On 28 August 1995 the Security Council approved
Resolution 1012 with the following operative paragraphs:
"The Security Council
Requests the Secretary-General to establish, as a matter of urgency, an international commission of inquiry, with the following mandate:
To establish the facts relating to the assassination of the President of Burundi on 21 October 1993, the massacres and other related serious acts of violence which followed;
To recommend measures of a legal, political and administrative nature, as appropriate, after consultation with the Government of Burundi, and measures with regard to the bringing to justice of persons responsible for those acts, to prevent any repetition of deeds similar to those investigated by the commission and, in general, to eradicate impunity and promote national reconciliation in Burundi;
Recommends that the international commission of inquiry be composed of five impartial and internationally respected, experienced jurists who shall be selected by the Secretary-General and shall be furnished with adequate expert staff, and that the Government of Burundi be duly informed;
Calls upon States, relevant United Nations bodies and, as appropriate, international humanitarian organizations to collate substantiated information in their possession relating to acts covered in paragraph 1 (a) above, to make such information available as soon as possible and to provide appropriate assistance to the commission of inquiry;
Requests the Secretary-General to report to the Council on the establishment of the commission of inquiry, and further requests the Secretary-General, within three months from the establishment of the commission of inquiry, to submit an interim report to the Council on the work of the commission and to submit a final report when the commission completes its work;
Calls upon the Burundi authorities and institutions, including all Burundi political parties, to fully cooperate with the international commission of inquiry in the accomplishment of its mandate, including responding positively to requests from the commission for security, assistance and access in pursuing investigations, including:
Adoption by the Government of Burundi of any measures needed for the commission and its personnel to carry out their functions throughout the national territory with full freedom, independence and security;
Provision by the Government of Burundi of all information in its possession which the commission requests or is otherwise needed to carry out its mandate and free access for the commission and its staff to any official archives related to its mandate;
Freedom for the commission to obtain any information the commission considers relevant and to use all sources of information which the commission considers useful and reliable;
Freedom for the commission to interview, in private, any persons the commission judges necessary;
Freedom for the commission to visit any establishment or place at any time;
Guarantee by the Government of Burundi of full respect for the integrity, security and freedom of witnesses, experts and any other persons who help the commission in its work;
Calls upon all States to cooperate with the commission in facilitating its investigations;
Requests the Secretary-General to provide adequate security for the commission in cooperation with the Government of Burundi;
Requests the Secretary-General to establish, as a supplement to financing as an expense of the Organization, a trust fund to receive voluntary contributions to finance the commission of inquiry;
Urges States and intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations to contribute funds, equipment and services to the commission of inquiry including the offer of expert personnel in support of the implementation of this resolution;
Decides to remain actively seized of the matter."
In accordance with Resolution 1012, the Secretary General appointed an International Commission of Inquiry for Burundi, on 20 September 1993, consisting of the following jurists:
Edilbert RAZAFINDRALAMBO (Madagascar), Chairman
Abdelali EL MOUMNI (Morocco)
Mehmet G†NEY (Turkey)
Luis HERRERA MARCANO (Venezuela)
Michel MAURICE (Canada).
Two United Nations missions preceded the Commission to Burundi: in March 1994, following the 21 October 1993 coup attempt in Burundi that resulted in the assassination of President Melchior Ndadaye and widespread massacres and other acts of violence throughout that country, the Secretary-General, in response to a request from the Government of Burundi and in compliance with a Note (S/26757) from the President of the Security Council, sent a preparatory fact-finding mission, for which he designated Ambassadors Martin Huslid and Simeon Aké. The report of this mission (S/1995/157) was made public on 24 February 1995. On 26 June 1995, responding to a formal request by the Government of Burundi that the United Nations set up a judiciary commission of inquiry, the Secretary-General sent Mr. Pedro Nikken to Burundi to discuss the manner in which such a Commission should be established. The report submitted by Mr. Nikken (S/1995/631) contained recommendations regarding the creation of the Commission and its mandate.
The Commission held its first meetings in Geneva on 25-27 October 1995.
The following distinct matters were comprised by the Commission’s mandate, as set forth in Security Council Resolution 1012:
"To establish the facts relating to the assassination of the President of Burundi on 21 October 1993".
"To establish the facts relating to ... the massacres and other related serious acts of violence which followed (the assassination of the President of Burundi on 21 October 1993)"
"To recommend ... measures with regard to the bringing to justice of persons responsible for those acts..."
"To recommend measures of a legal, political or administrative nature, as appropriate, after consultation with the Government of Burundi, ... to prevent any repetition of deeds similar to those investigated by the Commission and, in general, to eradicate impunity and promote national reconciliation in Burundi."
Although the Government of Burundi had requested a judicial commission of inquiry, the Commission was given no judicial powers: it had a fact-finding mission regarding the crimes mentioned above and wide discretion to make recommendations. Even so, as it stated in its Preliminary Report, the Commission decided to conform its fact-finding activities, insofar as possible, to judicial standards, not only to give its eventual conclusions a solid base, but also in order to amass evidence that could be of use for any later judicial action.
To this effect, the Commission adopted Rules of Procedure (Annex 1) regarding its internal procedures as well as rules regarding the hearing of testimony.
Regarding testimony, witnesses were heard under oath in the presence of at least one Commissioner, and their testimony was recorded on tape and later transcribed. Testimony in Kirundi was interpreted by two sworn interpreters, one for each main ethnic group, who did the transcription themselves. In the relatively few cases in which, due to conditions in the field, only one interpreter was used, a second interpreter of the other ethnic group always participated in the transcription. Witnesses were always heard singly and in private.
With respect to the assassination, the investigation sought to determine facts that would not merely point to the immediate authors of the crime, but that could establish whether it was ordered from above and, if so, had been planned in advance as part of the attempted coup d’Etat. It did, however, not seek to investigate the coup d’Etat as such, as it was not included in its mandate.
With respect to the massacres and other related serious acts of violence, it was patently impossible to undertake an investigation of each of the thousands of incidents that took place or to attempt to identify each of the tens - if not hundreds - of thousands of direct authors. The Commission, therefore, had to circumscribe its investigation to a limited number of communes that were selected, within the constraints imposed by the security situation, on the basis of being representative of the events that took place throughout the country. The Commission could not hope, even in these limited areas, to conduct a detailed investigation of every incident in order to establish the responsibility of the individuals involved in each case. Rather, it sought to establish the nature, the scope and, if possible, the pattern of the crimes, and whether they had been planned in advance and ordered or tolerated from above.
The Commission sought to proceed with complete impartiality, with no preconceived ideas, and hear as far as possible all sides in each case. To this end, it endeavored to analyze and verify accusations made by various organizations, without in any way limiting its action to such accusations, and, in spite of considerable difficulties and risks, to hear witnesses from different parties and ethnic groups, civilian and military, in Bujumbura and in the interior, in prisons, camps for displaced persons and out in the collines. Having no power to compel witnesses to appear before it, it was reduced to hearing such witnesses as were willing to come forth. In the case of prisoners, it had to rely on the cooperation of judicial authorities, which it received in all cases. Regarding military witnesses, it had to summon them through the Ministry of Defense, with unsatisfactory results.
With respect to written evidence, the Commission had no powers of direct inspection of files and records or to compel authorities or private persons to exhibit documents. Official records relevant to the inquiry had to be requested from the civilian or military authorities. Court and prosecution records were opened to Commission inspection. They were for the most part in Kirundi, and could neither be copied nor independently translated by the Commission. Notes were taken of oral summaries made by judges or prosecutors. Military records were requested through the Ministry of Defense, with no success.
With a view to the preparation of recommendations, the Commission sought to hear as wide a range as possible of officials, political leaders, businessmen and representatives of foreign governments and international organizations, both governmental and non-governmental. In accordance with Resolution 1012, it consulted with the President, the Prime Minister and members of the Cabinet and the President of the National Assembly.
The Commission’s work comprised two periods: a first period, from 25 October to 20 December 1995, which resulted in the submission of a Preliminary Report, as required by Resolution 1012, and a second period, from 7 January to 22 July 1996, which concluded with the submission of this Report.
The members of the Commission met for the first time in Geneva, from 25 to 27 October 1995. The Commission analyzed its mandate, discussed its procedures, planned its work and was briefed on the situation in Burundi by an Assistant Secretary-General for Political Affairs and by security officers of the Secretariat and of the Office of the High Commissioner for Refugees.
The Commission arrived in Bujumbura on 29 October 1995. It was received by an officer of the Political Department of the Secretariat who had been sent to Bujumbura to secure offices for the Commission, and by a staff consisting of nine persons, selected by Headquarters, that included a political affairs officer, a legal officer, and supporting personnel for security and administration. The administrative officer arrived some days later while the Executive Secretary, appointed after consultation with the Commission, arrived on 14 November. The Commission worked at first at the hotel where it resided, until its offices could be made operational.
The Commission paid courtesy visits to members of the Government and other high officials of the Assemblée Nationale and the administration and gathered information on the situation in Burundi, as well as other background information relevant to its mandate, in meetings with representatives of various sectors of public life in Burundi. To this effect, it met with members of political parties, religious leaders and local non-governmental organizations, in particular of the two main human rights organizations ITEKA and SONERA. Further information was obtained in meetings with representatives of foreign countries and international organizations, including representatives of various specialized agencies of the United Nations.
The Commission issued a public notice, which was diffused by the local media, stating its mandate and inviting all interested persons to provide information, as well as a circular letter to the same effect.
During the first period of inquiry in Burundi, the Commission received testimony from sworn witnesses regarding the assassination of President Ndadaye and the massacres and other related serious acts of violence that followed. Through the "Procurer général de la République" of Bujumbura (Attorney General of the Republic), it arranged to have brought to its offices to testify some of the persons accused of having taken part in the assassination who were in prison. The Commission also received the testimony of some key witnesses such as Mrs. Laurence Ndadaye, widow of the late President of the Republic, Mr. Sylvestre Ntibantunganya, President of the Republic, who had been Minister of Foreign Affairs and Cooperation at the time of those events, and Colonel Jean Bikomagu, then and now Chief of the General Staff of the Army.
In two visits to the interior of the country, members of the Commission visited the Provinces of Muramvya and Gitega, where they met the respective Governors, gathered relevant information and heard persons in the prisons and camps for displaced persons.
The Commission undertook the study of the judicial system in Burundi. To this end, members of the Commission and its staff met, among others, the Deputy Dean of the Law Faculty of the University of Bujumbura, the Chief Inspector of the Judicial Police, the Director of the National Center for Human Rights, the head of the Bar Association; the Representative of the High Commissioner for Refugees, and members of the Bar.
On 6 December, gunfire erupted around the offices of the Commission, situated in an outlying district of Bujumbura, forcing the evacuation of the Commission and its staff from the premises. The offices could not be used thereafter, due to security conditions in the area, so that the Commission had again to function at the hotel, without adequate facilities.
On 14 December 1995, the Commission met at Headquarters in New York to prepare its Preliminary Report. There, it met with the Secretary-General, the Head and other members of the Department of Political Affairs, the Head and members of the Office of Legal Affairs, the UN Security Coordinator and members of his staff, and with representatives of Member States. The Commission submitted its Preliminary Report to the Secretary-General on 20 December 1995. The Report contained the Commission’s interpretation of its mandate, an account of work accomplished to that date, and a description of difficulties it was encountering in trying to accomplish its mandate due to the situation of ethnic confrontation and insecurity in Burundi and the lack of human and material resources at its disposal.
The Commission was given assurances that all efforts would be made to provide it with adequate human and material resources.
The Commission resumed its work in Burundi on 8 January 1996. Until 6 February, when a new office could be made operational, the Commission functioned at the hotel.
The Commission chose two provinces, Gitega and Muramvya, to begin field work on the investigation of massacres and other serious acts of violence. Towards the end of February, the investigation was extended to the Province of Ngozi and early March also to the Province of Kirundo. Work in Kirundo had to be suspended shortly after it had begun due to the insufficiency of human resources.
The Commission assigned specific responsibilities to its various members. Two members were assigned responsibility for the investigation of the assassination as well as for events in the Province of Gitega, one member was assigned to investigate events in the Province of Muramvya, while the remaining two members undertook the remaining work, which included receiving documents, information and testimony submitted in response to the Commission’s public invitation. This initial distribution of responsibilities was modified several times in the following months, as indicated in various parts of this Report.
Members of the Commission met several times with the Attorney General of the Republic to gain access to prisoners and judicial records.
The Commission requested, in November 1995, a meeting with the Defense Minister in order to gain access to military files and records and military witnesses. It was received only on 23 January 1996, after repeated requests. Although direct access to files and records was not obtained, the Minister appointed a Liaison Officer to transmit requests for military witnesses to appear before the Commission. As reported elsewhere, the cooperation of the Ministry of Defense was highly unsatisfactory.
The Commission heard 61 military witnesses, including prisoners. Some of them were heard twice. Some prisoners who appeared before the Commission declined to testify. The following officers, having been summoned by the Commission, failed to appear:
A member of the Commission travelled to Headquarters at New York to examine the relevant material that had been gathered by the Aké/Huslid fact-finding mission, which could not be sent to Burundi for security reasons. While in New York, he also received relevant material from the inquiry conducted in 1994 by the "Fédération Internationale des Ligues des Droits de l’Homme". On his return trip, he heard two military witnesses, and the judge who had directed the investigation into President Ndadaye’s assassination for the afore mentioned inquiry.
Two members of the Commission traveled to Uganda to hear eight important military witnesses in Kampala. Another member heard an important civilian witness in Abidjan (Côte d’Ivoire).
In the course of its investigation, the Commission heard in all 667 witnesses.
Field work had to be begun by the Commissioners without the assistance of investigators. The first two investigators arrived in Burundi on 12 March 1996. Another five arrived in the following weeks. Field work for the investigation in the provinces was carried out through missions of one or more days. The scope and nature of this work is reported in the appropriate places in this Report. In total, Commissioners spent 30 working days in Muramvya, 21 in Ngozi, 20 in Gitega and 3 in Kirundo. At other times, the investigators worked in the field alone.
In the course of its work, the Commission, apart from occasional meetings with the Special Representative of the Secretary-General and the Resident Representative of the United Nations Development Program, who was designated official for security of UN personnel in Burundi, met with the following officials from the United Nations system: the UN High Commissioner for Refugees, who visited Burundi, the Special Rapporteur of the Human Rights Commission for Burundi, the members of the UN Commission of Inquiry concerning arms traffic in Rwanda, the Representative in Burundi of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and UN Human Rights Observers.
The Commission also met with the following representatives of member States: The National Security Adviser to the President of the United States, the United States Assistant Secretary of State for Human Rights, the Permanent Representative of the United States to the United Nations, the Special Coordinator of the United States for Rwanda and Burundi, the Chargé d’affaires of the United States in Burundi, the Director of USAID for Rwanda and Burundi, the Ambassador of Sweden, two representatives from the High Commissioner of South Africa in Nairobi, and a delegation from the ACP group of countries.
The Commission maintained close contact and cooperation with the Special Representative of the Secretary-General of the Organization of African Unity for Burundi and with the Head of the International Observers Mission of that organization in Burundi.
As was required by the Commission's mandate, the President of the Commission, assisted by the political and legal advisers, carried out consultations with the President of the Republic, the Prime Minister, the Ministers of Foreign Affairs, Justice, Defense and of Human Rights, the Attorney General of the Republic, the President of the Supreme Court, the President of the Constitutional Court and the President of the National Assembly concerning recommendations relating to legal, political and administrative measures. The Minister of the Interior could not find time to meet with the Commission.
Commissioner Güney resigned from the Commission on 16 May 1996, for reasons of a personal nature.
Before leaving the country, the President of the Commission paid courtesy visits to the President of the Republic, the Prime Minister and other ministers, to diplomatic representatives and to representatives of international organizations.
By the time of the Commission's arrival in Burundi, over two years had elapsed since the events that were to be investigated. In that period of upheaval, many actors, witnesses and survivors of the events were displaced, became refugees, or died, often violently. Those that could be heard had time to tell their stories many times over, sometimes in the course of official or unofficial investigations, and introduce modifications or embellishments. Memory of events had dimmed, leading to confusions regarding names, times and places. Evidence had been lost, suppressed or altered. Events in the country had further affected the objectivity of witnesses.
Since 1993, ethnic confrontation between Tutsis and Hutus has grown in intensity. Members of each "ethnic" group feel that they are collectively engaged in a death struggle against extermination or subjection. This situation fosters feelings of "ethnic loyalty", that leads most members of a group to conceal, or justify as defensive, any action, however atrocious, done by members of their own group, to exaggerate or even invent atrocities committed by members of the opposing group, and to condemn objectivity or moderation as traitorous. In such a climate, it is extremely difficult to obtain reliable testimony.
At this point, the Commission wishes to emphasize that it uses, in conformity with general usage in Burundi, the terms "ethnic", "Hutu" and "Tutsi", but that it does so with great reluctance, and only because to do otherwise would make its report incomprehensible. This usage should in no way be interpreted as an indication that the Commission believes that there are racial or cultural differences between the members of these two groups. It is an inescapable fact, however, that the overwhelming majority of Burundians consider themselves, and are considered by others, to belong to one or the other of these groups.
The present security situation in Burundi was perhaps the greatest challenge encountered by the Commission.
a) Security in Bujumbura
Curfew is in effect in Bujumbura from 9 p.m. to 5 a.m. At the time of the Commission's arrival, most Hutu residents had been forced out of the city by Tutsi militants and the security forces. Some Hutus still reside in upper income and in predominantly muslim quarters, other Hutus come into the city during the day to work or bring produce to markets. Gunfire and the explosion of grenades are common occurrences during the night hours, as is the assassination of individuals in broad daylight. Armed car theft is frequent, often affecting international organizations.
Although, due to the practically mono-ethnic present composition of the city and tight control by the security forces, there were no ethnic clashes within the city during the Commission's stay, strikes and demonstrations by Tutsis in several instances confined the Commission and its staff to their residence, at one time for periods of several days. Fortunately, due to the strict observance of security rules, neither the Commission nor its staff suffered any personal harm.
When the Commission first arrived in Bujumbura, offices had already been rented for it by United Nations staff in Mutanga-Nord, one of the remaining bi-ethnic upper income residential quarters in the outskirts of the city. Insecurity precluded work in the office after nightfall. On 6 December, intense firing from small firearms and armored car cannons broke out all around the house occupied by the Commission's office, and went on for over two hours, and was later reported as an operation by security forces against armed rebel infiltrators. After that incident, security considerations prevented further use of the office. From that time, until new offices were rented in the center, the Commission had to work in the Hotel Source du Nil, where it resided together with its international staff.
Both the hotel and the offices were guarded by a detachment of the Burundian Gendarmerie, which is a militarized corps under Army command. While the conduct and cooperation of these Gendarmes was at all times beyond reproach, their mere armed and uniformed presence constituted in itself a deterrent to the access of Hutu witnesses.
One of the greatest worries of the Commission was its inability to secure adequate confidentiality for its work and its files, since testimony could subject a witness to very real and immediate risks of lethal reprisals. Until 6 January 1996, only three United Nations security guards were assigned to the Commission. They could barely secure personal and residential security, so that the offices remained unguarded at night. It was only in April, when the number of United Nations security guards had risen to eight, that a 24 hour watch could be established at the office.
The Commission could at no time obtain means to detect electronic listening devices.
b) Security in the interior
If the Commission and its staff had conformed to established security rules generally applicable to United Nations personnel in Burundi, they would at no time have left Bujumbura. The entire country is the scene of armed confrontation between guerilla and the Army and attacks on civilians by both sides. Incidents are reported almost daily in the interior and around the capital. Attacks are carried out against international organizations, several of whose staff have been killed or wounded. Attacks on vehicles by common criminals are not infrequent. Members of the Commission and its staff in at least two occasions actually witnessed cannon firing. On several occasions, they saw vehicles riddled by gunfire by the side of the roads. Main roads were several times closed to traffic, interrupting the Commission's work.
The level of guerilla activity and Army repression excluded the possibility of carrying out investigation in provinces such as Karuzi and those bordering on Zaire or Tanzania. Even in the provinces the Commission selected, armed incidents never ceased, particularly in northern Gitega and Muramvya. As a result of a particularly serious guerilla attack in the Province of Gitega and the repression that followed, investigation in that province had to be suspended for over two weeks. For the greater part of the Commission's stay Bugendana, one of the Communes of Gitega under investigation, was inaccessible. In Ruhororo, in the Province of Ngozi, the Commission could go as far as the "Chef-lieu", but was advised not to leave the main road.
Apart from the personal risks involved, the security situation made contact with rural Hutu witnesses particularly difficult, since they were extremely wary of the indispensable Gendarmerie escort accompanying Commission teams.
When the Commission arrived in Bujumbura after its first two-day meeting and briefing in Geneva, neither its Chairman or any of its members had the opportunity to discuss plans, personnel or material resources at Headquarters. Its entire staff consisted of two advisers previously appointed by Headquarters, three administrative employees, a Security Coordinator and three security guards. Offices had been rented but were unfurnished. Its Administrative Officer arrived on 31 October. Its Executive Secretary, appointed with the Commission's approval, arrived on 14 November.
As stated in its Preliminary Report, when the Commission met at Headquarters in December 1995, it was given assurances that up to 10 trained investigators were to be provided to assist it with its work, starting in January. The first two investigators arrived on 12 March, and five others in the course of the following five weeks. A 7th investigator arrived on 28 April, 33 days before the Commission's departure from Bujumbura on 31 May, so that at its highest, the number of persons engaged in substantive work on the investigation, counting the Commissioners themselves, was fifteen.
The timely transcription of taped testimony posed an unsurmountable problem. The conduct of the investigation required the analysis and discussion of testimony, and this could not satisfactorily be accomplished by the use of recordings and necessarily abridged notes. To protect confidentiality, no Burundians could be employed in the transcription of testimony, except for the interpreters, who were given the additional task of transcribing testimony which they had interpreted themselves. Since they could only work on this when not occupied with interpreting or absent in the field, the backlog kept mounting. Transcription of testimony given in French could only be entrusted to available international personnel, who had to do other office work as well, and that consisted of two persons until 8 March, when a third transcriber joined the staff. Three more transcribers arrived in the course of the following five weeks.
By the time the Commission left Burundi, testimony of only about a third of the 667 witnesses had been transcribed. Transcription work went on in Bujumbura and New York while the Commission discussed and drafted its final Report, but testimony from about one hundred fifty witnesses remained untranscribed by the time this Report was submitted.
Lack of adequate material resources constantly hindered or limited the Commission's work in the field in many other ways, too numerous to detail.
The Commission wishes to acknowledge with gratitude the support it received from the following Governments: Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Ireland, Netherlands, Norway, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, United Kingdom and the United States of America. This support was in the nature of financial contributions to the Trust Fund 1, personnel to assist the Commission2, and general support of the Commission's investigation.
The Commission also wishes to acknowledge the invaluable support and cooperation of the military observation mission MIOB of the Organization of African Unity in Burundi during the conduct of its investigation in the interior of the country, to which specific reference is made elsewhere in the Report.
The Commission gratefully acknowledges the contributions of many international and national non-governmental organizations and informal groupings which have provided information and other support to the Commission. The United Kingdom based organization International Alert deserves particular mention in this context.
The Commission especially commends the dedication and courage shown by the members of its staff, both international and Burundian. Particular mention must be made of its Executive Secretary, Ms. Judith Schmidt (Switzerland), for her invaluable contribution to the Commission's work.
The body of evidence obtained by the Commission, consisting of documents and recordings, was given into the custody of the Secretary-General of the United Nations.
1. The financial contributions received were as follows: Ireland: USD 150,000.00; United Kingdom: USD 31,250.00; Norway: USD 49,983.00 (Norway made an additional amount available for communication equipment and users' fees); Spain: USD 10,000.00; Belgium: USD 336,553.64; Sweden: USD 73,784.40; Netherlands: USD 250,000.00; Denmark: USD 49,200.00; United States of America: USD 500,000.00.
2. The following countries seconded personnel to the mission: Canada provided two investigators for the period of 12 to 28 March. The Netherlands provided two investigators, one for the period of 25 March to 31 May and the other one for the period of 15 April to 31 May. Switzerland provided the Executive Secretary of the mission for the period of 24 October 1995 to 31 July 1996, and a transcription secretary for the period of 14 April to 15 July 1996. The United States of America provided an investigator for the period of 28 April to 26 May and 7 days in June.
Posted by USIP Library on:
January 13 2004
Source Name:
United Nations Security Council, S/1996/682; received from Ambassador Thomas Ndikumana, Burundi Ambassador to the United States
Date received:
June 7 2002
* Note:
This title is derived from information found at Part I:1:2 of the report. No title actually appears at the top of the report.
