Prosecutor v. Kayishema, Case No. ICTR-95-1, Appeals Judgment (Reasons) (June 1, 2001).

APPEALS CHAMBER

Before Judges: 
Claude Jorda, presiding
Lal Chand Vohrah
Mohamed Shahabuddeen
Rafael Nieto-Navia
Fausto Pocar

Registry:   Adama Dieng

Judgement of:  1 June 2001

THE PROSECUTOR
v.
CLÉMENT KAYISHEMA
and
OBED RUZINDANA

Case No. ICTR-95-1-A

JUDGEMENT (REASONS)

Office of the Prosecutor:

Carla del Ponte
Salomon Loh
Wen-qi Zhu
Sonja Boelaert-Souminen
Morris Anyah

Counsel for Clément Kayishema:                                                          

André Ferran 
Philippe Moriceau

Counsel for Obed Ruzindana:  

Pascal Besnier
William van der Griend

I INTRODUCTION
  A. Trial Proceedings
  B. The Appeal
1 Kayishema’s Appeal
  (a) Appeal on the merits
  (b) Appeal against sentence
2 Ruzindana’s Appeal
  (a) Appeal on the merits
  (b) Appeal against sentence
II. ADMISSIBILITY OF THE PROSECUTION’S APPEAL AND RESPONDENT’S BRIEFS
1 Arguments of the Parties
2 Discussion
3 Conclusion
III ISSUES RAISED ON APPEAL
  A. Fair Trial
1 Independence of the Tribunal
  (a) Kayishema’s arguments
  (b) Discussion
2 Inequality of arms
  (a) Kayishema’s arguments
  (b) Discussion
3 Presumption of innocence
  (a) Kayishema’s arguments
  (b) Discussion
4 The adversarial principle
  (a) Kayishema’s arguments
  (b) Discussion
5. Timing of disclosure of materials [Rule 66(A)(I)] of the Rules
  (a) Kayishema’s arguments
  (b) Discussion
6 Conclusion
  B. Specificity of the Indictment
1 Whether Ruzindana has waived his right to raise the issue of imprecision
2 Discussion
3 Conclusion
  C. Alibi
1 Arguments of the parties
  (a)  Kayishema’s defence of alibi
  (b) Ruzindana’s defence of alibi
2 Discussion
  (a) Burden of proof regarding the defence of alibi
  (b) Approach adopted by the Trial Chamber to assess the alibi
  (c) Trial Chamber’s assessment of the weight of evidence produced within the context of an alibi
3 Conclusion
  D. Genocide
1 Kayishema’s Appeal: Grounds Four and Six: Allegations of Factual and Legal Errors in Respect of the Crime of Genocide
  (a) Arguments of the Parties
  (b) Discussion
    (i) Challenge to factual determinations relating to the crime of genocide
      a. Existence of a genocidal plan, the role of the civil defence programme and the interpretation of the words “ratisser” and “travailler”
      b. Mens rea
    (ii) Challenge to the Trial Chamber’s interpretation of “killing” (“meurtre”) under Article 2(2)(a) of the Statute
    (iii) Alleged error relating to a charge under Article 2(2)(c) of the Statute
  (c) Conclusion
2 Ruzindana’s first and third Grounds of Appeal
  (a) Ground one: Allegations of Errors of Law in the Determination of the Mental Element of the Crime of Genocide
    (i) Arguments of the Parties
    (ii) Discussion
      a. Lack of explicit manifestations of intent
      b. Failure to legally define “persistent pattern of conduct”
      c. Failure to provide a reasonable opinion
    (iii) Conclusion
  (b) Ground Three: The Trial Chamber erred in law in its finding on the role of Ruzindana in respect of the essential ingredients of the crime of Genocide
    (i) Arguments of the Parties
    (ii) Discussion
3 Conclusion
  E. ARTICLES 6 (1) AND 6 (3) OF THE STATUTES
1 Ruzindana’s Responsibility under Article 6(1)
  (a) Arguments of the Parties
  (b) Discussion
    (i) Error in finding Ruzindana individually responsible for committing killings within the meaning of Article 6(1) by reason of the Prosecution’s failure to establish a resulting death
    (ii) Error by failing to provide a clear definition of the concept of common intention and to apply the criteria thereof to Ruzindana’s personal situation
  (c) Conclusion
2 Kayishema’s Responsibility under Article 6(1)
  (a) The intent of the Accused
    (i) Arguments of the Parties
    (ii) Discussion
  (b) The issue of the overall assessment of the Accused’s effective participation
    (i) The issue of the Trial Chamber’s approach in assessing the evidence presented
      a. Arguments of the Parties
      b. Discussion
    (ii) The issue of the credibility of witnesses
      a. The issue of the overall credibility of testimonies
        i. Credibility of witnesses
          Arguments of the Parties
          Discussion
        ii.  Credibility of testimonies and the issue of corroboration
          Arguments of the Parties
          Discussion
      b. Identification of the accused
         i. Arguments of the Parties
        ii. Discussion
    (iii) The issue of assessment of testimonies with regard to the different massacre sites
      a. Mubuga site
        i.  Arguments of the Parties
        ii. Discussion
      b. The attacks at Bisesero
        i. Arguments of the Parties
        ii. Discussion
      c. The Catholic church and Home Saint-Jean
        i. Arguments of the Parties
        ii. Discussion
      d. Kibuye Stadium
        i. Arguments of the Parties
        ii. Discussion
  (c) Conclusion on Kayishema’s responsibility under Article 6(1)
3 Kayishema’s responsibility under Article 6(3)
    (i) Interpretation of the concept of subordinate
      a. Arguments of the Parties
    (ii) Discussion
  (b) The issue of the préfet’s power to punish and prevent crime
    (i) Arguments of the Parties
    (ii) Discussion
  (c) Conclusion
  F. EVIDENTIARY MATTERS
1 Arguments of the Parties
2 Discussion
3 Conclusion
  G. APPEALS AGAINST SENTENCE
1 Arguments of the Parties
    (a) Kayishema’s arguments
    (b) Ruzindana’s arguments
2 Discussion
  (a) Relevant Provisions of the Statutes and the Rules
  (b) Standard of Review in an Appeal against Sentence
  (c) Preliminary Points Regarding Appeal Filed by Ruzindana
  (d) Aggravating and Mitigating Circumstances
    (i) Treatment of Aggravating Factors
    (ii) Treatment of Mitigating Factors
  (e) Gravity of the Offences
  (f) General Appeal Against Sentence Imposed on Kayishema
3 Conclusion
IV DISPOSITION
DECLARATION OF JUDGE NIETO-NAVIA
DISSENTING OPINION OF JUDGE SHAHABUDDEEN
ANNEXE A: HEARING ON APPEAL
1 Motions relating to the filing of briefs
2 Motions for leave to present new evidence
3 Filings by the parties
4 Hearing on Appeal
ANNEXE B: GLOSSARY
  A. FILINGS
1 Clément Kayishema’s Appeal
2 Obed Ruzindana’s Appeal
3 Prosecution’s Appeal
  (a) Prosecution’s First Appeal
  (b) Prosecution’s Second Appeal
  B. REFERENCES RELATED TO THIS CASE
  C. CITED CASES
  D. OTHER REFERENCES