PRESS BRIEFING ON RWANDA TRIBUNAL

Press Briefing

PRESS BRIEFING ON RWANDA TRIBUNAL

At a Headquarters press briefing this afternoon, Judge Laity Kama, President of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, told reporters that despite criticism by its detractors, much had been achieved at the Tribunal. The trials of those accused of genocide in Rwanda would be lengthy, in order to ensure due process for the defendants, and he repeated his appeal for an increase in the number of Tribunal judges.

Also present at the briefing was Agwu Ukiwe Okali, Registrar of the Tribunal, which was established by Security Council Resolution 955 in November 1994. He said the Tribunal had made significant progress since the crisis it experienced early this year. The problems of the Tribunal had been the subject of several negative reports, including one by the Office of Internal Oversight Services, but since the installation of a new administration (in February this year), there had been a marked improvement in its work.

The Tribunal was addressing its previous problems and getting back on track with its business: trying cases of people being prosecuted for genocide in Rwanda. There were three trials currently under way, and in order to speed the process, the Tribunal had recently commissioned a second courtroom so that its two chambers could hear cases in parallel.

Judge Kama said the Tribunal had got off to a rough start. Although nominally set up by the Security Council in November 1994, it had taken a full year to establish the actual Tribunal in Arusha, Republic of Tanzania. It had therefore been in existence for only two years. Detractors had stressed the negative aspects of the work of the Tribunal, and ignored the difficulties under which it was operating. Conditions were far different from those in The Hague. In the circumstances, much had been achieved. There were 33 accused, with 25 detainees in Arusha, including three he described as "very big fish". That in itself caused problems. The Tribunal was a victim of its own success, because it had to try those people quickly, out of respect for their fundamental human rights. There was a need to increase the number of judges at the Tribunal, and negotiations on that issue had begun. The Security Council had seemed positive on the matter, but action could take longer.

A correspondent asked how long it would take to clear up the backlog of cases. Did Judge Kama expect the trials to be an ongoing process? He replied that the 25 detainees needed to be brought to trial quickly, but that was not easy; hence the call for an increase in the number of judges. It was hoped

Rwanda Briefing - 2 - 11 December 1997

that all three of the current trials would be concluded during the first three months of next year. It was a difficult process, but justice must prevail. Trials were a lengthy process. Preparations and cross-examinations could take months. "The rights of the accused are and must be sacred, when you are aware how grave are the crimes before us for adjudication," he said. It would be impossible to try all 25 cases currently before the Tribunal by 1999 (the end of the judges' first mandate). In addition, new arrests were likely. By the end of the term, there may be 35 detainees in the Tribunal cells. There was another hearing room being built, which did give grounds for hope. Since the crimes were committed in Africa and by Africans, a correspondent asked, was the Tribunal following African or international jurisprudence, and how did that affect African customary law and traditions? Judge Kama replied that African customs had never included genocide. It was a Tribunal of the United Nations; just as in the case of the former Yugoslavia, the Tribunal was striving for universal justice. The crime was universal. In a universal civilization there was a synthesis of all civilizations, and he sought an equitable legal balance that included African legal systems. The crimes had taken place in Africa and the people being prosecuted were Africans, but he believed that the justice to be administered should be universal. Impunity of any kind for those who were accused of being the perpetrators of crimes that had shocked the world would be a strong signal that anyone anywhere in the world could commit such crimes.

Mr. Okali noted that not all of those being prosecuted were in fact Africans. They included one Belgian suspect.

* *** *