Second - class justice system
(The Guardian Weekly)

It is eight years since Rwanda was engulfed by genocide. Prosecutors at the international court trying Hutu extremists who started the slaughter planned to mark the anniversary by laying bare the political conspiracy behind it. They wanted to use the trial of Theoneste Bagosora, the army colonel who is alleged mastermind behind the murder of hundreds of thousands of Tutsis over 100 days, to blow away myths about the killing and draw attention to one of the 20th century´s last great crimes. But, after opening Bagosora´s trial recently, the judges postponed it for six months - because they did not have a translation of two simple documents. It was a fitting letdown for a tribunal that has vainly raised so many expectations and become a potent argument for and against the international criminal court.

Some say Rwanda´s tribunal - based in Arusha, Tanzania - lays bare why international justice doesn´t work. Others claim it is evidence of why a standing court is required. The Rwanda tribunal, like the international court trying Slobodan Milosevic at the Hague, is an ad hoc creation of the United Nations Security Council. But the Rwandan court has been very much the poor relation. At least twice as many people died in Rwanda as in the former Yugoslavia, but the tribunal trying Bagosora and his cohorts has had neither The Hague´s resources nor political clout. Milosevic was brought to trial within a few months of his arrest in the Balkans. Bagosora has been in custody for six years and Rwandans ares still waiting to hear the case.

While Belgrade is gripped by Milosevic´s perfomance in the dock, many genocide survivors are indifferent to the fate of Bagosora at the hands of the international court. They have lost faith in the ability of the tribunal to deliver justice. Too many years of delays, incompetence and a perception that the court is soft on the accused have undermined the tribunal´s standing in Rwanda. And when the court does catch public attention it is for the wrong reasons, such as the incident late last year when three judges laughed as a woman gave lengthy testimony about being raped. The judges later said they were laughing at the defence lawyer´s questions, not the victim. The genocide survivor´s confidence in the court is so low that witnesses are now threatening a boycott of the tribunal.

The Rwanda court has had successes. It was first international tribunal in history to convict anyone of genocide and it broke new legal ground four years ago when judges - in pronouncing on the guilt of a particularly brutal mayor, Jean-Paul Akayesu - declared for the first time the rape is an act of genocide when a woman is attacked because of her ethnicity. That ruling was picked up by the Yugoslav tribunal. The tribunal has also been remarkably successful at laying its hands on the main perpetrators of the genocide, if not actually getting them trial. Six people are in detention, including much of the cabinet that oversaw the slaghter.

Vocabulary

prosecutor(n.)	žalobce, prokurátor
trial (v)	být v procesním/soudním řízení
alleged	údajný
tribunal (n.)	soudní dvůr, tribunál,
in custody	ve vazbě
case (n)	případ
the dock(n)	lavice obžalovaných
the accused (n)	obžalovaný, obviněný
testimony (n)	výpověď, svědectví
rulling	(soudní)rozhodnutí, usnesení