Genocide, Justice, and Rwanda’s Gacaca Courts

• Author: Hollie Nyseth Brehm,Jean-Damascène Gasanabo,Christopher Uggen
• DOI: 10.1177/1043986214536660
• Date: 01 August 2014
• Published date: 01 August 2014
• Subject Matter: Articles

Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice

2014, Vol. 30(3) 333 –352

© 2014 SAGE Publications

Reprints and permissions:

sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

DOI: 10.1177/1043986214536660

ccj.sagepub.com

Article

Genocide, Justice, and

Rwanda’s Gacaca Courts

Hollie Nyseth Brehm1, Christopher Uggen2,

and Jean-Damascène Gasanabo3

Abstract

More than one million people participated in the 1994 genocide against the Rwandan

Tutsi. How did Rwanda, whose criminal justice infrastructure was decimated by the

genocide, attempt to bring the perpetrators to justice? In this article, we provide the

first analysis of the outcomes of the gacaca courts, a traditional community-based

justice system that was greatly modified to address crimes of genocide. After briefly

reviewing the creation of the National Service of Gacaca Jurisdictions, we explain the

court process. Then, we present an overview of the outcomes of the courts with a

focus on the specific sanctions given to those found guilty. This article provides the

first systematic analysis of these sanctions, contributing both an empirical overview

and new insights into how Rwanda attempted to bring justice to the many citizens

who took part in the genocidal violence. We conclude by briefly highlighting some

successes and failures of the gacaca system and its broader lessons for justice in other

contexts.

Keywords

genocide, restorative justice, Rwanda, punishment, courts

On April 6, 1994, the plane carrying the President of Rwanda and the President of

neighboring Burundi was shot down as it prepared to land in the capital of Rwanda.

The crash killed the plane’s occupants immediately, and within hours, targeted killing

1University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, USA

2The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA

3Research and Documentation Center on Genocide, Rwandan National Commission for the Fight

Against Genocide, Rwanda

Corresponding Author:

Hollie Nyseth Brehm, Department of Sociology, The Ohio State University, 238 Townshend Hall, 1885

Neil Avenue Mall, Columbus, OH 43210, USA.

Email: nyset005@umn.edu

536660CCJXXX10.1177/1043986214536660Journal of Contemporary Criminal JusticeNyseth Brehm et al.

research-article2014

334 Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice 30(3)

of Tutsis and those associated with them began. Members of the government had

deliberately engendered animosity between the two main ethnic groups—Hutu and

Tutsi—which had become politicized and polarized during Belgian colonialism. Just a

few months later, over 1,050,000 people were dead (Center for Conflict Management

of the National University of Rwanda, 2012). To put this number in perspective, these

1,050,000 people comprised approximately 14% of Rwanda’s 7.5 million1 inhabitants,

a rate of killing 2,800 times higher than the current U.S. homicide rate of 5 per 100,000.

Government leaders were largely responsible for the planning and execution of

genocide. Yet, it is also well documented that priests, doctors, nurses, judges, and

even human rights activists took part in the violence by murdering their neighbors,

looting houses, destroying property, and raping women (Center for Conflict

Management of the National University of Rwanda, 2012; Fujii, 2009; Hatzfeld,

2008; Mamdani, 2001; Straus, 2006). Overall, more than one million perpetrators

participated in the genocide; and as new government leaders debated how to rebuild

the country, an important part of the conversation concerned holding these partici-

pants accountable.

How has Rwanda, whose criminal justice system was destroyed by the genocide,

attempted to bring the massive number of perpetrators to justice? This article offers a

first look at some of the outcomes of the gacaca courts, a traditional community-based

justice system that was modified to address crimes of genocide. We briefly explain the

creation of the National Service of Gacaca Jurisdictions before discussing how these

courts functioned in law and in practice. Next, we draw on court records to present an

overview of the outcomes of these courts. We focus particularly on the sanctions given

to different groups of perpetrators, which have yet to be systematically analyzed.

Finally, we briefly place the successes and failures of the gacaca courts in context,

discussing the system’s lessons for transitional justice and other settings.

Transitional Justice: Responding to Genocide

Due in part to the magnitude and severity of the crimes, transitional justice responses

to genocide often occur at both the local and international levels. Internationally, for-

mal trials have only been legitimized as appropriate responses to genocide and similar

atrocity crimes since World War II. While prosecution was considered after the

Armenian genocide and for war crimes committed during World War I (Bass, 2000;

Heberer & Matthaus, 2008), the 1945 Nuremberg trials are widely recognized as the

key precedent for international trials for mass atrocity.2 After the Nuremberg Tribunal

closed, members of the newly formed United Nations began discussing the possibility

of a permanent international tribunal. Due in part to Cold War rivalries, however, that

court (known today as the International Criminal Court) was not yet in existence when

genocide occurred in Rwanda.

Instead, in November 1994, the United Nations Security Council passed a resolu-

tion that created the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR). The mandate

of this ad hoc tribunal was to try the Rwandans deemed most responsible for the geno-

cide. The ICTR held its first trial in Arusha, Tanzania, in 1997 and handed down the