Emmanuel Rukundo v. The Prosecutor

Court	International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (Appeals Chamber), Tanzania
Case number	ICTR-2001-70-A
Decision title	Judgement
Decision date	20 October 2010
Parties	Emmanuel Rukundo The Prosecutor
Categories	Crimes against humanity, Genocide
Keywords	crimes against humanity, extermination, genocide, intent to destroy, Murder, serious bodily harm
Links	Judgement

Summary

Emmanuel Rukundo was born on 1 December 1959 in Mukingi Community, Rwanda. In February 1993, by then an ordained priest, he was appointed a military chaplain in the Rwandan army, a position he occupied throughout the genocide in 1994.

On 27 February 2009, Trial Chamber II of the ICTR had found him guilty of genocide and murder and extermination as crimes against humanity in relation to the events at Saint Joseph’s College and for the killing of Tutsi refugees abducted from the Saint Léon Minor Seminary. On 20 October 2010, the Appeals Chamber affirmed these convictions, but only on the basis of his responsibility for aiding and abetting these crimes rather than committing them.

The Trial Chamber had also convicted Rukundo of genocide for causing serious mental harm to a Tutsi woman when he sexually assaulted her, and sentenced him to 25 years of imprisonment. The Appeals Chamber reversed this conviction for genocide for the sexual assault of the Tutsi woman and reduced Rukundo’s sentence to 23 years of imprisonment.

Procedural history

In February 1993, Emmanuel Rukundo was appointed as a military chaplain for the Rwandan army, a position he occupied throughout the relevant events in 1994.

On 27 February 2009, the Trial Chamber convicted Rukundo for committing genocide through his participation in the killing of Madame Rudahunga and the causing of serious bodily harm to four other Tutsis who had been abducted from Saint Joseph’s College, the abduction and killing of Tutsis from the Saint Léon Minor Seminary, and the sexual assault of a Tutsi woman at the seminary. The Trial Chamber also convicted him of committing murder as a crime against humanity for the killing of Madame Rudagunga and for extermination as a crime against humanity for his participation in the abduction and killing of Tutsis from the Saint Léon Minor Seminary. The Trial Chamber sentenced Rukundo to 25 years of imprisonment.

Rukundo appealed against his convictions and sentence requesting the Appeals Chamber to overturn his convictions, or, in the alternative, to reduce his sentence.

The Prosecution presented one ground of appeal challenging the sentence. It requested the Appeals Chamber to increase the sentence to life imprisonment or, alternatively, to remit the issue of sentencing to the Trial Chamber to reconsider the appropriate sentence.

Legally relevant facts

Under ground 1 of his appeal, Rukundo submitted that the Trial Chamber had erred in convicting him for the abduction and killing of Tutsis at Saint Joseph’s College in April 1994 and at Saint Léon Minor Seminary between mid-April and the end of May 1994 (paras. 13-16).

Under ground 2, the Accused contended that the Trial Chamber had erred in law and in fact in convicting him for genocide and murder as a crime against humanity for the events at Saint Joseph’s College (paras. 40-41).

Under ground 3, the Accused argued that the Trial Chamber had erred in law in excluding Witness BLJ’s evidence (para. 118).

Under ground 4, the Accused maintained that the Trial Chamber had erred in dealing with Witness BLP’s alleged recantation (para. 128).

Under ground 5, he submitted that the Trial Chamber had erred in convicting him for the events pleaded in paragraph 12 of the Indictment because it was insufficiently precise (para. 156).

Under ground 6, he contended that the Trial Chamber had erred in convicting him for the events at the Saint Léon Minor Seminary (para. 170).

Under ground 7, he claimed that the Trial Chamber had erred in refusing to hear Witness SLB by video-link (para. 220).

Under ground 8, he submitted that the Trial Chamber had erred in convicting him of the sexual assault of Witness CCH (para. 229).

Rukundo (ninth ground of appeal) and the Prosecution both appealed the sentence of 25 years of imprisonment imposed on the Accused (para. 240).

Core legal questions

Whether the Trial Chamber had erred in convicting the Accused for the death of Madame Rudahunga and the serious bodily harm inflicted on four other Tutsis as well as the abduction and killing of Tutsi refugees in Gitarama Prefecture on the basis of committing under Article 6(1) of the Statute.
Whether the Trial Chamber’s findings relating to the events at Saint Joseph’s College were erroneous.
Whether the Trial Chamber should not have excluded Witness BLJ’s evidence and whether it had committed errors in dealing with Witness BLP’s alleged recantation.
Whether the Trial Chamber had erred in convicting Rukundo for the events pleaded in paragraph 12 of the Indictment and for the events at the Saint Léon Minor Seminary.
Whether the Trial Chamber should have heard Witness SLB by video-link.
Whether the Trial Chamber had erred in convicting Rukundo of the sexual assault of Witness CCH.
Whether the Accused’s and the Prosecution’s appeals against the sentence imposed on the Accused should be granted.
What the effect on the sentence would be, in case any of the grounds of appeal were accepted.

Specific legal rules and provisions

Articles 2,3, 6(1), 20(4) and 24 of the Statute of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda.
Rules 50, 54, 75, 89, 90(A),(F), 91, 86(C), 101(B)(ii), 103(C), 107, 118 and 119 of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda.

Court's holding and analysis

Regarding ground 1 of appeal, the Appeals Chamber set aside Rukundo’s convictions for committing these crimes but held that his responsibility for these crimes, under Article 6(1) of the Statute is best described as aiding and abetting (paras. 38-39).

The Chamber held that the Trial Chamber had not erred in respect of the events at Saint Joseph’s College and it dismissed the Accused’s second ground of appeal. However, it found that Rukundo had aided and abetted genocide and murder as a crime against humanity in relation to these events (para. 115).

The Chamber dismissed the Accused’s third and fourth ground of appeal regarding Witnesses BLJ and BLP (paras. 123, 153).

The Chamber dismissed Rukundo’s fifth ground of appeal since it was not convinced that he had suffered any prejudice in the preparation of his defence (paras. 167-168).

The Chamber dismissed the Accused’s sixth ground of appeal but held, however, that his acts were most properly characterized as aiding and abetting genocide and extermination as a crime against humanity (para. 218).

The Chamber found no error in the Trial Chamber’s denial to allow Witness SLB to testify by video-link (para. 226).

The Chamber, with Judge Pocar dissenting, granted the Accused’s eighth ground of appeal (para. 238).

The Chamber dismissed the Accused’s ninth ground of appeal, as well as the Prosecution’s appeal (paras. 257, 268).

The Chamber, with Judge Pocar dissenting, reduced Rukundo’s sentence to 23 years of imprisonment (para. 269).

In his partially dissenting opinion, Judge Pocar noted that he would have affirmed Rukundo’s conviction for genocide based on causing serious mental harm to Witness CCH and he would have left the sentence imposed by the Trial Chamber undisturbed (para. 13).