Prosecution makes their opening statement; calls first witness in the trial of Kwoyelo

On Tuesday March 12, the prosecution team in the trial of former LRA colonel Thomas Kwoyelo made their opening statement and called their first witness at the International Crimes Division of Uganda’s High Court [ICD] sitting in Gulu. The same day court swore in four court assessors one of whom will be an alternate because the rules allow only three court assessors at a time. The duty of court assessors is to advice court and to give their opinions on matters arising. 

In their opening statement, the prosecution indicated that the main interest of the prosecution is for the victims to get fair justice and that the accused and his group will be remembered for many brutal killings some of which were carried out using machetes, axes, beating, mutilation etc. The prosecution also alleged that the group [LRA] forced people into IDP camps where their security was not good and lived vulnerably.

Kwoyelo is facing 93 charges of war crimes and crimes against humanity allegedly committed while in the LRA. He has pleaded not guilty to all charges

“The prosecution has about 130 witnesses who will be lined, 360 exhibits, pictures, medical notes, videos, newspaper extracts and other evidences to prove the charged crimes…we shall bring evidence to prove that the accused had intentions by way of common plan beyond reasonable doubt ” prosecution lawyer Florence Akello said.

The defense on the other hand said they would make their opening statements later but had some brief statements to make, 

“Before you is a victim who was not protected; was abducted on his way to school while in Primary Three, indoctrinated, and the government failed to protect him. A kid not liable for crimes alleged,” said Alaka one of the defense lawyers. “We shall demonstrate to this court that the accused did not hold a command position … the prosecution wants to put all the crimes of the LRA on his small shoulders,” he added.

After these submissions, the prosecution called their first witness- an expert witness to support their opening statement. The witness labeled PW1said he is a lawyer and researcher by profession and a senior lecturer at the Institute of International Criminal Justice at Nkumba University in Uganda; with training in Peace and Conflict studies. He also said he served in the Ugandan military force for 24 years before voluntarily retiring in 1999. 

His report was admitted into evidence as PE1 (a) and a summary of the same as PE1 (b) in accordance with the ICD rules of procedure. He went on with his testimony until the third day of proceedings.

Among other things, witness PW1 told the court that his report made four major findings all relating to Human Rights and Humanitarian violations that took place; i.e. there were widespread atrocities all over northern Uganda, he stated that although the conflict ended 10 years ago, its scar still remain to date. “Impacts of war do not end with the war but lives much longer,” he said.

The others findings according to PW1 were that the conflict was well known and characterized extreme brutality on civilians such as mutilation, killings and abductions; the situation presented a large freedom deficit and absence of freedom and that the former residents of IDP camps still continue to experience difficult times such as lack of essential basic needs; there is a dichotomy between traditional and formal justice system within Acholi which he said surfaced in the Juba peace talks which caused a ‘egg and chicken’ debate about what comes first. He summarized his finding on this particular matter by stating that the Acholi traditional system and the formal justice system should not be treated as competitive because both present solutions. He was cross-examined by the defense lawyers on his report and later re-examined in chief

During proceedings the same day, representative of victims Henry Kilama made an oral application to the court in which they requested court to allow him raise some important matters of interest to the victims. The counsel noted that since witness PW1 was testifying on very crucial matters the victims counsel had some issues for him to clarify as regards the context and history of the conflict in northern Uganda; the aim of the LRA rebels and why they targeted civilians. 

“Although aware that it is not the role of victims to establish innocence or guilt of the accused, we want the views of the victims to guide court because it is the backbone of this trial and the duty of victims to assist court establish the truth in regard to the conflict, impacts and not just killings and abductions…,” he said. 

Henry Kilama also told court that he had a text indicating the participation of victims at the ICC and that those best practices should be borrowed and applied locally.

The trial panel discussed with all sides and ruled that, “… it became apparent that the application be made formally because it will enable parties to respond. The application is considered when presented formally,” said one of the trial judges

The next prosecution witness was a protected witness who testified in camera as one of the ways of witness protection