STUDY GUIDE QUESTIONS FOR RAPE AND GENOCIDE IN RWANDA
I. An Unprecedented Opportunity
1. Which life experience would best prepare Judge Pillay to respect Akayesu's
right to a fair trial?
- Law degree from Harvard University
- Law practice defending political activists and prisoners*
- Board member service with Equality Now
- Minority group ancestry in South Africa
2. Why might a feminist judge object to defining rape as an act of genocide?
- Wartime rapes committed for soldiers' pleasure might become more difficult
to punish*
- Rape prosecutions involving pregnancy would undermine efforts to legalize
abortion
- Existing international laws on torture and crimes against humanity are sufficient
to protect women from sexual violence in war
- Rape is more like slavery than genocide
II. Prior Responses to Sexual Violence in War
1. Which opposed the treatment of women as spoils of war?
- Old Testament scripture
- Classical authors of ancient Greece
- 14th Century feudal rulers in Europe
- 1907 Hague Convention rules on noncombatants*
2. The account of prosecutions at Nuremberg implies that Nazis were not convicted
of rape because
- German troops were not responsible for mass rape
- Rape crimes were beyond the tribunal's jurisdiction
- There were no women prosecutors and judges
- Judges were from countries responsible for wartime rapes of German and Italian
women*
3. Which rape victims were ignored in postwar international criminal prosecution
of the Japanese?
- Korean women coerced into brothels for Japanese soldiers*
- Philippine children raped by Japanese occupation forces
- Chinese women abused when Japan seized Nanking
4. Which provision of the 1949 Geneva Conventions specifically prohibits rape?
- The 3rd Geneva Convention on prisoners of war
- Article 27 of the 4th Geneva Convention on civilians*
- Common Article 3 of all four Geneva Conventions
5. After the conflicts in Vietnam and Bangladesh, how did Protocol II of 1977
amend the 1949 Geneva Conventions?
- By creating an international tribunal to prosecute war criminals
- By applying all the rules of international war to internal armed conflicts
- By expanding the coverage of Common Article 3 to include rape*
6. What success did NGOs promoting women's human rights achieve?
- Rape prosecutions in Guatemala and El Salvador
- Appointment of women as U.N. Chief prosecutor for Yugoslavia and Rwanda*
- Guaranteed appointment of female judges to the new International Criminal
Court
III. Genocide In Rwanda
1. Which fact might Belgians use to refute criticism of their colonial policies
in Rwanda?
- Belgium is legally divided into French and Dutch speaking constituencies
with schools and government posts formally assigned to distinct language groups.*
- Biologists and anthropologists offer conclusive scientific support for the
tribal classifications used to identify the Tutsi group for leadership in
Rwanda
- Delegating power to a minority group in Rwanda enabled Belgian colonists
to secure the most loyal African administrators.
2. What factors differentiated Hutu and Tutsi?
- Religion
- Language
- Race
- None of the above*
3. After independence in the early 1960s
- Tutsis held power in both Rwanda and Burundi
- Hutus held power in both Rwanda and Burundi
- Burundi had not experienced the mass killing suffered by Rwandans
- Tutsis in exile posed a threat to Rwanda's Hutu government*
4. Which laid plans to commit genocide in 1994?
- RPF
- Interhamwe*
- UNAMIR
- Twa
5. Why might Hutu forces assassinate President Habyarimana?
- He was a Tutsi
- He agreed to share power with the RPF*
- He was unintentionally killed in the assassination of Burundi's Tutsi President
6. Rwanda army forces were predominantly
- Hutu*
- Tutsi
- Belgian
7. Which individual urged action to prevent the genocide?
- Kofi Annan
- Romeo Dallaire*
- Juvenal Habyarimana
- Jean Kambanda
8. A. U.S. journalist accused Akayesu of
- Orchestrating mass murder like Himmler in Germany
- Wielding primitive weapons in brutal murders
- Following orders from above to direct subordinates who killed Tutsi*
9. Akayesu personally
- served as an Interhamwe leader
- raped Tutsi women as a spoil of war
- attacked fellow Hutus who protected Tutsis*
- joined the genocide at the earliest opportunity
IV. The U.N. Creates a Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda
1. Which evidence would be most critical in determining whether the Security
Council had authority under the U.N. Charter to create a criminal tribunal for
Rwanda?
- Hutus had raped over 250,000 Tutsi women
- Over half a million Tutsi were killed
- Tutsi refugees threatened to involve neighboring states in the conflict*
- Hutu leaders had copied ethnic cleansing from Serbs in Yugoslavia
2. What did Rwanda want for the new U.N. tribunal?
- French speaking judges from Belgium, France and Quebec
- Prosecution and imprisonment in a neighboring state
- The power to sentence Hutu killers to death*
- A Tutsi court registrar and Tutsi prosecutor
3. The International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda had a
- trial chamber in Rwanda and an appellate panel in Arusha, Tanzania
- prosecutor in Rwanda and trial chambers in Arusha, Tanzania*
- trial chamber in Rwanda and an appellate panel at The Hague, Netherlands
4. Rwanda's representative on the Security Council correctly anticipated that
the U.N.
- would not give sufficient funding for prompt, effective investigation and
prosecution*
- court would ignore Hutu leaders and convict their subordinates
- would be unable to locate detention facilities for those convicted
- would convict RPF members of war crimes
V. The Trial of Jean-Paul Akayesu
1. Why was Akayesu not tried until several years after his crimes?
- The U.N. did not obtain custody until nearly two years after he fled.
- The ICTR was slow to organize and begin operations
- A dispute arose over appointed defense counsel
- All of the above*
2. Why would Akayesu choose a Belgian lawyer as defense counsel?
- Belgian peacekeepers sided with Hutu in the conflict.
- He needed expert counsel fluent in French.*
- He wanted a lawyer with experience in criminal prosecution.
3. Why did the prosecutors add counts to the indictment during the trial?
- They wanted to charge rape as an act of genocide.
- They wanted to charge sexual violence as a crime against humanity.*
- They had too few original counts to assure a conviction.
4. If Hutu killers massacred political enemies from their own ethnic group
- that would be genocide
- that would be politicide, not genocide*
- that would violate the 1949 Geneva Protocols
5. UNAMIR Commander Dallaire was called by
- the prosecutor to testify that Hutus raped Tutsis
- the defense to testify that the U.N. failed to stop the genocide*
- the defense to testify about RPF war crimes
6. Rwanda's government
- allowed Hutus in custody to testify for the defense in Tanzania*
- suspended executions in accord with U.N. ICTR procedures
- withheld all cooperation with the ICTR
7. By the end of Akayesu's trial. the ICTR had
- a significant backlog of cases to process.*
- been unable to obtain custody of major Hutu leaders responsible for genocide.
- fully resolved early administrative problems.
- established good working relations between European judges and African
court administrators.
VI. Issues for Judgment
1. In deciding the issue of ethnicity, the ICTR judges determined that
- Hutus and Tutsis satsfied the definition for ethnic groups based on distinct
physical characteristics.
- As a result of legal practice and social custom, Tutsis were a protected
group under international law.*
- German and Belgian colonial administrators properly classified the Hutu
as Bantu and the Tutsi as Nilotic.
2. A Tutsi in the RPF who killed and raped Hutus could only be convicted in
the ICTR if
- the prosecutor showed intent to extirminate the majority group in whole
or in part*
- the rapes involved forced impregnation to increase the number of Tutsi
- the conflict was judged an international war
3. If upheld on appeal, the Akayesu verdict would
- help prosecutors in other cases establish that genocide took place*
- set a precedent for convicting other village majors under Common Article
3
- set a precedent that laws against conspiracy must not infringe free speech