Desktop version

Home arrow Law arrow United States law and policy on transitional justice : principles, politics, and pragmatics

b. transitional justice options the u.s. government seriously considered and actually implemented

Just as with the FRY, the USG (like other members of the international community) almost immediately sought to arrange prosecution of Rwandan genocidaires. Unlike with the FRY, however, the USG appeared more flexible regarding the ultimate form that prosecution could take. At various points, the USG apparently seriously considered supporting prosecution through ICTY-Expanded, ICT-Separate, ICT-Tied, a permanent international criminal court, or the ICJ. Moreover, unlike with either the Nazis or Japanese from WWII or the Balkan atrocity perpetrators, the USG seemingly did not seriously consider supporting any non-prosecutorial transitional justice options for Rwanda.

The USG ultimately supported the implementation of ICT-Tied through the UNSC. Figure 7.1 shows the general transitional justice option the USG supported for addressing alleged Rwandan genocidaires, whereas Figure 7.2 displays the specific prosecutorial transitional justice option the USG supported in this case.

In addition, the USG later instituted programs to support the GoR’s confrontation of genocidaires through: (1) a U.S. Resident Legal Advisor to Rwanda to advise and materially assist the GoR in its national prosecutions,153 and (2) financial, technical, and material assistance to gacaca.154

U.S. Government Transitional Justice Options Tree for Suspected Rwandan Genocide Perpetrators—General

figure 7.1 U.S. Government Transitional Justice Options Tree for Suspected Rwandan Genocide PerpetratorsGeneral.

U.S. Government Transitional Justice Options Tree for Suspected Rwandan Genocide Perpetrators—Prosecution

figure 7.2 U.S. Government Transitional Justice Options Tree for Suspected Rwandan Genocide Perpetrators—Prosecution.

 
Source
< Prev   CONTENTS   Source   Next >

Related topics