Summary of Statement by Mr. A.U. Okali, Registrar
International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda

Mr. Okali opened by stating that it seems that what has been undertaken in Rwanda is a pursuit of “partial” justice. The whole aspect of justice has not been attended to at all and has been overlooked.

He stated that it is not within traditional criminal justice to do that and he believes that recovering communities need to see complete justice, not just partial. He referred briefly to the prior statements of Witness A and Witness B and stated that he could not speak to their experiences as they likely occurred before he became Registrar.

His first task as Registrar was to hire a Gender Advisor even though others questioned the advisability of that tactic. As Registrar, their office has been trying to ensure there is justice for the victim in addition to the traditional legal work of protecting accused persons.

He stated that since the time span during which Witness B’s story took place, they have done a lot of work to change the way in which victims are dealt with at the tribunal. Mr. Okali identified several provisions in particular such as consulting victims and witnesses beforehand as part of the basic regime he proposed after he took on the role. The regime, he stated, was rejected but he believes that in their work they must do all they can in practice to ascertain what victims and witnesses need.

Mr. Okali also observed that the ICTR’s experience is particularly relevant to the ICC and should help to build a better regime in the permanent court. The situations which the ICC will face, he stated, will be more like the ICTR experience. Thus, the ICC will be dealing with regions with no history of witness protection. Also, defense witnesses are scattered; they are not in Rwanda and often they are living illegally in other countries. Transporting witnesses has been a problem they have had to deal with and as a result they have developed schemes for transfers where countries will provide papers to witnesses for travel to the ICTR and will take them back after they have participated even though they were living there illegally.

He also identified the problem encountered in societies unaccustomed to proper records. Thus, most of the evidence is oral and survivors often find themselves telling and re-telling things that have happened to them long ago. It is difficult for the Court to balance the need to question witnesses with the need to protect them from badgering.