Annex : Witnesses profiles

Over the course of several meetings with Women’s Caucus members conducted prior to the first panel, the women from Rwanda revealed the following about themselves:

Witness A

On the 10 April 1994, the militia (Interhamwe) came to the house of Witness A. They took out her husband and killed him in front of the house. After four days the militia came back to the house, this time to rape her. For three months, until the genocide was stopped, witness A did not leave her bedroom. There were constantly men in her house, raping her. One group of men would sit in the living room, while another group was waiting in the bedroom. While one perpetrator were raping her, another one would get ready to take over. The mother-in-law and the children of witness A were in the same house during all this time.

When the genocide was over, the militia disappeared from the house, but at that time witness A was in such a bad state that she was not fully conscious for several weeks. As she slowly regained her consciousness of the world around her, she was finally able to go to a doctor in the month of October 1994. The doctor, who was from Belgium, told her that she had an infection as a consequence of the repeated rapes.

Until today witness A is still suffering from the sexual violence she experienced during 1994. Her stomach is still very swollen. Some days she is not in touch with her surroundings as she in her mind sees the militiamen coming in to her bedroom and undress, over and over again.

Witness A stated that it is very important for her that the perpetrators are sentenced. However, she also emphasizes the fact that it is not only the men that were in her house that are guilty. More important are the men and women that had high positions in the society and who were the ones that planned and gave orders about the genocide. As Witness A expressed it, “They were killing the men and raping the women, that was the plan.”

Also the fact that many of the perpetrators had AIDS and consequently many of the victims of sexual violence are today dying from that disease, underscores for victim A that rape was used as a tool to kill.

So far, witness A has had no personal contact with the ICTR. One of its investigators sometimes visits an organization in which she is a member, but the investigator has not spoken to witness A. In response to a question if she would be prepared to witness in front of the ICTR, witness A stated that she would be willing to do so.

Witness B

The second witness at the panel has a professional career and is the mother of her own children as well as several others orphaned during the massacres. Several members of her family were killed during the genocide. Investigators at the ICTR sought her out in 1995 as a potential witness to testify against someone accused of genocide.

She stated that when investigators first made contact with her in 1995 they did not identify themselves as investigators but rather made an appointment with her as if they were potential clients. When they showed up at her place of work, they demanded to be seen before her other clients and took up a great deal of time trying to take a statement. She met with them two more times right after the initial meeting. Each time they assured her if she were to testify she would be protected and the accused would not have to know she was testifying against him. Witness B was concerned about this because she and the accused knew each other.

The witness did not have any contact with investigators or other persons from the tribunal after the initial contacts in 1995 until 1997 when they approached her about going to the tribunal in Arusha to testify against the accused. She had not been advised by anyone at the tribunal that the case had progressed and that the accused had been brought to trial. Again, they assured her she would be protected and the accused would not need know she was testifying against him.

The Witness was very concerned about the journey to Arusha. She was transported to Arusha in a U.N. plane which made it obvious to bystanders that she was involved somehow with the tribunal. She also encountered derogatory remarks from some of the soldiers stationed at the airport. She asked the security people accompanying her several times about the process and was not given any information. When her passport was taken by one of the personnel she was told not to worry about it when she inquired as to why the passport was taken. She stated she would have rather travelled more anonymously on a commercial plane.

Witness B stated that when she arrived at the tribunal she saw two gentlemen she knew to be Hutu cleaning at the site of the Court and grew concerned. She expressed his concern to staff but got no response about the matter.

She was placed in a safehouse at the site of the Court where she could not leave or do anything for four days. She stayed there with a man who was also a prosecution witness. They were not allowed to go anywhere or do anything and she stated that the food and facilities were very lacking. The witness stated that this was the first time in many years where she had nothing to do. Indeed she tried to keep herself busy in the safehouse by cleaning or cooking and was told she could not do that.

As a result of not being able to occupy her mind and because she had to think about her testimony, she began to relive the events of several years before and began to feel unwell physically and very depressed. She requested the assistance of a psychiatric counsellor and was told it was not possible to provide one in Arusha. She stated that her depression worsened and even upon her return to her home, it took her a while to be able to work again and provide for her family.

It was not until witness B was given a tour of the Court’s facilities and the Trial Chamber that she realized she would not be anonymous from the accused. As the tribunal staff pointed out to her where all of the parties would be sitting and where she would be testifying, she asked about how her identity would be kept from the accused. They told her it would not be. She was shocked by this and grew very scared.

The day she was expected to testify, the trial was postponed. Witness B stated that she was very relieved by this. She was returned to her home where she decided she would not cooperate further with the tribunal if they sought her assistance in the future. The tribunal did seek her assistance, once the trial began again, and she has firmly refused to participate in any manner despite threats to charge her with obstruction of justice. She stated this is because she did not have faith in the methods and arrangements for her protection and did not like the way she was treated while at the Court. The witness also stated that she had been assured by investigators that she would be adequately reimbursed for her time in Arusha when she inquired about this. She was concerned about having no income for the time she was away and also about how to pay the person who would replace her while she was away to tend to her client’s urgent needs. She stated that ultimately that was a hardship as well as the compensation for her time away was not what she had been told it would be.

<<<<<< >>>>>>