Background Briefing

<<previous  |  index  |  next>>

International and Burundian National Law 

During the civil war in Burundi, soldiers of the Burundian armed forces and combatants of the FNL and other rebel movements have often been responsible for numerous violations of international humanitarian law (also known as the laws of war).60

Under the 1949 Geneva Conventions, the civil war in Burundi is a non-international (internal) armed conflict. Internal armed conflicts are those arising within the territory of a state party to the Geneva Conventions. They are covered under Article 3 common to the 1949 Geneva Conventions and the Second Additional Protocol of 1977 to the Geneva Conventions (Protocol II), as well as much customary law applicable to international conflicts. Burundi ratified the 1949 Geneva Conventions in 1971 and Protocol II in 1993.

Common Article 3 to the Geneva Conventions expressly binds all parties to an internal armed conflict, including Burundian armed forces and non-state armed groups such as the FNL. Common Article 3 requires the humane treatment of civilians and captured combatants and prohibits violence to life and person, particularly murder, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture; taking of hostages; outrages upon personal dignity; and the passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgment pronounced by a regular constituted court. 61

Protocol II is applicable when opposing forces in an internal conflict are under a responsible command, exercise enough control over territory to mount sustained and coordinated military operations, and are able to implement Protocol II, conditions which are satisfied in the case of Burundi. Protocol II supplements Common Article 3 and provides a more encompassing list of protections for civilians in internal armed conflicts, including prohibitions on pillage of civilian property, and mandating access for impartial humanitarian assistance.62

Burundi is also bound by international human rights law, which applies during armed conflict as well as during peacetime. Burundi is a party to the International Covenant on Civil Rights (ICCPR)63 and the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (Convention against Torture),64 both of which prohibit torture and other mistreatment at all times and under all circumstances. Burundi is also a party to the 1981 African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, which prohibits torture.65 

The Convention against Torture specifically provides for the competent authorities to undertake a prompt and impartial investigation whenever there is reasonable ground to believe that an act of torture has been committed.66  Both the ICCPR and the Convention against Torture require that persons whose rights have been violated have an effective remedy; that such a remedy be determined by a competent judicial or other authority; and that the authorities shall enforce remedies when granted.67

Burundian national law also prohibits the abuses described in this report. Homicide committed with the intent to kill is considered murder and punishable by imprisonment or the death penalty.68 While torture is not expressly defined, Burundian criminal law stipulates that “anyone who voluntarily wounds or who beats another” can be imprisoned and fined. If those wounds are incapacitating to the victim, or involve mutilating the body of the victim, the maximum sentence is twenty years in prison.69 Members of the armed forces can be prosecuted under these provisions of the ordinary penal code by the military justice system.70



[60] The signing of a ceasefire agreement does not end the applicability of international humanitarian law. For example, according to the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia in Tadic, Appeal on Jurisdiction, Case IT-94-1-AR72 (Oct. 2, 1995): “[A]rmed conflict exists wherever there is a resort to armed force between states or protracted armed violence between such groups within a State. International humanitarian law applies from the initiation of such conflicts and extends beyond the cessation of hostilities until a general conclusion is reached; or, in the case of internal armed conflicts, a peaceful settlement is achieved. Until that moment, international humanitarian law continues to apply …in the case of internal conflicts, in the whole territory under the control of a party, whether or not actual combat takes place there.”

[61] 1949 Geneva Conventions, article 3.

[62] Protocol Additional relating to the Protection of Victims of Non-International Armed Conflicts, 1977 (Protocol II, articles 13 to 18).

[63] International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, G.A. res. 2200A (XXI), 21 U.N. GAOR Supp. (No. 16) at 52, U.N. Doc. A/6316 (1966), entered into force March 23, 1976.

[64] Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, G.A. res. 39/46, annex, 39 U.N. GAOR Supp. (No. 51) at 197, U.N. Doc. A/39/51 (1984), entered into force June 26, 1987.

[65] African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, article 5.

[66] Convention against Torture, article 12.

[67] ICCPR, article 2; Convention against Torture, articles 13 & 14.

[68] Decret-loi no. 1/6 du Avril 1981 portant réforme du Code Pénal, articles 141-142.  Human Rights Watch opposes the death penalty in all circumstances as being irreversible and inherently cruel.

[69] Decret-loi no. 1/6 du Avril 1981 portant réforme du Code Pénal, articles 146-150.

[70] Decret-loi No. 1/8 du Mars 1980 portant code pénal militaire, article 116 (on complementarity between military and civilian penal codes).


<<previous  |  index  |  next>>November 2005