DL began practicing as an independent defence lawyer in Paris. Through his connection to another laywer that specialized in refugee law he was given the opportunity to visit Nairobi and Arusha to check out the newly established tribunal. DL referred to international criminal law as a new creation of the Hague and Arusha. He also specified that it was not something he was able to specialize in as a student, it didnt exist then.
At first, the ICTR was going to follow a model more like Nuremburg, where one joint trial would be held for all the accused (hard to imagine now as we sift through the 90 plus names of accused/convicted). According to DL, who became part of the volunteer defence counsel for this reason, there were different ideas on defence strategies. At first, the accused might have claimed that the genocide did not exist, or that the genocide of the Tutsis was actually in defense of a previous genocide of the Hutus. However, DL says no one has used this as a strategy, they have opted instead to appear more reasonable and cooperative with the court by claiming that, "there may have been a genocide, but I was not a part of it" (aka not guilty). He mentioned that a good defence strategy might even be to say that the court of a political body (the U.N.) that did nothing to stop a genocide has no place to judge a person on such a matter, though no one has used this. Regardless, DL believes individual trials have proven to move more quickly in most cases.
When asked how the ICTR might be contributing to reconciliation, DL mentioned the Nuremburg trials once again. It wasn't these that brought reconciliation, though the trials were a very neccesary step in international law. Rather, it was the economic boost that helped bring reconciliation to Europe.
When asked how he reconciles morals with representing the accused, DL emphasized that the defence is crucial to a fair trial as every accused has the right to a defendant. This he percieves as another important aspect in the overall attempt to ease conflict in the region. (The idea that assuring fair trials may limit the amount of later uprisal or backlash between Hutus and Tutsis).
One of the most thought provoking things he said was this: We need another 100 years of international criminal law before a culture of impunity might be ended and replaced with a culture of human rights. It will take more than just this tribunal to end genocides.
For my classmates especially:DL compared the ICC to the ICTR and said the two organizations have the same achievements and same difficulties. He didnt go too much beyond that, but I would be interested to hear your thoughts on this statement..
2 comments:
Well summarized, Chelle. I'm looking over my notes and you've covered most of it. To add from my notes:
1) There are two types of lawyers: one leaves everything (e.g. his own practice) behind; and the other has his own practice and own home to go to, thereby being the type of lawyer who is in a hurry to finish up at ICTR so s/he can go back to the preferred life.
2) Main difference bw domestic and international law is the difference of common vs. civil law. However, in regards to ICTR, the line between common and civil is blurry at times.
3) Defence has no permanent organ - it HAS to be this way. How will an accused trust his/her lawyer if the lawyer is associated with the ICTR, whose mandate is to prosecute? DL mentioned there could be a permanent standing for Defence nevertheless, but the tribunal's legitimacy would be questioned.
4) DL's response to "What do you think the ICTR has contributed to reconciliation in Rwanda?": not much. [And then he continued with what you already mentioned...that the ICTR has/does not contribute(d) much to international law and the end of impunity.]
5) International criminal law is very new. 10 years ago, few had heard about ICL - particularly students and as an area of studies.
well done ladies. I think you covered it. Can't really think og anything else to add. It will be interesting to see how this interview may be similar or different to others here at the Tribunal.
Post a Comment