European Parliament resolution on the situation in the Great Lakes Region with special reference to Rwanda
Date: 1999-11-18
Institutions: European Parliament
Subjects: International Criminal Tribunal, Rwanda, ruling, war crime

7.7.2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 189/239

Thursday 18 November 1999

5.
Asks all the warring parties to show respect for fundamental human rights and to ensure that the
humanitarian organisations have direct, unrestricted access to the places where there are refugees and dis-
placed persons;

Calls on the government of Burundi to permit the deployment of UN and/or OAU military observers

6.
for the protection of aid workers and the implementation of humanitarian aid;

7.
Re-emphasises the importance of holding, under UN and OAU auspices, an international conference
on peace, security and stability in the Great Lakes Region, to be attended by all the governments in the
region;

Insists that the neighbouring countries continue to support the peace process in Burundi by ensuring

8.
that their territory is not used in any way to threaten the security of the Burundian people;

9.
Reiterates its call for an international embargo on the export of arms and munitions to Burundi and
the Great Lakes Region as a whole, and calls on the Council and the Member States to honour the under-
takings entered into as regards controlling arms exports to the region and preventing the illegal sale of
such arms and the trafficking used to fund such activities;

Calls on the international community, and the EU in particular, to step up humanitarian aid to

10.
those in danger, displaced persons and Burundian refugees;

11.
Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Commission and Council, the governments
of the Member States and Burundi, Uganda, the Democratic Republic of Congo and Tanzania, the United
Nations, the WFP, Unicef and the OAU.

12. Rwanda

B5-0276, 0294 and 0300/1999

European Parliament resolution on the situation in the Great Lakes Region with special reference
to Rwanda

The European Parliament,

7 recalling its earlier resolutions on the situation in Rwanda,

A. whereas on 3 November 1999 the appeals Chamber of the International Criminal Court for Rwanda
decided to release Jean Bosco Barayagwiza on a technicality, despite the fact that he was charged with
six genocide-related crimes,

B. whereas Mr Barayagwiza was a senior official for a Rwandan hate radio which openly incited the

slaughter of Tutsis and moderate Hutus in the country,

C. whereas the Rwandan Government responded by suspending its cooperation with the International
Criminal Court in Arusha and postponing indefinitely the visit to the country by the Chief Prosecutor
of the International Criminal Court, Mrs Carla del Ponte,

D. whereas the suspension of Rwanda’s cooperation will seriously affect the Court’s ability to conduct its

trials, since most of the witnesses come from Rwanda,

E. whereas the work of the International Court in general has been characterised by excessive delays and
extremely slow investigations and proceedings, due among other things to a serious shortage of pro-
secutors and judges, which has resulted in the Court completing only four trials since it was estab-
lished five years ago,

F. whereas the International Court must establish the truth about the genocide which took place in
Rwanda in 1994 and must bring the instigators and perpetrators of the massacres to justice, so as to
put an end to the current climate of impunity;

C 189/240

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

7.7.2000

Thursday 18 November 1999

Deplores the decision of the International Court to release Mr Barayagwiza on technical

1.
grounds, which risks heavily undermining the credibility of the Tribunal;

legal

Calls on the International Court to review its decision, taking into account the gravity of the charges
2.
brought against Mr Barayagwiza, and in particular to reverse its ruling that Mr Barayagwiza cannot be
tried again in the Court on the charges for which he was originally indicted;

Firmly believes that there can never be immunity from prosecution over genocide charges and calls
3.
on the International Court to review its requirements for retrials to avoid such a situation arising again in
the future;

Calls on the Rwandan Government to review its decision and to cooperate fully with the Interna-

4.
tional Criminal Court in Arusha;

5.
Calls on the United Nations Secretary-General and the Chief Prosecutor of the International Criminal
Court to take appropriate action as a matter of urgency to ensure that the International Criminal Court is
able to perform the task set for it and establish without further delay the truth about the 1994 genocide;

6.
Calls on the UN and the EU to evaluate the work done so far by the International Court, so that an
assessment can be made to determine if additional resources are required, with time limitation, for the
Court to conclude the investigations and the trials of the genocide suspects;

Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Commission, the Council, the International

7.
Criminal Court for Rwanda, the UN and OAU Secretaries-General, and the Government of Rwanda.

13. Pakistan

B5-0269, 0277, 0278, 0286 and 0296/1999

European Parliament resolution on Pakistan’s declaration of emergency

The European Parliament,

7 having regard to its previous resolutions on Pakistan, conflicts between Pakistan and India and matters

of general concern in South Asia,

A. whereas the Pakistan military, led by army chief General Pervez Musharraf, overthrew and suspended
constitutional structures on 12 October 1999, issued a Proclamation of Emergency and detained and
deposed the Prime Minister in charge, Mr Nawaz Sharif,

B. whereas recent elected governments in Pakistan have failed to take steps to tackle corruption, to stop
grave human rights abuses and the practice of bonded labour, preventing economic development and
social progress, and to provide security in the country,

C. whereas the economic situation of the country has been deteriorating constantly and its financial

situation has reached the point where restructuring of external debt has become inevitable,

D. whereas the Pakistan army has been supporting the hardline fundamentalist Taliban regime in Afgha-

nistan,

E. whereas fundamentalist militants, supported also by the Taliban, are active in Pakistan and pose a
serious threat to the stability of the country and to respect for human rights, in particular those of
women and religious minorities,