Abstract

In 2014, 20 years after the Rwandan genocide, the first trial took place in France of a Rwandan génocidaire , Pascal Simbikangwa, despite the presence on French territory of a number of genocide suspects for many years, various extradition requests by Rwanda — declined by France — and numerous arrests and investigations. This article looks at questions surrounding jurisdiction in the Simbikangwa case and the reasons why the French courts heard this case. The article examines some issues that may hold significance in the future for the choice of arena in bringing to justice those suspects of the Rwandan genocide living in France.

Highlights

  • The Simbikangwa trialOn 14th March 2014, Pascal Simbikangwa was found guilty by the Cour d’Assises in Paris for the part that he had played in the Rwandan genocide nearly twenty years earlier, when approximately eight hundred thousand Rwandan citizens, mostly Tutsis or moderate Hutus, were massacred by the Hutu majority in a fearsome demonstration of ethnic cleansing

  • This article looks at issues of jurisdiction regarding the Simbikangwa case and the reasons the French courts heard his case, and examines some issues which may be of significance in the choice of arena for the bringing to justice of Rwandans genocide suspects living in France in future

  • The most logical solution would perhaps have been for his case to be heard before the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR), established by the United Nations Security Council in Arusha, Tanzania, in 1995, to ‘prosecute persons responsible for genocide and other serious violations of international humanitarian law committed in the territory of Rwanda and neighbouring States, between 1 January 1994 and 31 December 1994.’31 The ICTR clearly had jurisdiction to deal with Simbikangwa’s case

Read more

Summary

Introduction

On 14th March 2014, Pascal Simbikangwa was found guilty by the Cour d’Assises in Paris for the part that he had played in the Rwandan genocide nearly twenty years earlier, when approximately eight hundred thousand Rwandan citizens, mostly Tutsis or moderate Hutus, were massacred by the Hutu majority in a fearsome demonstration of ethnic cleansing. On trial for complicity in genocide and complicity in crimes against humanity, 1 Simbikangwa, former head of the Rwandan Service Central de Renseignement[2] and captain of the presidential guard, was convicted and sentenced to twenty-five years in prison His was no ‘ordinary’ crime, but the very lengthy delay in bringing him to justice was not due to lack of evidence or inability to track down the culprit. For Simbikangwa had been arrested in October 2008 on the French island of Mayotte,[3] remanded in custody on the Ile de la Réunion in April 2009 and transferred to Fresnes prison in the south of Paris, in mainland France some months later.[4] He remained at Fresnes until his trial in 2014 This article examines how Simbikangwa came to find himself before the French courts and the significance of the Simbikangwa trial in France in the bringing to justice of Rwandans living in France and suspected of committing the ‘crime of crimes’, a term often used to describe genocide since the World War II Nuremberg trials

Arrest and Investigation
The genocide case and issues of jurisdiction
Trial before the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda
The International Criminal Court
Extradition to face justice in the Rwandan courts
Trial before the French Courts
The French courts: the best forum for the génocidaires?
Conclusion

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.