Hategekimana - JUDGEMENT & SENTENCE - Refworld

More documents

Recommendations

Info

The Prosecutor v. Ildephonse Hategekimana, Case No. ICTR-00-55B-T “The only soldiers in the military camp were soldiers who had been injured at the front.” 158 The witness was wounded on the head and thought the Accused had injured his ribs. 159 116. Witness CBM2 insisted that everyone at the Camp was disabled, but acknowledged that many of the soldiers could work. 160 In addition to those who worked with him in the transmission centre, he testified that there were soldiers who worked in the dispensary, the officers’ mess and the troops’ canteen, as well as drivers and administrative staff. 161 He denied that there were masons, carpenters and electricians at the Camp. 162 He stated that these services were provided by soldiers from the ESO Camp. 163 117. According to Witness CBM2, because the Ngoma Camp housed disabled soldiers, “during periods of difficulty” soldiers from the ESO Camp guarded the camp. 164 He testified that ESO Camp soldiers would arrive at the Ngoma Camp at around 7.30 or 8.00 p.m. and would return to the ESO Camp in the morning. 165 The ESO Camp soldiers provided security for the Ngoma Camp both before and after the death of President Habyarimana. 166 Defence Witness CBN1 118. In April 1994, Defence Witness CBN1 was a 27-year-old soldier in the Rwandan Army stationed at the Ngoma Camp. 167 Witness CBN1 testified that the Ngoma Camp was a place for disabled soldiers. Since Ngoma Camp soldiers were disabled, ESO Camp soldiers guarded the Ngoma Camp during the nights, both before and after 6 April 1994. 168 The witness denied that Ngoma Camp soldiers could have killed any refugees at the Ngoma Parish or the Matyazo Health Centre because they were too disabled to carry out such orders. 169 He stated that soldiers from the Ngoma Camp “were not able bodied persons. They were suffering. Those soldiers could not have committed such atrocities.” 170 2.3 Deliberation 119. Defence Witnesses MLA, CBM2 and CBN1 testified that they were soldiers in the Rwandan Army and were transferred to the Ngoma Camp after sustaining injuries at the war front. These witnesses stated that most of the Ngoma Camp soldiers were disabled and incapable of engaging in the crimes alleged in the Indictment. 120. Regarding the ability of Ngoma Camp soldiers to participate in criminal activities, Prosecution Witness BYQ, who was a soldier based at the Ngoma Camp in April 1994, identified three categories of soldiers housed at the Camp: able-bodied soldiers, injured soldiers who 158 T. 9 July 2009 p. 10. 159 T. 9 July 2009 pp. 52-53. 160 T. 9 July 2009 pp. 27-28. 161 T. 9 July 2009 pp. 27-29. 162 T. 9 July 2009 p. 29. 163 T. 9 July 2009 p. 29. 164 T. 9 July 2009 p. 11. 165 T. 9 July 2009 p. 54. 166 T. 9 July 2009 pp. 11-12. 167 T. 9 July 2009 p. 59, 60, 64: He joined the Rwandan Army in 1986 and was wounded during a battle in 1991. In November 1992, he was transferred to Ngoma Camp where he continued recovering from his injury. He remained at the camp until 3 July 1994 when he fled Butare. 168 T. 10 July 2009 pp. 2, 3; T. 9 July 2009 p. 66. 169 T. 10 July 2009 p. 5. 170 T. 10 July 2009 p. 5. Judgement and Sentence 32 of 201 6 December 2010
The Prosecutor v. Ildephonse Hategekimana, Case No. ICTR-00-55B-T performed light work, and handicapped soldiers who could not work at all. 171 He was slightly disabled and worked at the Camp’s refectory in April 1994. He testified that, following the massacre of Tutsis at the Ngoma Parish on 30 April 1994, the soldiers who had been involved in the killings returned to the Camp and informed him of their activities. 121. Furthermore, the Prosecution evidence about the activities of Ngoma Camp soldiers throughout the relevant period suggests that not only disabled soldiers but also able-bodied men were based at the Camp. In fact, even the evidence of the Defence witnesses leads to the conclusion that some of the soldiers based at the Ngoma Camp in April 1994 were able to carry out normal military duties. For instance, according to Defence Witnesses MLA and CBM2, able-bodied Ngoma Camp soldiers guarded the Camp during the day and it was only at night that soldiers from the ESO Camp would come in to assist them. In addition, Defence Witness Faustin Ntilikina stated that Hategekimana “was standing on both legs” and that he could carry a weapon. He also stated that “there were some soldiers who were fit” and that they could, therefore, use their personal weapons. 172 122. Having considered the totality of the evidence, the Chamber takes the view that there were some disabled and injured soldiers at the Ngoma Camp. However, their injuries and disabilities did not necessarily preclude them from committing the alleged crimes along with able-bodied soldiers at the Camp. C. FACTUAL FINDINGS 1. Meeting at the ESO Military Camp, Ngoma Commune, Butare Préfecture, on or about 7 April 1994 1.1 Overview of the Parties’ Accounts 123. The Prosecution alleges that, on or about 7 April 1994, Hategekimana attended a meeting at the ESO Camp of Butare attended by military officials including Colonel Tharcisse Muvunyi, Lieutenant Ildephonse Nizeyimana, Major Cyriaque Habyaratuma, as well as senior officers of the Rwandan Army and Gendarmerie. At this meeting, a decision was taken that “all Tutsi should be killed and that Tutsi women should be raped before being killed.” The Prosecution further asserts that, following the meeting, Hategekimana issued orders to Ngoma Camp soldiers, in accordance with the alleged decision, “to kill Tutsi and to rape Tutsi women before killing them.” As a result, Tutsis were raped and killed in and around the town of Butare from 7 April to 31 May 1994 by armed soldiers, Interahamwe and civilians, who were members of a joint criminal enterprise. On the basis of these alleged acts, the Prosecution has charged Hategekimana, under Article 6(1) of the Statute, with genocide and rape as a crime against humanity. The Prosecution relies on the testimonies of Witnesses BUR and BRS. 173 124. The Defence disputes that the alleged meeting was held at the ESO Camp on 7 April 1994 and, pursuant to an alleged decision taken at the meeting, that Hategekimana issued orders to kill Tutsis and to rape Tutsi women before killing them. The Defence relies on the testimonies of Witnesses CBB and BJ3. 174 171 T. 31 March 2009 p. 34. 172 T. 1 July 2009 p. 29. 173 Indictment paras. 7, 43; Prosecution Pre-Trial Brief paras. 62, 63, 153; Prosecution Closing Brief paras. 149-174. 174 Defence Closing Brief paras. 28-50. Judgement and Sentence 33 of 201 6 December 2010
Page 1 and 2: International Criminal Tribunal for
Page 3 and 4: The Prosecutor v. Ildephonse Hatege
Page 17 and 18: 1.1.2 General Challenges to the Ind
Page 31: The Prosecutor v. Ildephonse Hatege
Page 77 and 78: Prosecution Witness Laurien Ntezima
Page 83 and 84:
The Prosecutor v. Ildephonse Hatege
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Prosecution Witness Laurien Ntezima
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178:
Page 179 and 180:
Page 181 and 182:
DISSENTING OPINION OF JUDGE MASANCH
Page 183 and 184:
Page 185 and 186:
Page 187 and 188:
Page 189 and 190:
Page 191 and 192:
ANNEX B: CITED MATERIALS AND DEFINE
Page 193 and 194:
Page 195 and 196:
Page 197 and 198:
Page 199 and 200:
DEFINED TERMS AND ABBREVIATIONS CDR
Page 201:
show all

Hategekimana - JUDGEMENT & SENTENCE - Refworld

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?