Of Simbikangwa’s sham trial and French courts’ political gimmick

Editor, I WISH to respond to the article, “Anger as French court overturns extradition order of Genocide suspects” (The New Times, February 27).
Simbikangwa being led to a French court in a wheelchair. Another French court this week overturned an extradition order involving two Genocide suspects and upheld an earlier ruling....
Simbikangwa being led to a French court in a wheelchair. Another French court this week overturned an extradition order involving two Genocide suspects and upheld an earlier ruling....

Editor,

I WISH to respond to the article, “Anger as French court overturns extradition order of Genocide suspects” (The New Times, February 27).

Clearly, these Genocide suspects must and will have to eventually face prosecution, even if not in their country of origin. That certainly is not up for debate. However, on an important side note, if Genocide suspects in question cannot be extradited to Kigali on the basis that genocide had not been “legally defined” as a crime in 1994 (in Rwanda I presume), something’s very amiss with the laws of some host countries. 

As far as justice and logic go, if such countries have laws recognising that genocide is a crime (I’m sure France does), it should be more than enough for them to consider that suspected perpetrators, who found refuge in their territory, can be extradited to wherever they have committed such crimes, regardless of the status of genocide laws in those places. 

Otherwise, and for argument’s sake, are we not falling in a vortex of absurdity where it is implicitly understood that countries would have to first experience a genocide before being granted the right to ask for extradition (repatriation) of perpetrators? 

Obviously, several French courts have weighed out this absurdity by confirming extradition orders. For the “Cour de Cassation” (last resort court) to reverse this wise decision is quite an unfortunate surprise...

Diyana, Rwanda 

*****************************

SOMEONE VERSED in law could assist me understand the double mistreatment of prosecution handling. Can’t France try the criminals if Rwanda delivers proof of acts of the genocide committed by the trio?

If France courts deliberately refuse to prosecute the suspected criminals, can’t other courts intervene?

It’s absurd that the judiciary of France deliberately avoids the obvious right path to justice: Refusal to extradite the suspected criminals of the most heinous crime.

France ostensibly pretends to forget the recent judicial cases involving the suspected Nazi criminals of Holocaust in a bid to deliver justice.

I’m afraid hosting blood-stained characters in France might in one way or another haunt the innocent citizens of France.

Kato, Bukoba, Tanzania 

*****************************

CAN SOMEONE tell France to stop this game? We will never have justice from a criminal state. Former President François Mitterrand said that “Genocide in that country (Rwanda) is meaningless”; someone also said that they were proud of having played a role in 1994 and before in Rwanda, which means extermination of Tutsis. The list goes on.

Why then try Pascal Simbikangwa if there were no enabling laws with regard to holding Genocide perpetrators to account? This is simply comedy.

Peter, Rwanda

 

Have Your SayLeave a comment