CARMEL RICKARD: Lessons for SA from Rwanda
SA would do well to heed a warning from the UK courts about the importance of a strong, independent judiciary
When the government of Rwanda recently applied to the UK’s secretary of state for the extradition of five alleged génocidaires, it claimed a "sea change" in the way Rwanda’s courts operated. Concerns expressed by the UK courts in earlier judgments had now been met, and the suspects should be extradited to face trial in their home country. But when the high court of justice examined the evidence, the judges disagreed with this assessment. In an important recent decision, they reviewed crucial information on the situation in Rwanda and refused the appeal, saying that if the five were extradited to their home country they "would be at risk of a flagrant denial of fair trial". Rwanda’s first extradition attempt, brought in 2007/2008, almost led to a handover. The UK magistrate who heard the application sent the matter to the secretary of state, who in turn signed the extradition orders. The five then successfully appealed, arguing that they would not have a fair trial. Some years later ...
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.
Subscribe now to unlock this article.
Support BusinessLIVE’s award-winning journalism for R129 per month (digital access only).
There’s never been a more important time to support independent journalism in SA. Our subscription packages now offer an ad-free experience for readers.
Cancel anytime.
Questions? Email helpdesk@businesslive.co.za or call 0860 52 52 00. Got a subscription voucher? Redeem it now.