INTRODUCTION

The notion of ‘victim’ in relation to the genocide perpetrated against the Tutsi population of Rwanda is not easily translatable in Kinyarwanda, the national language of Rwanda. Generally, the concept of victimhood encompasses those who were killed and those who survived the atrocities. However, Kinyarwanda generally uses ‘victims’ to refer to persons who were killed while other victimized individuals who were not killed during the atrocities are generally referred to as survivors. Most survivors lost nearly all they had or cared for during the genocide or the civil war that preceded and accompanied it. They are the first to acknowledge that nothing can be done to give them back what they lost. This does not prevent the resolute action by individual survivors or their organisations to participate in endeavours aimed at ensuring accountability for perpetrators of the genocide. The quest for retribution and reparation only represents partial remedies as they can only provide minimal satisfaction to survivors who have endured tremendous pain and suffering.

The present analysis looks at how the needs and interests of the survivors of the 1994 genocide either have or have not been accommodated under various judicial procedures dealing with the genocide legacy. The chapter dwells on procedures in Rwanda as the scene of the crimes but also as the forum where the overwhelming number of cases were handled. However, it also touches upon the position of survivors in other proceedings – the ICTR and foreign domestic jurisdictions – dealing with the Rwandan genocide. The chapter is generally concerned with the various forms of involvement of survivors in legal proceedings, from the time of instigation of proceedings to the trial phase and the aft ermath or procedures of extradition. Analytical focus on survivors of the genocide is not intended to downplay any other form of victimization before, during and aft er the 1994 genocide. A number of authors have explored the fact from the end 1950s – with the country's transition towards independence from Belgium – until the 1990 civil war and the 1994 genocide, violent repression was part of the country's strategy of governance (Prunier 1995; Mamdani 2001; De Feyter et al. 2005).