Operation Turquoise

Type of liability
Personne physique

Alleged perpetrator(s)
X

Nationality of alleged perpetrator(s)
French

Legal classification of crime(s)
Rape
Complicity in genocide
Complicity in crimes against humanity

Source of the complaint
NGO
Victim

Ongoing proceedings
oui

Regime
1 - TPIR/TPIY
4 - 113 CP

Summary of facts

Operation Turquoise was a French military operation authorized by UN Security Council Resolution 929 of June 22, 1994, during the genocide against the Tutsi in Rwanda.

Supported by 2,500 soldiers of the French army, the operation aimed to put an end to the massacres, possibly by using force, and to protect the populations threatened both by the genocide and by the military conflict between the RPF and the Rwandan interim government.

Defended by some as a humanitarian intervention, it was strongly criticized and remains the subject of controversy regarding the ambiguity of the operation and France’s role in Rwanda.

By supporting the Rwandan interim government, France allegedly seriously exceeded its mandate of neutrality.

Moreover, several former French soldiers have themselves testified to the ambiguity of Operation Turquoise, which allegedly was not merely a humanitarian mission. According to them, the operation may have been understood by some French soldiers on the ground as an intention to prevent the RPF from seizing power.

During Operation Turquoise, French soldiers allegedly raped Tutsi women and knowingly abandoned Tutsi civilians who had taken refuge in the hills of Bisesero, allowing the perpetrators of the genocide to massacre hundreds of them from June 27 to June 30, 1994.

Amnesty International France recalls that everyone is presumed innocent until proven guilty according to law.

Legal proceedings

June 2004: Three Tutsi women file complaints against X for rape by French soldiers during Operation Turquoise. 
February 2005: The associations Survie, Ibuka, FIDH and six Tutsi survivors of the 1994 massacres in Rwanda file complaints against X for “complicity in genocide” and “complicity in crimes against humanity”. The Public Prosecutor’s Office refuses to open a judicial investigation. The senior investigating judge must substantiate the elements of the complaint. She plans to travel to Rwanda. 
October 28, 2005: In a letter, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs stresses the risks of “significant pressure, or even threats” if the investigating judge travels to Rwanda for the purpose of hearings, France “not having military means of protection in that State”. 
November 2, 2005: In a memorandum, the Minister of Defense “reports on the risks that may weigh on [her] planned trip to Rwanda from November 20 to 25”. 
November 17, 2005: The prosecutor of the Armed Forces Court mentions the possibility of the Directorate of Judicial Services covering the travel costs of the civil parties for a hearing in France rather than in Rwanda. 
November 2005: The investigating judge hears the complainants in Rwanda and declares the six complaints admissible. 
December 23, 2005: The Public Prosecutor’s Office accepts the admissibility of two of the six complaints. It considers that four of the complainants lacked standing because they had not suffered direct harm. A judicial investigation is opened. 
February 16, 2006: The investigating judge confirms the admissibility of the four other civil party applications. The Public Prosecutor’s Office appeals this order. 
April 11, 2006: The prosecutor raises the nullity of procedural acts before the Investigating Chamber. 
May 29, 2006: The Paris Court of Appeal upholds the admissibility of all the civil party applications. 
July 3, 2006: The Paris Court of Appeal upholds the validity of the hearings conducted in Rwanda. 
April 2, 2010: The three complaints filed in 2004 for rape are declared admissible and are to be investigated as “crimes against humanity”. 
2012–2014: Three new complaints for rape are filed. 
October 31, 2017: The French judiciary refuses to hear the most senior French military officials involved in the Bisesero massacres. 
November 2, 2018: The French investigating judges reject the reopening of the investigation into the Bisesero massacre. 
May 2021: The Paris Public Prosecutor’s Office requests a general dismissal in the investigation into the responsibility of the French army during the Bisesero massacres. 
September 6, 2022: The investigating judges issue a general dismissal order in the investigation into the responsibility of the French army during the Bisesero massacres. The judges consider that the investigation did not establish “the direct participation of French military forces in abuses committed in refugee camps, nor any complicity by aiding or abetting the genocidal forces, or complicity by omission of the French soldiers on the hills of Bisesero, in the absence of any intention on their part to facilitate the commission of the crime of genocide and of crimes against humanity”. 
June 21, 2023: The Paris Court of Appeal annuls the dismissal order for failure to comply with Article 175 of the French Code of Criminal Procedure (CCP). The case is sent back to the investigating judges. The prosecutor again requested a dismissal, which was granted by the investigating judges. 
October 2023: The investigating judges issue a new general dismissal order. The civil parties appeal. 
September 19, 2024: The appeal hearing against the dismissal order was held before the Investigating Chamber of the Paris Court of Appeal. 
December 11, 2024: The Paris Court of Appeal upholds the dismissal. The civil parties appeal to the Court of Cassation.