Sometimes in April. Dieser Tage gedenkt Ruanda dem Völkermord an den Tutsi vor 25 Jahren. Gemeinsam mit Srebrenica die größte Wunde in der Geschichte der Vereinten Nationen.
In beiden Fällen hat die Welt zu wenig getan, obwohl alle über den Massenmord Bescheid wussten (siehe dazu die Dokumentation „Shakehands with the Devil“). Die USA wollten nach dem Debakel in Somalia (wo 18 US-Marines 1992 während des „Battle of Mogadischu und der Jagd nach dem Warlord Mohammed Farah Aidid getötet und von einer aufgebrachten Menschenmenge durch die Straßen geschleift wurden) nicht mehr in strategisch unbedeutenden (afrikanischen) Ländern das Leben ihrer Soldaten riskieren. Europa hatte ebensowenig Interesse, war es doch von den Jugoslawienkriegen überfordert. Frankreich spielte eine besonders schandvolle Rolle, hat es doch die damalige Hutu-Regierung lange unterstützt und nach seiner Intervention zu viele der Schuldigen entkommen lassen.
Um die Schuldigen zur Verantwortung zu ziehen, richtete der richtete im November 1994 ein ein eigenes internationales Tribunal, ein, den ICTR. Er nahm Anfang 1995 seine Tätigkeit auf, seine Entscheidungen haben das Völkerstrafrecht maßgeblich beeinflusst. Im Akayesu-Fall kam es zur ersten Verurteilung wegen Völkermords seit dem Ende des Zweiten Weltkriegs. Außerdem wurde der Tatbestand der Vergewaltigung erstmals näher definiert und als Teil eines Völkermords anerkannt. Ebenso bedeutsam ist der „Media Case„, in dem zwei führende (Radio-)“Journalisten“ wegen der Aufhetzung zum Völkermord lebenslang (ein weiterer für 35 Jahre) bestraft wurden (siehe auch hier). Der ICTR hat seine Tätigkeit mittlerweile beendet, das letzte Urteil wurde im Dezember 2012 gefällt.
Hier der entsprechende Auszug aus dem Akayesu-Urteil:
731. With regard, particularly, to the acts described in paragraphs 12(A) and 12(B) of the Indictment, that is, rape and sexual violence, the Chamber wishes to underscore the fact that in its opinion, they constitute genocide in the same way as any other act as long as they were committed with the specific intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a particular group, targeted as such. Indeed, rape and sexual violence certainly constitute infliction of serious bodily and mental harm on the victims and are even, according to the Chamber, one of the worst ways of inflict harm on the victim as he or she suffers both bodily and mental harm. In light of all the evidence before it, the Chamber is satisfied that the acts of rape and sexual violence described above, were committed solely against Tutsi women, many of whom were subjected to the worst public humiliation, mutilated, and raped several times, often in public, in the Bureau Communal premises or in other public places, and often by more than one assailant. These rapes resulted in physical and psychological destruction of Tutsi women, their families and their communities. Sexual violence was an integral part of the process of destruction, specifically targeting Tutsi women and specifically contributing to their destruction and to the destruction of the Tutsi group as a whole.
732. The rape of Tutsi women was systematic and was perpetrated against all Tutsi women and solely against them. A Tutsi woman, married to a Hutu, testified before the Chamber that she was not raped because her ethnic background was unknown. As part of the propaganda campaign geared to mobilizing the Hutu against the Tutsi, the Tutsi women were presented as sexual objects. Indeed, the Chamber was told, for an example, that before being raped and killed, Alexia, who was the wife of the Professor, Ntereye, and her two nieces, were forced by the Interahamwe to undress and ordered to run and do exercises „in order to display the thighs of Tutsi women“. The Interahamwe who raped Alexia said, as he threw her on the ground and got on top of her, „let us now see what the vagina of a Tutsi woman takes like“. As stated above, Akayesu himself, speaking to the Interahamwe who were committing the rapes, said to them: „don’t ever ask again what a Tutsi woman tastes like“. This sexualized representation of ethnic identity graphically illustrates that tutsi women were subjected to sexual violence because they were Tutsi. Sexual violence was a step in the process of destruction of the tutsi group – destruction of the spirit, of the will to live, and of life itself. 733. On the basis of the substantial testimonies brought before it, the Chamber finds that in most cases, the rapes of Tutsi women in Taba, were accompanied with the intent to kill those women. Many rapes were perpetrated near mass graves where the women were taken to be killed . A victim testified that Tutsi women caught could be taken away by peasants and men with the promise that they would be collected later to be executed. Following an act of gang rape, a witness heard Akayesu say „tomorrow they will be killed“ and they were actually killed. In this respect, it appears clearly to the Chamber that the acts of rape and sexual violence, as other acts of serious bodily and mental harm committed against the Tutsi, reflected the determination to make Tutsi women suffer and to mutilate them even before killing them, the intent being to destroy the Tutsi group while inflicting acute suffering on its members in the process.
Hier auch noch zwei Auszüge aus dem Media case:
The present case squarely addresses the role of the media in the genocide that took place in Rwanda in 1994 and the related legal question of what constitutes individual criminal responsibility for direct and public incitement to commit genocide. Unlike Akayesu and others found by the Tribunal to have engaged in incitement through their own speech, the Accused in this case used the print and radio media systematically, not only for their own words but for the words of many others, for the collective communication of ideas and for the mobilization of the population on a grand scale. In considering the role of mass media, the Chamber must consider not only the contents of particular broadcasts and articles, but also the broader application of these principles to media programming, as well as the responsibilities inherent in ownership and institutional control over the media. […]
the Chamber recalls that incitement is a crime regardless of whether it has the effect it intends to have. In determining whether communications represent an intent to cause genocide and thereby constitute incitement, the Chamber considers it significant that in fact genocide occurred. That the media intended to have this effect is evidenced in part by the fact that it did have this effect.