Table of contents:
P.27. Evidence inferred from a utterance, a document or a deed.
P.27.1. Evidence of subjecting one or more persons to forced nudity.
P.27.2. Evidence of forcing a person or persons to perform exercices naked in public.
P.27.3. Evidence of forcing a person or persons to march around naked in public.
P.27.4. Evidence of forcing a person or persons to dance and strip naked in public.
P.27.5. Evidence of forcing a person or persons to bathe the perpetrator.
P.27.6. Evidence of forcing one or more persons to have sexual intercourse.
P.27.7. Evidence of forcing one or more persons to commit incest.
Element:
P.27. Evidence inferred from a utterance, a document or a deed.
P.27.1. Evidence of subjecting one or more persons to forced nudity.
P.27.2. Evidence offorcing a person or persons to perform exercices naked in public.
P.27.3. Evidence offorcing a person or persons to march around naked in public.
A. Legal source/authority and evidence:
Prosecutor v. Jean-Paul Akayesu, Case No. ICTR-96-4-T, Judgement (TC), 2 September 1998, paras. 428, 436, 686:
428. [ ]Witness KK testified regarding an incident in which the Accused told the Interahamwe to undress a young girl named Chantal, whom he knew to be a gymnast, so that she could do gymnastics naked. The Accused told Chantal, who said she was Hutu, that she must be a Tutsi because he knew her father to be a Tutsi. As Chantal was forced to march around naked in front of many people, Witness KK testified that the Accused was laughing and happy with this.
436.[ ] the three women were forced by the Interahamwe to undress and told to walk, run and perform exercises so that they could display the thighs of Tutsi women. All this took place, she said, in front of approximately two hundred people. After this, she said the women were raped.
686. [ ] The incident described by Witness KK in which the Accused ordered the Interahamwe to undress a student and force her to do gymnastics naked in the public courtyard of the bureau communal, in front of a crowd, constitutes sexual violence.
[B. Evidentiary comment:]
P.27.4. Evidence of forcing a person or persons to dance and strip naked in public.
A. Legal source/authority and evidence:
Prosecutor v. Dragoljub Kunarac et al., Cases No. IT-96-23-T and IT-96-23/1-T, Judgement (TC), 22 February 2001, paras. 768-769:
769. A.S. testified, and the Trial Chamber accepts, that she, together with A.B. and FWS-87, were once made to strip and dance. Radomir Kovač, Jagos Kostic and possibly a third soldier watched them. Although she did not recall FWS-75 being present, A.S.s testimony fully supports FWS-87s evidence of these events.
Special Rapporteur on Contemporary Forms of Slavery, Systematic Rape, Sexual Slavery and Slavery-Like Practices during Armed Conflict, 22 June 1998, U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1998/13 para. 21:
21. [ ] Sexual violence covers both physical and psychological attacks directed at a person's sexual characteristics, such as forcing a person to strip naked in public, mutilating a person's genitals, or slicing off a woman's breasts. [Human Rights Watch, Shattered Lives: Sexual Violence during the Rwandan Genocide and its Aftermath, New York, (1996) p. 62.]
[B. Evidentiary comment:]
P.27.5. Evidence of forcing a person or persons to bathe the perpetrator.
P.27.6. Evidence of forcing one or more persons to have sexual intercourse.
P.27.7. Evidence of forcing one or more persons to commit incest.
A. Legal source/authority and evidence:
Prosecutor v. Zejnil Delalić et al., Case No. IT-96-21-T, Judgement (TC), 16 November 1998, paras. 1065-1066:
1065. Accordingly, on the basis of the foregoing evidence, the Trial Chamber finds that, on one occasion, Esad Lando ordered Vaso Đorđić and his brother, Veseljko Đorđić, to remove their trousers in front of the other detainees in Hangar 6. He then forced first one brother and then the other to kneel down and take the other ones penis into his mouth for a period of about two to three minutes. This act of fellatio was performed in full view of the other detainees in the Hangar.
1066. The Trial Chamber finds that the act of forcing Vaso Đorđić and Veseljko Đorđić to perform fellatio on one another constituted, at least, a fundamental attack on their human dignity. Accordingly, the Trial Chamber finds that this act constitutes the offence of inhuman treatment under Article 2 of the Statute, and cruel treatment under Article 3 of the Statute. The Trial Chamber notes that the aforementioned act could constitute rape for which liability could have been found if pleaded in the appropriate manner.
[B. Evidentiary comment:]
