skip navigation

(Source picture: TRIAL)

(Source picture: TRIAL)

The Prosecutor v. Yussuf Munyakazi

Court International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (Trial Chamber I), Tanzania
Case number ICTR-97-36A-T
Decision title Judgement and Sentence
Decision date 5 July 2010
Parties
  • The Prosecutor
  • Yussuf Munyakazi
Categories Crimes against humanity, Genocide
Keywords crimes against humanity, ethnic group, extermination, genocide, intent to destroy, widespread and systematic attack
Links
back to top

Summary

During the Rwandan genocide of 1994, Yussuf Munyakazi was a farmer in Bugarama commune (community), Cyangugu prefecture. Relying on his alleged acts in Cyangugu prefecture, the Prosecution charged Munyakazi with three counts, namely, genocide, or, in the alternative, complicity in genocide, and extermination as a crime against humanity.

The Trial Chamber of the ICTR delivered its judgment on 30 June 2010. It found that Munyakazi had been a leader in the incidents that had taken place at Shangi parish on 29 April 1994 and Mibilizi parish on 30 April 1994 and that he was responsible for the deaths of 5,000 Tutsi civilians. As a result, the Chamber convicted him for genocide and extermination as a crime against humanity and sentenced him to 25 years of imprisonment.  

back to top

Procedural history

During the 1994 genocide in Rwanda, Yussuf Munyakazi was a farmer in Bugarama commune (community), Cyangugu prefecture. On 10 October 1997, the Prosecution issued an Indictment against Emmanuel Bagambiki, Samuel Imanishimwe and Munyakazi. On 26 May 2000, since Munyakazi was still at large, the Trial Chamber issued an order severing him from the Indictment, in order to enable the trial against his Co-Accused to proceed.

The Prosecution filed an amended indictment on 29 November 2002, charging Mr. Munyakazi with two counts: Count 1-genocide, or alternatively complicity in genocide, count 2-extermination as a crime against humanity.

On 3 November 2008, the Prosecution filed a second amended indictment, adding detail to the previous indictment. Thus, the Accused was tried by Trial Chamber I for genocide (count 1), or in the alternative, complicity in genocide (count 2), and extermination (count 3) as a crime against humanity. His alleged responsibility was based on Article 6(1) of the Statute.

On 7 September 2007, the Prosecution filed a motion to refer Munyakazi’s case to the Rwandan authorities. On 28 May 2008, Trial Chamber III denied the Prosecution’s request due to fears that his fair trial right could not be guaranteed in Rwanda. On 8 October 2008, the Appeal Chamber upheld the Trial Chamber’s decision in this regard.   

back to top

Related developments

Both the Accused and the Prosecution appealed the Trial judgment. In his appeal, the Accused submitted eight grounds of appeal, which were dismissed by the Appeals Chamber. The Prosecution presented three grounds of appeal, which were also dismissed by the Chamber.

back to top

Legally relevant facts

The Prosecution charged Munyakazi with genocide (count 1), or in the alternative, complicity in genocide (count 2), and extermination (count 3) as a crime against humanity. His alleged responsibility was based on Article 6(1) of the Statute (para. 424).

In its factual findings, the Trial Chamber was satisfied that the Accused had led the attack on Shangi Parish on 29 April 1994, in which 5,000 to 6,000 Tutsi civilians had been killed. The Chamber further concluded that the Accused had been one of the leaders of the 30 April 1994 attack on Mibilizi Parish where 60 to 100 Tutsi civilians had been killed. He had also facilitated transportation of the Bugarama Interahmawe to the two crime sites. No other allegations in the indictment were proven. Hence, the Chamber addressed the Accused’s criminal responsibility for these events, which were charged as genocide, or, in the alternative, complicity in genocide. The killings were also charged as a crime against humanity (extermination) (para. 425).

back to top

Core legal questions

  • What is the exact content of ‘committing’ a crime as a form of individual criminal responsibility under Article 6(1) of the Statute.
  • Whether the Accused was guilty of genocide or, alternatively, of complicity in genocide, and extermination as a crime against humanity for his role in the killings of Tutsis at Shangi Parish on 29 April 1994 and Mibilizi Parish on 30 April 1994.
  • Which factors the Trial Chamber should take into account upon sentencing.
  • In case the Accused was found guilty, what the appropriate sentence would be.

back to top

Specific legal rules and provisions

  • Articles 2(2), 2(3)(a), 3(b), 6(1) and 23 of the Statute of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda.
  • Rules 11 bis,67(A)(ii)(a),(B), 101, 102(A) and 103 of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda.

back to top

Court's holding and analysis

Relying on the Accused’s leadership position at Shangi Parish and Mibilizi Parish, the Chamber concluded that Mr. Munyakazi enabled, approved and embraced the decision to commit the crimes as his own, thus, he was liable for ‘committing’ the killing at Shangi and Mibilizi Parishes on 29 and 30 April 1994 respectively (para. 491).

The Trial Chamber found the Accused guilty of genocide (count I) pursuant to Article 6(1) for the killings of Tutsis at Shangi Parish on 29 April 1994 and Mibilizi Parish on 30 April 1994. Hence, he was not found guilty of the alternative charge of complicity to commit genocide (count 2) (para. 501).

Regarding count 3, the Accused was found guilty of extermination as a crime against humanity under Article 6(1) for the killings of Tutsis at Shangi Parish on 29 April 1994 and Mibilizi Parish on 30 April 1994 (para. 508).

After considering the gravity of the offences, the aggravating and mitigating circumstances, the Chamber sentenced the Accused to 25 years of imprisonment (para. 522).

back to top

Further analysis

back to top

Instruments cited

back to top

Additional materials

back to top

Social media links