INTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIAN LAW

TOPIC
The Prosecutor v. Juvénal Kajelijeli

SUBMITTED BY:
THIRUVIKRAMAN.T
18BLB1080
Summary
On 1 December 2003, Trial Chamber II of the ICTR delivered its judgment on the case
against Juvénal Kajelijeli, former bourgmestre (mayor) of Mukingo. In its verdict on the 11-
count indictment, the Tribunal found him guilty on three counts: genocide; direct and public
incitement to commit genocide; and extermination as a crime against humanity.

He was sentenced for genocide and extermination as a crime against humanity with
imprisonment for the remainder of his life, and with 15 years’ imprisonment for direct and
public incitement to commit genocide. The sentences would be served concurrently. He was
given credit of five years, five months and 25 days for time already spent in custody.

The Accused was acquitted of the following three counts: conspiracy to commit genocide;
rape as a crime against humanity; and other inhumane acts of crimes against humanity.
Earlier, on 13 September 2002, following a Defence motion, the Tribunal found that the
Accused was not guilty of the two counts of war crimes—i.e., the charge of violence to life,
health and physical or mental well-being of persons: and causing outrages upon personal
dignity.
History
On 29 August 1998, the Tribunal confirmed an indictment dated 22 August 1998 against the
Accused and seven others. On 6 July 2000, Trial Chamber II granted a motion for severance
and separate trial filed by the Accused and ordered the Prosecutor to file a separate
indictment pertaining only to that Accused. The Trial Chamber granted the Prosecution’s
motion to amend the Indictment on 25 January 2001.

For his alleged involvement in the acts described in the amended indictment, the Accused
was charged with conspiracy to commit genocide under Articles 6(1) and 6(3) of the Statute;
genocide pursuant to Articles 6(1) and 6(3); or alternatively complicity in genocide pursuant
to Articles 6(1) and 6(3); direct and public incitement to commit genocide pursuant to
Articles 6(1) and 6(3); crimes against humanity—murder under Articles 6(1) and 6(3); crimes
against humanity—extermination pursuant to Articles 6(1) and 6(3); crimes against humanity
—rape pursuant to Articles 6(1) and 6(3); crimes against humanity—persecution pursuant to
Articles 6(1) and 6(3); crimes against humanity— other inhumane acts under Articles 6(1)
and 6(3); serious violations of Article 3 common to the Geneva Conventions and Additional
Protocol II pursuant to Articles 6(1) and 6(3).

On 13 September 2002, following the close of the case for the Prosecution, the Chamber
granted in part a Defence motion for acquittal and entered a judgment of acquittal in respect
of Counts 10 and 11 of the indictment (Violations of Common Article 3 and Additional
Protocol II of the Geneva Convention).
Facts
The Indictment charged Juvenal Kajelijeli with 11 counts of crimes comprising genocide,
crimes against humanity, and war crimes. The Indictment alleged that the crimes took place
between 1 January and 31 December 1994 in the Mukingo commune and the neighbouring
area within Ruhengeri prefecture.

The Indictment alleged that the Accused served as bourgmestre (mayor) of Mukingo
commune from 1988 to 1993 and was re-appointed bourgmestre in June 1994 until mid-July
1994. According to the Indictment, the Accused, in his capacity as bourgmestre, exercised
authority over his subordinates including civil servants, members of the police communale
and gendarmerie nationale, the civilian population of Mukingo commune and Interahamwe-
Mouvement Républicain National pour la Démocratie et le Développement (MNRD).

It was also alleged that the Accused was a founder and a leader of the Interahamwe-MRND
and that he consulted regularly with the national secretary general of the MRND, Joseph
Nzirorera on military training, distribution of weapons and uniforms to Interahamwe and
distribution of lists of Tutsis to be eliminated.

According to the Indictment, from April to July 1994, the Accused commanded, organised,
supervised and directly participated in attacks against Tutsis within the Mukingo commune
and neighbouring areas and that he ordered and witnessed the rape and other sexual assaults
of Tutsi females. The Accused was further being prosecuted for failing to exercise his
authority to prevent or stop the killings of Tutsis in his commune and for setting up
roadblocks.

Legal rules and provisions

Articles 1, 2, 3, 4, 6(1), (3), 22 and 23 of the Statute of the International Criminal Tribunal for
Rwanda.
Rules 15bis(C), 40(A)(i), 40bis, 50, 51, 67, 73bis, 85(A)(ii), 89(A), (B), (C), 92bis(A),(B),
98bis, 101, 102(A) and 103 of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence of the International
Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda.
Article 3 common to the Geneva Conventions and of Additional Protocol II thereto
Articles II and III of the Genocide Convention.
Analysis
The Chamber concluded that the Accused was guilty of genocide under Articles 6(1) and 6(3)
of the Statute for his role in the killing of Tutsis in Nukingo and Nkuli Communes and at the
Ruhengeri Court of Appeal in Kigombe Commune.

The Accused was also found guilty of direct and public incitement to commit genocide,
pursuant to Article 6(1) of the Statute, for inciting the Interahamwe and the crowd to commit
genocide against the Tutsi population.

The Trial Chamber dismissed Counts 1, 3, 5, 7, 8 and 9. Count 7 was dismissed by a

majority, with Judge Ramaroson dissenting.

The Chamber held that the Accused was guilty of extermination as a crime against humanity
under Articles 6(1) and 6(3) of the Statute for his role in the extermination of Tutsis in
Mukingo and Nkuli Communes and at the Ruhengeri Court of Appeal in Kigombe
Commune.

After considering the general sentencing practice, the mitigating and aggravating factors, the
sentencing ranges and the time served, the Chamber sentenced the Accused to life
imprisonment for genocide, fifteen years’ imprisonment for direct and public incitement to
commit genocide and life imprisonment for extermination as a crime against humanity. These
sentences would run concurrently.

In her dissenting opinion, Judge Ramaroson considered that it had been proved beyond a
reasonable doubt that the Accused was guilty of rape as a crime against humanity for the
rapes of Joyce, Kizungu, ACM, GDO’s daughter, GDT, GDF and her sister.