Follow Us:

Quotes from Coalition members, Updates on the Lubanga trial, on the Mbarushimana case; press articles

16 Nov 2010

Dear All,

Please find below latest information related to the situation in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC).

This message includes the latest press releases for the Coalition members (I), updates on the Lubanga trial (II) and on Mbarushimana case (III), as well as related press articles (IV).

Note that unless otherwise indicated, all translations are informal translations provided by the CICC Secretariat.

Please also take note of the Coalition's policy on situations before the ICC (below), which explicitly states that the CICC will not take a position on potential and current situations before the Court or situations under analysis. The Coalition, however, will continue to provide the most up-to-date information about the ICC.

For additional information you may refer to the Coalition's website at http://www.coalitionfortheicc.org/?mod=drc

Best regards,

CICC Secretariat
www.coalitionfortheicc.org

****************************************
I. MEMBERS MEDIA STATEMENTS

i. "Victims question the ICC about lack of proceedings against Jean-Pierre Bemba for crimes committed in the DRC: Judges dismiss the request considering that the Prosecutor's investigation is still open", FIDH Press release, 3 November 2010, http://www.fidh.org/Victims-question-the-ICC-about-lack-of

"The International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) and its member organisations in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), Association africaine des droits de l'Homme (ASADHO), Groupe Lotus and Ligue des électeurs, deplore the decision handed down by Pre-Trial Chamber I of the International Criminal Court (ICC) on 25 October 2010, which dismisses a request from Congolese victims to question the ICC Prosecutor about the decision not to prosecute Jean-Pierre Bemba for crimes he is alleged to have committed in Ituri (DRC).

The plaintiffs participate in ICC proceedings on the situation in the DRC. They are the victims of crimes committed by the troops of Jean-Pierre Bemba's Movement for the Liberation of the Congo (MLC), in Ituri, in 2002. However, Jean-Pierre Bemba, detained at the ICC since 2008, is being prosecuted solely for crimes committed in the Central African Republic (CAR) during the 2002-2003 conflict. The submission filed by the victims' legal representative in June 2010 called on the Prosecutor, through the Pre-Trial Chamber, to explain the reasons for his decision not to prosecute Jean-Pierre Bemba for crimes committed on Congolese territory, in particular in Ituri, despite the extent of available information and the fact that Mr. Bemba is in custody at the ICC detention centre. The filling referred inter alia to the numerous speeches and statements made by the Prosecutor announcing the closure of investigations in Ituri. [1]

"Our organisations are surprised at the grounds put forward by the Chamber for rejecting the request. The judges consider that in the absence of an explicit decision not to prosecute Jean-Pierre Bemba for crimes committed in Ituri, it can be affirmed that the investigations are still ongoing. The judges have thus disregarded the numerous speeches and statements made by the Office of the Prosecutor to the effect that the investigations were now focusing on the Kivu region of the DRC. Neither have they taken account of the fact that although Jean-Pierre Bemba is shortly to be put on trial, the Prosecutor has made no attempt to bring new charges for the crimes committed in Ituri, athough he used the MLC's modus operandi to illustrate that used by Bemba's forces in the CAR", said FIDH President Souhayr Belhassen.

The Chamber's ruling fails to take into consideration situations in which the Prosecutor takes no explicit decision not to prosecute. Can it be considered that those investigations are still ongoing even in the face of indications that the Prosecutor does not intend to prosecute? Also taking into account the principle of a reasonable time that should guide all judicial proceedings, the fact that the charges against Jean-Pierre Bemba have not been extended more than two years after his arrest gives reason to believe that the Prosecutor does not intend to prosecute.

Our organizations consider problematic that the Pre-Trial Chamber refuses de facto to scrutinise the decisions and omissions made by the Prosecutor in the pre-trial phase of proceedings. The whole idea of creating such a Chamber when the Rome Statute was adopted was precisely to put in place a system of 'checks and balances' with regard to the Prosecutor's decisions.

Furthermore, while our organizations welcome the fact that the Pre-Trial Chamber did not consider the Prosecutor's and Defence's argument regarding the victims' locus standi as an obstacle to examining the substance of the case, they deplore the fact that the judges did not seize this opportunity to clarify the scope of the victims' rights and the relevant mechanisms for participation in the situation phase.

The trial of Jean-Pierre Bemba for crimes committed in the CAR will open on 22 November 2010. FIDH and its member organizations have on numerous occasions called on the Prosecutor to carry on his investigations in the CAR, in order to identify and prosecute other persons allegedly responsible for war crimes and crimes against humanity committed in the CAR, as the Court has done in all other situations."

ii. "The Congolese MPs mustn't lose the opportunity to take a step forward in the fight against impunity and in the abolition of the capital punishment", FIDH Press release, 10 November 2010, http://www.fidh.org/Les-parlementaires-congolais-ne-doivent-pas [in French]

"The International Federation of Human Rights (FIDH) and its member organizations in DRC, the Association africaine des droits de l'Homme (ASADHO), the Ligue des Électeurs (LE) and Groupe Lotus, call on the Congolese MPs to pass the bill on the implementation of the Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC) into domestic law. Although the Congolese authorities ratified the ICC Statute on April 11, 2002 and seized the Court to fight against impunity for the serious crimes committed on its territory since July 1, 2002, our organizations have denounced many times the blockade of this bill since 2003...

Our organizations stress that this bill is a unique opportunity to institute a suitable legal framework to fight against impunity for the perpetrators of mass violations of human rights and international humanitarian law committed in DRC. It would allow a better cooperation between the ICC and the Congolese authorities...

In addition, our organizations welcome the fact that this bill removes the capital punishment from the list of criminal penalties for the perpetrators of international crimes, in conformity with the ICC Statute. This bill could be a crucial step towards the abolition of the capital punishment in DRC..."

iii. "The ACHPR must call for fight against impunity in DRC and Guinea and for the organization of calm and transparent consulting of the people in South-Sudan", FIDH Press release, 10 November 2010, http://www.fidh.org/La-CADHP-doit-appeler-a-la-lutte-contre-l [in French]

"... FIDH call on the African Commission on Human and People's Rights (ACHPR) to denounce the impunity for the serious human rights violations committed in Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) and in Guinea and to support the organization of calm and transparent consulting of the people in South-Sudan.

... The ACHPR must urge the Congolese authorities to take all the necessary measures to fight against impunity for the perpetrators of these crimes... These measures include the strengthening of the legal system and of its independence and also the cooperation with the ICC through the extradition of Bosco Ntaganda, wanted by the ICC, to The Hague and through the implementation of the ICC Statute into national law..."

II. UPDATES ON THE LUBANGA TRIAL

Note: Daily reports on the Lubanga trial are available on www.lubangatrial.org, an Open Society Justice Initiative project and on Lubanga Chronicles (http://lubanga.aegistrust.org/), an Aegis Trust project.

i. "Intermediary Questioned About Payments From The ICC", By Wairagala Wakabi (Lubanga Trial website), 10 November 2010, http://www.lubangatrial.org/2010/11/10/intermediary-questioned-about-payments-from-the-icc/

"An intermediary of prosecution investigators was today questioned by defense lawyers representing war crimes accused Thomas Lubanga about the various payments he received from the International Criminal Court (ICC).
Defense lawyer Marc Desalliers asked 'intermediary 316', who was continuing his testimony that started on Monday, to explain various payment vouchers that were presented in court.

He asked the intermediary whether he received a salary before November 2005, when he got a contract from the court. The intermediary responded that he was only reimbursed for his expenses while doing work for investigators of the Office of The Prosecutor (OTP).

'During the informal stage of your dealings with the OTP between the month of April 2005 and beginning of your contract in November 2005, did you receive any salary?' Mr. Desalliers asked again.

'I would say no, there was no salary,' the witness replied. 'There was reimbursement for expenses incurred. However, as things developed the OTP paid for my needs in terms of salary because I had to give enough time to working in the field.'

He said before he got a contract with the ICC's prosecution office, his payment was based on the number of days he worked.

The intermediary clarified that although there were payment vouchers before he got the contract, which indicated that he had a salary, in fact he only got a daily subsistence allowance for the days he worked.

Mr. Desalliers then showed the intermediary a September 25, 2005 receipt for reimbursement of 880 USD in subsistence allowance and an 11 day salary of 490 USD. According to the defense attorney, this receipt showed that the intermediary was receiving a salary besides the subsistence allowances.
In response, the intermediary responded that this was to cater for his expenses when he traveled for duty to neighboring Uganda. "I had to pay for hotel, meals, and other costs," stated the intermediary, reiterating that he was not paid a salary at the time.

Testifying with voice and face distortion, the intermediary gave most of his evidence in closed session. Presiding Judge Adrian Fulford said it was necessary for the intermediary to give most of his testimony in closed session because his evidence would have revealed his identity. "A transcript of this mornings hearing with suitable reductions will be published in due course," said the judge.

A prosecution witness told court that this intermediary gave him money and then coached him to lie in his testimony that he had been a child soldier with the Union of Congolese Patriots (UPC), the group that prosecutors allege was led by Mr. Lubanga.

The prosecution witness also claimed the intermediary told him to falsely claim to prosecution investigators that he knew children who were conscripted into the UPC, that he saw trainees get killed by firing squad after failing to obey commanders' orders, and that some girl child soldiers got pregnant while they were in the UPC.

In addition, the witness told the trial in March this year that due to pressure from the intermediary, he lied to investigators in 2005 that he had seen commanders of the UPC militia at Mr. Lubanga's offices. Since he started giving evidence on Monday, the intermediary has denied all these allegations, stressing that he neither gave money nor coached any witness.
Mr. Lubanga stands accused of conscripting, enlisting, and using children in armed conflict in the Democratic Republic of Congo. He has denied the charges and instead claimed that intermediaries bribed and coached all children who told court that they had served as soldiers in the UPC.
Mr. Lubanga's defense has also claimed that the parents of these children were bribed into providing incriminating evidence against the accused. The defense has stated that it will file an application next month for judges to dismiss the case because of this alleged corruption of evidence.
Tomorrow morning the defense will continue cross-examining 'intermediary 316.'"

ii. Lubanga Chronicle #101 Intermediary 316: "The allegations against me are all lies", Aegis Trust, 9 November 2010, http://www.aegistrust.org/Lubanga-Chronicles/lubanga-chronicle-101-intermediary-316-the-allegations-against-me-are-all-lies.html

"Tuesday, 9 November 2010- Intermediary 316 has been firm in his assertions. The individual who helped the Prosecution contact former child soldiers in Ituri has today denied all the accusations of bribery against him. 'I am shocked, very shocked at the many lies and the use of forgeries in regards to me,' said the witness, referring to the allegations made by an individual called Mr. X - it was not mentioned publicly, but in all likelihood, the unnamed person is Defence Witness 16, a former child soldier who previously testified in this court. The alleged corruption of evidence forms the Defence's request to dismiss the case on the grounds of abuse of process. It is now time for the Prosecution to rebut this argument.

As was revealed in the examination, the OTP intermediary has been interviewed by the Prosecution on several occasions in October 2009, and again in November 2010, prior to his testimony. It was then, during the interviews, when Intermediary 316 had an opportunity to read what Defence Witness 16 said in court and review his allegations. 'After reviewing the testimony of Mr. X, I am shocked by false accusations [that] attack upon my character,' the witness tells Prosecution Attorney Manoj Sachdeva. The unnamed individual accuses the Intermediary of writing a threatening letter in the garden of his house, signing it and sending it to him. 'The description [of the location where the letter was written] he provided in my residence is false,' said the witness. 'In the compound where I live there has never been a tree. I never sat with Mr. X to write a note, the substance of which is not of my doing. I never wrote that letter.'

In addition to his defence, Intermediary 316 asked the Court if he could check the original document to determine whether or not he wrote it. 'I do not recognise this letter; it is not binding upon my person, as I said that [it[ is entirely false [...] If the original [document] is here we can verify if this fingerprint is mine or not. As regards the handwriting, I have a number of documents drafted in my own hand and I believe that if we compare these documents we will be able to know whether or not I am the author. These are lies!'

The full story of the intimidating letter was told in private, but one can conclude that the Intermediary's words and the Defence Witness 16's testimony are linked. The former child soldier mentioned in court a document containing false threats and referred to the participation of Intermediary 316 in the drafting. 'My family members attacked me because a certain person had come to my home to say I was lying about Thomas Lubanga,' Defence Witness 16 explained to the judges. 'I went to [Intermediary 316's] home and said to him that the activities I performed with him caused me problems. He told me to [go back] home and he would call me the next day to find a solution. Then he told me we were going to draft this document on behalf of somebody else.' The letter was a false death threat against Witness 16, supposedly written by Intermediary 316, which had to be sent to the ICC officials. 'They would know how to get me out of Bunia,' explained Witness 16.

At that time, the Defence witness testified that he planned with Intermediary 316 to lie to the OTP investigators. 'The fib was to say that Thomas Lubanga had enrolled children in the army and I myself was amongst them,' he said.

In order to undermine the intermediary's reputation, Defence Witness 16 also said in court that Intermediary 316 persuaded him to say that even children from his own family had been recruited by the UPC, the political-military movement allegedly lead by Thomas Lubanga. 'I have no comments on that because I did not say that,' Intermediary 316 asserted. 'He also said that you were drunk when he met you' says Trial Attorney Mr. Sachdeva. 'What do have to say about that?' he asks. 'I can say my professional activities do not authorise drunkenness. This could not be proved in any way or at any time. This is a false allegation.'

The intermediary, who has given a substantial part of his evidence in private session, will continue to testify tomorrow."

SEE ALSO:

iii. "Lubanga Chronicle #100 The Gallery Remains Silent", Aegis Trust, 8 November 2010, http://www.aegistrust.org/Lubanga-Chronicles/lubanga-chronicle-100-the-gallery-remains-silent.html

iv. "Lubanga Trial: New Witness Testifies In Closed Session", Lubanga Trial website, 8 November 2010, http://www.lubangatrial.org/2010/11/08/lubanga-trial-new-witness-testifies-in-closed-session/

III. MBARUSHIMANA CASE

i. « Mbarushimana to Stand Trial at ICC", by James Karuhanga (The New Times), 4 November 2010, http://allafrica.com/stories/201011050414.html

ii. "French court commands DRC rape suspect transmit to Hague", by Maninder Singh (Top News), 4 November 2010, http://topnews.ae/content/24755-french-court-commands-drc-rape-suspect-transmit-hague

iii. "French court approves transfer of Rwandan to ICC", by Mathieu Foulkes (AFP), 3 November 2010, http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20101103/wl_africa_afp/rwandafrancewarcrimescourticc

iv. "Rwandan rebel leader to face ICC trial", Channel6News, 3 November 2010, http://channel6newsonline.com/2010/11/rwandan-rebel-leader-to-face-icc-trial

v. "French court approves transfer of Rwandan to ICC", The East African, 3 November 2010, http://www.theeastafrican.co.ke/news/-/2558/1046172/-/omvax3z/-/

IV. OTHER NEWS AND OPINIONS

i. "DRC Rape Victims Opt for Extrajudicial Settlements", Reuters/IWPR, 5 November 2010, http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/iwprep/128894795663.htm

ii. The ICC Registrar, Silvana Arbia, answers questions about the length of the Court procedures, Radio Interactive pour la Justice, 3 November 2010, http://www.irfj.org/2010/11/10-icc-registrar-silvana-arbia-speaks-on-this-program/

iii. The ICC Deputy Prosecutor, Fatou Bensouda, answers the following question: « Why is the ICC more interested in Congolese criminals than criminals in other countries? », Radio Interactive pour la Justice, 3 November 2010, www.irfj.org/category/drc/kivus-kasugho/

***************************************

CICC's policy on the referral and prosecution of situations before the ICC:

The Coalition for the ICC is not an organ of the court. The CICC is an independent NGO movement dedicated to the establishment of the International Criminal Court as a fair, effective, and independent international organization.
The Coalition will continue to provide the most up-to date information about the ICC and to help coordinate global action to effectively implement the Rome Statute of the ICC. The Coalition will also endeavor to respond to basic queries and to raise awareness about the ICC's trigger mechanisms and procedures, as they develop. The Coalition as a whole, and its secretariat, do not endorse or promote specific investigations or prosecutions or take a position on situations before the ICC. However, individual CICC members may endorse referrals, provide legal and other support on investigations, or develop partnerships with local and other organizations in the course of their efforts.

Communications to the ICC can be sent to:
ICC P.O. box 19519 2500 CM the Hague
The Netherlands