Prosecutor v. Rutaganda, Case No. ICTR-96-3-A, Appeals Judgment (May 26, 2003).


 

IN THE APPEALS CHAMBER

Original: FRENCH

Before:
Judge Theodor Meron, presiding
Judge Fausto Pocar
Judge Claude Jorda
Judge Mohamed Shahabuddeen
Judge Mehmet GŁney

Registrar: Adama Dieng

Judgement of: 26 May 2003

GEORGES ANDERSON NDERUBUMWE RUTAGANDA
v.
THE PROSECUTOR
Case No. ICTR-96-3-A


JUDGEMENT

 

Office of the Prosecutor:

Norman Farrell
Mathias Marcussen
Norul Rashid
Helen Brady

 

Counsel for the Appellant:

David Jacobs
David Paciocco




I. INTRODUCTION.. 2

A. Trial proceedings.

1. The Indictment 2

2. Judgement and Sentence. 3

B. Appeal proceedings. 3

C. Grounds of appeal. 4

II. STANDARD FOR APPELLATE REVIEW... 6

A. Standards for examination of allegations of errors of law and fact. 6

B. Findings on the law applicable to certain issues raised on appeal. 9

1. Corroboration. 10

2. Right to cross-examination. 10

3. Hearsay evidence. 11

III. RIGHT TO A FAIR TRIAL.. 13

A. Treatment of witnesses other than the Appellant. 16

1. Prosecution witnesses. 16

2. Comparison between the examination of Defence witnesses and that of Prosecution witnesses. 26

3. Defence witnesses. 27

4. Application of Rule 73ter of the Rules. 28

5. Findings. 29

B. Treatment of the Appellant’s testimony.. 29

1. Warning by the Presiding Judge. 30

2. Limits to the duration of testimony. 30

3. Remarks which give the impression that the Trial Chamber sided with the Prosecution. 35

4. Interventions aimed at cutting off the Appellant’s testimony. 38

5. Conclusion. 39

IV. GENERAL ERRORS OF LAW... 40

A. Error affecting the right to cross-examine. 40

B. Error affecting the right to raise objections. 44

C. Error relating to hearsay evidence. 45

D. Error relating to expert evidence. 49

E. Errors relating to the burden of proof. 51

F. Error relating to prior witness statements 55

G. Errors relating to the assessment of witness credibility.. 60

1. Application of Rule 91 of the Rules. 60

2. Question of “witness tainting”. 61

H. Error relating to the impact of trauma.. 64

I. Error relating to the impact of social and cultural factors. 66

J. Errors relating to the editing of transcripts. 69

V. SPECIFIC ERRORS OF LAW AND FACT.. 72

A. Errors relating to the alibi 72

B. Errors relating to the admissibility of the Tingi-Tingi witness statements  78

C. Cross-examination of Rutaganda USING collateral documents. 82

VI. DISTRIBUTION OF WEAPONS. 85

A. Interpretation of the Indictment and assessment of the alibi 85

B. Assessment of the evidence presented at trial. 88

1. Witness Q.. 88

2. Witness T. 90

3. Witness U.. 93

4. Witness  J. 94

5. Contradictions between the testimonies of Witnesses J, T and U.. 96

VII. CRIMES COMMITTED AT THE AMGAR GARAGE. 98

A. Assessment and treatment of Witness Q’s testimony.. 98

1. Inconsistencies and contradictions in Witness Q’s testimony. 99

2. Other allegations of errors in the assessment of Witness Q’s testimony. 102

B. Allegations of errors in relation to the assessment of Witness BB’s testimony   104

1. The way the evidence was sought 104

2. Credibility and reliability. 105

C. Admissibility of hearsay evidence and Witness T’s testimony.. 106

D. Use of the principle of corroboration.. 107

E. Witnesses DD, DF, DS, DEE and DDD.. 109

VIII. ETO SCHOOL AND NYANZA MASSACRES. 110

A. General Allegations. 110

B. ETO School Massacres. 112

1. Witness H.. 112

2. Witness DD.. 118

C. Forcible Transfer and Massacres at Nyanza.. 119

1. Witness A.. 119

2. Witness H.. 125

3. Witness W... 126

D. Consideration of an alleged MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE DUE TO error of law concerning the admission of additional evidence. 129

1. Procedural Background.

2. Standard of Review on Appeal 131

3. Whether the additional evidence actually reveals an error of fact of such magnitude as to occasion a miscarriage of justice. 131

IX. THE KILLING OF EMMANUEL KAYITARE.. 138

X. INTERAHAMWE ZA MRND MOVEMENT3

XI. GENOCIDE .. 146

A. Error as regards the test to be applied in determining the dolus specialis  146

B. Error in the assessment of the evidence. 150

C. Error as to the existence of a genocide in 1994. 154

XII. PROSECUTION’S APPEAL ON WAR CRIMES. 156

XIII. RECONSIDERATION OF THE SENTENCE.. 166

XIV.DISPOSITION.. 168

SEPARATE OPINION OF JUDGES MERON AND JORDA.. 168

DISSENTING OPINION OF JUDGE POCAR.. 1

SEPARATE OPINION OF JUDGE SHAHABUDDEEN1

ANNEX A: APPEAL PROCEEDINGS.

ANNEX B: GLOSSARY..