ABSTRACT
Abstract This paper argues that Rwanda's decision to abolish the death penalty should be viewed in a wider context rather than as a mere result of top-down pressure from the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR). Part I traces the creation of the ICTR and the breakdown of negotiations as a result of the exclusion of the death penalty from the ICTR's jurisdiction. It then outlines Rwanda's efforts to prosecute the hundreds of thousands of individuals accused of committing genocide-related crimes and notes the limited and steadily decreasing role the death penalty actually played within Rwanda. Part II discusses Rwanda's legislation abolishing the death penalty and argues that both international pressure and local historical and political forces influenced the decision. Part III situates Rwanda's story within a growing paradox of excluding the death penalty from international criminal tribunals for the most serious crimes while national jurisdictions maintain it. It concludes that as in Rwanda, any perceived or potential impact of international criminal law in national jurisdictions must be measured in light of local circumstances.
