Aloys Ntabakuze v. The Prosecutor

Court	International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (Appeals Chamber), Tanzania
Case number	ICTR-98-41A-A
Decision title	Judgement
Decision date	8 May 2012
Parties	Aloys Ntabakuze The Prosecutor
Categories	Crimes against humanity, Genocide, War crimes
Keywords	crimes against humanity, extermination, genocide, grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions, Murder, Non-international armed conflict, other inhumane acts, outrages upon personal dignity, persecution, rape, violence to life, war crimes, widespread or systematic attack
Links	Judgement

Summary

Aloys Ntabakuze is an ex-Commander of the Rwandan Para-Commando Battalion. On 18 December 2008 the Tribunal found him guilty of genocide, crimes against humanity, namely murder, extermination, persecution and other inhumane acts, and serious violations of Article 3 common to the Geneva Conventions and of Additional Protocol II (violence to life). He appealed the judgment on 37 grounds. The Appeals Chamber agreed with the Trial Chamber’s ruling that Ntabakuze was guilty as a superior for the participation of members of the Para-Commando Battalion in the killings committed at Nyanza hill on 11 April 1994 and at IAMSEA around 15 April 1994. However, the Chamber reversed Ntabazuke’s convictions for stopping the refugees killed at Nyanza hill from seeking sanctuary and for the killings in Kabeza on 7 and 8 April 1994, as well as for murder as a crime against humanity. The Appeals Chamber also set aside the Trial Chamber’s finding of Ntabakuze’s responsibility for the crimes committed by militiamen. Thus, his sentence to life imprisonment was reversed and he was sentenced to 35 years of imprisonment instead.

Procedural history

The Trial judgment was rendered by Trial Chamber I on 18 December 2008 in the joint case against Théoneste Bagosora, Gratien Kabiligi, Aloys Ntabakuze and Anatole Nsengiyumva on the basis of three separate indictments (see here for Bagosora, Kabiligi & Ntabakuze, and Nsengiyumva).

Ntabakuze was found guilty of genocide, crimes against humanity (murder, extermination, persecution, and other inhumane acts), and serious violations of Common Article 3 to the Geneva Conventions and of Additional Protocol II (violence to life) pursuant to Article 6(3) of the Statute of the Tribunal and he was sentenced to life imprisonment.

Ntabakuze presented 37 grounds of appeal challenging his convictions and his sentence.

Legally relevant facts

In ground 34 of his appeal, Ntabazuke submitted that his rights had been violated throughout the trial proceedings and that he suffered prejudice as a result (para. 16).

In grounds 1-14, 17, Ntabazuke argued that the Chamber had erred in law in finding him guilty as a superior of the killings at Kabeza, Nyanza hill and Institut africain et mauricien de statistiques et d’economie (IAMSEA) (paras. 25-26).

According to grounds 18, 22, 23, 26, 27, the Chamber had erred in law and fact in its assessment of the evidence concerning the crimes committed in Kabeza (para. 139).

In grounds 19, 24, 28, Ntabakuze contended that the Chamber had erred in law and fact in assessing the circumstantial evidence regarding the crimes at Nyanza hill (para. 177) and at IAMSEA (grounds 21,25,29) (para. 205).

In grounds 30-33, Ntabakuze submitted that the Chamber had erred in convicting him in the absence of the requisite mens rea (para. 229).

In ground 15, Ntabakuze maintained that the Chamber had erred in convicting him of murder and extermination as crimes against humanity relying on the same set of facts (para. 259).

In grounds 35-38, Ntabakuze submitted that the Chamber had erred in sentencing him to life imprisonment (para. 263).

Core legal questions

Whether the Accused’s rights were violated throughout the trial proceedings.
Whether the Trial Chamber erred in law in finding the Accused guilty as a superior for the killings in Kabeza, Nyanza hill, and IAMSEA, for preventing refugees killed at Nyanza hill from seeking sanctuary.
Whether the Trial Chamber erred in its assessment of the evidence concerning the killings in Kabeza, at Nyanza hill and at IAMSEA.
Whether the essential elements of the crimes for which the Accused was convicted had been proven beyond reasonable doubt.
Whether the Trial Chamber erred in convicting him of murder and extermination as crimes against humanity based on the same set of facts.
Whether the Trial Chamber erred in sentencing him to life imprisonment.

Specific legal rules and provisions

Articles 6(1),(3), 20(4)(C), 22(2) and 24 of the Statute of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda.
Rules 47(C), 50, 68, 73 bis, 86(C), 87(C), 101(A),(C), 103(B), 107, 118 and 119 of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda.
Rule 71 of the Rules Covering the Detention of Persons Awaiting Trial or Appeal before the Tribunal or Otherwise Detained on the Authority of the Tribunal.
Common Article 3 to the Geneva Conventions and to Additional Protocol II.

Court's holding and analysis

The Appeals Chamber affirmed the Trial Chamber’s holdings concerning Ntabakuze’s convictions pursuant to Article 6(3) of the Statute, for genocide, extermination and persecution as crimes against humanity, and violence to life as a serious violation of Article 3 common to the Geneva Conventions and of Additional Protocol II for the participation of members of the Para-Commando Battalion in the killings committed at Nyanza hill and IAMSEA (para. 313).

The Appeals Chamber reversed Ntabakuze’s convictions under Article 6(3) of the Statute for impeding the refugees killed at Nyanza hill from seeking sanctuary and, with Judges Pocar and Liu dissenting, for the killings in Kabeza. The Chamber further held that the Trial Chamber had erred in finding the Accused responsible as a superior for the criminal conduct of militiamen. The Chamber also set aside Ntabazuke’s conviction for murder as a crime against humanity (para. 314).

According to the Appeals Chamber, with Judges Pocar and Liu dissenting, the aforementioned reversal of Ntabazuke’s convictions resulted in a reduction of his overall culpability. Therefore, the Chamber set aside Ntabazuke’s sentence of life imprisonment and sentenced him to a term of 35 years of imprisonment (paras. 315-316).

Judges Pocar and Liu considered that the Majority’s approach with regard to the killings in Kabeza amounted to a de novo assessment of the evidence and was inconsistent with the standard of appellate review (para. 2). In light of the extremely serious nature of the crimes, Judges Pocar and Liu would have affirmed Ntabakuze’s sentence of life imprisonment (para. 8 of Joint Dissenting Opinion of Judges Pocar and Liu).