Mikaeli Muhimana v. The Prosecutor

Court	International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (Appeals Chamber), Tanzania
Case number	ICTR-95-1B-A
Decision title	Judgement
Decision date	21 May 2007
Parties	Mikaeli Muhimana The Prosecutor
Categories	Crimes against humanity, Genocide
Keywords	crimes against humanity, ethnic group, genocide, intent to destroy, Murder, rape
Links	Judgement

Summary

Mikaeli Muhimana was the conseiller of Gishyita Sector in Kibuye Prefecture from 1990 through the genocide in 1994. On 28 April 2005, Trial Chamber III of the ICTR convicted Muhimana of genocide and crimes against humanity for instigating, committing, and abetting numerous crimes between April and June 1994 at various locations in Kibuye Prefecture. The Chamber sentenced him to life imprisonment.

By majority the Appeals Chamber allowed only two of Muhimana’s sixteen grounds of appeal challenging his convictions and sentence. The Appeals Chamber unanimously determined, however, that these errors did not invalidate any of Muhimana’s convictions and sentences for rape and murder given his numerous other crimes, including his role in five other killings and ten other rapes. The Appeals Chamber unanimously dismissed Muhimana’s remaining fourteen grounds of appeal. The Appeals Chamber confirmed the Accused’s convictions for genocide, rape and murder as crimes against humanity, as well as his sentence of imprisonment for the remainder of his life.

Procedural history

Trial Chamber III convicted the Accused pursuant to Article 6(1) of the Statute for instigating, committing, and abetting (international) crimes between April and June 1994 at various locations in Kibuye Prefecture, including Gishyita Town, Mubuga Church, Mugonero Complex, and the Bisesero area comprising, inter alia, Nyarutovu Cellule, Ngendombi Hill, Kanyinya Hill, and Muyira Hill. The Trial Chamber convicted the Accused of genocide (Count 1), rape as a crime against humanity (Count 3), and murder as a crime against humanity (Count 4). The Trial Chamber sentenced the Accused to imprisonment for the remainder of his life on each count.

The Accused appealed his convictions and challenged his sentences. He requested the Appeals Chamber to overturn his convictions and to release him. In the alternative, he requested the Appeals Chamber to order a retrial or, as a further alternative, to quash his life sentences and substitute them with an appropriate fixed-term sentence.

Legally relevant facts

Under ground 1 of appeal, the Accused submitted that the Trial Chamber had erred on the definition of Interahamwe, its structure and his role therein (para. 11).

Under ground 2, the Accused contended that the Trial Chamber had erred in reversing the burden of proof (para. 14).

Under ground 3, the Accused claimed that the Trial Chamber had erred regarding the powers of conseiller de secteur (para. 22).

Under ground 4, the Accused challenged the Trial Chambers consideration of his alibi (para. 25).

Under ground 5, the Accused challenged the Trial Chamber’s findings concerning the intent to commit genocide (para. 30).

Under ground 6, the Accused submitted that the Trial Chamber had erred in its findings relating to the plot by Pascal Nkusi and certain witnesses (para. 34).

Under ground 7, the Accused challenged the Trial Chamber’s findings regarding the attacks at Nyarutovu Hill and the neighboring areas of Kiziba, Nyarutovu and Ngendombi (para. 41).

Under ground 8, the Accused challenged the Trial Chamber’s findings concerning the rapes of Naguida Kamukina and Goretti Mukashyaka (para. 46).

Under ground 9, the Accused challenged the Trial Chamber’s factual and legal findings on the attacks at Nyarutovu Hill and Ngendombi Hill, as well as the rape of Esperance Mukagasana (para. 54).

Under ground 10, the Accused maintained that the Trial Chamber had erred in its findings relating to the events at Mubuga Church from 11 to 15 April 1994 (para. 106).

Under ground 11, the Accused challenged the Trial Chamber’s findings concerning the rape of Agnes Mukagatare at Mubuga Cemetery on 15 April 1994 (para. 117).

Under ground 12, the Accused contended that the Trial Chamber had erred in its findings regarding the attack against Tutsi refugees at Muginero complex on 16 April 1994 (para. 125).

Ground 13 concerned the Trial Chamber’s findings regarding the rapes and murders committed at Mugonero complex and the rape of witness BG, while ground 14 concerned the attack at Kanyinya Hill in May 1994 (paras. 148, 193).

Under ground 15, the Accused challenged the Trial Chamber’s findings relating to the murder of Pascasie Mukaremera (para. 215).

Under ground 16, the Accused challenged his sentence (para. 230).

Core legal questions

Whether the Accused had been wrongly convicted of genocide and sentenced to life imprisonment.
Whether the Trial Chamber had erred in finding the Accused guilty of rape as a crime against humanity.
Whether the Trial Chamber had erred in convicting the Accused for murder as a crime against humanity.
Whether the right of the Accused to be informed before the judgment is rendered was violated in relation to the murder of Pascasie Mukaremera.
What the effect on the sentence would be, in case any of the grounds of appeal was accepted.

Specific legal rules and provisions

Articles 6(1), 21, 23 and 24 of the Statute of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda.
Rules 86(C), 101, 103(B), 107, 113, 115, 116, 118 and 119 of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda
Articles 14(3)(a) and (b) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
Article 7(a) of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights.
Article 6(3) of the European Convention of Human Rights.
Article II of the Genocide Convention.

Court's holding and analysis

The Appeals Chamber unanimously affirmed the Accused’s conviction for genocide (Count 1) and his sentence of imprisonment for the remainder of his life for that conviction (Disposition, p. 82).

The Appeals Chamber allowed, in part, with Judges Shahabuddeen and Schomburg dissenting, the Accused’s eighth ground of appeal; reversed, with Judge Shahabuddeen and Judge Schomburg dissenting, the Trial Chamber’s finding that he bore criminal responsibility for the rapes of Goretti Mukashyaka and Languida Kamukina; affirmed unanimously his conviction for rape as a crime against humanity (Count 3) in all other respects; and affirmed unanimously his sentence of imprisonment for the remainder of his life entered for that conviction (Disposition, p. 82).

The Chamber further allowed, in part, with Judge Schomburg dissenting, the Accused’s fifteenth ground of appeal; reversed, with Judge Schomburg dissenting, the Trial Chamber’s finding that he bore criminal responsibility for the murder of Pascasie Mukaremera; affirmed unanimously his conviction for murder as a crime against humanity (Count 4) in all other respects; and affirmed unanimously his sentence of imprisonment for the remainder of his life entered for that conviction (Disposition, p. 82).

The Chamber unanimously dismissed the Accused’s all other grounds of appeal (Disposition, p. 82).

In their joint partly dissenting opinion, Judges Shahabuddeen and Schomburg, considered that the Appeals Chamber should not have intervened in respect of the Accused’s eighth ground of appeal (para. 4).

In his partly dissenting opinion on the interpretation of the right to be informed, Judge Schomburg maintained that the defects of the Indictment had been cured and the defence had been in no way prejudiced (para. 15).