[2nd Preparatory Commission of the International Criminal Court (ICC Prepcom), "Perspectives from the Tribunals" panel, part 1],, 27 July 1999

This video is restricted. First part of footage from a panel hosted by the Women's Caucus entitled "Witnesses Speak," held on July 27, 1999 as part of the 2nd Preparatory Commission of the ICC. The participants included two women from Rwanda who wished to remain anonymous, referred to as Witness A and Witness B; Mary Balikungeri, of the Rwandan Women's Community Network; Annette Lyth, who has worked with victims and survivors on the ground in Rwanda and Kosovo as part of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe and later Kvinna till Kvinna in Sweden; and Agwu Okali, registrar at the ICTR. Betty Murungi, a human rights lawyer from Kenya, moderated. Pam Spees, of the Women's Caucus for Gender Justice, served as rapporteur. The discussion also benefitted from the insights of Ms. Francoise Ngendahayo, Advisor on Gender Issues and Assistance to Victims at the ICTR, who spoke when the discussion was opened for general questions and comments. The video begins with an introduction by Betty Murungi. Murungi introduces the panelists. The first speaker speaks in French, which is translated in English, and wears a headscarf and veil to obscure her identity. She is one of two women survivors from Rwanda on the panel. She describes her experience as a survivor of rape during the events of 1994. She talks about her life during the war, explaining that she was raped every day. She asks if the international community truly understands the atrocities and consequences of rape that women and children have to deal with, such as trauma and HIV, and asks if the ICC really has the power to give her justice. She asks why the tribunal was set up in Arusha and not in Rwanda. She concludes with a plea for justice. The second anonymous survivor talks about her experience going to Arusha to testify (in English), and says that things did not happen as she expected. As a witness, her identity was supposed to be protected, but it was compromised at many points. She recounts that members of the ICTR in Kigali came to her office, which threatened her security. Later, in Arusha, two cleaning staff saw her and recognized her. At the airport in Arusha, everyone could see that she had traveled by UN plane. While she was in Arusha, her passport was taken away and she was kept in a house with Tanzanian soldiers and workers for two days. In the court room, she was told that the accused would be sitting in front of her and that she would have to identify him. She was relieved when she found out he was too ill to appear in court, and declined to testify at another time. She says that if she is recognized, she will be in danger even if the accused is in jail. She says that the ICTR should explain the procedures to witnesses before they agree to testify. Mary Balikungeri, from the Rwandan Women’s Community Network, talks how previous tribunals have gone wrong and what the ICC can do to for victims and ensure that their participation is meaningful. She asks if the legal proceedings are actually designed to give justice to victims or just to assuage the guilt of the world community that allowed such crimes to occur. She asserts that the tribunals need to be made more relevant to survivors in order to achieve justice. Agwu Okali, registrar at the ICTR, talks about how he has advocated for victims' participation and a victim-oriented approach to justice. He discusses the need for a gender advisor in the ICTR and states that they have been working to improve the treatment of victims, but are still learning. He discusses how they have dealt with challenges like locating witnesses who are scattered around the world, and may be living illegally in other countries. He continues by discussing the difficulties of working in a society that is not accustomed to keeping records, and where evidence is based in oral testimony. Annette Lyth describes her experiences working in tribunals, praising the sensitivity shown to the victims during the Kosovo trials. She compares the ICTY and ICTR, and notes that none of the investigators in the Rwandan tribunal had any experience in working with sexual violence cases in their home countries, whereas the investigators in Kosovo had more experience and a more sensitized approach. She observes that Bosnian women's organizations tended to see the tribunal as a means for getting justice, while Rwandan women's organizations were more skeptical . She asserts that by including safeguards in the statutes, victims will be better supported. Questions from the audience follow. A woman asks about the funding differential in funding between ICTY and ICTR. Ben Ferencz, a former Prosecutor at the Nuremberg trials, talks about the importance of rehabilitation and compensation for victims. He says that the process is extremely complicated and costly, but important to carry out.