|Decision on Revocation of Referral - 04.10.2016||
71. […] The Appeals Chamber reiterates that as “professional judges, members of the Rwandan judiciary benefit from a presumption of independence and impartiality”. Thus, their personal impartiality must be presumed until there is proof to the contrary. This presumption cannot be easily rebutted and it is for the party alleging bias to rebut it on the basis of adequate and reliable evidence. In this respect, there is a high threshold to reach and the reasonable apprehension of bias must be firmly established. […]
 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, para. 24.
 See, e.g., The Prosecutor v. Yussuf Munyakazi, Case No. ICTR-97-36A-A, Judgement, 28 September 2011, para. 115; Tharcisse Renzaho v. The Prosecutor, Case No. ICTR-97-31-A, Judgement, 1 April 2011, para. 43. See also Kyprianou v. Cyprus  ECHR 873, para. 119.
 See The Prosecutor v. Pauline Nyiramasuhuko et al., Case No. ICTR-98-42-A, Judgement, 14 December 2015, paras. 95, 405 and references cited therein; Eliézer Niyitegeka v. The Prosecutor, Case No. ICTR-96-14-A, Judgement, 9 July 2004 (“Niyitegeka Appeal Judgement”), para. 45.
 Niyitegeka Appeal Judgement, para. 45 and references cited therein.