home > SESSION 4 > 26

contribution 26 - Roux François

français english


Sentence and detention

François ROUX

transtlated version

Yes, of course. First, I would like to reassure Mr. O’Donnell, because it would appear that both of us were using that footpath illegally to get to the UNDF but since Guindo has told me that the problem will be addressed now, O’Donnell, we can now use the main entrance. You see, that is a tangible result.

Now, on sentencing and prison terms, I just want to make a few comments. The first is that we can compare the sentences at the ICTY to those at the ICTR, and we observe that considering the length of sentences, those of the ICTY are always shorter than those of the ICTR. That is an observation and they are almost equivalent tribunals.

Similarly, at the ICTY, there is release on parole. As far as I’m concerned, on the issue of guilty pleas, there are persons who had very limited sentences. Twice applied for release on parole, but by all the supporting materials that are admitted at the ICTY and ICTR, but they were rejected, apart from the Ruggiu case, there has been no release on parole at the ICTR. Why? I don’t know.

Mr. President, you are right to say that the texts provide for these. But the texts are one thing, and it’s another thing for the Judges to grant such release. Once again, we have to observe that at the Rwanda Tribunal there have not been released on parole, whereas the texts provide for them.

Now I will come back to what Thierry Cruvellier was saying. Now my message was to academics and researchers. Admittedly, we are waiting for you to give us your comments on the difference that can be established between what is said today in the Bagosora judgement and what was said ten years ago in the Akayesu judgement.

That takes me to some other thing. Maybe Tadic did a service to the Tribunal and to international justice. Maybe Akayesu did a good service to international justice, but to us lawyers we have our own vision. When we defend somebody we are defending a human being. So I am not entirely sure that when the Akayesu judgement will be reviewed some day, if such a need arises, I don’t know whether the same approach would be adopted. We look at it with some from a distance. This is someone we visit in prison on months on end. We are looking at his family through him. We are looking at a man in prison. He is not a statistic. He is a human being.


Well, justice is a system of equivalence, and all these new jurisdictions have to establish a scale of sentences. And I believe it was ^(inaudible) who said it: How do we establish a scale of sentencing? What is the criteria or criterion used in scale of sentencing? Is it based on the gravity of the crimes or will it be adjusted to differentials, that is, one crime being more serious than the other, or the accused being the reference group? Should one consider the economics of the sentence, that is, a sentence given in exchange for a confession and all that? The question stands unanswered.

François ROUX

Could I please add a word to what I said. I don’t like it when they say these people killed thousands of people. That is very general. It is not because there was a genocide. The issue is, now the person you are judging, how many persons did he kill? There were close to a million persons in killed in Rwanda, but one person did not kill one million persons so we should watch out for that.

Pierre-Richard PROSPER

But this is what they’re found guilty for. They are found guilty for the killing of thousands of people.

François ROUX

Not one thousand each, not one thousand for each person.

Pierre-Richard PROSPER[/fond saumon

If the individual is found culpable of killing thousands of people under his leadership, then he deserves the punishment.