Case A: Trial of John Paul Akayesu

The trial of John-Paul Akayesu was a landmark case, not only for the ICTR, but for the international law community as a whole. The crimes for which John-Paul Akayesu was indicted, the arguments made by both the prosecution and defense, and the ultimate ruling handed down by the chamber justices, featured highly sensitive subject matter, and set great precedents. The indictment marked the first instance in which an individual was prosecuted under the controversial Genocide Convention, enacted nearly half-a-century prior, as well as the first instance of the inclusion of rape as an act of genocide and a crime against humanity.

Though both genocide and war rape were hardly new, having featured in domestic and international conflicts for a millennia, the method by which each aspect was incorporated into the conflict was unprecedented in scope and in effect. War rape had been markedly present in previous modern conflicts— it was common for occupying troops to rape civilian women during World War II, and thousands of women were raped during the Nanking Invasion, but rape as it featured in Rwanda was not war rape with the classic motives. It became an actual technique of the genocide, limiting the opposing population through infliction of shame, sterilization, or induced pregnancy. This trend of rape as a weapon of war continued after the Rwandan crisis, gaining international attention, and ultimately resulting in Security Council resolution 1820, which officially declared that mass rape (and complicity to commit mass rape) could be classified as a war crime.

However, the origin of this precedent can clearly be seen in the response taken by the ICTR in this case.
Genocide, likewise, had been a common feature in both international and domestic conflicts, but the scope of the Rwandan Genocide is unprecedented in history. In a mere 100 days, more than 800,000 Tutsi civilians and moderate Hutu civilians were brutally killed with machetes and guns, reducing the general population by 20 percent and the Tutsi population by 80 percent. Until this point, however, there had been no legal ramifications for the use of genocide in the conflict. Though the convention had been drafted and went into effect in 1948, it had never been used in the prosecution of any individual for war crimes. The trial of Jean-Paul Akayesu presents a potential precedent for one to be held responsible for the violations of this convention.

Case B: Trial of Jean-Bosco Barayagwiza, Ferdinand Nahimana, and Hassan Ngeze

The trial against hate media is charged with the prosecution of the media for the incitement of the Rwandan Genocide of 1994. The defendants are Ferdinand Nahimana and Jean-Bosco Barayagwiza, persons in charge of the Radio Télévision Libre des Mille Collines; and Hassan Ngeze, director and editor of Kangura. The defendants are being charged with Genocide, Conspiracy to Commit Genocide, Direct and Public Incitement to Commit Genocide, Complicity in Genocide, and Crimes Against Humanity.

The local print and broadcast media allegedly played a crucial role in the Rwandan Genocide by inciting and directing the killings. Kangura was a magazine established in 1990, following the invasion of the rebel Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF), that continued publishing up to the genocide. The magazine was the print equivalent of the later-established Radio Télévision Libre des Mille Collines (RTLM), publishing articles that criticized the RPF and Tutsis. Copies of Kangura were read during public meetings and Interahamwe militia rallies. Furthermore, after 6 April 1994, authorities used RTLM to spur and direct killings, specifically in areas where the killings initially were resisted. The radio station was allegedly used to mobilize the Hutu population and to give specific directions for carrying out the killings.

This landmark case is the first time that journalists are being accused of genocide and crimes against humanity. In trying the “Hate Media” case, it is the Tribunal’s mandate to determine whether Nahimana, Barayagwiza, and/or Ngeze were directly responsible for incitement to genocide through their leadership of RTLM and Kangura, or whether they were rightfully exercising their journalistic freedoms in a context of war.