2 FAM 940
PAYMENT AND REWARDS FOR INFORMATION RELATING TO WAR CRIMES (WAR CRIMES REWARDS PROGRAM)
(CT:GEN-569; 03-25-2021)
(Office of Origin: J/GCJ)
2 FAM 941 GENERAL
2 FAM 941.1 Summary
(CT:GEN-503; 05-18-2018)
a. Section 36 of the State Department Basic Authorities Act of 1956, as amended (22 U.S.C. 2708, et seq.) provides the authority for the Department of State to establish a rewards program to pay rewards for information leading to the arrest or conviction in any country, or the transfer to or conviction by an international criminal tribunal (including a hybrid or mixed tribunal), of any foreign national accused of war crimes, crimes against humanity, or genocide as defined under the statute of such tribunal. Continuity of authority exists under section 102 of Public Law 105-323, as amended, for the Department to pay rewards for information leading to the arrest or conviction of persons indicted by the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY), the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR), and the Special Court for Sierra Leone (SCSL).
b. The Office of Global Criminal Justice (J/GCJ) administers and provides policy guidance, as needed, for the War Crimes Rewards Program. The procedures in this chapter supersede those in 12 FAM 228 with respect to the War Crimes Rewards Program.
2 FAM 941.2 Authorities
(CT:GEN-465; 01-17-2017)
a. Section 36 of the State Department Basic Authorities Act of 1956, as amended (22 U.S.C. 2708 et seq., and in particular, 22 U.S.C. 2708(b)(10)) provides the authority for the Department of State to establish a rewards program to pay rewards for information leading to the arrest or conviction in any country, or the transfer to or conviction by an international criminal tribunal (including a hybrid or mixed tribunal), of any foreign national accused of war crimes, crimes against humanity, or genocide as defined under the statute of such tribunal.
b. Rewards under this section are subject to any requirements or limitations that apply to rewards under Section 36 of the State Department Basic Authorities Act of 1956, as amended (22 U.S.C. 2708, et seq.), with respect to the procedures for the approval and certification of rewards for payment (22 U.S.C. 2708(c) and (e)), the maximum reward amount (22 U.S.C. 2708(e)), and the ineligibility of government officers and employees for rewards (22 U.S.C. 2708(f)).
2 FAM 941.3 The Interagency Rewards Committee on Atrocity Crimes
(CT:GEN-569; 03-25-2021)
a. An interagency committee, the Interagency Rewards Committee on Atrocity Crimes (Interagency Rewards Committee), has been established to address issues associated with this program and to consider reward offer proposals and reward payment nominations to potential Rewards Program Participants (RPPs).
b. The Interagency Rewards Committee is chaired by the head of the Office of Global Criminal Justice or his or her designee, and is composed of representatives from:
(1) The Office of Global Criminal Justice (J/GCJ);
(2) The appropriate regional bureau(s);
(3) The Office of Emergencies in the Diplomatic and Consular Service (CGFS/EDCS);
(4) The Office of the Legal Adviser (L);
(5) The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA);
(6) The Department of Defense (DOD);
(7) The Department of Justice (DOJ); and
(8) The National Security Council Staff (NSC).
c. As appropriate in light of the countries or thematic or operational issues that arise in a specific situation or more generally in the Committee's work, and at the discretion of the chair, representatives of other Department bureaus or other U.S. Government agencies may confer with or participate as observers in the work of the Interagency Rewards Committee.
d. Meetings of the Interagency Rewards Committee may occur in person or through circulation of written proposals to committee members. Examples of situations in which the head of J/GCJ may determine that written proposals suffice may include, but are not limited to, time-sensitive matters, the unavailability of key members for in-person meetings, or situations in which initial consultations suggest the proposed actions are unlikely to raise complex or sensitive issues.
e. Policy considerations, including, but not limited to, those described in 2 FAM 942.5 paragraph (b)(8), in the discretion of the head of J/GCJ, may warrant a decision not to convene the Interagency Rewards Committee to consider a proposal or nomination for a reward payment, even when an individual might otherwise be eligible for consideration.
2 FAM 942 REWARDS PROCESS
2 FAM 942.1 Proposals to Offer Rewards for Foreign Nationals
(CT:GEN-465; 01-17-2017)
a. In accordance with the provisions of this chapter, the Department, posts, or other agencies may at any time propose that a reward be offered for information leading to the arrest, transfer, or conviction of any foreign national accused of war crimes, crimes against humanity, or genocide by an international criminal tribunal (including a hybrid or mixed tribunal). These proposals, called reward offer proposals, should include the following: the statutory basis under which a reward is offered; a summary of the relevant charges against the accused foreign national(s); any additional relevant information on the activities of the foreign national(s); a statement of the reasons why the arrest or conviction of such foreign national is in the national interest; and a proposed maximum monetary amount for any reward payment. A sample reward offer proposal is at 2 FAM Exhibit 940(1).
b. Such proposals may include a recommendation that a reward be offered either jointly with a foreign government or, with the approval of the Under Secretary for Management, supplemented by a non-USG entity, consistent with 2 FAM 942.7(e).
c. Reward offer proposals shall be submitted to J/GCJ, which will promptly transmit the proposals to the Interagency Rewards Committee for review, unless the Chair believes a proposal is manifestly without merit, such as if the proposed foreign national clearly falls outside the statutory designation criteria.
d. The Interagency Rewards Committee will consider such reward offer proposals within one month of receipt, absent extenuating circumstances requiring a longer delay, and after that consideration will promptly provide a recommendation to the Secretary of State, in the form of an action memorandum prepared by J/GCJ, supporting (as submitted or with modifications), opposing, or laying out divergent views on the inclusion of the named subject(s) in the program. If the Committee is unanimous in opposition, no action memo to the Secretary is necessary. A sample action memo for submitting a reward offer proposal is at 2 FAM Exhibit 940(2). Recommendations of the Committee generally will be made by consensus; however, none of the agencies (other than the Department of State) participating in the Committee meeting may block a recommendation to include a subject in the program. Any disagreement with any aspect of a recommendation to offer a reward for a particular foreign national will be described as a dissenting opinion in the action memorandum to the Secretary of State. The Secretary of State will approve or disapprove the inclusion of a subject in the program and the issuance of a reward offer for the subject.
e. Once approved by the Secretary, J/GCJ through the Bureau of Legislative Affairs (H) will promptly report on the particular reward offer to the relevant Congressional committees, as described in 2 FAM 944.1. The Department may not publicly announce a reward offer until 15 days after submitting the report. A sample letter and report to Congress are at 2 FAM Exhibit 940(3).
2 FAM 942.2 Publicizing Rewards Offers
(CT:GEN-465; 01-17-2017)
a. Once a reward offer is approved pursuant to 2 FAM 942.1, J/GCJ will work with other bureaus within the Department of State, and with other partners as appropriate, to develop advertising campaigns and/or promotional materials identifying the particular foreign nationals who are the subjects of reward offers. All reward program announcements and other media campaigns need to be cleared by the relevant regional bureau within the Department of State and other bureaus and offices, as appropriate. Relevant posts will also be consulted regarding proposed announcements and may be directed to consult with respective host governments as appropriate, including in light of current relations with the host government, the host government's anticipated posture toward the reward and associated publicity, and other factors.
b. Reward offers may be publicized through media campaigns developed by the Department of State and partners, if such publicity is deemed appropriate in light of political and other circumstances in the targeted regions or audiences. These reward offers will also be posted on the website for the War Crimes Rewards Program.
c. Announcement of reward offers will include, as appropriate, a concise description of the relevant fugitive or crime; the means by which potential informants may contact the Department or relevant Embassy; and a statement indicating that responses will be kept confidential.
2 FAM 942.3 Actions upon Receiving Information in Response to Reward Offers
(CT:GEN-465; 01-17-2017)
a. J/GCJ is the Department’s primary point of contact for all information that could be eligible for a reward payment. The Bureau of Diplomatic Security, through the Rewards for Justice Program (DS/TIA/PII/RFJ), provides investigative support and technical support, including via the secure tip-line server, for tips submitted to the War Crimes Rewards Program following the issuance of a reward offer.
b. Overseas, the Regional Security Officer (RSO) is designated to manage and oversee relevant information received at the post that could be eligible for a reward payment, in coordination with J/GCJ.
c. The RSO establishes policies and procedures for handling such information. All relevant information will be coordinated with appropriate embassy offices and with J/GCJ. The RSO must ensure that the information is properly and promptly coordinated with the appropriate embassy offices and J/GCJ; and that such information is promptly transmitted to the Department through appropriate secure channels. The RSO must coordinate with and consult J/GCJ, the Office of the Legal Adviser, and other bureaus and offices, as appropriate, prior to the sharing of any relevant information with host-country authorities or officials of international (including hybrid or mixed) criminal tribunals. If, however, information received at post is of sufficient credibility and urgency to warrant responsive action in the absence of instructions from the Department, the responsible officer at post should take the necessary steps and inform the Department immediately.
d. In Washington, J/GCJ is designated to manage and oversee relevant information received directly in the Department, including tips pertaining to the WCRP submitted through the Department’s email addresses and website established for rewards programs, and will promptly share such information with appropriate posts. J/GCJ will also coordinate, including with the Bureau of Diplomatic Security, the Office of the Legal Adviser and other bureaus and offices, as appropriate, the development and issuance of instructions from the Department to posts on specific measures to take in response to information received either directly or from posts, such as follow-up questioning of an informant or further contacts with host-country authorities.
2 FAM 942.4 Proposals to Pay Rewards to An Informant
(CT:GEN-465; 01-17-2017)
a. Reward payment nominations for a particular individual providing information (called a Reward Program Participant (RPP)) under the War Crimes Rewards Program may originate at post, at the Department, or at other agencies. Any of these offices may also receive recommendations from relevant staff at international criminal tribunals (including hybrid or mixed tribunals) that a reward be paid to a particular informant for furnishing qualifying information. Included with any such nomination must be specific details concerning the factors set forth in 2 FAM 942.5. In no case may any post, Department, or other agency official promise or agree to pay a reward under the War Crimes Rewards Program without express approval from the Department of State through J/GCJ in accordance with 2 FAM 942.
b. Posts proposing a reward payment to an RPP will in their nomination advise J/GCJ and the Committee of any host-country sensitivities or other considerations that may affect the decision-making process. For example, legal restrictions, either internationally or in the host country, may apply to the payment, or promise of payment, to witnesses for their testimony; such restrictions should be considered and highlighted in making recommendations, as should any effect that payment of a reward would have on the law enforcement efforts of host-country authorities.
c. Posts must advise at the time of submitting their nomination whether any specific measures for protection of the identity of the RPP are deemed necessary (see 2 FAM 943.5).
2 FAM 942.5 Reviewing Proposals to Pay Rewards To a Particular RPP
(CT:GEN-465; 01-17-2017)
a. While the Interagency Rewards Committee should generally be convened promptly following the receipt of a Reward Program Participant nomination, the Chair has discretion to delay doing so pending reasonable efforts to obtain additional information or verify existing information relevant to the Committee's consideration, or not to convene the Committee, consistent with 2 FAM 941.3(e).
b. When convened, the Interagency Rewards Committee will review reward payment nominations for a particular RPP and make a recommendation as to whether a reward shall be paid, and if so, the amount to be paid. In making these recommendations, the Committee will assess various factors, including:
(1) The number and degree of seriousness of the violations of international criminal law;
(2) The likelihood that the information provided has materially aided in bringing the accused to justice;
(3) The value of the information with respect to the arrest and/or prosecution of the accused;
(4) The degree and nature of participation in the violation of international criminal law of the accused (for example, whether the individual was an accessory, passive participant, active or joint participant, perpetrator, co-perpetrator, leader, superior, or mastermind);
(5) The degree of risk faced by the potential reward recipient and his or her family in providing the information;
(6) The degree to which the recipient voluntarily cooperated with authorities; and
(7) The attitude of relevant government authorities toward a reward payment.
(8) Other factors, including, but not limited to, foreign policy considerations, or actions by the potential reward recipient that are inconsistent with law or policy or could otherwise discredit the Rewards Program, that, in the Committee’s discretion, may warrant a decision not to recommend a reward, even when an individual might otherwise be eligible for consideration.
c. Recommendations of the committee generally are made by consensus; however, none of the agencies (other than the Department of State, or the Department of Justice in connection with matters over which there is Federal criminal jurisdiction) participating in the committee meeting has the right to block a recommendation to pay a reward. Any disagreement with any aspect of a recommendation to pay a reward will be noted in an action memorandum prepared pursuant to 2 FAM 942.6.
d. Whether a reward is paid and in what amount in any given case are matters wholly within the discretion of the Secretary of State, with the concurrence of the Attorney General of the United States if it is a matter over which there is Federal criminal jurisdiction.
e. If the Interagency Rewards Committee declines to recommend a payment nomination, or if the Secretary of State (or the Attorney General of the United States, where applicable) declines to approve an award, J/GCJ will promptly advise the originating post, Department bureau or office, or agency, if any, of the decision, specifying the basis for denial.
2 FAM 942.6 Action Memoranda for Reward Payments
(CT:GEN-465; 01-17-2017)
If the Committee recommends a reward payment be made to an RPP, J/GCJ will promptly send an action memorandum to the Secretary or to the Under Secretary for Management, as appropriate, recommending that a reward be certified for payment. A redacted sample action memo for recommending a reward program participant is available at 2 FAM Exhibit 940(4). The action memo should include:
(1) A relevant summary and analysis of the nomination;
(2) Other considerations that would affect the amount of the reward and/or the method of payment;
(3) A recommendation as to the amount of the reward;
(4) A recommendation as to any necessary measures to protect the identity of the recipient and/or members of the recipient’s immediate family;
(5) As appropriate, the dissenting opinion(s) of any Interagency Rewards Committee representatives involved in the decision to recommend payment of a reward; and
(6) If the matter is one over which there is Federal criminal jurisdiction, a proposed letter seeking the concurrence of the Attorney General.
2 FAM 942.7 Reward Payment
(CT:GEN-465; 01-17-2017)
a. Pursuant to section 36(e)(1) of the State Department Basic Authorities Act of 1956, as amended (22 U.S.C. 2708(e)(1)), no reward paid may exceed $25 million (and subject to available funds) except as personally authorized by the Secretary of State if he or she determines that offer or payment of an award of a larger amount is necessary to combat terrorism or defend the Nation against terrorist acts.
b. Section 36(e)(2) of the State Department Basic Authorities Act of 1956, as amended (22 U.S.C. 2708(e)(2)), requires that the Secretary of State personally approve reward offers of more than $100,000. Pursuant to section 36(e)(3) of the Act, the Secretary of State must also approve and certify for payment any reward granted under this authority. By Delegation of Authority No. 180 dated August 8, 1989, the Secretary of State has delegated to the Under Secretary of State for Management the functions vested in the Secretary by Section 36 of the State Department Basic Authorities Act of 1956, as amended, with respect to the payment of rewards of less than $100,000, subject to the concurrence of the Under Secretary of Political Affairs as to each proposed payment.
c. For offers of $100,000 or more, the final amount of reward paid is within the sole discretion of the Secretary. He or she may seek the views of other agencies, the post, the Department, or the agency proposing the reward, when making such a determination.
d. Provided the Secretary or Under Secretary for Management has decided that a reward shall be paid, and has received concurrence from the Attorney General if it involves a matter over which there is Federal criminal jurisdiction, J/GCJ will promptly notify the appropriate post, Department, or agency and coordinate the payment of the reward as quickly as can be done consistent with proper management and control of the funds and the safety of the RPP.
e. With the approval of the Under Secretary for Management, the Department may enter into arrangements with other non-U.S. Government entities to supplement the rewards the Department makes to RPPs under the War Crimes Rewards Program.
f. J/GCJ coordinates with the Bureau of Diplomatic Security in the payment of rewards to overseas RPPs.
2 FAM 943 REWARDS GUIDELINES
2 FAM 943.1 Ineligibility of Government Officers or Employees
(CT:GEN-465; 01-17-2017)
Pursuant to Section 36(f) of the State Department Basic Authorities Act of 1956, as amended (22 U.S.C. 2708(f)), an officer or employee of any entity of the Federal, state, or local government or of a foreign government who, while in the performance of his or her official duties, furnishes information as described in 2 FAM 941, is not eligible for a reward under the War Crimes Rewards Program
2 FAM 943.2 Coordination with Relevant Host-Government Authorities and UN Peacekeeping and Political Missions
(CT:GEN-465; 01-17-2017)
The War Crimes Rewards Program is implemented in such a manner as to supplement and complement the bona fide security and law enforcement efforts of relevant host-government authorities who bear the primary responsibility in these areas. To this end, the rewards process (see 2 FAM 942) will be closely coordinated as appropriate with responsible host-government authorities, unless such coordination could put the RPP or the arrest of the fugitive at risk. Such coordination will be accomplished primarily between the RSO and local security and law enforcement authorities. Any investigative activity (see 2 FAM 942.3) will be carried out consistent with the authorities of the investigating office, bureau or agency, including any requirements regarding coordination with host country authorities. The rewards process may also be closely coordinated with appropriate staff members of the relevant tribunals and United Nations peacekeeping or political missions that are authorized by the Security Council to support efforts of host-government authorities to bring to justice those responsible for serious crimes.
2 FAM 943.3 Responsibilities
(CT:GEN-465; 01-17-2017)
a. Overseas, the RSO is primarily responsible for the War Crimes Rewards Program at each post within that officer’s jurisdiction. Such responsibility includes implementation at post of each of the stages of the rewards process as set forth in 2 FAM 942, including coordination, at each stage where appropriate, with U.S. Government officials and host-government authorities. In carrying out these responsibilities, the RSO remains subject to the overall direction and supervision of the Deputy Chief of Mission (DCM) and must coordinate with other officers at post, including political, military, public affairs, law enforcement, and national security officers, as appropriate.
b. Within the State Department, all actions to offer a reward or to pay a reward to an informant under the War Crimes Rewards Program will be coordinated by J/GCJ, consistent with the provision of 2 FAM 940.
c. J/GCJ will be responsible for maintaining records pertaining to the War Crimes Rewards Program, including an inventory of all reward offers and reward payment participants; records of the Committee's decisions and supporting deliberative documents; action memos and other correspondence with the Secretary and notifications to Congress; and other documents pertaining to the consideration of reward offer proposals and the vetting and payment of reward program participants. The records will generally be maintained in J/GCJ's classified computer system or, in the case of hard-copy records, its security container.
2 FAM 943.4 Security Procedures
(CT:GEN-465; 01-17-2017)
a. All communications relating to the implementation of the War Crimes Rewards program must be transmitted in appropriate channels with classification level and distribution controls sufficient to ensure the security of these operations and persons involved. Such communications include:
(1) Nominations for rewards payments;
(2) Reports of information received in response to a reward offer;
(3) Measures taken in response to information received;
(4) Contacts with host-government authorities;
(5) Instructions from the Department to posts; and
(6) Other relevant information.
b. Names of individuals who provide information and RPPs and information that may lead to their identification must be handled in accordance with appropriate operational security procedures. Knowledge of an RPP’s identity and relationship with the War Crimes Rewards Program is limited to only those individuals with a need to know that information. A relationship by RPPs and any other individuals who provide information with the War Crimes Rewards Program must be kept confidential, even if the RPP’s identity or role in a case has been publicly alleged or disclosed in the media.
c. All other documents relating to implementation (such as internal memoranda), including information relating to identities of RPPs and times, places, and circumstances of contacts with U.S. officials, must be handled in accordance with appropriate operational security procedures.
2 FAM 943.5 Protection of Informants
(CT:GEN-465; 01-17-2017)
a. If the Secretary determines that the identity of the recipient of a reward or of the members of the recipient’s immediate family must be protected, the Secretary will take such measures in connection with the payment of the reward as he or she considers necessary to effect such protection. Specific measures employed to protect the identity of RPPs or potential RPPs (and immediate family members, as appropriate), beyond those described in 2 FAM 943.4, will depend on the circumstances of each case, but include not identifying the RPP by name in the reports sent to Congress in accordance with 2 FAM 944.
b. J/GCJ will work with DS, the Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration, the Department of Homeland Security, and other relevant U.S. partners promptly to assist informants and their immediate family members with relocation or other appropriate measures to address threats that result from their participation in the program.
c. The post, office, or agency working with the informant will report to J/GCJ which specific additional measures for protection of the identity of an informant are recommended and planned.
2 FAM 943.6 Accounting for Funds
(CT:GEN-465; 01-17-2017)
Fiscal responsibility and accountability for funds appropriated for use in carrying out the War Crimes Rewards Program will reside with the Department of State, Office of the Undersecretary for Management (M). M will also be responsible for instituting appropriate financial controls, including such controls as may be necessary to maintain the confidentiality of payments within the framework of internal control and audit requirements.
2 FAM 944 REPORTS TO CONGRESS
2 FAM 944.1 Advance Notification of Reward Offers
(CT:GEN-465; 01-17-2017)
Pursuant to Section 36(g)(3) of the State Department Basic Authorities Act of 1956, as amended (22 U.S.C. 2708(g)(3)), the Secretary shall submit a report to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs and the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations not less than 15 days before publicly announcing that a reward may be offered under the War Crimes Rewards Program. The report must set forth the reasons why the arrest or conviction of the foreign national who is the subject of the reward offer is in the national interests of the United States. The report may be submitted in classified form if necessary, for example, if operational security, political sensitivity, or other considerations consistent with classification justify doing so. J/GCJ will promptly prepare the report for transmittal by H after the Secretary has approved a new reward offer.
2 FAM 944.2 Reports on the Payment of Rewards
(CT:GEN-465; 01-17-2017)
Pursuant to Section 36(g)(1) of the State Department Basic Authorities Act of 1956, as amended (22 U.S.C. 2708(g)(1)), within 30 days after payment of any reward, the Secretary must submit a report to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs and the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations with respect to that reward. A redacted sample letter and report are at 2 FAM Exhibit 940(5). J/GCJ will prepare the report, which may be submitted in classified form if necessary and which must:
(1) Specify the amount of the reward paid;
(2) Identify to whom the reward was paid (when necessary to protect the recipient, an identification number may be used instead of a name);
(3) State the information and steps taken to obtain and provide the information with respect to which the reward was paid;
(4) Discuss the significance of the information for which the reward was paid in dealing with the respective acts; and
(5) Provide specific details regarding the fugitive and the role of the informant receiving the reward for providing information leading to the arrest or conviction of the fugitive.
2 FAM Exhibit 940(1)
REWARD OFFER PROPOSAL
(CT:GEN-465; 01-17-2017)
Reward Offer Proposal: Sylvestre Mudacumura
Personal Details:
Sex: Male
Date of Birth: 1954 or 1955
Place of Birth: Karago, Western Province, Rwanda
Nationality: Rwanda
Position: Supreme Commander of the Army of the Forces Démocratiques pour la Libération du Rwanda (FDLR)
Aliases: Bernard Mupenzi, Mpezi, Commandant Pharon, Pharaoh, Mudac, Mukanda, and Radja.
Location: likely North or South Kivu, Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC)
Sanctions: In March 2009, Mudacumura was added to the U.S. Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Asset Control’s sanctions list due to his role in the conflict in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). He is also under UN Security Council sanctions UNSCR 1596 (2005) as renewed by UNSCR 2078 (2012) for his role in the conflict.
Proposed Maximum Reward Amount: $5,000,000
Statutory Basis for Reward Offer: Section 36 of the State Department Basic Authorities Act of 1956, as amended (22 U.S.C. 2708 et seq.)
Background:
Several rebel groups that had fled Rwanda into the DRC following the 1994 Rwandan genocide merged to form the Forces Démocratiques de Libération du Rwanda (FDLR). The FDLR has been linked to continued crimes against the civilian population in the DRC in recent years, including the mass rapes in Walikale territory in August 2010. Sylvestre Mudacumura, a former deputy commander of the Presidential Guard of the Rwandan Armed Forces during the 1994 genocide, is suspected to have directed the operations of the FDLR as its Supreme Commander.
Summary of Charges:
The International Criminal Court (ICC) issued an arrest warrant for Mudacumura on July 13 2012 for acts alleged to have occurred between 20 January 2009 and the end of September 2010, in the context of the conflict in the Kivu provinces of the eastern Democratic Republic of Congo. Mudacumura is charged with nine counts of war crimes for ordering acts that amounted to: attacks against a civilian population, murder, mutilation, cruel treatment, rape, torture, destruction of property, pillaging and outrages against personal dignity.
U.S. National Interest:
The United States supports the international community’s comprehensive approach to disarming and demobilizing the FDLR, a violent armed group whose leaders are allegedly responsible for atrocities committed against civilians in the DRC’s eastern provinces and some of whose leaders participated in the 1994 genocide in Rwanda The continued military activities and human rights abuses of the forces under Mudacumura’s command have been a major obstacle to peace and stability in eastern DRC, where the United States has made major investments in humanitarian, peacekeeping, and development assistance. The U.S. supports ongoing efforts to hold FDLR leaders accountable for the atrocities.
2 FAM Exhibit 940(2)
ACTION MEMO FOR REWARD OFFER PROPOSAL
(CT:GEN-465; 01-17-2017)
[DATE]
SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED
ACTION MEMO FOR THE SECRETARY
FROM: J/GCJ – [head of office]
SUBJECT: Nomination of [Additional Subjects] for War Crimes Reward Program
Recommendation
(SBU) That you authorize a reward offer of up to $5,000,000, under the War Crimes Rewards Program, for information leading to the arrest or conviction of [Joseph Kony], a foreign national subject to an arrest warrant by [the International Criminal Court or other international or hybrid criminal tribunal].
Approve ______________ Disapprove ______________
(SBU) That you approve the proposed report at Tab B describing why the arrest or conviction of [these subjects] is in the U.S. national interest, and the report’s transmittal to the relevant Congressional committees.
Approve ______________ Disapprove ______________
Background
(SBU) The Department of State has authority to provide rewards for information leading to the arrest or conviction in any country, or the transfer to or conviction by an international criminal tribunal, of any foreign national accused of war crimes, crimes against humanity, or genocide, as defined under the statute of such tribunal. The law authorizes the Secretary of State, in consultation as appropriate with the heads of other relevant departments or agencies, to pay a reward of up to $25 million for such information. The law requires the Secretary of State to submit a report to the appropriate congressional committees at least fifteen days in advance of publicly announcing a reward offer for a particular foreign national, setting forth the reasons why the arrest or conviction of such foreign national is in the national interests of the United States.
(SBU) On [DATE], the Interagency Rewards Committee on Atrocity Crimes (Committee), through circulation of written reward offer proposals to its members, reviewed the designation of [Joseph Kony]. There were no objections from Committee members to a reward offer for this individuals. The arrest or conviction of this notorious individual will further our national security and foreign policy objectives in ensuring accountability, preventing and deterring atrocities, and contributing to regional stability, and will advance the U.S. government’s leadership on international law and human rights. The [International Criminal Court] has issued an arrest warrant for this individual for [war crimes, crimes against humanity, or genocide]. The Reward Offer Proposal summarizes personal details of and criminal charges against this individual; a brief background of the relevant conflict situation; and statements setting forth the reasons why the designation is in the national interests of the United States.
(SBU) The Office of Emergencies in the Diplomatic and Consular Service (M/EDC) concurs with offering a reward up to $5,000,000. Should individuals come forward with qualifying information, the Committee will reconvene to discuss and decide upon appropriate remuneration under the Program, as has been done in the past with rewards relating to the International Criminal Tribunals for Yugoslavia and Rwanda.
Attachments:
Tab 1 – Section 36 of the State Department Basic Authorities Act of 1956, as amended (22 U.S.C. 2708)
Tab 2 – Reward Offer Proposals
Tab 3 – Letters to Congressional Committees
Tab 4 – Reports to Congressional Committees
2 FAM Exhibit 940(3)
LETTER AND REPORT TO CONGRESS REGARDING NEW REWARD OFFER
(CT:GEN-465; 01-17-2017)
Dear Mr. Chairman,
In 1987, Joseph Kony formed the group that would later be known as the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA), and remains its Chairman and Commander in Chief. In the decades since, the LRA has committed numerous atrocities against civilians across northern Uganda, the DRC, Central African Republic, South Sudan, and Sudan. The U.S. State Department has included the LRA on its “Terrorist Exclusion List” since 2001. The LRA was formed in northern Uganda to fight against the Government of Uganda, and operated there until 2006. At the height of the conflict, nearly two million people in northern Uganda were displaced. A 2006 study funded by UNICEF estimated that at least 66,000 children and youth had been abducted by the LRA between 1986 and 2005. According to that study, most of these children were only held for a brief period of time and were then released or escaped, but others were forced to become child soldiers or sex slaves and commit unspeakable acts. Under increasing pressure, Joseph Kony ordered the LRA to withdraw completely from Uganda in 2005 and 2006 and move west into the border region of the DRC, CAR, and what would become the Republic of South Sudan. The LRA has continued to operate in this border region to date and commit attacks against innocent civilians. The UN estimates that 443,000 people are displaced or living as refugees across CAR, the DRC, and South Sudan as a result of the LRA threat.
Summary of Charges
The International Criminal Court (ICC) issued an arrest warrant for Kony under seal on 8 July 2005; it was amended on 27 September 2005, and unsealed on 13 October 2005. The warrant of arrest charges Kony with twelve counts of crimes against humanity and twenty-one counts of war crimes, for, among other things, murder, enslavement, sexual enslavement, rape, cruel treatment of civilians, intentionally directing an attack against a civilian population, pillaging, forced enlistment of children, and inhumane acts of inflicting serious bodily injury and suffering. In the warrant of arrest (ICC-02/04-01/05, 27 September 2005), the Pre-Trial Chamber cited the Prosecutor’s allegations that since at least 1987 the LRA had carried out an insurgency against the Government of Uganda and the Ugandan Army. The Prosecutor alleged that, over this time, including from July 1, 2002, the LRA
has been directing attacks against both military and civilian populations; that, in pursuing its goals, the LRA has engaged in a cycle of violence and established a pattern of ‘brutalization of civilians’ by acts including murder, abduction, sexual enslavement, mutilation, as well as mass burnings of houses and looting of camp settlements; that abducted civilians, including children, are said to have been forcibly ‘recruited’ as fighters, porters and sex slaves to serve the LRA and to contribute to attacks against the Ugandan army and civilian communities.”
The Pre-Trial Chamber was satisfied based on “the evidence and other information submitted by the Prosecutor, that there are reasonable grounds to believe that Joseph Kony committed and, together with other persons…, ordered or induced the commission of...crimes against humanity and war crimes” as alleged by the Prosecutor.
President Obama’s National Security Strategy of 2010 underscores that international justice is in the national interest of the United States:
From Nuremberg to Yugoslavia to Liberia, the United States has seen that the end of impunity and the promotion of justice are not just moral imperatives; they are stabilizing forces in international affairs. The United States is thus working to strengthen national justice systems and is maintaining our support for ad hoc international tribunals and hybrid courts. Those who intentionally target innocent civilians must be held accountable, and we will continue to support institutions and prosecutions that advance this important interest….[We] are supporting the ICC’s prosecution of those cases that advance U.S. interests and values, consistent with the requirements of U.S. law.
2 FAM Exhibit 940(4)
ACTION MEMO FOR NEW REWARD PAYMENT
(CT:GEN-528; 09-27-2018)
CLASSIFICATION [date]
ACTION MEMO FOR THE SECRETARY
FROM: J/GCJ – [Head of Office]
SUBJECT: War Crimes Rewards Program: Reward Payment for RPP XX-XX
Recommendation
(SBU) That you certify for payment the amount of _______ to the source who provided _______ with information leading to the arrest of ________, indicted for _______, and that you authorize the transmission to Congress of the enclosed report regarding this payment.
Approve _______________ Disapprove ________________
Background
(SBU) Section 36 of the State Department Basic Authorities Act of 1956, as amended (22 U.S.C. 2708 et seq.), authorizes the Secretary of State to pay a reward of up to $5,000,000 to individuals who furnish information leading to the arrest or conviction, or transfer to conviction, of any foreign national accused of war crimes, crimes against humanity, or genocide, as defined under the statute of an international criminal tribunal (including a hybrid or mixed tribunal). The Department issued such a reward on _______ with respect to _______.
(SBU) Crucial information on the location of ________ was supplied by RPP XX-XX, enabling ________ to locate and arrest him. ________ stated that the information was instrumental in verifying ________’s location. Throughout the investigation effort, RPP XX-XX undertook extraordinary personal risks by working with ________. [paragraph likely to be classified]
(SBU) The Committee reviewed the case of RPP XX-XX on [date] with regard to the specific factors described in 2 Foreign Affairs Manual (FAM) 940. Following discussions of the information available, the Interagency Rewards Committee believes a payment to RPP XX-XX in the amount of $________ is appropriate in light of various factors including, as laid out in 2 FAM 940, the value of the information provided, the danger to RPP XX-XX, and the degree of seriousness of the atrocities that ______ allegedly committed. The Bureau of Budget and Planning concurs with this payment and advises that funds are available in the Emergencies in the Diplomatic and Consular Service Appropriation (K) Fund to make the payment. [paragraph likely to be classified]
Attachments:
Letters and Report to Congress
2 FAM Exhibit 940(5)
LETTER AND REPORT TO CONGRESS REGARDING NEW REWARD PAYMENT
(CT:GEN-465; 01-17-2017)
CLASSIFICATION
Dear [name]:
Pursuant to the State Department Basic Authorities Act, Section 36(g)(1) (22 U.S.C. § 2708(g)(1)), I am advising Congress a reward has been paid to a participant in the War Crimes Rewards Program. The attached documents provide information required under the referenced legislation. To protect the identity of the reward recipient, the recipient is identified as Rewards Program Participant (RPP) XX-XX.
Under Executive Order 13526, the Department may not disseminate classified information outside the Executive Branch except under conditions that ensure that the information will be given protection equivalent to that afforded to such information within the Executive Branch. We ask that you protect the classified information by applying standards at least as stringent as E.O. 13526 on the handling of classified information.
We request that only Members (and staff with the necessary clearance and need-to-know the information) be allowed to review the enclosed material.
The Honorable
[name and Committee title]
If you require additional information or believe that we may be of further assistance in this, or any other matter, please do not hesitate to contact us.
Sincerely,
[name]
Assistant Secretary
Legislative Affairs
Enclosure:
As stated.
CLASSIFICATION
Significance of Information/Amount of Payment
(SBU) Through the War Crimes Rewards Program, the Department offered on _______ a reward of up to $5 million for information leading to the apprehension, transfer, or conviction of _______. [Description of accused’s crimes]
(SBU) Reward Program Participant (RPP) XX-XX supplied information leading to the arrest of _______ on ______. [Further description of source’s action and how it contributed to arrest – paragraph likely to be classified]
(SBU) Pursuant to Section 36 of the State Department Basic Authorities Act, as amended, a payment in the amount of $________ was completed on or about ______ to RPP XX-XX. [Description of payment – paragraph likely to be classified]