Operationalising International Criminal Law: A Critical Analysis of the High Court Chamber's Juridical Regimes in Rwanda

Abstract

While most scholarship on Rwanda and international criminal law focuses on the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda and the community-based Gacaca courts, this paper examines the lesser-studied High Court Chamber for International and Cross‑Border Crimes (HCCITC), established in 2012. Employing a doctrinal methodology, it critically compares the HCCITC with the International Criminal Court, highlighting key divergences: Rwanda’s application of conditional universal jurisdiction, the inclusion of transnational offences such as human trafficking and torture alongside core international crimes, the recognition of corporate criminal liability, and procedural features like the merging of trial and sentencing phases and the permissibility of trials in absentia. The analysis situates the chamber’s creation within the legacy of the 1994 Genocide against the Tutsi, the perceived political and jurisdictional constraints of the International Criminal Court, and Rwanda’s assertion of sovereign judicial authority. Drawing on landmark cases, including the chamber’s foundational trial of Léon Mugesera, the paper argues that the HCCITC represents a context-specific, sovereignty-affirming mechanism that can complement international justice frameworks. However, it identifies procedural shortcomings; particularly the combined trial‑sentencing procedure and the practice of proceeding without the accused, that risk undermining fair trial standards. The paper concludes with recommendations for procedural reform, enhanced judicial expertise, stricter criteria for trials in absentia, and the promotion of similarly specialised national institutions to strengthen domestic capacity to prosecute international crimes.

Keywords

• Rwanda
• ICC
• juridical regime
• high court chambers
• international crimes
• universal jurisdiction

Ethical Statement

No violation of any ethical rules.

Uluslararası Ceza Hukukunun Operasyonelleştirilmesi: Ruanda’daki Yüksek Mahkeme Dairesi’nin Hukuki Düzenlemelerine Eleştirel Bir Analiz

Abstract

Ruanda ve uluslararası ceza hukuku üzerine yapılan akademik çalışmaların çoğu, Ruanda Uluslararası Ceza Mahkemesi ve toplum temelli Gacaca mahkemelerine odaklanırken, bu makale 2012 yılında kurulan ve daha az incelenmiş olan Uluslararası ve Sınır Ötesi Suçlar Yüksek Mahkeme Dairesi’ni (HCCITC) ele almaktadır. Doktrinsel bir metodoloji benimseyen bu çalışma, HCCITC’yi Uluslararası Ceza Mahkemesi  ile eleştirel bir şekilde karşılaştırarak, aradaki temel farklılıkları vurgulamaktadır: Ruanda’nın koşullu evrensel yargı yetkisini uygulaması, temel uluslararası suçların yanı sıra insan ticareti ve işkence gibi sınır ötesi suçların da kapsama alınması, tüzel kişilerin cezai sorumluluğunun tanınması ve yargılama ile ceza belirleme aşamalarının birleştirilmesi ve gıyabi yargılamaya izin verilmesi gibi usul özellikleri. Analiz, bu mahkemenin kurulmasını 1994 Tutsi Soykırımı’nın mirası, Uluslararası Ceza Mahkemesi’nin algılanan siyasi ve yargı yetki kısıtlamaları ve Ruanda’nın egemen yargı yetkisini savunması bağlamında ele almaktadır. Makale, mahkemenin Léon Mugesera’ya ilişkin kurucu davası da dahil olmak üzere dönüm noktası niteliğindeki davalardan yararlanarak, HCCITC’nin uluslararası adalet çerçevelerini tamamlayabilecek, bağlama özgü ve egemenliği pekiştiren bir mekanizma olduğunu savunmaktadır. Bununla birlikte, bu makale, adil yargılama standartlarını zedeleyebilecek usulî eksiklikleri; özellikle de yargılama ve hüküm verme işlemlerinin birleştirilmesi ile sanığın yokluğunda yargılama uygulamasını ortaya koymaktadır. Makale, usulî reform, yargı uzmanlığının geliştirilmesi, gıyabi yargılamalar için daha katı kriterler ve uluslararası suçların kovuşturulmasına yönelik ulusal kapasitenin güçlendirilmesi amacıyla benzer şekilde uzmanlaşmış ulusal kurumların teşvik edilmesine yönelik önerilerle son bulmaktadır.

Keywords

• Ruanda
• Uluslararası Ceza Mahkemesi
• hukuki rejim
• yüksek mahkeme daireleri
• uluslararası suçlar
• evrensel yargı yetkisi

References

1. Bassiouni, M. (2001). Universal jurisdiction for international crimes: Historical perspectives and contemporary practice. Virginia Journal of International Law, 42(1), 81-161.
2. Bolhuis, M. (2026). "No Safe Haven" and the politics of accountability: The extradition and exclusion of Rwandan genocide suspects. Refugee Survey Quarterly, Makale hdag004. https://doi.org/10.1093/rsq/hdag004
3. Britannica Editors. (2025, March 25). Rwanda genocide of 1994. Encyclopedia Britannica. https://www.britannica.com/event/Rwanda-genocide-of-1994
4. Cassese, A. (2003). International criminal law. Oxford University Press.
5. Costello, C., & Itamar, M. (2020). Border justice: Migration and accountability for human rights violations. German Law Journal, 21, 311-334.
6. Hirondelle News. (2012, February 16). Rwanda/justice - Rwanda creates special chamber for international crimes. JusticeInfo.net. https://www.justiceinfo.net/en/24222-160212-rwandajustice-rwanda-creates-special-chamber-for-international-crimes.html
7. International Criminal Court. (1998). Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. https://www.icc-cpi.int/resource-library/documents/rs-eng.pdf
8. International Criminal Court (Ed.). (2010). Review conference of the Rome statute of the International Criminal Court. International Criminal Court Publication.

9. International Criminal Court. (2023, March 17). Situation in Ukraine: ICC judges issue arrest warrants against Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin and Maria Alekseyevna Lvova-Belova [Press release]. https://www.icc-cpi.int/news/situation-ukraine-icc-judges-issue-arrest-warrants-against-vladimir-vladimirovich-putin-and
10. International Criminal Court Project. (n.d.). Structure of the ICC. International Criminal Court Project. https://www.aba-icc.org/about-the-icc/structure-of-the-icc/
11. Khetarpal, M., & Jogiram, S. (2024). The role of national courts in complementing international tribunals: Successes, limitations, and future prospects. MSW Management Journal, 34(1), 390-407.
12. Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Netherlands. (2022, June 14). Questions from member Eppink (JA21) regarding the report that the Netherlands continued to provide financial support to dictatorial Rwanda despite human rights violations [Parliamentary document AH-TK-20212022-3123]. Official Publications of the Netherlands
13. Morris, J. W. (2013). The trouble with transfers: An analysis of the referral of Uwinkindi to the Republic of Rwanda for trial. Journal of International Criminal Justice, 11(1), 1-23.
14. Muhumuza, R. (2016, November 12). Netherlands extradites 2 genocide suspects to Rwanda. AP News. https://apnews.com/general-news-56a6a618f6a14887aa4ba5f9289f2c67
15. Mutabazi, H. (2018, April 2). High Court Chamber for International Crimes to be moved to Nyanza this month. The New Times. https://www.newtimes.co.rw/article/150127/News/high-court-chamber-for-international-crimes-to-be-moved-to-nyanza-this-month
16. Nnawulezi, U., Nwaechefu, H., & Magashi, S. B. (2023). Addressing the principles and challenges of enforcement and prosecutions under universal jurisdictions: Charting new pathways for international justice. Indonesian Journal of International Law, 20(2), 263-286.
17. O'Keefe, R. (2004). Universal jurisdictions: Clarifying the basic concept. International Journal of Criminal Justice, 2, 735-760.
18. Prosecution v Mugesera, Case no RP 0001/12/CCI, 15/04/2016.
19. Prosecutor v. Thomas Lubanga Dyilo, ICC-01/04-01/06, Judgment pursuant to Article 74 of the Statute, Trial Chamber I, 14 March 2012.
20. Roberts, A. (2011). Comparative international law? The role of national courts in creating and enforcing international law. International & Comparative Law Quarterly, 60, 57-92.
21. Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, 1998.
22. Rwanda. (2018). Law n°30/2018 of 02/06/2018 determining the jurisdiction of courts (Official Gazette, n° Special of 02/06/2018).
23. Rwanda. (2018). Law nº012/2018 of 04/04/2018 determining the organization and functioning of the judiciary (Official Gazette, n° Special of 30/05/2018).
24. Rwanda. (2018). Law nº014/2018 of 04/04/2018 determining the organization, functioning and competence of the national public prosecution authority and of the military prosecution department (Official Gazette, n° Special of 30/05/2018).
25. Rwanda. (2018). Law nº22/2018 of 29/04/2018 relating to the civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure (Official Gazette, nº Special of 29/04/2018).
26. Rwanda. (2018). Law nº68/2018 of 30/08/2018 determining offences and penalties in general (Official Gazette, no. Special of 27/09/2018).
27. Rwanda. (2019). Law nº 027/2019 of 19/09/2019 relating to the criminal procedure (Official Gazette, n° Special of 08/11/2019).
28. Rwanda. (2023). Constitution of the Republic of Rwanda (Official Gazette, n° Special of 04/08/2023).
29. Sarkin, J. (2021). The tension between justice and reconciliation in Rwanda: Politics, human rights, due process and the role of the Gacaca Courts in dealing with the genocide. Journal of African Law, 45(2), 143-172. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0221855301001675
30. Schabas, W. A. (2010). The International Criminal Court. In D. R. Black & P. D. Williams (Eds.), The international politics of mass atrocities (1st ed., pp. 134-154). Routledge.
31. Spencer, A. B. (2006). Jurisdiction to adjudicate: A revised analysis. University of Chicago Law Review, 73(2), Article 3.
32. Statute of the International Court of Justice, 1945.
33. TRIAL International. (2025, April 8). Pierre-Claver Karangwa. Universal Jurisdiction Database. https://ujim.trialinternational.org/latest-post/pierre-claver-karangwa/
34. United Nations. (1945). Charter of the United Nations. https://www.un.org/en/about-us/un-charter Utrecht Centre for Accountability and Liability Law. (2016, November 29). Does the Netherlands' extradition of genocide suspects to Rwanda violate their human rights? https://blog.ucall.nl/index.php/2016/11/does-the-netherlands-extradition-of-genocide-suspects-to-rwanda-violate-their-human-rights/