In November 2009, the ICTR Appeals Chamber had acquitted Zigiranyirazo. According to the Appeal Judgement, his convictions “violated the most basic and fundamental principles of justice."
In February this year, Zigiranyirazo filed a motion requesting financial compensation.
A week ago, the Trial Chamber denied the request.
The Chamber recognized that “Mr. Zigiranyirazo suffered prejudice as a result of the year of detention between his conviction by the Trial Chamber and his subsequent acquittal by the Appeals Chamber.”
However, the Chamber, denying the request, referred, inter alia, to the fact that the claimant “did not allege that the Prosecution was malicious or that the Trial Chamber was improperly constituted or motivated.”
In his Dissenting Opinion, judge Park opined that the “claimant’s detention following his conviction was entirely unjustified and ... violated his most basic and fundamental rights. In the circumstances the only effective remedy to the damage suffered by the claimant that was available to the Chamber is monetary compensation.”
As to the majority’s remark that “courts of first instance regularly make mistakes of fact and/or law”, the judge noted that distinction shall be made “between errors that impinge on the rights of the accused and those that do not affect the rights of the accused.”
In regard to the majority’s reasoning that the request for compensation was submitted over two years after the acquittal, the judge opined that as the “Chamber is vested with inherent power to redress violations of rights, time limits cannot impede the Chamber from invoking this power in order to address a violation of rights and harm suffered consequent upon such violation.”
Incidentally, the next day after this decision, the ICJ delivered its judgement on compensation in the Diallo case.
The Court, in particular, found that Mr. Diallo “had been arrested without being informed of the reasons for his arrest and without being given the possibility to seek a remedy”, and “was detained for an unjustifiably long period.”
The Court concluded that “the DRC’s wrongful conduct caused Mr. Diallo significant psychological suffering and loss of reputation.”
Accordingly, the ICJ found that the non-material injury suffered by Mr. Diallo shall be financially compensated.
Indeed, there is no reference to such requirement as malicious motivation of the authorities or judiciary in the ICJ judgement.