Bikindi, Simon: Guilty of Public Incitement to Commit Genocide

One of the most frustrating – and yet inspiring – parts of my position is that much of the work I’m dealing with is highly confidential. While this has yet to garner me a codename, any kind of “high-level clearence” or even a conversation with Slugworth, it does give me kind of a warm, fuzzy feeling – sort of like swallowing a number of caterpillars just before a hard winter. (Wow… my metaphor-creator is clearly on the fritz. Sorry.) It is in equal measures frustrating, since I’m unable to discuss the very interesting stuff that I’m doing with my friends and family. No more so had this been the case than the last couple of days when we were preparing the final judgement for Simon Bikindi.

I work primarily for Chambers these days. That’s the section of the Tribunal that serves as the judge’s assistants, therefore having no advocacy element. My position as intern was created to aid in the judge’s drafting of their decisions in two separate cases. Primarily, I have been working on the case of Protais Zigiranyirazo, the brother-in-law of the former president of Rwanda. That is where the bulk of the quotes on the ‘Unscripted’ page come from, incidentally. However, for the last few weeks I’ve been spending much of my time working on the case of Simon Bikindi, a Rwandan pop-star who was accused of composing and performing anti-Tutsi songs during the genocide, among a host of other crimes. This is because the Bikindi judgement was rendered today – and as these things draw to their conclusion, there’s usually more work than hours available.

Bikindi was charged with six separate counts under the jurisdiction of the tribunal: conspiracy to commit genocide, genocide (or alternatively, complicity in genocide), public incitement to commit genocide, murder as a crime against humanity and persecution as a crime against humanity. When all was said and done, and the decision was rendered today, Bikindi was found guilty of the 4th charge – public incitement to commit genocide.

From a sheer legal history standpoint, this case had an interesting element. It was, as far as I and others can tell, the first time that someone has been put on trial for their musical compositions and subsequent widespread play in a genocide-related setting. The issue was not, as is often the case with ‘new’ interpretations of law, totally sidestepped by the Chamber. The Chamber found that Bikindi indeed did compose these songs with the intention of disseminating pro-Hutu ideology and anti-Tutsi propaganda, that they were in fact disseminated throughout 1994 with that purpose. However, since the songs were written outside of the temporal jurisdiction of the ICTR (ie: NOT 1994) and it was not proven beyond a reasonable doubt that Bikindi himself had helped to disseminate them through 1994, they didn’t form the basis for any crime capable of being punished by the tribunal.

In the end, Bikindi was found guilty on an issue that his Defense team entirely forgot to include in their closing arguments. It was proven beyond reasonable doubt that Bikindi had used a car hooked up with loudspeakers to drive along a main road and exhort the people along it to “work” and eliminate the minority Tutsi, or “snakes” as he called them. This act formed the base of the guilty count on charge four of the indictment.

For public incitement of genocide, Bikindi was given a 15 year prison sentence, with his reputation as a celebrity serving as an aggravating factor.

Sitting in the courtroom as the judgement was rendered, it was interesting to watch the reactions of the various people in the court. Bikindi himself was attentive, not intent, and his face betrayed little-to-no emotion. At one point he looked at me, made eye contact, then carried on. His defense counsel, on the other hand, kept clenching and unclenching his jaw as the part of the judgement dealing with the guilty count was read. While I was fairly calm, knowing that all I had to do was keep my mouth shut and head down – always a challenge for me – multiple people on the Chambers team admitted to some anxiety.

This case featured a lot of very interesting notes, for me personally. It was the first time I’ve helped to draft a judgement of a case. It was the first time I knew the outcome of a trial before any of the parties involved in it. It was the first time I was invited to sit IN the courtroom – not in the public gallery – mere meters from the judge, and feet from the accused. Having read and re-read the legal findings of the judgement on editing assignments around 5 times over the past week, I was able to speak under my breath word-for-word along with the presiding judge.

And once the judgement was rendered, and everyone began to file out of the courtroom, I recieved an invitation from my supervisor – Maggie – to join her, the three judges, the other two interns from the case (Chris Shelton and Andrea) and a handful of others to the presiding judge’s chamber for a thank you drink. If it hadn’t been enriching enough to that point, to be personally thanked by the presiding judge of a trial put the final cap on the day. Especially since I was able to persuade everyone to pose for a brief picture, except Judge Arrey who departed too quickly.

Of course… I got about 12 minutes to celebrate a job-well-done, because the Zigiranyirazo judgement renders in the near future, and that’s my primary case, and it’s going to keep me busier than a badger in a button factory.

PS:My metaphor machine is definitely busted. We’ll see if I can’t get something better later in the week.

Also: I just recieved notice that the judgement made the front page of the BBC! This is, to remind you, a judgement that I helped in the creation of. Therefore, I made the front page of the BBC. In case you have qualms with the logic of that statement, allow me to remind you that logic is lame.