Rwandans advised to check private sector through consumer activism
BY GEORGE KAGAME
The Minster of Local government has asked Rwandans to be active consumers who can have their views addressed by the private sector instead of relying on government to set out all the policies in the country.
Protais Musoni was Friday a press conference at his ministry headquarters in Kacyiru and was responding to a question about increasing food prices in Rwanda and the fact that agricultural produce is sold at much cheaper prices in districts not so far away from Kigali like Msanze while in Kigali city food prices are exorbitant.
Musoni said a kilogram of irish potatoes in Musanze cost as low as Frw 60 while the same quantity could be as high Frw 150 -200.
Musoni said some policies like price regulations in food prices are no longer independent and are very complex for a country to adopt today, “if you set prices for foodstuffs like Egypt does for wheat, you invite the attention of IMF and World Bank to question your commitment to a free market economy, the risks can be as bad as reducing aid,” said Musoni.
The Egyptian funds the importing of wheat and prices for bread in that country are very low because taxes are subsidized. Bread is the staple food of Egypt.
Many businessmen in Rwanda mention high taxes charges and transport cost as the reason why prices of many commodities are very high making the cost of living in Rwanda higher than that of neighbouring countries like Uganda, Kenya and Goma in Eastern DR Congo.
Prices of agricultural produce are high in Kigali because of high fuel costs to transport foodstuffs from rich agricultural areas like Musanze Kigali businessmen say.
Musoni said government had abolished tax charges on agricultural products in the country; however he said the increase of food prices was because of increasing fuel prices.
He called upon Rwandans to be more active in determining the standards of the commodities they consume; “Rwandans should be more active consumers. They should question the sellers (of services and goods) instead of relying on government to make all the decisions.”
Increasing food prices have been the cause of political violence and death in and will present future concerns like war according to UN secretary general Ban Ki Moon who wrote recently wrote in an international newspaper article that...@@@@@@@@@@@@@....................
Last week another senior UN official said.........................................
Saturday 26 April 2008
TRAC PLUS calls for consistency in the successful fight against malaria
BY GEORGE KAGAME
The Centre for Infectious Diseases Control TRAC PLUS director Professor Michael Kramer has malaria control organisations in the country to maintain Rwanda’s successful efforts in controlling the most dangerous health issue in Africa.
In an exclusive interview with The New Times Kramer flanked by Dr Corine Karema the director general of the National Malaria Control programme said; “we are organizing ceremonies to honour the World Malaria Day at Kirehe in the Eastern Province. “
In Rwanda, the national Malaria Control programme has been impressive. World Health organisation statistics show that; Rwanda has scaled down malaria by 60 percent, the best performance in efforts to treat malaria in Sub Saharan Africa. Malaria has been labeled as the single most dangerous cause of death and low life expectance in developing countries.
By 2000, there were one million malaria related diseases in Rwanda today this according to Karema has been reduced, she says, alaria related infections in Rwanda have reduced by 60 percent in 2008.
Malaria still poses a serious threat to National Health Service sector as the disease is responsible for reduced working hours for working adults and limited time for study for school going children. Efforts to fight the disease in the country have received international recognition including a visit to Rwanda in March 2008 by US President George Bush.
Rwanda however has managed to scale down the threat of malaria; Karema adds; “Under-5 child mortality rate has greatly reduced to and the proportion of child related deaths attributable to malaria is currently below 5 percent.”
Research also shows that malaria is responsible for 9 percent of deaths in Sub Saharan Africa, the fight against malaria costs US Billion 12 in medical expenses and lost productivity. Rwanda according to WHO is the most successful country in Africa in fighting malaria.
This year’s national theme for the World Malaria Day for 2008 to be celebrated in Rwanda on Friday 25th April along the boarder with Tanzania is; “Malaria a Disease without Boarders”. Karema said; “Kirehe boarders Tanzania and Burundi, we are sending a message that the fight against malaria can only be won if we partner with our neighbours. We are also hoping to use this chance to launch the distribution of malaria drugs in the private sector.”
Karema said that Antemesurin based combination therapy which sells under the brand name of Coartem will be launched for commercial distribution in the private sector.
Influential medical journal Lancet suggests that the combination of artemether and lumefantrine, manufactured by leading pharmaceutical company Novartis under the brand name Coartem, is the most effective available treatment for malaria in children in areas of Africa where resistance to conventional anti-malarial drugs is high. Developed and produced by Novartis and its Chinese partners, Coartem is currently the only fixed-dose artemisinin-based combination therapy pre-qualified by the World Health Organization (WHO) for procurement by United Nations agencies.
The national celebrations organized by all malaria control stakeholders in public and private sectors including; Population Services International, Ministry of health, PNILP, PNILT, will see the launch of nationwide distribution of long lasting mosquito treated bed nets to people living with HIV/Aids.
Kramer said the move was to boost immunity of HIV positive patients; “HIV patients have a weak immunity system, it is important that we treat all opportunistic diseases especially Malaria.”
Kramer also said that unless efforts to combat malaria were adopted by regional countries, the drive to reduce the impact of the impact risk failing; “We have been successful so far in Africa but we hope one day we shall be able eliminate malaria, more importantly now we need total cooperation from our regional neighbours especially Burundi and Tanzania because of cross boarder movements and similar weather conditions”
In a related development the Minister of Health Damascene Ntawukuliryayo is set to launch Ea Sur, the water purifying tablet that treats bacteria and germs in drinking water.
Ceremonies to launch Eau Sur will be held in the Western province district of Rubavu on 26th April.
BY GEORGE KAGAME
The Centre for Infectious Diseases Control TRAC PLUS director Professor Michael Kramer has malaria control organisations in the country to maintain Rwanda’s successful efforts in controlling the most dangerous health issue in Africa.
In an exclusive interview with The New Times Kramer flanked by Dr Corine Karema the director general of the National Malaria Control programme said; “we are organizing ceremonies to honour the World Malaria Day at Kirehe in the Eastern Province. “
In Rwanda, the national Malaria Control programme has been impressive. World Health organisation statistics show that; Rwanda has scaled down malaria by 60 percent, the best performance in efforts to treat malaria in Sub Saharan Africa. Malaria has been labeled as the single most dangerous cause of death and low life expectance in developing countries.
By 2000, there were one million malaria related diseases in Rwanda today this according to Karema has been reduced, she says, alaria related infections in Rwanda have reduced by 60 percent in 2008.
Malaria still poses a serious threat to National Health Service sector as the disease is responsible for reduced working hours for working adults and limited time for study for school going children. Efforts to fight the disease in the country have received international recognition including a visit to Rwanda in March 2008 by US President George Bush.
Rwanda however has managed to scale down the threat of malaria; Karema adds; “Under-5 child mortality rate has greatly reduced to and the proportion of child related deaths attributable to malaria is currently below 5 percent.”
Research also shows that malaria is responsible for 9 percent of deaths in Sub Saharan Africa, the fight against malaria costs US Billion 12 in medical expenses and lost productivity. Rwanda according to WHO is the most successful country in Africa in fighting malaria.
This year’s national theme for the World Malaria Day for 2008 to be celebrated in Rwanda on Friday 25th April along the boarder with Tanzania is; “Malaria a Disease without Boarders”. Karema said; “Kirehe boarders Tanzania and Burundi, we are sending a message that the fight against malaria can only be won if we partner with our neighbours. We are also hoping to use this chance to launch the distribution of malaria drugs in the private sector.”
Karema said that Antemesurin based combination therapy which sells under the brand name of Coartem will be launched for commercial distribution in the private sector.
Influential medical journal Lancet suggests that the combination of artemether and lumefantrine, manufactured by leading pharmaceutical company Novartis under the brand name Coartem, is the most effective available treatment for malaria in children in areas of Africa where resistance to conventional anti-malarial drugs is high. Developed and produced by Novartis and its Chinese partners, Coartem is currently the only fixed-dose artemisinin-based combination therapy pre-qualified by the World Health Organization (WHO) for procurement by United Nations agencies.
The national celebrations organized by all malaria control stakeholders in public and private sectors including; Population Services International, Ministry of health, PNILP, PNILT, will see the launch of nationwide distribution of long lasting mosquito treated bed nets to people living with HIV/Aids.
Kramer said the move was to boost immunity of HIV positive patients; “HIV patients have a weak immunity system, it is important that we treat all opportunistic diseases especially Malaria.”
Kramer also said that unless efforts to combat malaria were adopted by regional countries, the drive to reduce the impact of the impact risk failing; “We have been successful so far in Africa but we hope one day we shall be able eliminate malaria, more importantly now we need total cooperation from our regional neighbours especially Burundi and Tanzania because of cross boarder movements and similar weather conditions”
In a related development the Minister of Health Damascene Ntawukuliryayo is set to launch Ea Sur, the water purifying tablet that treats bacteria and germs in drinking water.
Ceremonies to launch Eau Sur will be held in the Western province district of Rubavu on 26th April.
Nepad to merge with African Union; leadership wrangle allegations cited
BY GEORGE KAGAME
The highly acclaimed New Partnership for African Development program has been merged with the African Union but remains with its office in South Africa.
Speaking to The New Times, Francis Gatare President Kagame’s permanent representative at NEPAD who also happens to be the director general of Rwanda Investment and export promotions agency Riepa said Nepad’s working structures will be merged will be with the existing African Union but what remains are the technical issues like human resource personnel, he also said the Nepad will ask the South Africa to host its secretariat.
Formed in 2002, Nepad was seen as a development initiative among African leaders to promote service delivery from governments to their citizens and alleviate poverty.
The initiative was highly supported by South Africa’s Thabo Mbeki, Nigeria’s Olusegun Obasanjo, President Paul Kagame and Senegal’s Aboudalaye Wade.
The proposal to merge Nepad within the African Union comes amid allegations of a leadership wrangle between the President of Senegal and that of South Africa in a Nepad consultative meeting ahead of the AU heads of State summit in June. The meeting held last week brought together heads of state from Senegal, Algeria, Ethiopia and South Africa in Dakar.
A high level meeting involving the mentioned countries, Nigeria, South Africa and Egyptian delegations were meeting in Dakar on Tuesday for Nepad and AU leaders. The meeting comes only one month after AU heads of state summit to be held in Cairo Egypt.
The heads of state, who were joined by Nigeria's foreign minister and the Egyptian economy minister, agreed to put forward all the proposals discussed on Tuesday to the next African Union heads of state summit.
President Paul Kagame has among African leaders that have supported the Nepad initiative and was the first to endorse the peers’ leaders’ assessment program. In this program African leaders agreed in principle to assess each other in terms of service delivery to their populations, good governance principles and respect for the rule of law.
It is reported in the media that disagreements about leadership between South Africa’s Thabo Mbeki and Senegal’s Aboudalaye Wade was the main reason Nepad merged with the AU. Gatare said Nepad’s merging was not a failure; “Nepad was born at the same time the Organization of African Unity was transforming into the African Union. It was formed as a programme for African countries to drive their own development destiny. Both organizations therefore grew simultaneously; the leaders have therefore decided to merge the two because they have the same principles.”
Gatare said Nepad will remain with its based South African secretariat but work with the same structures as AU, he said Nepad had succeeded in fulfilling its objectives with a good measure.
The disagreement between South African President Thabo Mbeki and Senegal’s Aboudalaye Wade about the leadership of Nepad caused reports that talks between the leaders had caused the failure of the talks.
Gatare said Nepad had been efficient in fulfilling the principles for which it was formed even if the AU also existed at the same time. “Nepad has increased among African leaders to take care of their solutions to African problems instead of waiting for action form elsewhere. We have been able to create a growth and development structure for Africa, Nepad has promoted regional integrations in all regions on the African continent that are actively benefiting Africans. In East Africa there’s the East African Community, ECOWAS for West Africa and SADC for South Africa.
Gatare said that Nepad had promoted regional and continental development programs for infrastructure like linking the entire continent on the transport network and plans were underway for Information Technology to penetrate the continent. He said that when projects like the EASSY and east African marine cables were launched Africa will be more advanced in the use of ICT.
EASSY or the East African Sub-marine Cable System (EASSy), is an ICT system that will connect the African continent with the rest of the world and Rwanda has also been one of its most vocal supporters.
The African marine cable is another ICT cable that seeks to link Africa on the broadband technology from Cape Town in South Africa to Cairo on Africa’s north most tip.
President Paul Kagame has asked beneficiary states to forge concerted efforts towards the effective implementation of the venture.
Gatare said the next heads of state summit will be held in June and the proposals put forward on Tuesday will be endorsed, the summit will be held in Cairo
But currently both organisations are dealing with harmonizing personnel details, and signing a host agreement with South Africa to host the Nepad secretariat which will effectively be working under the African.
Those proposals include Senegal’s Aboudalaye Wade demanding changing the structure of the current AU organisation to hand more decision-making power to the heads of state, rather than technocrats as has been the case.
The African dream has moved from brand name to another, beginning with the Organization of African Unity in 1963 for African independence, which has transformed into the African Union which also has political and economical African unity and having Libyan Leader Colonel Muamar Gaddafi as its most eloquent promoter.
BY GEORGE KAGAME
The highly acclaimed New Partnership for African Development program has been merged with the African Union but remains with its office in South Africa.
Speaking to The New Times, Francis Gatare President Kagame’s permanent representative at NEPAD who also happens to be the director general of Rwanda Investment and export promotions agency Riepa said Nepad’s working structures will be merged will be with the existing African Union but what remains are the technical issues like human resource personnel, he also said the Nepad will ask the South Africa to host its secretariat.
Formed in 2002, Nepad was seen as a development initiative among African leaders to promote service delivery from governments to their citizens and alleviate poverty.
The initiative was highly supported by South Africa’s Thabo Mbeki, Nigeria’s Olusegun Obasanjo, President Paul Kagame and Senegal’s Aboudalaye Wade.
The proposal to merge Nepad within the African Union comes amid allegations of a leadership wrangle between the President of Senegal and that of South Africa in a Nepad consultative meeting ahead of the AU heads of State summit in June. The meeting held last week brought together heads of state from Senegal, Algeria, Ethiopia and South Africa in Dakar.
A high level meeting involving the mentioned countries, Nigeria, South Africa and Egyptian delegations were meeting in Dakar on Tuesday for Nepad and AU leaders. The meeting comes only one month after AU heads of state summit to be held in Cairo Egypt.
The heads of state, who were joined by Nigeria's foreign minister and the Egyptian economy minister, agreed to put forward all the proposals discussed on Tuesday to the next African Union heads of state summit.
President Paul Kagame has among African leaders that have supported the Nepad initiative and was the first to endorse the peers’ leaders’ assessment program. In this program African leaders agreed in principle to assess each other in terms of service delivery to their populations, good governance principles and respect for the rule of law.
It is reported in the media that disagreements about leadership between South Africa’s Thabo Mbeki and Senegal’s Aboudalaye Wade was the main reason Nepad merged with the AU. Gatare said Nepad’s merging was not a failure; “Nepad was born at the same time the Organization of African Unity was transforming into the African Union. It was formed as a programme for African countries to drive their own development destiny. Both organizations therefore grew simultaneously; the leaders have therefore decided to merge the two because they have the same principles.”
Gatare said Nepad will remain with its based South African secretariat but work with the same structures as AU, he said Nepad had succeeded in fulfilling its objectives with a good measure.
The disagreement between South African President Thabo Mbeki and Senegal’s Aboudalaye Wade about the leadership of Nepad caused reports that talks between the leaders had caused the failure of the talks.
Gatare said Nepad had been efficient in fulfilling the principles for which it was formed even if the AU also existed at the same time. “Nepad has increased among African leaders to take care of their solutions to African problems instead of waiting for action form elsewhere. We have been able to create a growth and development structure for Africa, Nepad has promoted regional integrations in all regions on the African continent that are actively benefiting Africans. In East Africa there’s the East African Community, ECOWAS for West Africa and SADC for South Africa.
Gatare said that Nepad had promoted regional and continental development programs for infrastructure like linking the entire continent on the transport network and plans were underway for Information Technology to penetrate the continent. He said that when projects like the EASSY and east African marine cables were launched Africa will be more advanced in the use of ICT.
EASSY or the East African Sub-marine Cable System (EASSy), is an ICT system that will connect the African continent with the rest of the world and Rwanda has also been one of its most vocal supporters.
The African marine cable is another ICT cable that seeks to link Africa on the broadband technology from Cape Town in South Africa to Cairo on Africa’s north most tip.
President Paul Kagame has asked beneficiary states to forge concerted efforts towards the effective implementation of the venture.
Gatare said the next heads of state summit will be held in June and the proposals put forward on Tuesday will be endorsed, the summit will be held in Cairo
But currently both organisations are dealing with harmonizing personnel details, and signing a host agreement with South Africa to host the Nepad secretariat which will effectively be working under the African.
Those proposals include Senegal’s Aboudalaye Wade demanding changing the structure of the current AU organisation to hand more decision-making power to the heads of state, rather than technocrats as has been the case.
The African dream has moved from brand name to another, beginning with the Organization of African Unity in 1963 for African independence, which has transformed into the African Union which also has political and economical African unity and having Libyan Leader Colonel Muamar Gaddafi as its most eloquent promoter.
Ubudehe program building self esteem among Rwanda-Minister
BY GEORGE KAGAME
Ubudehe project has been lauded as very effective in fostering unity and development among Rwandans today.
Musoni said; “Ubudehe has been very critical in solving community problems, enhancing self independence and raising self esteem among members of our society.”
Ubudehe is a government initiated program as part of the decentralization policies adopted in 2003; the program works at the lowest administrative level in local government authorities, the Mudugudu.
At the cell level, the poorest two families are identified by mutual consent at by community members at cell meetings. The two families are then assisted by free labour to build a house and then government funds iron sheets and other finishing material.
He said this year the program was funded to the tune of 14m Euros and that his ministry had already covered half of the budget.
Musoni said along with Ubudehe, Ministry of local government had also adopted programs to assist poverty stricken Rwandans, he said; “we have built homes for poor Rwandans especially genocide survivors, by the end of 2008 we will build another 12000 homes across the country.”
Musoni however criticized the custom among Rwandans to getting to familiar with free offers from government; “in some areas where we built houses, even financially able people benefited. They simply left their old homes and came to government houses meant for vulnerable persons. In the process, they sold their lands for farming; they starved in government funded houses and caused a new problem, some others remained with two houses and rented one out.”
Musoni said by early 2008, his ministry has already funded the 15000 local government lower authorities in the country with 73710 roofing materials of which 43000 have already been supplied. There are 15000 cells in the country.
He said the government was also in advanced stages of streamlining the Fund for Genocide Survivors, the fund set up in @@@@is implemented by the ministry of Local government; “We shall start to give the money directly to students so they can spend it themselves instead of funding schools which had in some cases created stereotypes towards the beneficiaries.” He also said the national cultural troupe Itorero had trained 43000 teachers; “these teachers will be exemplary in their communities in building a future Rwanda,” said Musoni.
Musoni called upons Rwandans to register in the ongoing national identity cards exercise because the digital cards to be issued will be used in parliamentary elections on 15 September 2008.
BY GEORGE KAGAME
Ubudehe project has been lauded as very effective in fostering unity and development among Rwandans today.
Musoni said; “Ubudehe has been very critical in solving community problems, enhancing self independence and raising self esteem among members of our society.”
Ubudehe is a government initiated program as part of the decentralization policies adopted in 2003; the program works at the lowest administrative level in local government authorities, the Mudugudu.
At the cell level, the poorest two families are identified by mutual consent at by community members at cell meetings. The two families are then assisted by free labour to build a house and then government funds iron sheets and other finishing material.
He said this year the program was funded to the tune of 14m Euros and that his ministry had already covered half of the budget.
Musoni said along with Ubudehe, Ministry of local government had also adopted programs to assist poverty stricken Rwandans, he said; “we have built homes for poor Rwandans especially genocide survivors, by the end of 2008 we will build another 12000 homes across the country.”
Musoni however criticized the custom among Rwandans to getting to familiar with free offers from government; “in some areas where we built houses, even financially able people benefited. They simply left their old homes and came to government houses meant for vulnerable persons. In the process, they sold their lands for farming; they starved in government funded houses and caused a new problem, some others remained with two houses and rented one out.”
Musoni said by early 2008, his ministry has already funded the 15000 local government lower authorities in the country with 73710 roofing materials of which 43000 have already been supplied. There are 15000 cells in the country.
He said the government was also in advanced stages of streamlining the Fund for Genocide Survivors, the fund set up in @@@@is implemented by the ministry of Local government; “We shall start to give the money directly to students so they can spend it themselves instead of funding schools which had in some cases created stereotypes towards the beneficiaries.” He also said the national cultural troupe Itorero had trained 43000 teachers; “these teachers will be exemplary in their communities in building a future Rwanda,” said Musoni.
Musoni called upons Rwandans to register in the ongoing national identity cards exercise because the digital cards to be issued will be used in parliamentary elections on 15 September 2008.
Media practitioners urged to take academic opportunities
BY GEORGE KAGAME
The Director of the National University of Rwanda’s School of journalism Dominique Nduhura has called upon practicing Rwandan journalists to take up study opportunities in many of the country’s higher institutions of learning and enrich themselves with latest trends in the media industry.
Nduhura was on Friday closing a week training program for journalism lecturers in Rwanda, Burundi and DR Congo at Kigali’s Hotel Okapi.
The 12 member workshop had six journalism lecturers from Rwanda, three from Burundi and three from DR Congo and completed a two week program which began on 24 March to 4th April.
The training was organized by NUR’s Great Lakes Media centre was funded by the Dutch government and targets media trainers in the Great Lakes Region.
“We are committed to producing quality graduates, therefore we are targeting improving teachers’ skills by exposing them to good academic and practical elements so we improve the trade in the region,” Nduhura said.
Bosco Rushingabigwi an official with The Lakes Media Centre said the training program is ongoing; “the next module will begin in July this year and will be held in Netherlands, we are being taught about the latest trends in the media industry in regard to ICT,” said Rushingabigwi.
Gerard Mfuranzima a representative from Burundi said the training workshop has given him the opportunity to learn about challenges that his country faces in developing a media sector which is currently very low standard in his country.
The National University of Rwanda has lately introduced a certificate course to help unqualified journalists practicing the trade in Kigali, the classes leading to the award of certificates will eventually lead to a diploma and degree awards will be conducted from Kigali
BY GEORGE KAGAME
The Director of the National University of Rwanda’s School of journalism Dominique Nduhura has called upon practicing Rwandan journalists to take up study opportunities in many of the country’s higher institutions of learning and enrich themselves with latest trends in the media industry.
Nduhura was on Friday closing a week training program for journalism lecturers in Rwanda, Burundi and DR Congo at Kigali’s Hotel Okapi.
The 12 member workshop had six journalism lecturers from Rwanda, three from Burundi and three from DR Congo and completed a two week program which began on 24 March to 4th April.
The training was organized by NUR’s Great Lakes Media centre was funded by the Dutch government and targets media trainers in the Great Lakes Region.
“We are committed to producing quality graduates, therefore we are targeting improving teachers’ skills by exposing them to good academic and practical elements so we improve the trade in the region,” Nduhura said.
Bosco Rushingabigwi an official with The Lakes Media Centre said the training program is ongoing; “the next module will begin in July this year and will be held in Netherlands, we are being taught about the latest trends in the media industry in regard to ICT,” said Rushingabigwi.
Gerard Mfuranzima a representative from Burundi said the training workshop has given him the opportunity to learn about challenges that his country faces in developing a media sector which is currently very low standard in his country.
The National University of Rwanda has lately introduced a certificate course to help unqualified journalists practicing the trade in Kigali, the classes leading to the award of certificates will eventually lead to a diploma and degree awards will be conducted from Kigali
Media practitioners urged to take academic opportunities
BY GEORGE KAGAME
The Director of the National University of Rwanda’s School of journalism Dominique Nduhura has called upon practicing Rwandan journalists to take up study opportunities in many of the country’s higher institutions of learning and enrich themselves with latest trends in the media industry.
Nduhura was on Friday closing a week training program for journalism lecturers in Rwanda, Burundi and DR Congo at Kigali’s Hotel Okapi.
The 12 member workshop had six journalism lecturers from Rwanda, three from Burundi and three from DR Congo and completed a two week program which began on 24 March to 4th April.
The training was organized by NUR’s Great Lakes Media centre was funded by the Dutch government and targets media trainers in the Great Lakes Region.
“We are committed to producing quality graduates, therefore we are targeting improving teachers’ skills by exposing them to good academic and practical elements so we improve the trade in the region,” Nduhura said.
Bosco Rushingabigwi an official with The Lakes Media Centre said the training program is ongoing; “the next module will begin in July this year and will be held in Netherlands, we are being taught about the latest trends in the media industry in regard to ICT,” said Rushingabigwi.
Gerard Mfuranzima a representative from Burundi said the training workshop has given him the opportunity to learn about challenges that his country faces in developing a media sector which is currently very low standard in his country.
The National University of Rwanda has lately introduced a certificate course to help unqualified journalists practicing the trade in Kigali, the classes leading to the award of certificates will eventually lead to a diploma and degree awards will be conducted from Kigali
BY GEORGE KAGAME
The Director of the National University of Rwanda’s School of journalism Dominique Nduhura has called upon practicing Rwandan journalists to take up study opportunities in many of the country’s higher institutions of learning and enrich themselves with latest trends in the media industry.
Nduhura was on Friday closing a week training program for journalism lecturers in Rwanda, Burundi and DR Congo at Kigali’s Hotel Okapi.
The 12 member workshop had six journalism lecturers from Rwanda, three from Burundi and three from DR Congo and completed a two week program which began on 24 March to 4th April.
The training was organized by NUR’s Great Lakes Media centre was funded by the Dutch government and targets media trainers in the Great Lakes Region.
“We are committed to producing quality graduates, therefore we are targeting improving teachers’ skills by exposing them to good academic and practical elements so we improve the trade in the region,” Nduhura said.
Bosco Rushingabigwi an official with The Lakes Media Centre said the training program is ongoing; “the next module will begin in July this year and will be held in Netherlands, we are being taught about the latest trends in the media industry in regard to ICT,” said Rushingabigwi.
Gerard Mfuranzima a representative from Burundi said the training workshop has given him the opportunity to learn about challenges that his country faces in developing a media sector which is currently very low standard in his country.
The National University of Rwanda has lately introduced a certificate course to help unqualified journalists practicing the trade in Kigali, the classes leading to the award of certificates will eventually lead to a diploma and degree awards will be conducted from Kigali
local government Rwanda
Local government inspection manual to be launched soon
BY GEORGE KAGAME
The ministry of local government is set to launch an inspection manual where all administrative units in the country will be guided on how to deliver speedy services to their people.
The manual comes in place to compliment the now famous Imihigo performance contracts between local leaders and the President Paul Kagame. The contracts are part of the Rwandan government determination to practice good governance principles.
Speaking to The New Times Protais Musoni the minister of Local Government said; “the local government manual will consist a database in which all tax payers in the country are registered and the firms that collect these taxes,” Musoni said the information would be used by policy makers in the public, and private sectors as well as community based organisations. He added that with clear statistics the manual hopes to achieve a good working environment between tax payers and collectors.
The Ministry of Local government supervises the Imihigo targets otherwise known as performance contracts. Musoni said the manual will emphasize pro poor measures to reduce poverty in the country; “we have set out social protection measures to help absolutely poor people in the country. We aim to help vulnerable people in communities that have genocide survivors, child headed families disabled persons and people living with HIV/aids.” The local government inspection manual comes into force in this year.
The local government inspection manual is a Minaloc document that is approved by cabinet and it spells out clear guidelines for local government official to implement in regard to what needs to be done in order to achieve fast service delivery in the country.
Local government authorities have since 2006 signed performance agreements with President Paul Kagame, in the agreements the authorities set out performance targets to achieve in improving education, health, and speedy service across the country. Some district mayors like that of Muhanga district, who was voted out of office by his executive council citing failure to achieve performance, which are also enshrined in the national Vision 2020 document.
Rwanda’s commitment to Good governance, the decentralization policy adopted in 2003 has received world wide recognition for its effectiveness in getting public service closer to the people at the grassroots level of the Rwandan community.
In the decentralization reforms which began in 2003 have been lauded for improving services delivery by local government leaders to grassroots communities.
Musoni further added that his ministry intends to reduce the cost of paper work in administrative routines; he said the Minaloc was in partnership with national institutions like RITA (Rwanda Information and Technology Authority, NISR, Ministry of Infrastructure to deliver ICT across the country; “by end of 2008 all sectors (Mirenge) in the country will have ICT services in their office,” said Musoni.
BY GEORGE KAGAME
The ministry of local government is set to launch an inspection manual where all administrative units in the country will be guided on how to deliver speedy services to their people.
The manual comes in place to compliment the now famous Imihigo performance contracts between local leaders and the President Paul Kagame. The contracts are part of the Rwandan government determination to practice good governance principles.
Speaking to The New Times Protais Musoni the minister of Local Government said; “the local government manual will consist a database in which all tax payers in the country are registered and the firms that collect these taxes,” Musoni said the information would be used by policy makers in the public, and private sectors as well as community based organisations. He added that with clear statistics the manual hopes to achieve a good working environment between tax payers and collectors.
The Ministry of Local government supervises the Imihigo targets otherwise known as performance contracts. Musoni said the manual will emphasize pro poor measures to reduce poverty in the country; “we have set out social protection measures to help absolutely poor people in the country. We aim to help vulnerable people in communities that have genocide survivors, child headed families disabled persons and people living with HIV/aids.” The local government inspection manual comes into force in this year.
The local government inspection manual is a Minaloc document that is approved by cabinet and it spells out clear guidelines for local government official to implement in regard to what needs to be done in order to achieve fast service delivery in the country.
Local government authorities have since 2006 signed performance agreements with President Paul Kagame, in the agreements the authorities set out performance targets to achieve in improving education, health, and speedy service across the country. Some district mayors like that of Muhanga district, who was voted out of office by his executive council citing failure to achieve performance, which are also enshrined in the national Vision 2020 document.
Rwanda’s commitment to Good governance, the decentralization policy adopted in 2003 has received world wide recognition for its effectiveness in getting public service closer to the people at the grassroots level of the Rwandan community.
In the decentralization reforms which began in 2003 have been lauded for improving services delivery by local government leaders to grassroots communities.
Musoni further added that his ministry intends to reduce the cost of paper work in administrative routines; he said the Minaloc was in partnership with national institutions like RITA (Rwanda Information and Technology Authority, NISR, Ministry of Infrastructure to deliver ICT across the country; “by end of 2008 all sectors (Mirenge) in the country will have ICT services in their office,” said Musoni.
IRS
What happened to the IRS campaign in the fight against malaria?
BY GEORGE KAGAME
The Indoor Residual Spray campaign launched late last year as a very effective measure in controlling malaria in Rwanda was stopped on 14th February this year by the Ministry of Health. RTI Rwanda who were charged with the spraying cried foul at the intentions of the National Malaria Control Programme. GEORGE Kagame finds out what happened.
The highly publicized national indoor residual spray campaign which was launched last year in August has been described as a successful initiative among a handful that Rwanda has adopted in her drive to reduce malaria related health problems in the country.
Speaking to The New Times, Professor Michael Kramer, the director General of TRAC Plus said; “we are on top of fighting Malaria in Africa, we are model country in regard to reducing the threat of malaria to the population.”
With funding from US President George Bush Presidential Malaria Initiative; Rwanda has adopted several techniques to reduce to reduce malaria which is the leading cause of death in Rwanda. These techniques include, rolling out of insect treated mosquito nets, provision of water purifying tablets and this week will see the official launching of Coartem drugs in the private sector.
With a budget of over 100 million US dollars according to Dr Corine Karema the director general of the National Malaria Control Programme, the fight against malaria in Rwanda has been largely successful and is considered a model to other countries upstaged by the leading public health problem in developing countries malaria.
Health officials state that Malaria is the leading cause of death and illness in Rwanda.
The latest attack technique against malaria was launched last year in August. With the launching of the Indoor Residual Spraying, all the homes in the country were to be sprayed, with ICON an insecticide manufactured in the US to be sprayed on all the interior halls.
The project was highly successful when it was started in Kigali, where 159000 homes were sprayed i\with ICON, however on 14th Feb 2008, IRS was halted by the Ministry of Health and the National Malaria Control Programme.
By December 2008, the IRS campaign which was started in Kigali had posted good results, spraying implementers, donors and policymakers agreed.
Malaria related complications Professor Michael Kramer the director of TRAC PLUS says; “what was thought to be impossible in the fight against Malaria 20 or even 5 years ago has been successfully implemented in Rwanda, but by 2007, the use of health centres for malaria related illnesses had reduced in the country.” Kramer further states that at CHUK, there are no more malaria complicated cases and that in the whole country; “the distribution of mosquito bed nets and our change of malaria treatment cases has reduced ,malaria case n the country by 60 percent and its related deaths by 64 percent. This is a significant success considering that malaria was leading the cause of death in Rwanda before, currently it’s the fourth.”
However on 14th February 2008, IRS campaign was suspended by the Ministry of Health citing lack of enough preparations by all stakeholders involved in controlling malaria in the country.
RTI Rwanda the US based experts charged with implementing the task of spraying inside residential houses across the country have since taken offence at the decision to suspend the exercise. They accuse the National Malaria Control (PNILP) office for sabotaging the exercise; Dr Corine Karema the director General of PNILP says the allegations are “unprofessional and absurd”.
Kramer adds that the fight against malaria in Rwanda had registered a lot of success in a very short time and therefore we needed to reflect on our various approaches. He says the postponement of IRS was because of the need; “to address issues that developed during the first phase of the campaign, we needed to increase community sensitization, use of ICT, and train more sprayers because we were are also lacking in capacity.”
RTI officials cited that PNLIP was jealous because IRS funding was not channeled through the national malaria office; they say “the national malaria control office which is managed by the Ministry of Health did not cooperate with us (RTI), because they did not manage the money.”
Karema dismissed such allegations as baseless, she said, “RTI manages only 5US million dollars, PNILP manages 100 US million dollars, and we have partners that manage larger budgets that RTI. We cannot be jealous with RTI because of money.” She added that other malaria control organisations like Twubakane have a budget of 20 million US dollars, “all we require of our partners is to their activities aligned to our strategic plan. And besides most of that RTI money is going to the communities we cannot sabotage the funds that are in the interest of ministry of health,” Karema added.
For long malaria and is related infections have been responsible for 60 percent of deaths in the country. Development experts have stated that bottleneck to efforts in reducing poverty in the Sub Saharan African region. Today, Rwanda is the model country among developing nations that the cost of malaria can be reduced and eliminated with good approach.
Kramer said Rwanda is performing very well in fighting malaria; “we are on top of Africa in controlling malaria, we also a model country by WHO in fighting the disease. You cannot achieve that with cases sabotage in your team. I don’t have a word for such allegations.”
Kramer confirms the effectiveness of IRS, he says that the insecticide used to spray inside the homes which is branded as ICON by its American manufacturers@@@@ was tested by the World Heal Organisation and the government of Rwanda to be the best one available in fighting malaria spreading mosquitoes. Kramer adds; “this is an effective measure but we don’t want to start the program when we are not sure of its long term implications, we needed a concrete plan before spraying continued.”
A reliable source within RTI says they had trained enough Rwandans to take on the job but they were stopped from using their sprayers by PNLIP’s Karema. The source adds that the campaign was stopped abruptly even when RTI had invested a lot of money and time in preparations for the second phase; ‘we had our officials stuck in hotels for none days because Karema would not meet them to discuss why IRS was stopped,” he adds.
However the RTI officials have not been idol since the suspension of the exercise, the source says that they have been outsourced by their international office to teach other African countries how to carry on the exercise, “our managers have been taken to teach IRS spraying teams in Ghana, Mali, and Benin where RTI is also contracted to carry out spraying.
Professor Michael Kramer the director of TRAC PLUS said such allegations are an embarrassment to stakeholders involved the malaria control programme, “IRS is a large undertaking that needs a lot of logistics. The first round was quite successful but we had problems with the implementation of the second phase and we have informed our partners.”
The first round which saw 159000 homes sprayed in Kigali alone was labeled highly successful by PNILP but the second round of the IRS was postponed on 14th February 2008 a day before RTI had organized to resume spraying in Kirehe.
This was about the same time that the Rwandan rainy seasons began which would technically present problems to spraying teams and the efficiency of the spray.
Kramer says there were problems with RTI’s implementation teams; “we suggested some recommendations to the implementers of the campaign, I don’t know why they did not to what we proposed and this was about the same time that the El Niño seasons began. This was jointly agreed between us our partners including USAID.”
Kramer said a senior USAID official had recently been in Rwanda about “their concern with our decision to suspend the IRS and he agreed with our suggestions.”
The United States International Development Agency-USAID is financier of IRS and the project is part of the US president George Bush Presidential Malaria Initiative.
With the launching of PMI President Bush challenged the world to reduce the burden of malaria dramatically as a major killer of children in sub-Saharan Africa, and pledged to increase funding of malaria prevention and treatment by more than $1.2 billion over five years. The goal of this effort is reduce malaria deaths by 50 percent in each of the target countries after three years of full implementation.
USAID currently provides bilateral assistance for malaria control to Angola, Benin, Burundi, Democratic Republic of Congo, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Ghana, Guinea, Kenya, Liberia, Madagascar, Malawi, Mali, Mozambique, Nigeria, Rwanda, Senegal, Sudan, Tanzania, Uganda, and Zambia.
A total of 1.3, million Rwandans were expected to have been protected from malaria through the indoor residual spray program by end of 2008.
RTI is a US based sub contractor that has been offered the job of handling the technical issues related with spraying the insecticide in all the benefiting countries.
Spray operators use ICON, inside the walls and it remains effective for three to six months after it is applied. In 2007, the U.S. Government contributed US$4.6 million to IRS efforts in Rwanda.
Karema said arrangements were underway to have IRS spraying resuming in June; “we hope to resume spraying in June but we are not unilateral in these decisions, if all our partners in malaria control are ready the spraying will go ahead in Kirehe.”
On side effects of ICON insecticide; Karema; “this insecticide comes from the family of pyrethrums and it is recommended by WHO, it has the lowest recorded side effects and they are minor. They include, skin irritation if the body is close contact with the drug. It is also efficient for use in boarding schools, military barracks, and prisons and inside homes, because one spray benefits many people at a once.”
BY GEORGE KAGAME
The Indoor Residual Spray campaign launched late last year as a very effective measure in controlling malaria in Rwanda was stopped on 14th February this year by the Ministry of Health. RTI Rwanda who were charged with the spraying cried foul at the intentions of the National Malaria Control Programme. GEORGE Kagame finds out what happened.
The highly publicized national indoor residual spray campaign which was launched last year in August has been described as a successful initiative among a handful that Rwanda has adopted in her drive to reduce malaria related health problems in the country.
Speaking to The New Times, Professor Michael Kramer, the director General of TRAC Plus said; “we are on top of fighting Malaria in Africa, we are model country in regard to reducing the threat of malaria to the population.”
With funding from US President George Bush Presidential Malaria Initiative; Rwanda has adopted several techniques to reduce to reduce malaria which is the leading cause of death in Rwanda. These techniques include, rolling out of insect treated mosquito nets, provision of water purifying tablets and this week will see the official launching of Coartem drugs in the private sector.
With a budget of over 100 million US dollars according to Dr Corine Karema the director general of the National Malaria Control Programme, the fight against malaria in Rwanda has been largely successful and is considered a model to other countries upstaged by the leading public health problem in developing countries malaria.
Health officials state that Malaria is the leading cause of death and illness in Rwanda.
The latest attack technique against malaria was launched last year in August. With the launching of the Indoor Residual Spraying, all the homes in the country were to be sprayed, with ICON an insecticide manufactured in the US to be sprayed on all the interior halls.
The project was highly successful when it was started in Kigali, where 159000 homes were sprayed i\with ICON, however on 14th Feb 2008, IRS was halted by the Ministry of Health and the National Malaria Control Programme.
By December 2008, the IRS campaign which was started in Kigali had posted good results, spraying implementers, donors and policymakers agreed.
Malaria related complications Professor Michael Kramer the director of TRAC PLUS says; “what was thought to be impossible in the fight against Malaria 20 or even 5 years ago has been successfully implemented in Rwanda, but by 2007, the use of health centres for malaria related illnesses had reduced in the country.” Kramer further states that at CHUK, there are no more malaria complicated cases and that in the whole country; “the distribution of mosquito bed nets and our change of malaria treatment cases has reduced ,malaria case n the country by 60 percent and its related deaths by 64 percent. This is a significant success considering that malaria was leading the cause of death in Rwanda before, currently it’s the fourth.”
However on 14th February 2008, IRS campaign was suspended by the Ministry of Health citing lack of enough preparations by all stakeholders involved in controlling malaria in the country.
RTI Rwanda the US based experts charged with implementing the task of spraying inside residential houses across the country have since taken offence at the decision to suspend the exercise. They accuse the National Malaria Control (PNILP) office for sabotaging the exercise; Dr Corine Karema the director General of PNILP says the allegations are “unprofessional and absurd”.
Kramer adds that the fight against malaria in Rwanda had registered a lot of success in a very short time and therefore we needed to reflect on our various approaches. He says the postponement of IRS was because of the need; “to address issues that developed during the first phase of the campaign, we needed to increase community sensitization, use of ICT, and train more sprayers because we were are also lacking in capacity.”
RTI officials cited that PNLIP was jealous because IRS funding was not channeled through the national malaria office; they say “the national malaria control office which is managed by the Ministry of Health did not cooperate with us (RTI), because they did not manage the money.”
Karema dismissed such allegations as baseless, she said, “RTI manages only 5US million dollars, PNILP manages 100 US million dollars, and we have partners that manage larger budgets that RTI. We cannot be jealous with RTI because of money.” She added that other malaria control organisations like Twubakane have a budget of 20 million US dollars, “all we require of our partners is to their activities aligned to our strategic plan. And besides most of that RTI money is going to the communities we cannot sabotage the funds that are in the interest of ministry of health,” Karema added.
For long malaria and is related infections have been responsible for 60 percent of deaths in the country. Development experts have stated that bottleneck to efforts in reducing poverty in the Sub Saharan African region. Today, Rwanda is the model country among developing nations that the cost of malaria can be reduced and eliminated with good approach.
Kramer said Rwanda is performing very well in fighting malaria; “we are on top of Africa in controlling malaria, we also a model country by WHO in fighting the disease. You cannot achieve that with cases sabotage in your team. I don’t have a word for such allegations.”
Kramer confirms the effectiveness of IRS, he says that the insecticide used to spray inside the homes which is branded as ICON by its American manufacturers@@@@ was tested by the World Heal Organisation and the government of Rwanda to be the best one available in fighting malaria spreading mosquitoes. Kramer adds; “this is an effective measure but we don’t want to start the program when we are not sure of its long term implications, we needed a concrete plan before spraying continued.”
A reliable source within RTI says they had trained enough Rwandans to take on the job but they were stopped from using their sprayers by PNLIP’s Karema. The source adds that the campaign was stopped abruptly even when RTI had invested a lot of money and time in preparations for the second phase; ‘we had our officials stuck in hotels for none days because Karema would not meet them to discuss why IRS was stopped,” he adds.
However the RTI officials have not been idol since the suspension of the exercise, the source says that they have been outsourced by their international office to teach other African countries how to carry on the exercise, “our managers have been taken to teach IRS spraying teams in Ghana, Mali, and Benin where RTI is also contracted to carry out spraying.
Professor Michael Kramer the director of TRAC PLUS said such allegations are an embarrassment to stakeholders involved the malaria control programme, “IRS is a large undertaking that needs a lot of logistics. The first round was quite successful but we had problems with the implementation of the second phase and we have informed our partners.”
The first round which saw 159000 homes sprayed in Kigali alone was labeled highly successful by PNILP but the second round of the IRS was postponed on 14th February 2008 a day before RTI had organized to resume spraying in Kirehe.
This was about the same time that the Rwandan rainy seasons began which would technically present problems to spraying teams and the efficiency of the spray.
Kramer says there were problems with RTI’s implementation teams; “we suggested some recommendations to the implementers of the campaign, I don’t know why they did not to what we proposed and this was about the same time that the El Niño seasons began. This was jointly agreed between us our partners including USAID.”
Kramer said a senior USAID official had recently been in Rwanda about “their concern with our decision to suspend the IRS and he agreed with our suggestions.”
The United States International Development Agency-USAID is financier of IRS and the project is part of the US president George Bush Presidential Malaria Initiative.
With the launching of PMI President Bush challenged the world to reduce the burden of malaria dramatically as a major killer of children in sub-Saharan Africa, and pledged to increase funding of malaria prevention and treatment by more than $1.2 billion over five years. The goal of this effort is reduce malaria deaths by 50 percent in each of the target countries after three years of full implementation.
USAID currently provides bilateral assistance for malaria control to Angola, Benin, Burundi, Democratic Republic of Congo, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Ghana, Guinea, Kenya, Liberia, Madagascar, Malawi, Mali, Mozambique, Nigeria, Rwanda, Senegal, Sudan, Tanzania, Uganda, and Zambia.
A total of 1.3, million Rwandans were expected to have been protected from malaria through the indoor residual spray program by end of 2008.
RTI is a US based sub contractor that has been offered the job of handling the technical issues related with spraying the insecticide in all the benefiting countries.
Spray operators use ICON, inside the walls and it remains effective for three to six months after it is applied. In 2007, the U.S. Government contributed US$4.6 million to IRS efforts in Rwanda.
Karema said arrangements were underway to have IRS spraying resuming in June; “we hope to resume spraying in June but we are not unilateral in these decisions, if all our partners in malaria control are ready the spraying will go ahead in Kirehe.”
On side effects of ICON insecticide; Karema; “this insecticide comes from the family of pyrethrums and it is recommended by WHO, it has the lowest recorded side effects and they are minor. They include, skin irritation if the body is close contact with the drug. It is also efficient for use in boarding schools, military barracks, and prisons and inside homes, because one spray benefits many people at a once.”
Odinga Raila
I knew there was something about Odinga that I never liked. But with the following statement I think I now know why;
Each minister is to be paid about $16,000 a month and entitled to two officials cars and five security personnel - and in the case of Mr Odinga, 45 security personnel.
Mr Odinga has said that he knows people would have preferred a leaner cabinet, but it was a price that had to be paid to balance everyone's interests.
.....
A price of over 1200 lives and in a country where some people live below the value of one US dollar a day!
What is the difference between Odinga and proverbial colonial governor?, that one id black and the other WAS white?
Fuck Politicians
Each minister is to be paid about $16,000 a month and entitled to two officials cars and five security personnel - and in the case of Mr Odinga, 45 security personnel.
Mr Odinga has said that he knows people would have preferred a leaner cabinet, but it was a price that had to be paid to balance everyone's interests.
.....
A price of over 1200 lives and in a country where some people live below the value of one US dollar a day!
What is the difference between Odinga and proverbial colonial governor?, that one id black and the other WAS white?
Fuck Politicians
Gacaca and Arusha
bstract: The epicentre of post-genocide Rwandan society and politics has been the need for reconciliation to assuage ethnic tensions and end a culture of impunity. The International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) has yet to meet its goal of reconciliation in Rwanda: The failure of the tribunal goes beyond its institutional shortcomings and can be attributed the norms of international criminal law that render it an inappropriate response to criminalizing mass violence. The Gacaca courts were resurrected in Rwanda as an indigenous form of restorative justice. The principles and process of these courts hope to mitigate the failures of “Arusha Justice” at the tribunal and seeks to punish or reintegrate over one hundred thousands genocide suspects. Its restorative foundations require that suspects will be tried and judged by neighbours in their community. However, the revelation that Gacaca is a reconciliatory justice does not preclude its potential for inciting ethnic tension it if purports to serve as an instrument of Tutsi power. The state-imposed approach of command justice has politicised the identity of the participants in Gacaca -- perpetrators remain Hutus and victims and survivors remain Tutsis. Additionally, the refusal of the Kagame government to allow for the prosecution of RPF crimes to be tried in Gacaca courts empowers the notion that Tutsi survival is preconditioned by Tutsi power and impunity. If Gacaca fails to end the perceptions of impunity in post-genocide Rwanda, it will come at a much higher cost for reconciliation than the failure of the ICTR. The relevance of justice after genocide speaks to the appropriateness of retributive and restorative models of justice in a post-genocide society such as Rwanda. Additionally, the model of justice must be reconciled to the nature of a political regime that imposes unity under an ethnocratic minority.
INTRODUCTION
It is frequently said that reconciliation in post-genocide societies is not possible without justice. In Rwanda, the form that justice should take is at the heart of the debate. The 1994 genocide in Rwanda left over 800,000 dead and over 130,000 in prison upon suspicion of committing acts of genocide. The recent tenth anniversary of the genocide entailed memorials, burials, and the reawakening of violent memories. Amidst this atmosphere there was also political rhetoric filled with blame, guilt, and disappointment. Despite the obvious desire to bring justice to the victims and hold the perpetrators accountable, impunity persists in Rwanda.
The international community responded to the atrocities with a call for accountability and an end to impunity. This resulted in the creation of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR). This tribunal, plagued by institutional shortcomings, has been an insufficient and inappropriate response to criminalizing mass violence. Rwandans have tired of its inefficiencies and feel its principles are at odds with their views of justice and reconciliation.
With the judicial infrastructure destroyed and most prosecutors and judges killed in 1994, there was no chance that the national court system could prosecute all those responsible for such crimes. Even now, after years of rebuilding, the national courts cannot handle such a high volume of cases. In response to the ineffectiveness of the tribunal and the incapacity of its national court system, the Rwandan government has revived a traditional form of dispute resolution called Gacaca (ga-CHA-cha). 10,000 Gacaca courts will try genocide suspects in the communities where their crimes were committed. They will be tried and judged by their neighbours.
Gacaca represents a model of restorative justice because it focuses on the healing of victims and perpetrators, confessions, plea-bargains, and reintegration.[1] It is these characteristics that render it a radically different approach from the retributive and punitive nature of justice at the ICTR and national courts. Great hope has been placed in the ability of restorative justice to contribute to reconciliation at the individual and community level. Gacaca justice is meant to be as intimate as the genocide itself: If it is unable to provide for reconciliation it will come at a high cost for Rwandan society. This paper will argue that the characterisation of the Rwandan government as a “Tutsi ethnocracy” and its heavy-handed approach to reconciliation has tainted Gacaca as a form of victor’s justice. If the Gacaca process is threatened by an approximation of the same politicised ethnic identities that fuelled the violence then reconciliation will not be attainable.
The next section will proceed with a brief description of post-genocide justice issues and the importance of understanding victim-oppressor group relationships. This will be followed by a review of the two types of justice models available to criminalise mass violence: retributive and restorative justice. It is necessary to describe the ideal features of these models prior to analysing their institutional manifestations (i.e. the ICTR as retributive and Gacaca as restorative). Section three will then turn to Gacaca itself and address two issue areas. First, what is Gacaca in terms of its traditions, processes, and goals? Second, as a form of restorative justice, how might Gacaca’s norms and processes contribute to reconciliation in ways which retributive models, i.e. the ICTR, have not? Section four will address the controversial political and societal dangers associated with Gacaca. These dangers, particularly in the form of renewed ethnic violence, are discussed on several levels. First, what elements in the process of Gacaca trials violate human rights and victim’s expectations of reconciliation? Second, how is this form of justice connected to the criticism that the government represents a Tutsi ethnocracy? Finally, is this ultimately a form of victor’s justice disguised by its indigenous and restorative nature?
POST GENOCIDE RWANDA OPTIONS FOR JUSTICE AND RECONCILIATION
Rwandan Context
The genocide produced staggering statistics that indicate the enormity of reconciliation in terms of scope and process. The genocide created an initial population displacement of 1.7 million Hutus fearing reprisals, left 400,000 widows, 500,000 orphans, and 130,000 imprisoned upon suspicion of committing acts of genocide.[2] The country’s fledgling judicial system was all but destroyed in terms of personnel and infrastructure by the spring of 1994. The judiciary was a primary target during the genocide that eliminated all but 244 out of a previous 750 judges, with many of the survivors fleeing into exile.[3] As late as 1997 the courts in Rwanda were left to function with only fifty lawyers and a notable absence of infrastructure and administration, specifically Courts of Appeal, in all twelve counties.[4] The 130,000 prisoners arrested under suspicion of committing crimes during the genocide, required a capable and extensive national court system. As noted by the Rwandan Ambassador to the United States, Richard Sezibera, “even though we had asked the international community to set up a tribunal for Rwanda, we knew that, given the way international bodies work, the bulk of the cases would have to be handled by our own legal system.”[5]
Human rights and justice have not enjoyed a viable working relationship in Rwanda. As of August 2003, the Ministry of Justice stated that 6,500 of the 130,000 imprisoned had been sentenced for genocide cases in the national courts, 700 received the death sentence and twenty-three were executed.[6] The incremental rate of prosecution in the Rwandan national courts has meant that prisoners languish in overcrowded prisons suffering from malnutrition and disease, serving sentences without due process.[7] The Rwandan government has responded to the accusations of human rights violations based upon prison conditions by stating they have no alternative and to continue to follow the “western trial process would take far too long and therefore be a violation of human rights in itself.”[8]
At the heart of this controversy is determining what form of justice is best suited for dealing with these tens of thousands of cases and providing for reconciliation. It is the nature of post-genocide society in Rwanda, not the form of violence that occurred, that indicates what type of justice is most appropriate. Mark Drumbl has devised a typology of post-genocide societies that describes the relationship between victim and oppressor groups and prescribes an appropriate model of justice. He delineates three types of societies: homogenous, dualist, and pluralist. [9] Drumbl argues that Rwanda constitutes a dualist post-genocide society.
Drumbl’s description of a dualist post-genocide society lists a specific set of characteristics. First and foremost, his type of society requires that both groups, victims and oppressors, coexist within the nation-state and territorial division is not possible. Secondary characteristics include: control of political and economic power (and the groups’ numerical significance), level of participation in the violence, and geographic distribution of the two groups. Rwanda complies with the characteristics of a dualist post-genocide society on all counts. In Rwanda, Tutsis and Hutus both coexist within an overpopulated nation-state where territorial division between the two groups would be impossible. Additionally, both groups live in the same communities and participate in civil society, sharing culture with social status. In terms of power sharing, the Tutsis who wield the most political power despite being numerically weaker at only ten to fifteen per cent of the population. With regard to the level of participation, documented testimonies indicate that a large number of civilians participated and a large number of victims and survivors remain.[10]
A post-genocide society of this nature raises two prominent concerns with regards to justice and reconciliation. First, a dualist post-genocide society is in danger of genocide occurring again if institutions and civil society are incapable of ensuring that both groups can coexist within the same social and political space. Second, institutions that seek to reconcile the two groups must be conscious of the risk that punishing past violence may incite more violence.[11] Thus, moderation in punitive measures may be necessary. In dualist post-genocide societies, restorative justice is required over retributive justice in order to moderate punitive measures and maximise the possibility of reintegration through an emphasis on shame over guilt.[12] The remainder of this section will compare the normative components of retributive and restorative models of justice and relate them to the Rwandan context.
Retributive vs. Restorative Justice
The concept of justice, specifically in the context of post-conflict reconciliation, can have many descriptive qualifiers that denote different rules, procedures, and goals. Additionally, justice paradigms assign different parties to the roles of architects and beneficiaries of the judicial process. For both the ICTR and Gacaca courts, the architects of each system have accorded different notions of legitimacy to the process through various institutional and normative components.
The architects of the ICTR, the international community, have constructed a tribunal that follows the rules and procedures of retributive justice in seeking an end a culture of impunity. Retributive justice is punitive, focussing on the defendant and the adversarial relationship between defence and prosecution. Success can be measured by the fairness of the process and the equality and proportionality of the sanctions.[13] Furthermore, crimes are addressed by legal professionals who are not connected to the parties in dispute. This type of justice has been deemed by the international community to be an appropriate response to the Rwandan genocide. It follows as part of an atrocities regime that converges international criminal law with crimes against humanity and human rights abuses. Despite its mandate to promote reconciliation, it is designed to satisfy its architects by exacting punitive measures against the elite criminals of the genocide. Thus, the politicised nature of retributive justice has allowed for the architects of the ICTR to also be its only beneficiaries, leaving Rwandans essentially unaffected by its process.
Restorative justice is the alternative to retributive justice. The goals of restorative justice are to repair the harm, heal the victims and community, and restore offenders to a healthy relationship with the community. Success is measured by the value of the offender to his/her community after reintegration and the level of emotional and financial restitution for the victim(s).[14] The process requires that crimes should be addressed in and by the community. Furthermore, restorative justice can be differentiated from retributive justice with its focus on reintegrative shaming over guilt and its impact on reconciliation: “Reintegrative shaming means that expressions of community disapproval, which may range from mild rebuke to degradation ceremonies are followed by gestures of reacceptance into the community of law-abiding citizens.”[15] It will be shown in the following section that the norms underlying Gacaca closely resemble those of restorative justice.
THE GACACA COURTS: THE MANIPULATION OF INDIGENOUS JUSTICE FOR RECONCILIATION
What is Gacaca?
The revival of a traditional model of dispute resolution to deal with the over one hundred thousand genocide suspects awaiting trial has received a mixed response both inside and outside of Rwanda. Gacaca, meaning “judgement on the grass,” offers a pragmatic and community based solution. It is expected to relieve the congestion in Rwandan prisons that are the source of many human rights violations. Additionally, the reintegration of suspects back into the community and the truth-telling nature of confessions offer hope for reconciliation. Gacaca’s positive attributes lie in its characterisation as a model of restorative justice.
In its precolonial form, Gacaca was used to moderate disputes concerning land use and rights, cattle, marriage, inheritance rights, loans, damage to properties caused by one of the parties or animals, and petty theft.[16] Gacaca was intended to “sanction the violation of rules that are shared by the community, with the sole objective of reconciliation” through restoring harmony and social order and reintegration of the person who was the source of the disorder.[17] Additionally, compensation could be awarded to the injured party. Gacaca occurred at a meeting that was convened by elders whenever there was a dispute between individuals or families in a community and was settled only with the agreement of all parties.[18] The Government of Rwanda does not pretend that Gacaca today strictly adheres to its indigenous form. Officials argue that its reinvention takes the form that it does to better accommodate for the severity of the crimes in its mandate and the volume of cases to be tried.
Rwandan Organic Law was conceived in 1996 to facilitate the prosecution of those suspected of committing acts of genocide. It applies both to the Gacaca and national courts. There are two notable aspects of the Organic Law. Gacaca has a much longer temporal jurisdiction than the international tribunal, covering crimes committed between 1990 and 1994. Second, the Organic Law categorises criminal responsibility through four levels indicating the seriousness of the crime committed and the appropriate punishment.
Category one suspects are the most serious and will be prosecuted by the national courts of Rwanda who have the authority to hand out punishments of life imprisonment or the death penalty upon conviction. This category targets the planners, organisers, “notorious” murderers, perpetrators in a position of religious and political authority, and those who committed acts of “sexual torture or violence.”[19] The Gacaca courts hold jurisdiction over categories two to four of the Organic Law for which the punishments vary but do not include the death penalty. Category two to four suspects range from the perpetrators, conspirators, or accomplices of intentional homicide, to those who destroyed property.[20] Punishments range from life in prison to community service and reintegration.[21] Plea bargaining is a controversial but key element of the process that allows for the possibility of immediate release if a suspect confesses. Prosecution in Gacaca is communally participatory in that a general assembly acts as the prosecutor to identify perpetrators and victims as well as present evidence.
The approximately 10,000 Gacaca courts are far behind in their scheduled trials. Many courts remain in the pre-trial stages. These stages began with the elections of judges that were completed in 2001. The trials have to be preceded by a seven step pre-trial process that includes identifying suspects and witnesses and establishing the appropriate categories for offences.[22] In June 2002, twelve pilot trials began and were followed several months later by 760 courts beginning their pre-trial phases.[23] The rest of the 10,000 courts have not begun their work and as of June 2003, less than half of the pilot trials had finished their pre-trial phases.[24]
Gacaca: Mitigating the Failures of the ICTR through Restorative Justice
To juxtapose the principles and procedures of Gacaca with the ICTR is to contextualise the normative differences between the two types of courts. The norms underlying Gacaca reflect both cultural traditions and the characteristics of restorative justice. The benefits that Gacaca will bring to the reconciliation process are tied to the integrity of its indigeneity and its adherence to a restorative model of justice. The following table compares the normative differences between the two types of justice.
TABLE 1. NORMS OF JUSTICE
Institutional Component
Restorative Justice Norms:
Gacaca
Retributive Justice Norms:
ICTR
Goal
Justice for reconciliation; ending impunity is secondary
Justice to end impunity; reconciliation is secondary
Venue
Local Communities
Isolation from participants to avoid victor’s justice
Due Process
Primacy of truth telling
Primacy of rules and procedures; defendant’s rights
Establishing Guilt
Confession; Community Consensus
Judgement
Burden of Proof
Testimony/Accusations
Testimony; investigation
Compensation for Victims
Depends on nature of crime
None
Judiciary
Respected community members
Independent
Punishment
Imprisonment; reintegration
Imprisonment
Process
Trials; negotiations
Trials
Local prisoner support for the ICTR is very low. The U.S.-based Internews Network has shown what are known as the “Arusha Tapes” in Rwandan prisons to give genocide suspects a view of what has been happening in the ICTR trials and to encourage debate on Rwanda’s own judicial process.[25] Ironically, while the tapes are meant to generate support for the tribunal, they have had opposite effect on local prisoners. The reactions to the tapes have revealed concerns among the prisoners over the absence of the death penalty at the tribunal and the luxurious living conditions of the tribunal prisoners as compared to those of the Rwandan prisons. The issue of the death penalty is significant because it is used by the national courts in Rwanda but not at the international tribunal. One prisoner replied, “why is it that the tribunal gives them more lenient sentences than us, they are the ones who told us to kill on radio . . . how come we are paying the higher price?”[26]
The objections and shock registered by the prisoners to the Arusha Tapes were reflected in their support of the Gacaca process as an appropriate and fair judicial process. Awareness and acceptance of the community courts is evidenced by the high and increasing number of confessions among the prisoners, numbering in the tens of thousands, and a willingness to provide testimony and evidence against other genocide suspects.[27] It is acknowledged that some of these prisoners have opted for confession on the basis of a personal cost-benefit analysis whereby they have their sentences reduced and can possibly indict someone with whom they hold a grudge. However, the personal intentions of suspects aside, confessions still provide a function of restorative justice that is the discovery of truth over punishment.
The Gacaca courts are expected to have a community impact when Rwandans become participants as judge and jury of genocide suspects. A consensus is needed among the participants to either find someone guilty or allow them to be reintegrated into their society. Unlike those convicted by the ICTR, many Gacaca defendants will most likely be reintegrated into the community immediately or within several years if the plea bargain system is widely used. Therefore, it is necessary for the community to make the decision on the desirability of an individual’s integration.
In contrast, those on trial at the ICTR were isolated from community life in Rwanda during the genocide. Many of the prisoners held in Rwanda saw for the first time in the Arusha Tapes what the orchestrators and leaders of the genocide looked like.[28] As the tribunal is isolated from Rwanda in terms of its geography and impact, and its defendants equally distanced by their former elite status in the genocide, the indictment of the genocide leaders at the ICTR will have very little effect on reconciliation within Rwandan communities. In line with the restorative paradigm, Gacaca is presented as a shift in power in the community, a sort of “populist response to a populist genocide.”[29]
There are additional benefits that Gacaca brings to the reconciliation process that differentiates it from the norms of retributive and international justice. One such benefit is the recognition of a specific demographic, namely women, in the justice and reconciliation process. The demographics of post-genocide Rwanda illustrate that the socio-economic responsibilities of women increased dramatically. As the heads of tens of thousands of households and the producers of up to 70% of the country’s agricultural output, they are overwhelmingly responsible for the livelihood and stability of their community.[30]
Rwandan women have a lot invested in the success of the Gacaca courts for several reasons. The importance of women and the crimes committed against them is recognised in the Organic Law where crimes of sexual violence fall under Category One (most serious) and will be tried in the national courts. Some women will be attending the trials of their husbands or family members who have been accused and to whom they have been bringing food and supplies to while in prison. Others want to accuse those on trial of crimes committed against them or their families and to tell their stories as witnesses and victims. Additionally, some women will receive compensation from the government or from reintegrated perpetrators if their property had been destroyed or the breadwinners in their family were killed by the accused.
Most importantly, Rwandan women seek to hear the confessions of the accused and an admission of guilt. As reconciliation for most Rwandans represents an act between two people where one confesses and the other forgives, the confession is a necessary first step for reintegration.[31] Rwandan women will be expected to live in the same communities as those who assaulted them or killed their family members. As judges and witnesses, women will have the responsibility of determining punishment or the desirability of the suspect’s reintegration. In sum, the community basis of Gacaca allows women to participate on various levels, recognises their role in the reconciliation process, and brings their identity beyond that of victimisation.
Further to the restorative justice paradigm, decisions rendered by Gacaca courts will allocate compensation to victims. The Rwandan government set up a genocide survivor’s fund in 2003 that accounts for eight per cent of the annual budget and assists destitute survivors.[32] The Organic Law provides for the commutation of half of the sentences through Gacaca to community services. Therefore, the Gacaca courts will assist in supplementing the compensation fund from the property constructed and services provided by prisoners.[33] To further aid reconciliation, the compensation fund hopes to ease the burden of female and child-headed households.
In sum, the Gacaca courts subscribe to the restorative justice paradigm most diligently in the elements that liken it to its indigenous form. The emphasis on reconciliation and reintegration over punishment is evident in the confession and plea bargain procedures stipulated by the Organic Law. Furthermore, the array of participants is widely extended in Gacaca to include all those affected by the crimes and also those who will be affected by the suspect’s return to the community. These characteristics of restorative justice are also indicative of the purpose of Gacaca in its traditional form. Gacaca carries enormous potential for reconciliation if it remains true to the principles of restorative justice.
VICTOR’S JUSTICE: THE TUTSI ETHNOCRACY AND THE POLITICISATION OF GACACA
There is tremendous hope attached to Gacaca for its potential contribution to a reconciled and reintegrated Rwandan society. However, there exist many elements in the principles and practices of the Gacaca trials that render it a dangerous venue which refuels ethnic tensions. The processes of Gacaca are highly politicised and the participants racialised by assumptions of guilt based on ethnic group membership. The nature of ‘modernised’ Gacaca is most dramatically a departure from its indigenous form as it represents a state-imposed model of justice that threatens the community based principles of restorative justice. The modernised elements of Gacaca serve the interests of a government that can be characterised as a Tutsi ethnocracy. The end result could be the imposition of a victor’s justice that is wrought with the ethnic tensions of pre-genocide Rwanda. This section will first address the many critiques made about Gacaca in terms of its process and legitimacy. The primary focus of this section is to explore Gacaca’s link to an increasingly “Tutsified” state through notions of victor’s justice and ethnic identities.
The International Community’s Response: The Human Rights and International Law Critique
Much of the criticism directed towards Gacaca, voiced primarily by international and local human rights groups, centers on the practical limitations to Gacaca. Specifically, these critiques point to the incapacity of the government and the community to safeguard against the consequences of community trials. Their strongest critique arises from Organic Law’s lack of adherence to the principles of international criminal law.[34] The architects of Gacaca have had to respond to critiques of human rights violations, capacity problems, and legal procedures. The government of Rwanda has sensibly pointed out that many of these problems are unavoidable if Gacaca is to serve its pragmatic purpose of putting tens of thousands of prisoners on trial. Additionally, they rightly point out that it is those very principles of Gacaca which do not adhere to standards of international criminal law that make justice and reconciliation possible.
One of the primary concerns centers on the lack of services available to deal with the level of psychological and social trauma that witnesses or survivors will experience with the trials. Tensions could ensue from trials that will “reawaken memories of the genocide and its profound consequences and to renew feelings of grief, pain, fear, rage, outrage and hatred among the people of Rwanda.”[35] While many in Rwanda seek peace in their communities, it is undeniable that there is a desire for vengeance and retribution among many who will attend the Gacaca trials. Human rights organizations have warned of the violations of due process, the lack of training for judges, and the inconsistencies expected with judgments after plea bargains. The absence of these safeguards is thought to increase the chance of “vigilante’s justice” as the flipside to community empowerment.[36]
Many who support the Gacaca process have questioned the relevance of international criminal law in a post-genocide society where there are so many perpetrators and victims. Peter Uvin has identified many of the practical and theoretical falsehoods of applying international legal standards to the Gacaca courts. His first response is one of practicality: “criminal law standards were not designed to deal with the challenges faced when massive numbers of people -- victims and perpetrators of crimes -- have to live together again, side by side, in extremely poor and divided countries.”[37] A corollary to this, and what the Rwandan government argues as well, is that the current national court system (as designed to adhere to all the aforementioned standards of international law) has failed both in terms of upholding civil and political rights and guaranteeing due process. As the government has repeated time and again, prosecuting genocide suspects through the national court system is a violation of human rights in itself. The number of prisoners is not comparable to the capacity of the courts to provide proper counsel and expeditious trials.
Finally, Uvin identifies the cultural inappropriateness of the international law critiques of the Gacaca courts: “the practice of Gacaca may well be able to respect key conditions of fair trial and due process, but in an original, locally appropriate form, and not in the usual western-style form.”[38] Formalized notions of witnesses, prosecutors and defendants were not relevant to Gacaca in its indigenous form. The interplay of argument and counter-argument between community members and the emphasis on consensus does not adhere to the individualisation of roles in western trial processes. Uvin concludes with the importance of indigeneity when evaluating “modernised” Gacaca and the important role of the international community in ensuring that the “spirit of Gacaca” is respected.[39]
Victor’s Justice
The dangers of victor’s justice are very much dependent on the context of the conflict and composition of the post-conflict society. In Rwanda, both parties to the conflict remain in the same communities together after the genocide. The perpetrators of the genocide are individualised in the legal process and the proceedings extend far beyond the “elite” criminals. Individuals who are victims must coexist in the same social and political space with those who were perpetrators. Therefore, the tension between these two groups becomes much more acute and localised if punitive actions are perceived as victor’s justice.
The events preceding the Rwandan genocide have been characterised by the Rwandan government as a “civil war” and so too are the events that followed it. According to the government and the international community, it is the RPF that ended the civil war, of which genocide was a component, and thus their claim to political power is legitimate. Mahmood Mamdani notes the consequences of an RPF victory are that they must constantly be on guard as to protect the spoils of war, to protect their hold on power and ensure their survival: “the price of victor’s justice is either a continuing civil war or a permanent divorce.”[40] Despite the government’s insistence that ethnic divisions are a thing of the past, there is nothing to indicate that local communities accept this policy as anything more than naïve political rhetoric.
The Tutsi Ethnocracy
Since coming to power after the genocide under the continuing leadership of Paul Kagame, the RPF has been characterised inside and outside of Rwanda as a militarised ethnocracy that propagates the survival of Tutsis over the well-being of Hutus. Characterising the government in such a way runs contrary to the appearance that Rwanda has successfully democratised its political institutions and is committed to the idea of “Rwandaness”. The Rwandan government has been adhering to the pre-genocide Arusha accords that require an equitable division of power and representation. Indeed, a number of Hutus have retained key positions in the cabinet, which is evenly divided between ethnic groups. Additionally, “issues of good governance and the development and implementation of checks and balances have emerged as part of government policy.”[41] The government is confident enough in its democratisation process that it recently volunteered to have its policies reviewed by the NEPAD’s African Peer-Review Mechanism under the auspices of the African Union.[42] This issue remains controversial. While many laud Rwanda’s progress and see it as a star among democratising states in Africa, both academics and human rights groups have argued for higher standards.
Despite significant progress in terms of power sharing, it shall be argued that the government has been masking the increasing Tutsification of state institutions. This accusation has been articulated both by academics and human rights groups with regard to the democratisation process, including faulty elections, restrictions on civil society, and the militarisation of the state. The presence of Hutus in positions of power is nominal. Rene Lemarchand wrote in 1997 that the “appointed parliament is a fig leaf . . . the civil service, the judiciary, the economy, the schools and university are all under Tutsi control.”[43]
Many who cite the importance of eliminating ethnicity in Rwanda also caution that this policy has been used as a political tool to legitimate Tutsi authority. Filip Reyntjens argued in a recent publication that the “political discourse opposed to ethnism attempts to hide the domination of society by the self-proclaimed representatives of the Tutsi community.”[44] Furthermore, he argues that the Tutsification of the state began in 1996 and encompasses the Supreme Court judges, mayors, “university students and teachers, and almost the entire army command structure and intelligence services.”[45] As will be shown in the forthcoming examples, the Tutsification of the state in Rwanda is well under way and is evident in a variety of policies ranging from democratisation to social agendas and militarisation. Each of these issue areas will be dealt with in turn, drawing on controversial examples of domestic and regional policies.
Tutsi power and survival are inextricably linked in the government’s political agenda. Citing complaints from moderate Hutu parties opposed to the RPF, Mamdani states that “not only are the structures of power in Rwanda being Tutsified, civil organization-- from the media to nongovernmental organizations -- are being cleansed of any but a nominal Hutu presence.”[46] He identifies the founding ideology of the government as the “conviction that Tutsi power is the precondition for Tutsi survival.”[47] Mark Drumbl cites examples of limits on civil society, state influence on church leaders, resistance to power sharing, and an aggressive foreign policy as indicative of the “authoritarian behaviour of the RPF.”[48] He argues that as Tutsis can only count on Tutsis for support, ethnicity is still a significant factor in Rwanda. Given this, he warns that “among the factors most closely related to the (re)occurrence of genocide is a “ruling elite whose ethnicity is politically significant but not representative of the entire population.”[49]
The notion that Tutsi Power preconditions Tutsi survival has been aptly illustrated by the elimination of Hutu-based opposition parties and expansion of Tutsi influence in politics. As the military victor after the genocide, the RPF was the dominant political party. However, there was initially a great deal of power sharing with the MDR (Mouvement democratique republicain) and two smaller groups.[50] While there was a great deal of parity among posts allocated to the RPF and MDR after the genocide, over the years the RPF has gradually appropriated more posts for itself.
The recent elections have highlighted the dangers associated with transitions to democracy in a post-genocide society. Many see that continuing stability is unlikely as opposition parties have been banned, leadership control is being tightened, and restrictions are still in place for party and civil organizations. According to the Arusha Accords, elections were supposed to be held after five years in 1999. The Rwandan government pushed that date back four years to 2003 in the interests of “unity.” There has been little pressure from the international community to make democratisation a big part of the development agenda. According to Peter Uvin, the concept of democracy and multiparty elections in a post-genocide society can be unrealistic and inappropriate if attempted too early and thus democracy has been traded for stability.[51]
In an attempt to forge unity under the RPF agenda, the Rwandan government has expanded its rhetoric into a social and educational context. The Rwandan government and its National Unity and Reconciliation Committee has organized what are unpopularly known as “solidarity camps,” now known by their Kinyarwandan name ingando. These camps are meant to assist in the reintegration process for refugees and those released from prison (who were incarcerated after the genocide), educate youth, and provide military training. While there has been little reported on these camps, they have been characterised as a negative combination of militarisation and one-sided political propaganda in favour of the RPF. Human Rights Watch has reported that the “camps were meant to promote ideas of nationalism, to erase the ethnically charged lessons taught by the previous government, and to spur loyalty to the RPF.”[52]
The correlation of Tutsi power and Tutsi survival has also been evident in the militarisation of the state, as “even the most cursory glance at the pattern of reconstruction in Rwanda cannot fail to notice the characteristic traits of a military ethnocracy.”[53] Elizabeth Sidiropoulos argues, “despite the strong trend toward democratisation and openness in civil matters, the military establishment continues to be regarded as critical for the survival and protection of the state and is not subject to the same levels of accountability.”[54] However, the militarisation of the RPF has served the interests of the Tutsi ethnocracy by justifying the elimination of Hutus in the name of unity. It is widely recognized that the Kagame government has been supporting militias in the DRC under the pretext of capturing Hutus who are said to be propagating violent reprisals against Tutsis in the DRC and Rwanda. However, his military rationale is inconsistent with the domestic political rhetoric of unity through a “Rwandaness” that is blind to ethnicity. The RPF’s justifications reveal the “extent to which its notions of political obligation and political community are ethnic, transnational, and diasporic. Can the RPF act both as the protector of all Tutsi everywhere and as the national government of the Rwandan people?”[55]
Gacaca and Recontexualising Identity
One of the dangers that a Tutsi ethnocracy poses to the success of Gacaca is that it assigns collective guilt to Hutus. Identity in post-genocide Rwanda is not as ethnically dichotomised as it was prior to the genocide. Identities have now been recontextualised to conform to the unity and reconciliation agenda that attempts to take the emphasis off of ethnicity. However, the result has been that Rwandan identities, as tied to their participatory role in the genocide, still correlate to ethnicity. Identity can be recontextualised in post-genocide Rwanda in a way that divides the population into categories of victims, victors, survivors and perpetrators.[56] However, these categorisations may not be mutually exclusive. Despite the government’s agenda of forging a single political identity of Rwandans, the identity of participants in the justice process deploys a dangerous link to ethnicity.
According to Mamdani, victims refer to both Tutsis and Hutus that were targeted in the genocide. However, the living victims refer almost solely to “Tutsi genocide survivors” and “old case load refugees” who were primarily Tutsis that had fled after the 1959 Hutu Revolution. The term survivor refers to all Tutsis who remained in the country during the genocide and survived. The assumption is that all Hutus who had opposed the Habyarimana regime were killed earlier and thus those Hutus who were in Rwanda during the genocide and were not killed were never targeted. A corollary to identifying victims and survivors is the need to identify some as perpetrators: The danger is that all Hutus are deemed perpetrators as their survival of the genocide seemingly assumes their participation or complicity.
To identify the victors of the genocide requires putting Rwandan history in the context of civil war in which the victors are undoubtedly the RPF. While the Rwandan government denies the continuing distinction of Rwandans as either Hutus or Tutsi, its use of national and local judicial processes to label participants as survivors and perpetrators further entrenches their ethnic identities. The Organic Law and its division of labour between the national court system and Gacaca purport to promote reconciliation through a survivor’s justice. Thus, survivors are by way of their Tutsi identity also the victors. This, combined with the state-imposed Organic Law, leaves Rwandan justice as nothing more than victor’s justice and closely associates justice with Tutsi power. Mamdani presents the dilemma to which the process of Gacaca must respond and from which the international community must determine its level of support: “the form of justice flows from the form of power. If victor’s justice requires victor’s power, then is not victor’s justice simply revenge masquerading as justice?”[57]
For Gacaca to overcome these limited and ethnically charged characterisations, the notion of a survivor and perpetrator must include both Hutus and Tutsis. Additionally, the idea that Hutu survival during the genocide depended solely on their participation or complicity serves to generalise blame among Hutus and explains their characterisation as perpetrators. Characterisations that only Tutsis can be survivors and only Hutus can be perpetrators ignore many of the individual specific circumstances of the genocide. Many Hutus survived, not because they were in agreement with extremists, but because they chose to hide, or simply keep from publicly denouncing the crimes. Furthermore, many Hutus were targeted and survived such as those who were mistaken as Tutsis, those who survived their injuries, and women who suffered from sexual violence.
This critique of the ascribed ethnic identities of participants in Gacaca also speaks to the importance of individualising the circumstances surrounding the crimes committed. One of the components of reconstructing a new narrative on the genocide is the attempt to individualise mass violence. While this finds utility in assessing the individual motivations and incentives to commit the crimes, the actual act of committing the crime is much more difficult to individualise. One of the benefits ascribed to Gacaca is that its trials prosecute individuals and differentiate between members of a group and thus individualizes responsibility. This deters the accusing member from exacting undifferentiated vengeance on Hutu individuals based on their ethnic membership.[58] However, the criminal acts of genocide perpetrators in Rwanda are unlike those of conventional homicide cases in that individualizing guilt is very difficult. There are circumstances in which a family was killed by a group of the militia, each of whom maybe have contributed in one way or another to the death of an individual. This need for consensus in Gacaca and the difficulty of individualizing responsibility will further entrench the ethnic identity of perpetrators as Hutus and the victims/survivors as Tutsis.
The Government of Rwanda’s agenda of reducing identity to that of “Rwandan” has only been successful in the public sphere of government rhetoric and bureaucracy. The social conditions of post-genocide Rwanda remain constructed in terms of ethnic identity and relegation to the private sphere renders them more destructive. As a Hutu woman stated, “If you ban these terms….they take a different form that’s even more exclusive.” Rwandans now ask each other ‘is he one of us?’.[59] After the expected release of many prisoners into the community as a result of their confessions in the Gacaca pre-trials, it would be unreasonable to expect a sudden social reconstruction of ethnic identity that no longer adheres to the exclusivity of Tutsi and Hutu. The government’s agenda of eliminating ethnicity is a fallacy in Rwandan society. This fallacy will be exacerbated by the prosecution of genocide suspects based on their group membership and by the release of such suspects into the community.
INTRODUCTION
It is frequently said that reconciliation in post-genocide societies is not possible without justice. In Rwanda, the form that justice should take is at the heart of the debate. The 1994 genocide in Rwanda left over 800,000 dead and over 130,000 in prison upon suspicion of committing acts of genocide. The recent tenth anniversary of the genocide entailed memorials, burials, and the reawakening of violent memories. Amidst this atmosphere there was also political rhetoric filled with blame, guilt, and disappointment. Despite the obvious desire to bring justice to the victims and hold the perpetrators accountable, impunity persists in Rwanda.
The international community responded to the atrocities with a call for accountability and an end to impunity. This resulted in the creation of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR). This tribunal, plagued by institutional shortcomings, has been an insufficient and inappropriate response to criminalizing mass violence. Rwandans have tired of its inefficiencies and feel its principles are at odds with their views of justice and reconciliation.
With the judicial infrastructure destroyed and most prosecutors and judges killed in 1994, there was no chance that the national court system could prosecute all those responsible for such crimes. Even now, after years of rebuilding, the national courts cannot handle such a high volume of cases. In response to the ineffectiveness of the tribunal and the incapacity of its national court system, the Rwandan government has revived a traditional form of dispute resolution called Gacaca (ga-CHA-cha). 10,000 Gacaca courts will try genocide suspects in the communities where their crimes were committed. They will be tried and judged by their neighbours.
Gacaca represents a model of restorative justice because it focuses on the healing of victims and perpetrators, confessions, plea-bargains, and reintegration.[1] It is these characteristics that render it a radically different approach from the retributive and punitive nature of justice at the ICTR and national courts. Great hope has been placed in the ability of restorative justice to contribute to reconciliation at the individual and community level. Gacaca justice is meant to be as intimate as the genocide itself: If it is unable to provide for reconciliation it will come at a high cost for Rwandan society. This paper will argue that the characterisation of the Rwandan government as a “Tutsi ethnocracy” and its heavy-handed approach to reconciliation has tainted Gacaca as a form of victor’s justice. If the Gacaca process is threatened by an approximation of the same politicised ethnic identities that fuelled the violence then reconciliation will not be attainable.
The next section will proceed with a brief description of post-genocide justice issues and the importance of understanding victim-oppressor group relationships. This will be followed by a review of the two types of justice models available to criminalise mass violence: retributive and restorative justice. It is necessary to describe the ideal features of these models prior to analysing their institutional manifestations (i.e. the ICTR as retributive and Gacaca as restorative). Section three will then turn to Gacaca itself and address two issue areas. First, what is Gacaca in terms of its traditions, processes, and goals? Second, as a form of restorative justice, how might Gacaca’s norms and processes contribute to reconciliation in ways which retributive models, i.e. the ICTR, have not? Section four will address the controversial political and societal dangers associated with Gacaca. These dangers, particularly in the form of renewed ethnic violence, are discussed on several levels. First, what elements in the process of Gacaca trials violate human rights and victim’s expectations of reconciliation? Second, how is this form of justice connected to the criticism that the government represents a Tutsi ethnocracy? Finally, is this ultimately a form of victor’s justice disguised by its indigenous and restorative nature?
POST GENOCIDE RWANDA OPTIONS FOR JUSTICE AND RECONCILIATION
Rwandan Context
The genocide produced staggering statistics that indicate the enormity of reconciliation in terms of scope and process. The genocide created an initial population displacement of 1.7 million Hutus fearing reprisals, left 400,000 widows, 500,000 orphans, and 130,000 imprisoned upon suspicion of committing acts of genocide.[2] The country’s fledgling judicial system was all but destroyed in terms of personnel and infrastructure by the spring of 1994. The judiciary was a primary target during the genocide that eliminated all but 244 out of a previous 750 judges, with many of the survivors fleeing into exile.[3] As late as 1997 the courts in Rwanda were left to function with only fifty lawyers and a notable absence of infrastructure and administration, specifically Courts of Appeal, in all twelve counties.[4] The 130,000 prisoners arrested under suspicion of committing crimes during the genocide, required a capable and extensive national court system. As noted by the Rwandan Ambassador to the United States, Richard Sezibera, “even though we had asked the international community to set up a tribunal for Rwanda, we knew that, given the way international bodies work, the bulk of the cases would have to be handled by our own legal system.”[5]
Human rights and justice have not enjoyed a viable working relationship in Rwanda. As of August 2003, the Ministry of Justice stated that 6,500 of the 130,000 imprisoned had been sentenced for genocide cases in the national courts, 700 received the death sentence and twenty-three were executed.[6] The incremental rate of prosecution in the Rwandan national courts has meant that prisoners languish in overcrowded prisons suffering from malnutrition and disease, serving sentences without due process.[7] The Rwandan government has responded to the accusations of human rights violations based upon prison conditions by stating they have no alternative and to continue to follow the “western trial process would take far too long and therefore be a violation of human rights in itself.”[8]
At the heart of this controversy is determining what form of justice is best suited for dealing with these tens of thousands of cases and providing for reconciliation. It is the nature of post-genocide society in Rwanda, not the form of violence that occurred, that indicates what type of justice is most appropriate. Mark Drumbl has devised a typology of post-genocide societies that describes the relationship between victim and oppressor groups and prescribes an appropriate model of justice. He delineates three types of societies: homogenous, dualist, and pluralist. [9] Drumbl argues that Rwanda constitutes a dualist post-genocide society.
Drumbl’s description of a dualist post-genocide society lists a specific set of characteristics. First and foremost, his type of society requires that both groups, victims and oppressors, coexist within the nation-state and territorial division is not possible. Secondary characteristics include: control of political and economic power (and the groups’ numerical significance), level of participation in the violence, and geographic distribution of the two groups. Rwanda complies with the characteristics of a dualist post-genocide society on all counts. In Rwanda, Tutsis and Hutus both coexist within an overpopulated nation-state where territorial division between the two groups would be impossible. Additionally, both groups live in the same communities and participate in civil society, sharing culture with social status. In terms of power sharing, the Tutsis who wield the most political power despite being numerically weaker at only ten to fifteen per cent of the population. With regard to the level of participation, documented testimonies indicate that a large number of civilians participated and a large number of victims and survivors remain.[10]
A post-genocide society of this nature raises two prominent concerns with regards to justice and reconciliation. First, a dualist post-genocide society is in danger of genocide occurring again if institutions and civil society are incapable of ensuring that both groups can coexist within the same social and political space. Second, institutions that seek to reconcile the two groups must be conscious of the risk that punishing past violence may incite more violence.[11] Thus, moderation in punitive measures may be necessary. In dualist post-genocide societies, restorative justice is required over retributive justice in order to moderate punitive measures and maximise the possibility of reintegration through an emphasis on shame over guilt.[12] The remainder of this section will compare the normative components of retributive and restorative models of justice and relate them to the Rwandan context.
Retributive vs. Restorative Justice
The concept of justice, specifically in the context of post-conflict reconciliation, can have many descriptive qualifiers that denote different rules, procedures, and goals. Additionally, justice paradigms assign different parties to the roles of architects and beneficiaries of the judicial process. For both the ICTR and Gacaca courts, the architects of each system have accorded different notions of legitimacy to the process through various institutional and normative components.
The architects of the ICTR, the international community, have constructed a tribunal that follows the rules and procedures of retributive justice in seeking an end a culture of impunity. Retributive justice is punitive, focussing on the defendant and the adversarial relationship between defence and prosecution. Success can be measured by the fairness of the process and the equality and proportionality of the sanctions.[13] Furthermore, crimes are addressed by legal professionals who are not connected to the parties in dispute. This type of justice has been deemed by the international community to be an appropriate response to the Rwandan genocide. It follows as part of an atrocities regime that converges international criminal law with crimes against humanity and human rights abuses. Despite its mandate to promote reconciliation, it is designed to satisfy its architects by exacting punitive measures against the elite criminals of the genocide. Thus, the politicised nature of retributive justice has allowed for the architects of the ICTR to also be its only beneficiaries, leaving Rwandans essentially unaffected by its process.
Restorative justice is the alternative to retributive justice. The goals of restorative justice are to repair the harm, heal the victims and community, and restore offenders to a healthy relationship with the community. Success is measured by the value of the offender to his/her community after reintegration and the level of emotional and financial restitution for the victim(s).[14] The process requires that crimes should be addressed in and by the community. Furthermore, restorative justice can be differentiated from retributive justice with its focus on reintegrative shaming over guilt and its impact on reconciliation: “Reintegrative shaming means that expressions of community disapproval, which may range from mild rebuke to degradation ceremonies are followed by gestures of reacceptance into the community of law-abiding citizens.”[15] It will be shown in the following section that the norms underlying Gacaca closely resemble those of restorative justice.
THE GACACA COURTS: THE MANIPULATION OF INDIGENOUS JUSTICE FOR RECONCILIATION
What is Gacaca?
The revival of a traditional model of dispute resolution to deal with the over one hundred thousand genocide suspects awaiting trial has received a mixed response both inside and outside of Rwanda. Gacaca, meaning “judgement on the grass,” offers a pragmatic and community based solution. It is expected to relieve the congestion in Rwandan prisons that are the source of many human rights violations. Additionally, the reintegration of suspects back into the community and the truth-telling nature of confessions offer hope for reconciliation. Gacaca’s positive attributes lie in its characterisation as a model of restorative justice.
In its precolonial form, Gacaca was used to moderate disputes concerning land use and rights, cattle, marriage, inheritance rights, loans, damage to properties caused by one of the parties or animals, and petty theft.[16] Gacaca was intended to “sanction the violation of rules that are shared by the community, with the sole objective of reconciliation” through restoring harmony and social order and reintegration of the person who was the source of the disorder.[17] Additionally, compensation could be awarded to the injured party. Gacaca occurred at a meeting that was convened by elders whenever there was a dispute between individuals or families in a community and was settled only with the agreement of all parties.[18] The Government of Rwanda does not pretend that Gacaca today strictly adheres to its indigenous form. Officials argue that its reinvention takes the form that it does to better accommodate for the severity of the crimes in its mandate and the volume of cases to be tried.
Rwandan Organic Law was conceived in 1996 to facilitate the prosecution of those suspected of committing acts of genocide. It applies both to the Gacaca and national courts. There are two notable aspects of the Organic Law. Gacaca has a much longer temporal jurisdiction than the international tribunal, covering crimes committed between 1990 and 1994. Second, the Organic Law categorises criminal responsibility through four levels indicating the seriousness of the crime committed and the appropriate punishment.
Category one suspects are the most serious and will be prosecuted by the national courts of Rwanda who have the authority to hand out punishments of life imprisonment or the death penalty upon conviction. This category targets the planners, organisers, “notorious” murderers, perpetrators in a position of religious and political authority, and those who committed acts of “sexual torture or violence.”[19] The Gacaca courts hold jurisdiction over categories two to four of the Organic Law for which the punishments vary but do not include the death penalty. Category two to four suspects range from the perpetrators, conspirators, or accomplices of intentional homicide, to those who destroyed property.[20] Punishments range from life in prison to community service and reintegration.[21] Plea bargaining is a controversial but key element of the process that allows for the possibility of immediate release if a suspect confesses. Prosecution in Gacaca is communally participatory in that a general assembly acts as the prosecutor to identify perpetrators and victims as well as present evidence.
The approximately 10,000 Gacaca courts are far behind in their scheduled trials. Many courts remain in the pre-trial stages. These stages began with the elections of judges that were completed in 2001. The trials have to be preceded by a seven step pre-trial process that includes identifying suspects and witnesses and establishing the appropriate categories for offences.[22] In June 2002, twelve pilot trials began and were followed several months later by 760 courts beginning their pre-trial phases.[23] The rest of the 10,000 courts have not begun their work and as of June 2003, less than half of the pilot trials had finished their pre-trial phases.[24]
Gacaca: Mitigating the Failures of the ICTR through Restorative Justice
To juxtapose the principles and procedures of Gacaca with the ICTR is to contextualise the normative differences between the two types of courts. The norms underlying Gacaca reflect both cultural traditions and the characteristics of restorative justice. The benefits that Gacaca will bring to the reconciliation process are tied to the integrity of its indigeneity and its adherence to a restorative model of justice. The following table compares the normative differences between the two types of justice.
TABLE 1. NORMS OF JUSTICE
Institutional Component
Restorative Justice Norms:
Gacaca
Retributive Justice Norms:
ICTR
Goal
Justice for reconciliation; ending impunity is secondary
Justice to end impunity; reconciliation is secondary
Venue
Local Communities
Isolation from participants to avoid victor’s justice
Due Process
Primacy of truth telling
Primacy of rules and procedures; defendant’s rights
Establishing Guilt
Confession; Community Consensus
Judgement
Burden of Proof
Testimony/Accusations
Testimony; investigation
Compensation for Victims
Depends on nature of crime
None
Judiciary
Respected community members
Independent
Punishment
Imprisonment; reintegration
Imprisonment
Process
Trials; negotiations
Trials
Local prisoner support for the ICTR is very low. The U.S.-based Internews Network has shown what are known as the “Arusha Tapes” in Rwandan prisons to give genocide suspects a view of what has been happening in the ICTR trials and to encourage debate on Rwanda’s own judicial process.[25] Ironically, while the tapes are meant to generate support for the tribunal, they have had opposite effect on local prisoners. The reactions to the tapes have revealed concerns among the prisoners over the absence of the death penalty at the tribunal and the luxurious living conditions of the tribunal prisoners as compared to those of the Rwandan prisons. The issue of the death penalty is significant because it is used by the national courts in Rwanda but not at the international tribunal. One prisoner replied, “why is it that the tribunal gives them more lenient sentences than us, they are the ones who told us to kill on radio . . . how come we are paying the higher price?”[26]
The objections and shock registered by the prisoners to the Arusha Tapes were reflected in their support of the Gacaca process as an appropriate and fair judicial process. Awareness and acceptance of the community courts is evidenced by the high and increasing number of confessions among the prisoners, numbering in the tens of thousands, and a willingness to provide testimony and evidence against other genocide suspects.[27] It is acknowledged that some of these prisoners have opted for confession on the basis of a personal cost-benefit analysis whereby they have their sentences reduced and can possibly indict someone with whom they hold a grudge. However, the personal intentions of suspects aside, confessions still provide a function of restorative justice that is the discovery of truth over punishment.
The Gacaca courts are expected to have a community impact when Rwandans become participants as judge and jury of genocide suspects. A consensus is needed among the participants to either find someone guilty or allow them to be reintegrated into their society. Unlike those convicted by the ICTR, many Gacaca defendants will most likely be reintegrated into the community immediately or within several years if the plea bargain system is widely used. Therefore, it is necessary for the community to make the decision on the desirability of an individual’s integration.
In contrast, those on trial at the ICTR were isolated from community life in Rwanda during the genocide. Many of the prisoners held in Rwanda saw for the first time in the Arusha Tapes what the orchestrators and leaders of the genocide looked like.[28] As the tribunal is isolated from Rwanda in terms of its geography and impact, and its defendants equally distanced by their former elite status in the genocide, the indictment of the genocide leaders at the ICTR will have very little effect on reconciliation within Rwandan communities. In line with the restorative paradigm, Gacaca is presented as a shift in power in the community, a sort of “populist response to a populist genocide.”[29]
There are additional benefits that Gacaca brings to the reconciliation process that differentiates it from the norms of retributive and international justice. One such benefit is the recognition of a specific demographic, namely women, in the justice and reconciliation process. The demographics of post-genocide Rwanda illustrate that the socio-economic responsibilities of women increased dramatically. As the heads of tens of thousands of households and the producers of up to 70% of the country’s agricultural output, they are overwhelmingly responsible for the livelihood and stability of their community.[30]
Rwandan women have a lot invested in the success of the Gacaca courts for several reasons. The importance of women and the crimes committed against them is recognised in the Organic Law where crimes of sexual violence fall under Category One (most serious) and will be tried in the national courts. Some women will be attending the trials of their husbands or family members who have been accused and to whom they have been bringing food and supplies to while in prison. Others want to accuse those on trial of crimes committed against them or their families and to tell their stories as witnesses and victims. Additionally, some women will receive compensation from the government or from reintegrated perpetrators if their property had been destroyed or the breadwinners in their family were killed by the accused.
Most importantly, Rwandan women seek to hear the confessions of the accused and an admission of guilt. As reconciliation for most Rwandans represents an act between two people where one confesses and the other forgives, the confession is a necessary first step for reintegration.[31] Rwandan women will be expected to live in the same communities as those who assaulted them or killed their family members. As judges and witnesses, women will have the responsibility of determining punishment or the desirability of the suspect’s reintegration. In sum, the community basis of Gacaca allows women to participate on various levels, recognises their role in the reconciliation process, and brings their identity beyond that of victimisation.
Further to the restorative justice paradigm, decisions rendered by Gacaca courts will allocate compensation to victims. The Rwandan government set up a genocide survivor’s fund in 2003 that accounts for eight per cent of the annual budget and assists destitute survivors.[32] The Organic Law provides for the commutation of half of the sentences through Gacaca to community services. Therefore, the Gacaca courts will assist in supplementing the compensation fund from the property constructed and services provided by prisoners.[33] To further aid reconciliation, the compensation fund hopes to ease the burden of female and child-headed households.
In sum, the Gacaca courts subscribe to the restorative justice paradigm most diligently in the elements that liken it to its indigenous form. The emphasis on reconciliation and reintegration over punishment is evident in the confession and plea bargain procedures stipulated by the Organic Law. Furthermore, the array of participants is widely extended in Gacaca to include all those affected by the crimes and also those who will be affected by the suspect’s return to the community. These characteristics of restorative justice are also indicative of the purpose of Gacaca in its traditional form. Gacaca carries enormous potential for reconciliation if it remains true to the principles of restorative justice.
VICTOR’S JUSTICE: THE TUTSI ETHNOCRACY AND THE POLITICISATION OF GACACA
There is tremendous hope attached to Gacaca for its potential contribution to a reconciled and reintegrated Rwandan society. However, there exist many elements in the principles and practices of the Gacaca trials that render it a dangerous venue which refuels ethnic tensions. The processes of Gacaca are highly politicised and the participants racialised by assumptions of guilt based on ethnic group membership. The nature of ‘modernised’ Gacaca is most dramatically a departure from its indigenous form as it represents a state-imposed model of justice that threatens the community based principles of restorative justice. The modernised elements of Gacaca serve the interests of a government that can be characterised as a Tutsi ethnocracy. The end result could be the imposition of a victor’s justice that is wrought with the ethnic tensions of pre-genocide Rwanda. This section will first address the many critiques made about Gacaca in terms of its process and legitimacy. The primary focus of this section is to explore Gacaca’s link to an increasingly “Tutsified” state through notions of victor’s justice and ethnic identities.
The International Community’s Response: The Human Rights and International Law Critique
Much of the criticism directed towards Gacaca, voiced primarily by international and local human rights groups, centers on the practical limitations to Gacaca. Specifically, these critiques point to the incapacity of the government and the community to safeguard against the consequences of community trials. Their strongest critique arises from Organic Law’s lack of adherence to the principles of international criminal law.[34] The architects of Gacaca have had to respond to critiques of human rights violations, capacity problems, and legal procedures. The government of Rwanda has sensibly pointed out that many of these problems are unavoidable if Gacaca is to serve its pragmatic purpose of putting tens of thousands of prisoners on trial. Additionally, they rightly point out that it is those very principles of Gacaca which do not adhere to standards of international criminal law that make justice and reconciliation possible.
One of the primary concerns centers on the lack of services available to deal with the level of psychological and social trauma that witnesses or survivors will experience with the trials. Tensions could ensue from trials that will “reawaken memories of the genocide and its profound consequences and to renew feelings of grief, pain, fear, rage, outrage and hatred among the people of Rwanda.”[35] While many in Rwanda seek peace in their communities, it is undeniable that there is a desire for vengeance and retribution among many who will attend the Gacaca trials. Human rights organizations have warned of the violations of due process, the lack of training for judges, and the inconsistencies expected with judgments after plea bargains. The absence of these safeguards is thought to increase the chance of “vigilante’s justice” as the flipside to community empowerment.[36]
Many who support the Gacaca process have questioned the relevance of international criminal law in a post-genocide society where there are so many perpetrators and victims. Peter Uvin has identified many of the practical and theoretical falsehoods of applying international legal standards to the Gacaca courts. His first response is one of practicality: “criminal law standards were not designed to deal with the challenges faced when massive numbers of people -- victims and perpetrators of crimes -- have to live together again, side by side, in extremely poor and divided countries.”[37] A corollary to this, and what the Rwandan government argues as well, is that the current national court system (as designed to adhere to all the aforementioned standards of international law) has failed both in terms of upholding civil and political rights and guaranteeing due process. As the government has repeated time and again, prosecuting genocide suspects through the national court system is a violation of human rights in itself. The number of prisoners is not comparable to the capacity of the courts to provide proper counsel and expeditious trials.
Finally, Uvin identifies the cultural inappropriateness of the international law critiques of the Gacaca courts: “the practice of Gacaca may well be able to respect key conditions of fair trial and due process, but in an original, locally appropriate form, and not in the usual western-style form.”[38] Formalized notions of witnesses, prosecutors and defendants were not relevant to Gacaca in its indigenous form. The interplay of argument and counter-argument between community members and the emphasis on consensus does not adhere to the individualisation of roles in western trial processes. Uvin concludes with the importance of indigeneity when evaluating “modernised” Gacaca and the important role of the international community in ensuring that the “spirit of Gacaca” is respected.[39]
Victor’s Justice
The dangers of victor’s justice are very much dependent on the context of the conflict and composition of the post-conflict society. In Rwanda, both parties to the conflict remain in the same communities together after the genocide. The perpetrators of the genocide are individualised in the legal process and the proceedings extend far beyond the “elite” criminals. Individuals who are victims must coexist in the same social and political space with those who were perpetrators. Therefore, the tension between these two groups becomes much more acute and localised if punitive actions are perceived as victor’s justice.
The events preceding the Rwandan genocide have been characterised by the Rwandan government as a “civil war” and so too are the events that followed it. According to the government and the international community, it is the RPF that ended the civil war, of which genocide was a component, and thus their claim to political power is legitimate. Mahmood Mamdani notes the consequences of an RPF victory are that they must constantly be on guard as to protect the spoils of war, to protect their hold on power and ensure their survival: “the price of victor’s justice is either a continuing civil war or a permanent divorce.”[40] Despite the government’s insistence that ethnic divisions are a thing of the past, there is nothing to indicate that local communities accept this policy as anything more than naïve political rhetoric.
The Tutsi Ethnocracy
Since coming to power after the genocide under the continuing leadership of Paul Kagame, the RPF has been characterised inside and outside of Rwanda as a militarised ethnocracy that propagates the survival of Tutsis over the well-being of Hutus. Characterising the government in such a way runs contrary to the appearance that Rwanda has successfully democratised its political institutions and is committed to the idea of “Rwandaness”. The Rwandan government has been adhering to the pre-genocide Arusha accords that require an equitable division of power and representation. Indeed, a number of Hutus have retained key positions in the cabinet, which is evenly divided between ethnic groups. Additionally, “issues of good governance and the development and implementation of checks and balances have emerged as part of government policy.”[41] The government is confident enough in its democratisation process that it recently volunteered to have its policies reviewed by the NEPAD’s African Peer-Review Mechanism under the auspices of the African Union.[42] This issue remains controversial. While many laud Rwanda’s progress and see it as a star among democratising states in Africa, both academics and human rights groups have argued for higher standards.
Despite significant progress in terms of power sharing, it shall be argued that the government has been masking the increasing Tutsification of state institutions. This accusation has been articulated both by academics and human rights groups with regard to the democratisation process, including faulty elections, restrictions on civil society, and the militarisation of the state. The presence of Hutus in positions of power is nominal. Rene Lemarchand wrote in 1997 that the “appointed parliament is a fig leaf . . . the civil service, the judiciary, the economy, the schools and university are all under Tutsi control.”[43]
Many who cite the importance of eliminating ethnicity in Rwanda also caution that this policy has been used as a political tool to legitimate Tutsi authority. Filip Reyntjens argued in a recent publication that the “political discourse opposed to ethnism attempts to hide the domination of society by the self-proclaimed representatives of the Tutsi community.”[44] Furthermore, he argues that the Tutsification of the state began in 1996 and encompasses the Supreme Court judges, mayors, “university students and teachers, and almost the entire army command structure and intelligence services.”[45] As will be shown in the forthcoming examples, the Tutsification of the state in Rwanda is well under way and is evident in a variety of policies ranging from democratisation to social agendas and militarisation. Each of these issue areas will be dealt with in turn, drawing on controversial examples of domestic and regional policies.
Tutsi power and survival are inextricably linked in the government’s political agenda. Citing complaints from moderate Hutu parties opposed to the RPF, Mamdani states that “not only are the structures of power in Rwanda being Tutsified, civil organization-- from the media to nongovernmental organizations -- are being cleansed of any but a nominal Hutu presence.”[46] He identifies the founding ideology of the government as the “conviction that Tutsi power is the precondition for Tutsi survival.”[47] Mark Drumbl cites examples of limits on civil society, state influence on church leaders, resistance to power sharing, and an aggressive foreign policy as indicative of the “authoritarian behaviour of the RPF.”[48] He argues that as Tutsis can only count on Tutsis for support, ethnicity is still a significant factor in Rwanda. Given this, he warns that “among the factors most closely related to the (re)occurrence of genocide is a “ruling elite whose ethnicity is politically significant but not representative of the entire population.”[49]
The notion that Tutsi Power preconditions Tutsi survival has been aptly illustrated by the elimination of Hutu-based opposition parties and expansion of Tutsi influence in politics. As the military victor after the genocide, the RPF was the dominant political party. However, there was initially a great deal of power sharing with the MDR (Mouvement democratique republicain) and two smaller groups.[50] While there was a great deal of parity among posts allocated to the RPF and MDR after the genocide, over the years the RPF has gradually appropriated more posts for itself.
The recent elections have highlighted the dangers associated with transitions to democracy in a post-genocide society. Many see that continuing stability is unlikely as opposition parties have been banned, leadership control is being tightened, and restrictions are still in place for party and civil organizations. According to the Arusha Accords, elections were supposed to be held after five years in 1999. The Rwandan government pushed that date back four years to 2003 in the interests of “unity.” There has been little pressure from the international community to make democratisation a big part of the development agenda. According to Peter Uvin, the concept of democracy and multiparty elections in a post-genocide society can be unrealistic and inappropriate if attempted too early and thus democracy has been traded for stability.[51]
In an attempt to forge unity under the RPF agenda, the Rwandan government has expanded its rhetoric into a social and educational context. The Rwandan government and its National Unity and Reconciliation Committee has organized what are unpopularly known as “solidarity camps,” now known by their Kinyarwandan name ingando. These camps are meant to assist in the reintegration process for refugees and those released from prison (who were incarcerated after the genocide), educate youth, and provide military training. While there has been little reported on these camps, they have been characterised as a negative combination of militarisation and one-sided political propaganda in favour of the RPF. Human Rights Watch has reported that the “camps were meant to promote ideas of nationalism, to erase the ethnically charged lessons taught by the previous government, and to spur loyalty to the RPF.”[52]
The correlation of Tutsi power and Tutsi survival has also been evident in the militarisation of the state, as “even the most cursory glance at the pattern of reconstruction in Rwanda cannot fail to notice the characteristic traits of a military ethnocracy.”[53] Elizabeth Sidiropoulos argues, “despite the strong trend toward democratisation and openness in civil matters, the military establishment continues to be regarded as critical for the survival and protection of the state and is not subject to the same levels of accountability.”[54] However, the militarisation of the RPF has served the interests of the Tutsi ethnocracy by justifying the elimination of Hutus in the name of unity. It is widely recognized that the Kagame government has been supporting militias in the DRC under the pretext of capturing Hutus who are said to be propagating violent reprisals against Tutsis in the DRC and Rwanda. However, his military rationale is inconsistent with the domestic political rhetoric of unity through a “Rwandaness” that is blind to ethnicity. The RPF’s justifications reveal the “extent to which its notions of political obligation and political community are ethnic, transnational, and diasporic. Can the RPF act both as the protector of all Tutsi everywhere and as the national government of the Rwandan people?”[55]
Gacaca and Recontexualising Identity
One of the dangers that a Tutsi ethnocracy poses to the success of Gacaca is that it assigns collective guilt to Hutus. Identity in post-genocide Rwanda is not as ethnically dichotomised as it was prior to the genocide. Identities have now been recontextualised to conform to the unity and reconciliation agenda that attempts to take the emphasis off of ethnicity. However, the result has been that Rwandan identities, as tied to their participatory role in the genocide, still correlate to ethnicity. Identity can be recontextualised in post-genocide Rwanda in a way that divides the population into categories of victims, victors, survivors and perpetrators.[56] However, these categorisations may not be mutually exclusive. Despite the government’s agenda of forging a single political identity of Rwandans, the identity of participants in the justice process deploys a dangerous link to ethnicity.
According to Mamdani, victims refer to both Tutsis and Hutus that were targeted in the genocide. However, the living victims refer almost solely to “Tutsi genocide survivors” and “old case load refugees” who were primarily Tutsis that had fled after the 1959 Hutu Revolution. The term survivor refers to all Tutsis who remained in the country during the genocide and survived. The assumption is that all Hutus who had opposed the Habyarimana regime were killed earlier and thus those Hutus who were in Rwanda during the genocide and were not killed were never targeted. A corollary to identifying victims and survivors is the need to identify some as perpetrators: The danger is that all Hutus are deemed perpetrators as their survival of the genocide seemingly assumes their participation or complicity.
To identify the victors of the genocide requires putting Rwandan history in the context of civil war in which the victors are undoubtedly the RPF. While the Rwandan government denies the continuing distinction of Rwandans as either Hutus or Tutsi, its use of national and local judicial processes to label participants as survivors and perpetrators further entrenches their ethnic identities. The Organic Law and its division of labour between the national court system and Gacaca purport to promote reconciliation through a survivor’s justice. Thus, survivors are by way of their Tutsi identity also the victors. This, combined with the state-imposed Organic Law, leaves Rwandan justice as nothing more than victor’s justice and closely associates justice with Tutsi power. Mamdani presents the dilemma to which the process of Gacaca must respond and from which the international community must determine its level of support: “the form of justice flows from the form of power. If victor’s justice requires victor’s power, then is not victor’s justice simply revenge masquerading as justice?”[57]
For Gacaca to overcome these limited and ethnically charged characterisations, the notion of a survivor and perpetrator must include both Hutus and Tutsis. Additionally, the idea that Hutu survival during the genocide depended solely on their participation or complicity serves to generalise blame among Hutus and explains their characterisation as perpetrators. Characterisations that only Tutsis can be survivors and only Hutus can be perpetrators ignore many of the individual specific circumstances of the genocide. Many Hutus survived, not because they were in agreement with extremists, but because they chose to hide, or simply keep from publicly denouncing the crimes. Furthermore, many Hutus were targeted and survived such as those who were mistaken as Tutsis, those who survived their injuries, and women who suffered from sexual violence.
This critique of the ascribed ethnic identities of participants in Gacaca also speaks to the importance of individualising the circumstances surrounding the crimes committed. One of the components of reconstructing a new narrative on the genocide is the attempt to individualise mass violence. While this finds utility in assessing the individual motivations and incentives to commit the crimes, the actual act of committing the crime is much more difficult to individualise. One of the benefits ascribed to Gacaca is that its trials prosecute individuals and differentiate between members of a group and thus individualizes responsibility. This deters the accusing member from exacting undifferentiated vengeance on Hutu individuals based on their ethnic membership.[58] However, the criminal acts of genocide perpetrators in Rwanda are unlike those of conventional homicide cases in that individualizing guilt is very difficult. There are circumstances in which a family was killed by a group of the militia, each of whom maybe have contributed in one way or another to the death of an individual. This need for consensus in Gacaca and the difficulty of individualizing responsibility will further entrench the ethnic identity of perpetrators as Hutus and the victims/survivors as Tutsis.
The Government of Rwanda’s agenda of reducing identity to that of “Rwandan” has only been successful in the public sphere of government rhetoric and bureaucracy. The social conditions of post-genocide Rwanda remain constructed in terms of ethnic identity and relegation to the private sphere renders them more destructive. As a Hutu woman stated, “If you ban these terms….they take a different form that’s even more exclusive.” Rwandans now ask each other ‘is he one of us?’.[59] After the expected release of many prisoners into the community as a result of their confessions in the Gacaca pre-trials, it would be unreasonable to expect a sudden social reconstruction of ethnic identity that no longer adheres to the exclusivity of Tutsi and Hutu. The government’s agenda of eliminating ethnicity is a fallacy in Rwandan society. This fallacy will be exacerbated by the prosecution of genocide suspects based on their group membership and by the release of such suspects into the community.
NAS
osong=Thugz Mansion (N.Y.)&artist=Nas">Play this song
[Intro: Nas]
I want you to close your eyes
And vision the most beautiful place in the world
If you in the hood on the ghetto street corner
Come on this journey
The best journey
Thugz Mansion
Acres of land and swimming pools and all that
Check it out
[Verson One: Nas]
I'm capable of anything, my imagination can give me wings
To fly like Ddoves over the streets watchin' many things
Kids walkin' home from school on drug blocks, missionaries
Pass out papers that read: Love God
I see faces, cases, judges, juries, masons, lawyers and cops
I watch because every thugs face is my mirror
But this was one in particular
This kid he was the vintage stick em up pro
16 years old, did his jail sentence, nowhere to go
Every mornin calls his comrad to come and get him to smoke
He insane, already gone mad
Blames himself for his setbacks
Dangerous street corners where his sets at
Sling from dust to dawn, detectives act like they maniacs
Chasin' him, his ass was flarin'
Smokin' like a chimney, on REMY, of course he not carin'
He need a place to go to keep his mind expandin'
I give him a helpin' hand and, bring him out to Thugz Mansion
[Chorus: J. Phoenix]
Every corner, every city
There's a place where life's a little easy
Little Hennessy, laid back and cool
Every hour, cause it's all good
Leave all the stress from the world outside
Every wrong done will be alright
Nothin but peace, love
And street passion, every ghetto needs a Thugz Mansion
[Verse two: Tupac]
Dear momma don't cry, your baby boy's doin good
Tell the homies I'm in heaven and they ain't got hoods
Seen a show with Marvin Gaye last night, it had me shook
Drippin peppermint Schnapps, with Jackie Wilson, and Sam Cooke
Then some lady named Billie Holiday
Sang sittin there kickin it with Malcolm, 'til the day came
Little LaTasha sho' grown
Tell the lady in the liquor store that she's forgiven, so come home
Maybe in time you'll understand only God can save us
When Miles Davis cuttin lose with the band
Just think of all the people that you knew in the past
that passed on, they in heaven, found peace at last
Picture a place that they exist, together
There has to be a place better than this, in heaven
So right before I sleep, dear God, what I'm askin
Remember this face, save me a place, in Thugz Mansion
[Chorus: J. Phoenix]
Every corner, every city
There's a place where life's a little easy
Little Hennessy, laid back and cool
Every hour, cause it's all good
Leave all the stress from the world outside
Every wrong done will be alright
Nothin but peace, love
And street passion, every ghetto needs a Thugz Mansion
[Verse three: Nas]
A place where death doesn't reside, just thugs who collide
Not to start beef but spark trees, no cops rollin by
No policemen, no homicide, no chalk on the streets
No reason, for nobody's momma to cry
See I'm a good guy, I'm tryin to stick around for my daughter
But if I should die, I know all of my albums support her
This whole year's been crazy, asked the Holy Spirit to save me
Only difference from me and Ossie Davis, gray hair maybe
Cause I feel like my eyes saw too much sufferin
I'm just twenty-some-odd years, I done lost my mother
And I cried tears of joy, I know she smiles on her boy
I dream of you more, my love goes to Afeni Shakur
Cause like Ann Jones, she raised a ghetto king in a war
And just for that alone she shouldn't feel no pain no more
Cause one day we'll all be together, sippin heavnly champagne
What angels saw, with golden wings in Thugz Mansion
[Chorus: J. Phoenix]
Every corner, every city
There's a place where life's a little easy
Little Hennessy, laid back and cool
Every hour, cause it's all good
Leave all the stress from the world outside
Every wrong done will be alright
Nothin but peace, love
And street passion, every ghetto needs a Thugz Mansion
[Intro: Nas]
I want you to close your eyes
And vision the most beautiful place in the world
If you in the hood on the ghetto street corner
Come on this journey
The best journey
Thugz Mansion
Acres of land and swimming pools and all that
Check it out
[Verson One: Nas]
I'm capable of anything, my imagination can give me wings
To fly like Ddoves over the streets watchin' many things
Kids walkin' home from school on drug blocks, missionaries
Pass out papers that read: Love God
I see faces, cases, judges, juries, masons, lawyers and cops
I watch because every thugs face is my mirror
But this was one in particular
This kid he was the vintage stick em up pro
16 years old, did his jail sentence, nowhere to go
Every mornin calls his comrad to come and get him to smoke
He insane, already gone mad
Blames himself for his setbacks
Dangerous street corners where his sets at
Sling from dust to dawn, detectives act like they maniacs
Chasin' him, his ass was flarin'
Smokin' like a chimney, on REMY, of course he not carin'
He need a place to go to keep his mind expandin'
I give him a helpin' hand and, bring him out to Thugz Mansion
[Chorus: J. Phoenix]
Every corner, every city
There's a place where life's a little easy
Little Hennessy, laid back and cool
Every hour, cause it's all good
Leave all the stress from the world outside
Every wrong done will be alright
Nothin but peace, love
And street passion, every ghetto needs a Thugz Mansion
[Verse two: Tupac]
Dear momma don't cry, your baby boy's doin good
Tell the homies I'm in heaven and they ain't got hoods
Seen a show with Marvin Gaye last night, it had me shook
Drippin peppermint Schnapps, with Jackie Wilson, and Sam Cooke
Then some lady named Billie Holiday
Sang sittin there kickin it with Malcolm, 'til the day came
Little LaTasha sho' grown
Tell the lady in the liquor store that she's forgiven, so come home
Maybe in time you'll understand only God can save us
When Miles Davis cuttin lose with the band
Just think of all the people that you knew in the past
that passed on, they in heaven, found peace at last
Picture a place that they exist, together
There has to be a place better than this, in heaven
So right before I sleep, dear God, what I'm askin
Remember this face, save me a place, in Thugz Mansion
[Chorus: J. Phoenix]
Every corner, every city
There's a place where life's a little easy
Little Hennessy, laid back and cool
Every hour, cause it's all good
Leave all the stress from the world outside
Every wrong done will be alright
Nothin but peace, love
And street passion, every ghetto needs a Thugz Mansion
[Verse three: Nas]
A place where death doesn't reside, just thugs who collide
Not to start beef but spark trees, no cops rollin by
No policemen, no homicide, no chalk on the streets
No reason, for nobody's momma to cry
See I'm a good guy, I'm tryin to stick around for my daughter
But if I should die, I know all of my albums support her
This whole year's been crazy, asked the Holy Spirit to save me
Only difference from me and Ossie Davis, gray hair maybe
Cause I feel like my eyes saw too much sufferin
I'm just twenty-some-odd years, I done lost my mother
And I cried tears of joy, I know she smiles on her boy
I dream of you more, my love goes to Afeni Shakur
Cause like Ann Jones, she raised a ghetto king in a war
And just for that alone she shouldn't feel no pain no more
Cause one day we'll all be together, sippin heavnly champagne
What angels saw, with golden wings in Thugz Mansion
[Chorus: J. Phoenix]
Every corner, every city
There's a place where life's a little easy
Little Hennessy, laid back and cool
Every hour, cause it's all good
Leave all the stress from the world outside
Every wrong done will be alright
Nothin but peace, love
And street passion, every ghetto needs a Thugz Mansion
Hollywood star denounces western reluctance during 1994 Genocide
BY GEORGE KAGAME
Renowned Hollywood actress Ashley Judd has criticized western countries for not doing anything to have stopped the 1994 Rwanda Genocide.
Speaking today at Kigali Genocide Memorial Judd who is the country to assess the activities of health and social marketing firm Population Services International- PSI she said; “Some countries like the US just looked on while others like France are implicated in the Genocide, yet they have not come out to apologize to the victims.”
Judd added that while the Genocide was happening in Rwanda, it was given very little coverage in the US media; “while the genocide was happening here, I never heard much about in the US,” she said that she got to know much about the genocide through the movie Hotel Rwanda.
Judd said Verhofstadt did a good thing to have apologised to Rwandans on behalf of Belgium,” she that was a good example for Europe.
Former Belgium+ Prime Minister Guy Verhofstadt's made a public apology to Rwandans that died in the genocide about Belgium’s failure to help the country in its time of need.
In the visitors book Judd remarked thanked the Rwandan government for setting up a profound and clear memorial, she added that; “I will do my part to ensure such a tragedy never happens.” she added that walking inside the memorial, she almost fainted twice; “the rooms are filled with grief.”
She also applauded the measures that the government has undertaken to educate Rwandan people towards peace, unity and reconciliation.
Judd has appeared in Holly blockbusters like Someone like you, Just one of those things, High Crimes and Twisted. She also sits on the PSI board which is responsible for the distribution of condoms and other health related products like water purifying tablets like Ea Sur.
Ashley Judd is also a Global Ambassador for YouthAIDS to explore more explore innovative and effective strategies YouthAIDS/PSI employs to address the transmission of HIV.
YouthAids funds Centre Dushishoze which provides young people with a friendly and confidential environment where they can receive life-saving health peer education, products and services.
In a related development, Honore Gatera the head guide at the memorial said that recent grenade attacks which killed one police man at the gate have not affected the activities at the memorial during this mourning period; “people have been ordinarily, we have received over 10000 visitors at the centre this month and we have also carried out formal burial ceremonies for over 200 victims of the 1994 Genocide.”
BY GEORGE KAGAME
Renowned Hollywood actress Ashley Judd has criticized western countries for not doing anything to have stopped the 1994 Rwanda Genocide.
Speaking today at Kigali Genocide Memorial Judd who is the country to assess the activities of health and social marketing firm Population Services International- PSI she said; “Some countries like the US just looked on while others like France are implicated in the Genocide, yet they have not come out to apologize to the victims.”
Judd added that while the Genocide was happening in Rwanda, it was given very little coverage in the US media; “while the genocide was happening here, I never heard much about in the US,” she said that she got to know much about the genocide through the movie Hotel Rwanda.
Judd said Verhofstadt did a good thing to have apologised to Rwandans on behalf of Belgium,” she that was a good example for Europe.
Former Belgium+ Prime Minister Guy Verhofstadt's made a public apology to Rwandans that died in the genocide about Belgium’s failure to help the country in its time of need.
In the visitors book Judd remarked thanked the Rwandan government for setting up a profound and clear memorial, she added that; “I will do my part to ensure such a tragedy never happens.” she added that walking inside the memorial, she almost fainted twice; “the rooms are filled with grief.”
She also applauded the measures that the government has undertaken to educate Rwandan people towards peace, unity and reconciliation.
Judd has appeared in Holly blockbusters like Someone like you, Just one of those things, High Crimes and Twisted. She also sits on the PSI board which is responsible for the distribution of condoms and other health related products like water purifying tablets like Ea Sur.
Ashley Judd is also a Global Ambassador for YouthAIDS to explore more explore innovative and effective strategies YouthAIDS/PSI employs to address the transmission of HIV.
YouthAids funds Centre Dushishoze which provides young people with a friendly and confidential environment where they can receive life-saving health peer education, products and services.
In a related development, Honore Gatera the head guide at the memorial said that recent grenade attacks which killed one police man at the gate have not affected the activities at the memorial during this mourning period; “people have been ordinarily, we have received over 10000 visitors at the centre this month and we have also carried out formal burial ceremonies for over 200 victims of the 1994 Genocide.”
Dear Mr Muhinda,
Following the e-mail of Mr. Khalid Dahab which confirmed your registration for the training on Parliamentary Report during the 9th Session of the PAP, please find below the itinerary for your flight to Johannesburg.
1MUHINDA/GEORGEMR
KQ 474 04MAY Kigali JNB 1110 2350
KQ 463 17MAY JNB NBO 0040 0550
KQ 474 17MAY NBO KGL 0930 0955
Please let me know LATEST until Thursday 24th of April 18:00h if you will participate, so that we can issue the ticket asap.
You will have to take care of your visa for South Africa AS SOON AS possible, as the South African Embassies might be only open two days next week due to public holidays.
All participants are accommodated in the Centurion Lake Hotel. There will be a shuttle waiting for you at the airport to transfer you to the hotel. PLEASE DO NOT take any other transport (taxi or shuttle from the Pan African Parliament) to the hotel.
Further information will be send to you once we have issued the ticket.
Kind Regards,
Nicole Schaffer
Nicole Schaffer
Programme "Support to Pan African Institutions"
German Technical Cooperation (GTZ)
Hatfield Gardens Block E,
333 Grosvenor Street
P. O. Box 13732
Hatfield 0028, Pretoria
Tel.: +27 (0) 12 423 5985
Fax: +27 (0) 12 342 3646
Cell: +27 (0) 83 640 8147
Following the e-mail of Mr. Khalid Dahab which confirmed your registration for the training on Parliamentary Report during the 9th Session of the PAP, please find below the itinerary for your flight to Johannesburg.
1MUHINDA/GEORGEMR
KQ 474 04MAY Kigali JNB 1110 2350
KQ 463 17MAY JNB NBO 0040 0550
KQ 474 17MAY NBO KGL 0930 0955
Please let me know LATEST until Thursday 24th of April 18:00h if you will participate, so that we can issue the ticket asap.
You will have to take care of your visa for South Africa AS SOON AS possible, as the South African Embassies might be only open two days next week due to public holidays.
All participants are accommodated in the Centurion Lake Hotel. There will be a shuttle waiting for you at the airport to transfer you to the hotel. PLEASE DO NOT take any other transport (taxi or shuttle from the Pan African Parliament) to the hotel.
Further information will be send to you once we have issued the ticket.
Kind Regards,
Nicole Schaffer
Nicole Schaffer
Programme "Support to Pan African Institutions"
German Technical Cooperation (GTZ)
Hatfield Gardens Block E,
333 Grosvenor Street
P. O. Box 13732
Hatfield 0028, Pretoria
Tel.: +27 (0) 12 423 5985
Fax: +27 (0) 12 342 3646
Cell: +27 (0) 83 640 8147
To whom it may concern
Kigali, 25 April 2008
This is to certify that GEORGE MUHINDA is a bonafide employee of The New Times, he has been invited to participate in a training programme for African reporters in Johannesburg South Africa, the training will begin on 4th May 2008.
The purpose of this letter is to request you for any assistance where necessary
Thank you for your cooperation.
Joseph Bideri
Managing Director
The New Times Publications Sarl
Kigali, 25 April 2008
This is to certify that GEORGE MUHINDA is a bonafide employee of The New Times, he has been invited to participate in a training programme for African reporters in Johannesburg South Africa, the training will begin on 4th May 2008.
The purpose of this letter is to request you for any assistance where necessary
Thank you for your cooperation.
Joseph Bideri
Managing Director
The New Times Publications Sarl
Dear Nicole,
I find this very difficult to tell you but i also have to be honest with you, i will not be able to attend the Pan African/NEPAD training Programme, for which i was successfully nominated and i had cleared all requirements to come to Johannesburg on 4th May 2008.
This is because decided to assign me urgently to Arusha to cover the proceedings of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda and the East African Legislative assembly.
Not coming to attend your training will be the worst point in my career so far, i was very excited about Johannesburg, but i cannot do much.
If it can be a consolation, my immediate boss, Ignatius Kabagambe can nominate someone else at the newspaper.
Please take my apologies, and should there be a next training programme please contact me again
GEORGE Muhinda
I find this very difficult to tell you but i also have to be honest with you, i will not be able to attend the Pan African/NEPAD training Programme, for which i was successfully nominated and i had cleared all requirements to come to Johannesburg on 4th May 2008.
This is because decided to assign me urgently to Arusha to cover the proceedings of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda and the East African Legislative assembly.
Not coming to attend your training will be the worst point in my career so far, i was very excited about Johannesburg, but i cannot do much.
If it can be a consolation, my immediate boss, Ignatius Kabagambe can nominate someone else at the newspaper.
Please take my apologies, and should there be a next training programme please contact me again
GEORGE Muhinda
With its current population nearing the one million ark during the day and 800,000 during the night Kigali city is a hub of various activities business or otherwise that the capital city is slowly getting busier. The busier it gets the smaller the city has become, Bruno Rangira the Director of Communication at Kigali city says the city council is currently in advanced stages of constructing housing units in Btasinda estate, “Early in March, we completed the construction of 250 houses, Batsinda alone will be composed of 1000 low cost houses for urban families to move in.”
Before Rangira’s projects open and solve Kigali’s house searching problems, finding a decent low cost house in the capital city is increasingly becoming a nightmare for Kigali residents. Today, you need more than money to get a house to rent, it is possible that you will be denied a house even you meet financial rent expectations of a prospective land lord.
Finding low cost house in Kigali today has become as elusive as finding a job, even with appropriate education qualification, you can walk the streets for years, not to forget the mockery of interviews.
With the world wide increasing cost of living in agricultural produce, even land lords have caught on like one David Hitimana said; “the prices of everything has increased, food is very expensive in he markets, why do you expect a house to be cheaper? Is food more important than a house?” he asked again.
I met Jean Baptiste outside my gate one day; he was just like any other stranger. When Jean Baptiste heard I was looking for a house to rent, he came close. What followed was a month long partnership looking for a small urban condo that a low income earner like me could afford.
Immediately JP mentioned 7 prospective houses that I could occupy and he was known well with the land lords. I was convinced by the fact the JP was on top of his game, but he could only show me two houses and on both occasions we only stopped at a short distance away from the houses from where JP would go on about the beauty of the rooms inside and the neighbourhood.
Whenever I asked to meet the land lords JP told me he had to talk to them first, I tried to get the phone of one land lord, when he picked up the phone, the land lord denied having a house. That was the first day of our search, the next day I was supposed to meet JP early in the morning, he gave me his number, and the next day his phone was off the network the whole day. I kept calling till he picked up finally after 48 hours later; he took to me one land lord, Gerard. Gerard is the kind of person I would not advise anybody to meet. Apparently Gerard had a house but according to him; “it is very bad shape I don’t want to rent it out in its current state, but after one month it will be on the market.”
Gerard said he would tender his house when it was completed, he would explain the fact that he allowed me to meet me when he fully knew that I was interested in renting his house and now he is saying he does not have one.
I met another broker, who among his proclamations before he even knew my name was to ask for ‘Diporosima’ of Frw 5000. Diporosoma is a specific amount of money that a person in need of a house pays to the house broker before the prospective tenant sees the house, upon getting a house the tenant is required to pay the broker the equivalent of a half month rent charge, say if the house a broker has identified for you is Frw 200,000 per month, you pay the tenant Frw 100,0000.
"The owner of the houses left clear insructions that he only wanted foreignors (Abanyamahanga)"'
I asked the boy why the landlord preferred foreignors to Rwandans; "i dont know," the boy replied.
Check MacBook for some more info
Before Rangira’s projects open and solve Kigali’s house searching problems, finding a decent low cost house in the capital city is increasingly becoming a nightmare for Kigali residents. Today, you need more than money to get a house to rent, it is possible that you will be denied a house even you meet financial rent expectations of a prospective land lord.
Finding low cost house in Kigali today has become as elusive as finding a job, even with appropriate education qualification, you can walk the streets for years, not to forget the mockery of interviews.
With the world wide increasing cost of living in agricultural produce, even land lords have caught on like one David Hitimana said; “the prices of everything has increased, food is very expensive in he markets, why do you expect a house to be cheaper? Is food more important than a house?” he asked again.
I met Jean Baptiste outside my gate one day; he was just like any other stranger. When Jean Baptiste heard I was looking for a house to rent, he came close. What followed was a month long partnership looking for a small urban condo that a low income earner like me could afford.
Immediately JP mentioned 7 prospective houses that I could occupy and he was known well with the land lords. I was convinced by the fact the JP was on top of his game, but he could only show me two houses and on both occasions we only stopped at a short distance away from the houses from where JP would go on about the beauty of the rooms inside and the neighbourhood.
Whenever I asked to meet the land lords JP told me he had to talk to them first, I tried to get the phone of one land lord, when he picked up the phone, the land lord denied having a house. That was the first day of our search, the next day I was supposed to meet JP early in the morning, he gave me his number, and the next day his phone was off the network the whole day. I kept calling till he picked up finally after 48 hours later; he took to me one land lord, Gerard. Gerard is the kind of person I would not advise anybody to meet. Apparently Gerard had a house but according to him; “it is very bad shape I don’t want to rent it out in its current state, but after one month it will be on the market.”
Gerard said he would tender his house when it was completed, he would explain the fact that he allowed me to meet me when he fully knew that I was interested in renting his house and now he is saying he does not have one.
I met another broker, who among his proclamations before he even knew my name was to ask for ‘Diporosima’ of Frw 5000. Diporosoma is a specific amount of money that a person in need of a house pays to the house broker before the prospective tenant sees the house, upon getting a house the tenant is required to pay the broker the equivalent of a half month rent charge, say if the house a broker has identified for you is Frw 200,000 per month, you pay the tenant Frw 100,0000.
"The owner of the houses left clear insructions that he only wanted foreignors (Abanyamahanga)"'
I asked the boy why the landlord preferred foreignors to Rwandans; "i dont know," the boy replied.
Check MacBook for some more info
The spaces along Kigali’s roads continue diminishing while settlements feel the pressure
BY GEORGE KAGAME
Every morning Jean Pierre Hakizimana (not his real name) comes to the Total petrol station at the junction between the roads leading to Gikondo and Kacyiru. Hakizimana is not employed at the petrol station neither is he a traffic policemen controlling the growing vehicle congestion at the junction.
He used to own the plot of land on which Total petrol station stands brightly, open 24 hours a day. Hakizimana sold his plot to an investor who built the modern petrol station, how or where Hakizimana spent the cash he was paid his plot are not clear enough because it is hard enough having a conversation with him, what is clear though is that he now suffering from mental problems and every morning Hakizimana comes to the petrol station and spends his entire day there making antics of admiration of the station.
Hakizimana is among of many petty land lords that have been displaced by investors, yesterday’s bushes are today’s mansions as Kigali continues its modernization drive. No where is this modernization more visible that the long drive from Nyabugogo to Kanombe airport!
The drive from Nyabugogo Taxi Park to Kanombe airport is like entering Rwanda’s Vision 2020, more than that, feeling the pulse of the residents of this long stretch of beautiful buildings on both sides of the road and the evergreen lush gardens.
During evening hours, the pavements and the roads are equally busy, vehicles speeding workers to or from work on the road while Kigali residents burn some fat jogging away their sweat on the pavements.
Many of architectural mazes on this road are newly built, while some like the new American embassy are still on their fist painting coat.
This beautiful drive will even need more superlatives to describe it once construction works begin this year for the highly anticipated Kigali Convention centre opens for business sometime.
And yet the convention centre will compete for importance with the equally impressive Dubai World funded golf course hotel which has taken about 100 hectares and displaced many more people in Kacyiru.
The land on which these two structures will be erected and on which many other modern buildings sit were until recently a bunch of dilapidated housing shacks that scrupulous city land owners used to exploit urban peasants in Kigali, the end of such landlords has been Kigali city’s increasing commercial depth, which even with the soon to be launched Kigali Master plan have made land extremely expensive and changed the view of the surrounding area which until recently were empty fields overgrown with bushes and trees.
Bruno Rangira the director of communication with Kigali City council says; “Kigali city council is taking a new direction as far as the resettlement of those moved from areas that are planned to be developed. We started with a pilot project of 1000 low cost houses that are being built in Batsinda-Gasabo district. Presently the first phase of over 250 houses was completed. Now about the first 50 families from lower Kiyovu are moving in these houses.”
The new Kigali master plan that will soon presented to parliament states;
“Most slums are located along the main roads where planned high income residential, commercial and administrative land use activities can highly thrive. An example of such a location is in Kiyovu-Muhima, where you will find a planned road network, but a precarious settlement.”
The petty land lords that used own these bushes were paid off and many went back to rural areas, others invested in other businesses while the rest just moved to inner slum areas. Hakizimana is among such peasant land lords currently crowded in many urban slums and ironically renting the same quality of shacks they used to own.
Steven Mbanda who used to own several plots of land in Remera and now runs a shop in the same area says; “many have just moved to inner city settlements like Kabagari in Kacyiru and Biryogo in Nyamirambo.”
I visited one such land lord who proffered not to be named, he is very bitter with the government and like Mbanda he reminisces about the way he spent his money; “I don’t like this government and any one that works or for it,” the anonymous ex land lord says. But Mbanda says such land lords are in fact bitter with themselves with the way they spent their new found cash.
Matayo Nduwumwami 48, a small landlord five years ago before the an investor bought him off, shares this opinion. Although he was given compensation, it was not enough fo rhim to build another home outside the city. The Kigali municipal authorities have tried to resolve the problem by providing alternative housing for them in Batsinda estate.
The lucky ones have been resettled in the PIGU (Projet d'Infrastructure et de Gestion Urbaine), in this project government has since 2003 created housing schemes to reduce chronic housing shortage in the country.
Some of the inhabitants of this estate will be ones that were driven from Kigali to make way for the new Kigali
Their lands are now history, large modern buildings are in place, and these are owned by even larger corporations or private bungalows for international executives doing their time in Kigali.
“So this is a new policy of Kigali city of facilitating those people moved to get better houses and even decent livelihoods. This is different from the past where after they were given their compensation money they would be left to fend for themselves, which eventually led to the growth of slums.
Other districts- Kicukiro and Nyarugenge are have plans to also build these low cost houses to settle the populations that are move,” Rangira says.
Some of the unlucky ones have genuine concerns like Matayo; "there is no sanitation or other infrastructure for development that they promised us, like hospitals, schools, electricity, or water supplies. The misery related to joblessness is too frequent and the authorities have not helped us find a solution," Matayo said.
The new Kigali is not that modern glitter that the master plan envisions or anything close to Vision 2020 but the city has rather taken its own unique way to adopt to its new found beauty a cold night drive from Kanombe to Mumuji as well as its nasty warmer concentration camps behind the ministry of education offices...the famous Kabagari.
BY GEORGE KAGAME
Every morning Jean Pierre Hakizimana (not his real name) comes to the Total petrol station at the junction between the roads leading to Gikondo and Kacyiru. Hakizimana is not employed at the petrol station neither is he a traffic policemen controlling the growing vehicle congestion at the junction.
He used to own the plot of land on which Total petrol station stands brightly, open 24 hours a day. Hakizimana sold his plot to an investor who built the modern petrol station, how or where Hakizimana spent the cash he was paid his plot are not clear enough because it is hard enough having a conversation with him, what is clear though is that he now suffering from mental problems and every morning Hakizimana comes to the petrol station and spends his entire day there making antics of admiration of the station.
Hakizimana is among of many petty land lords that have been displaced by investors, yesterday’s bushes are today’s mansions as Kigali continues its modernization drive. No where is this modernization more visible that the long drive from Nyabugogo to Kanombe airport!
The drive from Nyabugogo Taxi Park to Kanombe airport is like entering Rwanda’s Vision 2020, more than that, feeling the pulse of the residents of this long stretch of beautiful buildings on both sides of the road and the evergreen lush gardens.
During evening hours, the pavements and the roads are equally busy, vehicles speeding workers to or from work on the road while Kigali residents burn some fat jogging away their sweat on the pavements.
Many of architectural mazes on this road are newly built, while some like the new American embassy are still on their fist painting coat.
This beautiful drive will even need more superlatives to describe it once construction works begin this year for the highly anticipated Kigali Convention centre opens for business sometime.
And yet the convention centre will compete for importance with the equally impressive Dubai World funded golf course hotel which has taken about 100 hectares and displaced many more people in Kacyiru.
The land on which these two structures will be erected and on which many other modern buildings sit were until recently a bunch of dilapidated housing shacks that scrupulous city land owners used to exploit urban peasants in Kigali, the end of such landlords has been Kigali city’s increasing commercial depth, which even with the soon to be launched Kigali Master plan have made land extremely expensive and changed the view of the surrounding area which until recently were empty fields overgrown with bushes and trees.
Bruno Rangira the director of communication with Kigali City council says; “Kigali city council is taking a new direction as far as the resettlement of those moved from areas that are planned to be developed. We started with a pilot project of 1000 low cost houses that are being built in Batsinda-Gasabo district. Presently the first phase of over 250 houses was completed. Now about the first 50 families from lower Kiyovu are moving in these houses.”
The new Kigali master plan that will soon presented to parliament states;
“Most slums are located along the main roads where planned high income residential, commercial and administrative land use activities can highly thrive. An example of such a location is in Kiyovu-Muhima, where you will find a planned road network, but a precarious settlement.”
The petty land lords that used own these bushes were paid off and many went back to rural areas, others invested in other businesses while the rest just moved to inner slum areas. Hakizimana is among such peasant land lords currently crowded in many urban slums and ironically renting the same quality of shacks they used to own.
Steven Mbanda who used to own several plots of land in Remera and now runs a shop in the same area says; “many have just moved to inner city settlements like Kabagari in Kacyiru and Biryogo in Nyamirambo.”
I visited one such land lord who proffered not to be named, he is very bitter with the government and like Mbanda he reminisces about the way he spent his money; “I don’t like this government and any one that works or for it,” the anonymous ex land lord says. But Mbanda says such land lords are in fact bitter with themselves with the way they spent their new found cash.
Matayo Nduwumwami 48, a small landlord five years ago before the an investor bought him off, shares this opinion. Although he was given compensation, it was not enough fo rhim to build another home outside the city. The Kigali municipal authorities have tried to resolve the problem by providing alternative housing for them in Batsinda estate.
The lucky ones have been resettled in the PIGU (Projet d'Infrastructure et de Gestion Urbaine), in this project government has since 2003 created housing schemes to reduce chronic housing shortage in the country.
Some of the inhabitants of this estate will be ones that were driven from Kigali to make way for the new Kigali
Their lands are now history, large modern buildings are in place, and these are owned by even larger corporations or private bungalows for international executives doing their time in Kigali.
“So this is a new policy of Kigali city of facilitating those people moved to get better houses and even decent livelihoods. This is different from the past where after they were given their compensation money they would be left to fend for themselves, which eventually led to the growth of slums.
Other districts- Kicukiro and Nyarugenge are have plans to also build these low cost houses to settle the populations that are move,” Rangira says.
Some of the unlucky ones have genuine concerns like Matayo; "there is no sanitation or other infrastructure for development that they promised us, like hospitals, schools, electricity, or water supplies. The misery related to joblessness is too frequent and the authorities have not helped us find a solution," Matayo said.
The new Kigali is not that modern glitter that the master plan envisions or anything close to Vision 2020 but the city has rather taken its own unique way to adopt to its new found beauty a cold night drive from Kanombe to Mumuji as well as its nasty warmer concentration camps behind the ministry of education offices...the famous Kabagari.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)