The troubled mandate of the ICTR

19 November 2007 by Thierry Cruvellier

On November 8, thirteen years ago, the United Nations Security Council created the ICTR to try those primarily responsible for the serious crimes committed in Rwanda in 1994. Representatives of the Arusha tribunal promise it will have finished its first instance trials by the end of 2008, except for one, which will be completed in 2009. Two uncertainties still weigh on the ICTR: its ability to transfer some of the accused to national courts and the 14 fugitives. But most of all, the ICTR continues to mourn its most serious failure: the absence of proceedings against the winners of the war.

In fifteen years, the ICTR will have indicted 90 individuals and prosecuted between 60 and 70. The acknowledgement of the genocide of Tutsis, perpetrated between April and July 1994, will have been the heart of its work and its accomplishment. On multiple levels, Hassan Jallow, the ICTR's fourth and final prosecutor, embodies a pragmatic and realistic vision of what the tribunal was able to accomplish. "We learned that the legal process is an important, necessary part of conflict resolution, but it's not enough. Justice for the victims, justice for history, we cannot deliver; you need to put a diversity of mechanisms in order to deal with all aspects of the problem," he acknowledged. For four years, the Gambian prosecutor has remained scrupulously committed to keeping the closing date of 2008. To do this, he has still not held the same trump card as the ICTY: the possibility of transferring some of the accused to national courts. This exit solution—made necessary by the international tribunals' lack of effectiveness—has turned out to be nothing but a major headache for the ICTR. No one wants to try Rwandan genocidaires, except Rwanda.

Want to read more?

If you subscribe to a free membership, you can read this article and explore our full archive, dating back to 1997.

Subscribe now

Related articles

article
19 February 2007 by Laetitia Grotti

One year ago on January 6, 2006, the 17 members of Morocco's Equity and Reconciliation Commission (IER) were closing up shop after submitting their final report to King Mohammed VI. The Moroccan truth commission had received a flood of compliments from the international community praising the recommendations in its report, especially those advocating legislative and constitutional reforms. One year later, however, the results have been rather mixed.

article
11 September 2006 by our correspondent in Arusha

After having tried high-ranking officers, ministers, businessmen, priests, journalists, local officials and militiamen, the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) is in uncharted waters. On September 11, the most famous rwandese troubadour of his generation will stand trial for genocide. 

article
23 October 2006 by Christine Chaumeau

China is keeping a polite distance from international criminal justice. Beijing is hardly disinterested, but China does want to make sure that these new global mechanisms are not going to infringe upon its sovereignty by delving into particularly sensitive cases such as Tibet. 

article
United Nations Operation in Burundi disarms rebel forces in Mbanda in February 2005 (Photo: Flickr/UN Photo/Martine Perret)
03 June 2015 by Janet H. Anderson, The Hague (The Netherlands)

Over the last month, Burundi has hit the headlines as the president put himself forward to be elected for a controversial third term, resulting in street protests, thousands of refugees who fled instability and an attempted coup. Behind the issues of elections and constitutionalism are also those of justice following Burundi’s long-running civil war. The international community supported an intensive process of negotiation and the signing of the Arusha Accord in 2000. But in the decade and a half since, its provisions on justice have been debated though never fully implemented.

article
06 November 2006 by Pierre Hazan

France's attitude towards international criminal justice is marked by ambiguity. Paris subscribes to a vision of the world in which international humanitarian law is considered a way to curb violence against civilian populations, but at the same time it is wary of an unchecked judicial system that could end up prosecuting French soldiers engaged in areas where it has old and deep-rooted interests.