LEADER 03921cam a2200373Ia 4500001 146642 005 20240621183458.0 008 090305s2006 xx rb 000 0 eng d 035 (OCoLC)ocn312415265 035 146642 049 LHMA 040 LHM |beng |erda |cLHM 090 KZ1201.A2 |bJ66 2006 100 1 Jones, Nicholas A., |d1968- 245 10 Adjudicating the perpetrators of genocide : |ba preliminary investigation into the judicial response to genocide in Rwanda / |cby Nicholas A. Jones. 264 1 [Place of publication not identified] : |b[publisher not identified], |c2006. 300 x, 298 pages 336 text |btxt |2rdacontent 337 unmediated |bn |2rdamedia 338 volume |bnc |2rdacarrier 502 Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Calgary, 2006. 504 Includes bibliographical references ( pages 274-290). 520 The research presents an exploratory and comparative analysis of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR), the Rwandan National Judiciary, and the Gacaca Courts. These three judicial arenas are involved in the process of adjudicating approximately 750,000 perpetrators of genocide. The research involved three field excursions to Rwanda and Tanzania. Many of the key actors in the judicial processes were interviewed, the courts were observed and various documents were collected. The research incorporates a theoretical framework that includes restorative and retributive justice. Although the research is exploratory in nature, the "jury" as it were, remains "out", a number of conclusions were nonetheless drawn. The achievement of simply engaging in such a monumental task must be applauded. Especially within Rwanda, and more specifically, the Gacaca, the process can be seen as the largest community-based judicial undertaking in recent history. The Rwandan National Judiciary is undergoing a massive reconstruction effort to establish the Rule of Law. The work of the ICTR has produced significant international jurisprudence that may have its impact at the International Criminal Court. Despite these significant achievements a number of contradictions also became apparent. Continuity in the efforts of the three judicial realms was not observed. Rather a distinctive and pervasive discontinuity appeared between the Rwandan and the international efforts. There was also a politicization of the judicial processes that undermines the overall notion of achieving justice for the victims. Additionally, a discontinuity in the allocation of resources was readily apparent. The ICTR operates on a budget over twenty times that of the entire Rwandan Judiciary while only addressing perhaps 100 of the three quarters of a million perpetrators. The ability of the Rwandan effort to successfully address the enormous number of cases is a final issue that became evident during the course of the research. The Rwandan judicial system appears to be ill-equipped to handle the burden of a case-load of such proportions. Despite the limitations and contradictions that were observed, the success of the judicial response to genocide may lie in the fact that the effort brings to the forefront recognition of the atrocities that took place. 530 Electronic version(s) |bavailable internally at USHMM. 533 Photocopy. |bAnn Arbor, Mich. : |cUMI Dissertation Services. |e22 cm. 590 Dissertations and Theses 591 Record updated by Marcive processing 21 June 2024 650 0 War crime trials |zRwanda. 650 0 Trials (Genocide) |zRwanda. 610 20 International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda. 856 41 |uhttp://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?did=1225147321&sid=17&Fmt=6&clientId=54617&RQT=309&VName=PQD |zElectronic version from ProQuest 956 41 |u http://dc.ushmm.org/library/bib146642/NR19156.pdf |z Hosted by USHMM. 852 0 |bstacks |hKZ1201.A2 |iJ66 2006 852 |bebook