Vietnam War
VOA News
By Mean Veasna
August 20, 2008

The executions of ethnic Vietnamese by the Khmer Rouge could be the key to genocide charges for jailed leaders of the regime, but prosecutors documents also recount a conflict between the Khmer guerrillas and their Vietnamese neighbors that began almost immediately after the Khmer Rouge came to power.

The Vietnam government does not fund the Khmer Rouge tribunal, but more Vietnamese nationals were killed by the regime than any other foreign group. The regime also killed Thai, Lao, French, New Zealand and US nationals.

"Regarding this issue, several powerful countries, rich countries, have assisted in funding the Khmer Rouge tribunal already," Vietnamese Embassy spokesman Trinh Bac Cam said Wednesday.

Closing orders in the case of Kaing Kek Iev, also called Duch, issued by tribunal judges claim at least 400 Vietnamese civilians and soldiers were killed at Tuol Sleng prison alone.

Youk Chhang, director of the Documentation Center of Cambodia, said at least 600 Vietnamese were killed by the Khmer Rouge at Tuol Sleng and another detention center in Prey Veng province.

In highlighting the conflict, which led to the eventual invasion of Cambodia by Vietnamese forces and the ouster of the Khmer Rouge, tribunal documents are fulfilling a quieter role of the tribunal: a recounting of history that has been lost on Cambodians in subsequent years.

According to indictment documents posted by tribunal prosecutors recently, the Khmer Rouge maintained a conflict with Vietnam over border disputes between April 1975 and December 1978.

The conflict took place in border areas including Ratanakkiri, Mondolkiri, Takeo, Svay Rieng, Kampong Cham and Prey Veng provinces, and on the island formerly known as Koh Tral, better known now by its Vietnamese name, Phu Quoc.

An invasion force of 150,000 Vietnamese troops began an offensive in December 1978, driving the Khmer Rouge out of the capital on Jan. 7, 1979.

The conflict, and suspicions of Vietnamese agents withing the ranks of the Khmer Rouge, led to the killing of many Vietnamese.

"If there will be a trial, justice is for all victims," Trinh Bac Cam said.

Tribunal observers said recently prosecutors could seek genocide charges against the five jailed Khmer Rogue leaders for the killing of the Vietnamese.

"A part of justice will be shared with Vietnamese citizens who have their relatives, military and civilian, killed during Democratic Kampuchea," Youk Chhang said.

More charges sought against Khmer Rouge jailer
AP via International Herald Tribune
August 21, 2008

Prosecutors at Cambodia's genocide tribunal said Thursday they will seek to have more charges added to the indictment issued against a former member of the Khmer Rouge who headed the group's most notorious prison.

A senior genocide researcher said the plan to appeal the court's indictment could cause another snag in efforts to convene the trial of Kaing Guek Eav — also known as Duch — who headed the S-21 prison in Phnom Penh in the late 1970s.

The trial for Duch, 66, has been expected to open in late September.

About 16,000 men, women and children are believed to have been held at the prison, which served as a torture center for the Khmer Rouge. Only 14 are thought to have survived.

The number is a small fraction of the estimated 1.7 million deaths attributed to the radical policies of the communist Khmer Rouge, who held power in 1975-79.

In a prepared statement, the prosecutors said the charges of crimes against humanity and war crimes for which Duch has been indicted "may prevent the trial chamber from fully accounting for Duch's criminal responsibility" during his tenure at the prison.

"They believe that there should be a wider scope to the charges," Peter Foster, a tribunal spokesman, said Thursday.

In their final submission in July, the prosecutors had also sought to have Duch charged for homicide and torture — crimes under Cambodian law — in addition to crimes against humanity and war crimes under international law.

But last week, after finishing their mandated probe, the investigating judges issued their order indicting Duch only for crimes against humanity and war crimes.

The prosecutors argued in response that Duch should also be charged "for his responsibility as a co-perpetrator for a significant number of crimes that occurred as part of a joint criminal enterprise inside" the prison.

They said their mandate "is not just to prosecute certain individuals but ... also to ensure the recording of a full and truthful account of the crimes of the Khmer Rouge and the individual criminality of those responsible for them."

The prosecutors said they will file their appeal before the statutory deadline of Sept. 10.

Youk Chhang, director of the Documentation Center of Cambodia, an independent group researching Khmer Rouge atrocities, said he feared that the prosecutors' move would cause a further delay to the trial, which will come almost three decades after the fall of the group.

"It won't ease the frustration of the public," he said. Many fear the five former Khmer Rouge leaders in detention may die before they face justice.

UN expert arrives as US announces it might fund the ECCC
Phnom Penh Post
By Georgia Wilkins
August 23, 2007

David Tolbert is back in Cambodia, keeping an eye on the Extraordinary Chambers as the US mulls money for the financially troubled court.

THE UN's financial expert to the Khmer Rouge tribunal has arrived in Cambodia on what UN officials are calling a "private" visit to meet with donors and ramp up fundraising efforts for the ECCC.

Tolbert, whose previous visits have been to boost donor confidence in the wake of mismanagement claims, began work Monday and is expected to stay a week, UN spokesman Peter Foster said.

Tolbert was hired by the UN secretary general in April to review the world body's operations at the joint tribunal. His arrival comes as the US announced that it was on the "threshold" of making a decision to fund the struggling tribunal.

"He will be meeting with key people from the court, the local donor community, and will look at donor contributions and the progress made by the court," Foster said.

He described the visit as "strictly technical", however, and said Tolbert was under no jurisdiction from the UN Development Program.

An appointment for the US?
Tolbert, who couldn't be reached for comment Tuesday, was appointed after Kao Kim Hourn, a secretary of state with the Foreign Ministry, told the UN in January that Washington wanted an advisory role in the tribunal and would consider helping fund the court if given the post.

Kao Kim Hourn later retracted his statement, but the US embassy said that they were likely to meet with Tolbert, although were not sure when.

"We expect there will be an opportunity to speak with the Secretary General's advisor about his activities and the importance to donors of ensuring that advancement of administrative reforms in the ECCC match the judicial progress observed to date," said embassy spokesman John Johnson in an email Tuesday.

Outgoing US Ambassador Joseph Mussomeli said Monday that he thought the corruption issue "will be resolved ... and ultimately [the tribunal] will get funding".

Allegations that Cambodian staff were kicking back a portion of their salaries to higher officials are being reviewed by the UN's Office of Internal Oversight. Hundreds of thousands of dollars in funds have been frozen by the UNDP in the meantime.

The court has repeatedly faced bankruptcy and still faces a more than US$40 million shortfall.

[back to contents]

Central African Republic

Official Website of the International Criminal Court
ICC Public Documents - Cases: Central African Republic

Rape by Rebels, Bandits and Soldiers Has Sordid History in CAR
Voice of America
By Nico Colombant
August 19, 2008

Former Congolese warlord Jean-Pierre Bemba is at the International Criminal Court in the Hague awaiting trial on charges related to violence committed by his troops in the Central African Republic. While raping sprees against women in the capital Bangui have been well publicized, sexual violence also took place in other parts of the vast, lawless country, and against men as well. And the sordid pattern continues. VOA's Nico Colombant reports in this the second part of a series on neglect and challenges in the mostly lawless Central African Republic.

Robert Souleymane, a former soldier in the French army during colonial times, shows the house where he says he was gang raped by a group of female Congolese rebels during heavy fighting in the town of Bossangoa in 2002.

Souleymane says they pushed him into his home, brandishing their weapons and forced themselves on him. Later he found out he was infected with HIV. He said his wife had fled to Chad, but that when she came back, he did not know he was infected, and that he is the one who must have infected her. He says his body has "melted" from a weight of nearly 90 kilograms before becoming sick to about 70 kilograms now.

Souleymane says he is very happy the former Congolese warlord Bemba has been arrested. He says when the Congolese mercenaries came through, everything was pillaged and burned to the ground.

Bemba has denied wrongdoing, or knowing what his forces were doing on the ground. The Movement for the Liberation of Congo was also backed by Uganda's government.

It was called in by then-CAR president Ange Felix Patasse to defend his elected government against fighters for then rebel-leader, Francois Bozize, who is now the CAR president, following a successful coup and subsequent elections.

But the entire north of the Central African Republic remains wracked with violence, some of it committed by former rebel fighters who say they were not paid enough after the coup, and who now terrorize civilians by acting as road bandits, looting vehicles and also kidnapping passengers and pedestrians.

New rebel groups also emerged in recent years, while militias have been formed to protect villages and roads. All armed groups, as well as the military, have been accused of using sexual violence as a tool of intimidation.

Toby Lanzer, who recently left his post as the United Nations humanitarian coordinator in the CAR says, in 2007, he heard of one group of rebels controlling a road, who were "taxing" women as they came through - in other words, raping them.

"We worked, I would say quite quickly, and hard with people to explain what is on and what is not on," he said. "And we have been able to make some headway. We are working in a place where violence unfortunately is too common and where women often bear the brunt of it. But it is not only women who have suffered from gender-based violence, it has also been young men and boys and we will continue to do what we can."

He says U.N. workers tried to end such practices on the 50-kilometer stretch of road north of Kaga Bandoro, where he says the situation was particularly bad.

"We essentially started going up and down the road and talking with everybody that we could find who had a weapon, who could force himself or herself onto somebody else, simply by the power of the gun," Lanzer said. "And there was a lot of advocacy, a lot of explaining, a lot of very delicate discussions going on, and the situation improved markedly over the last few months, so I think that is an encouraging thing."

Back in Bossangoa, a group of women who were raped during the fighting in 2002 and became ill with HIV, work together in a field, clearing land with machetes to grow vegetables.

One of the victims, Pelagie, says she was attacked by men while she came to Bossangoa's market to get food, not knowing fighting was taking place. She says she has heard rape is still perpetrated by rebels, unruly soldiers, and bandits in more remote areas of CAR.

Pelagie says if her association was given money, she could travel to these areas and warn women about armed men.

She says women need to know what has happened to others, and how best to avoid the same fate. She says women are also often viewed as being guilty if they have been raped, but that they should not be afraid to come forward with their stories and get tested to see if they have HIV. She says isolation and shame only make things worse.

When asked about Bemba, Pelagie says she is not into politics. But she says rapists and those who organize rapes during conflict should be put in jail, so that others may be afraid to do the same.

She shows her diploma as agricultural technician, which she completed after she was raped. But she says no one wants to give her a job anymore, because she has HIV.

[back to contents]

Darfur, Sudan (ICC)

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

Sudan warned UN of serious consequences over ICC warrant – envoy
Sudan Tribune
August 18, 2008

(UNITED NATIONS) — Sudan has warned the United Nations of "serious consequences" for its staff and facilities if the International Criminal Court issues an arrest warrant for President Omar Hassan al-Bashir over Darfur, a U.N. envoy said on Monday.

Addressing the U.N. Security Council, Ashraf Qazi, head of the U.N. mission charged with monitoring a 2005 peace accord between Sudan’s north and south, said the mission was preparing for any such actions.

"The government has conveyed to me that the issuance of an arrest warrant against President Bashir could have serious consequences for U.N. staff and infrastructure in Sudan," Qazi said, without specifying where the threat might come from.

"We are taking all necessary precautionary measures including strengthening our cooperation with Sudanese security institutions," Qazi said.

On July 14, ICC Prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo charged Bashir with masterminding a campaign of genocide in Darfur, western Sudan, and asked the court for the warrant. The Hague-based court has yet to issue a decision.

Khartoum has acknowledged the distinction between the ICC and the mandate of the two peacekeeping missions in Sudan, Qazi said. However he noted the Bashir government had called the ICC prosecutor’s action a political and not a legal move.

The missions in Sudan are UNMIS, a 10,000-strong U.N. force that aims to ensure the north and south comply with the 2005 peace deal that ended two decades of civil war, and UNAMID, a joint operation with the African Union in Darfur.

International experts and U.N. officials estimate at least 200,000 people have died and 2.5 million have been driven from their homes in Darfur since mostly non-Arab rebels took up arms in 2003 accusing the central government of neglect.

ABYEI LESSONS

While UNAMID is struggling to reach its planned level of 26,000 troops and police, UNMIS came under criticism after heavy fighting between Sudan’s army and southern Sudanese forces in the disputed oil-rich town of Abyei in May.

U.S. envoy to Sudan Richard Williamson has accused the force of hiding in barracks during the fighting instead of protecting Sudanese civilians.

Qazi acknowledged mistakes but also defended the actions of UNMIS peacekeepers during the fighting, which resulted in an estimated 89 deaths, including 18 civilians.

"The fact of the matter is that there was a breakdown of local command and control. Instructions of high officials were simply ignored by local commanders," Qazi reported, apparently referring to the Sudanese.

He conceded that an internal UNMIS review had acknowledged failure to protect U.N. agency compounds in the town.

But he said the peacekeepers sheltered and escorted more than 100 civilians during the fighting in the town, which straddles the border between northern and semi-autonomous southern Sudan.

"When two regular armies fight each other with tanks, multi-barrel rocket launchers, artillery and heavy machine guns, then, irrespective of the specific number of peacekeepers assigned to Abyei, there is no way they can actively intervene to suppress the fighting," Qazi said.

"Moreover, UNMIS has no such mandate," he added.

Human rights: Growing clamour to remove the Hague prosecutor who wants Sudanese president arrested
The Guardian (London)
David Pallister
August 18, 2008

A coalition of human rights lawyers, academics and leading non-governmental organisations (NGOs) has begun openly to criticise the competence and conduct of the prosecutor of the international criminal court, the Argentinian Luis Moreno-Ocampo. Their concerns follow his announcement last month that it is to seek an arrest warrant for genocide against the Sudanese president, and the collapse of the five-year-old court's first trial.

Supporters of the court fear that Moreno-Ocampo's style of management is damaging the court's credibility and its ability to prosecute those responsible for crimes against humanity. He has been accused of alienating senior staff and seriously misreading the situation in Sudan. One academic has called for the court to consider removing him.

The concerns have been compounded by the way in which Moreno-Ocampo dismissed his media adviser, who made a complaint against him of sexual misconduct with a South African female journalist. That complaint, denied by Moreno-Ocampo and the woman involved, was dismissed by the court as "manifestly unfounded". But last month the adviser, Christian Palme, was awarded two years' salary as compensation for wrongful dismissal and €25,000 (£19,700) in moral damages by a tribunal of the International Labour Organisation. It found that the prosecutor had not followed due process and had "seriously infringed" Palme's rights. The NGOs which support the court are likely to call for a new oversight mechanism as a result.

Speaking to the Guardian, Moreno-Ocampo dismissed the criticisms of him as one-sided. "I believe in due process," he declared, and defended the way he had handled the two controversial cases.

There have been muted rumblings within the human rights community about the prosecutor for a couple of years. He was unanimously elected to the job in 2003 by the 70-plus signatories to the Rome Treaty, which set up the court in the face of fierce opposition from the Bush administration.

The prosecutor came to prominence at the height of the "dirty war" by the Argentinian junta against its opponents between 1976 and 1983. From being a clerk in the solicitor general's office, he was thrust into the spotlight at the age of 31 in 1984. A year after the military regime collapsed he became junior prosecutor in the historic trial of senior figures responsible for gross human rights abuses including the "disappearance" of 30,000 people. He was then appointed public prosecutor in Buenos Aires, where he was involved in the trial of the army officers responsible for the 1982 Falklands war and those who fomented military uprisings in the 1980s.

Moreno-Ocampo has been praised by some. Geoffrey Robertson, the British QC who sat as an appeal judge in the special court for Sierra Leone, calls him "a careful, respected lawyer with a fine record in prosecuting inhumane Argentinian generals."

But a high turnover of experienced staff has been seen as a symptom of underlying problems. "We are concerned about the phenomena of burn-out among experienced investigators who have left the office since 2005," said Richard Dicker, director of Human Rights Watch's international justice programme. "There are simply not enough to handle the rigorous demands of these investigations and there is the perception that their efforts are not sufficiently valued."

But it is the events of the last month that have flushed out critics. First, there was a pre-trial judgment against Moreno-Ocampo, which ordered the release of the first war crimes suspect to appear before the court.

The judges ruled that the Congolese warlord Thomas Lubanga could not have a fair trial because the prosecutor had wrongly used confidentiality agreements to withhold evidence that might have pointed to his innocence on charges of conscripting child soldiers. "I disagree with the judges," Moreno-Ocampo said. "I have a strong case. That is why I am appealing the judgment."

Then last month he announced he was seeking an arrest warrant for genocide and war crimes against the Sudanese president, Omar Hassan al-Bashir, for the five years of carnage and pillage in Darfur. It was a historic decision - the first against a serving head of state - and unusual because normally warrants are only announced once the court's pre-trial chamber has formally agreed. It was immediately denounced by the African Union and the Arab League and opposed by Sudan's ally China.

"I came out of the press conference in a state of shock," said Alex de Waal, the British academic formerly seconded to the African Union mediation team in Darfur. "He painted a picture no scholar would recognise. He was basically calling for regime change, making a political statement, which is surprising coming from the chief prosecutor of the ICC.

"By presenting his case in such stark terms, the prosecutor has made it easy for his critics to dismiss him as ill-informed and driven by a desire for publicity, and has made it harder for the advocates of justice in Darfur to pursue the challenge of calling to account those responsible for crimes no less heinous than genocide."

Antonio Cassese, chair of the UN international commission of inquiry on Darfur, which dismissed the charge of genocide, has described the decision as "puzzling".

Mark Klamberg, a Swedish academic who has worked in the court, says it should consider removing the prosecutor. Moreno-Ocampo thinks he did the right thing. "I cannot choose the easy way," he said. "No one knows what my evidence is. Let the judges decide."

Turkey inched closer to ratifying ICC statute during Al-Bashir’s visit
Sudan Tribune
August 22, 2008

(ANKARA) – The Turkish government moved ahead in its plans to ratify the Rome Statute which forms the basis of the International Criminal Court (ICC).

The Turkish daily ‘Today’s Zaman’ reported that the ruling Justice and Development Party (AK Party) on Monday released a long-awaited EU reform package that suggests changes to a number of local laws and ratification of a number of International treaties including the Rome Statute.

The ratification now heads to the Turkish parliament for consideration and a vote before it becomes official.

Ironically the Sudanese president Omer Hassan Al-Bashir started an official visit to Turkey on the same day where he took part in the Turkish-African summit along with other leaders.

This is Al-Bashir’s first visit since the ICC’s prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo announced in mid-July that he requested an arrest warrant for Al-Bashir.

Ocampo filed 10 charges: three counts of genocide, five of crimes against humanity and two of murder. Judges are expected to take months to study the evidence before deciding whether to order Al-Bashir’s arrest.

Even if an arrest warrant was issued during Al-Bashir’s visit, Turkey had no obligation to apprehend the Sudanese head of state since they are not members of The Hague based court.

Turkey has been hesitant for years to join the ICC but the European Union stipulates ratification of the Rome Statute for Ankara to be eligible for its membership. The government has also been under pressure from human rights group to proceed with ICC membership.

Ankara initially wanted incorporation of terrorism crimes into the Statute before it can endorse. Any changes to the Rome Statute must approved by the 108 countries comprising ICC members.

Some Turkish parliamentarians from the opposition indicated that they will vote against the ratification saying they want terrorism to be part of the ICC jurisdiction.

The ruling Justice and Development Party controls 341 of the 550 available seats in the legislative body. According to the Turkish electoral system, this translates to 46.6% voting power.

The ICC is steadily gaining international recognition as world countries ratify the Rome Statute. Three states ratified the treaty this year; Madagascar, Suriname and Cooks Islands. Major countries such as the US, China, Russia and India have yet to sign the convention.

If an arrest warrant is issued for Al-Bashir he is vulnerable to be arrested in any ICC member country he travels to.

The Sudanese president hinted in an interview with Reuters that he may only visit countries which are not members of the ICC.

“We are not concerned about traveling, ourselves, we have good relations with a number of countries that do not have relations with the ICC” he said.

Sudan has not ratified the Rome Statute, but the UNSC triggered the provisions under the Statute that enables it to refer situations in non-State parties to the world court if it deems that it is a threat to international peace and security.

Sudan calls on UNSC to void possible arrest warrant for Al-Bashir
Sudan Tribune
August 25, 2008

(KHARTOUM) – The Sudanese government said it will ask the UN Security Council (UNSC) to nullify the application by the prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC) requesting an arrest warrant for Al-Bashir.

Sudan’s envoy to the UN Abdel-Haleem Abdel-Mahmood also told Sudan official news agency (SUNA) that Khartoum wants an “official apology but to the people and the leadership [of Sudan]”.

The ICC prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo asked pre-trial judges in mid-July to issue arrest warrants for Sudanese president Omar Hassan Al-Bashir.

Abdel-Mahmood said the allegations were masterminded by “circles hostile to Sudan aimed at smearing the country’s reputation and hinder its development and democratic transformation”.

The Sudanese diplomat said that Africa, Islamic world, Arabs, Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) and other regional organizations are strongly behind Khartoum.

He further said that all these groups are in contact with the UNSC “to correct the situation” created by the ICC move.

The African Union, Arab League, Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) and Organization of Islamic Conference (OIC) called for invoking Article 16 which allows the UNSC to suspend the ICC prosecutions in any case for a period of 12 months that can be renewed indefinitely.

Sudanese officials have as of late been making statements saying that a suspension will not be acceptable and demanded a cancellation of charges leveled against Al-Bashir.

However the UNSC does not appear ready to address the ICC issue at the moment due to opposition of veto wielding members of the council particularly Western countries.

Sudan has not ratified the Rome Statue, but the UNSC triggered the provisions under the Statue that enables it to refer situations in non-State parties to the world court if it deems that it is a threat to international peace and security.

Sudan rejects Arab League’s proposal over Bashir warrant
Daily Nation
August 27, 2008

KHARTOUM - The Sudanese government for the first time unveiled disagreements with the Arab League on a plan it formulated to counter a move by the International Criminal Court (ICC) to indict Sudan’s president Omar Hassan al-Bashir.

In mid-July, the ICC’s prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo announced that he will seek an arrest warrant against Sudan’s President Omar al-Bashir for war crimes in Darfur.

Following the move, Sudan has been looking into ways that would allow it to avoid confrontation with the international community over the ICC.

Arab League Secretary-General Amr Moussa carried a number of proposals to President al-Bashir last month which included conducting internal trials for Darfur war crimes suspects. These proposals were rejected.

Sudanese presidential adviser Mustafa Ismail was quoted by the daily Al-Hayat newspaper as telling reporters in Cairo after meeting with Mr Moussa “that there are some parts of the plan that need more discussions”.

Mr Ismail also insisted that the Sudanese judiciary is capable of looking into the Darfur war crimes and noted the recent appointment of a special prosecutor for Darfur by Sudan’s justice minister.

The Sudanese official also accused the ICC of targeting third world countries only.

“We did not see that the court looked into what superpowers did in Iraq, Palestine or Afghanistan” he said.

Mr Ismail reiterated his country’s refusal to hand over any Sudanese citizens abroad and stressed that local investigations into Darfur crimes “will not exclude the president, ministers or janitors”.

However Sudan’s presidential adviser refused to say what will be the next steps if an arrest warrant for al-Bashir is issued by the ICC.

Sudan’s appointment of a special prosecutor was seen as concession that would provide leverage to the Arab League and African Union (AU) when requesting a resolution from the UN Security Council (UNSC) deferring Al-Bashir’s indictment under Article 16 of the ICC Statute.

The Arab League and the African Union already have asked the Security Council to suspend the case for 12 months, something that only the UN body can do under the ICC statue.

Neo-colonialist agenda

Yesterday, President al-Bashir, on his first trip abroad since the ICC moved to indict him for war crimes, denied that his forces had committed genocide in Darfur, adds Reuters. President Bashir, who calls the court’s move part of a neo-colonialist agenda to protect the interests of developed countries, said that his government forces were not responsible for crimes in Darfur.

“We are not committing genocide in Darfur,” President Bashir told Turkish President Abdullah Gul during a meeting in Istanbul, according to a Turkish official close to the talks.

“We are saddened by the events there,” President Bashir was quoted as saying.

The two men, who met for 30 minutes in an Ottoman-era palace by the Bosphorus Strait on the sidelines of a Turkey-Africa economic summit, did not discuss the ICC or the case against Bashir.

Nato member Turkey has not ratified the treaty forming the ICC but is under pressure to become a member as part of negotiations to join the European Union.

ICC judges could take weeks or months to issue a warrant, but have never failed to issue one after a prosecutor has requested it. Sudan has warned the United Nations of “serious consequences” for its staff and facilities if an arrest warrant is issued, a UN envoy told the Security Council on Monday.

Mr Abdelmahmood Abdelhaleem, permanent Sudanese representative to the UN, echoed Bashir’s defiance in comments to reporters.

“The president can go anywhere and is not afraid of anything,” he said. “Our president will never be arrested as long we are alive. As long as we are living nothing will happen to our president.”

African and Arab states are pushing for the suspension of moves by the court to indict Bashir and say they could hamper efforts to bring peace to Darfur.

International experts estimate 200,000 people have died and 2.5 million have been driven from their homes in Darfur since mostly non-Arab rebels took up arms in early 2003 accusing the central government in Khartoum of neglect.

US-based Human Rights Watch has called on Turkey to express its support for the court during Bashir’s visit.

Mr Gul, who asked Mr Bashir to give priority to Turkish investors in Sudanese oil fields, said they had talked about Darfur and the suffering there. “We have to pay attention to human rights. The blood and the tears there must stop. Whatever happens the pain of the people there has to be put to an end,” Gul told a news conference.

The summit in Istanbul was attended by senior political figures from some 40 African countries, with which Turkey wants to build ties to tap into the continent’s vast energy resources. Turkey, which has signed liquefied gas agreements with Algeria, is trying to boost investment in and trade with sub-Saharan Africa, following similar moves by emerging powerhouses China and India.

Meanwhile, Lawyers for 38 people condemned to death for taking part in a shock Darfur rebel attack on Khartoum said today they had failed in their bid to have the sentences overturned.

A spokesman for the defence team said judges on Sudan’s constitutional court narrowly voted to reject their arguments that the controversial special courts that sentenced the defendants were unconstitutional and violated a series of laws.

More than 200 people were killed and hundreds injured when Darfur rebels from the Justice and Equality Movement (JEM) launched an unprecedented attack on the Khartoum suburb of Omdurman in May.

The attackers drove across hundreds of miles of desert and scrubland to reach the capital and were only repelled at a bridge just a few kilometres away from the presidential palace.

Khartoum set up three anti-terror courts to try people suspected of taking part in the assault or of supporting it.

Human rights groups accused the Sudanese government of making hundreds of arbitrary arrests and torturing suspects after the attack, charges dismissed by government officials.

Amin Mekki, coordinator for the defence team, told Reuters he was “obviously disappointed” that four out of the seven judges on the constitutional court had voted to reject their challenge against the special courts on Tuesday.

[back to contents]

Uganda (ICC)

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

Ugandan Rebel Leader Wants ICC Warrant Lifted Before Peace Deal
VOA
By Derek Kilner
August 22, 2008

A spokesman for the Lord's Resistance Army rebel group says its leader will not sign a peace agreement with the government of Uganda, unless an International Criminal Court warrant for his arrest is lifted. As Derek Kilner reports from VOA's East Africa bureau in Nairobi, Joseph Kony, is scheduled to meet with mediators for the peace talks on Sunday.

Joseph Kony, the leader of the Lord's Resistance Army, or LRA, is set to meet on Sunday, with the U.N. special envoy for the conflict in Northern Uganda, former Mozambiquan president Joaquim Chissano, and mediator Riek Machar, vice president of the semi-autonomous southern Sudanese government. They are scheduled to meet along the border between southern Sudan, which is hosting the negotiations, and the Democratic Republic of Congo, where the rebels are currently based.

But at a news conference in Nairobi on Friday, a spokesman for the rebels, David Matsanga, said Kony would not sign the peace agreement that has been prepared by negotiators for the rebels and the Ugandan government, until arrest warrants issued by the International Criminal Court, or ICC, in The Hague are lifted.

"The ICC is a stumbling block to this peace process, and that's why we want the Ugandan government to tell us what they want to do with the ICC before we meet general Joseph Kony so that he can make a decision on what to do on the way forward," he said. "It's not yet time for signing the agreement because there are so many contentions items in the agreement that he wants to look at."

The ICC has issued arrest warrants for Kony and his top deputies on charges of war crimes including murder, forced recruitment of children, rape and mutilation.

According to Matsanga, Kony also wants to revisit the question of how to disarm and reintegrate rebels under an agreement.

But the Ugandan government has repeatedly said the negotiations are finished. Kony is welcome to sign the agreement that has already been prepared, they say, but its contents cannot be revisited. In April, Kony failed to turn up at a signing ceremony to lend his signature to the document.

Matsanga also denied reports that the LRA had attacked villages in eastern Congo in the past week.

"LRA have not attacked any parts of Congo in the last two to three months, as far as I know," he said. "They are concocting it in order to create confusion that we don't reach a peaceful solution on Sunday."

On Wednesday, the U.N. peacekeeping mission in the Congo announced that it was sending troops to respond to the attacks.

Matsanga said he believes Kony is committed to reaching an agreement. But the rebel leader's intentions are notoriously difficult to decipher. And it has often been unclear whether Kony, and those who speak on his behalf, are indeed on the same page.

The conflict in northern Uganda, which has spilled over into southern Sudan, eastern Congo and the Central African Republic in recent years, has displaced some two million people and killed thousands.

ICC Warrant Disrupts Ugande Peace Talks
Ohmy News
By Zachary Ochieng
Date

The peace talks between the Ugandan government and the rebel Lord's Resistance Army (LRA), which ended in Juba in June pending the signing of a final peace agreement, are now headed for collapse.

David Nyekorach-Matsanga, leader of the LRA peace delegation to Juba told a press conference yesterday in Nairobi that the LRA would not sign a final peace agreement unless the International Criminal Court (ICC) warrants were lifted.

"Joseph Kony says he will not sign the final peace agreement unless the warrants are lifted. We are going to make another attempt to convince him to meet the chief mediator, Dr. Riek Machar and UN Special Envoy Joaquim Chissano on Aug. 24 in order to convey his grievances on the ICC warrants," Matsanga told reporters.

In a letter to the chief government negotiator, Dr. Ruhakana Rugunda, the LRA warns that despite the millions of dollars spent on the Juba peace process, a deadlock now seems imminent.

"The truth is that the peace process that we negotiated and the agreements already signed in Juba have reached a dead end if your government does not solve the saga of ICC warrants," the letter says in part.

"The LRA High Command wants to make it clear that there will be no such thing like signing the final peace agreement until the warrants of ICC are set aside or a solution found for them. It looks like peace in Uganda is millions of years away due to the slow speed of your administration," says another paragraph in the letter.

The LRA accuses the Ugandan government of lying to it on its stand on the warrants.

"Since the talks started in 2006, the government of Uganda has kept on telling the LRA delegation that it would move to the ICC or UN Security Council to remove the warrants once the agreement on accountability and reconciliation was signed," Matsanga claimed.

But what comes out clearly is the fact that LRA delegates were duped into believing that by signing the agreement on accountability and reconciliation on June 29, 2007, the ICC indictees had already subjected themselves to the justice system in Uganda and would escape prosecution at The Hague.

"The LRA finds the ICC situation more confusing and complicated due to the fact that they have signed Agenda Number 3 on accountability and reconciliation which has created alternative mechanisms of justice capable of handing the ICC matter and ones that can bring permanent peace to Uganda," Matsanga argued.

Among the arguments being pushed by LRA for the withdrawal of the warrants is the fact that both parties to the conflict spent over US$2.5 million of donor funds in consultative talks with the people of Uganda. According to LRA, the report on the consultations indicated that 90 percent of the people of Uganda consulted in all regions rejected the ICC warrants and wanted peace. LRA therefore blames the Ugandan government for failing to register the wishes of the people with the UN Security Council.

Another basis of LRA's argument is that under Article 19 of the 1998 Rome Statute of the ICC, the government of Uganda can file a formal inter-party request to the ICC and at the Pre-trial Chambers to withdraw the case.

Still, the current stand taken by the LRA is a clear departure from what they have always made the world to believe. Matsanga has on several occasions assured the press that the final agreement would be signed soon and that Kony has only been seeking clarifications on his security arrangements and how he would share power with President Yoweri Museveni.

"As LRA peace delegation we have done what any person on Planet Earth would do to bring peace. But the ICC warrants have blocked the same peace and what follows after the 24th August remains to be seen and the blame should not be heaped on my delegation. As negotiators we have done our job and we have warned the world of this danger that will block the signing of the final peace agreement," Matsanga said in a veiled threat to return to war if the LRA demands are not met.

"All we want is peace but if war comes, we are always ready as we have a very disciplined and strong force," added Justine Labeja, an LRA peace delegate who flanked Matsanga during the press briefing.

The ICC warrants have been a thorny issue in the negotiations that began in July 2006 in the South Sudanese capital city of Juba to end the 22-year-old insurgency. On Oct. 6, 2005, the ICC issued warrants against five LRA commanders for crimes against humanity. They included Kony, his deputy Vincent Otti, Raska Lukwiya, Okot Odiambo and Dominic Ong'wen. Otti and Lukwiya have since died.

A week later, on Oct. 13, ICC chief prosecutor Luis Moreno Ocampo released details on Kony's indictment, lining up 33 charges, of which 12 counts are crimes against humanity, which include murder, enslavement, sexual enslavement and rape. There are another 21 counts of war crimes, which include murder, cruel treatment of civilians, intentionally directing an attack against a civilian population, pillaging, inducing rape and forced enlisting of children into the rebel ranks.

ICC arrest warrants no impediment to justice
New Vision
August 27, 2008

MANY people have argued that the arrest warrants issued by the International Criminal Court (ICC) against the leaders of the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA) are an impediment to the peace process in northern Uganda.

They argue that the ICC imposes a Western notion of retributive justice, which clashes with the local restorative justice system. I wish to disagree.

Although the LRA leaders continue evade arrest, the ICC indictments have contributed to the peace process in a positive way. There are two reasons for this view.

Firstly, the local population is interested in accountability mechanisms. A recent survey carried out by the International Center for Transitional Justice (ICTJ) and the Human Rights Center at Berkeley revealed that 76% of residents interviewed in the camps for Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) want those responsible for gross human rights abuses to be held accountable.

Secondly, the ICC does not preclude but rather complements local reconciliation mechanisms. While the ICC targets the leaders, reconciliation and amnesty are directed at the low-rank LRA combatants, especially child soldiers.
The criticism that the ICC obstructs peace is untenable on two grounds.

First, international criminal justice deters the commission of future crimes. Global justice has a preventative effect. The deterrence effect is at work in Uganda because as the LRA case gained momentum in 2004, the humanitarian situation dramatically improved.

Secondly, it is evident that the ICC indictments have generated such pressure that the LRA was left with no other option but to negotiate.

This is because the ICC focused the international community’s attention on the conflict in Northern Uganda and the horrific crimes committed by the LRA.

This has had the effect of increasing international legitimacy and support for the Uganda People’s Defence Forces (UPDF) military campaigns; putting pressure on Sudan to stop supporting the LRA; and inducing states to restrict diaspora funding for the LRA.

Therefore, the ICC indictments have made war more costly and risky for the LRA and the rebels have no option but to seek a safe exit through a negotiated settlement with the Government.

Therefore, the ICC should be embraced by the international community. If in some cases it makes peace negotiations difficult, that may be the price that has to be paid.

[back to contents]

The Trial of Alberto Fujimori

Fujimori on Trial

According to national experts, La Cantuta victims were exposed to fire
Fujimori On Trial
August 20, 2008

Ninety-third session. During this session, 11 experts from the National Police Force and the Institute of Legal Medicine (IML) were presented to confirm their conclusions regarding their investigations of the Barrios Altos and La Cantuta massacres.

1. Incidents surrounding the criminal trial

Fujimori’s penitentiary regime
According to what was established by the Judicial Power Presidency, the Court that is trying former President Alberto Fujimori sent Fujimori’s trial documents to the National Penitentiary Institute (INPE), including copies of the order initiating investigations of the causes, orders for the trial, accusations from the Peruvian Public Prosecutor’s Office and the extradition sentence from the Chilean Supreme Court.

2. Trial happenings

Fujimori’s health
The IML announced that Fujimori’s health is stable, but recommended he be examined by a forensic dentist.

More national experts
11 experts from the police force and IML confirmed the reports completed during the Barrios Altos and La Cantuta investigations:

Barrios Altos
Forensic dentist Hugo Caballero Cornejo and biologist Esmeralda Aliaga Lodhmann were presented, who carried out examinations of the victims Alfonso Rodas Alvites, Felipe León León, Tomás Livias Ortega and Natividad Condorcahuana Quicaña the day after the crime.

La Cantuta
Pedro Ruiz Chunga, a forensic anthropologist from the IML, confirmed conclusions from the 16 reports on the bone remains of the La Cantuta victims. These reports were completed by a team of 38 experts from the IML, coordinated by Ruiz Chunga. According to the reports, the La Cantuta victims’ remains had bullet impacts, covered in quicklime and exposed to fire.

The anthropologist also said that the bodies had to have DNA tests, for which the remains were turned in to the genetic specialist, Dr. Aníbal Escalante Forton. In 1990 before the presidential elections, Dr. Escalante tended to Alberto Fujimori, who was unable to turn in his government plan due to a case of food poisoning from codfish. Dr. Escalante was supposedly in charge of sending the remains to England in order to obtain an analysis, but Ruiz Chunga is unaware of any results for this analysis abroad.

3. Next session

Amicus Curiae from the Pontifical Catholic University of Peru (PUCP)
For the next session on Aug. 25, the rules on how evidence will be treated will be discussed. Also, the Court will announce a decision on the amicus curiae presented by the PUCP Law School.

International experts
Since international experts will be speak at the following session, the Court announced that the next session will be on Monday, Aug. 25, since some were not yet in the country. These experts include Federico Andreu-Guzman, José Antonio Martín Pallín, José Luis García (Argentine military official) and Keneth Doyle (US official from the National Security Archive).

Written orders not needed to prove command responsibility, says international expert
Fujimori On Trial
August 25, 2008

Ninety-fourth session. Colombian expert Federico Andreu-Guzmán was presented, who asserted that in order to prove command responsibility in the organized power structure, it is necessary to establish the existence of a crime-committing structure as well as orders that are "implicit or tacit."

1. Trial happenings

Information to the INPE
At the beginning of the session, the Court announced that it had already sent the documentation for Alberto Fujimori’s trials to the National Penitentiary Institute (INPE), which reports directly on the Justice Ministry. This was a response to how Fujimori’s penitentiary regime that was changed through an unpublished resolution in June.

According to Andreu-Guzmán:

The lawyer declared that according to international jurisprudence, "the objective existence of a structure to commit crimes" as well as evidence that the person responsible had power over this criminal structure must be demonstrated in order to prove command responsibility for a crime. It is not necessary, he said, to prove if the organized power structures are legal or illegal.

Similarly, it is not necessary to prove personal interaction among those who commit the crimes and the person who gives the order; what must be proven is the functional relationship between them.

Furthermore, Andreu-Guzmán said that the person with command responsibility could give different kinds of orders, such as coded language, previously agreed upon silence, notices in the press, etc. Thus it is not necessary for the orders to be written, since written orders hardly ever exist when authorizing crimes against human rights. He asserted that written orders are not a key element in proving the violation or the responsibility, rather they serve as material proof of the act. He explained that there were no written orders in the case of the Argentine, Chilean or Uruguayan dictatorships; on the contrary, many of the orders are verbal.

According to Andreu-Guzmán, this concept of command responsibility is established in international jurisprudence in countries such as Spain, Japan, Rwanda, former Yugoslavia, Haiti, Argentina and Chile, among others.

The expert also asserted that Fujimori’s responsibility is demonstrated since he not only failed to order investigations of the Barrios Altos (1991) and La Cantuta (1992) crimes, but also congratulated and rewarded the members of the Colina military detachment who committed them.

2. Next session Aug. 27

Discussion on evidence
The Court announced that next session the rules regarding evidence will be debated. The evidence stage in the trial will take place after all of the experts are presented.

International experts
At the next session, Spanish Supreme Court Judge José Antonio Martín Pallín will be presented as an international expert.

No session Aug. 29
Since several anniversary-related activities will be carried out on Friday Aug. 29 in the police base where Fujimori’s human rights trial is held, the session for that day has been suspended.

It’s not easy to investigate state crimes, says international expert
Fujimori On Trial
August 27, 2008

Ninety-fifth session. José Antonio Martín Pallín, former Spanish Supreme Court judge, was presented during this session as an international expert. Martín Pallín, who spoke based on his experience as an international jurist, asserted that in investigating state crimes it is very difficult to obtain evidence since those in power hide or deny the information.

1. Incidents during the hearing

Fujimori’s health
The doctors assigned to Fujimori reported on his health, recommending a routine post-op evaluation following his surgery in July. The Court requested that the necessary arrangements be made between the Institute of Legal Medicine (IML) and National Institute of Neoplastic Illnesses in order to carry out the post-op exam.

More amici curiae
The Court announced that two more amici curiae have been received from international institutions.

Rules for the role of evidence
The Court requested contributions from the Prosecution (including the Public Prosecutor and the lawyers for the victims’ families) and the defense regarding rules for the role of evidence in the trial.

2. International expert – Among the most relevant aspects of José Antonio Martín Pallín’s statements:

Difficulty in finding direct proof for state crimes
Based on his international judicial and academic experience regarding the difficulty in proving state crimes, the judge stated: "It is very difficult to find documental traces of an express order."

Likewise, he said that based on historical experience, it is known that in state crimes there is always a plan that includes the participation of government leaders as well as security forces — including members of the police, secret service or armed forces.

Crime investigation phase and obstruction attempt
However, measures adopted by the State (such as impunity for those who execute the crimes) can be used to determine responsibility for these crimes in criminal trials. In the case of the Colina Military Detachment, several attempts for impunity were made: the Cantuta Law on Feb. 10, 1994, which permitted the trial for the Cantuta crime to pass from civil to military courts; the Amnesty Law in July 1995; and the attempt to make the Amnesty Law constitutional in the year 2000, when Alberto Fujimori was already leaving power.

Regarding the evidence for these criminal trials, the international expert said: "it is not easy to confront these kinds of investigations or obtain direct proof." Based on his experience, he also asserted that in the investigation phase, there is generally reluctance to turn in information, either by denying it, arguing that it doesn’t exist anymore or that the information cannot be turned in order to protect national security.

After being tried for state crimes
Martín Pallín also said that when a sentence is given for state crimes, later a "kind of pact" is made, which results in a "symbolic" completion of the sentence or even an amnesty.

3. Next session

At the end of the session, the President of the Court announced that the next session would take place on Sept. 3, when international expert José Luis García will be presented. Afterward, the experts from the Peruvian Forensic Anthropology Team will speak at the Sept. 5 session and expert Kate Doyle will be presented at the session on Monday, Sept. 8.

[back to contents]

International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY)

Official Website of the ICTY

A new trial chamber for Radovan Karadzic
SENSE Tribunal: ICTY
August 21, 2008

The case of the former Bosnian Serb political leader charged with genocide and other serious crimes in BH has been reassigned to Trial Chamber III: Judge Robinson, Judge Bonomy and Judge Antonetti. This decision was not motivated by Karadzic’s motion for the disqualification of Judge Orie, but has rendered it irrelevant

ICTY president Fausto Pocar today assigned the Radovan Karadzic case to Trial Chamber III, consisting of judges Patrick Robinson, Iain Bonomy and Jean-Claude Antonetti.

One of the three judges will preside at the trial of Karadzic, former Bosnian Serb political leader charged with genocide and other grave crimes in BH. Scottish judge Bonomy is the most likely candidate for the presiding judge. He is about to complete the trial of six former Serbian officials charged with crimes against Kosovo Albanians in 1999. Judge Robinson from Jamaica is currently the presiding judge in the trial of former chiefs of the Serbian state security service. As this trial has been suspended because of the ill health of the first accused Jovica Stanisic, Judge Robinson took over the trial of Milan and Sredoje Lukic, charged with crimes in Visegrad. French judge Antonetti is currently presiding in two trials, that of former Herceg Bosna leaders and the Serbian Radical Party leader Vojislav Seselj.

After Karadzic’s arrest and his transfer to The Hague in July 2008, his case was assigned to Trial Chamber I, with Dutch judge Orie presiding. As the president made clear in his order, this decision was motivated by the prosecution announcing it would be applying for the joinder of Karadzic’s case with the case of Momcilo Perisic, former chief of the VJ General Staff. Perisic is also charged with shelling of Sarajevo and the Srebrenica massacre; his case was assigned to Trial Chamber I. In the meantime, the prosecution decided not to join the two cases, and President Pocar decided to reassign the Radovan Karadzic case to a new trial chamber; this is usual practice at the Tribunal.

There is no mention in the ICTY president’s decision of Karadzic’s motion for the disqualification of Judge Orie. Karadzic’s motion has thus been rendered irrelevant as his case has now been assigned to Trial Chamber III.

Kosovo Six Prosecutors Demand Severe Sentences
Institute for War & Peace Reporting
Simon Jennings
August 22, 2008

They say if the accused are convicted, they should receive long prison terms.

Prosecutors called for sentences of between 20 years and life imprisonment for six former Serb officials on trial for the murder, persecution and deportation of ethnic Albanians from Kosovo in 1999.

In its closing address this week, the prosecution in the trial of former Serbian president Milan Milutinovic and his five co-defendants said that all six men should be convicted.

It argued that it had proven their involvement in a joint criminal enterprise aimed at changing the ethnic balance of what was the Serbian province to maintain Serb control.

According to the indictment, forces of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, FRY, and Serbia forcibly expelled and displaced hundreds of thousands of Kosovo Albanians. Civilians were "frequently intimidated, assaulted or killed in public view to enforce the departure of their families and neighbours", it said.

The ex-president is on trial with former Yugoslav deputy prime minister Nikola Sainovic, ex-chief of staff of the Yugoslav army, VJ, Dragoljub Ojdanic, former Yugoslav military commanders Nebojsa Pavkovic and Vladimir Lazarevic, and police chief Sreten Lukic.

According to prosecutor Thomas Hannis, the expulsions and killings of ethnic Albanians can be traced to ex-Serbian president Slobodan Milosevic, who told Klaus Naumann, then president of the NATO Military Committee, and NATO commander Wesley Clarke in October 1998 that "a final solution to the Kosovo problem would be found in the spring".

Asked to clarify, Milosevic said that he would repeat what happened in Drenica in 1946 when Albanians were gathered together and shot, Hannis told the court.

Prosecutors told judges that although there were no documents detailing any common Serb official objective, evidence of coordinated action between the army and the Ministry of the Interior, MUP, together with the testimony of villagers who survived the massacres, pointed to a shared criminal purpose.

"[The office of the prosecutor’s] position is that the departure of over 800,000 Kosovo Albanians from Kosovo was mainly due to the actions of the forces of the FRY and Serbia and to the actions of the VJ and the police acting in a coordinated manner under the command of the accused," prosecutor Daniela Kravetz told the court.

The prosecution sought this week to undermine the arguments of the defence teams as to why this mass exodus occurred, including the suggestion that Serb forces were escorting Kosovo Albanians to the border with Macedonia to protect them.

According to the prosecution, those who fled had their identity cards confiscated at the border and the license plates taken off their cars.

"This practice…of identity cleansing was aimed at forcing people out and preventing them from returning. This was not a humanitarian evacuation," Kravetz told the court.

During the trial, defence lawyers have also argued that civilians were fleeing a NATO bombing campaign – not Serb atrocities. Kravetz cast doubt on this, using the testimony of one witness who said the border area between Albania and Macedonia was hit by 80 per cent of the NATO bombing.

"Why would civilians…flee precisely to the areas where the bombs were falling?" asked Kravetz.

"The evidence clearly shows that [the NATO bombing] was not the reason for the departure of the population."

Prosecutors also dismissed defence arguments that civilians died because they were caught in the cross-fire or as a result of a legitimate anti-terrorism campaign against the Kosovo Liberation Army, KLA.

Kravetz highlighted two atrocities carried out in April 1999 against civilian targets where there was no KLA presence.

At one house, policemen forced women and children out of a basement and then shot them dead. In another incident, 40 Kosovo Albanians were shot at a pizzeria, she said. Their bodies were then transported over 280 kilometres to Belgrade and hidden in mass graves, continued Kravetz.

"Clearly, these were not legitimate killings. These were civilians who were specifically targeted because they were Kosovo Albanians," she added.

Prosecutor Chester Stamp dismissed claims made on behalf of the defendants – particularly Ojdanic – that the attacks in Kosovo were random violence. Supporting his argument with a map showing where people were killed before being transported to Serbia to be buried, Stamp said that the conflict was not a matter of a few victims, but a "massive organised criminal enterprise".

Addressing Milutinovic’s responsibility, Stamp rejected the defence argument that the former president had not contributed to the crimes and had done nothing about them because he lacked authority to act.

"The reports that he received [from] the media is sufficient evidence of notice that imposed on him a duty to do…everything…within his power to stop and to prevent these massive crimes," said Stamp.

Stamp also countered defence efforts to "marginalise" Milutinovic and cast him as a peripheral figure in government.

The prosecutor questioned the evidence of defence witness Ratko Markovic, who said that under Serbian law Milutinovic did not have a significant role in foreign affairs.

Stamp said that as a member of the government ruling party, Markovic lacked impartiality, and therefore his testimony should be treated with "extreme suspicion and caution".

The closing arguments are scheduled to be completed by August 27.

BIA denies regional Mladic meeting
B92
August 26, 2008

BELGRADE -- BIA Director Saša Vukadinovic has denied media reports that regional secret services met in Belgrade recently.

Sarajevo's daily Dnevni Avaz said yesterday that Serbian security agency, BIA, had a meeting with Montenegrin, Bosnian and Croatian counterparts to discuss locating and arresting of Hague fugitive Ratko Mladic.

Vukadinovic, in a statement sent to the Danas newspaper, today denied this.

Allegations which appeared in the press citing a source who said that "groundwork is being prepared for the arrest and extradition of Mladic to The Hague", and that "Belgrade, the BIA and MUP of Serbia, along with the military intelligence structures, know where the general currently is and that it is a matter of days when they will reveal that they were able to arrest him", has not been confirmed by the Serbian Prosecution Office, nor by any of the MUP top brass.

Karadzic says he has no hope of a fair trial
International Herald Tribunal
August 26, 2008

THE HAGUE, Netherlands: Former Bosnian Serb leader Radovan Karadzic has called for the U.N. genocide and crimes against humanity case against him to be dismissed because negative publicity means he can not get a fair trial.

In a three-page filing dated Aug. 24 and released Tuesday, Karadzic said any presumption of innocence "has been ... reduced to a joke" by what he called "demonization in the media."

The document's release came just days before Karadzic was due to make his second appearance at the U.N.'s International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia.

On Friday he will be asked by Scottish judge Iain Bonomy to enter pleas to 11 charges. If Karadzic refuses, the court will enter not guilty pleas on his behalf and begin preparations for trial. If convicted, he faces a maximum life sentence.

Karadzic was extradited to The Hague after his arrest in Serbia in July while posing as a bearded new age guru. He had been on the run for 13 years.

Since his arrival in The Hague, Karadzic has been held in a cell at the tribunal's detention unit built inside the walls of a Dutch jail near the North Sea coast.

He is charged with genocide for allegedly masterminding atrocities, including the slaughter of more than 8,000 Bosnian Muslims in Srebrenica in July 1995 and the deadly siege of Sarajevo, when he was president of the breakaway Bosnian Serb republic.

In the written statement, Karadzic wrote that "nobody in the world believes that there is any possibility of an acquittal."

The filing released Tuesday was Karadzic's latest attempt to draw attention to a deal he claims he cut with the United States to disappear from the public eye in return for immunity from prosecution at the U.N. court.

Karadzic says he agreed to the deal with U.S. envoy Richard Holbrooke in the aftermath of the peace deal known as the Dayton Accord that ended Bosnia's bloody 1992-95 war.

Holbrooke has rejected the claim, calling it "an invented story" that no one should believe.

In his latest filing, Karadzic says the deal meant that he was unable to defend himself against "the systematic, continuous and total demonization of my person" in the media following his disappearance in 1996.

UN court charges ex-spokeswoman with revealing Milosevic secrets
AFP
August 27, 2008

THE HAGUE (AFP) — The UN war crimes court said Wednesday it has charged a former court spokeswoman with divulging confidential information over the trial of late Serbian leader Slobodan Milosevic.

Florence Hartmann, a French national, has been ordered to appear before the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) on September 15 to answer two counts of contempt of court, the ICTY said.

She could face a punishment of seven years in jail or a fine of 100,000 euros (150,000 dollars) if found guilty.

A court statement said the tribunal "orders the prosecution of Florence Hartmann for knowingly and wilfully disclosing information in knowing violation of an order of a Chamber."

It added: "Hartmann is alleged to have authored text published in 2007 and 2008 that disclosed information relating to confidential decisions of the Tribunal's appeals chamber in the case of Slobodan Milosevic."

Hartmann covered the Balkan wars of the 1990s as a journalist for French newspaper Le Monde and went on to become spokeswoman for the former chief war crimes prosecutor Carla del Ponti from 2000 to 2006.

After leaving she published a book, "Peace and Punishment: The Secret Wars of Politics and International Justice" and wrote several articles on the court's work, notably for Paris Match magazine.

The charges say three pages of her book give details on decisions by the appeals court between September 20, 2005 and April 6, 2006 and the confidential nature of those decisions.

The statement said Hartmann "knew that the information was confidential at the time disclosure was made, that the decisions from which the information was drawn were ordered to be filed confidentially, and that by her disclosure she was revealing confidential information to the public."

Hartmann's lawyer denounced the charges and said in a statement that they were motivated by non-legal concerns.

"This decision is incredible," lawyer William Bourdon said from Paris.

"Taking action against Ms. Hartmann means that all those who, legitimately, in the interest of the public and of history, wish to bear witness to their actions in the service of international penal justice will be muzzled," he said.

Hartmann, who also wrote a book about Milosevic before joining the court, was not immediately available for comment.

The court said a specially named lawyer would lead the prosecution so that no-one from the same department that Hartmann worked in would be involved.

Judges suspend Seselj's war crimes trial
AFP
August 27, 2008

THE HAGUE (AFP) — The war crimes trial of Serbian ultra-nationalist Vojislav Seselj has been adjourned as judges await a decision on his right to defend himself, the UN war crimes tribunal said Wednesday.

"It was an oral order given by the judges yesterday (Tuesday) at the audience," Nerma Jelacic, spokeswoman for the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY), told AFP.

"The trial is adjourned awaiting a decision of the appeals chamber."

Earlier this month, the trial prosecutor asked judges to strip Seselj of the right to defend himself, arguing he was holding up the trial. He also requested the trial be suspended while a decision is taken on whether to appoint a lawyer to represent the 53-year-old Serbian.

Serge Brammertz, who has accused Seselj of deliberately obstructing the trial, appealed against a first ruling, in which judges decided not to suspend the proceedings. They know decided to adjourn awaiting the outcome of this appeal.

In a July 28 submission published in part, the Belgian prosecutor warned that Seselj is "substantially and persistently obstructing the proceedings of this trial, both in and out of court."

Brammertz also said that Seselj was "interfering with witnesses" and using the courtroom as a "platform to espouse his political agenda and to intimidate witnesses."

Seselj's second trial on charges of war crimes and crimes against humanity during the 1990s Balkan wars began in November 2007.

After he surrendered to the UN court in 2003, he forced his first trial to be nullified by going on a hunger strike in 2006 to insist on his right to defend himself.

Head of the biggest party in the parliament in Belgrade (the Serb Radical Party), Seselj denies joining with former Serbian president Slobodan Milosevic to "ethnically cleanse" large parts of Bosnia, Croatia and Serbia.

His trial is expected to run for another year.

[back to contents]

International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR)

Official Website of the ICTR

Rwanda does not need International Approbation- Its Judicial System is Ready
The New Times
Charlotte Kingsman
August 18, 2008

A recently released report by the Rwandan government accusing France of having a role in the 1994 Rwanda Genocide, is a crucial step for Rwanda, let alone Africa.

The report accuses thirty-three French politicians, officials and soldiers, including former Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin and the late former president Francois Mitterrand, of playing major roles in the genocide.

Such allegations are extremely meaningful in light of this year’s recent events.

In its World Report in January 2008, Human Rights Watch (HRW) claimed that the Rwandan government was still "struggling with the consequences of the genocide".

It took issue with the Gacaca jurisdiction in which the accused have no right to counsel and claimed that the popularity of Gacaca had declined following numerous cases of "faulty procedures, judicial corruption and false accusation".

Gacaca is an indigenous form of restorative justice in Rwanda.

HRW’s report released in July, entitled Progress and Judicial Reform in Rwanda, was little more satisfying.

Despite acknowledgements that there have been noteworthy achievements in the delivery of justice in the last five years, the report claimed that "the technical and formal improvements in laws and administrative structure have not been matched by gains in independence in the judiciary and assurance of rights to a fair trial".

The judiciary is said to be dominated by the executive and that official antipathy to views diverging from those of the government and its dominant party hamper the full realization of the potential of the reforms.

Allegedly, basic fair trial rights are not fully assured, including the right to presumption of innocence, the right to humane conditions of detention and the right to freedom from torture.

The report also argued that Rwandan political considerations have made it practically impossible for victims of crimes committed by Rwanda Patriotic Army soldiers in 1994 to receive justice.

The ICTR Trial Chambers took a similar position as they have consistently been denying the transferal of certain accused to Rwandan national jurisdiction, agreeing with HRW’s statement that "at this time, the independence of the courts and the assurance of fair trials are too limited".

Requests for the transfer of Kanyarubiga’s case, as well as of Munyakazi and Hategekimana, were denied.

The Judges were not satisfied that the accused would have received a fair trial and, if sentenced to life imprisonment, the accused might have faced solitary confinement.

In such a context, accusing the French government of involvement in the 1994 genocide is a very meaningful political statement.

The head of HRW claimed that the accusation deliberately coincided with international pressure on Kagame’s Rwandan Patriotic Front to bring to trial those RPA soldiers accused of crimes in 1994.

The investigative journalist Linda Melvern, on the other hand, argued that the report was far too serious to be "a sort of tit-for-tat as part of a diplomatic spat". She added that "this is a European army being accused of human rights abuses in Africa.

It thus needs careful consideration by international human rights groups".

But here lies the paradox. International human rights groups deem that the country’s judicial system is not ready to try the most important persons accused of Genocide.

Yet, Rwanda releases a report officially accusing another country’s government of participation in the genocide.

This is a serious matter and the message is clear enough. Indeed, Rwanda’s Minister of Justice Tharcisse Karugarama warned that "this report is not just going to lie down but it’s going to be used to help bring to justice people that were involved in committing Genocide".

He said that his country would try to press charges in an international body.

Rwanda is asking that the concept of "Challenging Impunity", which has been the ICTR’s motto, be applicable to all, including western powers.

Rwanda is asking the international community to bring those accused of genocide to trial, in this case French officials, in the same way that the international community has been urging Rwanda to try the accused RPA soldiers.

The Rwandan government is making a point; no one must escape accountability.

As Linda Melvern said, "What is needed here is the release of a lot of information". For instance, regarding the assassination on April the 6th of Juvenile Habyarimana, the former president of Rwanda.

She claimed that "It’s incredible that two African presidents were assassinated that night over the skies of Kigali and that there’s been no international inquiry. Had it been two European presidents assassinated, there would have been an immediate inquiry".

The journalist told Democracy Now that she believed certain western governments, including France, the US, and Belgium, are holding back information.

Beyond the question of whether the French government will be held responsible in the events of 1994, the way the international community will respond to the report might prove to be a turning point in African politics.

Kigali, Arusha Favoured for ICTR Archives
The New Times
Kagire Edmund
August 20, 2008

RWANDA should be home to the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda Archives if the United Nations permits the retention of the archives in Africa.

The argument was fronted by the majority of the participants in the just concluded consultative meeting on the ICTR archives that was held in Arusha over the weekend.

During the two-day meeting organised by the East African Law Society, many participants disagreed with the suggestion that the archives remain housed in the current ICTR Headquarters in Arusha after the tribunal ends its mandate scheduled for 2010.

The suggestion came up after archivists and curators from East Africa presented their case, seconding Arusha as the most suitable location to host the records and documentation accumulated by the ICTR from 1994 to 2010 when it is expected to wind up.

The archivists from Uganda, Kenya, Tanzania, and Zanzibar had earlier presented a paper justifying the retention of the Repository in Arusha on reasons ranging from security to neutrality of the Tanzanian town.

Though the original archives would remain in Arusha, Kigali would be given electronic and microfilm copies of the archives.

"We chose Arusha for all reasons and purposes that the United Nations should make the archival institution close to the ‘Heart and Soul’ of the people of Rwanda as much as possible," pronounced Kenyan chief archivist, J. Odhiambo Omollo.

In response to the suggestion, the Dean, Faculty of Law, National University of Rwanda, Didas Kayihura challenged the argument of the archivists by asking them what Arusha has that Kigali does not.

"It would make little sense if something that concerns Rwanda and is for Rwandans and was provided by Rwanda is kept outside Rwanda. The documentation centre should be put in Rwanda and Arusha retains the electronic and Microfilm copies if need be," argued Kayihura.

He further said that the ICTR role is doubted by many because it’s located outside Rwanda and that though its achievements need to be commended, taking the archives away from Rwanda to the Hague or New York would be an idea that Rwanda would not buy.

Another member from Rwanda, Alice Buhinja, working with The Great Lakes Parliamentary Forum on Peace (AMANI Forum) questioned the suggestion of keeping the archives in Arusha because it is near to the ‘Heart and Soul’ of Rwandans instead of Kigali and wanted to know what role the archives would serve in Arusha.

"If I was a student from Canada and I wanted to do research on Genocide, the first place I would think of is Rwanda and not Arusha where documents that can help me more in my research on Genocide are kept," reasoned Buhinja.

Turyahebwa Robert, the UNILAK Faculty of Law Dean who was one of the presenters challenged the ICTR to prove its case by handing over the archives to Rwanda for future use.

He added that Rwanda has the capacity to keep the highly sensitive archives safe and secure and put them to use, than taking them to The Hague where they will be covered in dust.

Meanwhile as the question of the permanent home for the archives remains a contentious issue, participants came up with recommendations to the United Nations which they handed to Judge Richard Goldstone to take to the United Nations.

The two-page proposal is a request to the United Nations to retain the archives, records and related equipment on African soil when the tribunal closes in 2010.

An agreement was reached that the United Nations remains the sole owner and responsible for the archives.

"The consultative meeting acknowledges and accepts that the United Nations (UN) retains ownership of UNICTR records, archives and related equipment after the completion of its activities, and that all records, archives and related equipment, regardless of form, remain the property of the UN.Custodian" the proposal reads in part .

Among other things in the proposal is the assurance of confidentiality of some of the records especially of secret witnesses who may not be exposed to the public for fear of persecution and revenge from the accused parties.

The security of the records and material will be placed under secure confines and will be kept in their original form unless there is a court order to unseal such materials.

Also discussed were the accessibility, funding, infrastructure, technology and expertise required to keep the archives.

"Taking cognizance of the resources necessary, there is need for the UN, and its African Member States, the East African Community, the African Union (AU), the International Conference on the Great Lakes Region (ICGLR) and the Private sector to pool resources together," the proposal continued.

Goldstone assured the participants that the case will be presented to the United Nations and their request will be considered.

"You are presenting a strong case and its understandable that the UN will have to consider it for the sake of Africans and Rwandans especially who would love to use them in many aspects," he remarked.

In a related development the meeting was informed that the Government of Rwanda, the National Courts and the Kigali Bar Association have reached an agreement to unseal some of the evidence used in Genocide cases if need be.

The evidence will be used in other cases as evidence, research and reference propose.

ICTR to Ask for One Year Extension
The New Times
Kagire Edmund
August 20, 2008

THE International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) will ask the United Nations Security Council for a one year extension of its mandate so that it can deliver judgments on the pending cases and also try to apprehend five remaining Genocide master minds still on the run.

The one-year extension means that the court will wind up in 2011 instead of 2010 as expected.

This was revealed by the Spokesperson to the ICTR Prosecutor, Dr. Timothy Gallimore while addressing participants in the East African Law Society consultative meeting on the future of the UNICTR archives.

"The tribunal has not been able to deliver judgment on certain cases due to their complexity and notoriety, while some individuals are still at large," noted Gallimore citing it as the reason the Chief Prosecutor will ask the next Security Council meeting to extend the mandate for at least a year.

He mentioned the case of Theoneste Bagosora, and three other individuals accused with him, that has lasted seven years. He said it involves joint military trials which the ICTR cannot convene.

Another case he mentioned was that of Pauline Nyiramasuhuko, currently the only woman ever charged with Rwanda Genocide atrocities and her five other co-accused.

Current Status

Currently the ICTR has 28 detainees on trial.12 are awaiting judgment, 14 are awaiting transfer while two are pending on appeal.

Arusha has a total of 56 detainees while seven: Jean Paul Akayesu, Jean Kambanda, Clement Kayishema, Alfred Musema, Obed Ruzindana and Omar Serushago are serving sentences in Mali.

Another detainee Georges Ruggiu is serving a 12 year sentence in Italy, putting the total of current detainees at 63.

In its 14 years of existence, the ICTR has acquitted several of the suspected Genocide perpetrators who include Ignace Bagilishema, Emmanue Bagambakil, Andre Ntagerura, Jean Mpambara and Andre Rwamakuba while four were released on grounds ranging from lack of insufficient evidence, withdrawal of indictment and completion of sentences.

Two individuals died in detention while the cases of Munyeshyaka and Bucyibaruta were transferred to a National Jurisdiction (France). Another case involving Ngirabatware is awaiting transfer to the ICTR.

According to the ICTR, the number of the accused whose cases have been completed is 35 while 32 have had their judgment rendered after appeal, bringing the total of arrests to 44.

Though the statistics above may project a success story, Gallimore was put to task to explain why most Rwandan’s may not give credit to the ICTR as far as delivering justice and reconciliation, of which the Court was set up, is concerned.

Another delegate asked why the ICTR came up with a list of only 90 people yet thousands were involved in the planning of the genocide and also compared the success of the ICTR to Gacaca Local courts.

"There are over half a million people involved and all these could not be tried under the ICTR. We only targeted the ‘big fish’ or the Master minders and others would be charged under National courts," explained Gallimore.

Kabgayi Killings: Soldiers Back in Court
The New Times
Felly Kimenyi
August 21, 2008

Four Rwanda Defence Forces (RDF) officers who are charged with the killing of several clergymen in Kabgayi in 1994, yesterday appeared for the second time before the Military Tribunal.

The quartet which includes Brig. Gen. Wilson Gumisiriza, were arrested in connection with the murder of 15 catholic clergymen who included bishops in the now Southern Province.

During the hearing that was presided over by Brig. Gen. Steven Kalyango, who is also the tribunal’s Vice President, Gumisiriza maintained his plea of innocence to the crime of complicity in the killing of the clerics who had been evacuated from Kabgayi Diocese.

Together with Maj. Wilson Ukwishaka, the then commander of the soldiers who allegedly commited the crimes, the two are charged with complicity to murder as a war crime as stipulated in the Geneva Convention.

Gumisiriza, who was the Intelligence Officer (IO) of the Operational Brigade that was operating in that sector at the time, led the evacuation mission of the clerics who were later killed at a Catholic parish called Gakirazo.

The priests were killed by some members of the then Rwanda Patriotic Army (RPA), two of whom, Capt. John Butera and Capt. (Rtd) Dieudonée Rukeba have pleaded guilty.

Military Prosecutor Capt. Kayijuka Ngabo said that there had been an early warning that the priests would be harmed especially because they were being referred to as Interahamwe by refugees who were in that area.

"As the commander of that operation, he should have known that such utterances by these refugees would intoxicate the soldiers who were there at the time to later turn around and harm the priests," Kayijuka told court in Nyamirambo yesterday. He added that the commanders would have done something to avert the killings.

On their initial appearance Tuesday, both Butera and Rukeba said that they were angered by the fact that a colleague called Deo Nyagatare had found his entire family killed where the clerics were.

In his defence, however, Gumisiriza said that all he did was to evacuate the priests from the war zone and hand them over to their fellow clergymen who were at the parish.

"How would I sense that a soldier who was not even there at the time I dropped them off would eventually turn and kill them long after I had left?" pleaded the General.

Athanase Rutabingwa, his attorney also contested the scenario presented by the prosecutor arguing that it was presumption of knowledge.

"What other form of protection would he give the priests other than appointing soldiers to guard the parish? Was there any other befitting force than RPA soldiers?" Rutabingwa retorted.

The trial was adjourned to September 2 and witnesses are expected to be called by both State and the Defence. The officers were arrested on June 11 following a joint investigation between Rwandan prosecution and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR).

Genocide Trial of Former Top Rwandan Army Officer Begins at UN Tribunal
UN News Centre
August 26, 2008

26 August 2008 – Prosecutors at the United Nations war crimes tribunal set up in the wake of the 1994 Rwandan genocide have opened the trial of a former senior military officer alleged to have been one of the key architects of the mass killings.

Lieutenant-Colonel Ephrem Setako, 55, has pleaded not guilty to six counts of genocide, or alternatively complicity in genocide, crimes against humanity (murder and extermination), and violations of the Geneva Conventions and its Additional Protocols.

During their opening statement yesterday in Arusha, Tanzania, where the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) is based, prosecutors said they would present 25 witnesses to testify that Lt.-Col. Setako was one of the principal planners and executors of the genocide.

An estimated 800,000 Tutsis and moderate Hutus were killed – often by machete or club – during a 100-day period starting in early April 1994.

Ojemeni Okali, one of the prosecutors, told the ICTR that the accused had carried out his role in the genocide despite the fact that he was a highly educated and privileged man in Rwanda who was a lawyer as well as a soldier.

Given his seniority as a former top officer in the Rwandan armed forces and the Director of the Defence Ministry’s Judicial Affairs Division, she said Lt.-Col. Setako was closely associated with other high-ranking military officers, businessmen, militia leaders and politicians in then president Juvénal Habyarimana’s government.

Lt.-Col. Setako, who was arrested in the Netherlands in 2004, stands accused of planning, instigating, ordering and participating in the killing of Tutsi civilians in two prefectures, and of distributing arms to members of the Rwandan armed forces, the presidential guard, the notorious Interahamwe and other groups engaged in the killings.

Defence lawyer Lennox Hinds, who said he did not want to make an opening statement at this stage, cautioned the ICTR to seek the truth about the allegations concerning Lt.-Col. Setako.

[back to contents]

Iraqi High Tribunal

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

Court resumes trial of Tariq Aziz
Middle East Times
August 18, 2008

BAGHDAD, Aug. 18 (UPI) -- An Iraqi court resumed session Monday in the case against former Iraqi Deputy Premier Tariq Aziz for the execution of several merchants in 1992.

Aziz, a Christian, and seven other defendants face war crimes charges in an Iraqi court for ordering the execution of several businessmen who had protested rising food prices in the wake of U.N. sanctions on the former regime.

Witnesses took to the stand Monday concealed behind a curtain using voice alterations to disguise their identity, Voices of Iraq reported.

The tribunal judge, Chief Justice Raouf Abdul Rahman Rasheed, also presided over the case that brought a conviction against former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein.

The former deputy premier, widely recognized by his coke-bottle glasses and bombastic English, surrendered to U.S. forces shortly after the fall of Saddam Hussein. He has been in U.S. custody since then.

Residents demand execution of Chemical Ali
Middle East Times
August 21, 2008

SULAIMANIYA, Iraq, Aug. 21 (UPI) -- Residents in northern Sulaimaniya province sent a letter to the Iraqi government calling for the execution of "Chemical Ali" and others for war crimes.

An Iraqi tribunal in June 2007 sentenced Ali Hassan al-Majid and his co-defendants to death for the alleged use of chemical weapons in response to a 1988 Kurdish uprising. Prosecutors claim Majid ordered the use of nerve agents in what was called Operation Anfal, earning him the nickname "Chemical Ali."

Residents in the northern province sent a letter to local and state officials demanding the "swift execution" of Majid for the Anfal campaign, the media arm of the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan said Thursday.

The "mercenary chiefs who aided the ousted Baath regime in the Anfal operation against the Kurds (should) be brought to justice," the letter said.

Residents also called on the Iraqi government to compensate family members of the Anfal victims.

Iraqi authorities in February said Majid would hang "in a matter of days." He allegedly suffered a heart attack in April due to a hunger strike and was returned to a U.S. detention facility.

[back to contents]

Special Court for Sierra Leone (SCSL)

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

Drama at Charles Taylor's War Crimes Trial
Cokorioko Newspaper
Joseph Cheeseman
August 19, 2008

There was a dramatic resumption to the Charles Taylor trial in The Hague. After a month long recess the case was expected to continue with more witness testimony. But the trial has been adjourned for a at least a day because the defendant refused to appear. BBC World Service Trust Joseph Cheeseman reports from The Hague.

CHEESEMAN: According to Lead Defence Counsel, Courtney Griffiths, Mr.Taylor has objected to two security measures instituted by the Dutch Prison Authority on behalf of International Criminal Court.

Mr. Griffiths said one involved sensory deprivation. He said he could not be more precise about what this means because he had been asked by the Custody Authority not give details. He said there was another measure to which his client also objected.

GRIFFITHS: The Defendant is chained around his waist and effectively led like a leashed animal, and he finds that particularly objectionable and degrading.

CHEESEMAN: The head of The Hague Office of the Special Court, Gregory Townsend said Dutch officials had informed him that security had been raised from medium to high level. He also said the new measures were not just applicable to Mr. Taylor. But Mr. Griffiths asked the court to launch an urgent investigation.

GRIFFITHS: These matters ought in the first place to be properly investigated, and second, we are concerned that the impact the imposition of such measures might have on Mr. Taylor’s fair trial rights, in particular because the adoption of such measures in the first place taints his public image, not only with the Court, but we submit also with the public.

CHEESEMAN: Prosecution lawyer Brenda Hollis opposed the Defence submission. She said it was Mr. Taylor’s choice not to come to court and that the security measures did not undermine his rights to a fair trial.

HOLLIS: He is attempting to use these proceedings to impose his will over the security personnel who have made determinations about appropriate measures. We believe that that should not be allowed and we believe that we should go forward because it is a voluntary absence. He has refused to attend, and therefore he has waived his right to be present and these proceedings should not be hostage to his whims about how he is transported.

CHEESEMAN: After a brief adjournment, the Presiding Judge, Teresa Doherty, ruled that the security issue did have some bearing on Charles Taylor’s fair trial rights and she ordered the Registrar to investigate and report back to the court on Tuesday morning.

Joseph Cheeseman reporting for the BBC World Service Trust from The Hague.

Liberia: Taylor Re-Appears in Court
Concord Times (Freetown)
Olusegun Ogundeji
August 21, 2008

After being delayed for the past two days since the Special Court for Sierra Leone resumed from its annual judicial recess in The Hague, former Liberian president, Charles Taylor appeared in court yesterday.

Dressed in white gown with a cap to match, Taylor's presence in court signaled the commencement of the trial proper.

On Monday, Taylor's lead defense counsel Courtenay Griffiths informed the Court sitting before presiding judge Doherty that Taylor had last Friday expressed his concerns about a raised level of security during his transportation to court.

According to charlestaylortrials.org, Taylor objected to 'being chained around his waist, leading him to feel like a leashed animal, which he finds particularly degrading' and certain measures which he says cause sensory deprivation for him.

Taylor chose not go to court as long as these two measures are in place even though Lead Prosecutor, Brenda Hollis' argued that Taylor waived his right to go to court so the proceedings should not be held hostage to his will.

Following day, Taylor was not in court as he still expressed concerns over the two extra security measures. Griffiths said since the Dutch authority is not ready lift these measures and Taylor is anxious for the court proceedings to discontinue, he decided to submit himself to these extra security measures and will be in court the next day.

Afterwards, Presiding Judge Doherty informed the court that the trial chamber is not satisfied with the reasons why Mr. Taylor is submitted to this kind of security measures and thinks this will lead to a serious disruption of the trial so it directed the Registrar to find a speedy resolution and report back to the court.

Since last week the level of security has been raised to the maximum level. This applies not only to the accused in this trial, but also to one ICC detainee and to one ICTY detainee. It is not due to any misconduct of Charles Taylor.

Yesterday's entire court session was devoted to testimony by one witness identified as TF1-367 for security reasons. He was an RUF with close links to the men in command. He gave the first part of his testimony in closed session.

In open session, the witness recalled an attack on the city of Kakata in Liberia in 1990, executed by Charles Taylor's NPFL rebels; how he changed his name and joined the rebels; how he was introduced to Foday Sankoh to fight with him in Sierra Leone; and how some of his co-trainees such as Sam Bockarie, Mike Lamin and Issa Sesay became high commanders in the RUF. The witness also answered different questions about his assignments in different towns in Sierra Leone.

The prosecution encountered strong resistance from defence counsel and the court upon their request to have the witness identify signatures on documents. On two occasions, the court denied the documents to be shown to the witness, ruling that insufficient foundation in relation to those documents had been established even though the prosecution made attempts to do so. However, a third document, already submitted as evidence, was shown to the witness at the end of the session and he identified the signature as that of Djaba.

The prosecution moved to show the witness a document, but the defence objected and asked for the correct procedure to be followed. The court allowed the objection, asking the prosecution for more foundation in respect of the document to be presented.

The prosecution proceeded to ask the witness questions in relation to the document, such as what a "tin" of AK runs means and the witness explained that there were two tins in a box, and what a G3 is which the witness said is one of the heavy weapons they used (stronger than an AK).

The prosecution then requested the document to be shown to the witness but the defence and the court still requested more foundation. To address this objection, the prosecution asked the witness if records of ammunitions were kept. The witness stated that an adjutant would keep records of ammunitions. The court ruled that no proper foundation was laid for the document and that it could not be shown to the witness.

Interview with Charles Taylor’s lead defence counsel, Courtney Griffiths
The Patriotic Vanguard
August 26, 2008

The former Liberian president Charles Taylor surprisingly showed up in court on Tuesday morning after his lead counsel had on Monday told the Special Court for Sierra Leone sitting in The Hague that his client would not subject himself to the two new security measures.

On Monday, the Head of the sub-office of the Special Court in The Hague, Gregory Townsend presented a four-page report in which the Dutch authorities said they would not drop the two security measures.

BBC World Service Trust reporter at The Hague, Mariama Khai Fornah caught up with defence counsel Courtney Griffiths and first asked him what the two security measures were.

GRIFFITHS: Well, one of the measures involved a chain being put around Mr. Taylor’s waist, and he finds that provision particularly objectionable and obnoxious. Because you can imagine coming from an African background with our history of slavery, what it must feel like to a black person to be led with a chain around your waist. And I can perfectly understand why he regards that as being an affront to his humanity.

Now the other provision, which I’m not allowed to discuss publicly, effectively is a method of sensory deprivation on the journey from the prison facilities to the Court. Mr. Taylor’s willing to compromise on that, because he understands that for security reasons such a measure might be necessary. But so far as the chain around his waist is concerned, he fails to understand - and neither do we as his legal counsel - why that should be felt necessary when he’s escorted to Court by a number of fully-armed Dutch security officers.

FORNAH: You are emphasising on the chain around his waist, but when we spoke to the Head of the Sub-Office here at the Special Court, Greg Townsend, he said it is only a leather belt that is placed on Mr. Taylor. Why are you really emphasising on the chain around his waist?

GRIFFITHS: Well my information is that there is a chain involved. I have not been allowed sight of the particular contraption, but the fact of the matter is everybody knows that Mr. Taylor likes to look good. So the thought that he’d be leaving prison without a belt to keep his trousers up is that unimaginable. Why he needs another belt around his waist, God only knows.

FORNAH: What do you intend to do after Mr. Townsend has given his report to the Court that there is no way these measures can be removed?

GRIFFITHS: Well, as advised by the Judges, who have already stated that they can find no justification or rational basis for the imposition of these provisions against Mr. Taylor, we intend to take up this issue with the President of the Special Court for Sierra Leone and provide written submissions in the hope that they will be able to resolve these matters with the Dutch authorities.

FORNAH: When the report was read out, you said there is no justification or rationale for your client, Mr. Taylor, to conform to what he said in Court. Why did you make such statement?

GRIFFITHS: Well I was merely quoting what the Judges had said on, I think it was Wednesday of last week, when having consulted with the head of the Court [sic.], Mr. Townsend, in private session without counsel from either side being present, they were given the intelligence upon which this change in security was based. And having been so briefed by Mr. Townsend, their response was that there was no rational basis or justification for these measures being imposed against Mr. Taylor. So I was merely repeating a conclusion to which these Judges, who obviously know a thing or two about security considerations, had already said.

FORNAH: You quoted Mr. Taylor as saying that he will not be in Court, but it is surprising to note that Mr. Taylor is in Court. On what basis is he in Court?

GRIFFITHS: Well, we have prevailed on Mr. Taylor that despite his objections to these obnoxious conditions to which he’s being subjected, that we all have a vital interest in the trial continuing, and continuing smoothly and efficiently. Now you will recall that the particular witness who is currently giving evidence, that person’s evidence had been adjourned since June. And so consequently we appreciate the logistical difficulties involved for the Office of the Prosecution in transporting witnesses from West Africa to The Hague. We’re anxious not to exacerbate those problems, so in the short term at least we are willing to cooperate, but there is a limit to our patience and there will come a time, if nothing is done about the removal of these conditions, when Mr. Taylor frankly will refuse to come to Court, because he regards the imposition of these measures as an affront to his humanity.

FORNAH: So how soon do we expect you and your colleagues to take this kind of action from stopping Mr. Taylor not to come to Court?

GRIFFITHS: Well it depends on how speedily the President of the Court can respond to the written submissions we intend to submit to the Court as soon as possible.

FORNAH: Now Mr Griffiths, don’t you think that if Mr. Taylor refuses to show up in Court that will be a waiver of his rights?

GRIFFITHS: Well, I find it somewhat objectionable and cynical of the Prosecution to adopt such a position, knowing as they certainly do that throughout Mr. Taylor’s been fully cooperative with the Court. He has fully engaged with the court system. Unlike in other trials of this kind where defendants have refused to accept the authority of the Court, Mr. Taylor bows when the Judges come in and he bows when they go out, and he’s fully engaged in the trial process and has shown respect for the proceedings. Against that background, one must understand how strongly he feels about this issue, that having behaved in that way throughout these proceedings he should find it necessary to say "I will refuse to cooperate in future if these conditions continue."

Sierra Leone: Taylor Chained Like a 'Monkey'
Concord Times via AllAfrica
Bhoyy Jalloh
August 27, 2008

Lead defence counsel said the Dutch security measure to put a chain round the waist of former Liberian President Charles Taylor, standing trial for war crimes in The Hague was particularly objectionable and obnoxious.

Courtney Griffiths argued in an interview with a BBC world service trust reporter at the Special Court sitting in The Netherlands that: "you can imagine coming from an African background with our history of slavery. What it must feel like to a black person to be led with a chain around his waist." He said his client considered the action as an affront to his humanity, adding that Taylor was willing to compromise on the other provision because he understood the security reasons of such a measure.

"But so far as the chain around his waist is concerned, he fails to understand - and neither do we as his legal counsel - why that should be felt necessary when he's escorted to court by a number of fully-armed Dutch security officers." However, Griffiths said they intend to take up this issue with the President of the Special Court for Sierra Leone and provide written submissions in the hope that they would be able to resolve these matters with the Dutch authorities.

"And having been briefed by head of the court, their response was that there was no rational basis or justification for these measures being imposed against Mr. Taylor. So I was merely repeating a conclusion to which these Judges, who obviously know a thing or two about security considerations, had already said."

[back to contents]

Special Tribunal for Lebanon

In Focus: Special Tribunal for Lebanon (UN)

Jamil Sayyed Sues Detley Mehlis for 'Distorting' Hariri Investigation
AFP via The Daily Star
August 28, 2008

BEIRUT: A former Lebanese security chief detained over the murder of Lebanese Former Premier Rafik Hariri is suing a former UN investigator in the case, his lawyer said on Wednesday.

General Jamil Sayyed, the former head of General Security, filed the lawsuit in France against Detlev Mehlis, attorney Akram Azouri told reporters.

Sayyed is among four officers, believed to be close to Syria, who are in custody in Lebanon over the February 2005 assassination of Hariri in a massive Beirut car bombing.

"Jamil Sayyed's lawyers in France have filed the lawsuit against Mehlis for distorting the investigation and calling false witnesses," Azouri said.

Sayyed and the other officers - former presidential guard chief Mustafa Hamdan, the former head of the Internal Security Forces Ali Hajj and the former chief of Army Intelligence Raymond Azar - have been held without charge since August 2005 but all have professed their innocence.

Earlier this month prosecutor Saqr Saqr turned down a request to free the generals and in April the government defended their detention, saying it was "perfectly legal." Mehlis had implicated senior officials from Syria, which was the power broker in Lebanon for three decades until it withdrew its troops two months after Hariri's killing.

But Damascus has strongly denied any involvement in the bombing.

[back to contents]

Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Liberia

Official Website of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Liberia

TRC Must Hold Witnesses accountable….Presidential Secretary Badio Urges Responsibility"
The Liberian Journal
By Jimmey C. Fahngon
August 18, 2008

MONROVIA, After months of speculations as to whether President Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf would appear before the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC), Presidential Press Secretary Cyrus Wleh Badio says the Liberian leader is prepared and ready to appear before the Commission (TRC) to explain her role in the Liberian conflict.

Mr. Badio said once the TRC gets ready and give the President the green light, she would appear to explain not only her role in the Liberian civil conflict but also her political struggle from 1979 to the present.

The Presidential Press Secretary made the disclosure Monday at his regular weekly press briefing held at his temporary office at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Monrovia.

He said President Johnson-Sirleaf sometimes ago held meeting with members of the TRC at which time she assured them that she would appear once the commission invites her.

After the meeting, he said the Commission misinformed the public that she was appearing on a particular day, which was not the case.

But he was quick to add that the Commission has since made the necessary clarifications.

Asked as to whether the President would testify in camera, Badio said she would do just what TRC wants her to do saying, “which ever way the Commission wants her to appear.”

He pledged the President’s continuous support to the TRC, noting that the President remains supportive of the process.

The Presidential Press Secretary denied reports that the Executive Mansion was planning to take some witnesses who testified before the TRC to court, adding, “we are not thinking about that.”

However, he cautioned those appearing before the TRC to do the process a favor by telling nothing but the truth.

Badio also hoped that TRC would hold witnesses accountable for whatever they say to ensure that people do not give false information about others.

U.S. Diplomat Told NPFL Not to Sign Ceasefire Agreement
The News
By C. Emmanuel Johnson
August 19, 2008

MONROVIA, Former Information Minister during the Samuel K. Doe administration, J. Emmanuel Bowier has informed the TRC that a former U.S. Embassy official had influenced the NPFL delegation at peace talks in Freetown, Sierra Leone, not to sign the ceasefire agreement with representatives of the Samuel Doe government because his group had “the military advantage”.

Mr. Bowier said Charles Groony, then Political Advisor of the US Embassy accredited near Monrovia told Thomas Wouwiyu, then spokesman of the NPFL in 1990 not to sign the ceasefire agreement.

Testifying Saturday before Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC), Mr. Bowier said Mr. Groony, who served as the US Embassy Representative to the negotiation, told the NPFL delegation that “they had the military advantage”.

He said after series discussions in June of 1990, both the National Patriotic Front if Liberia (NPFL) and Government delegation agreed to sign the ceasefire agreement but the process was discarded following the remarks made by the US Diplomat.

He said the negotiation started when he (Bowier) was designated by the late President Samuel K Doe to head government delegation to a ceasefire conference with NPFL in Freetown, Sierra Leona in June 1990.

He disclosed that the government delegation including Jerkins Scott, Gbah Gballeh among others, upon arrival in Freetown on June 10, 1990, began the drafting of the agreement along with the head of the NPFL delegation Sam Dokie.

The Witness Bowier said while in the process of preparing the document, Mr. Dokie burst into tears.

“When I asked Dokie why he was shading tears, he told me that he was disappointed as to how the war was being fought,” he added.

Although, Mr. Bowier did not explain further but added that Dokie informed him that things were not going the way they had planned the war, noting “a lot of people were dying”.

According to Bowier, Mr. Dokie, at certain point in time, upon the call from one of the members walked out of the room where the agreement was being prepared and did not return.

He said after the ceasefire agreement failed, ECOWAS Chief Mediator, Dr. Abass Bundu convened a meeting with the government‘s delegation to negotiate for the resignation and asylum of President Doe.

Mr. Bowier said further explained that while in the meeting, it was agreed that a member of the delegation return to Monrovia to brief the President Doe and get his approval.

“So after that discussion, a letter was prepared to be brought to Mr. Doe, but Gbai Gballeh and Jerkins Scott who were also members of the delegation refused to bring the message to President.”

After the two men refused, Mr. Bowier said he came to Monrovia and unveiled the message to President Doe who vehemently refused and said he was ready to attack anyone opposing his regime.

Bowier also explained that during his arrival in Monrovia, he met Liberia’s Ambassador to the state of Israel, Amb. Bennett Pearson who informed him that he had come to Monrovia with a special message from the Israeli government who wanted to help get Doe out of Liberia. But Doe refused.

He said it was based upon his refusal that he (Bowier) returned to Freetown, Sierra Leone under very difficult circumstances.

Mr. Bowier said several months following his arrival in Freetown; he heard on the BBC that Mr. Doe later captured and killed by Prince Johnson led Independent National Patriot Front of Liberia (INPFL) on September 9, 1990.

Sierra Leone Supported The Quiwonkpah Invasion
TRC Press Release
August 23, 2008

A participant of the November 12, 1985 abortive invasion, Joe Wyllie told commissioners of Liberia’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) how the Government of Sierra Leone supported the insurgents to cross into Liberia.

Mr. Wyllie said then Sierra Leonean President Siaka Stevens was reportedly angry with Head of State Samuel K. Doe because Doe had a love affair with one of his young wives.

As a means to apparently get even with Doe, Wyllie said, President Stevens supported insurgents led by former commanding general Thomas Quiwonkpah to cross the Sierra Leonean frontier to topple the regime.

He was testifying Friday at the ongoing TRC Thematic and Institutional Inquiry Hearings at the Centennial Memorial Pavilion in Monrovia.

“I think they developed some differences because of some social problems. President Siaka Stevens had a young girl by the name of Bendu or Bintu who came to visit Monrovia and I heard Doe had an affair with her”, Wyllie who was deputy defense minister for operation in the Gyude Bryant National Transitional Government of Liberia (NTGL) power sharing government said.

[back to contents]

United States

Canadian Detainee Loses Bid for Independent Exam
Associated Press
August 15, 2008

A military judge on Friday denied a request for an independent psychological evaluation of a young Canadian detainee facing a war crimes trial at Guantanamo Bay.

The Army judge, Col. Patrick Parrish, said the services of two experts requested by Omar Khadr's defense lawyers will only be accepted if prosecutors cannot find government specialists with similar qualifications.

Khadr is scheduled to face trial in October on charges that he lobbed a grenade that killed a U.S. Special Forces soldier in Afghanistan in 2002.

At a pretrial hearing this week, defense lawyers requested funding for two doctors with expertise in juvenile issues to examine Khadr, who was captured at age 15.

Details of the ruling were released to reporters by Khadr's Pentagon-appointed attorney, Navy Lt. Cmdr. William Kuebler. The ruling was not immediately released by the Pentagon.

Parrish also rejected a bid to dismiss the charges against Khadr over claims that another judge was removed from the case because of rulings favorable to the defense.

Legal Logjam May Be Ahead: Attorneys for Guantanamo Detainees Cite Dearth of Interpreters
Washington Post
By Del Quentin Wilber
August 20, 2008

Lawyers representing many of the 265 detainees at Guantanamo Bay say they are heading for a unexpected logjam that could delay federal court hearings: a shortage of interpreters.

After the Supreme Court ruled that terrorism suspects held at the military prison in Cuba have a right to seek their release in federal court, lawyers are gearing up for what they expect to be an avalanche of legal briefs and new evidence filed by the Justice Department. Lawyers say they are trying to rush to meet with their clients in advance of cases that judges may want to hear quickly.

"The shortage of interpreters will pose a problem, because it's already difficult enough to get to Guantanamo and to see one's client," said Martha Rayner, a lawyer who represents two detainees and is also a clinical associate professor of law at Fordham University Law School in New York. "But without an interpreter, the meeting can't take place."

The issue concerns lawyers so much that they clashed with the Justice Department recently when the security clearances for several Arabic interpreters were rescinded for unexplained reasons. Worried the pool would grow even smaller, the lawyers said they enlisted the help of U.S. District Judge Royce C. Lamberth, who prodded Justice officials into fixing the clearance problems

Just over a dozen interpreters, who speak languages ranging from Arabic to Russian and work for more than 400 lawyers, have performed critical work in recent years, acting as interpreters of not only language but also culture. The prisoners' attorneys say they have played a vital role in helping them build trust with often-suspicious detainees.

The lawyers hire the interpreters, who must be U.S. citizens and pass a rigorous background check. The government and military contractors have already snapped up many interpreters, further reducing the pool of available talent for the detainees' lawyers, according to outside experts.

The interpreters can charge as much as $1,400 a day, a rate that is three times what they would charge for similar work in the United States, interpreters and lawyers said. Several interpreters said they are already booked through mid-November.

In response to the shortage, the lawyers said they are asking the government to increase the hours and days they may talk to their clients at Guantanamo to maximize use of their interpreters. Currently, lawyers may only visit their clients on work days for two three-hour stints each day.

Some lawyers are pushing the military to allow telephone and video conferences with the detainees, a move that attorneys say would probably reduce the security clearance requirements for interpreters working with lawyers on the U.S. end of calls because they would not have to visit the secure military base.

"If we got them to change the rules, the number of hours, and we worked New York lawyers' hours instead of a European auto plant workers' schedule, there would be less of a problem," said Shayana Kadidal, a lawyer with the Center for Constitutional Rights, which has spearheaded the detainees' legal efforts.

The Defense Department, however, has no plans to change the hours or security requirements, said Navy Cmdr. Jeffrey D. Gordon, a spokesman for the department. Gordon said the government is working as quickly as possible to clear interpreters to work at Guantanamo and that restrictions on who may speak to detainees "are necessary to protect national security."

When lawyers first were allowed to visit the detainees in 2004, they searched frantically for months to find interpreters -- in languages including Pashto, Farsi, Arabic and Uighur, spoken by a group of detainees from western China.

Through referrals from trade groups, cultural organizations, universities and other lawyers, the attorneys cobbled together a small pool that is largely unchanged since they first started visiting the prison. The interpreters, who live across the United States, travel back and forth to Guantanamo and get paid for travel days. Soon, the lawyers said they were afraid to try new interpreters outside the small pool because the stakes of the initial visits are so high.

About 210 of the 265 prisoners -- from more than 30 countries -- at Guantanamo are represented by lawyers who are challenging their detentions before federal judges in U.S. District Court. The others have not filed lawsuits seeking to challenge their detentions.

During meetings, the interpreters said they improvise far more frequently than when they are working in courtrooms or for business meetings in the United States. And they also admitted to fudging what the lawyers are saying so they don't offend the detainees' sensibilities.

"Perhaps at Guantanamo, like no where else, the interpreter has to change the nuance of what is being said," said an Arabic interpreter, who requested that his name not be used because lawyers did not authorize him to be interviewed. "Culture, Islamic culture, is very important at Guantanamo. Sometimes the lawyer will make a politically incorrect statement. You raise your eyebrows, try to get their attention or get them to rephrase. . . . Or you leave things out and tell the lawyer later what he should not have been saying."

Mahvish Rukhsana Khan, 29, of San Diego, became an interpreter after visiting Guantanamo as a law student helping detainees' attorneys. A fluent Pashto speaker, Khan visited Guantanamo every other week for a year before lawyers found others who could speak the language. The "list of interpreters is very limited," she said.

At Guantanamo, Khan said much of her time has been spent navigating the cultural divides and "being a buffer" between the volunteer lawyers, many from corporate law firms, and the detainees. Lawyers sometimes asked the detainees about their wives and daughters, a route of conversation that would make the prisoners uncomfortable, she said.

"It is good information to collect for an affidavit, but they are very private about women in their families," said Khan, who wrote a memoir published this year about her experiences as an interpreter, "My Guantanamo Diary: The Detainees and the Stories They Told Me."

Eventually, Khan said she became close friends with the detainees and brought them food and showed them videotapes of their families that were made in Afghanistan. "They trusted me, and I helped bridge the gap," she said.

Julia Karpeisky, a Russian interpreter who lives in McLean, works with three inmates at Guantanamo. She said a major part of her job involves ensuring that lawyers are communicating in terms that the detainee can understand. Most have limited educations and are not familiar with the U.S. legal system, she said.

In one instance, a lawyer began to describe a recent victory at the U.S. Supreme Court, and the interpreter had to intervene to get him to explain things more simply. "These are corporate attorneys who are used to very bright clients," Karpeisky said. "I told them to start with how the court system works in very simple terms."

Guantanamo Inmate Wins Right to See Secret 'Torture' Evidence
Independent
By Robert Verkaik, Law Editor
August 22, 2008

A British resident facing the death penalty at Guantanamo Bay has won his case for the Government to disclose secret evidence that he says supports claims he was tortured into confessing to crimes he did not commit.

Binyam Mohamed, 30, who was arrested in Pakistan six years ago, says the Americans flew him to a prison in Morocco where he was tortured before his transfer to a US detention centre in Afghanistan.

In 2004, he was taken to the US Navy base in Cuba where he is awaiting a trial before a military commission on charges that he conspired with al-Qa'ida leaders to plan terror attacks on civilians.

But yesterday the High Court in London said British authorities still held secret material that might help confirm Mr Mohamed's whereabouts and the nature of his detention after 2002.

The judges said his allegations of torture were at least "arguable" and that the Security Service, MI5, had information relating to him that was "not only necessary but essential for his defence".
In the ruling, the judges said the "conduct of the Security Service facilitated interviews by or on behalf of the US when Binyam Mohamed was being detained by the US incommunicado" in 2002 in Pakistan. Working with the Americans after the 9/11 terror attacks, the British authorities sent an officer from MI5 to interview him, the court said. The officer told him he could expect no help from Britain unless he fully co-operated with his US interrogators. Mr Mohamed said the MI5 officer also told him he was going to be rendered to an Arab country where he would be tortured. The US has refused to say what happened to Mr Mohamed between 2002 and 2004.

The court found that without the information held by MI5, Mr Mohamed would be unable to put up a defence to the charges against him at his US military tribunal. His lawyers yesterday described the ruling yesterday as a "a momentous decision".

Clive Stafford Smith, legal director of human rights group Reprieve, said: "Compelling the British Government to release information that can prove Mr Mohamed's innocence is one obvious step towards making up for the years of torture that he has suffered. The next step is for the British Government to demand an end to the charade against him in Guantanamo Bay, and return him home to Britain."

Richard Stein, of the solicitors Leigh Day & Co, who represent Mr Mohamed, said the judgment "reflects the abhorrence of decent society at the methods employed by the US government in the supposed 'war on terror'. We can only hope the Foreign Secretary will reflect on this judgment and provide direct assistance to Binyam's defence team."

In 1994, Mr Mohamed, an Ethiopian by birth, was granted asylum in the UK. He spent seven years in north Kensington, London, working in a mosque as a caretaker, and travelled to Afghanistan in 2000 to confront his drug and personal problems. In 2002, he was arrested in Pakistan while trying to board a flight to Britain.

The court has yet to decide whether the Foreign Secretary is within the law to withhold the information on the ground of national security.

Former Guantanamo Detainees Petition US Supreme Court to Hear Rights Appeal
Jurist
By Devin Montgomery
August 26, 2008

British nationals and former Guantanamo Bay detainees Shafiq Rasul, Asif Iqbal, Rhuhel Ahmed and Jamal Al-Harith have petitioned the US Supreme Court to hear a lawsuit in which they seek religious rights and protection from torture for those still at the facility.

In the petition, docketed Monday, the men argue that a lower court's dismissal of their claims should be reversed after Boumediene v. Bush, in which the Court ruled that that detainees have the right to file habeas corpus petitions in federal court. The men argue that the Court should hear the case because of the gravity of the issues addressed and the claimed error of the lower court:

Guantanamo continues to present numerous jurisprudential challenges to the judiciary. This case provides a critical opportunity for this Court to affirm strongly the guarantee to Guantanamo detainees of an irreducible minimum of human rights. It is essential for this Court to reverse the Court of Appeals’ decision, which manifests indifference to religious abuse and torture and flouts the Guantanamo jurisprudence carefully developed and expounded by this Court.
The US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit had previously dismissed the plaintiffs' Alien Tort Statute claim for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, along with their Religious Freedom Restoration Act claim because of their status as "enemy combatants." The Supreme Court is scheduled to decide whether to grant certiorari on or before September 24. AFP has more.

The appellants in the case are among eight former British detainees who in April sued the UK's MI5 and MI6 intelligence services over alleged complicity with the US in their abduction and subsequent treatment, which included interrogation. In that suit the appellants, who were released from Guantanamo in March 2004, were joined by four other UK citizens released from the detention center in December and April of 2007.

[back to contents]

UN Reports

Karadzic wants UN judge replaced
BBC News
August 18, 2008

Former Bosnian Serb leader Radovan Karadzic has asked the UN war crimes tribunal to replace the judge in charge of the preparatory stage of his trial.

In a letter to The Hague tribunal, he said presiding judge Alphons Orie had a "personal" interest in convicting him.

Mr Karadzic said the Dutch judge would convict him to reinforce rulings in his earlier cases against Bosnian Serbs.

Mr Karadzic is indicted on 11 counts of war crimes in connection with the 1990s Bosnian war, including genocide.

Judge Orie presided over Mr Karadzic's first courtroom appearance at the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) on 31 July - just days after his capture near Belgrade.

Mr Karadzic - who had been more than a decade on the run - then declined to enter a plea.

'Biased' trial

"There clearly cannot be any question of impartiality on his [Judge Orie's] part," Mr Karadzic said in the letter made public by The Hague tribunal on Tuesday.

He cited a number of cases involving Judge Orie, including the conviction of Momcilo Krajisnik, the former Bosnian Serb parliament speaker, who was sentenced to 27 years in jail.

Mr Karadzic argued that the Dutch judge would now be keen on having that ruling "upheld and somehow validated, which could be achieved through, inter alia, partial and biased conduct of the case against me".

Mr Karadzic is due to appear in court again on 29 August.

He led the formation of a separate Bosnian Serb assembly in 1991 - one of the sparks that ignited the 1992-1995 Bosnian war.

He had remained president of the Bosnian Serb Republic (Republika Srpska) until 1996, despite having been indicted for war crimes the year before.

International Criminal Court monitoring events in Georgia, Prosecutor says
UN News Service
August 20, 2008

The Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court confirmed today that his Office is analysing information related to alleged crimes committed in Georgia in recent weeks that fall under the Court’s jurisdiction.

Heavy fighting began earlier this month in South Ossetia between Georgian and South Ossetian forces, with Russian forces becoming involved there and in the separate region of Abkhazia and other parts of Georgia in the following days. The violence has uprooted almost 160,000 people in recent weeks.

Prosecutor Luis Moreno Ocampo said today that his Office is analying information alleging attacks on civilians in Georgia, which is a State Party to the Rome Statute that established the Court.

“My Office considers carefully all information relating to alleged crimes within its jurisdiction – war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide – committed on the territory of States Parties or by nationals of States Parties, regardless of the individuals or groups alleged to have committed the crimes,” he said.

The Office has been closely monitoring all information on the situation in Georgia since the outbreak of violence, including information from public sources, according to a news release from the ICC.

In addition, both the Georgian and Russian Governments have offered information to the Court on the situation. “The Office will proceed to seek further information from all actors concerned,” the news release added.

Other situations under analysis by the Office of the Prosecutor include Colombia, Afghanistan, Chad, Kenya and Cote d’Ivoire.

The Office is currently conducting investigations in four situations – the Democratic Republic of Congo, Northern Uganda, the Darfur region of Sudan, and the Central African Republic.

The ICC is the first independent, permanent court to investigate and prosecute persons accused of the most serious crimes, namely genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes, if national authorities with jurisdiction are unwilling or unable to do so.

Prosecutors seek re-investigation of Khmer Rouge prison chief
AFP
August 21, 2008

Prosecutors at Cambodia's UN-backed war crimes court appealed Thursday the indictment of the former Khmer Rouge prison chief, saying it failed to present a "full and truthful account" of his crimes.

Kaing Guek Eav, better known as Duch, became the first suspect indicted by the genocide tribunal last week.

The 65-year-old was charged with war crimes and crimes against humanity for allegedly overseeing the torture and extermination of more than 12,000 men, women and children when he headed Tuol Sleng prison, known as S-21.

But prosecutors claim the charges do not extend far enough.

"The Closing Order (indictment) does not charge Duch for his responsibility, as a co-perpetrator, for a significant number of crimes that occurred as part of a joint criminal enterprise inside S-21," the prosecution said in a statement.

"This may prevent the Trial Chamber from fully accounting for Duch's criminal responsibility at S-21," the prosecutors added.

Their appeal requests that a panel of investigating judges reopen the case against Duch in order to extend the charges against him.

Tribunal spokesman Reach Sambath told AFP the appeal would not significantly delay the trial, expected to open around late September and last up to four months.

"All sides have no intention of delaying the trial," he said.

Duch, a former mathematics teacher, has been in prison since 1999 for his role at Tuol Sleng.

He was transferred to the custody of the UN-backed court in July last year, becoming the first top Khmer Rouge cadre to be detained by the tribunal.

The indictment order, posted on the tribunal website, said more than 12,380 people were executed at S-21 -- most after suffering inhumane detention conditions and prolonged mental and physical torture.

Thousands of inmates were also taken from the centre for execution at Choeng Ek, one of the areas now known as the Killing Fields.

Established in 2006 after nearly a decade of negotiations between Cambodia and the UN, the long-stalled tribunal seeks to prosecute crimes committed 30 years ago by senior Khmer Rouge leaders.

Genocide Trial of Former Top Rwandan Army Officer Begins at UN Tribunal
UN News Service
By Elissa Gootman
August 26, 2008

Prosecutors at the United Nations war crimes tribunal set up in the wake of the 1994 Rwandan genocide have opened the trial of a former senior military officer alleged to have been one of the key architects of the mass killings.

An estimated 800,000 Tutsis and moderate Hutus were killed – often by machete or club – during a 100-day period starting in early April 1994.

Defence lawyer Lennox Hinds, who said he did not want to make an opening statement at this stage, cautioned the ICTR to seek the truth about the allegations concerning Lt.-Col. Setako.

[back to contents]