Category: Justice

This decision overturns a 2024 ruling by a French court, which had dismissed the case on the grounds of insufficient evidence.

The Collectif des Parties Civiles pour le Rwanda (CPCR), rights group dedicated to prosecuting genocide suspects, successfully appealed the dismissal.

The Paris Court of Appeal ordered a renewed investigation into Mbarushimana’s alleged role in the atrocities.

Speaking with IGIHE, CPCR co-founder Dafroza Gauthier welcomed the ruling.

“We are pleased that the judiciary has agreed to reopen the investigation to uncover new evidence,” she said.

Mbarushimana worked for the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) during the genocide.

In April 1994, after the UN evacuated foreign staff from Rwanda, he was tasked with protecting local employees. Hired by the UN in 1992, he was dismissed in 2001 following allegations of involvement in the deaths of 32 people, including UN staff.

UN war crimes investigator Tony Greig reported that Mbarushimana personally shot two victims and was implicated in the killing of Florence Ngirumpatse, UNDP’s human resources chief in Rwanda, and several Tutsi children she had sheltered, aged 8 to 18.

Greig’s findings, submitted to the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR), included testimonies from 25 witnesses alleging Mbarushimana’s direct involvement in the massacre and support for the Interahamwe militia, which spearheaded the genocide.

On April 7, 2024, Rwandan President Paul Kagame publicly criticized Mbarushimana’s freedom, noting that Florence Ngirumpatse was his cousin.

Kagame further disclosed that his cousin was betrayed by a colleague to the killers and celebrated after her death.

He expressed his disappointment that no action was ever taken against the UNDP staffer despite evidence implicating him.

“It later emerged that a Rwandan working at the UNDP betrayed his Tutsi colleague to the killers. Witnesses remember him celebrating Florence’s murder the night after the attack. He continued his career with the UN for many years even after evidence implicating him emerged. He is still a free man now living in France,” Kagame narrated.

In 2008, the CPCR requested an investigation into Mbarushimana by the Paris court handling crimes against humanity.

French authorities dismissed the case in October 2024, citing insufficient evidence and unreliable witness testimony.

The CPCR appealed, arguing that the ruling ignored critical testimonies and a UN internal report detailing Mbarushimana’s alleged crimes.

On May 21, 2025, the Paris Court of Appeal acknowledged these oversights, ordering a re-examination of evidence and new witness interviews. The reopened investigation has renewed hopes for accountability.

Links to the FDLR

Mbarushimana’s alleged crimes extend beyond 1994. He is linked to the Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda (FDLR), a terrorist group operating in eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo, where he reportedly served as Executive Secretary.

In 2010, the International Criminal Court (ICC) arrested him in France on 13 counts of war crimes and crimes against humanity committed by FDLR fighters in 2009.

The ICC released him in 2011 citing insufficient evidence, and he has since lived freely in France.

The hearing, which began at 2:00 p.m. local time (0500 GMT), included the examination of evidence by Yoon’s legal team and the National Assembly, which acted as the prosecution.

Appearing in court at 9:00 p.m., Yoon expressed regret for the confusion caused by his martial law declaration, claiming it was necessary due to a national emergency. However, the opposition argued that no such emergency existed.

Yoon insisted lawmakers were not prevented from entering the National Assembly to revoke the martial law, which lasted only two and a half hours. The emergency declaration, issued on Dec. 3, was overturned by the opposition-led parliament shortly after.

During the brief imposition, military helicopters landed at the National Assembly, and armed soldiers entered the building, as shown in TV footage.

While Yoon denied ordering the removal of lawmakers, military commanders testified they had received such directives, according to the prosecution.

The National Assembly’s lawyers argued Yoon had violated the constitution and was unfit for office due to his outdated views on presidential emergency powers.

Yoon was apprehended on Jan. 15 and indicted on Jan. 26 as a suspected leader of insurrection, a charge that could lead to life imprisonment or the death penalty if convicted.

The National Assembly passed the impeachment motion on Dec. 14, suspending Yoon’s presidency while the court deliberates for up to 180 days. However, given past precedents, a final ruling is expected within two weeks.

He committed the crimes on November 13, 2024, when Minani opened fire at a bar in the Rushyarara Trading Center, Rubyiruko Village, Nyamasheke District.

The victims were identified as 17-year-old Denis Benemugabo, 20-year-old Onesphore Habumugisha, 44-year-old Zephanie Sindayiheba, 35-year-old Jonas Muhawenimana, and 51-year-old Ezra Nsekambabaye.

Prior to the shooting, Minani had reportedly argued with the bar owner over an unpaid bill.

Witnesses testified that Minani, who had been granted a 10-day leave from duty, went to the bar, where he fired 60 rounds from an SMG-3945 firearm after the disagreement.

The trial, held publicly in Rubyiruko village, was attended by both civilians and military personnel.

Minani’s legal representative, Lawyer Jean Claude Murigande, withdrew from the case, citing rejected claims of mental illness.

The court dismissed this argument, referencing a medical report that confirmed Minani was mentally fit.

The prosecution requested a life sentence, which was upheld by the court, considering the brutal nature of the killings.

Minani confessed to the crimes, expressing remorse and asking the court to take into account the violence he had endured prior to the incident.

The tribunal determined that the killings were premeditated, with Minani leaving the bar to retrieve a weapon, demonstrating intent to commit an act of revenge.

Additionally, it was found that Minani violated military regulations by using a weapon without authorization from his superiors and by stealing military equipment.

Despite the defense’s request for leniency, the court held that the extreme cruelty of killing five people warranted a harsh sentence.

In a ruling delivered on Wednesday, November 6, 2024, the Kicukiro Primary Court also imposed a fine of Frw 190,000 for the two offences. However, the 21-year-old was acquitted of the charge of fleeing the scene after causing an accident.

The suspended sentence means that Muheto will not serve time immediately, but the sentence could be enforced if she commits the offences again within one year.

The former pageant queen was arraigned in court on October 31, 2024, following her arrest for the traffic offences.

The prosecution had told the court that Miss Muheto had been drinking at a bar named “Atelier du Vin” around midnight before attempting to drive home. Due to her limited driving skills and high level of intoxication, she crashed into an electricity pole and a tree.

She was accused of fleeing the scene after the crash but later returned to retrieve her phones, only to find that the police had already arrived. She then reportedly claimed that she was not the driver of the vehicle.

The prosecution noted that this was not her first offence, pointing out that she had been previously cautioned and apologized for similar behaviour on September 23, 2024. They urged the court to find her guilty on all charges and sentence her to a one-year and eight-month jail term: six months for drink-driving, two months for driving without a permit, and one year for fleeing the scene after causing an accident.

In her plea, Miss Muheto admitted to driving under the influence and causing the accident but denied fleeing the scene.

She pleaded for leniency, requesting the court to spare her from a jail term, citing her remorse.

Miss Muheto stated that she is involved in national projects aimed at combating child stunting and is a student at the African Leadership University, where she needs to continue her studies.

Efforts to change this law face resistance from conservatives fearing interference with marital traditions. Legal challenges have been ongoing, with a split verdict in the Delhi High Court in 2022 leading to an appeal in the Supreme Court.

The woman had reported the incident to the police, alleging that her husband had forced her into “unnatural sex” multiple times, accompanied by threats of divorce if she spoke out. Despite her bravery in coming forward in 2022, the husband’s defense leaned on the exemption of marital rape in Indian law, which dates back to British colonial-era laws.

Campaigners have been trying to change the law for years, but they say they’re up against conservatives who argue that state interference could destroy the tradition of marriage in India.

A challenge to the law has been winding its way through the country’s courtrooms, with the Delhi High Court delivering a split verdict on the issue in 2022, prompting lawyers to file an appeal in the country’s Supreme Court that is still waiting to be heard.

According to the Madhya Pradesh High Court order, the woman told police her husband came to her house in 2019, soon after they were married, and committed “unnatural sex,” under Section 377 of India’s penal code.

The offense includes non-consensual “carnal intercourse against the order of nature with any man, woman or animal,” and was historically used to prosecute same sex couples who engaged in consensual sex, before the Supreme Court

According to court documents, the woman alleged the act happened “on multiple occasions,” and that her husband had threatened to divorce her if she told anyone about it. She finally came forward after telling her mother, who encouraged her to file a complaint in 2022, the court heard.

The husband challenged his wife’s complaint in court, with his lawyer claiming that any “unnatural sex” between the couple was not criminal as they are married.

Delivering his judgement, Justice Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia pointed to India’s marital rape exemption, which does not make it a crime for a man to force sex on his wife, a relic of British rule more than 70 years after independence.

“When rape includes insertion of penis in the mouth, urethra or anus of a woman and if that act is committed with his wife, not below the age of fifteen years, then consent of the wife becomes immaterial … Marital rape has not been recognized so far,” the judge said.

India’s Supreme Court increased marital consent from the age of 15 to 18 in a landmark judgement in 2017.

The woman also accused her in-laws of mental and physical harassment “on account of nonfulfilment of demand of dowry,” the court order said. A trial is pending.

Ahluwalia’s remarks have once again raised questions over India’s treatment of women, who continue to face the threat of violence and discrimination in the deeply patriarchal society.

The world’s largest democracy of 1.4 billion has made significant strides in enacting laws to better safeguard women, but lawyers and campaigners say its reluctance to criminalize marital rape leaves women without adequate protection.

The 2019-2021 National Family Health Survey conducted by the Indian Government revealed that approximately 17.6% of over 100,000 women aged 15-49 surveyed felt unable to refuse sexual advances from their husbands, and about 11% believed that husbands were justified in resorting to violence if their wives declined sex. In India, women who claim rape by their spouses have certain legal options available.

For instance, they can pursue a restraining order through civil law or file charges under Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code, which addresses sexual assault excluding rape, and Section 498A, which deals with domestic violence. However, the interpretation of these laws varies, and while some judges may enforce them with imprisonment in cases of alleged rape within marriage, many do not, as noted by lawyer Karuna Nundy in a CNN report. Furthermore, a study from 2022 highlighted that many married women face obstacles when attempting to lodge a police complaint.

This study, which examined records from three public hospitals in Mumbai spanning from 2008 to 2017, discovered that out of 1,664 survivors of rape, none had their cases officially registered by the police. Notably, among these survivors, at least 18 reported instances of marital rape to the authorities, including 10 cases involving rape by a former partner or spouse. Shockingly, four women were explicitly informed by the police that marital rape was not considered a crime, effectively dismissing their complaints.

These allegations relate to actions taken around 2016, where Trump is accused of using deception to secure his electoral victory over Hillary Clinton. Central to the charges is a payment of $130,000 Trump made to his former lawyer, Michael Cohen, who has been previously convicted on separate charges.

The controversy centers on Cohen’s use of this money to pay Stormy Daniels, a former adult film star, to prevent her from going public about her alleged affair with Trump during his 2016 campaign. This payment, prosecutors argue, was a pivotal act of deceit aimed at influencing the election outcome.

Moreover, the charges extend to how Trump managed these payments, focusing on alleged falsehoods about financial disclosures, a critical expectation for presidential candidates.

The trial features Michael Cohen as a potential key witness, which could provide damning testimony given their former close relationship and subsequent fallout. Trump, meanwhile, denies the affair with Daniels, with his legal team asserting that the payments, made through Cohen to Daniels, do not constitute a criminal act.

If convicted, the ramifications for Trump would be severe, tarnishing his image and possibly eroding trust among his supporters, particularly the undecided voters. Despite these challenges, Trump faces three additional serious legal battles, with the New York case being the most pressing.

The trial is expected to last six weeks, though Trump’s defense team seeks to prolong proceedings, suggesting a narrative of persecution aimed at preventing his political return. This strategy might resonate with his base, potentially amplifying their support amidst rising legal costs and the intense scrutiny of multiple ongoing cases.

Muzaaya was arrested in 2013 when authorities were informed that in his home on Buvuma Island, there were 39 children working in his fields but not attending school.

Investigations revealed that of these children, only nine were his biological offspring. He was unable to even provide the names of the parents of the rest.

When asked why he did not send these children to school, he explained that he educated them himself, but investigations showed that he lacked the knowledge to teach them, except for providing Islamic teachings.

The prosecution demonstrated that these teachings, known as ‘Asalaf’, are typically provided by terrorist groups; Al Qaeda and ADF operating in the eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo.

The investigation also found that the children in Muzaaya’s home were to be taken to the DRC, especially since some of their parents were already there.

Based on an agreement Muzaaya made with the prosecution during the trial on April 11, 2024, where he admitted to all charges, the court decided to reduce his sentence, sentencing him to 16 years in prison.”

Truong My Lan, chair of major developer Van Thinh Phat, was found guilty of embezzlement, bribery and violations of banking rules by a court sitting in Ho Chi Minh City on Thursday, April 11.

Lan had been accused of looting Saigon Joint Stock Commercial Bank (SCB), which she controlled through dozens of proxies, by arranging unlawful loans to shell companies between 2012 and 2022.

The alleged value of the assets Lan appropriated was approximately 3 percent of Vietnam’s gross domestic product (GDP) in 2022, making the heist one of the largest in the country’s history.

Prosecutors claim that 1,000 properties owned by the accused have been seized.

The tycoon had denied any wrongdoing and instead blamed subordinates for the crimes. She stated that she had contemplated suicide due to the charges leveled against her.

“In my desperation, I thought of death,” Lan told the court in her final submissions last week, adding, “I am so angry that I was stupid enough to get involved in this very fierce business environment – the banking sector – which I have little knowledge of.”

The court attributed the severity of the sentence to the seriousness of the charges.

“Her actions not only violate the property management rights of individuals and organizations but also push SCB into a state of special control; eroding people’s trust in the leadership of the Party and State,” the judgment read in part.

Lan’s husband, Hong Kong investor Eric Chu Nap-Kee, was one of the 86 suspects implicated in the trial. He was accused of setting up fake loan applications to withdraw money from the Saigon bank, in which Lan owned a 90 percent stake. Lan’s niece Truong Hue Van, who was the CEO of Van Thinh Phat, was also implicated.

Reports in the local media indicate that 84 defendants in the case received sentences ranging from probation for three years to life imprisonment.

The trial marked the highest level of drama yet in the “Blazing Furnaces” anti-corruption effort led by Communist Party Secretary-General, Nguyen Phu Trong.

Trong launched the fierce campaign on the belief that popular anger over untamed corruption poses an existential threat to the Communist Party’s monopoly on power.

Two presidents and two deputy prime ministers have been forced to resign, and hundreds of officials punished since the campaign began in earnest in 2016.

Eric Nshimiye’s request for bond was rejected by a federal magistrate in Youngtown on Friday, March 29, 2024, a week after he was arrested in Ohio on charges of hiding his involvement in the genocide that left more than a million people dead and thousands injured.

“Nshimiye is accused of lying to conceal his participation in one of the greatest human tragedies of all time,” Homeland Security Investigations Special Agent Michael Krol said in a statement.

“The government alleges his testimony in the defence of a convicted genocidaire was a calculated attempt to conceal the horrific crimes committed during the genocide.”

Nshimiye is expected to be moved to the Boston area, where he will face the charges.

The local media reports that during the hearing of the bond application, about 25 supporters, including family and friends, showed up at the courthouse holding signs in support of the accused.

Lie under oath

Prosecutors accuse the 53-year-old of lying under oath during his 2019 testimony on the trial of Jean Leonard Teganya, who was convicted as a genocide perpetrator.

According to the prosecution, Nshimiye lied to conceal his involvement in the killings.

Court filings indicate that he participated in the killings of ethnic Tutsis by hitting the victims on the head with a nail-studded club and hacking them to death with machetes.

Nshimiye, who has denied his involvement in the genocide in the past, left Rwanda in the mid-1994. He moved to Kenya in 1995, where he is alleged to have lied to US immigration officials to enter the US.

His arrest and arraignment come ahead of the 30th commemoration of the Genocide, which began on April 7, 1994, and went on for 100 days.