Rwanda genocide trial

[nightowl]

I could not believe this when I heard it yesterday. This country's judicial system has become a joke. Everyone, from the government down, are so tightly tied up with red tape and a misguided sense of justice, that these men will get off "scot free" without even a rap on the knuckles. No wonder the criminal element from countries all over the world want to settle here. They must laugh at us being such a soft touch.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1168521/Four-men-accused-Rwanda-genocide-win-battle-extradition-Britain.html

http://news.scotsman.com/rwanda/Four-held-in-UK-accused.2838518.jp

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/apr/08/rwanda-genocide-accused-extradition-case

The History of Rwanda Genocide
http://www.historyplace.com/worldhistory/genocide/rwanda.htm

The cover-ups have been going on for years....
http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/forumy/2008/02/rwanda-genocide-cover-up.php

[northener]

If it was a British national (say a white female aid worker) whom the Rwandan government was trying to extradite, would you be happy for that extradition to go ahead and be fully convinced that they would get a fair trial?

We spend a lot of time criticising Third World judicial procedure in the UK. So it's hardly a suprise when, occasionally, our own judicial system agrees with this view.

[porshiepoo]

OMG. So they go free? No penance for Genocide? No justice for their victims? Their families?
And all because they'll not get a "fair trial" in their country. It's beyond ridiculous. Did their victims get a "fair trial" before they were murdered? No, cos they were the only innocent victims in this whole thing.
And to top it off, these murderers are considering "compensation" claims. [evil]

Northerner, I get what you're saying but we have to consider what message we are sending out here.
Seek refuge in the Uk after committing genocide and they'll get us off due to their "misguided sense of justice", is that really what this country wants or needs to become?
These people are not British, full stop. They are wanted for war crimes in their own country. They should be extradited back to their own country and made to stand trial, they certainly should be not be just set free.

And where are these vile creatures with the morals of Satan going to be living once they're free? Here? Blinkin great! Makes us Brits feel well safe in our own country doesn't it.

Is it really the business of the UK or the best interests of the UK to support the men that carried out or conspired to carry out such heinous crimes?

[northener]

OMG. So they go free? No penance for Genocide? No justice for their victims? Their families?
And all because they'll not get a "fair trial" in their country. It's beyond ridiculous. Did their victims get a "fair trial" before they were murdered? No, cos they were the only innocent victims in this whole thing....



So you believe that justice is best served by allowing people to stand trial even though you agree that the trail will not be fair? Hmmmm....You talk about "justice for their victims", Porshie, yet you are happy to send potentially innocent men off to a country not renowned for its system of "justice". No mention of "justice" for the accused........

Hutu murders Tutse - Tutse murders Hutu. Who are we to take sides in a tribal confrontation that has been simmering away for years? I'll wager this conflict is not as clear cut as the media would have us believe. At the moment, one tribe has the upper hand over another one. Ten years down the line and that situation could be swiftly reversed again with further lethal consequences. This is Africa - not Andover or Alloa.


However, there is always the opportunity for Appeal...and we may find that this decision is overturned by an Appeal court if enough pressure is brought to bear.

[porshiepoo]

So you believe that justice is best served by allowing people to stand trial even though you agree that the trail will not be fair? Hmmmm....You talk about "justice for their victims", Porshie, yet you are happy to send potentially innocent men off to a country not renowned for its system of "justice". No mention of "justice" for the accused........

Hutu murders Tutse - Tutse murders Hutu. Who are we to take sides in a tribal confrontation that has been simmering away for years? I'll wager this conflict is not as clear cut as the media would have us believe. At the moment, one tribe has the upper hand over another one. Ten years down the line and that situation could be swiftly reversed again with further lethal consequences. This is Africa - not Andover or Alloa.


However, there is always the opportunity for Appeal...and we may find that this decision is overturned by an Appeal court if enough pressure is brought to bear.

Exactly! Who are we to takes sides?
But we have. By releasing these people and giving them their freedom with no trial, then we have taken a side. And personally it's not a side I want to be on.

These men (I use that term loosely) Should most certainly be held accountable for what they did. It's shameful and disgusting that just because there is a teeny chance of an unfair trial in their own country, they should not be taken to trial at all.

I understand what you're saying about a fair trial, honestly I do, but to not be made to go to trial at all! Is that really the answer?

Could a trial not be held in a neutral country? Preferably not this one but if that's the only way............
If a country other than their own can determine such a monumental decision as to free them, can not such a country do what's right instead, and hold them to trial?

I don't really know anything more than I what I see on the TV or read in the news with regards to what has actually happened.
But I do know that IMO harbouring such people as these men in our country is not going to bring any good to it.

[northener]

I don't think harbouring them is a good thing either.

But we have the Law here for a reason. And the Law has made a decision, albeit probably a very unpopular one. If we were to allow mass opinion to influence legal proceedings, then we have nothing more than a trial by (usually misinformed) public opinion.

I've resurrected the Mr Tomlinson thread to prove a point about this. Just a couple of days back we had people who were convinced that they had all the facts on Mr Tomlinsons death merely because they got a few seconds of video footage and unsubstantiated 'witness' accounts that stated Mr Tomlinson had "just finished work and was on his way home".

Now it appears, the picture is quite different. Public opinion would have had that incident boxed off and wiped down as a case of a totally innocent man minding his own business, on his way home and being in no way responsible for his own problems. Period.
Such is the power of misinformation and incomplete information when presented to the gullible masses.

The judge had his reasons for not authorising the Rwandans extradition based on the evidence presented before him. He or she must base their judgement on Law and evidence as it stands and, presumably, there was enough evidence to support the argument that the Rwandan authorities could not guarantee them a fair trail.

And that is all that counts, not opinion about 'justice for victims' etc.

Nuffink' personal, Porshie.


BTW:
If anyone wants to comment on the Tomlinson aspect of this post, could they please post it on the Tomlinson thread. I commented here to prove a point about opinion and hearsay erroneously shaping 'facts'.

[JAWS]

Who has decided that they will not get a fair trial? The arrogant assumption that because a country does not do things exactly like us then their system must be unfair is reminiscent of the days of Empire when Europeans went round the world showing the ignorant savages how to be civilised.

What many people who have committed atrocities in their own Countries mean by not getting a fair trial is that there is that much proof of what they have done and so many witnesses who can confirm the fact that they know they will be found guilty.

That is not an unfair system, that is called "Justice".

[porshiepoo]

I don't think harbouring them is a good thing either.

But we have the Law here for a reason. And the Law has made a decision, albeit probably a very unpopular one. If we were to allow mass opinion to influence legal proceedings, then we have nothing more than a trial by (usually misinformed) public opinion.

I've resurrected the Mr Tomlinson thread to prove a point about this. Just a couple of days back we had people who were convinced that they had all the facts on Mr Tomlinsons death merely because they got a few seconds of video footage and unsubstantiated 'witness' accounts that stated Mr Tomlinson had "just finished work and was on his way home".

Now it appears, the picture is quite different. Public opinion would have had that incident boxed off and wiped down as a case of a totally innocent man minding his own business, on his way home and being in no way responsible for his own problems. Period.
Such is the power of misinformation and incomplete information when presented to the gullible masses.

The judge had his reasons for not authorising the Rwandans extradition based on the evidence presented before him. He or she must base their judgement on Law and evidence as it stands and, presumably, there was enough evidence to support the argument that the Rwandan authorities could not guarantee them a fair trail.

And that is all that counts, not opinion about 'justice for victims' etc.

Nuffink' personal, Porshie.


BTW:
If anyone wants to comment on the Tomlinson aspect of this post, could they please post it on the Tomlinson thread. I commented here to prove a point about opinion and hearsay erroneously shaping 'facts'.


These guys are not British though. They should be held to trial under the legal system of their own country.
It's awful to think that there's a chance they may not get a fair trial but the justice system of another country is not a subject that the UK alone could or should fight to change.
Getting involved in the business of other countries has caused much ill will over the years, ill will that is contributing toward acts of terrorism now and the deaths of our soldiers.

The problem with the head honchos of this country is that they're too eager to fight for the rights of every other country that they neglect their own.
What message do they really think is being sent to the world when genocide suspects are not only not extradited to their country for trial, not only made free men but are also able to consider compensation for their woes?

It's making a mockery of this country of epic proportions.

[northener]

Who has decided that they will not get a fair trial? The arrogant assumption that because a country does not do things exactly like us then their system must be unfair is reminiscent of the days of Empire when Europeans went round the world showing the ignorant savages how to be civilised..........


I agree Jaws, more often than not it's Western superiority complex that leads to suspicion and accusations that certain countries/people are not as 'Civilised' as us. In other words they mean West Good - Everyone Else Bad.

But, my point there is that this has been decided by the Courts who have access to a damn sight more information than we have. We might not like it - but that is the Courts decision. Mob rule and trial by Media/Internet based on emotion and opinion cannot be allowed to prevail over the law of the land.

And no, I don't think it's a good decision...but there y'go.

[northener]

These guys are not British though. They should be held to trial under the legal system of their own country.
It's awful to think that there's a chance they may not get a fair trial but the justice system of another country is not a subject that the UK alone could or should fight to change.
Getting involved in the business of other countries has caused much ill will over the years, ill will that is contributing toward acts of terrorism now and the deaths of our soldiers.

The problem with the head honchos of this country is that they're too eager to fight for the rights of every other country that they neglect their own.
What message do they really think is being sent to the world when genocide suspects are not only not extradited to their country for trial, not only made free men but are also able to consider compensation for their woes?

It's making a mockery of this country of epic proportions.

Extradition laws work both ways and for all people. I asked earlier what your reaction would be if it was a white female aid worker who was being extradited to Rwanda in connection with genocide charges (and please don't tell me it couldn't happen)....I await your response.....

We need more robust immigraton and asylum laws, certainly. And I've never said i agree with them staying in this country. But if the courts make a decision - then that's just tough.

BTW. Regarding sending unsavoury characters back to their own country for trial...given your response in another thread to the 12 Pakistani students arrested : I'll bet there's some stuff they could be charged with back in Pakistan - Would you like to see them in Pakistan on trial or here?

I bet I know which one you'd prefer......