Table of contents
12. The term as part of would include the initial conduct in a mass killing.
P.12. Evidence of killing on a massive scale.
P.12.1. Evidence of massacres witnessed.
P.12.2. Evidence of large numbers of bodies or mass graves.
P.12.3. Evidence of estimates of number of victims.
P.12.4. General statements many people were killed (without estimates of numbers).
P.12.5. Evidence of the killing of particular victims.
P.12.6. Evidence of children orphaned by massacres.
P.12.7. Evidence of decrease in population.
P.12.8. Evidence of the size of the crowd gathered or prisoners held before an killings occurred.
P.12.9. Number of people listed as missing after the conflict.
P.13. Cumulative application of evidence to prove a massive scale of killing.
P.14. Evidence of incidents amounting to a massive killing.
6.2. The victims of the mass killing were members of a civilian population.
Element
General evidentiary comment:
The jurisprudence of the ICTR and ICTY has also required that for extermination to be established it must be shown that killings occurred "on a massive scale" or such as to involve an element of "mass destruction": Akayesu, Trial Judgment, para. 591, Musema Trial Judgment, para. 217, Niyitegeka Trial Judgment, para. 450, Ntakirutimana Trial Judgment, paras. 813 – 814, Bagilishema Trial Judgment, para. 87, Kajelijeli Trial Judgment, paras. 890 – 891, http//www.legal-tools.org/doc/440d3a/Krstic Trial Judgment, para 497, Gacumbitsi Trial Judgment, para. 309, Kumahanda Trial Judgment, paras 691 – 692, Brđanin Trial Judgment, para. 390, Blagojević Trial Judgment para. 571, Vasiljević, para. 227.
The Ad Hoc Tribunals have refused to quantify the requirement for massive killings, saying that this requirement must be considered on a case-by-case basis: Kayishema Trial Judgment, para. 145, Bagilishema Trial Judgment, para. 87, Stakic Trial Judgment, para. 640, Blagojević Trial Judgment, para. 572.
It is clear that separate incidents may be considered cumulatively in assessing whether killings meet the required scale: Brđanin Rule 98bis Decision, para. 73, Brđanin Trial Judgment, para. 391.
Some decisions have suggested that it is necessary for the victims of the mass killings to form some sort of identifiable group, rather than merely an aggregate of individuals. Both the ICTY and ICTR have adopted the commentary on the ILC’s Draft Code of Crimes Against the Peace and Security of Mankind, which stated that extermination "is a crime which by its very nature is directed against a group of individuals" (Akayesu Trial Judgment, para 591, Musema Trial Judgment, para. 217, Niyitegeka Trial Judgment, para. 450, Bagilishema Trial Judgment, para. 86, Kajelijeli Trial Judgment, para. 890, Gacumbitsi Trial Judgment, para. 309, Kumahanda Trial Judgment, para. 691, Krstic Trial Judgment, para. 497, Stakic Trial Judgment, para. 638.) In Vasiljević, the Trial Chamber held that "the act of extermination must be collective in nature rather than directed towards singled out individuals." This approach was followed in Stakić (Trial Judgment, para. 639) and Brđanin (Trial Judgment, para. 390). However, in Stakic the Trial Chamber (at para. 639) clarified that the group need not be one defined by national, ethnic, racial or religious characteristics:
It is not clear whether this "group" requirement will be applied by the ICC since it is not contained in the Elements of Crimes.
P.12. Evidence of killing on a massive scale.
"2119. The Trial Chamber convicted Ntahobali of extermination as a crime against humanity on the basis of killings perpetrated at the Hotel Ihuliro roadblock, including the killing of a “Tutsi girl” and Ruvurajabo, at a location near the IRST, and at or near the EER as well as on the basis of the killing of Tutsis abducted from the Butare Prefecture Office and of the Rwamukwaya family.4914 The Trial Chamber found that “these killings, taken by themselves or collectively, occurred on a large scale.4915
4914. See supra, para. 14.
4915. Trial Judgement, para. 6054.
2120. Ntahobali challenges the Trial Chamber’s finding that the killings perpetrated at the Hotel Ihuliro roadblock and the killing of the Rwamukwaya family, “considered individually or collectively”, support the conclusion that they were committed on a large scale and that they reach the threshold for a conviction for extermination as a crime against humanity.4916 He contends that the acts underpinning his convictions with respect to the Hotel Ihuliro roadblock and the Rwamukwaya family cannot in any way support the finding that they contributed to the killing of a large number of people.4917 Ntahobali argues that the reasoning adopted in the Bagosora and Nsengiyumva Appeal Judgement should apply in this case and that his convictions for extermination as a crime against humanity should be reversed.4918
4916. Ntahobali Notice of Appeal, heading “Motif 4.9” at p. 3152/A (Registry pagination) (French), paras. 338 (emphasis omitted), 339.
4917. Ntahobali Notice of Appeal, para. 339.
4918. Ntahobali Notice of Appeal, para. 340; Ntahobali Appeal Brief, para. 982, referring to Bagosora and Nsengiyumva Appeal Judgement, paras. 395-397. Ntahobali explained that he could not develop Ground 4.9 any further in his appeal brief due to the word limit. See idem.
2121. The Prosecution responds that this ground should be dismissed as it is undeveloped and because merely citing case law is insufficient to establish that the Trial Chamber erred.4919
4919. Prosecution Response Brief, para. 1220.
2122. The Appeals Chamber considers that Ntahobali’s ground of appeal, although not developed in his appeal brief beyond the reliance on the Bagosora and Nsengiyumva Appeal Judgement, was sufficiently substantiated in his notice of appeal to allow for appellate review.4920 The Appeals Chamber will therefore examine Ntahobali’s contention. However, because it has reversed Ntahobali’s conviction for extermination as a crime against humanity based on the killing of the Rwamukwaya family,4921 the Appeals Chamber considers that Ntahobali’s allegation of error related to this killing has become moot. While it has also reversed Ntahobali’s convictions for extermination as a crime against humanity for committing killings of Tutsis at the Hotel Ihuliro roadblock beyond the killing of the Tutsi girl,4922 the Appeals Chamber considers that Ground 4.9 of Ntahobali’s appeal is not moot to the extent that it relates to the killing of the Tutsi girl and Ruvurajabo at the roadblock.
4920. See supra, para. 30.
4921. See supra, Section V.H.
4922. See supra, paras. 1394, 1503.
2123. The Appeals Chamber recalls that the actus reus of extermination is the act of killing on a large scale.4923 This is what distinguishes the crime of extermination from the crime of murder.4924 The Appeals Chamber further recalls that “large scale” does not suggest a strict numerical approach with a minimum number of victims.4925 The assessment of “large scale” is made on a case-by-case basis, taking into account the circumstances in which the killings occurred.4926 Relevant factors include, inter alia, the time and place of the killings, the selection of the victims and the manner in which they were targeted, and whether the killings were aimed at the collective group rather than victims in their individual capacity.4927
4923. See, e.g., Karemera and Ngirumpatse Appeal Judgement, para. 660; Lukić and Lukić Appeal Judgement, para. 536; Bagosora and Nsengiyumva Appeal Judgement, para. 394; Ntakirutimana Appeal Judgement, para. 516.
4924. See, e.g., Lukić and Lukić Appeal Judgement, para. 536; Stakić Appeal Judgement, para. 260, referring to Ntakirutimana Appeal Judgement, para. 516.
4925. See, e.g., Lukić and Lukić Appeal Judgement, para. 537; Rukundo Appeal Judgement, para. 185; Ntakirutimana Appeal Judgement, para. 516. See also Bagosora and Nsengiyumva Appeal Judgement, fn. 924.
4926. Lukić and Lukić Appeal Judgement, para. 538 and references cited therein.
4927. Lukić and Lukić Appeal Judgement, para. 538 and references cited therein.
2124. There can be no dispute that, “taken by themselves”, the individual killings of the Tutsi girl and Ruvurajabo at the Hotel Ihuliro roadblock in late April 1994 do not meet the “large scale” requirement. The Appeals Chamber, however, is not persuaded that the Trial Chamber erred in finding that these two killings, taken collectively with the other killings for which Ntahobali was convicted, “occurred on a large scale”.
2125. In the Bagosora and Nsengiyumva Appeal Judgement, the Appeals Chamber considered that “the Trial Chamber was unreasonable to conclude that the ‘large scale’ requirement for extermination was satisfied based on a collective consideration of events committed in different prefectures, in different circumstances, by different perpetrators, and over a period of two months.”4928 The Appeals Chamber observes that, by contrast, the two killings perpetrated at the Hotel Ihuliro roadblock were perpetrated in the same commune, in similar circumstances, by the same category of perpetrators, and approximately at the same time as the numerous killings perpetrated at the locations near the IRST, at or near the EER, and the killings of Tutsis abducted from the Butare Prefecture Office.4929 For all these events, the Trial Chamber concluded that the victims were all or predominantly of Tutsi ethnicity and were not targeted in their individual capacity but as part of a collective aim to exterminate the Tutsis.4930
4928. Bagosora and Nsengiyumva Appeal Judgement, para. 396. See also Karemera and Ngirumpatse Appeal Judgement, para. 661.
4929. See supra, Sections V.F, V.G.3, V.G.4, V.I, V.J.
4930. Trial Judgement, paras. 5783, 5784, 5844, 5852, 5854, 5870-5873, 5914, 5915. The Appeals Chamber is mindful that there is no genocidal intent requirement for the crime of extermination as a crime against humanity. However, the Appeals Chamber finds that the Trial Chamber’s findings with respect to the perpetrators’ and Ntahobali’s genocidal intent are relevant in this case to establish that the killings were directed against Tutsis as a collective group rather than victims in their individual capacities.
2126. In the circumstances of this case, the Appeals Chamber finds no error in the Trial Chamber’s collective consideration of the events in relation of which Ntahobali was convicted to find him guilty of extermination as a crime against humanity for the killings perpetrated at the Hotel Ihuliro roadblock and all other killings for which he remains convicted. Accordingly, the Appeals Chamber dismisses Ground 4.9 of Ntahobali’s appeal."
P.12.1. Evidence of massacres witnessed.
A. Legal source/authority and evidence:
Prosecutor v. Eliézer Niyitegeka, Case No. ICTR-96-14-T, Judgement (TC) 16 May 2003, para. 133:
"133. Witness GGY saw the Accused again that same day at 10.00 a.m. at Muyira Hill, shooting at the refugees. The distance between the witness and the Accused was not more than 100 metres. The attackers were shouting "Tuba Tsemba Tsembe", which he said means "Let’s exterminate them". The witness stated that this attack lasted until 5:30 p.m. After the attack, the attackers assembled at Kucyapa for a meeting. He said that there were so many refugees killed that day that he would compare them to "leaves which were falling from trees"."
"447. The evidence in the present case also supports the findings that there was widespread violence in the area of Bisesero between April and June 1994, that the attacks against Tutsi occurred almost on a daily basis. Witnesses XX, II, and HH testified about daily attacks, and Witness HH stated that very few attacks did not result in loss of life.[646] Several of the witnesses testified that the number of victims of the attacks was high.[647] Based on the totality of the evidence, the Chamber finds that the majority of the victims were Tutsi. The attackers consisted of Interahamwe, gendarmes, soldiers, and civilians. The Interahamwe, gendarmes, and soldiers were usually armed with guns and wore uniforms. The civilians were usually armed with clubs, machetes, bows, arrows, spears, hoes, knives, sharpened bamboo sticks, and other traditional weapons.[648] Some of the attackers arrived in vehicles; others came on foot.[649]"
"[646] T. 22 October 2001 pp. 38, 41-42, 108; T. 26 September 2001 pp. 49-50.
[647] Bisesero survivors testified upon attacks which claimed "many" lives of refugees at Gitwe Primary School in early May 1994 (DD, T. 23 October 2001 p. 138), at Mubuga Primary School at the end of June 1994 (SS, T. 30 October 2001 pp. 140-142); at Rwiramba, nearby Muyira Hill, in mid-May 1994 (GG, T. 24 September 2001 p. 30); at Muyira Hill on an unspecified day (FF, T. 28 September 2001 p. 73), during night attacks against houses in Bisesero where Tutsi refugees were seeking shelter (YY, T. 2 October 2001 pp. 102, 104). Asked whether he saw the bodies of the refugees who died during an attack at Muyira Hill, Witness YY specified that they looked like "grass on the hills" (T. 2 October 2001 p. 53, read in the light of T. in French at p. 63: "lorsqu'on regardait les corps, on semblait regarder les herbes sur la colline, dans la brousse").
[648] T. 26 September 2001 pp. 34, 42, 58; T. 28 September 2001 pp. 66-67; T. 4 October 2001 pp. 8-10; T. 22 October 2001 pp. 18-20; T. 30 October 2001 p. 132.
[649] T. 26 September 2001 p. 31; T. 4 October 2001 pp. 8-10; T. 22 October 2001 p. 14."
Prosecutor v. Alfred Musema, Case No. ICTR-96-13-T, Judgement (TC), 27 January 2000, para. 360:
360. Musema testified that while in his house in Kigali, he heard and saw the shots aimed at the plane, heard an explosion, although he did not see the plane crash, nor was he aware of those who were on board. The following day, on RTLM, he learnt of the crash and of those on board. He also admitted the occurrence of this incident and the inception of violence in Rwanda soon thereafter. Musema testified that in the days following the plane crash he witnessed massacres, the destruction of houses and the displacement of people from Kigali. Musema admitted that in the hours following the crash of the President's plane, violence set in and massacres began in Kigali and other préfectures in the country, marking the beginning of massacres described by him as a genocide.
"317. With thousands of internally displaced persons (hereinafter refugees)192 effectively imprisoned at the three sites in Kibuye, five days of almost continuous massacres commenced. First, at Mubuga Church the major killing started on 15 April and continued on 16 April. On 15 and 16 April the Complex suffered preliminary attacks followed by a major slaughter on 17 April. On 18 April, the massacre at the Stadium began with the attackers returning on 19 April to complete the job. Evidence before the Trial Chamber suggests that thousands of Tutsi seeking refuge were killed during these few days."
"192. Because the parties referred to the internally displaced persons as "those seeking refuge"throughout the trial, the Trial Chamber will remain consistent with this usage, noting however, that this use of the term in this context is inaccurate."
"157. […] The Chamber has substantially relied on the testimonies of Dr. Ronie Zachariah, Ms. Lindsey Hilson, Mr. Simon Cox, Dr. Alison Desforges, who testified as an expert witness, and General Romeo Dallaire, the force commander of UNAMIR at the time of these events as well as United Nations reports of which it takes judicial notice, for its general findings on the factual allegations set forth in paragraphs 5-11 of the indictment."
158. Dr. Zachariah, the Chief Medical and Field Coordinator for Medecins sans frontieres ("MSF"), based in the Butare region, testified that he witnessed widespread massacres of civilians in Rwanda from 13 to 24 April 1994. He stated that he travelled from Butare to Gitarama on 13 April 1994 in order to provide medical supplies to a hospital in Gitarama which had received 40 to 50 injured people. From 25 kilometres outside Gitarama, Dr. Zachariah said he and his team began to see refugees on the road, who reported the killings of civilians at roadblocks. At one of these barriers, Dr. Zachariah stated that his driver was treated aggressively by a guard manning the roadblock, because the driver was Tutsi and the Tutsi were accused of helping the RPF. Dr. Zachariah testified that it soon became apparent upon arrival at Gitarama Hospital that Tutsi civilians were being targeted for attack on a massive scale. Subsequently, Dr. Zachariah witnessed attacks on civilian populations, and killings of civilians. He recounted visiting Kibeho Church on 16 April 1994, where two to four thousand Tutsi civilians were apparently killed, and Butare on 17 April 1994, where a Burundian Tutsi was apparently beaten to death at a checkpoint, and where his purchase officer reported seeing the bodies of 5-10 dead civilians at every checkpoint on the road from Kigali. These checkpoints were apparently manned by well-armed, drunken soldiers and civilians. On the road from Butare to Burundi on 19 April 1994, Dr. Zachariah sated that saw civilians being massacred in villages throughout the countryside and at roadblocks. In his words:
"All the way through we could see on the [...] hillside, where there were communities, people [...] being pulled out by people with machetes, and we could see piles of bodies. In fact the entire landscape was becoming spotted with corpses, with bodies, all the way from there until almost Burundi's border".
(Hearing of 16 January 1997, pp 98-99)
159. At the Rwanda-Burundi border, on the same day, Dr. Zachariah testified that he saw a group of 60 to 80 civilians fleeing towards the Burundian border, from men armed with machetes. He stated that most of these civilians were hacked to death before they reached the border. Returning from the Burundian border, on 21 April 1994, Dr Zachariah stated that he had spoken to eye-witnesses who had informed him of the killings of approximately 40 Tutsi MSF personnel, in the Saga camps in Butare. He stated that his driver's entire family had been killed on the outskirts of Butare by Interahamwe and he had been informed of these killings by his driver who had managed to escape death. Dr. Zachariah testified that he had witnessed, on 22 April 1994, the aftermath of the massacre of the family of a moderate Hutu, Mr. Souphene, the sub-Prefect of Butare, by the Presidential Guard, and, on the same day, the killings of children in the Hotel Pascal in Butare and the executions of tens of Tutsi patients and nurses in Butare Hospital, including a Hutu nurse who was pregnant by a Tutsi man and whose child would therefore be Tutsi. […]"
"162. On a second trip, in June 1994, Mr. Cox visited the western part of Rwanda, arriving in Cyangugu from Zaire (now the Democratic Republic of Congo) and travelling north towards Kibuye. […] He visited a church in Shangi where a Priest described how the whole of his congregation who had been Tutsi had been hiding inside the church, because they had heard disturbances, and they were eventually all killed by large armed gangs of people, some of whom were equipped with hand grenades."
"165. In addition to the testimony of these witnesses, the Chamber takes judicial notice of the following United Nations reports, which extensively document the massacres which took place in Rwanda in 1994: notably, the Final Report of the Commission of Experts Established Pursuant to Security Council Resolution 935 (1994), U.N. Doc. S/1994/1405 (1994); Report of the Special Rapporteur of the Commission on Human Rights on Extrajudicial, Summary or Arbitrary Executions, Bacre Waly Ndiaye, on his mission to Rwanda from 8-17 April 1993, U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/1994/7/Add.1 (1993); Special Report of the Secretary-General on UNAMIR, containing a summary of the developing crisis in Rwanda and proposing three options for the role of the United Nations in Rwanda, S/1994/470, 20 April 1994; Report of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Mr. José Ayala Lasso, on his mission to Rwanda 11-12 May 1994, U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/S-3/3 (1994). See also, generally, the collection of United Nations documents in The United Nations and Rwanda, 1993-1996, The United Nations Blue Books Series, Volume X, Department of Public Information, United Nations, New York."
P.12.2. Evidence of large numbers of bodies or mass graves.
A. Legal source/authority and evidence:
Prosecutor v. Sylvestre Gacumbitsi, Case No. ICTR-2001-64-T, Judgement (TC), 17 June 2004, paras. 310, 142 – 144:
"310. […] Witness accounts show sufficiently that it was a large-scale massacre that resulted in numerous deaths. The fact is corroborated by Prosecution Witness Patrick Fergal Keane who, weeks later, saw many corpses.[289]"
"[289] See supra: Chapter II, Part C."
"142. Expert Witness, Alison Des Forges, testified that in 1994 she visited, among other places in Rwanda, sites close to Nyarubuye, and that she found corpses on those sites. Based on the information she received from different sources that were not disclosed at trial, she testified that the corpses she saw in all the areas she visited were mostly those of Tutsi, or of Hutu, depending on the sites. The former were victims of attacks perpetrated by the Forces armées rwandaises (FAR), the militia and members of the population, while RPF was responsible for the latter.[149]
143. The expert witness identified information contained in a document which the Defence showed to her[150] and which she referred to as the Gersony Report. She testified that the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees requested the said document from Mr. Gersony, but that it was not made public. She testified that Mr. Gersony referred to corpses floating in the river a few weeks after the arrival of RPF in an area including Rusumo, the River Akagera and Nyarubuye. Ms. Des Forges explained that, according to her own information, a general distinction should be made between corpses with hands bound behind the back, dating back to the period after the arrival of RPF, and corpses with unbound hands, dating back to the period before the arrival of RPF. She further testified that that she never saw any corpse with hands bound at Nyarubuye Parish.[151]
144. Prosecution Witness Patrick Fergal Keane, a journalist, who, in May 1994, produced a documentary for the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC)[152] on Rwanda, focussing on the events in Rusumo commune, testified that at the end of May 1994, with the assistance of RPF which was in control of that area, he was in Rusumo and filmed the Nyarubuye Parish building, which was littered with corpses.[153] Having heard the stories of the survivors of the events at the parish, he started looking for Bourgmestre Sylvestre Gacumbitsi, and had a conversation with him at the Benaco refugee camp in Tanzania.[154] In the documentary, some clips of which were shown and tendered as exhibits,[155] many decomposing and intermingled corpses are visible. The corpses are numerous, piled on top of each other, in front of a building located behind Nyarubuye Church, under the arches. The corpses are those of persons of both sexes, and bodies of children, including some in school uniforms, can be seen."
"[149] T., 26 August 2003, pp. 61 to 63.
[150] By Oral Decision of 20 October 2003, this document was then admitted as Defence Exhibit (D04), see T., 20 October 2003, pp. 3 to 5.
[151] T., 26 August 2003, pp. 63 to 72.
[152] T., 28 July 2003, pp. 22 to 24 and 31.
[153] T., 28 July 2003, pp. 25 et seq.
[154] See Prosecution Exhibit P7A. The witnesses identified the Accused in court (T., 28 July 2003, pp. 30 to 31).
[155] See Prosecution Exhibits P1, P2, P3, P4, P5, P6, P7, P8 and P9. These clips were shown in court and the witness commented on them. (T., 28 July 2003, pp. 31 et seq.)."
"562. […] The Witness estimated that more than three hundred people were killed at the Convent. Although he was not present at the massacre, the Witness helped to bury approximately 300 bodies on the following day of 8 April 1994.739"
"739. T. 24 July 2001, pp. 49-50 and124 (GAO)."
"604. Based upon the totality of the evidence, the Chamber finds that there was a killing of a large number of Tutsis at the Convent at Busogo Parish on the morning of 7 April 1994. The number of bodies buried the following day is an indicator that approximately 300 people died in the attack. Members of the Interahamwe were involved in the attack."
http//www.legal-tools.org/doc/325567/The Prosecutor v. Eliézer Niyitegeka, Case No. ICTR-96-14-T, Judgement (TC) 16 May 2003, paras. 85, 133, 141:
"85. […] During this attack, the witness suffered injuries to his head, chest and fingers from a grenade. […] He survived by remaining under the dead bodies until the night when he extracted himself from the bodies and left. The witness could not estimate the number of dead victims resulting from this attack, but he stated that people spent about ten days burying the dead. There were dead bodies everywhere and the witness could hear the cries of people dying and suffering.[66]"
"[66] T. 29 Aug. 2002, pp. 114-123, 160, 174."
"133. […] Some survivors recognized their kith and kin amongst the dead bodies and buried them in shallow graves; however, other dead bodies were eaten by wild animals and dogs on the hill."
"141. […] The attackers had surrounded Bisesero hills and there were violent confrontations. The Interahamwe far outweighed the refugees during the attack. Between 40,000 and 50,000 people were killed that day.[128] There were many bodies strewn everywhere around Muyira and Kagari, and all over the hills.[129]"
"[128] Id., p. 51.
[129] T. 26 Aug. 2002, p. 28."
"179. […]The attack lasted until 4.30 p.m. or 5.00 p.m. They were chased to Kiraro river where another group of attackers were waiting and "they slayed many, many people to the extent that the river became red with blood."[173]"
"[173] T. 14 Aug. 2002, pp. 47-53; T. 15 Aug. 2002, p. 79; T. 14 Aug. 2002, pp. 79-81 (Fr.)."
Prosecutor v. Laurent Semanza, Case No, ICTR-97-20-T, Judgement (TC), 15 May 2003, paras. 173, 220, 463:
"173. The witness testified that she saw "everything" because she was covered with dead bodies.[291] The witness explained that when the assailants came to load the dead bodies in vehicles, they noticed that she was not yet dead; they struck her head with a hammer and undressed her.[292] Later, they threw her in a pit full of dead bodies, from which she subsequently escaped.[293]"
"[291] T. 7 March 2001 p. 85.
[292] T. 7 March 2001 p. 85.
[293] T. 7 March 2001 p. 85."
"220. […]The attack continued until about 5 p.m. and the assailants killed many people so that "the whole hill was full of corpses."[421] […]"
"[421] T. 4 December 2000 p. 71."
"463. […] The Chamber recalls that a substantial number of refugees were killed at Musha church. One witness recalled seeing around 100 bodies at this site. The Chamber also recalls that on 18 April 1994 there were up to 10,000 refugees at Mwulire Hill and that after the attack the hill was full of corpses. […]"
The Prosecutor v. Elizaphan And Gérard Ntakirutimana, Cases No. ICTR-96-10 and ICTR-96-17-T, Judgment (TC), 21 February 2003, paras. 315, 335 – 337:
"315. As to the number of people killed on 16 April, the Prosecution relies primarily on Witness QQ. He testified that in March 1995, when he returned to Mugonero, he saw masses of bodies thinly covered with soil, remains of bodies scattered in dormitories, classrooms, toilets, and on the lawns of the Complex. There were also mass graves. The witness participated in the burial of the bodies lying about and in the reburial of bodies exhumed from the mass graves. He believed that all the bodies belonged to Tutsi, as it was his view that only Tutsi were targeted in 1994. The witness testified that the remains were put in forty coffins measuring about three metres long and one metre wide. He estimated that between 7,000 and 8,000 bodies were reburied. The Prosecution notes that when asked to explain how he arrived at those figures, Witness QQ said: "if you were to look at the size of the coffin, and during the burial at least 10 people would lift a coffin. And I would say there would be 150 skeletons in each coffin. So if you take 150 and you multiply by 45 you see you come to … 6,650… But there were other bodies … which were found in the graves which were not … exhumed. Therefore, one can make an estimate of between 6,000 to 7,000, given my calculations".[439]"
"Prosecutor v. Radislav Krstić, Case No. IT-98-33-T, Judgement (TC), 2 August 2001, paras. 73, 80:
"73. The forensic evidence supports the Prosecution’s claim that, following the take-over of Srebrenica, thousands of Bosnian Muslim men were summarily executed and consigned to mass graves. Although forensic experts were not able to conclude with certainty how many bodies were in the mass-graves, due to the level of decomposition that had occurred and the fact that many bodies were mutilated in the process of being moved from primary to secondary graves by mechanical equipment, the experts were able to conservatively estimate that a minimum of 2,028 separate bodies were exhumed from the mass-graves.141"
"141. Additional Manning Report p. 7614."
"80. It is impossible to determine with precision the number of Bosnian Muslim men killed by Bosnian Serb forces following the take-over of Srebrenica in July 1995. During the course of the exhumations conducted by the OTP, the process of identifying the number of bodies was complicated by the fact that, in the course of being removed from primary gravesites to secondary gravesites, the corpses were broken up and body parts became intermingled. However, as already noted, experts were able to conservatively determine that the minimum number of bodies in the graves exhumed was 2028.165 Although the Trial Chamber cannot dismiss the possibility that some of the exhumed bodies were killed in combat, it accepts that the majority of the victims were executed. Eighteen additional graves linked with Srebrenica have been located but not yet exhumed. Based on preliminary examinations conducted by the OTP, all of these sites contain human remains and it is expected that the total number of bodies found and linked with Srebrenica will significantly increase as these sites are exhumed.166"
"165. As Baraybar (a Prosecution forensic expert) pointed out, the minimum number of individuals within the grave is a very conservative estimate. Baraybar, T. 3811.
166. Baraybar, T. 3844. Four additional gravesites were exhumed in 2,000, reducing the number of unexhumed sites from 22 to 18. Prosecution experts estimate that a minimum of 2,571 further bodies are located in probed, but as yet, unexhumed gravesites. On the basis of their investigations to date, the Prosecution estimates that the total number of bodies detected in the mass graves is 4,805. See Additional Manning Report, p. 7614. This estimate was, however, contested by the Defence. See Additional Stankovic Report, p. 8179."
Prosecutor v. Alfred Musema, Case No. ICTR-96-13-T, Judgement (TC), 27 January 2000, para. 360, 414, 456, 486:
"360. […] Musema stated that these persons manning the roadblock threatened him and his family with death. At the roadsides he saw many bodies. […]"
"414. Witness R stated that he stayed hidden until the departure of the attackers, including Musema, at which point he went to Muyira hill to find the bodies of his family. He found the cadavers of his wife, child, mother and older brothers, amongst the many bodies which covered Muyira hill. All the dead were Tutsis and all were civilians."
"456. Witness F testified that on 14 May 1994 the attacks continued on Muyira hill and surrounding hills during which he was shot in his right arm and was hit by shrapnel in his shoulder. […]The witness added that the hills were strewn with bodies of those who had died the day before."
"486. […] Once the attackers had left, said the witness, she went with others to the entrance of the cave where she saw many bodies. She then fled."
The Prosecutor v. Clément Kayishema and Obed Ruzindana, Case No. ICTR-95-1-T, Judgement (TC), 21 May 1999, paras. 335 – 336, 356, 381, 409, 411, 442:
"335 […]Witnesses A, B, C, D and F saw substantial numbers of dead bodies after the attack. Witness O, a local Hutu who had recorded this massacre as an entry in his personal diary, testified that he had participated in burying the dead bodies. Witness E testified that one week after the massacre at the Church, he saw prisoners come to collect bodies for burial. They spent five days burying the dead. Witness G, a Hutu, who had assisted in burying the dead, testified that at the Catholic Church, there were bodies along the road from the Prefecture, in front of the main door to the Church, inside the Church, in front of the Father’s residence and also inside the Priests’ house. […]
336. At the Home St. Jean, in particular, Witness T, a person employed at Home St. Jean, testified that she lost nine staff members and their children. Witness G saw around 200 to 300 Tutsi corpses scattered in front, behind, in the cellar, on upper floors and around the Home St. Jean buildings. Further, many of the survivors were injured. Witness F observed about forty injured people, whose ankles had been cut."
"356. […]Witness G, a local Hutu, who helped to bury bodies found in and near the Stadium, stated that dead bodies covered the entire ground of the Stadium and that bodies were buried using machinery over five days. […]"
"381. The allegation that this appalling event occurred at Mubuga Church is not in dispute. In fact, an assortment of witnesses, including various eyewitnesses, Sister Julie Ann Farrington, Defence witness DP, and Kayishema, confirmed that after the massacre, corpses and/or human remains were found inside and/or in the immediate vicinity of Mubuga Church. Witnesses who visited this site shortly after the massacre remarked that the decomposing bodies caused a strong stench in the area. In addition, Dr. Haglund, testified that he went to the Church grounds on 20 September 1995 to investigate two alleged graves sites there. He deposed that one grave had been exhumed previously and the bodies had been reburied nearby. In the second area he found a depression in the ground and there were indications that this area had been disturbed. Upon an attempt to probe the second mass grave he found that the ground was too hard and therefore he did not conduct further investigations there. Due to uncontested evidence showing a massacre near the Church in Mubuga, the questions that remain relate to the presence and the participation of Kayishema and those under his control in this massacre. 215 The Trial Chamber examines the role Kayishema and his subordinates played at this massacre site, in detail, below."
"215.The Prosecutor presented witnesses who testified that Ruzindana was present and participated in the massacre at Mubuga Church. The Trial Chamber will not consider this evidence because the Indictment in question charges Clement Kayishema alone with crimes at this site."
"409. […] Numerous witnesses confirmed the mass murder of Tutsis in the Bisesero area. For instance, Chris McGreal, a journalist for the London-based Guardian newspaper, testified that he spoke to Tutsis seeking refuge on a hill in Bisesero in June 1994. While there, he saw evidence of mass killings in the area including human corpses. The Tutsis whom he interviewed told him that these bodies remained unburied because they (the Tutsis) feared attacks by the armed Hutus near the water. Patrick de Saint Exupery, a journalist for the Paris-based Le Figaro, visited Bisesero in June 1994. He confirmed that a "Bisesero Hill was scattered, literally scattered with bodies, in small holes, in small ditches, on the foliage, along the ditches, there were bodies and there were many bodies." 229
"229. Trans., 18 Nov. 1997, p.137."
"411. The above allegations were not contested. Most Prosecution witnesses, including survivors of attacks, confirmed that attacks took place on a regular basis, during the time in question. Witness OO testified that "the attacks were every day in Bisesero, but most frequent in Muyira and Gitwa. The attacks began at about 6 a.m. and would continue until about 4 to 5 p.m." Kayishema himself testified that "major attack"230 and "massacres"231 took place in Bisesero. There is sufficient evidence to show that attacks occurred at approximately twelve sites in the Bisesero area.232 Dr. Haglund observed the aftermath of the massacres in September 1995 at various sites at Bisesero. Testifying about his visit to a hill on the border of Gishyita and Gisovu Commune, Dr. Haglund stated "[a]nd if one looks through field glasses or a magnifying instrument across . . . this hillside there were many white spots – it looks almost like strange mushrooms growing here and they represented skeletons, the heads of human bodies that were littered on this landscape . . ."233 and "in a brief walk around I observed a minimum of 40 to 50 individual skeletons lying about on the hill. These were skeletons on the surface. They represented men, women, children and adults."234
"230. Trans., 9 Sep. 1998, p. 37.
231.Trans., 8 Sep. 1998, p. 117.
232. The Trial Chamber notes that some witnesses used specific names of neighbourhoods when testifying about specific attacks. For the purpose of clarity however, we have grouped neighbouring localities together and described the attacks by date.
233. Trans., 25 Nov. 1997, p. 65.
234. Trans., 24 Nov. 1997, p. 82."
"442. […] Witness DD described how the slaughtered bodies on the Hill were like "small insects which had been killed off by insecticide."241 On that day, DD lost many members of his family, including his mother, wife, nine children, four sisters and their children, five of his brother’s children, two brothers and their wives."
"241. Trans., 25 Feb. 1998, p. 28."
Prosecutor v. Jean-Paul Akayesu, Case No. ICTR-96-4, Judgment (TC), 2 September 1998, paras. 158 – 159, 160 – 162, 181:
"158. […]. On the road from Butare to Burundi on 19 April 1994, Dr. Zachariah sated that saw civilians being massacred in villages throughout the countryside and at roadblocks. In his words:
"All the way through we could see on the [...] hillside, where there were communities, people [...] being pulled out by people with machetes, and we could see piles of bodies. In fact the entire landscape was becoming spotted with corpses, with bodies, all the way from there until almost Burundi's border".
(Hearing of 16 January 1997, pp 98-99)
159. […] Dr. Zachariah stated that he then decided to evacuate his team from Rwanda and he arrived at the Burundian border on 24 April 1994. On the way to the border and at the border, he stated that he had crossed streams and rivers in which the mutilated corpses of men, women and children floated by at an estimated rate of five bodies every minute. […]"
"160. Lindsey Hilson, a journalist, testified that she was in Kigali from 7 February 1994 to mid-April 1994. Following the aeroplane crash of 6 April 1994 in which the Presidents of Rwanda and Burundi were killed, she said she heard from others and saw for herself the ensuing killings of Tutsi in the capital. On the third day after the aeroplane crash, she toured Kigali with aid workers and saw victims suffering from machete and gunshot wounds. In Kigali central hospital, where she described the situation as "absolutely terrible", wounded men, women and children of all ages were packed into the wards, and hospital gutters were "running red with blood". At the morgue she saw "a big pile like a mountain of bodies outside and these were bodies with slash wounds, with heads smashed in, many of them naked, men and women". She estimated that the pile outside the morgue contained about five hundred bodies, with more bodies being brought in all the time by pickup trucks. She stated that she also saw teams of convicts around Kigali collecting bodies in the backs of trucks for mass burial, as well as groups of armed men roaming the city with machetes, clubs and sticks.
161. Simon Cox, a cameraman and photographer, testified that he was on an assignment in Rwanda during the time of the events set forth in the indictment. He said he entered Rwanda from Uganda, arriving in the border town of Mulindi, in the third week of April 1994. Thence he headed south with an RPF escort and found evidence of massacres of civilian men, women and children, whom it appeared from their identity cards were mostly Tutsi, in church compounds. En route to Rusumo, in the south-east of the country, he visited hospitals where Tutsi civilians suffering from machete wounds were being treated, some of whom he interviewed. At the Tanzanian border, near Rusumo, by the Kagera river which flows towards Lake Victoria, Mr. Cox saw and filmed corpses floating by at the rate of several corpses per minute. Later, at the beginning of May, he was in Kigali and saw more bodies of dead civilians on the roads. The Chamber viewed film footage taken by Mr. Cox.
162. On a second trip, in June 1994, Mr. Cox visited the western part of Rwanda, arriving in Cyangugu from Zaire (now the Democratic Republic of Congo) and travelling north towards Kibuye. […]Mr. Cox himself examined the church and outbuildings and found graves, much blood and other evidence of killings. On the way to Kibuye, he saw further evidence of freshly dug mass graves in churchyards. Later, in the hills of Bisesero, he saw some 800 Tutsi civilians "in a desperate, desperate state", many apparently starving and with severe machete and bullet wounds, and with a great many corpses strewn all over the hills."
"181. With regard to the allegation that at least 2000 Tutsi were killed in Taba from 7 April to the end of June 1994, the Chamber notes that while many witnesses testified to widespread killings in Taba, very few witnesses were able to estimate numbers of people killed. The number 2000 has not been contested by the Defence, and it seems to the Chamber, based on the evidence of killing and mass graves, a modest estimate of the number of people killed in Taba during this period. […]"
P.12.3. Evidence of estimates of number of victims.
A. Legal source/authority and evidence:
Prosecutor v. Callixte Nzabonimana, Case No. ICTR-98-44D, Judgement (TC), 31 May 2012, para. 1785:
1785. The Chamber has found that on or about 15 April 1994, following the orders of Nzabonimana at Cyayi centre, between 15 and 60 Tutsis were killed at the Nyabikenke commune office. The Chamber considers that these killings occurred on a large scale (3.5.2.4).
"639. The Chamber recalls its findings that at least 25 to 30 people were killed following Gatete’s orders, as well as the Nyagasambu cellule responsable, Damascéne Macali. About 40 Interahamwe had gathered at the sector office and the Chamber has determined that they would also have participated in killings, as well as marshalled further assailants, who ultimately included soldiers, policemen and Hutu civilians. Recalling that no numerical minimum is required, the Chamber is satisfied, in light of these findings, that the killings were conducted on a sufficiently large scale for the purposes of amounting to extermination. Moreover, the Chamber considers that Gatete’s express orders to kill Tutsis, and to "work relentlessly", demonstrate his intention to kill on a large scale, particularly when viewed in the larger context of the
Prosecutor v. Popović et al., Case No. IT-05-88-T, Judgement (TC), 10 June 2010, para. 803:
"803. The Trial Chamber has found that the Bosnian Serb Forces killed thousands of Bosnian Muslim able-bodied males in the areas of Srebrenica, Potočari, Bratunac and Zvornik.2902"
2902 See supra, Chapter III, Sections E–J.
http//www.legal-tools.org/doc/af5ad0/Prosecutor v. Lukić et al., Case No. IT-98-32/1-T, Judgement (TC), 20 July 2009, para. 938, 941-945, 949:
"938. The crime of extermination differs from murder in that it requires an element of mass destruction. However, there is no requirement that a certain number of victims must have been killed.2864 An assessment of whether this element is met must be made on a case-by-case basis, taking account of all the relevant factors.2865 It has, for example, been held that the actus reus of extermination may be established on the basis of "an accumulation of separate and unrelated incidents, meaning on an aggregate basis."2866 Another factor in the majority’s view, Judge Van den Wyngaert dissenting, is the population density of the particular area. In other words, while there may be a higher threshold for a finding of extermination in a densely-populated area, it would not be inappropriate to find extermination in a less densely-populated area on the basis of a lower threshold, that is, fewer victims. The majority notes, Judge Van den Wyngaert dissenting, that in Krajisnik the Trial Chamber found that approximately 66 persons were killed in the Pionirska street incident and that this constituted extermination.2867"
2864 http//www.legal-tools.org/doc/09f75f/Stakic Appeal Judgement, para. 260; http//www.legal-tools.org/doc/af07be/Ntakirutimana Appeal Judgement, para. 516; http//www.legal-tools.org/doc/86a108/Krstic Appeal Judgement, para. 501; http//www.legal-tools.org/doc/7483f2/Blagojevic and Jokic Trial Judgement, para. 573; http//www.legal-tools.org/doc/4c3228/Brdanin Appeal Judgement, paras 471-472.
2865 http//www.legal-tools.org/doc/06634c/Martic Trial Judgement, para. 63.
2866 http//www.legal-tools.org/doc/4c3228/Brdanin Trial Judgement, para. 391. The Trial Chamber’s approach was affirmed by the Appeals Chamber, Br|anin Appeal Judgement, paras 471-472; http//www.legal-tools.org/doc/af07be/Ntakirutimana Appeal Judgement, para. 521.
2867 http//www.legal-tools.org/doc/62a710/Krajisnik Trial Judgement, paras 699, 720.
"941. The Trial Chamber has found that Milan Lukic committed murder in connection with the Pionirska street incident, killing 59 persons.2869
942. The Trial Chamber has considered, in particular, the number and type of victims of the fire, the area from which they came, and the manner in which the fire was prepared in the context of the other events that took place on 14 June 1992.
943. The victims of the Pionirska street incident were mainly elderly persons, women and children from Koritnik, one of the small and less densely populated villages at the Drina river close to Višegrad town. The Trial Chamber recalls that the villagers of Koritnik had gathered in the morning of 14 June 1992 as they were told by Serbs from neighbouring villages that they would be evacuated to the Serb village of Kladanj. Although a few persons merged with the villagers from Koritnik between Greben and Vi{egrad when the group passed through Sase, the victims of the Pionirska street incident were predominantly the elderly, female and children villagers of Koritnik.
944. Milan Luki} herded the Koritnik group into the lower room of Adem Omeragic’s house in which the floor had been covered with an accelerant. He then closed the door. After a while, he opened the door and threw an incendiary device into the room which started the fire. Milan Lukic attempted to prevent any escape of the victims by shooting at the windows of the room.
945. On the basis of the above, the Trial Chamber finds that the killing of 59 persons is killing on a large scale and, Judge Van den Wyngaert dissenting, sufficient to meet the element of mass destruction required for extermination. In this respect, the Trial Chamber has particularly considered the characteristics of the place where the victims came from."
"949. The Trial Chamber has found that Milan Lukić committed murder in connection with the Bikavac incident. In relation to the charge of extermination, the Trial Chamber has considered, in particular, the manner in which Meho Aljic’s house was prepared and the Muslim victims were herded into the house. The Trial Chamber has also considered the number and type of victims of the fire. The evidence shows that all the exits of the house had been blocked by heavy furniture when the people entered the house, thereby preventing anyone inside the house from escaping. Milan Lukic forced the Muslim persons into Meho Aljić’s house. He blocked the last exit to the house, fired at it, threw in grenades and set the house on fire. The Trial Chamber recalls that at least 60 people were killed. The Trial Chamber finds that the killing of at least 60 people is killing on a large scale and, Judge Van den Wyngaert dissenting, meets the element of mass destruction required for extermination."
"434. The Chamber recalls that hundreds and possibly over a thousand Tutsi were killed on Kesho Hill on 8 April 1994. The Chamber therefore finds beyond reasonable doubt that the actus reus requirement of large scale killings, for the crime of extermination as a crime against humanity, is met."
"438. In view of the Chamber’s finding that at least 10 to 20 people were killed at the Kiyovu roadblock, it does not find beyond reasonable doubt that the requirement of large scale killings, as required for the crime of extermination, has been met."
http//www.legal-tools.org/doc/4ac346/Prosecutor v. Jean de Dieu Kamuhanda, Case No. ICTR-99-54A-T, Judgement (TC), 22 January 2004, paras. 324, 334, 349:
"324. Prosecution Witness GAF testified that he took refuge in a sorghum field and ran away during the night. From that location, he could see people being killed in the Compound, but not the killers in the classrooms. The Witness testified that the number of people killed that day at the Parish was approximately one thousand. The Witness was shown photographs from Prosecution Exhibit P2 and pointed out the area to the court. The Witness was also shown a video to clarify what he had identified from the photographs."
"334. […] The Witness’s family members told him that the shooting continued for four to five hours, and after he returned from exile he estimated the number of people killed at approximately three thousand."
"349. […] The Witness estimated that there were about three thousand refugees there, of which approximately 2,500 died. […]"
http//www.legal-tools.org/doc/325567/The Prosecutor v. Eliézer Niyitegeka, Case No. ICTR-96-14-T, Judgement (TC) 16 May 2003, para. 141:
"141. […] The attackers had surrounded Bisesero hills and there were violent confrontations. The Interahamwe far outweighed the refugees during the attack. Between 40,000 and 50,000 people were killed that day.[128] […]"
"[128] Id., p. 51."
Prosecutor v. Alfred Musema, Case No. ICTR-96-13-T, Judgement (TC), 27 January 2000, paras. 393, 403 – 404, 471, 475:
"393. Witness M said he saw Musema aboard one of the Daihatsus with tea factory workers wearing blue uniforms. He was carrying a firearm, while the other attackers bore traditional weapons and were dressed in banana leaves and grass belts called "Umuhurura"(3) in Kinyarwanda. The attackers killed with a determination unlike before to such an extent that, apart from a few men, no woman or child was able to survive. Musema and others shot into the crowd as such, individuals fell as they fled. Thousands were killed, including many of the witness' relatives."
"3. In plural "Imihurura""
"403. On 13 May 1994, after a period of calm, Tutsis, estimated by witnesses to number between 15000 and 40000, had sought refuge on Muyira hill and in neighbouring areas. These unarmed Tutsi civilians were subjected to the biggest attack to date, during which thousands lost their lives. The Defence admitted that such an attack occurred and that Tutsi civilians were murdered and exterminated. […]
404. […] Witness F estimated that only 10000 of the 40 - 50000 refugees on Muyira hill on 13 May 1994 survived the attack.[…]"
"471. T[…]Witness S said the attackers first grouped and had a "meeting" before blowing their whistles and launching the attack against Sakufe's house on Mumataba hill. The attack was aimed at between 2000 and 3000 Tutsis who had sought refuge in and around the house. The majority of the refugees, including relatives of the witness, were killed during the attack. The witness stated that Musema stayed by his car during the attack in the company of persons dressed in white."
"475. Witness AC recalled that of the 300 people inside the cave, only one survived, all others being suffocated to death by the smoke. […]"
"291. Final reports produced estimated the number of the victims of the genocide at approximately 800,000 to one million, nearly one-seventh of Rwanda’s total population.173"
"173. Pros. exh. 331B, p. 5."
"356. […] The fact that the massacre at the Stadium occurred does not appear to be in dispute; Kayishema himself testified that a major attack at the Stadium took place on 18 April 1994 210 and witness DO estimated that about 4,000 of those seeking refuge were killed at the Stadium."
210. Trans., 10 Sept 1998 p.24.
P.12.4. General statements many people were killed (without estimates of numbers).
A. Legal source/authority and evidence:
Prosecutor v. Emmanuel Rukundo, Case No. ICTR-2001-70-T , Judgement (TC), 1 December 2010, para. 589:
"589. Although no evidence was adduced before the Chamber regarding the specific number of deaths resulting from the abductions at the St. Léon Minor Seminary, the Chamber finds that, in light of the repetitive nature of the abductions and the fact that at least one bus was used to remove the identified refugees, the specific requirement for the crime of extermination, has been met in this case."
Prosecutor v. Emmanuel Rukundo, Case No. ICTR-2001-70-A, Judgement (AC), 20 October 2010, paras. 187, 189:
"187. With respect to the element of killing on a large scale, the Trial Chamber acknowledged that "no evidence was adduced before the Chamber regarding the specific number of deaths resulting from the abductions at the [Saint] Léon Minor Seminary".451 Nonetheless, it found that this element was satisfied in view of the repetitive nature of the abductions as well as the fact that "at least one bus was used to remove the identified refugees".
"189. Furthermore, a review of the record reflects that the Trial Chamber had a reasonable basis for concluding that killing on a large scale occurred. First, the evidence indicates that refugees were housed at the seminary in several buildings and that, as the number of refugees increased, there was no longer enough space for everyone and many refugees had to settle outside. This demonstrates that the seminary hosted a large refugee population. Second, during the fourth abduction of refugees from the seminary, Witness CSF saw Rukundo with "a very long list of names of refugees to be taken away". Third, after the final round of abductions, "[o]nly a few young girls and boys as well as elderly people were left".This demonstrates that a large part of the refugee population was abducted from the seminary. Accordingly, the Appeals Chamber is not convinced that Rukundo has shown any error in the Trial Chamber’s findings concerning the large number of refugees abducted from the Saint Léon Minor Seminary."
http//www.legal-tools.org/doc/325567/The Prosecutor v. Eliézer Niyitegeka, Case No. ICTR-96-14-T, Judgement (TC) 16 May 2003, para. 133:
"133. […] He said that there were so many refugees killed that day that he would compare them to "leaves which were falling from trees". […]"
http//www.legal-tools.org/doc/4ac346/Prosecutor v. Jean de Dieu Kamuhanda, Case No. ICTR-99-54A-T, Judgement (TC), 22 January 2004, paras. 345. 377:
"345. Prosecution Witness GEA testified that he could not say how many people had died at that location, because "that day there were very many." […]"
"377. […]. On cross-examination, the Witness stated that the attacks took a great deal of time because of the large number of victims. […]"
P.12.5. Evidence of the killing of particular victims.
A. Legal source/authority and evidence:
Prosecutor v. Sylvestre Gacumbitsi, Case No. ICTR-2001-64-T, Judgement (TC), 17 June 2004, paras. 115, 122, 126:
"115. Witness TAQ testified that more than 100 members of her extended family died during that attack. They included her elder sister and her seven children, her younger sister with her two children and husband, her aunt and her uncles, one of whom had a family of about 70 people, including children and grandchildren. Witness TAQ explained that the people who were attacked on 15 April were Tutsi. She testified that she believed the Hutu who were among the refugees left the parish before the attack, after being asked to do so. She further testified that they are still alive, she sees them, and they talk about it from time to time. They told her that they left the parish when they heard the Accused asking them to come out of the complex.[99]"
"[99] T., 29 July 2003, pp. 53 to 59."
"122. Witness TAO testified that all the victims of the attack at Nyarubuye Church were Tutsi. His younger brother, his sister and one of her children aged 6 were killed during that attack, as well as 200 members of his extended family. They were all Tutsi.[116] "
"[116] T., 30 July 2003, pp. 55 to 56."
"126. Witness TAX testified that the victims of the attack of 15 April in Nyarubuye were Tutsi, and that they were many in number. A number of her family members died in the attack, including her father, mother, two sisters and two brothers.[125] "
"[125] T. 31 July 2003, pp. 35 to 37."
Prosecutor v. Juvénal Kajelijeli, Case No. ICTR-98-44A-T, Judgement (TC), 1 December 2003, para. 535:
"535. Prosecution Witness GAO testified that he was present when Bizabarimana arrived with guns.712 […] The attack on Rwankeri began sometime in the morning and lasted until about 5:00pm, when the Witness and the other Interahamwe left to attack Tutsi refugees at the Convent at Busogo Parish.714 The dead were too numerous to count: there were 80 families of between 12 and 15 people each, including the families of Rudatinya, Epimak, Bukumba, Karasankima, Sebirayi, Gasahane, Gateyiteyi, Kamakora, Bijanja, Rukara, Lucien Karakezi, and Bihutu.715 The Witness testified that the heads of some of the families killed at Rwankeri had died before April 1994 (i.e., Gasahane and Rudatinya, the father of Epimak Samvura, current bourgmestre of Mukingo commune).716
712. T. 23 July 2001, p. 27; T. 24 July 2001, p. 65 (GAO).
[…]
714. T. 24 July 2001, pp. 31, 38 and 45 (GAO).
715. T. 23 July 2001, pp. 36-37 (GAO).
716. T. 23 July 2001, pp. 37-38; T. 24 July 2001, p. 106 (GAO).
Prosecutor v. Milomir Stakić, Case No. IT-97-24-T, Judgment (TC), 31 July 2003, paras. 220, 222 – 224, 654:
"220. On the basis of the evidence presented at trial, the Chamber is convinced that hundreds of detainees were killed or disappeared in the Omarska camp between the end of May and the end of August when the camp was finally closed. Among them were :
"459. Witness R, T. 4314.
460. Nusret Sivac, T. 6634.
462. Witness R, T. 4318-20.
463. Witness A, T.1920, Witness R, T. 4302, Nusret Sivac, T. 6686.
464. Witness A, T.1920-21.
465. Nusret Sivac, T. 6684-86, Dr. Beglerbegovic, T. 4148-49.
466. Witness R, T. 4315 and T. 4318.
467. Witness A, T.1909.
468. Witness R, T. 4319.
469. Nusret Sivac, T. 6680.
470. Witness A, T. 1909, Nusret Sivac, T. 6629-30.
471. Witness R, T. 4318-19.
472. Witness A, T.1910-11. Kerim Mesanovic, who was detained in Omarska, saw Crnalic being killed. Krle, who was the shift commander was present and Zeljko, the camp commander was also there. Kerim Mesanovic, 92 bis transcript in Kvocka, T. 5191.
473. Witness A, T.1911.
474. Witness R, T. 4319.
475. Witness A, T. 1912. Mirsad Mujadzic testified that this individual was killed in Omarska because it was believed that he was politically involved. Mirsad Mujadzic, T. 3737.
476. Witness A, T.1921. Mirsad Mujadzic, T. 3737.
477. Dr. Beglerbegovic, T. 4148-49.
478. Witness Z, T. 7560.
479. Witness R, T. 4315.
480. Witness R, T. 4314-15.
481. Witness R, T. 4315.
482. Witness R, T. 4315.
483. Witness R, T. 4315.
484. Emsud Garibovic, 92 bis transcript in Kvocka, T. 5819-22, T. 5837 and T. 5839.
485. Dr. Beglerbegovic, T. 4148.
486. Witness R, T. 4304-14.
487. Samir Poljak, T. 6374; Witness W, T. 6831.
488. Witness R, T. 4304 and T. 4314.
489. Witness A, T.1915-17.
490. Samir Poljak, T. 6374.
491. Witness R, T. 4320.
492. Witness A, T.1914.
493. Witness A, T.1911.
494. Witness A, T.1913-14.
495. Witness R, T. 4314; Samir Poljak, T. 6374.
496. Witness A, T. 1913 and Nusret Sivac, T. 6680.
497. Nusret Sivac, T. 6634.
498. Witness A, T.1912.
499. Nusret Sivac, T. 6634.
500. Witness A, T.1911-12.
501. Witness A, T. 1912; Dr. Beglerbegovic, T. 4148; Nusret Sivac, T. 6684-86; Witness Z, T. 7560.
502. Nusret Sivac, T. 6680.
503. Witness A, T. 1909
504. Witness A, T. 1910.
505. Witness A, T. 1913; Nusret Sivac, T. 6680.
506. Witness R, T. 4318.
507. Witness R, T. 4315.
508. Witness A, T. 1920
509. Witness A, T. 1915.
510. Witness A, T. 1920.
511. Witness A, T. 1919
512. Witness R, T. 4318.
513. Witness Z, T. 7560.
514. Witness A, T. 1914.
515. Nusret Sivac, T. 6686; Dr. Beglerbegovic, T. 4148-49; Witness Z, T. 7560.
516. Witness A, T. 1917.
517. Samir Poljak, T. 6373-74.
518. Witness A, T.1911.
519. Witness A, T. 1910; Dr. Beglerbegovic T. 4148-49; Nusret Sivac, T. 6686-87; Witness Z, T. 7560.
520. Nusret Sivac, T. 6680.
521. Witness A, T. 1913; Nusret Sivac, T. 6680.
522. Nusret Sivac, T. 6686; Dr. Beglerbegovic, T. 4148-49; Witness Z, T. 7560.
523. Nusret Sivac, T. 6686; Dr. Beglerbegovic, T. 4148-49; Witness A, T. 1914.
524. Witness A, T. 1913.
525. Witness A, T. 1920.
526. Witness A, T. 1918."
"222. A dispatch from the Command of the 1st Krajina Corps dated 22 August 1992529 refers to the mass execution of civilians in the camps and centres. It states that everyone was trying to pass responsibility for issuing orders for these executions on to someone else.
223. The Trial Chamber finds that killings were committed in the Keraterm camp between 24 May and 5 August 1992, when the camp finally closed. A brief review of the relevant evidence follows.
224. Among others, the following persons, known by their names, were killed in the Keraterm camp:
Dzemal Mesic,530
Sabid Sijecic,531
Samir Music,532
Fatusk Music,533
Muharem Sivac, 534
Drago Tokmadzic,535
Fikret Avdic,536
Besim Hergic,537
Zehro Causevic,538
Dzemal Mesic,539
Safet Mesic,540
Emsud Bahonjic.541
Witness E compiled a list of about 60 people who were killed in Keraterm and later identified some of the victims at an exhumation site in Hrastova Glavica.542"
"529. Exh. S358.
530. Witness O, T. 2233.
531. Witness E, 92 bis testimony in Sikirica, T. 2508.
532. Witness E, 92 bis testimony in Sikirica, T 2506-07.
533. Witness E, 92 bis testimony in Sikirica, T. 2506-07.
534. Witness E, 92 bis testimony in Sikirica, T. 2518.
535. Witness Y, 92 bis testimony in Sikirica, T. 1421-25.
536. Witness Y, 92 bis testimony in Sikirica, T. 1421-25.
537. Witness Y, 92 bis testimony in Sikirica, T. 1421-25.
538. Witness Y, 92 bis testimony in Sikirica, T. 1421-25.
539. Witness O, T. 3216-17.
540. Witness O, T. 3213.
541. Witness K, statement 18 August 200, para. 24. Jusuf Arifagic also testified that he saw the dead body of Emsud Bahonjic on the garbage dump in Keraterm. Jusuf Arifagic, T. 7089-90.
542. Witness E, 92 bis testimony in Sikirica, T. 2522-23 and T. 2527.
"654. Although the total number of victims of the killings set out in paragraphs 44 and 47 of the Indictment, for which Dr. Stakic incurs criminal liability, can never be accurately calculated, the Trial Chamber finds that based on a conservative estimate, more than 1,500 persons were killed. Considering the scale of the killings and in an effort not to lose sight of the fact that these crimes were committed against individual victims, the Trial Chamber has included a List of Victims known by name, in which are enumerated the names of those persons identified as killed in Prijedor municipality in 1992, in total 486 human beings."
http//www.legal-tools.org/doc/325567/The Prosecutor v. Eliézer Niyitegeka, Case No. ICTR-96-14-T, Judgement (TC) 16 May 2003, para. 85, 143:
"85. […] During this attack, the witness suffered injuries to his head, chest and fingers from a grenade. He also lost seven of his family members at this attack (others died elsewhere). […]"
"143. During May 1994, the witness was hiding in Bisesero with others who were being pursued. […] By 13 May, his entire family had been killed.[133]"
"[133] T. 26 Aug. 2002, p. 13."
Prosecutor v. Laurent Semanza, Case No, ICTR-97-20-T, Judgement (TC), 15 May 2003, para. 216:
"216. The witness testified that the attacks continued on 9 April 1994, and that by 10 April 1994 there were more than 5,000 refugees gathered at Mwulire Hill, all of whom were civilians.[396] The witness stated that the attacks lasted through 18 April 1994.[397] […] Six members of his family died during the attacks on Mwulire Hill. [399]"
"[396] T. 9 November 2000 pp. 75, 101, 106.
[397] T. 9 November 2000 p. 101.
[…]
[399] T. 9 November 2000 p. 107."
"335. It follows from the evidence that the persons killed included the following named individuals: Pastor Sebihe, Pastor Semugeshi, Ukobizaba, Kajongi, Nkuranga, three members of Witness MM’s family, four members of Witness KK’s family, Kagemana, Macantaraga, Iminadad, seven members of Witness YY’s family, Ruhigisha, Nkuranga’s younger brother, Evelyn and four other women in hiding with Witness FF, one of Witness SS’s brothers, more than five members of Witness PP’s family, and three or more members of Witness DD’s family. It is also clear that many persons were wounded, for instance the following identified persons: Witness KK, Witness XX, three persons with whom Witness YY was hiding, Witness YY’s father, Segikware, and Witness FF. (The Chamber did not receive information about the ethnicity of each of these individuals, but is left with the clear impression that most of them were Tutsi.). […]"
Prosecutor v. Alfred Musema, Case No. ICTR-96-13-T, Judgement (TC), 27 January 2000, paras. 393, 408, 414:
"393. Witness M said he saw Musema aboard one of the Daihatsus with tea factory workers wearing blue uniforms. He was carrying a firearm, while the other attackers bore traditional weapons and were dressed in banana leaves and grass belts called "Umuhurura"(3) in Kinyarwanda. The attackers killed with a determination unlike before to such an extent that, apart from a few men, no woman or child was able to survive. Musema and others shot into the crowd as such, individuals fell as they fled. Thousands were killed, including many of the witness' relatives.
3. In plural "Imihurura"
"408. Witness P had sought refuge on Muyira hill with many others up until 13 May 1994. On that day he and other refugees, numbering 40000, on Muyira hill, were the victims of a massive attack during which his wife and two children were killed. Such was the attack, that the refugees were unable to resist the assailants and as a result had to flee. […]"
414. Witness R stated that he stayed hidden until the departure of the attackers, including Musema, at which point he went to Muyira hill to find the bodies of his family. He found the cadavers of his wife, child, mother and older brothers, amongst the many bodies which covered Muyira hill. All the dead were Tutsis and all were civilians.
"336. At the Home St. Jean, in particular, Witness T, a person employed at Home St. Jean, testified that she lost nine staff members and their children. […]"
"442. […]On that day, [Witness] DD lost many members of his family, including his mother, wife, nine children, four sisters and their children, five of his brother’s children, two brothers and their wives."
P.12.6. Evidence of children orphaned by massacres.
A. Legal source/authority and evidence:
Prosecutor v. Jean-Paul Akayesu, Case No. ICTR-96-4, Judgment (TC), 2 September 1998, para. 162:
162. On a second trip, in June 1994, Mr. Cox visited the western part of Rwanda, arriving in Cyangugu from Zaire (now the Democratic Republic of Congo) and travelling north towards Kibuye. On that journey, he visited orphanages populated by Tutsi children whose parents had been massacred or disappeared.
P.12.7. Evidence of decrease in population.
A. Legal source/authority and evidence:
http//www.legal-tools.org/doc/325567/The Prosecutor v. Eliézer Niyitegeka, Case No. ICTR-96-14-T, Judgement (TC) 16 May 2003, para. 143:
"143. During May 1994, the witness was hiding in Bisesero with others who were being pursued. These people were Tutsi from Rubengera, Rutsiro, Rwamatamu, Gisovu and Gikongoro. There were about 60,000 Tutsi in Bisesero and by the time the French arrived, only 1,000 Tutsi had survived.[131]"
"[131] T. 23 Aug. 2002, pp. 12-14."
Prosecutor v. Jean-Paul Akayesu, Case No. ICTR-96-4, Judgment (TC), 2 September 1998, para. 181:
181. With regard to the allegation that at least 2000 Tutsi were killed in Taba from 7 April to the end of June 1994, the Chamber notes that while many witnesses testified to widespread killings in Taba, very few witnesses were able to estimate numbers of people killed. Ephrem Karangwa, the present bourgmestre of Taba, testified that the population of Taba has decreased by 7,000 persons since April 1994, and he described mass graves in each sector of the commune. While some part of the population decrease may be attributed to refugees leaving the commune, it is clear from the testimony of many witnesses that a substantial number of people were killed in Taba.
P.12.8. Evidence of the size of the crowd gathered or prisoners held before an killings occurred.
A. Legal source/authority and evidence:
Prosecutor v. Ildephonse Nizeyimana, Case No. ICTR-2000-55, Judgement (TC), 19 June 2012, para. 1547:
1547. The Prosecution has charged Nizeyimana with the attack on Cyahinda Parish (II.4 .2) as extermination as a crime against humanity under Article 6 (1) and 6 (3) of the Statute.3893 The Chamber has already concluded that the attack on Cyahinda Parish amounts to genocide. Given the high concentration of Tutsis within the parish facilities and the fact that the concluding attack resulted in the deaths of thousands who had sought refuge there, the Chamber has no doubt that this attack amounted to killings on a large scale. The evidence firmly establishes that the principal perpetrators, as well as Nizeyimana, participated with the intent to kill on a mass scale based on ethnic grounds. […]
Prosecutor v. Sylvestre Gacumbitsi, Case No. ICTR-2001-64-T, Judgement (TC), 17 June 2004, paras. 109, 118:
109. Prosecution Witness TAQ is a young Tutsi woman who lived in Rusumo in 1994, and who personally knew the Accused. She was pregnant in April 1994. [88] She fled the killings carried out against the Tutsi in Nyarutunga and took refuge at Nyarubuye Parish compound, with members of her family and her neighbours, at about 4 p.m. on April 14 1994. There, she found thousands of civilians, some of whom were natives of the communes bordering on Rusumo, such as Rukira, Birenga and Kigarama. She learned that these people had fled attacks carried out against the Tutsi. The number of refugees rose again between 14 and 15 April 1994.[89]
[88] T., 29 July 2003, pp. 42 to 45 and 52 to 53.
[89] T., 29 July 2003, pp. 47 to 48, T., 30 July 2003, pp. 7 to 10 and 27 to 29.
118. Witness TAO testified that he escaped the massacres committed by the gendarmes, Interahamwe and Hutu civilians against the Tutsi on 14 April 1994, at the Nyarutunga market place. That same day, around 4 p.m., he took refuge at Nyarubuye Parish, where he hoped to find his family. When he got there, he saw a crowd of between 20,000 to 30,000 people, Tutsi and Hutu. Some of them were natives of other communes, namely Mugesera, Muhazi, Rwamagana, Birenga, Rugera and Kibungo. When he arrived, he started looking for his family, whom he found only on 15 April between 1 and 2 p.m.Prosecutor v. André Ntagerura et al., Case No. ICTR-99-46-T, Judgement (TC), 25 February 2004, para. 416:
"416. […] The witness stated that refugees continued to arrive and that, on 12 April 1994, approximately 3,000 refugees had gathered at the field.[952]"
"952. T. 9 October 2000 pp. 32, 34."
http//www.legal-tools.org/doc/4ac346/Prosecutor v. Jean de Dieu Kamuhanda, Case No. ICTR-99-54A-T, Judgement (TC), 22 January 2004, para.407:
"407. Defence Witness GPF, a Hutu born in 1972, testified that in April 1994 he lived near Gikomero Parish Compound. In answer to a question from the Bench, the Witness testified that 1,500 people, approximately, were sheltered at the Parish on 12 April 1994, the day of the attack. He further testified that some were killed on the spot, some were killed as they fled the attack and others survived."
Prosecutor v. Laurent Semanza, Case No, ICTR-97-20-T, Judgement (TC), 15 May 2003, paras. 218, 463:
"218. Prosecution Witness VP, a Tutsi who identified the Accused in court, testified that he sought refuge on Mwulire Hill from the afternoon of 13 April 1994.[408] When he arrived on Mwulire Hill, he found that over 5,000 people, mostly Tutsis, were taking refuge there and that their numbers kept increasing, so that by 18 April 1994 there were about 10,000 refugees.[409] The witness testified that from 15 through 17 April 1994 there were daily attacks on the refugees, which the refugees tried to ward off with stones.[410] The witness recognised several of the attackers including people who, according to him, had received arms from the Accused and Rugambarara.[411]
[408] T. 4 December 2000 pp. 35, 36, 59.
[409] T. 4 December 2000 pp. 62, 63, 64; T. 5 December 2000 p. 93.
[410] T. 4 December 2000 pp. 63-64; T. 5 December 2000 pp. 84-85.
[411] T. 4 December 2000 pp. 66-67, 71-72.
"463. […]The Chamber also recalls that on 18 April 1994 there were up to 10,000 refugees at Mwulire Hill and that after the attack the hill was full of corpses. […]"
Prosecutor v. Radislav Krstić, Case No. IT-98-33-T, Judgement (TC), 2 August 2001, para. 83:
"83. […] An intercepted conversation, at 1730 hours on 13 July 1995, indicates that about 6,000 men had been captured from the Bosnian Muslim column by that time.169 Consistent with this, around 14 July, Colonel Radislav Jankovic (from the VRS Main Staff), during a conversation with a Dutch Bat officer about the attempted breakthrough by the 28th Division, stated that the VRS had already taken 6,000 prisoners of war.170 Other intercepted VRS conversations reveal that, on 15 July 1995, midway through the executions, at least 3,000-4,000 Bosnian Muslim prisoners were being detained by the VRS.171 […]"
"169. P 523.
170. Franken, T. 2050.
171. P 478 (A conversation intercepted at 1000 hours in which Colonel Beara stated he still had 3,500 "parcels" to distribute.); P 675 (Interim Combat Report dated 18 July 1995, sent by the Commander of the Zvornik Brigade stating that "someone brought in 3,000 Turks of military age and placed them in schools in the municipality")."
P.12.9. Number of people listed as missing after the conflict.
A. Legal source/authority and evidence:
Prosecutor v. Vidoje Blagojević and Dragan Jokić, Case No. IT-02-60-T, Judgement (TC), 17 January 2005, para. 577:
291. There is ample evidence before the Trial Chamber of a wide-scale and organised killing operation carried out by VRS and MUP forces from 12 until 19 July 1995. Thousands of Bosnian Muslim men from the Srebrenica enclave were executed and buried in different locations in the Srebrenica, Bratunac and Zvornik municipalities.1048
1048. Ex. P731, Chart of Srebrenica -related Missing and Dead Persons, Helge Brunborg. Helge Brunborg testified that the total number of persons missing or killed in relation to the Srebrenica enclave amounted to 7475 persons. Helge Brunborg, T. 6968.
Prosecutor v. Radislav Krstić, Case No. IT-98-33-T, Judgement (TC), 2 August 2001, paras. 81 - 82:
"81. The number of people still listed as missing from Srebrenica in July 1995 provides further guidance as to the likely number of men executed. Professor Brunborg testified that, conservatively estimated, a minimum of 7,475 persons from Srebrenica are still listed as missing, based on the cross-referencing of ICRC lists and other sources and that it is likely that the vast majority of these missing people are deceased.167 In determining the number of people missing following the take-over of Srebrenica, checks were made to ensure that people who were listed as missing prior to July 1995 were excluded. In particular , steps were taken to exclude ABiH soldiers who were reported as killed, wounded , captured or missing in action prior to July 1995 to the extent that was possible . In over 180 cases, however, this could not be done with certainty due to a lack of adequate personal data about the missing persons.168
82.Nonetheless, the evidence given by witnesses, as corroborated by the forensic and demographics evidence presented by the OTP, strongly suggests that well in excess of 7,000 people went missing following the take-over of Srebrenica. The correlation between the age and sex of the bodies exhumed from the Srebrenica graves and that of the missing persons support the proposition that the majority of missing people were, in fact, executed and buried in the mass graves."
"167. Brunborg, T. 4067. The final list prepared by the OTP refers to 7,481. This discrepancy is explained by the fact that information from the International Committee of the Red Cross revealed that six people on the list have been found alive, but the ICRC was not at liberty to disclose the names.
168. Brunborg, T. 4078-4079."
P.13. Cumulative application of evidence to prove a massive scale of killing.
A. Legal source/authority and evidence:
Prosecutor v. Popović et al., Case No. IT-05-88-T, Judgement (TC), 10 June 2010, para. 804-805:
"804. The systematic manner in which the Bosnian Serb Forces carried out the killings is patently demonstrated by the organised pattern in which they occurred. After the military take-over of the Srebrenica enclave, the Bosnian Serb Forces rapidly started to capture Bosnian Muslim able-bodied males. Those in Potocari were separated and held in detention. Many of those in the column were captured and held in detention along the Bratunac-Milici road, where some were killed. Large numbers in both groups were eventually brought to Bratunac, from where they were transported to detention sites in the Zvornik area. From these locations, they were transported to other sites nearby where they were executed. Their graves were dug before, during and after the executions. Within a matter of a few days, thousands had been executed by the Bosnian Serb Forces.
805. In light of the temporal and geographical proximity of the killings, the similarities between them and the organized and coordinated manner in which the Bosnian Serb Forces conducted them, the Trial Chamber finds that they formed part of a single operation. It is clear from the evidence that the Bosnian Serb Forces intended to kill Bosnian Muslim able-bodied males from Srebrenica on a massive scale."
Prosecutor v. Radoslav Brđanin, Case No. IT-99-36-T, Judgement (TC), 1 September 2004, para. 465:
"465. In sum, the Trial Chamber is satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that, considering all the incidents described in this section of the judgement, at least 1669 Bosnian Muslims and Bosnian Croats were killed by Bosnian Serb forces, all of whom were non-combatants. The Trial Chamber is further satisfied that these killings fulfil the element of massiveness for the crime of extermination. It is also proven that the direct perpetrators had an intention to kill or to inflict serious injury, in the reasonable knowledge that their acts or omissions were likely to cause the death of the victim."
Prosecutor v. Milomir Stakić, Case No. IT-97-24-T, Judgment (TC), 31 July 2003, paras. 653, 655:
"653. The evidence shows that the proven killings, many of which independently would reach the requisite level of massiveness for the purposes of an evaluation under Article 5(b) of the Statute, were aimed at the collective group of targeted individuals and not at the victims in their individual capacity. This holds true inter alia for:
? the massacre in Room 3 of the Keraterm camp;[1]
? the killings of around 120 men who were called out in an organised fashion on 5 August in the Keraterm camp;
? the closely controlled and cold-blooded executions at Korićanske Stijene on Mount Vlašić on 21 August 1992;[2]
"655. The Trial Chamber therefore considers that the killings committed in the Municipality of Prijedor during the relevant period of 1992 […] fulfil the requisite element of massiveness for the purposes of Article 5(b) of the Statute. It is proven that acts of extermination were committed by the Accused."
Prosecutor v. Laurent Semanza, Case No, ICTR-97-20-T, Judgement (TC), 15 May 2003, para. 463:
"463. The material element of extermination is the mass killing of a substantial number of civilians. […] The Chamber is not, however, in a position to make a specific finding of the number of deaths at either the Musha church or the Mwulire Hill massacres. The Chamber recalls that a substantial number of refugees were killed at Musha church. One witness recalled seeing around 100 bodies at this site. The Chamber also recalls that on 18 April 1994 there were up to 10,000 refugees at Mwulire Hill and that after the attack the hill was full of corpses. On the basis of the reliable and credible evidence of these two massacres, the Chamber is satisfied that the element of mass killing has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt. The Chamber finds that the scale of killings at these two massacres is sufficient to be termed extermination. The Chamber therefore finds that the principal perpetrators committed extermination as a crime against humanity."
Prosecutor v. Georges Rutaganda, Case No. ICTR-96-3, Judgement (TC), 6 December 1999, para. 416:
"416. The Chamber finds beyond a reasonable doubt that the Accused: aided and abetted in the killings by distributing weapons to the Interahamwe on 8, 15 and 24 April 1994; ordered the killing of 10 people in April 1994 who were subsequently killed in his presence; participated in an attack on the people who sought refuge at the ETO; directed and participated in the attack at Nyanza; murdered Emmanuel Kayitare and by his conduct intended to cause the death of a large number of people belonging to the Tutsi ethnic group, because of their ethnicity."
P.14. Evidence of incidents amounting to a massive killing.
A. Legal source/authority and evidence:
Prosecutor v. Radoslav Brđanin, Case No. IT-99-36-T, Judgement (TC), 1 September 2004, para. 465:
"465. In sum, the Trial Chamber is satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that, considering all the incidents described in this section of the judgement, at least 1669 Bosnian Muslims and Bosnian Croats were killed by Bosnian Serb forces, all of whom were non-combatants. The Trial Chamber is further satisfied that these killings fulfil the element of massiveness for the crime of extermination. It is also proven that the direct perpetrators had an intention to kill or to inflict serious injury, in the reasonable knowledge that their acts or omissions were likely to cause the death of the victim."
Prosecutor v. Milomir Stakić, Case No. IT-97-24-T, Judgment (TC), 31 July 2003, paras. 653, 655:
"653. The evidence shows that the proven killings, many of which independently would reach the requisite level of massiveness for the purposes of an evaluation under Article 5(b) of the Statute, were aimed at the collective group of targeted individuals and not at the victims in their individual capacity. This holds true inter alia for:
? the massacre in Room 3 of the Keraterm camp;[3]
? the killings of around 120 men who were called out in an organised fashion on 5 August in the Keraterm camp;
? the closely controlled and cold-blooded executions at Korićanske Stijene on Mount Vlašić on 21 August 1992;[4]
"655. The Trial Chamber therefore considers that the killings committed in the Municipality of Prijedor during the relevant period of 1992 […] fulfil the requisite element of massiveness for the purposes of Article 5(b) of the Statute. It is proven that acts of extermination were committed by the Accused."
Prosecutor v. Laurent Semanza, Case No, ICTR-97-20-T, Judgement (TC), 15 May 2003, para. 463:
"463. The material element of extermination is the mass killing of a substantial number of civilians. […] The Chamber is not, however, in a position to make a specific finding of the number of deaths at either the Musha church or the Mwulire Hill massacres. The Chamber recalls that a substantial number of refugees were killed at Musha church. One witness recalled seeing around 100 bodies at this site. The Chamber also recalls that on 18 April 1994 there were up to 10,000 refugees at Mwulire Hill and that after the attack the hill was full of corpses. On the basis of the reliable and credible evidence of these two massacres, the Chamber is satisfied that the element of mass killing has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt. The Chamber finds that the scale of killings at these two massacres is sufficient to be termed extermination. The Chamber therefore finds that the principal perpetrators committed extermination as a crime against humanity."
Prosecutor v. Georges Rutaganda, Case No. ICTR-96-3, Judgement (TC), 6 December 1999, para. 416:
"416. The Chamber finds beyond a reasonable doubt that the Accused: aided and abetted in the killings by distributing weapons to the Interahamwe on 8, 15 and 24 April 1994; ordered the killing of 10 people in April 1994 who were subsequently killed in his presence; participated in an attack on the people who sought refuge at the ETO; directed and participated in the attack at Nyanza; murdered Emmanuel Kayitare and by his conduct intended to cause the death of a large number of people belonging to the Tutsi ethnic group, because of their ethnicity."
6.2. The victims of the mass killing were members of a civilian population.
General evidentiary comment:
This requirement is likely to be proved by the same or similar evidence which demonstrates the common element of crime against humanity that the actus reus must have been part of an attack against a civilian population.
A. Legal source/authority and evidence:
Prosecutor v. Radislav Krstić, Case No. IT-98-33-T, Judgement (TC), 2 August 2001, paras. 75 – 78:
"75. The results of the forensic investigations suggest that the majority of bodies exhumed were not killed in combat; they were killed in mass executions. Investigators discovered at least 448 blindfolds on or with the bodies uncovered during the exhumations at ten separate sites.151 At least 423 ligatures were located during exhumations at 13 separate sites.152 Some of the ligatures were made of cloth and string, but predominately they were made of wire.153 These ligatures and blindfolds are inconsistent with combat casualties. The Prosecution also relied on forensic evidence that the overwhelming majority of victims located in the graves , for who a cause of death could be determined, were killed by gunshot wounds.154 The exhumations also revealed that some of the victims were severely handicapped and, for that reason, unlikely to have been combatants.155
76. Upon reviewing the Prosecution’s forensic evidence, the Defence forensic expert, Dr. Zoran Stankovic, argued that "some mass graves originated from the bodies of the persons who lost their lives in mutual armed conflicts of the warring sides , and that in some graves, where the cases of sure execution were registered, there were also…bodies killed in combat…".156 He particularly criticised the methodology employed during some of the Prosecution’s forensic investigations into cause of death.157 Certainly, at those sites where no blindfolds or ligatures were found during exhumations , the evidence that the victims were not killed in combat was less compelling.158 Significantly, some of the gravesites located in the Nova Kasaba and Konjevic Polje area, where intense fighting took place between the Bosnian Serb and Bosnian Muslim forces, on 12 and 13 July 1995, were amongst those where very few blindfolds and ligatures were uncovered.159 The Defence expert, Dr. Stankovic did not however, fundamentally challenge the substantive findings of the Prosecution experts and accepted that the exhumations were conducted by experts with "substantial professional experience and adequate technical, scientific and moral integrity."160
77. The Trial Chamber cannot rule out the possibility that a percentage of the bodies in the gravesites examined may have been of men killed in combat. Overall , however, the forensic evidence presented by the Prosecution is consistent with the testimony of witnesses who appeared before the Trial Chamber and recounted the mass execution of thousands of Bosnian Muslim men at Cerska Valley, Kravica Warehouse , Orahovac, Branjevo Farm, Petkovci Dam and Kozluk.161
78. Most significantly, the forensic evidence presented by the Prosecution also demonstrates that, during a period of several weeks in September and early October 1995, Bosnian Serb forces dug up many of the primary mass gravesites and reburied the bodies in still more remote locations.162 Forensic tests have linked certain primary gravesites and certain secondary gravesites , namely: Branjevo Military Farm and Cancari Road 12; Petkovci Dam and Liplje 2; Orahovac (Lazete 2) and Hodzici Road 5; Orahovac (Lazete 1) and Hodzici Road 3 and 4; Glogova and Zeleni Jadar 5; and Kozluk and Cancari Road 3.163 The reburial evidence demonstrates a concerted campaign to conceal the bodies of the men in these primary gravesites, which was undoubtedly prompted by increasing international scrutiny of the events following the take-over of Srebrenica. Such extreme measures would not have been necessary had the majority of the bodies in these primary graves been combat victims. The Trial Chamber also notes that General Krstic himself did not contest the exhumation evidence presented by the Prosecution about the existence of the mass graves containing the bodies of "victims of Srebrenica ".164"
"151. The sites were: the primary grave at Branjevo Military Farm and the related secondary grave of Cancari Road 12; the primary grave at Orahovac (known as Lazete 2), and the three connected secondary graves at Hodzici Road 3, Hodzici Road 4 and Hodzici Road 5 ; and the Kozluk grave and the associated secondary grave at Cancari Road 3. Manning T.3569-3570. In addition, during the exhumations conducted in 2000, blindfolds were found at Lazete 2C and Lazete 1. Additional Manning Report, p. 7601.
152. The sites were: the primary grave at Cerska; the primary grave of Nova Kasaba exhumed in 1996; the primary grave of Orahovac (Lazete 2) and its related secondary site of Hodzici Road 5; the primary grave of Branjevo Military Farm, and the related secondary grave at Cancari Road 12; the primary site of Petkovci Dam and its related site of Liplje 2; the primary grave of Kozluk and its associated secondary grave of Cancari Road 3; and the secondary site of Zeleni Jadar 5. Manning, T. 3579-3576. In addition, during the exhumations conducted in 2000, ligatures were found at Lazete 2 C, and Glogova 1. Additional Manning Report, p 7601.
153. Manning, T. 3576.
154. Manning, T. 3565. The results of the additional exhumations conducted in 2000 continued to reflect this pattern. See Additional Manning Report.
155. See e.g. P 219 (an individual with a prosthetic leg and his hands tied behind his back). See generally, Lawrence, T. 3987-3989; and Clark, T. 3912-3913, 3939-3940.
156. Stankovic Report, p 13. See also Additional Stankovic Report, p 8174.
157. Stankovic Report, p 10-11.
158. Clark, T. 3958.
159. Manning Report, T. p. 00950924. See also the Additional Manning Report p. 7606 (regarding the Ravnice primary grave, which is also located close to the Konjevic Polje to Bratunac Road, and in which no ligatures or blindfolds were uncovered. In addition, this is an undisturbed primary gravesite, which further suggests that the victims may have been combat casualties. See the discussion Infra para. 78).
160. Stankovic Report, at p. 11.
161. The statistics relating to the forensic examinations conducted at these individual gravesites will be considered more closely in the Part IIB.
162. Ruez, T. 3534.
163. Manning, T. 3614-3615 and See also Additional Manning Report p. 7601.
164. Krstic, T. 6489."
Prosecutor v. Alfred Musema, Case No. ICTR-96-13-T, Judgement (TC), 27 January 2000, para. 360:
"360. Musema testified that while in his house in Kigali, he heard and saw the shots aimed at the plane, heard an explosion, although he did not see the plane crash, nor was he aware of those who were on board. The following day, on RTLM, he learnt of the crash and of those on board. He also admitted the occurrence of this incident and the inception of violence in Rwanda soon thereafter. Musema testified that in the days following the plane crash he witnessed massacres, the destruction of houses and the displacement of people from Kigali. Musema admitted that in the hours following the crash of the President's plane, violence set in and massacres began in Kigali and other préfectures in the country, marking the beginning of massacres described by him as a genocide. As he travelled between Kigali and Gitarama during the time of the massacres, he saw individuals manning roadblocks. These persons separated people they identified as Tutsi or those accused of being Inyenzi by asking for identity cards which indicated the ethnic group of the holders. Musema stated that these persons manning the roadblock threatened him and his family with death. At the roadsides he saw many bodies. He stated that the victims of the massacres were killed, because they were Tutsis (so-called Inyenzi) or because they looked Tutsi or because they were accused of helping the Tutsis. The majority of the victims were Tutsis. Musema stated that the victims included Tutsi children, who naturally could not have been among the FAR or FPR fighters."
A. Legal source/authority and evidence:
"147. An actor may be guilty of extermination if he kills, or creates the conditions of life that kills, a single person providing the actor is aware that his act(s) or omission(s) forms part of a mass killing event.86 For a single killing to form part of extermination, the killing must actually form part of a mass killing event. An ‘event’ exists when the (mass) killings have close proximity in time and place."
"86. Trans., 17 April 1997, p.11"
B. Evidentiary comment:
The Ad Hoc Tribunals have tended not to consider this requirement expressly. It is readily conflated with questions pertaining to the mode of liability of the accused. However where, as in many cases, the accused is not charged with commission of the offence but another mode of liability (often aiding and abetting) it would need to be proved that the specific killings constributed to by the accused constituted or took place as part of the mass killing. However in most cases although not expressly considered this is self-evidently made out as the mass killing discussed by the Tribunal has been, or included, that carried out by the perpetrator.
