The war crimes trial of Roger Lumbala, a former rebel chief from the Democratic Republic of Congo, has opened in France, marking another step in the French judiciary's pursuit of international crimes committed abroad.

The proceedings began under France's universal jurisdiction framework, which allows French courts to prosecute serious international crimes — including war crimes and crimes against humanity — regardless of where they were committed and regardless of the nationality of the accused or the victims.

Who is on trial and where?

Roger Lumbala is a former rebel leader from the DR Congo. French prosecutors have brought him before the French courts to answer allegations of war crimes connected to his role in the DRC's armed conflicts.

The case is being heard in France rather than in the Democratic Republic of Congo, reflecting the reach of French extraterritorial criminal law. Under Article 689 of the French Code of Criminal Procedure, French courts may try individuals present on French territory for grave breaches of international humanitarian law.

Why is France trying Congolese crimes?

France has progressively strengthened its universal jurisdiction statutes. Lawmakers expanded the framework in 2010 and again in 2024, removing earlier conditions that required the suspect to be habitually resident in France and giving prosecutors broader latitude to open cases.

The result has been a steady docket of cases at the Paris specialised judicial unit — the national anti-terrorist prosecutor's office's specialised crimes unit (PNAT) and, at trial stage, the Paris Criminal Court — concerning atrocities committed in Rwanda, Liberia, the Central African Republic, Syria and, as here, the Democratic Republic of Congo.

The Lumbala trial opening now adds to that record.

What does the trial mean for practitioners?

For defence counsel and prosecutors alike, universal jurisdiction cases raise recurring procedural questions: the admissibility of evidence gathered abroad, the interpretation of foreign conflict dynamics for a French fact-finder, witness testimony from individuals living outside France, and the application of international humanitarian law categories — such as the distinction between international and non-international armed conflict — to events on Congolese soil.

Judgments in these cases tend to travel. They are cited by other national courts weighing universal jurisdiction, by counsel advising victims' associations, and by NGOs documenting mass atrocities who consider where to file complaints.

For victims of the DRC conflicts and their representatives, the French trial offers a forum — at a distance — in which alleged crimes are judicially examined, and potentially reparations awarded through the civil party mechanism available under French procedure.

What comes next?

The trial will now proceed to hearing evidence. A verdict will follow at the conclusion of proceedings, with the court determining guilt and, if applicable, sentence.

French proceedings of this kind can run for several weeks, depending on the number of civil parties, witnesses and the scope of the alleged events under examination.

Whatever the outcome, the opening of Lumbala's trial confirms that the DR Congo's cycles of armed violence continue to generate legal accountability proceedings well beyond Africa — and that France remains one of the most active jurisdictions in Europe for such cases.