troche http://csrf.net/wp-content/plugins/bbpress/templates/default/extras/taxonomy-topic-tag-edit.php geneva; font-size: small; line-height: 200%;”>The ruling in the majority, viagra 60mg http://cosmopolitan.taconeras.net/wp-includes/ms-blogs.php with Judge Christine Van den Wyngaert dissenting, check was issued Friday in hague, Netherlands.
The Chamber said it was satisfied beyond reasonable doubt of Germain Katanga’s guilt as an accessory, within the meaning of article 25(3)(d) of the ICC’s founding treaty, the Rome Statute, to one crime against humanity (murder) and four war crimes (murder, attacking a civilian population, destruction of property and pillaging) committed on 24 February 2003 during the attack on the village of Bogoro, in the Ituri district of the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC).
Decisions on sentencing and victim reparations will be rendered later. The Prosecutor and the Defence may appeal the judgment within 30 days.
Presiding Judge Bruno Cotte delivered a summary of the judgment at a public hearing today.
He explained that in light of the witness testimonies and the evidence presented before the Chamber, it had been established beyond reasonable doubt that Germain Katanga had made a significant contribution to the commission of the crimes by the Ngiti militia, which was acting with a common purpose, by assisting its members to plan the operation against Bogoro.
The Chamber found that Germain Katanga acted in the knowledge of the criminal common plan devised by the militia to target the predominantly Hema population of Bogoro. The crimes of murder, attacking civilians, destroying property and pillaging were part of the common plan.
The Chamber found that Mr Katanga was the intermediary of choice between the weapons and ammunition suppliers and those who physically committed the crimes using those munitions in Bogoro. He contributed to reinforcing the strike capability of the Ngiti militia who carried out the crimes committed in Bogoro on 24 February 2003.
He also contributed, by virtue of his position in Aveba – the only place in the collectivité with an airport which could accommodate aircraft transporting weapons – to equipping the militia and enabling it to operate in an organised and efficient manner.
His involvement allowed the militia to avail itself of logistical means which it did not possess enabling it to secure military superiority over its adversary. However, the Chamber dismissed the mode of liability, as principal perpetrator, applied to Germain Katanga, since it was not proven beyond reasonable doubt that in respect of the collectivité he had the material ability to give orders or to ensure their implementation, or that he had the authority to punish camp commanders.
The Chamber changed the characterisation of the mode of liability against Mr Katanga – who had initially been charged as principal perpetrator – on the basis of article 25(3)(d) of the Rome Statute, which defines being an accessory as contributing “[i]n any other way […] to the commission […] of […] a crime by a group of persons acting with a common purpose”.
Germain Katanga was found guilty, as an accessory within the meaning of article 25(3)(d) of the Rome Statute, of the crimes of murder constituting a crime against humanity and a war crime and the crimes of directing an attack against the civilian population as such or against individual civilians not taking direct part in hostilities, destroying the enemy’s property and pillaging constituting war crimes. The Chamber also decided that Germain Katanga shall continue to be detained pending sentencing.
The Trial Chamber acquitted Germain Katanga of the other charges that he was facing. With respect to these charges, the Chamber found that there was evidence beyond reasonable doubt that the crimes of rape and sexual slavery were committed.
Regarding the crime of using child soldiers, it found that there were children within the Ngiti militia and among the combatants who were in Bogoro on the day of the attack. However, the Chamber concluded that the evidence presented in support of the accused’s guilt did not satisfy it beyond reasonable doubt of the accused’s responsibility for these crimes.
Germain Katanga during his days as rebel leader (Internet Photo)
In her dissenting opinion, Judge Van den Wyngaert challenges the change in the characterisation of Germain Katanga’s mode of liability. She argues that the change in characterisation rendered the trial unfair and breached the rights of the Defence, as it did not receive proper notification of the new charges and was not afforded a reasonable opportunity to conduct investigations in order to mount a defence against them.
Judge Van den Wyngaert maintains that there is no basis in the evidence for findings beyond reasonable doubt which can be relied on to establish Germain Katanga’s guilt.
Information about the trial
Germain Katanga, alleged commander of the Force de résistance patriotique en Ituri [Patriotic Force of Resistance in Ituri] (FRPI), was tried before Trial Chamber II, composed of Judges Bruno Cotte, Fatoumata Dembele Diarra and Christine Van den Wyngaert, for the crimes against humanity of murder, rape and sexual slavery and the war crimes of wilful killing, directing an attack against a civilian population as such or against individual civilians not taking direct part in hostilities, destruction of property, pillaging, using children under the age of fifteen years to participate actively in hostilities, sexual slavery, and rape.
Mr Katanga was transferred to the Detention Centre in The Hague, the Netherlands, on 17 October 2007. The trial commenced on 24 November 2009, and the parties and participants delivered their closing statements from 15 to 23 May 2012.
In the course of 265 days of hearings, Trial Chamber II heard 25 witnesses and expert witnesses called by the Prosecution, 28 called by the defence teams for Germain Katanga and Mathieu Ngudjolo Chui (whose case was joined to Mr Katanga’s during the trial and severed on 21 November 2012) and two called by the legal representatives of the victims.
The Chamber also called two further experts to testify. In addition, Germain Katanga also chose to testify under oath as a witness. The judges ensured respect for the rights assured to each of the parties by the Rome Statute, including the right to cross-examine witnesses.
Leave was granted to 366 victims to participate in the proceedings, through their legal representatives. They were thus able to present their views on the issues before the Chamber and were authorised to put specific questions to the witnesses.
Trial Chamber II issued 409 written orders and decisions and 168 oral decisions. The parties and participants submitted more than 3,300 applications to the Chamber.