libération afrique
Solidarité internationale et luttes sociales en Afrique subsaharienne
 

Accueil | Qui sommes nous ? | Actualité | Dossiers | Pays | Liens
 
Enregistrer au format PDF   afficher une version imprimable de cet article



Abonnez-vous à la
lettre d'information
de Libération Afrique




Derniers articles :

Les autorités font obstruction à la tenue du procès dans l’affaire LIPRODHOR - Observatoire pour la protection des défenseurs des droits de l’Homme - 16 mai 2014
Les autorités françaises persistent et nient - Survie - 7 avril 2014
Simbikangwa : un procès historique mais tardif - Survie - 28 janvier 2014
Ouverture d’une information judiciaire suite au dépôt de plainte contre Paul Barril pour complicité de génocide au Rwanda - Survie - Ligue des Droits de l’Homme - LDH - FIDH - 27 juin 2013
Aucun présumé génocidaire n’a été jugé en France - Collectif des Parties Civiles pour le Rwanda - CPCR - 6 avril 2011
EurAc is concerned about the violence and the democratic deficit in the run up to presidential elections in Rwanda - EurAC - Réseau Européen pour l’Afrique centrale - 4 July 2010
EurAc s’inquiète de la violence et du déficit démocratique dans la période pré-électorale au Rwanda - EurAC - Réseau Européen pour l’Afrique centrale - 4 juillet 2010
Appel Citoyen France-Rwanda : Faire toute la lumière sur les "erreurs" - 7 avril 2010
L’Etat français dissimule des preuves de complicité dans le génocide des Tutsi - Commission d’enquête citoyenne - 4 février 2009
L’avancement des réformes judiciaires n’est pas conforme aux attentes - Human Rights Watch - 25 juillet 2008
Progress in Judicial Reforms Falls Short - Human Rights Watch - 25 July 2008
Wenceslas MUNYESHYAKA et Laurent BUCYIBARUTA devant la justice française Dominique NTAWUKULIYAYO transféré au TPIR - Survie - FIDH - Ligue des Droits de l’Homme - LDH - 21 février 2008


Voir également :


République démocratique du Congo : Global Witness appelle les gouvernements à agir en s’appuyant sur les conclusions du rapport des Experts de l’ONU sur le commerce de minerais dans l’est du Congo
Afrique Centrale : Appel des femmes pour la paix
Lutte contre l’impunité : La France, terre de villégiature des criminels internationaux ?
Françafrique : 1958-2008 : 50 ans de République Françafricaine
République centrafricaine : Les forces gouvernementales se livrent à des exactions avec le soutien des forces spéciales françaises
Afrique Centrale : La présidence allemande de l’UE peut faire la différence
Soudan : Africa Action Releases New Darfur Report, Holds Major Rally at White House
Afrique Centrale : Déclaration sur les défenseurs des Droits de l’Homme de la région des Grands Lacs
Dette : Dette des pays pauvres : la trahison du FMI


Site(s) web :

Commission d’Enquête Citoyenne pour la vérité sur l’implication française dans le génocide :
Ibuka - « souviens-toi » :
La Nuit Rwandaise :
Fondation Ntarama :


Dernier(s) document(s) :

La loi et la réalité : les progrès de la réforme judiciaire au Rwanda - Par Human Rights Watch - 26 July 2008 (PDF - 450.2 kb)
Le génocide rwandais: comment il a été préparé - Une note d’information d’Human Rights Watch - 7 April 2006 (PDF - 205 kb)
L’usage de la dette extérieure du Rwanda (1990-1994) : la responsabilité des bailleurs de fonds - Rapport de Pierre Galand et Michel Chossudovsky - November 1996 (PDF - 332.6 kb)

Appeals Court Confirms Sentence Against Activist
Judges Fail to Account for Defense Evidence and Previous Court Error

22 August 2007
Human Rights Watch - http://www.hrw.org/


An appeals court has upheld the 19-year prison sentence of a Rwandan human rights activist on genocide-related charges, failing to address the errors of a lower court judgment that violated Rwandan law and fair trial standards, Human Rights Watch said today.

The court, which issued its decision against François-Xavier Byuma on August 18, is part of an innovative judicial system known as gacaca that was set up to try some 818,000 people accused of participating in the 1994 genocide of Tutsi in Rwanda.

The law that established gacaca requires judges who have had a past conflict with an accused to step aside, reflecting the principle that for a trial to be fair the judge must be independent and impartial. In the lower court proceedings, the president of the gacaca jurisdiction, Fraridhi “Saudi” Imanzi, had a conflict with Byuma but did not step aside when asked to do so. Instead, he proceeded to hear the case along with four other judges.

For gacaca courts to deliver justice, the judges must be, and be seen to be independent and impartial,” said Alison Des Forges, senior advisor to Human Rights Watch’s Africa division. “The appeals courts are supposed to guarantee that independence and impartiality, but in this case apparently failed to do so.”

Byuma, who heads an organization for the defense of children’s rights known as Turengere Abana, had previously investigated allegations that Imanzi had raped a young girl. Imanzi was briefly detained and questioned but never prosecuted for rape.

The trial court, relying on witness testimony, had found Byuma guilty, among other charges, of having assaulted a Tutsi during the genocide. At least one of those witnesses had testified in court four years before that another person was guilty of the assault.

The appeals court permitted Byuma to defend himself and allowed him to present court records establishing that a witness against him had previously testified that another person had committed the crime. Byuma was also allowed to explain that the trial court had failed to hear some of the witnesses whom he wished called in his defense. He said too that the court had not reconciled contradictions in the evidence presented. After hearing these arguments, the appeals court nonetheless decided to uphold the guilty verdict of the lower chamber.

The appeals court gave no reasons for its decision and offered no explanation of how it reconciled the requirement of impartiality with the fact that a judge of the lower court had a history of prior conflict with Byuma.

Byuma announced he would request a review of the decision. Under Rwandan law, such a review is possible only when a gacaca judgment conflicts with a judgment given in conventional court or when new evidence is discovered. Prior sessions were recorded on videotape, simplifying any review of the gacaca hearings.

People put faith in the courts when they are fair and seen to be fair,” said Des Forges. “When an appeals court renders a decision that provides no reasoning and seems to take no account of evidence and of procedural errors in a prior trial, efforts to establish the rule of law in Rwanda suffer. Gacaca authorities should use available video recordings to review the case and assure that appropriate procedures were followed.”





Accueil | Qui sommes nous ? | Actualité | Dossiers | Pays | Liens
Libération Afrique c/o Cedetim - 21ter, rue Voltaire - 75 011 Paris - France- Tél : +33 (0) 1 43 71 62 12 -
Ce site est réalisé avec PHP, MySQL et SPIP, logiciels libres sous licence GNU/GPL