|
The International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR)
62
Following events in Rwanda during 1994 and the mass slaughter that
took place, the Security Council decided in resolution 955 (1994) to es-
tablish an International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, with the power to
prosecute persons responsible for serious violations of international hu-
manitarian law. The Statute of this Tribunal was annexed to the body of
the Security Council resolution and bears many similarities to the Statute
of the Yugoslav Tribunal.
59
See resolutions 1503 (2003) and 1534 (2004). Under the resolutions the Trial Chambers
were required to complete their business by 2008 and the Appeals Chamber by 2010. See
also D. Raab, ‘Evaluating the ICTY and Its Completion Strategy’, 3
Journal of International
Criminal Justice
, 2005, p. 82.
60
See M. Bohlander, ‘Referring an Indictment from the ICTY and ICTR to Another
Court – Rule 11
bis
and the Consequences for the Law of Extradition’, 55 ICLQ, 2006,
p. 219. See also below, pp. 409 ff.
61
See ICTY Annual Report 2007, A/62/172 – S/2007/469, para. 10.
62
See e.g. UN Secretary-General Reports S/1994/879 and S/1994/906 and the Report of the
Special Rapporteur for Rwanda of the UN Commission on Human Rights, S/1994/1157,
annex I and annex II, and the Report of the Commission of Experts, S/1994/1125. See also
V. Morris and M. P. Scharf,
The International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda
, New York,
1998; L. J. van den Herik,
The Contribution of the Rwanda Tribunal to the Development of
International Law
, The Hague, 2005; L. Sunga, ‘The Commission of Experts on Rwanda
and the Creation of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda’, 16 HRLJ, 1995,
p. 121, and R. S. Lee, ‘The Rwanda Tribunal’, 9
Leiden Journal of International Law
, 1996,
p. 37.
408
i n t e r nat i o na l l aw
The Rwanda Tribunal consists of three Trial Chambers, an Office of
the Prosecutor and a Registry with the same functions as those of the
Yugoslav Tribunal.
63
The Chambers are composed of sixteen permanent
independent judges, no two of whom may be nationals of the same state,
and a maximum at any one time of nine
ad litem
independent judges.
The ICTR and the ICTY share a joint Appeals Chamber, two members of
whom are members of the Rwanda Tribunal.
64
Articles 2 to 4 stipulate the crimes over which the Tribunal has jurisdic-
tion. Article 2 deals with genocide; article 3 with crimes against humanity,
being the crimes of (a) murder; (b) extermination; (c) enslavement; (d)
deportation; (e) imprisonment; (f) torture; (g) rape; (h) persecutions on
political, racial and religious grounds; and (i) other inhumane acts, when
committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack against any civil-
ian population on national, political, ethnic, racial or religious grounds;
and article 4 deals with violations of article 3 common to the Geneva
Conventions and of Additional Protocol II.
65
Article 6 provides for indi-
vidual criminal responsibility with regard to persons planning, ordering,
committing or aiding the crimes listed, while provisions similar to the
Statute of the Yugoslav Tribunal with regard to the absence of immu-
nity for persons holding official positions, command responsibility and
superior orders apply.
The Tribunal has jurisdiction with regard to serious violations of in-
ternational humanitarian law committed in the territory of Rwanda and
Rwandan citizens responsible for such violations committed in the ter-
ritory of neighbouring states between 1 January 1994 and 31 December
1994.
66
As is the case with the ICTY, the ICTR has concurrent jurisdiction
with national courts and has primacy over national courts of all states,
while at any stage of the procedure, the Tribunal may formally request
national courts to defer to its competence.
67
Similarly, no person may
be tried before a national court for acts constituting serious violations
of international humanitarian law under the present Statute, for which
he or she has already been tried by the International Criminal Tribunal
for Rwanda, while a person who has been tried before a national court
for acts constituting serious violations of international humanitarian law
may be subsequently tried by the Tribunal only if either the act for which
63
Article 10.
64
See Security Council resolution 1329 (2000). The two Tribunals shared a Prosecutor until
a separate Prosecutor was appointed to the ICTR in 2003; see Security Council resolution
1503 (2003).
65
See below, chapter 21, p. 1194.
66
Article 7.
67
Article 8.
i n d i v i d ua l c r i m i na l r e s p o n s i b i l i t y
409
he or she was tried was characterised as an ordinary crime; or the national
court proceedings were not impartial or independent, were designed to
shield the accused from international criminal responsibility, or the case
was not diligently prosecuted.
68
After several difficult early years, during which problems of misman-
agement with regard to the Office of the Prosecutor and the Registry
predominated,
69
the Tribunal began to produce some significant deci-
sions. These commenced with the
Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: |
