Tribunal to finish work no later than 2008

By reducing the number of suspects targeted for investigation and ending all enquiries over the next couple of years, as well as adding a pool of temporary judges, the United Nations International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) will be able to wrap up its work no later than 2008, according to the president of the court, Judge Navanethem Pillay.

In a letter to UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan, released on 12 March, Pillay notes revisions to the workings of the court, recently instituted to allow it to complete its work before the designated date: The chief prosecutor of the ICTR, Carla del Ponte, has reduced the number of investigations the court will proceed with to 111 (from 136); has agreed not to undertake any new investigations after 2003; and has submitted a proposal to shift trials to national jurisdictions, thereby relieving the Tribunal's caseload.

Her proposal has been forwarded to the presidents of the UN Security Council and General Assembly, the UN reports.

The issue of transferring trials to Rwanda is likely to remain a contentious one, however. The spokesman for the ICTR, Tom Kennedy, told IRIN on Monday that while the prosecutor would like to see the cases being transferred, for the moment it remains impossible as the legal provisions to allow this are not in place.

"Firstly, the rules would have to be amended to allow it, and secondly it would raise practical and logistical difficulties," Kennedy said.

Following a meeting with del Ponte late in 2001, Rwanda's justice minister, Jean de Dieu Mucyo, expressed his government's support for such a move: "You know Rwanda has asked for the transfer of the ICTR to Rwanda. It would still be useful if some of its trials were held in Kigali, because the people at the tribunal [ICTR detainees] are the ones who told others to kill," Internews quoted him saying.

"Part of the reason as to why the tribunal was established is to also bring reconciliation to the Rwandan people, and it cannot be possible if the trials are held outside the country," Rwanda's representative at the ICTR, Martin Ngoga, told a press conference last December.

There are, however, many obstacles in the way of transferring cases to Rwanda, Kennedy told IRIN, refusing to comment on how likely it was to actually happen.

"Lots of countries that extradited people to the ICTR would not have done so to Rwanda because of the presence of the death penalty. It would be an act of bad faith to transfer those people to a jurisdiction where the death penalty is given," he said. "While Rwandan authorities have said they would not impose the death penalty in such cases, the judiciary is independent and therefore the government cannot make that commitment," he added.

Logistical problems would also be huge, he said. "Even with the best will in the world, it would also be very difficult for the authorities in Rwanda to provide an adequate and full defence for detainees. Defence witnesses would be very reluctant to go back to Rwanda."

In any case, judges would have to make the decision on an individual basis for each case, and whether to transfer it to Rwanda, he said. There would also be a number of different options to consider. Judges could decide to hear all or part of a case in Rwanda; complete trials could be held there; or the ICTR could investigate the cases and then pass on the information to Rwandan authorities. All these options would need to be considered.

"The prosecutor does not speak on behalf of the tribunal, she has a right to speak for herself. I know what this process means, it is very complex," Internews quoted the ICTR spokesman, Kingsley Moghalu, saying on the subject.

The ICTR has come under heavy criticism for being too slow, despite its large budget. Since 1996, when the court was established, it has handed down only nine judgements - eight convictions and one acquittal. Its budget in 2001 was almost US $94 million.