Report of Proceedings - International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda

who receives compensation and in what amounts. The Genocide Survivors Assistance Fund in
Rwanda was proposed as a workable model.
Participants responded to audience questions about the tribunals’ rationale to draft
indictments without sufficient evidence. They emphasised the tremendous international
pressure to arrest high level targets whose whereabouts were obvious. In Nairobi, genocide
suspects were walking the streets and there was pressure to arrest them. Although cases were
not ready, the courts had to start the process to keep the international community comfortable.
Also, in many cases, once there was any evidence, a person was arrested and an indictment had
to be prepared. After the confirmed indictment, evidence was examined to assemble a more
proper indictment. Cases were often not ready, and though it did seem backward, it was a way
to establish credibility with NGOs and the media.
As a footnote to Mr. Jallow’s comments on geographical distribution, it was noted that the
OTP did a very important job by drawing from different sectors of the Rwandan population
while identifying those who participated in the genocide. Members of the military, politicians,
religious figures, and even musicians (who were very good mobilises during the time of
genocide,) have been prosecuted.
Some audience members noted that in addition to international indifference, there is also an
international incoherence of policies related to the way that similar issues are addressed across
regions. Although the international community is spending a lot of resources on Rwanda, it is
not addressing issue in the Congo. These are two very different approaches to a very similar
problem.
The excessive length of trials was discussed throughout the presentations. One participant
proposed the following: is it possible that basing defence compensation on the hours spent in
courtrooms might be an incentive for “delays?” He asked if there might be another method of
ensuring fair representation. Participants noted that there is an approach that grades the cases
by complexity. Lawyers are given a lump sum payment according to the complexity of the
case. One participant noted that plea-agreements are another sensitive issue as there is no
financial incentive for the defence.
CONCLUSION
In concluding the session, Mr. Ocampo commented on independence, interdependence, and
innovation. He emphasised the need for the ICC to maintain independence. At the same time, it
is a complementary court. Therefore, it has an obligation to support others in the international
justice system. With regard to innovation, the ICC must actively seek knowledge from both the
international and domestic systems. In particular, it should examine the demonstrated success
of creative approaches in nations such as Argentina and Chile, and alternatives such as gacaca
in Rwanda.
18