{"id":6649,"date":"2001-05-28T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2001-05-27T22:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/6649-28052001-tpirmusema-la-defense-affirme-que-le-jugement-en-premiere-instance-est-errone3439.html"},"modified":"2001-05-28T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2001-05-27T22:00:00","slug":"28052001-tpirmusema-la-defense-affirme-que-le-jugement-en-premiere-instance-est-errone3439","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/fr\/6649-28052001-tpirmusema-la-defense-affirme-que-le-jugement-en-premiere-instance-est-errone3439.html","title":{"rendered":"28.05.2001 - TPIR\/MUSEMA - LA DEFENSE AFFIRME QUE LE JUGEMENT EN PREMIERE INSTANCE EST ERRONE"},"content":{"rendered":"<p  >\nArusha 28 mai 2001 (FH) - La d\u00e9fense a affirm\u00e9 que le jugement port\u00e9 contre l'ancien directeur de l'usine \u00e0 th\u00e9 de Gisovu (pr\u00e9fecture de Kibuye, ouest du Rwanda), Alfred Musema, en premi\u00e8re instance, est erron\u00e9 en droit et dans les faits, au cours D'une audience, lundi, devant la chambre D'appel du Tribunal p\u00e9nal international pour le Rwanda (TPIR).  Les d\u00e9fenseurs anglais, Me Steven Kay, et n\u00e9erlandais, Me Micha Vladmiroff, ont soutenu que la chambre a \"err\u00e9 dans ses conclusions\" en d\u00e9clarant leur client coupable.\n<\/p>\n<p><!--more--><\/p>\n<p  >\nAlfred Musema a \u00e9t\u00e9 condamn\u00e9 \u00e0 l'emprisonnement \u00e0 vie le 27 janvier 2000 apr\u00e8s avoir \u00e9t\u00e9 d\u00e9clar\u00e9 coupable de g\u00e9nocide et de crimes contre l'humanit\u00e9. Alfred Musema a fait appel du jugement et de la sentence.\n<\/p>\n<p  >\nMe Steven Kay a maintenu que \"le d\u00e9fendeur nie avoir \u00e9t\u00e9 pr\u00e9sent \u00e0 toute sc\u00e8ne de crime\". Alfred Musema a \u00e9t\u00e9 condamn\u00e9 pour des massacres de Tutsis dans la r\u00e9gion de Bisesero et un viol. \"C'est un alibi sur une longue p\u00e9riode de temps. Il se fonde sur des d\u00e9clarations de t\u00e9moins et des documents\", a poursuivi Me Kay.\n<\/p>\n<p  >\nLa d\u00e9fense de Musema avait pr\u00e9sent\u00e9 divers documents, dont des lettres et des ordres de missions en vue de prouver qu'il ne se trouvait pas \u00e0 Bisesero au moment de la commission des crimes all\u00e9gu\u00e9s. Les juges de premi\u00e8re instance avaient accept\u00e9 certains arguments et rejet\u00e9 D'autres.\n<\/p>\n<p  >\n\"Ces documents ont \u00e9t\u00e9 obtenus sur une longue p\u00e9riode. Ils n'ont \u00e9t\u00e9 fabriqu\u00e9s pour servir notre cause\", a r\u00e9it\u00e9r\u00e9 Me Kay lundi. \"Si la chambre avait tenu compte de nos arguments, elle aurait atteint un jugement juste\", a d\u00e9clar\u00e9 Me Kay.\n<\/p>\n<p  >\nl'avocat anglais a ajout\u00e9 que certains passages du jugement en premi\u00e8re instance \u00e9taient \"une expression incorrecte de la loi.\" Selon l'avocat, \"la cour n'a pas appliqu\u00e9 la norme de la pr\u00e9pond\u00e9rance des probabilit\u00e9s\".\n<\/p>\n<p  >\nLa d\u00e9fense de Musema a par ailleurs reproch\u00e9 aux juges de premi\u00e8re instance D'avoir viol\u00e9 le principe de la pr\u00e9somption D'innocence en se forgeant une opinion avant D'avoir entendu tous les moyens de preuve.\n<\/p>\n<p  >\nMe Kay poursuivait son argumentation lundi en fin de matin\u00e9e. Me Vladmiroff devrait aborder plus tard des aspects relatifs \u00e0 la modification tardive de l'acte D'accusation, la notification tardive de la citation de t\u00e9moins et le cumul de charges. Me Kay avait D'abord indiqu\u00e9 avoir obtenu de nouveaux moyens de preuve attribuant le viol all\u00e9gu\u00e9 \u00e0 une autre personne, qualifiant cela de motif suppl\u00e9mentaire D'appel.\n<\/p>\n<p  >\nAT\/PHD\/FH (MS_0528A)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Arusha 28 mai 2001 (FH) - La d\u00e9fense a affirm\u00e9 que le jugement port\u00e9 contre l'ancien directeur de l'usine \u00e0 th\u00e9 de Gisovu (pr\u00e9fecture de Kibuye, ouest du Rwanda), Alfred Musema, en premi\u00e8re instance, est erron\u00e9 en droit et dans les faits, au cours D'une audience, lundi, devant la chambre D'appel du Tribunal p\u00e9nal international [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":64,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[554],"tags":[],"ji_location":[],"class_list":["post-6649","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-hirondellenews"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO Premium plugin v25.3.1 (Yoast SEO v25.3.1) - https:\/\/yoast.com\/wordpress\/plugins\/seo\/ -->\n<title>28.05.2001 - TPIR\/MUSEMA - LA DEFENSE AFFIRME QUE LE JUGEMENT EN PREMIERE INSTANCE EST ERRONE - JusticeInfo.net<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/fr\/6649-28052001-tpirmusema-la-defense-affirme-que-le-jugement-en-premiere-instance-est-errone3439.html\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"fr_FR\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"28.05.2001 - TPIR\/MUSEMA - LA DEFENSE AFFIRME QUE LE JUGEMENT EN PREMIERE INSTANCE EST ERRONE\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Arusha 28 mai 2001 (FH) - La d\u00e9fense a affirm\u00e9 que le jugement port\u00e9 contre l&#039;ancien directeur de l&#039;usine \u00e0 th\u00e9 de Gisovu (pr\u00e9fecture de Kibuye, ouest du Rwanda), Alfred Musema, en premi\u00e8re instance, est erron\u00e9 en droit et dans les faits, au cours D&#039;une audience, lundi, devant la chambre D&#039;appel du Tribunal p\u00e9nal international [&hellip;]\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/fr\/6649-28052001-tpirmusema-la-defense-affirme-que-le-jugement-en-premiere-instance-est-errone3439.html\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"JusticeInfo.net\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/JusticeInfo\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2001-05-27T22:00:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/JusticeInfoNet_logo_1200x630px.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1200\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"630\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"solivri\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@justiceinfonet\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@justiceinfonet\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"\u00c9crit par\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"solivri\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Dur\u00e9e de lecture estim\u00e9e\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"2 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"NewsArticle\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/fr\/6649-28052001-tpirmusema-la-defense-affirme-que-le-jugement-en-premiere-instance-est-errone3439.html#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/fr\/6649-28052001-tpirmusema-la-defense-affirme-que-le-jugement-en-premiere-instance-est-errone3439.html\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"solivri\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/fr#\/schema\/person\/6e53cba1629e2e66f3fc1821d3091865\"},\"headline\":\"28.05.2001 - TPIR\/MUSEMA - LA DEFENSE AFFIRME QUE LE JUGEMENT EN PREMIERE INSTANCE EST ERRONE\",\"datePublished\":\"2001-05-27T22:00:00+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/fr\/6649-28052001-tpirmusema-la-defense-affirme-que-le-jugement-en-premiere-instance-est-errone3439.html\"},\"wordCount\":467,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/fr#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Hirondelle News\"],\"inLanguage\":\"fr-FR\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/fr\/6649-28052001-tpirmusema-la-defense-affirme-que-le-jugement-en-premiere-instance-est-errone3439.html#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/fr\/6649-28052001-tpirmusema-la-defense-affirme-que-le-jugement-en-premiere-instance-est-errone3439.html\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/fr\/6649-28052001-tpirmusema-la-defense-affirme-que-le-jugement-en-premiere-instance-est-errone3439.html\",\"name\":\"28.05.2001 - TPIR\/MUSEMA - LA DEFENSE AFFIRME QUE LE JUGEMENT EN PREMIERE INSTANCE EST ERRONE - JusticeInfo.net\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/fr#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2001-05-27T22:00:00+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/fr\/6649-28052001-tpirmusema-la-defense-affirme-que-le-jugement-en-premiere-instance-est-errone3439.html#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"fr-FR\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/fr\/6649-28052001-tpirmusema-la-defense-affirme-que-le-jugement-en-premiere-instance-est-errone3439.html\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/fr\/6649-28052001-tpirmusema-la-defense-affirme-que-le-jugement-en-premiere-instance-est-errone3439.html#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/fr\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"28.05.2001 - TPIR\/MUSEMA - LA DEFENSE AFFIRME QUE LE JUGEMENT EN PREMIERE INSTANCE EST ERRONE\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/fr#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/fr\",\"name\":\"JusticeInfo.net\",\"description\":\"La justice doit \u00eatre vue pour \u00eatre rendue\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/fr#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/fr?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"fr-FR\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/fr#organization\",\"name\":\"Justice Info\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/fr\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"fr-FR\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/fr#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/justiceinfo_logo-trans_1200x1200px.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/justiceinfo_logo-trans_1200x1200px.png\",\"width\":1199,\"height\":1200,\"caption\":\"Justice Info\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/fr#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/JusticeInfo\/\",\"https:\/\/x.com\/justiceinfonet\",\"https:\/\/www.linkedin.com\/company\/justice-info\",\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/channel\/UCyCEsARodyuWtkWyhn-e7pA\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"name\":\"solivri\",\"url\":\"\/fr\/?s=solivri\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"28.05.2001 - TPIR\/MUSEMA - LA DEFENSE AFFIRME QUE LE JUGEMENT EN PREMIERE INSTANCE EST ERRONE - JusticeInfo.net","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/fr\/6649-28052001-tpirmusema-la-defense-affirme-que-le-jugement-en-premiere-instance-est-errone3439.html","og_locale":"fr_FR","og_type":"article","og_title":"28.05.2001 - TPIR\/MUSEMA - LA DEFENSE AFFIRME QUE LE JUGEMENT EN PREMIERE INSTANCE EST ERRONE","og_description":"Arusha 28 mai 2001 (FH) - La d\u00e9fense a affirm\u00e9 que le jugement port\u00e9 contre l'ancien directeur de l'usine \u00e0 th\u00e9 de Gisovu (pr\u00e9fecture de Kibuye, ouest du Rwanda), Alfred Musema, en premi\u00e8re instance, est erron\u00e9 en droit et dans les faits, au cours D'une audience, lundi, devant la chambre D'appel du Tribunal p\u00e9nal international [&hellip;]","og_url":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/fr\/6649-28052001-tpirmusema-la-defense-affirme-que-le-jugement-en-premiere-instance-est-errone3439.html","og_site_name":"JusticeInfo.net","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/JusticeInfo\/","article_published_time":"2001-05-27T22:00:00+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1200,"height":630,"url":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/JusticeInfoNet_logo_1200x630px.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"solivri","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@justiceinfonet","twitter_site":"@justiceinfonet","twitter_misc":{"\u00c9crit par":"solivri","Dur\u00e9e de lecture estim\u00e9e":"2 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"NewsArticle","@id":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/fr\/6649-28052001-tpirmusema-la-defense-affirme-que-le-jugement-en-premiere-instance-est-errone3439.html#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/fr\/6649-28052001-tpirmusema-la-defense-affirme-que-le-jugement-en-premiere-instance-est-errone3439.html"},"author":{"name":"solivri","@id":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/fr#\/schema\/person\/6e53cba1629e2e66f3fc1821d3091865"},"headline":"28.05.2001 - TPIR\/MUSEMA - LA DEFENSE AFFIRME QUE LE JUGEMENT EN PREMIERE INSTANCE EST ERRONE","datePublished":"2001-05-27T22:00:00+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/fr\/6649-28052001-tpirmusema-la-defense-affirme-que-le-jugement-en-premiere-instance-est-errone3439.html"},"wordCount":467,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/fr#organization"},"articleSection":["Hirondelle News"],"inLanguage":"fr-FR","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/fr\/6649-28052001-tpirmusema-la-defense-affirme-que-le-jugement-en-premiere-instance-est-errone3439.html#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/fr\/6649-28052001-tpirmusema-la-defense-affirme-que-le-jugement-en-premiere-instance-est-errone3439.html","url":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/fr\/6649-28052001-tpirmusema-la-defense-affirme-que-le-jugement-en-premiere-instance-est-errone3439.html","name":"28.05.2001 - TPIR\/MUSEMA - LA DEFENSE AFFIRME QUE LE JUGEMENT EN PREMIERE INSTANCE EST ERRONE - JusticeInfo.net","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/fr#website"},"datePublished":"2001-05-27T22:00:00+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/fr\/6649-28052001-tpirmusema-la-defense-affirme-que-le-jugement-en-premiere-instance-est-errone3439.html#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"fr-FR","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/fr\/6649-28052001-tpirmusema-la-defense-affirme-que-le-jugement-en-premiere-instance-est-errone3439.html"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/fr\/6649-28052001-tpirmusema-la-defense-affirme-que-le-jugement-en-premiere-instance-est-errone3439.html#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/fr"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"28.05.2001 - TPIR\/MUSEMA - LA DEFENSE AFFIRME QUE LE JUGEMENT EN PREMIERE INSTANCE EST ERRONE"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/fr#website","url":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/fr","name":"JusticeInfo.net","description":"La justice doit \u00eatre vue pour \u00eatre rendue","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/fr#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/fr?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"fr-FR"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/fr#organization","name":"Justice Info","url":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/fr","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"fr-FR","@id":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/fr#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/justiceinfo_logo-trans_1200x1200px.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/justiceinfo_logo-trans_1200x1200px.png","width":1199,"height":1200,"caption":"Justice Info"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/fr#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/JusticeInfo\/","https:\/\/x.com\/justiceinfonet","https:\/\/www.linkedin.com\/company\/justice-info","https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/channel\/UCyCEsARodyuWtkWyhn-e7pA"]},{"@type":"Person","name":"solivri","url":"\/fr\/?s=solivri"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6649","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/64"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=6649"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6649\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=6649"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=6649"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=6649"},{"taxonomy":"ji_location","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/ji_location?post=6649"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}