Rwanda's Experimental Community-Based Gacaca Courts - Essay Example

RWANDA’S EXPERIMENTAL COMMUNITY-BASED GACACA COURTS Introduction The Rwandan Genocide is one of the most disturbing occurrences in history to the extent that processes of reconciling, healing, and execution of justice are seemingly overwhelming tasks. In the attempts to obtain truth and justice, citizens of Rwanda have embarked on transitional justice, which will enable them to address various disturbing moments that resulted from the genocide. This process is not only focused on reprisal, but also educating, healing as well as building relationships that are essential for ensuring the strength of community, peace, and collective interest. Since transitional justice is interdisciplinary, it addresses several social elements and provides judicial approaches that the gacaca courts are offering in Rwanda. Rwanda’s experimental Gacaca courts are grassroots, village or community-based hearings wherein the community judges, defends as well as prosecutes individuals accused of genocide crimes1. Based on apparent outcomes of various hearings, the gacaca court system has several strengths associated with sociological, economic, cultural, and psychological benefits. Some of the economic benefits include timeliness, cost, and social drain of individuals in the prison. Besides, social relations effectively addressed by Gacaca courts include the perpetrator’s mentality or mind-set, and the general social objective of creating a unified community as well as country. However, Gacaca courts have several weaknesses, which include procurement of suspects, procedural issues, deprivation of rights of the defendant, and court legitimacy problems2. This essay will analyze the strengths and weaknesses of Rwanda’s experimental community-based gacaca courts based on general theories of transitional justice. It will consider how Rwanda incorporates truth, retributive, and reconciliatory techniques of resolving conflict to address the 1994 genocide cases. Furthermore, the significance of Gacaca courts in attaining social, economic, and political needs of post-genocide Rwanda will be analyzed. Strengths of the Gacaca Courts Economic Benefits Gacaca trials have cost-related benefits because they are carried out in the communities and neighborhoods where the offenses occurred. The community-based Gacaca courts avoid enormous overhead cost that would be incurred by the government such as court costs, utilities, housing, and transportation. Furthermore, judges of Gacaca courts are paid low wages, although lack of financial benefit among judges raises arguments concerning the effectiveness of these Rwandan courts. The gacaca trials do not involve lawyers or other sanctioned salaried representation for the defendant, but allows individuals in the community to represent the accused3. However, failure to involve official representation to argue for the accused has several negative aspects associated with the non-existence of due process rights. In this sense, the accused may lack fair treatment in the process. Despite these shortcomings, it is apparent that Rwanda is applying a cost-effective system to deliver justice to her immense population. This is basically attributed to Gacaca courts’ reliance on functioning of judges as members of the community, and voluntary contributions of the communities to the trials. Another economic-related strength of Gacaca courts is timeliness. The Gacaca system avoids the slow-moving process of delivering justice and costs of formal trials that would greatly drain the economy of Rwanda. It also addresses economic drain, which result from the prison system. By disposing of the cases promptly, the Gacaca system prevents labor drain caused by imprisoned individuals who become unproductive members of the community4. Social-Relations Benefits The Rwandan society benefits on micro as well as macro levels from the gacaca courts, and its capability to consider particular sociological prototypes of perpetrators of the genocide. Most individuals accused at the Gacaca courts do not have the mentality of killers, or social deviants. Although they are accused of acts of violence, the defendants often want to be accepted as well as integrated in the society. It is apparent that the social climate resulting to the Rwandan genocide constituted brainwashing, propaganda, and general social unrest, thus the perpetrators are not exclusively liable for their actions. Many defendants in Gacaca courts are remorseful, and confess to their offenses as a way of apologizing to genocide victims. Gacaca promotes this through reduced sentences as well as earlier reintegration of the accused into Rwandan society5. Gacaca system facilitates reintegration of citizens as a form of establishing a unified Rwanda. It encourages forgiveness to the accused, and their acceptance in the society. In addition, the open set-up of Gacaca courts permits transgressors and victims to speak openly regarding deviants acts committed in the attempts to promote unity. As such, Gacaca system strives towards open forgiveness. It seeks to solve issues associated with genocide at the present to avoid the hurt from being passed across the generations as a problem of blood dispute. Furthermore, Gacaca courts allocate participatory justice to Rwandan citizens, and encourage society participation in the trials or proceedings. The judges are local community members and other individuals in the society attend the Gacaca courts to hear the accused as well as make accusations. As a result, the community readily accepts the outcome of the hearings6. Rwandan Culture-related benefits The Gacaca courts substantially promote the unification of Rwanda, which builds a novel culture for the country. Since Gacaca system originates from traditions of Rwandan community, Gacaca courts are a system of justice that most Rwandans are contented with as a means of resolving disputes. The Gacaca system incorporates the Rwandans’ traditions, although it has slight disparities from the original Gacaca with respect to function and form. In addition, the Gacaca system offers reconciliation opportunities with the capacity to reinstate a culture that was nearly faced out during the colonization process. This system provides individuals an opportunity to have conversations with and understand the transgressors while avoiding forcible, miserable circumstances of remote proceedings. The system shapes as well as educates the culture of future generation. This is significant because it prevent the dispute from being passed to the next generation. It is apparent that Gacaca system teaches the future generation on the importance of unity as well as forgiveness. Most important feature of the Gacaca courts is that they are formed based on cultures of openness and community involvement7. Psychological Benefits The Gacaca courts incorporate several theories of punishment such as deterrence, restitution, rehabilitation, and retribution that are part of the conventional criminal law. These theories have proved to affect the transgressors or criminals as well as other individuals in the Rwandan community. By making an individual’s crimes known to the entire society, the Gacaca system creates an enormous deterrent effect. The family is a significant institution in Rwandan culture, and the community is perceived as an extended family. Therefore, Gacaca format prevents individuals from committing crimes by making the perpetrators to confess their crimes or answer the accusations before their family8. The Gacaca courts also have a retributive aspect. Confrontation by the victims of the incident is a form of punishment. In addition, prison sentences have retributive effects on the perpetrators. Rehabilitation takes place after prisoners are released and integrated in their societies or communities, and with the help of individuals who accused them, they endeavor to lead a better life. In this sense, the Rwandan society is wholly accountable for the rehabilitation of transgressors or perpetrators. On the other hand, restitution happens when the criminal or wrongdoer returns to his or her community because he or she is required to seek forgiveness and reconcile with the victims. Some of the forms of restitution include laboring in victims’ fields, and monetary repayment accorded to individuals charged with level-three property crimes9. Weaknesses of the Gacaca Courts Critics from all over the world have pointed out the many weaknesses that the Gacaca courts have. Their criticism has been confirmed true by documentations provided by the Rwandan government. While the courts have been frequently praised by some analysts, others have criticized the courts due to different perspectives that they use to evaluate the courts. One of the greatest weaknesses is the way the courts handle case procedures. Some of the steps that a case follows in the courts are very peculiar and suspicious. Another great weakness that has been seen with the Gacaca courts is that it has allowed some of the people who were accused of genocide crimes to walk away free. Some of these accused criminals are still in hiding in the nation while others fled to other nations. Court legitimacy is also another great problem observed in the Rwandan Gacaca courts. There are also concerns among the Rwandan people on how the accused people’s rights are addressed by the court during their trials10. According to the Rwandan government, the Gacaca Courts faced numerous trial obstacles especially while the National Service of Gacaca Courts was gathering information and data. The greatest challenge that the Gacaca Courts encountered was the destruction of evidence by the criminals and other people who did it unknowingly. The form of information they required was vulnerable to destruction, especially due to the settings that it was to be collected from. The people who came across the information required by the courts had unknowingly destroyed most of the important documents. For instance, most of the notebooks that contained viable information had been thrown into latrines by the illiterate people who stumbled on it. The whole information gathering issue was caused by the high level of illiteracy in the Rwandans and the courts had no option but to work with the inadequate evidence and information. This caused the termination of many cases involving criminals whose cases had lacked enough evidence to incriminate them11. Some of the data and information that was gathered by the courts was irrelevant; hence most of the trials ended unceremoniously with the suspected criminals walking away freely despite the fact that it was universally known that they were the culprits in crime. The court’s efforts to find duplicates of the destroyed information failed miserably since the only available duplicates did not contain enough information to incriminate the suspects. The witnesses who were called upon would either fail to show up due to poor Court coordination or they would mysteriously disappear. The courts did not provide any witness protection programs to the witnesses. Some sources reveal that some witnesses in the rural areas were ready to testify but they were not provided with transportation by the Courts. Critics believe that if the cases would have taken place in the Rwandan civil courts, the government would have done a thorough job in acquiring witnesses where the evidence was not enough to incriminate the suspects. The government would be in a better position to acquire information and data by mobilizing its human resources and machinery to retrieve destroyed evidence12. The Gacaca Courts have not been able to effectively deliver justice to the Rwandan people. Many of the Genocide criminals have escaped from their rural areas and they have moved to other places in Rwanda and in the neighboring nations where they are unknown. The fact that Rwanda is still lagging behind in the technological development area makes it very hard to track the suspected criminals. The Gacaca Courts have done little, if not nothing, to chase after the fleeing suspected criminals. In recent developments, nations where the suspected criminals have fled to are helping in the capture of these people so that justice can be done. These efforts to extradite the criminals from other nations have not been very successful since the courts only provide vague descriptions of the criminals. This has made the identification of the suspected criminals to be very difficult and justice is yet to be delivered to the Rwandan people. The Gacaca courts need to incorporate the latest tracking technology to capture some of the suspects13. The Gacaca Courts have been engulfed in legitimacy issues. For instance, a very big number of the people who were elected into the judges’ seats in the courts have been linked to the genocide crimes. The Rwandan people have raised their concern on the possibility of bias in the judges since they are linked to the crimes. When the competence level of the judges is compromised, the entire justice system becomes unreliable. Critics are worried that the whole justice and reconciliation process is a total fail in the nation since the legitimacy issues compromise the effectiveness of the system. Judges may spare some of the suspects who may end up incriminating them. The Gacaca Courts have not received universal trust from the Rwandan people and the international observers. There are also concerns that most of the judges in the Gacaca Courts are not trained enough for the tasks that they are presented with. It is worrying that the genocide criminals are being brought to trial before unskilled judges who barely know the law in depth. The main concerns with this are that the judges may fail to sentence the criminals to their appropriate time in prison14. The Rwandan people elected the judges in the Gacaca Courts on merits of their integrity and they ignored the educational qualifications of the judges. During the elections, the elected judges’ background information was not thoroughly scrutinized to establish whether they were competent enough to be vested with the power to be the justice grantors to the Rwandan people. The illiteracy level in the nation may have been a contributing factor to the election of incompetent judges in the Gacaca Courts. Most of the people in the nation followed their political leader’s choices without looking for an oversight on the people they were voting for. Most of the goals that were initially set by the Gacaca Courts have remained unmet, which has caused the questioning of the legitimacy of the courts. There is limited evidence of the effectiveness of the Gacaca Courts. The credibility of this justice system is questionable and the Rwandan people and the international critics still demand for the Gacaca Courts to deliver substantial justice to the people in the nation who suffered the genocide15. The process of justice and reconciliation in the Gacaca Courts has been observed to be unjust on the part of the accused suspects. Critics have established that the courts treat the suspected criminals in an unjust manner whereby the accused civil rights are not fully granted. For instance, there are trials that happen too fast, denying the accused people a chance to prepare for their defense. It is also common for the judges to have a predestined judgment for some of the suspected criminals. Just because the courts are expected to send some people to prison, the Gacaca Courts have been accused with unjust imprisonment of the suspects even where the evidence is not ample enough to incriminate the accused. There are also incidences where the accused are denied the chance to get bail and to appeal for trial. The suspects are also denied the chance to contact their legal attorneys. The court proceedings are below the required justice system standards. There is need for the Gacaca courts to redeem themselves from the proceedings injustice16. Another weakness that has been viewed in the Gacaca Courts is the constant interference from the government of Rwanda. The political leaders in the nation have been known to influence the decision making of the judges in the courts. The national government’s interference with the court proceedings slows down the justice process. It also provides space for bias in the judges involved since their decision making may be motivated by external pressure. The fact that the politics in the nation is still driven by name tarnishing against rival politicians has seen the courts being presented with false evidence as the rival parties try to accuse each other of being criminal minds. The government has also been accused of forcing the people to take part in the case proceedings as witnesses17. Conclusion The quest for justice for the Rwandan people who were directly affected by the historical genocide that left the country in chaos has been engulfed with many obstacles. The people in the community have always advocated for the people behind the criminal activities to be brought to justice. The Gacaca Courts were put in place in order to specifically deal with the justice and reconciliation process. The courts have been able to bring some of the culprits to justice but most of the suspected criminals are still free. The courts have not been as effective as had been expected due to incompetence on the part of those involved in various processes in the justice system. The whole process has been politicized, and analysts from Rwanda and around the world believe that the courts may fail to deliver the required results in the end. Justice should always prevail; thus, the Rwandan government should look into alleviating the weaknesses that have already been identified in the Gacaca Courts. Bibliography Bornkamm, Paul Christoph. Rwandas Gacaca Courts: Between Retribution and Reparation. New York: Oxford University Press, 2012. Clark, Philip. The Gacaca courts, post-genocide justice and reconciliation in Rwanda: justice without lawyers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010. Corey, Allison, and Sandra F Joireman. "Retributive Justice: The Gacaca Courts in Rwanda." African Affairs 103, no. 1 (2004): 73–89. Eamon, Aloyo. "Transitional Tradeoffs and Vital Victims: A Partially Democratic Theory of Transitional Justice." March 2010. http://www.oneearthfuture.org/siteadmin/images/files/file_54.pdf (accessed September 30, 2012). Fischer, Martina. "Transitional Justice and Reconciliation: Theory and Practice." 2011. http://www.berghof-handbook.net/documents/publications/fischer_tj_and_rec_handbook.pdf (accessed September 30, 2012). International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance. "The Gacaca Courts in Rwanda." 2008. http://www.idea.int/publications/traditional_justice/upload/Chapter_2_The_Gacaca_Courts_in_Rwanda.pdf (accessed September 30, 2012). Lahiri, Karan. "Rwanda’s ‘Gacaca’ Courts a Possible model for local Justice in International Crime?" International Criminal Law Review 9 (2009): 321–332. Longman, Timothy. "An Assessment of Rwanda’s Gacaca Courts." Peace Review 21, no. 3 (2009): 304–312. Sarkin, Jeremy. "The Tension between Justice and Reconciliation in Rwanda: Politics, Human Rights, Due Process and the Role of the Gacaca Courts in Dealing with the Genocide." Journal of African Law 45, no. 2 (2001): 143-172. Westberg, Megan M. "Rwandas Use of Transitional Justice After Genocide: The Gacaca Courts and the ICTR." Kansas Law Review 59, no. 2 (2011): 331-367. Read More