ICTR PROSECUTOR ASKS FOR HELP IN POTENTIAL CASES

C O N F I D E N T I A L KIGALI 000954

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 10/01/2017
TAGS: KAWC PHUM PREL RW
SUBJECT: ICTR PROSECUTOR ASKS FOR HELP IN POTENTIAL CASES
AGAINST RWANDAN OFFICIALS

REF: KIGALI 296 (NOTAL)

Classified By: Classified by CDA Cheryl J. Sim, reason 1.4 (B/D)


1. (U) This is an action request. Please see paragraph 7.


2. (C) International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR)
Prosecutor Hassan Bubacar Jallow met with Charge and pol/econ
chief on October 17 to discuss potential cases against
Rwandan officials and the importance of witness protection.
Jallow said the ICTR is considering charges in two cases, but
will not act unless adequate witness protection measures are
in place, including relocation to third countries. Possible
charges concern two events in 1994, the killing of Catholic
Bishops at Kabgayi, and a "massacre" at Byumba Stadium, both
involving Rwanda troops and military commanders. If charges
are brought at the ICTR, the cases would be likely
transferred to Rwanda courts for actual prosecution, said
Jallow.


3. (C) Filing of charges and transfer of these two cases
to Rwanda would form part of the ICTR's overall strategy to
complete its prosecution caseload and send pending cases to
other jurisdictions, said Jallow. Four cases involving
genocide suspects had already been submitted to the ICTR
judges for formal review of the prosecutor's transfer
request. Several other cases involving genocide suspects
would "soon" be sent to the judges for transfer review, he
commented. The two cases against Rwandan commanders, said
Jallow, would represent the ICTR's effort to address Rwandan
Patriotic Army/Rwanda Defense Force (RPA/RDF) offenses at the
time of the genocide and immediately thereafter (Note: ICTR
jurisdiction runs from January 1 to December 31, 1994 for
genocide and crimes against humanity). The ICTR has told the
Government of Rwanda (GOR) that these two cases will
potentially be brought, he added.


4. (C) Jallow asked if the USG would consider accepting
witnesses and their families for relocation. Jallow
commented that the potential witnesses "had ruled out all of
Africa," and preferred to relocate in the U.S., Canada, the
U.K., Australia, or New Zealand. While he agreed that claims
by witnesses that security could not be assured anywhere in
Africa might be exaggerated, "we are asking all our partners
to assist us." Without witness relocation, he said, "we
can't proceed." Charge agreed to pass Jallow's inquiry to
the Department.


5. (C) Commenting generally on the state of Rwandan
preparations for receiving cases from the ICTR, Jallow said
the Rwandans "have done what they need to do to get ready."
He noted the government was finishing holding facilities in
Mpanga and Kigali ("at a very high standard") for individuals
transferred by the ICTR, had abolished the death penalty, had
a new statute in place governing ICTR transfers (with
extensive due process protections for suspects and
international monitoring mechanisms),and was in the process
of becoming a party to the UN Convention Against Torture. He
was optimistic that the panel of ICTR judges examining the
request for case transfers to Rwanda would approve the
prosecutor's request.


6. (C) Comment. This is the closest the ICTR has come to
actually proceeding against officers and officials of the
present government for offenses committed in 1994. The deal
appears to be that if charges are filed, the cases will be
heard in Rwanda by a Rwandan court -- a decision fully in
keeping with the ICTR's completion strategy and its plan to
transfer genocide cases and suspects to Rwanda. The ICTR and
the GOR have been criticized for the appearance of one-sided
justice, with the genocidal remnants of the Habyarimana
government on trial in Arusha, while the Rwandan Patriotic
Front and its military forces, the RPA/RDF, remain untouched.
Rwanda has always been resistant to the notion that crimes
by its troops should be tried by the ICTR, and the ICTR has
feared a rupture with the GOR (and loss of access to
witnesses) if it pursued such crimes. Such proceedings will
not entirely satisfy their critics, as there are other
incidents that will remain unexamined, but these two cases
would make the point that impunity is unacceptable for all
participants in the events of 1994. End comment.


7. (C) Action request: Mission requests Department consult
with other relevant USG departments and agencies on the
question of witness relocation in the United States in
exchange for testimony or statements at ICTR proceedings
against the GOR and its military forces. Please advise.

SIM