The world has a moral challenge to oppose the early release of ICTR Genocide convicts

The collective international community of bystanders kept silent in 1994 when the ground was being stained with the blood of one million victims in Rwanda. Today, that blood cries out for justice and I join the Rwandan survivors and all of humanity to oppose release of the genocide perpetrators and to shout loudly, Never Again. Aloys Simba, Dominique Ntawukulilyayo and Hassan Ngeze requested early release from imprisonment for the genocide crimes that the UN International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) convicted them of committing. Their crimes include genocide, aiding and abetting genocide, direct and public incitement to commit genocide, and extermination as a crime against humanity. The Mechanism for International Criminal Tribunals (MICT) that was setup to carry on the work of the ICTR when it closed in 2015 is deliberating their requests for early release. A vestige of the divine right of kings, the power to commute prison sentences and to pardon the guilty may be exercised in mercy or misused and abused. In what can only be called a gross miscarriage of justice, the presidents of the ICTR and MICT have already granted early release to 11 of the 65 ICTR genocide convicts. The early release of most of these convicts was done at the discretion of a single individual – the American judge Theodor Meron who is the current President of the MICT. The release of genocide convicts could be a life-and-death issue for some Rwandans. For the rest of us in the international community, it is a moral challenge to oppose the practice in order to reaffirm our commitment to ending genocide. A group of genocide researchers, justice advocates, and former staff members of the ICTR have signed an open letter opposing the release of any more genocide convicts. I am pleased to be among the co-signers who are from the U.S., Canada, UK, France, Australia, and Rwanda. On June 6, 2018, the letter was filed with the MICT on behalf of the international community. The co-signers reminded Judge Meron that, “Genocide is not just the problem of those groups and individuals targeted for extermination. It is a problem for all of us. We are all implicated in the moral and legal struggle to preserve, protect and restore human rights, human dignity and the rule of law. And that is why we, the undersigned members of the international community, stand with the people of Rwanda to express our outrage at the requests for early release and to publicly resist the personal affront represented by these requests.” Genocide is a premeditated act fueled by a heinous ideology. And we should treat genocide ideology and genocide perpetrators with the opprobrium that they rightly deserve. The ICTR convicts have shown no change of heart or mind. They are hardened, unrepentant adherents to the goal of extermination. Rewarding them with early release from punishment undermines justice and the attempt to prevent future genocides and crimes against humanity. The purpose of international justice is to end impunity, by punishing genocide perpetrators through incarceration so as to dissuade other would-be perpetrators, and to demonstrate justice being done so that the survivors may take some comfort from the international community asserting that they are valuable (worthy of existence), that their victimization was wrong, and that the collective humanity will not tolerate such crimes. All of these stated judicial purposes dictate against commutation of prison sentences imposed on convicted genocide perpetrators. The ICTR was acting on behalf of the international community in prosecuting, convicting and incarcerating those who committed “crimes against humanity” in their attempt to exterminate the Tutsi minority group in Rwanda in 1994. And we – the international community – must insist that the MICT continues the work of justice by keeping these convicts behind prison bars where they belong. There is no justification for releasing any of these convicts. Most of the prison sentences imposed by the ICTR trial judges were inconsequential compared to the crimes that the convicts committed. None of the three convicts confessed to their crimes, demonstrated regret and remorse, or asked for forgiveness – conditions that normally underlie any consideration for pardon. Instead, they have insisted on their innocence and have launched multiple appeals against their convictions and made premature requests for release. Aloys Simba first requested early release in 2014 from his 25-year prison sentence. The MICT denied that request on February 2, 2016. Ntawukulilyayo was denied early release on July 8, 2016. He had the unmitigated gall to apply for release even before he was eligible to do so under MICT rules requiring that he serve at least two-thirds of his 20-year prison sentence. On March 8, 2018, Ngeze applied for commutation of his 35-year sentence and early release. He also filed the request before being eligible to do so. Ngeze won’t complete two-thirds of his prison sentence until November 18, 2020. It would be a grave miscarriage of justice by the MICT to release Ngeze, one of the principal purveyors of the hateful propaganda that facilitated the genocide of Tutsi civilians in 1994. His release would condone – rather than condemn – the repugnant act of genocide. The MICT has already started down this slippery slope when it released Ferdianad Nahimana from prison in 2016 before he completed his 30-year sentence for direct and public incitement to commit genocide and persecution as a crime against humanity. Nahimana was one of the architects of the genocide ideology on which the extermination campaign was based. In fact, the Trial Chamber judges found him to be the mastermind of RTLM hate radio who used all forms of the Rwandan mass media as a “complement to bullets” to propagate the genocide in1994. The international community has carried the financial burden of prosecuting and defending the accused who were judged culpable for their part in the campaign of extermination. It has already cost us more than $2 billion to pay defence attorneys, clothe, feed, and house the convicts since the ICTR opened in 1995. The financial burden continues to mount with every new request for judicial review by these convicts seeking to escape the consequences of their crimes. On June 7, 2018, Ntawukulilyayo submitted a request for the MICT to pay for his pro bono defence counsel, Philippe Larochelle, to advance his second legal attempt to secure early release from prison. Hassan Ngeze has historically abused the international justice system. Over the years, he has filed multiple frivolous motions with the Tribunal, including a request to the Registrar for permission to consummate his marriage in the United Nations Detention Center where he was held during trial. The MICT denied his latest request for funding to send his pro bono counsel and a legal assistant to Mali to meet with him and to discuss new exculpatory information that he allegedly uncovered to advance appeal of his conviction. The shortcoming of the international justice system is not restricted only to abuse carried out by the accused and the convicted. Adherence to legal process and procedures has often been cast aside through error, neglect, and willful indifference of those entrusted with the administration of justice. For example, the previous early releases of convicts were done without consulting the Rwandan Government and in one instance without the knowledge or approval of the Tribunal. The decision of the MICT to release genocide convicts before they complete their sentences ought to be subject to the most rigorous legal and moral public scrutiny. A review of the previous decisions shows that the early release of convicts is being done without strict adherence to the rules and presentation of adequate evidence. The rules require that convicts provide documentary evidence from psychological experts confirming that they have been rehabilitated and are fit for reintegration in society. Review of the public decisions confirms that the convicts have presented no such evidence. Instead, Judge Meron has shown incredible and unjustifiable deference to the prison wardens who have been vouching for the convicts’ self-proclaimed rehabilitation based on their good behavior in prisons in Mali and Benin. Nahimana submitted psycho-social and psychiatric reports supposedly demonstrating his rehabilitation. However, the contents and conclusions of the reports are redacted from Meron’s written decision freeing Nahimana 10 years before his sentence was supposed to end. Based on the reports and a warden’s letter stating that the convict was well-behaved, “humble and courteous,” Judge Meron concluded that Nahimana “demonstrated some signs of rehabilitation.” However, the fact that ICTR convicts get along with each other and with other prison inmates is not evidence of their rehabilitation and fitness to rejoin the communities where they terrorized and traumatized Rwandans based on their identity – their basic humanity. The fact that the convicts are loved, visited, and supported by their family while in prison, is not evidence that they are rehabilitated from their destructive plans and purpose. It is worth noting that the ICTR did not create any specific programs to rehabilitate genocide perpetrators. The national prisons that incarcerate ICTR convicts also do not have specific rehabilitation programs for these offenders. There are no known psychological interventions to rid human rights offenders of the ideology and their malevolent, hateful motive to exterminate other human beings. Stephen Rapp, the former ICTR Chief of Prosecutions and former Prosecutor for the Special Court for Sierra Leone submitted a letter to the MICT opposing Ngeze’s request for early release. Rapp pointed out that unlike the Special Court for Sierra Leone; the MICT lacks the safeguards and conditions for release, rehabilitation, and monitoring of convicts. What assurance do we have that after their release, ICTR convicts will not go back to their old associations, their old criminal ways, and to their genocidal ideology of extermination? We in the international community demand that, at the very least, the MICT establishes appropriate means to monitor and report on the convicts it has already released. This monitoring and reporting should be done at least through the end of the convicts’ original prison sentences to protect the public safety, to confirm their rehabilitation and successful reintegration into the community, and to prevent their reoffending. We hope that the President of the MICT will follow all of the rules for assessing the pending requests for early release. This includes verifying the evidence and psychological evaluations submitted by the convicts to demonstrate that they have indeed undergone successful rehabilitation and are now free of the poisonous ideology that motivated their criminal acts in 1994. The early release of convicts does not promote healing and reconciliation in Rwanda but rather reopens wounds that the international justice system was intended to salve – if only symbolically. By continuing this practice, the MICT would add insult to moral injury. Any additional grants of early release would be tantamount to minimizing the genocide against the Tutsi and would place the MICT in the forefront of the very public campaign of genocide denial that is being carried out worldwide by the perpetrators and their sympathizers. Along with the group of genocide scholars, researchers, human rights advocates and former ICTR staff members, we – the rest of the international community, stand with the survivors and family members of victims of the Genocide against the Tutsi in Rwanda to vehemently oppose the early release of any more ICTR genocide convicts. Tim Gallimore, Ph.D. is the former Spokesperson for the ICRT Prosecutor. He is a genocide researcher and communications consultant. editorial@newtimes.co.rw

News

The world has a moral challenge to oppose the early release of ICTR Genocide convicts