* L. Danielle Tully is the Solicitations and Symposium Editor on the Boston College International & Comparative Law Review. 1SeeAlison Des Forges, Leave None to Tell the Story: Genocide in Rwanda 14 (1999). 2 Peter Uvin, The Introduction of a Modernized Gacaca for Judging Suspects of Participation in the Genocide and the Massacres of 1994 in Rwanda 2 (2000) (unpublished manuscript on file with the Boston College International & Comparative Law Review until May, 2004). 3Id. 4Id. 5See Stef Vandeginste, Justice, Reconciliation and Reparation after Genocide and Crimes Against Humanity: The Proposed Establishment of Popular Gacaca Tribunals in Rwanda 1 (1999) (paper presented at the All Africa Conference on African Principles of Conflict Resolution and Reconciliation, Addis Ababa Nov. 812, 1999, on file with the Boston College International & Comparative Law Review until May, 2004). 6See Loi Organique No. 40/2000 du 26/01/2001 Portant Creation des Jurisdictions Gacaca et Organisation des Pousuites des Infractions Constitutives du Crime de Genocide ou de Crimes contra LHumanite, Commises enter le 1 Octobre 1990 et Le 31 Decembre 1994 [hereinafter Gacaca Law] (French text), available at http://www.minijust.gov.rw (last visited Jan. 23, 2003). 7See generally Jeremy Sarkin, The Tension Between Justice and Reconcilliation in Rwanda: Politics, Human Rights, Due Process and the Role of the Gacaca Courts in Dealing with the Genocide, 45(2) J. AFR. LAW 143 (2001). 8See generallyAmnesty International, Rwanda: The Troubled Course of Justice (Apr. 2000) (discussing human rights abuses associated with the search for justice in Rwanda), available at http://web.amnesty.org/aidoc/aidoc_pdf.nsf/index/AFR470112000 ENGLISH/$File/AFR4701100.pdf [hereinafter Troubled Course of Justice]; see alsoHuman Rights Watch, The Search for Security and Human Rights Abuses, vol. 12, no. 1, (Apr. 2000) (discussing silencing the press, extra judicial killings, arbitrary arrests, and torture), available at http://www.hrw.org/reports/2000/rwanda/ [hereinafter Search for Security]. 9SeeTroubled Course of Justice, supra note 8, at 35. 10See William A. Shabas, Justice, Democracy, and Impunity in Post-genocide Rwanda: Searching for Solutions to Impossible Problems, 7 Crim. L.F. 523, 532 (1996). 11Id. 12 Gerard Prunier, The Rwanda Crisis: History of a Genocide 212 (1995). 13Id. at 22930. 14Id. at 231. 15See Shabas, supra note 10, at 523. 16Id. at 52324. 17Id. at 524. 18Id. 19Id. 20 Shabas, supra note 10, at 524. 21Id. 22Id. 23Human Rights Watch/Africa, Genocide in Rwanda April-May 1994, vol. 6, no 4, at 2 (May 1994), available at http://hrw.org/reports/world/rwanda-pubs.php. 24Id. at 4. 25Des Forges, supra note 1, at 14. 26See Shabas, supra note 10, at 524. 27See id. 28 Mark Drumbl, Rule of Law amid Lawlessness: Counseling the Accused in Rwandas Domestic Genocide Trials, 29 Colum. Hum. Rts. L. Rev. 545, 565 (1998). 29Human Rights Watch/Africa, Rwanda: A New Catastrophe? Increased International Efforts Required to Punish Genocide and Prevent further Bloodshed, vol. 6 no. 12, at 9 (Dec. 1994), available at http://www.hrw.org/africa/index.php [hereinafter Rwanda: A New Catastrophe?]. 30International Crisis Group, Five Years after the Genocide in Rwanda: Justice in Question 10 (1999), available at http://www.crisisweb.org/projects/africa/central africa/reports/A400224_07041999.pdf. 31 Drumbl, supra note 28, at 571. 32SeeRwanda: A New Catastrophe?, supra note 29, at 9. 33See Madeline H. Morris, The Trials of Concurrent Jurisdiction: The Case of Rwanda, 7 Duke J. Comp. & Intl L. 349, 352 (1997). 34Rwanda: A New Catastrophe?, supra note 29, at 2. 35Id. 36Id. at 9. 37 Shabas, supra note 10, at 531. Shabas describes massacres of Tutsi that took place in March of 1992 in which 466 individuals were arrested and detained illegally for this atrocity. Id. A lawyer retained by an extremist political party was able to get the detainees released. Rather than correcting the situation and issuing new warrants, the prosecutors office did not pursue the matter further. Id. at 53132. 38Seeid. at 531. 39SeeRwanda: A New Catastrophe?, supra note 29, at 9. 40See Shabas, supra note 10, at 524. 41SeeRwanda: A New Catastrophe?, supra note 29, at 3. 42Id. at 34. 43Id. at 9. In addition to providing security, the RPF themselves were also engaged in several massacres of unarmed and unresisting civilians. Id at 89. These human rights abuses have largely gone un-addressed in Rwanda. Id. at 8. 44See id. 45Lawyers Committee for Human Rights, Prosecuting Genocide in Rwanda: A Lawyers Committee report on the ICTR and National Trials � VIII.c (July 1997), available at http://www.lchr.org/pubs/descriptions/rwanda.htm [hereinafter Prosecuting Genocide]. 46Id. 47 Shabas, supra note 10, at 528. 48Id. at 52829. 49Id. at 530. 50Id. 51Id. 52 Organic Law No. 8/96 of August 30, 1996, on the Organization of Prosecutions for Offenses Constituting the Crime of Genocide or Crimes Against Humanity Committed Since October 1, 1990, at http://preventgenocide.org/law/domestic/rwanda.htm (last visited Ja. 23, 2003) [hereinafter Organic Law 8/96]. 53 Shabas, supra note 10, at 530. 54Prosecuting Genocide, supra note 45, � VIII-C. 55 Organic Law 8/96, supra note 52, art. 19. 56Id. art. 2. 57Id. 58Id. 59Id. 60 Organic Law 8/96, supra note 52, art. 2. 61Id. 62See Vandeginste, supra note 5, at 8. 63Id. 64 Organic Law 8/96, supra note 52, arts. 49. According to the law, Category I suspects are not able to avail themselves of reduced sentencing for confession. Id. art. 5. Suspects in Category II may attempt to receive a reduced sentence of seven to fifteen years imprisonment for confession and implication. Id. arts. 15, 16. Those who do not avail themselves of this procedure will face life imprisonment if found guilty. Id. art. 14. Category III suspects may also seek reduced sentences of 1/2 to 1/3 of the full sentence. Id. arts. 5, 1516. 65 Shabas, supra note 10, at 539. 66See Vandeginste, supra note 5, at 8; Rwanda: A New Catastrophe?, supra note 29, at 34; Shabas, supra note 10, at 539. 67See Garine Hovsepian, The Gacaca Tribunals for Trying Genocide Crimes and Rwandas Fair Trial Obligations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights 4 (2001) (unpublished thesis, Institut Universitaire de Hautes Etudes Internationalales, on file with the Boston College International and Comparative Law Review). 68 Vandeginste, supra note 5, at 9. 69Id. 70 Drumbl, supra note 28, at 574. 71Id. 72Id. 73See id. 74Report of the Special Representative of the Commission on Human Rights on the Situation of Human Rights in Rwanda, Michel Moussalli, U.N. GAOR, 55th Sess., Agenda Item 116(c), at 30, U.N. Doc. A/55/59 (2000) [hereinafter Moussalli Report 2000]. 75See id. 76Id. 77 Vandeginste, supra note 5, at 9. 78Id. 79Moussalli Report 2000, supra note 74, at 30. 80Id. 81Id. 82 Vandeginste, supra note 5, at 1. 83Id. 84 Hovsepian, supra note 67, at 7. 85 Sarkin, supra note 7, at 159. 86 Hovsepian, supra note 67, at 7, 8 n.30. 87Id. at 8. 88 Sarkin, supra note 7, at 159. 89Id. 90 Vandeginste, supra note 5, at 15. 91Id. 92Id. 93Id. 94Id. 95 Hovsepian, supra note 67, at 9. 96Id. 97Id. 98See Vandeginste, supra note 5, at 15. 99 Hovsepian, supra note 67, at 9. 100 Vandeginste, supra note 5, at 15. 101See Hovsepian, supra note 67, at 10. 102Seeid. at 11. 103Id. 104Id. 105Id. 106 Hovsepian, supra note 67, at 13. 107Id. 108Id. at 1314. 109See id. at 14. 110See generally Gacaca Law, supra note 6. 111See Anne M. Pitsch, The Gacaca Law of Rwanda: Possibilities and Problems in Adjudicating Genocide Suspects 2 (Aug. 2001) (unpublished working paper, Center for International Development and Conflict Management, University of Maryland) 112See id. 113 Uvin, supra note 2, at 7 n.5. 114See Gacaca Law, supra note 6. 115Id. 116 Hovsepian, supra note 67, at 16. The country of Rwanda is broken down into a series of administrative units. Id. The top administrative structure is comprised of twelve prefectures. Id. Each prefecture is subdivided into about ten communes, totaling 154. Each commune has approximately 50,000 citizens. Id. Each of these 154 communes is further divided into approximately ten secteurs, which are then further subdivided into six cellules. Id. The cellule is the lowest administrative unit. Id. There are approximately 8,987 cellules in Rwanda with each cellule representing a little over 800 citizens. Id. 117Id. 118Id. 119Id. at 17. 120Id. 121 Hovsepian, supra note 67, at 17. 122See id. At the Secteur, Commune, and Prefecteur levels there will be a General Assembly composed of fifty representatives from the level below it. Id. Each General Assembly will choose a bench of twenty persons. Id. The Bench will then choose its own five-member Coordinating Committee. Id. 123 Vandeginste, supra note 5, at 18. 124 Gacaca Law, supra note 6, art. 2. 125Id. 126 Vandeginste, supra note 5, at 19. 127See id. 128Id. 129Id. 130Id. 131 Vandeginste, supra note 5, at 19. 132Id. 133Id. 134Id. 135Id. at 20. 136See Gacaca Law, supra note 6, arts. 6871. 137Seeid. 138 Vandeginste, supra note 5, at 20. 139Id. 140See Gacaca Law, supra note 6, art. 70(a). 141Id. art. 70(b). 142Id. art. 70(c). 143Id. art. 69(a). 144See id. art. 69(b). 145 Gacaca Law, supra note 6, art. 69(c). 146See Vandeginste, supra note 5, at 20. 147See Uvin, supra note 2, at 6; Hovesepian, supra note 67, at 25. 148 Gacaca Law, supra note 6, art. 89. 149Seegenerally International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Dec. 16, 1966, S. Exec. Doc. No. 95-E, art. 14, 999 U.N.T.S. 171 [hereinafter ICCPR]; African [Banjul] Charter on Human and Peoples Rights, June 27, 1981, art. 7, O.A.U. Doc. CAB/LEG/67/3 Rev. 5 [hereinafter Banjul Charter]. 150See ICCPR, supra note 149, art. 14; Banjul Charter, supra note 149, art. 7. 151See ICCPR, supra note 149, art. 14; Banjul Charter, supra note 149, art. 7. 152SeeTroubled Course of Justice, supra note 8, at 4; see also ICCPR, supra note 149; Banjul Charter, supra note 149. 153See Uvin, supra note 2, at 23; Shabas, supra note 10, at 53132. 154SeeTroubled Course of Justice, supra note 8, at 3536; Hovsepian, supra note 67, at 2930; Sarkin, supra note 7, at 21; Vandeginste, supra note 5, at 25. The Rwandan government is further obligated to ensure fair trial guarantees under its own constitution following the Arusha Peace Agreement, in which Rwanda adopted into domestic law the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and stated that the UDHR shall take precedence over corresponding principles enshrined in the Constitution of the Republic of Rwanda, especially when the latter are contrary to the former. See Hovsepian, supra note 67, at 31. Since they are fully enshrined in Article 14 of the ICCPR, I will not deal with Rwandas obligations under Articles 10 and 11 of the UDHR. In addition, while Rwanda is equally obligated under the ICCPR and the Banjul Charter, the due process obligations of the ICCPR are more specific and have been interpreted frequently by the Human Rights Committee. Therefore, I will not address Rwandas obligations under the Banjul Charter in this analysis. 155Troubled Course of Justice, supra note 8, at 33. 156Id. 157Id. at 3334. 158Seeid.; Moussalli Report 2000, supra note 74, at 34. 159See Vandeginste, supra note 5, at 25. 160See generally ICCPR General Comment 13: Equality before the courts and the right to a fair and public hearing by an independent court established by law (Art. 14), Human Rights Committee, 21st Sess., U.N. Doc A/39/40 (1984), available at www.unhchr [hereinafter General Comment 13]. 161Id. �4. 162 ICCPR, supra note 149, art. 14(1). 163See id. 164See Vandeginste, supra note 5, at 25. 165General Comment 13, supra note 160, � 4. 166See Vandeginste, supra note 5, at 2526. 167Id. 168Id. 169Seeid. at 25. 170Republic of Rwanda, Reply to Amnesty Internationals Report Rwanda: The Troubled Course of Justice 30 (2000), at http://www.rwanda1.com/govern-ment/06_11_00news_ai.htm [hereinafter Republic of Rwanda]. 171 ICCPR, supra note 149, art. 14.3.d. 172Id. 173Seeid. 174Id.; Memorandum from Marguerite M. Dorn, Professor, Suffolk University Law School, to Jan Rocamora, Special Assistant, Ministry of Justice Rwanda (Jul. 11, 1997), at http://www.law.suffolk.edu/academic/ihr/papers/counsel2.html [hereinafter Memorandum]. 175 ICCPR, supra note 149, art. 14.3.d. 176Id. 177See General Comment 13, supra note 160, � 4. 178See Memorandum,supra note 174. 179See European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, Nov. 4, 1950, art. 6, 213 U.N.T.S. 222, Europ. T.S. no.5. [hereinafter European Convention on Human Rights]. 180Seegenerally Granger v. United Kingdom, 12 Eur. Ct. H.R. 469 (1990) (stating that whether legal aid must be provided shall be determined by considering the case as a wholeincluding the complexity of the issues involved and the potential sentence for the crimes and holding that a difficult and dispositive issue in the appeal along with a potential sentence of five years were sufficient to require the appointment of free legal aid); Quaranta v. Switzerland reprinted in 12 Hum. Rts. L.J. 251 (1991) (stating that the seriousness of the offense and the severity of the sentence must be considered in determining whether appointing free legal counsel is in the interest of justice and holding that a maximum sentence of three years, combined with the possibility of activating a suspended sentence, and the wide range of measures available to the court, were sufficient to require the appointment of free legal counsel without which [the defendant] would not have been able to present his case in an adequate manner); Pham Hoang v. France, App. No. 13191/87, 16 Eur. Ct. H.R. 53 (1991)(holding that the defendant did not have the legal training essential to enable him to present and develop the appropriate arguments on complex issues himself). 181 Granger, 12 Eur. Ct. H.R. at para. 47; Quaranta, 12 Hum. Rts. L.J. at paras. 33, 34; Pham Hoang, 16 Eur. Ct. H.R. at paras. 37, 40. 182 Organic Law 8/96, supra note 52, art. 36. 183Republic of Rwanda, supra note 170, at 29. 184Troubled Course of Justice, supra note 8, at 33. 185See Gacaca Law, supra note 6, art 51. 186Id. arts. 69, 70. 187See Quaranta, 12 HUM. RTS. L.J. at para. 36. In this case, the court considered Mr. Qurantas background, including that he was a young adult of foreign origin, with a long criminal record, and little occupational training. Id. at para. 35. These factors, in addition to the wide range of measures that were available to the court in sentencing, led the court to determine that participation of a lawyer at the trial would have created the best conditions for the accuseds defense. Id. at para. 34. 188 Pham Hoang, 16 Eur. Ct. H.R. at para. 40. In this case, the court determined that the challenges Mr. Pham Hoang intended to raise on appeal were sufficiently complex and that he did not have the legal training essential to enable him to present and develop the appropriate arguments on such complex issues himself. Id. 189 Gacaca Law, supra note 6, art. 51. 190Id. arts. 70, 71. 191See Granger, 12 Eur. Ct. H.R. at para. 47. In this case, the European Court of Human Rights was particularly concerned with the complexity of the issue that Mr. Granger was raising in his appeal of a perjury conviction for which he was sentenced to five years in prison. Id. Mr. Grangers appeal would turn on establishing that certain evidence was inadmissible as a precognition. Id. at paras. 47, 17(b). The court concluded that because Mr. Granger was appealing a five-year sentence by arguing a complex legal issue, that he was not fully in a position to comprehend, the interests of justice required the appointment of counsel. Id. at paras. 47, 48. 192Republic of Rwanda, supra note 170 at 28. 193Id. at 2829. 194Id. at 28. 195Id. 196See generallyTroubled Course of Justice, supra note 8; see also ICCPR, supra note 149, arts. 9, 10. 197 See Moussalli Report 2000, supra note 74, at 30. 198See Memorandum, supra note 174. 199Troubled Course of Justice,supra note 8, at 33. 200 ICCPR, supra note 149, art. 14(3)b. 201General Comment 13, supra note 160, � 9. 202Id. 203Id. 204SeeTroubled Course of Justice, supra note 8, at 33. 205 This is not to argue that the ability to consult with a lawyer might not be preferred, but rather that the structure of the process reduces the threat that the prosecution will outmatch the defense in legal acumen. 206 Gacaca Law, supra note 6, art. 47; Hovsepian, supra note 67, at 22. 207 Gacaca Law, supra note 6, art. 48; Hovsepian, supra note 67, at 22. 208SeeTroubled Course of Justice, supra note 8, at 33 (describing that defendants who do not have the aid of counsel will be unable to effectively refute accusations established in the dossier). 209 Gacaca Law, supra note 6, arts. 6466. 210Id. 211 Uvin, supra note 2, at 5. 212See General Comment 13, supra note 160, � 5. 213Id. � 3. 214See Human Rights Committee, Bahamonde v. Equatorial Guinea, Comm. No 468/1991, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/49/D/468/1991 (1993). 215Id. � 9.4. 216SeeTroubled Course of Justice, supra note 8, at 34; Hovsepian, supra note 67, at 37; Sarkin, supra note 7, at 16364. 217See Pitsch, supra note 111, at 10. 218 Gacaca Law, supra note 6, art. 10. 219Id. art. 12. 220 Hovsepian, supra note 67, at 37; Julia Crawford, Hopes and Fears as Kigali Launches Participative Justice,Africa News, Oct. 11, 2001, available at http://www.hirondelle.org [hereinafter Hopes and Fears]. 221Hopes and Fears,supra note 220. 222SeeGeneral Comment 13,supra note 160, �4. 223SeeTroubled Course of Justice, supra note 8, at 34. 224See Uvin, supra note 2, at 1426. 225See Hovsepian, supra note 67, at 3839. 226See id. 227 Gacaca Law, supra note 6, art. 11; see also Hovsepian, supra note 67, at 39; Sarkin, supra note 7, at 163-64. 228See Uvin, supra note 2, at 11. 229 Uvin, supra note 2, at 2. 230Id.; Republic of Rwanda, supra note 170, at 27. 231See Moussalli Report 2000, supra note 74, at 30. 232See Uvin, supra note 2, at 5; ICCPR, supra note 149, art. 14. 233See Kerrigan, supra note 9, at 10. 234See id. 235Moussalli Report 2000, supra note 74, at 35.