MICT appellate review
Notion(s) | Filing | Case |
---|---|---|
Appeal Judgement - 18.12.2014 |
NGIRABATWARE Augustin (MICT-12-29-A) |
|
6. The Appeals Chamber recalls that the Mechanism was established pursuant to United Nations Security Council Resolution 1966 (2010) and continues the material, territorial, temporal, and personal jurisdiction of the ICTR.[1] The Statute and the Rules of the Mechanism reflect normative continuity with the Statutes and Rules of the ICTR and ICTY.[2] The Appeals Chamber considers that it is bound to interpret its Statute and Rules in a manner consistent with the jurisprudence of the ICTR and ICTY.[3] Likewise, where the respective Rules or Statutes of the ICTR or ICTY are at issue, the Appeals Chamber is bound to consider the relevant precedent of these tribunals when interpreting them.[4] [1] United Nations Security Council Resolution 1966, U.N. Doc. S/RES/1966, 22 December 2010 (“Security Council Resolution 1966”), paras. 1, 4, Annex 1, Statute of the Mechanism (“Statute”), Preamble, Article 1. See also Security Council Resolution 1966, Annex 2. [2] See Phénéas Munyarugarama v. Prosecutor, Case No. MICT-12-09-AR14, Decision on Appeal Against the Referral of Phénéas Munyarugarama’s Case to Rwanda and Prosecution Motion to Strike, 5 October 2012 (“Munyarugarama Decision”), para. 5. [3] See Munyarugarama Decision, para. 6. [4] See Munyarugarama Decision, para. 6. |