Large number of victims

Notion(s) Filing Case
Appeal Judgement - 16.12.2013 NDAHIMANA Grégoire
(ICTR-01-68-A)

231. It is well-established that a large number of victims is not an element of the crime of genocide. The Appeals Chamber also recalls that, with respect to extermination as a crime against humanity, “a particularly large number of victims can be an aggravating circumstance in relation to the sentence for this crime if the extent of the killings exceeds that required for extermination.” The Appeals Chamber further recalls that extermination is the act of killing on a “large scale”, and that “large scale” does not suggest a strict numerical approach with a minimum number of victims. While extermination as a crime against humanity has been found in relation to the killing of thousands of persons, it has also been found in relation to fewer killings, such as the killings of approximately 60 individuals and less. In the present case, the Trial Chamber found that the attacks on Nyange Church resulted “in the death of approximately 2,000 Tutsi men, women and children.” The Appeals Chamber considers that the extent of the killings at Nyange Church on 15 and 16 April 1994 exceeded that required for extermination, and that the number of victims could therefore be taken into consideration as an aggravating circumstance in the determination of the sentence. The Appeals Chamber accordingly rejects Ndahimana’s contention that the Trial Chamber engaged in impermissible double-counting in considering the number of victims of the attacks on NyangeChurch as an aggravating factor.

[1] See, e.g., Ndindabahizi Appeal Judgement, para. 135.

[2] Ndindabahizi Appeal Judgement, para. 135.

[3] See, e.g., Lukić and Lukić Appeal Judgement, para. 536; Bagosora and Nsengiyumva Appeal Judgement, para. 394; Rukundo Appeal Judgement, para. 185.

[4] Lukić and Lukić Appeal Judgement, para. 537, referring to Stakić Appeal Judgement, para. 260 and Ntakirutimana Appeal Judgement, para. 516.

[5] See Lukić and Lukić Appeal Judgement, paras. 537, 544, fns. 1564-1567, and references contained therein. See also Bagosora and Nsengiyumva Appeal Judgement, para. 398.

[6] Trial Judgement, para. 854. 

Download full document
Notion(s) Filing Case
Appeal Judgement - 16.01.2007 NDINDABAHIZI Emmanuel
(ICTR-01-71-A)

The Appeals Chamber found:

135.  […] the Trial Chamber did not err in considering the large number of victims at Gitwa Hill as an aggravating circumstance relevant to the sentence. As to the conviction for genocide, there need not be a large number of victims to enter a genocide conviction. As for extermination, the actus reus requires “killing on a large scale”.[1] While this does not “suggest a numerical minimum”,[2] a particularly large number of victims can be an aggravating circumstance in relation to the sentence for this crime if the extent of the killings exceeds that required for extermination. In the present case, there is no indication that, in considering aggravating circumstances, the Trial Chamber looked at only those killings required for extermination when it specifically cited the fact that “thousands” of people were killed.[3]

 

[1] Ntakirutimana Appeal Judgement, para. 516.

[2] Ntakirutimana Appeal Judgement, para. 516.

[3] Trial Judgement, para. 508(ii).

Download full document