Letter to the Editor:
The New York Times,
Saturday, January 3, 1998

From Stefanie Grant,
Director of Program and Policy,
Lawyers Committee for Human Rights

Your Dec.30 front-page article on the refusal by a Federal magistrate judge in Texas to surrender a Rwandan charged with genocide to the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda understates the negative effect of this decision. It will be seen as a failure by the United States to practice at home what it preaches abroad.

The United States has led international efforts to prosecute war criminals and those responsible for genocide, in Yugoslavia and then in Rwanda. Once the two tribunals were established, the challenge was to compel governments to arrest indictees, either their own citizens or foreigners who sought safe Haven within their borders. But despite legal obligations requiring cooperation with the tribunals, many governments refuse to do so, and more than half of those indicted by the Yugoslav tribunal remain at liberty. The Rwanda tribunal has had more success, in part because other African states, under United States pressure, have made arrests on its behalf.

The United States has a legal duty itself to surrender an indictee to an international tribunal. This differs from extradition, and the magistrate judge's confusion on the point should be challenged.