The Prosecutor v. Casimir Bizimungu, Justin Mugenzi, Jérôme-Clément Bicamumpaka, Prosper Mugiraneza

Court	International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (Trial Chamber II), Tanzania
Case number	ICTR-99-50-T
Decision title	Judgement and Sentence
Decision date	30 September 2011
Parties	The Prosecutor Casimir Bizimungu Justin Mugenzi Jérôme-Clément Bicamumpaka Prosper Mugiraneza
Other names	The Prosecutor v. Casimir Bizimungu et al. ‘Government II’ case
Categories	Crimes against humanity, Genocide, War crimes
Keywords	crimes against humanity, extermination, genocide, grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions, Murder, outrages upon personal dignity, rape, violence to life, war crimes
Links	Judgement and Sentence

Summary

Casimir Bizimungu was Minister of Health from April 1987 until January 1989. He returned to this position form April 1992 until he fled Rwanda in July 1994.

Justin Mugenzi founded the Parti Libéral (PL) on 14 July 1991. He became Minister of Commerce in July 1993. Mr. Mugenzi continued to hold this position in the Interim Government.

Jérôme-Clément Bicamumpaka joined the Mouvement Démocratique Républicain (MDR) party in 1991 and was sworn in to the Interim Government as the Minister of Foreign Affairs on 9 April 1994.

After working as a prosecutor and in various ministries in Kigali, Prosper Mugiraneza was appointed Minister of Public Service and Professional Training in 1992. When the Interim Government was formed, he became the Minister of Civil Service.

The Trial Chamber convicted both Mugenzi and Mugiraneza for conspiracy to commit genocide for their participation in the decision to remove Butare’s Tutsi Prefect, Jean-Baptiste Habyalimana. They were also convicted for direct and public incitement to commit genocide for their participation at the installation ceremony where President Théodore Sindikubwabo gave an inflammatory speech inciting the killing of Tutsis. The two Accused were sentenced to 30 years of imprisonment. Bizimungu and Bicamumpaka were acquitted.

Procedural history

On 7 May 1999, the Prosecution filed an indictment against the Accused. On 12 May 1999 Judge Navanethem Pillay confirmed the indictment, subject to an amendment that complicity in genocide be pleaded as an alternative to genocide. The judge held that reasonable grounds existed to believe that the Accused had committed conspiracy to commit genocide, genocide, complicity in genocide, direct and public incitement to commit genocide, murder, extermination and rape as crimes against humanity, as well as violence to life and outrages upon personal dignity as violations of Article 3 common to the 1949 Geneva Conventions and Additional Protocol II thereto. The Prosecution re-filed the indictment on 12 May 2012.

The Trial Chamber rendered its judgment on 30 September 2011.

Related developments

Justin Mugenzi and Prosper Mugiraneza have appealed the Trial judgment. On 14 October 2011 the Appeals Chamber handed down an order assigning judges to their case.

On 4 February 2013, the Appeals Chamber issued its judgment, overturning the decision of the Trial Chamber on the grounds that the Appellants did not possess the necessary intent for conspiracy and direct and public incitement to commit genocide. They were consequently acquitted of all charges and released

Legally relevant facts

The Prosecution argued that the Interim Government imposed their de facto authority on the perpetrators of the massacres of Tutsis that occurred in the early 1990s, including those in Kibilira (1990), in Bugesera (1992) and those of the Bagogwe (1991) (para. 178).

In its factual findings, the Chamber, the Chamber found that the Prosecution had not demonstrated that any of the Accused were involved in the execution of the attacks in Kibilira, Bugesera and those on the Bagogwe (para. 184).

With regard to the alibis presented by the Accused, the Chamber found that Mugiraneza’s alibi provided a reasonable explanation for his activities throughout 7 April 1994 regarding his alleged order to Interahamwe to kill Tutsis at the Cyamuribwa Centre (para. 1767). The Chamber reached the same conclusion regarding his alibi for 9 April 1994 (para. 1776). With respect to Bizimungu’s alibi, the Chamber found that it provided a reasonable explanation for his activities from 12 to 25 April 1994 (para. 1794). It further concluded that the Prosecution’s evidence had not excluded the reasonable possibility that Bizimungu was not in Rwanda between 17 or 18 May until 24 May 1994 (para. 1826). The Chamber considered that the evidence supported the reasonable possibility that Bicamumpaka was not in Kabuga on 9 April 1994 (para. 1834), as well as that he was in Burundi from 15 to 17 April 1994 (para. 1846) and in Goma on 22 April 1994 (para. 1853). The Chamber also concluded that the totality of evidence showed that it was reasonably possibly true that Mr. Bicamumpaka was outside of Rwanda between 23 April and 22 May 1994 (para. 1868).

Core legal questions

Whether the Accused were guilty of conspiracy to commit genocide, genocide, complicity in genocide, direct and public incitement to commit genocide, murder, extermination and rape as crimes against humanity, as well as violence to life and outrages upon personal dignity as violations of Article 3 common to the 1949 Geneva Conventions and Additional Protocol II thereto.
What the appropriate sentence would be, in case the Accused were found guilty.

Specific legal rules and provisions

Articles 2(2), 2(3)(c), 6(1),(3), 15, 19(1),(2), 20(4)(a),(c),(d),(e), 23 and 28 of the ICTR Statute.
Rules 2, 5(B), 33, 39, 40(A),(D), 40 bis, 42, 46(A), 47, 50, 54, 62, 65(B), 66(A)(ii),(B), 67(D), 68, 70, 72(B)(ii),(D), 75(F)(i),(ii), 86(C), 89(C), 90, 91, 92 bis, 94(B), 98 bis, 101(B),(C) and 102(A) of the ICTR RPE.
Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions and Additional Protocol II thereto.
Articles II and III of the Genocide Convention.
Article 14(3)(c) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
Article 6(1) of the European Convention of Human Rights.
Article 8(1) of the American Convention on Human Rights.
Article 7(1)(d) of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights.

Court's holding and analysis

Upon examination of the preliminary issues of the Defence teams of the four Accused, the Chamber found that the Prosecution’s failure to inform the Defence teams of exculpatory material was inexcusable and that the most appropriate remedy would be to draw a reasonable inference in favour of the Accused from the exculpatory material (paras. 175-176).

The Chamber held that none of the proven allegations were pursued by the Prosecution in support of Counts 2 or 3 (genocide or complicity in genocide), 6 and 7 (murder and extermination as crimes against humanity), 9 (violence to life, health and physical or mental well-being of persons as serious violations of Article 3 common to the Geneva Conventions and of Additional Protocol II thereto). The Chamber also acquitted all four Accused on Counts 8 (rape as a crime against humanity) and 10 (outrages upon personal dignity as serious violations of Article 3 common to the Geneva Conventions and of Additional Protocol II thereto) at the close of the Prosecution’s case. Therefore, the Chamber did not consider Counts 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10 in its legal findings (para. 1953).

The Chamber convicted Mugenzi and Mugiraneza for conspiracy to commit genocide and direct and public incitement to commit genocide. A term of 30 years’ imprisonment was imposed on them. Bizimungu and Bicamumpaka were acquitted of all counts (paras. 1988, 2021-2022).

In his partially dissenting opinion, Judge Short considered that the Accused’s right to trial without undue delay had been violated but the dismissal of the Indictment against them with prejudice was not the appropriate remedy. For Mugenzi and Mugiraneza he would provide a five-year reduction of sentence (para. 7 of the partially dissenting opinion).

Further analysis

K. Margetts and K.I. Kappos, ‘Current Developments at the Ad Hoc International Criminal Tribunals’, Journal of International Criminal Justice, 2012, Vol. 10, pp. 447-487,