Juvénal Kajelijeli v. The Prosecutor

Court	International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (Appeals Chamber), Tanzania
Case number	ICTR-98-44A-A
Decision title	Judgement
Decision date	23 May 2005
Parties	Juvénal Kajelijeli The Prosecutor
Categories	Crimes against humanity, Genocide
Keywords	crimes against humanity, extermination, genocide
Links	Judgement

Summary

On 1 December 2003, Trial Chamber II of the ICTR sentenced Kajelijeli to two concurrent life terms for genocide and extermination as a crime against humanity and to an additional 15 years imprisonment for direct and public incitement to commit genocide. All three sentences were to run concurrently.

The Appeals Chamber overthrew Kajelijeli's cumulative convictions for genocide and extermination as a crime against humanity under Counts 2 and 6 insofar as they were based upon a finding of command responsibility. However, the Appeals Chamber found that the Trial Chamber was required to take its finding on Kajelijeli’s superior position (Article 6(3)) into account at sentencing as an aggravating factor. The Appeals Chamber found that the Trial Chamber had done so. The appeal was dismissed in all other respects.

However, the Appeals Chamber ruled that in view of the serious violations of his fundamental rights during his arrest and detention in Benin and at the UN detention facility from 5 June 1998 to 6 April 1999, the two life sentences and the 15 year sentences which were to run concurrently imposed by the Trial Chamber should be converted into a single sentence of imprisonment for 45 years. The Appeals Chamber ordered that Kajelijeli be given credit for time already served in detention.

Procedural history

On 1 December 2003, Trial Chamber II convicted the Accused pursuant to Article 6(1) for ordering, instigating, and aiding and abetting crimes, as well as Article 6(3) for failing to prevent crimes committed in the communes of Nkuli, Mukingo, and Kigome, in particular at Byangabo Market, Busogo Hill, the Munyemvano compound and the Ruhengeri Court of Appeal in April 1994. These crimes included genocide (Count 2) and extermination as a crime against humanity (Count 6). With respect to the events at Byangabo Market, he was further convicted of direct and public incitement to commit genocide pursuant to Article 6(1) of the Statute (Count 4). The Trial Chamber sentenced the Accused to imprisonment for the remainder of his life for the convictions on each of Counts 2 and 6, and to imprisonment for fifteen years for his conviction on Count 4, with all sentences to run concurrently, and with credit for time served.

The Accused appealed his convictions, his sentence and the Trial Chamber’s denial of three of his motions. The Appeals Chamber identified twenty-five grounds of appeal.

Legally relevant facts

The Accused submitted that the Trial Chamber had erred in the application of law to the facts of the case and challenged the Trial Chamber’s rejection of evidence of Defence’s Tutsi witnesses that he had saved their lives (paras. 9, 27).

The Accused further argued that the Trial Chamber had erred in rejecting his argument that Prosecution witnesses, who had been arrested by him, had a motive to testify falsely. The Accused also claimed that the Chamber had committed an error with respect to the burden of proof regarding the alibi (paras. 31, 38).

The Accused challenged the Trial Chamber’s finding concerning the distribution of Tutsi properties to the Interahamwe, his involvement in the training of the Interahamwe, his leadership and effective control over them and his authority to stop the killings in Mukingo, Nkuli and Kigombe Communes (paras. 63, 68, 77).

The Accused also submitted that the Trial Chamber erred in its finding regarding his presence at the canteen in Nkuli commune on 6 April 1994, at the Mukingo Commune office and Byangamo market on 7 April 1994 and during the killings at Rwankeri on 7 April 1994 (paras. 92, 98, 105, 134).

In addition, the Accused maintained that the Trial Chamber erred in its finding concerning his presence during the killings at Munyemvano’s compound and at Busogu Convent (paras. 153, 165).

The Accused challenged the Trial Chamber’s acceptance of Witness GDD’s testimony that he had killed Tutsis on the Accused’s orders and its finding that the Accused had facilitated the killings at the Ruhengeri Court of Appeal (paras. 168, 171). He further challenged the Trial Chamber’s finding regarding his presence at a roadblock during the killing of Kanoti’s wife, as well as his presence and participation in the overall killings in Mukingo Commune (paras. 179, 187).

The Accused contended that the Trial Chamber had erred in denying his motion concerning his arbitrary arrest and illegal detention, his two motions seeking disclosure of prior statements and exclusion of the testimony of detained Prosecution witnesses and his motion seeking admission into evidence of a rental receipt (paras. 197, 256, 272).

Core legal questions

Whether the Prosecution bears the burden to disprove each alibi witness’s testimony beyond reasonable doubt.
Whether concurrent convictions for individual and superior responsibility in relation to the same count based on the same facts are permissible.
Whether the Accused’s fundamental rights had been violated during his arrest and detention prior to his initial appearance and, if so, what the appropriate remedy would be.
What the effect on the sentence would be, in case any of the grounds of appeal were accepted.

Specific legal rules and provisions

Articles 1, 6(1),(3), 7, 17, 19(3), 20(4)(d), 23, 24, 25 and 28 of the Statute of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda.
Rules 2, 40, 40bis, 42, 44bis(D), 45, 47, 62, 68, 89, 90(G), 92bis, 95, 101, 103(B), 107, 111, 115, 118, 119, 120 and 121 of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda.
Articles 2(3)(a), 9(1),(2) and 14(3)(a) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
Article 5(1)(c),(3) of the European Convention of Human Rights.

Court's holding and analysis

The Appeals Chamber clarified that the Prosecution’s burden is not to specifically disprove each alibi witness’s testimony beyond reasonable doubt but to prove the Accused’s guilt beyond reasonable doubt despite the proffered alibi (para. 43).

The Appeals Chamber underlined that concurrent convictions for individual and superior responsibility in respect of the same count relying on the same facts constitute legal error invalidating the Trial judgment. Therefore, the Chamber unanimously vacated the Accused’s convictions under Counts 2 and 6 for genocide and extermination as a crime against humanity insofar as they were based on a finding of the Accused’s superior responsibility under Article 6(3) of the Statute (paras. 81, 325).

The Appeals Chamber dismissed the appeal in all other respects (para. 325).

The Appeals Chamber, proprio motu, found that under the circumstances of this case, in view of the serious violations of the Accused's fundamental rights during his arrest and detention in Benin and the UNDF from 5 June 1998 to 6 April 1999, and considering his entitlement to an effective remedy for those violations under the Tribunal’s law and jurisprudence and Article 2(3)(a) of the ICCPR, the Accused’s two life sentences and fifteen years’ sentence as imposed by the Trial Chamber were to be set aside and converted into a single sentence consisting of a fixed term of imprisonment of 45 years. Pursuant to Rule 101(D) of the Rules, the Accused was to receive credit for time already served in detention as of 5 June 1998 (paras. 324-325).