Congolese march shines light on genocide

Some 30 former citizens of the Democratic Republic of Congo now living in Illinois cities walked quietly through downtown Springfield on Friday, Sept. 17, to call attention to the genocide and mass rape happening in their former country.

“Our country is known today as the World Capital of Rape,” Pappy Bakungola of Springfield said. Tens of thousands have been killed in refugee camps and villages, much of the violence instigated by the President Paul Kagame of neighboring Rwanda, according to individuals demonstrating last week. Former Congolese living in Champaign, Bloomington, Beardstown, Chicago and Springfield participated.
Soldiers from the Rwandan Patriotic Front sent by President Kagame into Congo since 1994 have been charged with atrocities in a United Nations report that has been circulating recently. Rwandan forces and Congolese militias targeted Hutu refugees and native Congolese Hutus.
The U.N. report, “Democratic Republic of Congo, 1993-2003,” will be officially released on Oct. 1. It was leaked to the French newspaper Le Monde in August. Most believe that it was leaked so that the word “genocide” was made public, in case the report was later watered down in the final version.
Kagame has called the report “outrageous” and is reportedly pressuring the U.N. to remove the word “genocide” from the report. He is also threatening to withdraw peacekeeping forces from the Sudan as the United Nations begins its fall session.
The Congolese group walked to the office of U.S. Sen. Richard Durbin to encourage him to continue his support for the people of the Democratic Republic of Congo and to speak out on how the situation is handled at the United Nations this fall.
Durbin was a cosponsor to Senate Bill 109-456, the “Democratic Republic of Congo Relief, Security and Democracy Promotion Act,” which was introduced by then-Senator Barack Obama, and signed into law in 2006 by President George W. Bush.
The group also met with representatives from Sen. Roland Burris’s office in Springfield.

“This report is a very, very powerful tool which will bring the truth to the public,” Bakangola said. “It gives specific information of crimes in specific villages. For the first time the international community is bringing to light what we’ve been saying all along.”
The report documents 600 events of murder, torture, and rape in DRC between 1993 and 2003. It was compiled from some 1,000 documents and 1,000 eyewitness accounts. Most of the victims were children, women and elderly and sick people.
“More people have been killed in Congo than in Darfur,” Bakangola said. “We had to stand up and let our voices be heard. We are average people — students and people working in restaurants. The rapes and killings continue today, and people committing these crimes go free.”

No bail for men accused of killing Rwandan general

Published in: Legalbrief Today


Date: Thu 23 September 2010

Category: In Court

Issue No: 2652

Pascal Kanyandekwe, fingered as the brains behind the assassination attempt against a former Rwandan general living in SA, has been denied bail by the Johannesburg Magistrate's Court.
A report in The Star says Kanyandekwe and his co-accused face charges of attempted murder and conspiracy to commit murder for the June shooting of Lieutenant-General Faustin Kayumba Nyamwasa. The report says in a case that has already seen SA recall its ambassador to Rwanda, evidence placed before the court seems to indicate the men were acting on the instructions of the Rwandan Government. But Kanyandekwe also faces a further charge of conspiracy for allegedly plotting to kill Nyamwasa while he was recovering in hospital. It was for this charge that he and two co-accused were denied bail. After the first failed assassination attempt, Kanyandekwe is alleged to have regrouped with a new set of conspirators. Their supposed plan was to pose as hospital visitors. Once in Nyamwasa's room, they were to strangle him before ditching their suits and escaping in casual wear. But the men were arrested on the way to the hospital after a police tip-off. Magistrate Lukas van der Schyff also denied bail to co-accused Shafiri Bakari and Ahmed Ali. The report notes two other alleged conspirators - Juma Husein and George Francis - abandoned their bail applications earlier in the trial.

Spain asks SAfrica to extradite ex-Rwanda general

(AP) – 1 hour ago

JOHANNESBURG — A justice department spokesman says South Africa has received an extradition request from Spain for a Rwandan general already at the center of tensions between the two African countries.

Spokesman Tlali Tlali said Wednesday that he would not comment on how the South African government would respond to the request or when it was received by the government.
Spain's cabinet on Friday said it was asking South Africa to extradite former army Gen. Faustin Kayumba Nyamwasa so that he can be tried for genocide and killing Spanish aid workers, charges Rwandan authorities have denied.
Spanish legal doctrine allows Spanish courts to prosecute egregious human rights crimes even if they are alleged to have occurred in other countries, so long as there is a clear link to Spain.

Pictures of People protesting Kagame in Newyork.

The truth about Rwanda conflict

Rwanda Hutu rebels warn UN over Kigali's 'tactics'

By AFP


Posted Tuesday, September 14 2010 at 17:17
NAIROBI, Tuesday

Rwandan Hutu rebels urged the United Nations Tuesday not to succumb to Kigali's threat to withdraw troops from Sudan if the world body publishes a report accusing the country's troops of crimes.

The Democratic Liberation Forces of Rwanda (FDLR) rebels, based in neighbouring Democratic Republic of Congo, called on the UN to purge its peacekeeping missions of forces it claimed were soiling its image.
The group asked the UN "not to surrender to the manoeuvres, tactics of intimidation and other forms of blackmail that Kigali began to practice... by threatening to withdraw its troops from the UN peacekeeping missions.
"Rather, it's now or never for the UN to get rid of soldiers that, with hands stained with innocent blood, bring disgrace upon an institution whose mission is to maintain peace in the world," the FDLR said in a statement.
A draft version of a UN human rights report on the DR Congo accused Rwandan troops of genocide-style massacres in the country in 1996-97.
Infuriated Kigali threatened to pull out its 3,500 troops serving in a UN peacekeeping mission in the Sudan, prompting UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon to travel to Kigali last week for talks with President Paul Kagame.
"The FDLR urge the international community and particularly the UN... to ensure that no one, without exception, of those who have participated in the genocide of Rwandan and Congolese Hutu escape justice," added the text.
Some FLDR elements have themselves been accused by Kigali of participating in Rwanda's 1994 genocide by Hutu extremists in which some 800,000 people, mainly Tutsis, were killed

New allegations against Rwanda president

MBANDAKA, Democratic Republic of Congo, Sept 10 GNE - Mbandaka is a town on the southern bank of the Congo River. Inaccessible, hidden, lost deep inside the Democratic Republic of Congo, it is far from its neighbour Rwanda.
Yet according to a draft United Nations report, seen by the GlobalPost news service, it was there, almost 2000 kilometres from their home, that Rwandan soldiers and their allies killed hundreds of refugees on May 13, 1997.
According to the leaked report compiled by a team of researchers from the United Nations' Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, Rwandan troops "opened fire on refugees at the port for five to 10 minutes, killing an unknown number".
"The commanding officer then ordered the soldiers to stop firing and told the refugees to leave their hideouts," the report continues.

"Some jumped into the Zaire (now Congo) River, hoping to escape. The soldiers then took up position along the river and opened fire. Around two o'clock in the afternoon, the soldiers began to sort the refugees, then clubbed them to death."
Accusations of atrocities have been levelled before at Rwandan rebel-turned-president Paul Kagame's forces, but never in such detail and never by an organisation carrying the authority of the UN.
The researchers spent seven months examining a decade of violence between 1993 and 2003 across the entire country.
To conduct the "mapping exercise", they consulted more than 1500 documents and interviewed more than 1280 witnesses insisting on double sourcing of all allegations.
Of the 617 incidents included in the 500-page draft, 104 are attributed to Kagame's troops and their allies.
Kagame's forces invaded Congo in 1996 to hunt down the perpetrators of the Rwandan genocide two years earlier in which about 800,000 ethnic Tutsis and moderate Hutus were murdered by Hutu extremists.
The invasion triggered a violent years-long maelstrom that drew in six more countries and led to the deaths of millions, mostly because of resulting sickness and disease.
Observers have dubbed the conflict "Africa's World War".
While every side involved in the fighting is accused of killing civilians, it is the Rwandans who come off worst.
The UN report says Rwanda and its allies made "no effort" to distinguish between civilians and combatants, between innocent and guilty, in the "relentless" pursuit of Hutus across Congo's vast territory.
"Probably several tens of thousands" were killed, the report says.
In numerous examples, Hutus were rounded up under some pretext or another - perhaps to be registered for a return to Rwanda, or to be given food - only to be shot, hacked or clubbed to death and flung into mass graves, hundreds at a time.
"The numerous deaths cannot be attributed to the hazards of war or seen as equating to collateral damage," the report says.
"The majority of the victims were children, women, elderly people and the sick, who were often undernourished and posed no threat to the attacking forces."
Most controversially, the report states that if proven in a court of law some of the incidents "could be classified as crimes of genocide".
The Rwandan government is outraged over the report, especially because Kagame's moral authority rests on his reputation as the man who stopped the Rwandan genocide.
The report is "immoral and unacceptable", according to Kagame's spokesman, Ben Rutsinga.
In a letter to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon written before the leak, Rwandan Foreign Minister Louise Mushikiwabo threatened to withdraw its peacekeeping soldiers from the joint UN and African Union mission in Darfur if the report was published in its current form.
"It is patently absurd for the UN, which deliberately turned its back on the Rwandan people during the 1994 genocide, to accuse the army that stopped the genocide of committing atrocities in the Democratic Republic of Congo," Ms Mushikiwabo wrote in the letter obtained by GlobalPost.
Following Rwanda's outcry, publication of the report had been delayed until next month.
"We have decided to give concerned states a further month to comment on the draft and I have offered to publish any such comments alongside the report itself on 1 October," said Navi Pillay, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, based in Geneva.
Sources say the "genocide" allegations are expected to remain in the final report, and although the Rwandan government will have its right to reply the damage might already have been done.
Recent presidential elections in Rwanda were widely criticised for the stifling of dissent, banning of newspapers and political parties, and mysterious murders that preceded the polls.
Kagame went on to win a landslide victory but his reputation took a knock. The leaked UN report is a still deeper scratch in Kagame's carefully burnished image.
© 2010 AAP

Brought to you by AAP

Rwanda needs deeper reforms

In a signed paper emailed to Sunday Monitor, co-authors Gen. Kayumba Nyamwasa, Col. Patrick Karegeya, Dr Theogene Rudasingwa and Gerald Gahima say progress in Rwanda needs to be buttressed by deeper democratic reforms. Excerpts.

In 1994, Rwanda suffered a tragedy that left over one million of its citizens dead as a result of war and genocide. The war and genocide resulted in immense suffering to millions more. The war and genocide have had far-reaching repercussions for both Rwanda and the Great Lakes Region of Central Africa as a whole.



Rwanda’s recovery from the ravages of war and genocide is generally regarded as a rare success story in post-conflict reconstruction. Visitors to the country are impressed by its economic growth, security situation and cleanliness, as well as the orderliness of its people and the efficiency with which its institutions conduct business. To its passionate friends, Rwanda is a shining example of democratisation, reformation, and an effective and efficient government.

Supporters of the Rwandan government largely attribute Rwanda’s success in post-war reconstruction to President Paul Kagame. The rebel general-turned-civilian politician cultivates a cult-image as the sole hero of the country’s achievements. President Kagame is perceived by most outsiders as both invincible and indispensable to national and regional stability.




RPF achievements

The Rwandese Patriotic Front (RPF) has registered many achievements since 1994. Its army is generally credited with having stopped the genocide, although there are genocide survivors who do not share this view. Its government re-established law and order, restored essential social services, repatriated and resettled millions of refugees and internally displaced persons, and established effective state institutions, that have rescued Rwanda from the brink of becoming a failed state.



The government has, with the often grudgingly acknowledged assistance of the international community, helped to spur economic recovery. President Kagame rightly deserves his share of credit for Rwanda’s progress in reconstruction after the war and genocide.



There is, however, more to Rwanda and Kagame than new buildings, clean streets, and efficient. Rwanda is essentially a hard-line, one-party, secretive police state with a façade of democracy. The ruling RPF has closed space for political participation. The RPF does not tolerate political opposition or open competition for power.
The government ensures its monopoly of power by means of draconian restrictions on the exercise of the fundamental human rights of citizens. The press, civil society and opposition parties are deprived of freedom to operate freely. President Kagame and the ruling party that he leads depend on repression to stay in power.




Rwanda has failed to transition to good governance and democracy. The RPF manipulated the transition process to entrench its monopoly of political and economic power. Rwanda is a one-party authoritarian state, controlled by President Kagame through a small clique of Tutsi military officers and civilian cadres of the RPF from behind the scenes.



Hutus excluded

The majority Hutu community remains excluded from a meaningful share of political power. State institutions are as effective as they are repressive. The government relies on severe repression to maintain its hold on power.



The situation that prevails raises serious questions about the country’s future. Are the country’s development achievements sustainable? Can Rwanda continue to be peaceful while the government continues to be repressive and many people consider the government illegitimate? How do we balance individual freedoms and the requirement for a stable community? How should citizens respond when rulers mistake the state to be their personal estate and deprive their subjects of their inalienable rights?



More questions

Should they resist peacefully or take up arms? If armed conflict is ill-advised, given its potential to cause human suffering, how else then can citizens reclaim their rights to hold the government accountable?

What strategies would help Rwanda avoid violent conflict that appears inevitable and to set it on the path towards peaceful resolution of the problems that drive conflict in Rwandan society?
The state of governance in Rwanda cannot be discussed in isolation from the character of the RPF and the quality of its leadership because of the very dominant role that the RPF in general and President Kagame have played in the politics of post-genocide Rwanda. The RPF assumed control of government at the end of the genocide and civil war because it was the only opposition group with the military capacity to take on the organisers and perpetuators of the genocide.




At the end of the genocide, the RPF briefly cohabited in a coalition government with other organisations that had opposed the Habyarimana dictatorship. Since late 1995, the RPF has progressively assumed exclusive control of the state.



The RPF was originally established as a people’s movement whose goal was to bring together under one umbrella, individuals and groups of different political backgrounds and ideological beliefs that shared a minimum political platform to promote democracy in Rwanda. From its founding in 1979 as the Rwandese Alliance for National Union (RANU) to its capture of state power in 1994, the RPF professed a commitment to the vision of a free, democratic order under an accountable government.



The RPF is no longer the democratic, inclusive and principled organisation that its founders and early leaders and members intended it to be. The organisation has now become a caricature of its former self.

The party, like the rest of the country, is engulfed by fear, held hostage to President Kagame’s arbitrary and repressive rule.



The prime objective of the struggle of the RPF, as well other groups that rose up during the late 1980s and early 1990s to take on the challenge of opposing the Habyarimana dictatorship, was to establish democracy in Rwanda. The RPF’s management of the affairs of Rwanda since the genocide and civil war has led to reversing, rather than consolidating, the gains that the struggle for democracy had achieved prior to the genocide.

In practice, the RPF has progressively reduced the space for other political forces to operate in the country. The 1995 ousting of Prime Minister Faustin Twagiramungu and other critical ministers started a trend towards progressive consolidation of the RPF’s monopolistic control of the machinery of the state. The RPF has, since then, striven for unrivalled political supremacy in Rwanda.
It has achieved this political supremacy not through an open and free process of competition with other political forces, but through repressive laws, administrative practices and the use of the security services to frustrate the exercise of the civil and political rights of opponents. Not only is the opposition excluded from participating in government; it is effectively barred from undertaking any activities inside the country at all. The RPF enjoys unchallenged power in Rwanda. Rwanda is far less free now than it was prior to the genocide. The political system of the Rwandan state lacks mechanisms of checks and balances that are essential for good governance and genuine democracy. The President has absolute control over the executive branch of government. The Executive, in turn, completely dominates other organs of government.




Re-defining sectarianism

The government passed legislation to punish sectarianism and discrimination. The government has, since 2003, used accusations of “sectarianism,” “divisionism,” and “spreading of genocide ideology” to curtail political opposition and civil society work, most specifically human rights work. These crimes are not properly defined in the relevant legislation.



The politics of ethnicity remain intractable in Rwanda. The majority of the Hutu middle-class that was ousted from power in 1994 remains in exile, un-reconciled to the new political order, biding time and hoping for a regime change. Some armed insurgents continue to wage war against the Rwandan state from their sanctuaries in the Democratic Republic of Congo, sixteen years after the genocide.

The externally-based unarmed opposition calls for dialogue on how to resolve the country’s continuing crisis, but the government says that the conflict has been resolved and there is no need for negotiation of a settlement.




Reconciliation wanting

There cannot be genuine reconciliation in Rwanda until the grievances of the Hutu community over the issues of political participation, as well as the guarantees for the minorities, equal citizenship before the law, access to resources and accountability for human rights abuses are addressed.



The hopes for a democratic, peaceful and stable Rwanda that the overthrow of the rump government that carried out the genocide once inspired have dissipated. The issues that have previously driven conflict in Rwanda remain unresolved. Rwanda is, by many accounts, again in grave risk of very violent conflict.



Such conflict is not inevitable, but neither is it easily avoidable. Whether Rwanda will again have to endure atrocious conflict or find a way to overcome the forces responsible for intractable conflict and transition to a peaceful, stable democracy will depend on the policies and actions of many players, including President Kagame himself, Rwandan society at large and, indeed, the international community.



We offer the following reflections on some of the steps that may need to be taken to avert a new catastrophe and set Rwanda on a path towards security, peace, democracy, genuine reconciliation, national healing, and sustainable development.



Promoting freedom as the foundation on which to build peace and shared prosperity for all Rwandans; Undertaking a genuine, inclusive, unconditional and comprehensive National dialogue on the nature and causes of the country’s major problems, and on a compact on the future of the country; Establishing a New National Partnership Government to lead Rwanda through the transition to democracy; and Engaging the international community including, in particular, Rwanda’s neighbours, to support Rwanda’s reform agenda.

Looming crisis


The people of Rwanda, together with rest of the international community, have a moral duty to work to end this repressive system of government. Rwanda is literally again on the brink of an abyss.



The complicity of collusion and silence that contributed to making the 1994 genocide possible ought not to be repeated. The manner in which the international community has engaged the government of Rwanda to date clearly indicates that the lessons that ought to have been drawn from the 1994 genocide have not been learnt.



The next priority is to ensure that Rwanda changes its laws on political participation.

U.N. report on Congo genocide strengthened

A draft U.N. report accusing the Rwandan army of massacring Hutus in the Democratic Republic of the Congo in the 1990s is corroborated by findings of an international human rights group.

The U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights (UNHCHR) postponed the release of the report on Thursday after leaked sections of the document prompted angry protests from Rwanda.

The draft report, a copy of which was obtained by The Washington Times, notes the "devastating consequences of the Rwandan genocide on the declining Zairian state" between March 1993 and June 1996. The Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) was known as Zaire at the time.
It accuses Rwanda's Tutsi-led army of killing tens of thousands of Hutus, including women, children and the elderly.
The period July 1996 to July 1998 was marked by the "relentless pursuit and mass killing" of Hutu refugees by members of the former Armed Forces of Rwanda and affiliated militias, the draft report says.

The report covers a period from March of 1993 to June of 2003.
"The period covered by this report is probably one of the most tragic chapters in the recent history of the DRC. Indeed, this decade was marked by a string of major political crises, wars and multiple ethnic and regional conflicts that brought about the deaths of thousands, if not millions, of people. Very few Congolese and foreign civilians living on the territory of the DRC managed to escape the violence, and were victims of murder, mutilation, rape, forced displacement, pillage, destruction of property or economic and social rights violations," the draft report says.
Rwandan officials say their troops entered the former Zaire in pursuit of Hutu militias responsible for the massacre of Tutsis in Rwanda in 1994.

The international watchdog Human Rights Watch extensively documented abuses that took place in former Zaire in the late 1990s.
The group's researchers are familiar with most of the incidents document in the draft report, said Rona Peligal, acting director of the Africa division at Human Rights Watch. "But even they are still shocked and horrified by the extent of the abuses perpetrated against the Congolese people, particularly by the Rwandan army and its Congolese allies," she added.
"This is a very uncomfortable issue for the Rwandans because the report is quite a damning investigation of abuses committed in part by Rwandans and their Congolese allies," Ms. Peligal said in a phone interview on Friday.




Rwanda has threatened to pull its troops out of U.N. peacekeeping missions in protest.



U.N. High Commissioner for Human RightsNavi Pillay said on Thursday that she had postponed publication of the report to Oct. 1.



"Following requests, we have decided to give concerned states a further month to comment on the draft and I have offered to publish any comments alongside the report itself on 1 October, if they so wish," Ms. Pillay said in a statement.



The U.N. has been under political pressure not to undertake this report.



"We had heard that the Rwandans were very much trying to dilute the report and prevent its publication and the fact that it has taken this long to publish is a testament to that," Ms. Peligal said.



She said she initially had concerns that the report would be watered down, but added, "we believe that the delay will make possible the full publication of the report with Rwanda's comments."

Ms. Peligal said she was somewhat disappointed by the delay.

"But we also look forward to the report being published in full. That is the most important thing. And that proper action is taken on the report's recommendation," she added.

The report results from interviews and meetings with several hundred Congolese men and women.

"[N]o report could adequately describe the horrors experienced by civilian populations in Zaire, now the Democratic Republic of the Congo," Ms. Pillay says in an introduction to the draft report. "Every individual has at least one story to tell of suffering and loss."

Rwandan hutus refeeges killed in congo.

U.N. says Rwandan troops carried out mass killings in '90s

The release of the report is a political blow to Rwandan President Paul Kagame. (Margaret Cappa)

By Colum Lynch


Washington Post Staff Writer

Sunday, August 29, 2010



An exhaustive U.N. investigation into the history of violence in Congo has concluded that the Rwandan military and its allies carried out hundreds of large-scale killings of ethnic Hutu refugees during the 1990s that amounted to war crimes, crimes against humanity and possibly genocide, according to a confidential copy of the report.
The report - which is 545 pages and details crimes committed in Congo from March 1993 to June 2003 - represents the harshest United Nations account to date of the conduct of the ethnic Tutsi-dominated Rwandan government, which has largely been credited with liberating the country from the perpetrators of the 1994 Rwandan genocide.
Its release represents a political blow to Rwandan President Paul Kagame, who was reelected this month in a landslide victory that was marred by allegations of political repression against political opponents. His government denounced the U.N. findings as "immoral and unacceptable," and Rwanda has sought to block the report's release, according to U.N. sources.
The inquiry, which was conducted by a team from the U.N.'s Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, alleges that Rwanda and its military allies carried out systematic waves of well-planned, highly organized reprisal killings against Hutu refugees in the years after they fled across the border into eastern Zaire, now known as Congo, along with remnants of the former Rwandan military. It also notes that Rwanda's ethnic Tutsi allies in eastern Congo were the target of mass killings and persecution.
The report documents more than 600 incidents of large-scale killings in Congo, which it claims constitute war crimes and crimes against humanity. It notes that the "systematic and widespread attacks described in this report reveal a number of damning elements that, if proven, could be classified as crimes of genocide."
"The period covered by this report is probably one of the most tragic in the recent history" of Congo, the report stated. "Indeed, this decade was marked by a string of major political crises, wars and multiple ethnic and regional conflicts that brought about the deaths of thousands, if not millions of people."

The Rwandan government issued a statement Thursday challenging the findings, asserting that the U.N. investigators employed a "questionable methodology, sourcing and shockingly low standard of proof" in reaching their conclusions.

"The report is a dangerous and irresponsible document that under the guise of human rights can only achieve instability in the Great Lakes [of Africa] region and undermine ongoing efforts to stabilize the region," the Rwandan statement said. The Great Lakes region encompasses Burundi, Congo, Tanzania, Rwanda and Uganda.

Rwanda's foreign minister, Louise Mushikiwabo, warned U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon in a recent letter that her government would withdraw from U.N. peacekeeping missions, including the U.N.-African Union mission in Darfur.

The U.N. findings were reported Wednesday by the French daily Le Monde and in the New York Times on Saturday.

Rwanda's former Hutu-dominated government, backed by ethnic Hutu militias, killed more than 800,000 Rwandans, primarily ethnic Tutsis, during the 1994 genocide. A Rwandan rebel movement, headed by Kagame, seized control of Kigali, the Rwandan capital. Many of those responsible for the mass killings, along with hundreds of thousands of Hutu civilians, fled across the border into eastern Zaire, where they continued to mount raids against the new Rwandan government.
Kagame is credited with having transformed Rwanda into a dynamic economic upstart and with providing women with unprecedented rights to pursue entrepreneurial and political endeavors. But his government has been dogged by allegations, stemming from the years following the genocide, that his own forces engaged in massive human rights abuses, though on a far smaller scale than the government it ousted.

Kagame maintains that his country's army has engaged in military operations in eastern Congo targeted solely at combatants responsible for perpetrating genocide in Rwanda and for subsequently mounting attacks against the country from bases inside Congo. The report acknowledges that Kagame's government continued to face armed attacks from Rwandan rebels in Congo, and that it welcomed back a massive number of Hutu refugees to Rwanda - a gesture, the report noted, that may complicate efforts to prosecute government officials for engaging in genocide.




But the report includes evidence that Rwanda and its allies may have targeted and killed tens of thousands of civilians, including women, children and the elderly. The report focuses on the activities of a nascent rebel movement - the Alliance of Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Congo-Zaire (known by its French initials AFDL) - that was set up in October 1996 and headed by Laurent Desire Kabila. The group received arms, training and logistical support from Burundi, Rwanda and Uganda. While the group's stated goal was the overthrow of Zairean President Mobutu Sese Seko, its activities were "characterized by the relentless pursuit of Hutu refugees" and Rwandan rebels, the report said.



The report cites numerous accounts of Rwandan army forces and members of the AFDL mounting attacks on scores of Rwandan refugee camps, often luring their victims by promising to repatriate them safely to their homes. On Oct. 20, Rwandan and Burundian army troops, backed by the AFDL, "carried out widespread and systematic attacks on eleven camps. They killed about 370 refugees the following day at the Luberizi refugee camp, dumping the victims into the latrines. Later that month, the troops killed around 220 male refugees outside a nearby Pentecostal church.
"The soldiers separated the men from the rest of the group and . . . killed them with bayonets. The bodies of the victims were buried in mass graves near the church," the report said.
The U.N. first decided to set up a team to investigate human rights violations in eastern Congo in 1997, but the plan never materialized, according to the report. The U.N. revisited the issue in 2005, after U.N. peacekeepers uncovered three mass graves in North Kivu, a province in eastern Congo. In response, the U.N. decided to establish a "mapping exercise of the most serious violations of human rights and international humanitarian law" in eastern Congo between July 1993 and June 2003, and advise Congo on how to ensure some form of justice for the crimes. U.N. investigators began their work in July 2008 with the goal of amassing a large sample of cases that could expose the extent and nature of violence that occurred in Congo. The authors - who reviewed more than 1,500 documents and interviewed 1,280 witnesses - cautioned that they were not trying to establish "individual criminal responsibility, but to expose the seriousness of the violations committed."




Navanethem Pillay, U.N. high commissioner for human rights, would maintain a confidential database of alleged war criminals that could be used in the event that a court is set up to prosecute them, the report said.

The release of the report is a political blow to Rwandan President Paul Kagame. (Margaret Cappa)

Rwanda: UN Report on Genocide Against Hutu Gives Hope for Genuine Reconciliation

By Nkunda Rwanda
The Cry For Freedom
August 28, 2010


Most of us have a past life we never wish to remember. For some, it could be an incident of embarrassment or a scene from the teenage years when we struggled to fit in. But to many genocide survivors, these would-rather-be-forgotten incidences are truly horrific, as they include images of mass murder and rapes mixed with the desperate, all too human, struggle to survive. Overcome by a thirst for healing, amnesia is often the only option for the victims trying to lay haunting pasts to rest.

Towards the end of 1996, the Rwandan Patriotic Army having gained credit for putting an end to the Rwandan Genocide invaded the Congo (then known as Zaire). It would soon become apparent though that the new Rwandan army was on a killing spree, targeting mostly Hutu civilians.

When under scrutiny, the new Rwandan government (GOR) defended its mission always citing the difficult nature of the operation. They (GOR) said it had been difficult to distinguish civilians from the EX-FAR and Interahamwe. Indeed, this school of thought prevailed for the last decade and outside of academic circles, remained unchallenged. However, one striking question remained unanswered: “why were Hutu-Congolese murdered?” to this day, the government of Rwanda has been unable to provide a convincing response.

The first serious inquiry was blocked by the war lord turned into president, Laurent Kabila. However, after he fell out with Rwanda, he would later remark “I never understood how people (Tutsi soldiers) having suffered Genocide would kill like this”.

That Congolese-Hutu were targeted is not the only evidence for Genocide. Excerpts from the “leaked report” reveal how children and women were deliberately targeted. Accused of no other crime but for being Hutu. Consider this chilling report by US journalist French Howard writing for the New York Times in September 1997:

In Loukolela, the Hutu survivors who have gathered across the Congo River from the former Zaire, 200 miles northeast of Kinshasa, say they know little about the conflict that pits the United Nations against Mr. Kabila's Government.

What they do have, however, are consistent accounts of the murderous attacks that they suffered in the Mbandaka area, as well as at several other stops during their westward trek of more than 1,000 miles across the country.

Mrs. Mporayonzi remembers wandering the woods after the attack had subsided, and said she was taken in by a Zairian family to whom she owes her survival. They told her that she looked enough like the local people to pass undetected, gave her a white bandanna to wear, in the fashion townspeople had adopted as a sign of support for Mr. Kabila, and urged her not to talk to people.

The next day, while she stood in front of the house where she had taken refuge, Mrs. Mporayonzi said a truckload of solders drove by and then stopped. She had feared they were looking for her, but instead they grabbed a Hutu boy on the street.

She said they yelled, ''Here is another son of Habyarimana,'' referring Juvenal Habyarimana, the Hutu former President of Rwanda. ''Right there in the road the soldiers swung the boy by his feet and beat his head against a tree trunk until he was dead.''

Mrs. Mporayonzi said she turned away in horror but had to bite her hand to keep from screaming for fear of giving herself away.

And from the “The Guardian”:

A soldier brought an eight-month-old (Hutu) baby so we could bury him," said a Red Cross worker. But we said, "We can't bury someone living". He took a stick and he hit the child on the head until he was dead.
Important to note is that some of the killing happened as far as Mbandaka which is approximately 758 miles from the eastern border of Congo where the refugees initially camped. The exhausted and hungry refugees having walked all these many miles were finally captured by the Rwandan forces and slaughtered, their bodies dumped into river Congo. This was witnessed and reported by international humanitarian organizations as well as Congolese communal groups.

While killings close to the Rwandan border could perhaps be justified, it is especially difficult to understand why the Rwanda forces would kill civilians on the opposite end of the country (Zaire). Also, by this time, Kabila forces had triumphed marking an end to the civil war. The killings do point to a deliberate and cruel attempt at extermination.

Also, in some noted cases, Congolese civilians were forced to participate in the massacres and were rewarded with cash.

However in certain instances, only males were targeted, while women would be allowed to repatriate to Rwanda. Here is an account from Professor Boyer:

They [Tutsi soldiers] separated the little boys from the girls...And they started killing the boys. First they shot them, and then they cut them in half. So that...if they came back to life they wouldn't be able to escape.

Of course this is just but the beginning of another difficult battle. Although the “leaked report” is a major victory for us as survivors, the struggle is far from over. There needs to be a mechanism to prevent “retributive genocide” from taking place. Counter-Genocide needs to be acknowledged (just like Genocide denial) as another step of Genocide. This will help not only Rwanda but many conflict ridden nations around the world.

Equally important is that the report can be instrumental in fostering genuine reconciliation in Rwanda. One of the key challenges of present Rwanda is that western analysts are stuck in the “bad guys vs. good guys” mentality. They forget that the majority of Hutu, Tutsi and Twa are good people trying to overcome extremely difficult realities. The notion becomes a stumbling block as the present regime is given a green light (Genocide credit) to repress its Hutu citizens who are considered Genocide perpetrators. This has provided huge political capital for former rebel Paul Kagame—and the recent elections is just but another confirmation.

My genuine hope is that Rwandans will find this report as an opportunity for reflection that in would be transformed into action. The government reaction towards the report though predictable is very unfortunate. Simply attacking the researchers and methodology used will not do away these crimes. Threatening to pull out peace-keepers if the report is released will only prove your guilt.It would be more beneficial to respond to the specific allegations--and tell your side of the story.

For once, as Rwandans, let's not squander another opportunity for national healing.

Bombshell UN report leaked: 'Crimes of genocide' against Hutus in Congo

The striking conclusion of a new draft UN report is that violence perpetrated by Rwandan President Paul Kagame's and Congolese President Laurent Kabila's forces against Hutus could constitute 'crimes of genocide.'

By Jason Stearns, Guest blogger / August 26, 2010

Over a year after its completion, the UN mapping report has finally been leaked to the press. The report was mandated by the UN to investigate war crimes and crimes against humanity in the Congo between 1993 and 2003 in the hope that there could be accountability for the violence. To date, almost nothing has been done to bring those responsible to justice.


.The report is huge, spanning 545 pages, and deals with war crimes committed by the security forces of Angola, Mobutu's Zaire, Uganda, Chad, Laurent Kabila's government, Joseph Kabila's government, Zimbabwe, the ex-FAR and Interahamwe (and later the FDLR), the Mai-Mai and the many other rebel groups. I will speak at length about the massacres carried out by these forces in later postings. Here, I will speak about the most controversial claim: the massacres carried out by the Rwandan army (RPA) together with the AFDL rebellion (led by Laurent Kabila) against the Hutu refugees in 1996-1997.

The striking conclusion is that the crimes committed by the RPA/AFDL against Hutu refugee and Congolese Hutu could constitute a crime of genocide. This will be a bombshell for Paul Kagame's government, which prides itself of having brought an end to the 1994 genocide against the Tutsi and have built their reputation and their appeal to donors on their promotion of post-genocide reconciliation. This report will rock the internet for months and years to come, its political improtance is hard to overstate.

A few words of caution. The report was not based on the same high standards of a judicial investigation, it was intended to provide a broad mapping of he most serious human rights abuses between 1993 and 2003.

Indeed, the report says that an international court will have to be the final arbiter whether the RPA/AFDL did commit acts of genocide. Verbatim: "The systematic and widespread attacks described in this report, which targeted very large numbers of Rwandan Hutu refugees and members of the Hutu civilian population, resulting in their death, reveal a number of damning elements that, if they were proven before a competent court, could be classified as crimes of genocide."

Nonetheless, it was their mandate to documents crimes of genocide, and they were rigorous: In total, the team gathered evidence on 600 incidents of violence (not just on the genocide allegations). Their standard was two independent sources for each incident. They interviewed 1,280 witnesses and gathered 1,500 documents. Many of the reports of killings of Congolese and Rwandan Hutu civilians were corroborated by eyewitnesses. While we always knew that there had been large massacres of Hutu refugees in the Congo, this is the first rigorous investigation, and the first time an international body has thrown its weight behind charges of genocide.

Another word of caution: This is the preliminary draft. The report is due to be released on Monday, but it has been leaked, I gather because the Secretary General Ban Ki Moon has pressed for the charges of "acts of genocide by the RPA/AFDL" to be removed. The Rwandan government has reportedly threatened to withdraw its troops from the AU mission in Darfur and I have even heard that they will withdraw from the UN all together, becoming "associate" or "observer" states. I imagine that it is to prevent such editing that the report was finally leaked.
On to the conclusion of the report:Paragraph 512. The systematic attacks [...] resulted in a very large number of victims, probably tens of thousands of members of the Hutu ethnic group, all nationalities combined. In the vast majority of cases reported, it was not a question of people killed unintentionally in the course of combat, but people targeted primarily by AFDL/APR/FAB [Burundian army] forces and executed in their hundreds, often with edged weapons. The majority of the victims were children, women, elderly people and the sick, who posed no threat to the attacking forces. Numerous serious attacks on the physical or pyschological integrity of members of the group were also committed, with a very high number of Hutus shot, raped, burnt or beaten. Very large numbers of victims were forced to flee and travel long distances to escape their pursuers, who were trying to kill them. The hunt lasted for months, resulting in the deaths of an unknown number of people subjected to cruel, inhuman and degrading living conditions, without access to food or medication. On several occasions, the humanitarian aid intended for them was deliberately blocked, in particular in Orientale Province, depriving them of assistance essential to their survival.

Paragraph 513. At the time of the incidents covered by this report, the Hutu population in Zaire, including refugees from Rwanda, constituted an ethnic group as defined in the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. Moreover, as shown previously, the intention to destroy a group in part is sufficient to be classified as a crime of genocide. Finally, the courts have also confirmed that the destruction of a group can be limited to a particular geographical area. It is therefore possible to assert that, even if only a part of the Hutu population in Zaire was targeted and destroyed, it could nonetheless constitute a crime of genocide, if this was the intention of the perpetrators. Finally, several incidents listed also seem to confirm that the numerous attacks were targeted at members of the Hutu ethnic group as such. Although, at certain times, the aggressors said they were looking for the criminals responsible for the genocide committed against the Tutsis in Rwanda in 1994, the majority of the incidents reported indicate that the Hutus were targeted as such, with no discrimination between them. The numerous attacks against the Hutus in Zaire, who were not part of the refugees, seem to confirm that it was all Hutus, as such, who were targeted. The crimes committed in particular in Rutshuru (30 October 1996) and Mugogo (18 November 1996), in North Kivu, highlight the specific targeting of the Hutus, since people who were able to persuade the aggressors that they belonged to another ethnic group were released just before the massacres. The systematic use of barriers by the AFDL/APR/FAB, particularly in South Kivu, enabled them to identify people of Hutu origin by their name or village of origin and thus to eliminate them. Hundreds of people of Hutu origin are thus thought to have been arrested at a barrier erected in November 1996 in Ngwenda, in the Rutshuru territory, and subsequently executed by being beaten with sticks in a place called Kabaraza. In South Kivu, AFDL/APR/FAB soldiers erected numerous barriers on the Ruzizi plain to stop Rwandan and Burundian refugees who had been dispersed after their camps had been dismantled.514. Several incidents listed in this report point to circumstances and facts from which a court could infer the intention to destroy the Hutu ethnic group in the DRC in part, if these were established beyond all reasonable doubt. Firstly, the scale of the crimes and the large number of victims are illustrated by the numerous incidents described above. The extensive use of edged weapons (primarily hammers) and the systematic massacre of survivors, including women and children, after the camps had been taken show that the numerous deaths cannot be attributed to the hazards of war or seen as equating to collateral damage. The systematic nature of the attacks listed against the Hutus also emerges: these attacks took place in each location where refugees had been identified by the AFDL/APR, over a vast area of the country. Particularly in North Kivu and South Kivu but also in other provinces, the massacres often began with a trick by elements of the AFDL/APR, who summoned the victims to meetings on the pretext either of discussing their repatriation to Rwanda in the case of the refugees, or of introducing them to the new authorities in the case of Hutus settled in the region, or of distributing food. Afterwards, those present were systematically killed. Cases of this kind were confirmed in the province of North Kivu in Musekera, Rutshuru and Kiringa (October 1996), Mugogo and Kabaraza (November 1996), Hombo, Katoyi, Kausa, Kifuruka, Kinigi, Musenge, Mutiko and Nyakariba (December 1996), Kibumba and Kabizo (April 1997) and Mushangwe (around August 1997); in the province of South Kivu in Rushima and Luberizi (October 1996), Cotonco and Chimanga (November 1996) and Mpwe (February 1997) and on the Shabunda-Kigulube road (February-April 1997); in Orientale Province in Kisangani and Bengamisa (May and June 1997); in Maniema in Kalima (March 1997) and in Équateur in Boende (April 1997). Such acts certainly suggest premeditation and a precise methodology. In the region south of the town of Walikale, in North Kivu (January 1997), Rwandan Hutus were subjected to daily killings in areas already under the control of the AFDL/APR as part of a campaign that seemed to target any Hutus living in the area in question.
515. Several of the massacres listed were committed regardless of the age or gender of the victims. This is particularly true of the crimes committed in Kibumba (October 1996), Mugunga and Osso (November 1996), Hombo and Biriko (December 1996) in the province of North Kivu, Kashusha and Shanje (November 1996) in the province of South Kivu, Tingi-Tingi and Lubutu (March 1997) in Maniema Province, and Boende (April 1997) in Équateur Province, where the vast majority of victims were women and children. Furthermore, no effort was made to make a distinction between Hutus who were members of the ex-FAR/Interahamwe and Hutu civilians, whether or not they were refugees. This tendency to put all Hutus together and “tar them with the same brush” is also illustrated by the declarations made during the “awareness-raising speeches” made by the AFDL/APR in certain places, according to which any Hutu still present in Zaire must necessarily be a perpetrator of genocide, since the “real” refugees had already returned to Rwanda. These “awareness-raising speeches” made in North Kivu also incited the population to look for, kill or help to kill Rwandan Hutu refugees, whom they called “pigs”. This type of language would have been in widespread use during the operations in this region.
516. The massacres in Mbandaka and Wendji, committed on 13 May 1997 in Équateur Province, over 2,000 kilometres west of Rwanda, were the final stage in the hunt for Hutu refugees that had begun in eastern Zaire, in North and South Kivu, in October 1996. Among the refugees were elements of the ex-FAR/Interahamwe, who were disarmed by the local police force as soon as they arrived. In spite of everything, the AFDL/APR opened fire on hundreds of defenceless Hutu refugees, resulting in large numbers of victims.517. The systematic and widespread attacks described in this report, which targeted very large numbers of Rwandan Hutu refugees and members of the Hutu civilian population, resulting in their death, reveal a number of damning elements that, if they were proven before a competent court, could be classified as crimes of genocide. The behaviour of certain elements of the AFDL/APR in respect of the Hutu refugees and Hutu populations settled in Zaire at this time seems to equate to “a manifest pattern of similar conduct directed against that group”, from which a court could even deduce the existence of a genocidal plan. “Whilst the existence of such a plan may contribute to establishing the required genocidal intention, it is nonetheless only an element of proof used to deduce such an intention and not a legal element of genocide.” It should be noted that certain elements could cause a court to hesitate to decide on the existence of a genocidal plan, such as the fact that as of 15 November 1996, several tens of thousands of Rwandan Hutu refugees, many of whom had survived previous attacks, were repatriated to Rwanda with the help of the AFDL/APR authorities and that hundreds of thousands of Rwandan Hutu refugees were able to return to Rwanda with the consent of the Rwandan authorities prior to the start of the first war. Whilst, in general, the killings did not spare women and children, it should be noted that in some places, at the beginning of the first war, Hutu women and children were in fact separated from the men, and only the men were subsequently killed.

518. Nonetheless, neither the fact that only men were targeted during the massacres, nor the fact that part of the group were allowed to leave the country or that there movement was facilitated for various reasons, are sufficient in themselves to entirely remove the intention of certain people to partially destroy an ethnic group as such. In this respect it seems possible to infer a specific intention on the part of certain AFDL/APR commanders to partially destroy the Hutus in the DRC, and therefore to commit a crime of genocide, based on their conduct, words and the damning circumstances of the acts of violence committed by the men under their command. It will be for a court with proper jurisdiction to rule on this question.

Rwandan army accused of genocide

August 27 2010 at 12:16PM

Nairobi - A draft United Nations report says the Rwandan army and Congolese rebels killed thousands of Rwandan Hutus in a revenge campaign during the 1990s that could be classed as genocide.

The report by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, leaked to the media, details how the Rwandan army and associated rebel groups systematically targeted Hutus in the Democratic Republic of Congo from 1993-2003.

Around one million Hutus fled to DR Congo after the 1994 genocide in Rwanda, during which Hutu militia slaughtered 800 000 ethnic Tutsis and moderate Hutus.

The report said that checkpoints were set up to identify Hutus and eliminate them in DR Congo, which was formerly known as Zaire. Among the victims were women, children and the elderly.

Recently re-elected Rwandan President Paul Kagame, who led the rebel group that ended the genocide and seized power, is likely to be angered by the claims.

The genocide is still a sensitive subject in Rwanda. Opponents of Kagame have been arrested on charges of genocide denial for suggesting Tutsi forces carried out massacres in the aftermath of the slaughter.

French daily Le Monde said Kagame, who this month won a landslide re-election, is threatening to withdraw Rwandan forces from peacekeeping missions should the report be published in its current form. - Sapa-dpa

Rwanda: Kagame's seven more years, another term of Political Armageddon

By Karekezi Eduard
Kigali, Rwanda
August 24, 2010

According to what I saw on August 9th 2010, it looks as the only free and fair elections in Rwanda are those which have not yet been conducted or imagined. The recent election in my country, Rwanda of which I experienced personally, left all and sundry astounded. This election left every one asking a single question related to the role of elections monitors/observers. When they came here in Rwanda, they were chauffeur-driven to expensive hotels, their role was to eat and drink eye closed, and then off to the airport chauffeur-driven to their capitals. That was the end of their businesses. In real terms it was electoral fallacy. I always wonder if these observers are given basic training in matters pertaining to their crucial missions and moral responsibilities. One of them was Dr. Salim Ahmed Salim, former Secretary General of the Organization of African Unity (OAU), who headed the Commonwealth Observer Group (COG), a body that was constituted by the Commonwealth Secretary-General at the invitation of our unrepentant National Electoral Commission (NEC). The COG had a mandate to observe the preparation for the elections, the polling, the counting and the overall electoral environment. If I remember well this man he might be the one who left nought on OAU score card. The next was former President of Burundi H.E. Sylvestre Ntibantunganya. After witnessing the Burundi electoral saga on 28 June 2010, he came to observe elections here in Rwanda!!!! Any way, from a political angle, we are going where Burundians are coming from. When elections ended, to my uttermost surprise, however, when asked (Dr. Salim Ahmed Salim) by a New Times (Government supported Newspaper) journalist about his own assessment of the process, he replied “We are extremely impressed by the determination of Rwandans to exercise their democratic rights”. This was patently an insult to the people of Rwanda. But here are intriguing and thoughts provoking questions: why resources are spent where elections’ outcomes are already known? Why do we like these symbolic electoral gymnastics? Imagine millions and billions of dollars, and pounds spent on this electoral charade. Why can’t we use these resources and strengthen the most RPF infiltrated institutions such as our ever weak and political enduring civil society, parliament, the judicial system, etc?


1. Elections per se: Tools used by the National Electoral Commission

It is when this electoral comedy ended that I tried to collect different testimonies from different voters. Collecting these testimonies was a trouble-free exercise as my relatives head some villages. As it appeared, there is no difference to what happened during the 2003 presidential elections. When National Electoral Commission Facilitators were told that the former Premier Minister Faustin Twagiramungu was going to defeat General Paul Kagame a decision was taken to bring extra-ballot papers. Those who were there remember well how it took almost six months for ink to get off their fingers. Imagine submerging your finger in ink and fingerprint at least one thousand ballot papers. This was done despite the fact that in many villages, village heads had already taken all voting cards on eve of the elections day and the next day (of voting) what they did was to collect their cards marked “YATOYE” meaning “HE HAS VOTED”. This emphatically corroborated with what FDU-INKINGI committee made public soon after this treacherous exercise of August 9th 2010, stressing that “in many areas of the north and west of Rwanda such as Busasamana, Cyanzarwe, Bugeshi Kanzenze and Nyabihu, the population had their voting cards seized by local authority. They were ordered to show up and collect their cards at poll stations as early as 4 o’clock in the morning. At the polling station, their voting cards were returned to them with “VOTED” stamp mark already on”. This vividly is also supported by the League for Human Rights in the Great Lakes Region (LDGL) report which criticized the electoral process alleging that “in some parts of the country where their observers monitored, people did not exercise their rights to vote but rather others (local leaders) voted for them”. On all these allegations, the government has decided to remain silent.

In fact most parts of the country people were told to come as early as 4:00 AM. But this was not an act of generosity, rather to collect their already stamped voting cards. All in all elections started, and ended when observers were almost still asleep in their lavishly hotels. This was done under what is known as “performance contract”. Leaders whatever they do, under any circumstances, and through any mechanisms, proper or dubious they must achieve the ruling party’s goals. Thus as an assessment was to be done latter after elections, the top performer has to be trusted and the poor performers to be investigated. Fear scratching their brains, village heads collected all voting cards from their subjects and on elections day, instead of casting their votes, they went (people) to collect their stamped voting cards. In addition to that, in most rural areas there was no secrecy in voting. People were shown were to put their fingers, and nowhere else but on President Kagame’s picture. This daylight robbery and unchristian act was done all over the country but excessively in the Northern and the Western parts of the country. This human rights violation succeeded because all villages were equipped with at least a single polling station. Equipping each and every village with a polling station was a barbaric strategy crafted by the RPF through its arm-NEC- to ensure that villages where RPF is lowly supported are caught red-handed. But to observers, they wrongfully thought this was a good strategy which allows people to cast their votes on their door steps. Additionally, soft contenders willingly chosen by the ruling party, did not want to be represented at all polling stations, except those seen as being closer to the so-called ‘Foreign Observers’ led by Dr. Salim Ahmed Salim and the former President of Burundi H.E. Ntibantunganya. All these dirty tricks were used in most cases by village heads because voting against the ruling party is tantamount to political assassination. Hence village heads had to prevail and avoid such political calamity.

2. Analysis of peoples’ attitudes towards elections in Rwanda

The overall analysis of the impact these elections might have on the ordinary citizen is somehow catastrophic. This results from the fact that by virtue of being a bogus exercise, people don’t see or intuitively think the intention, motivation and the value added when elections are conducted under this disheartening environment. People regard this as a perfunctory exercise. But for how long people of Rwanda, still struggling to make ends meet will continue financing political parties’ campaigns? During all electoral processes we always sit on the fence because we are not given an opportunity to choose amongst different contenders. This normally leaves us in a political orphanage. Here are some few factors that characterized the electoral/political apathy I personally observed:

2.1. Peoples’ reaction after casting their votes

I observed that soon after casting their votes most people did not even wait the counting exercise. In fact, when a voter believes his or her voice counts; that his/her voice can drive the country in a different direction, in most cases she/he waits until the verdict is pronounced. I saw this during the constitutional referendum in Kenya when people were asked to choose Yes or No. Most people passed their unforgettable night on polling stations. Their intention was to guard jealously their decisions (their Votes). But we (Rwandese) knew our voices meant less, hence leaving a polling station was as good as leaving a graveyard after a burial ceremony. This was a major preoccupation of local journalists on different radio stations across the country during "live" vote counting exercise. All in all, this is due to the fact that the whole process was seen as a political gimmick that amounts to nothing but renewed dictatorship.

2. 2. Lack of voters’ names on voters roll despite NEC mobilization

This also shows how people were not interested by this electoral charade. Despite persistent calls by the commission, requesting people to go and check their names on voters roll, many people did not heed NEC’s call. This is because people know that the current regime does not value the most cherished; the most fundamental; and God-given right of choosing our Leaders. In addition, people do not believe in our NEC.

2. 3. People’s fear of not having cast their votes

A great number of people did not vote. This is because they were no where on the list. To my surprise when people were asked to comment on what may follow after missing the exercise (Journalists suggesting to even wait the next decade (2017)) most of them shed tears. They expressed fear saying they might be victimized if their voting cards were not stamped. They said if they were to be arrested they could find themselves in a compromising position as they do not have anything to show local authorities? From these testimonies it is beyond reasonable doubt that people voted against their will because there was no choice. Thus one votes because he/she wants her/his voting card to be stamped. And this was also done for the sake of satisfying the current force-backed regime. If you don’t know how this government operates, please use Google and read the article "The Paul Kagame I know" by Robert Krueger.

3. Congratulatory messages

Today the most heated debate among Rwandan intellectuals and ordinary people revolve around congratulatory messages. Leaders have refrained from sending these messages to the re-elected President. We strongly believe it is due to galvanized efforts by civic organizations, and other activists and peace lovers who continue to show the international community the unfolding politics of our leaders. Politics of politicking is unfolding here. Different leaders have been very cautious, vigilant, and careful due to political mayhem we went through as a country until elections date and thereafter. The first message came from his so-called challengers, those whose motivation and intention was to legitimize the process and be rewarded government posts. Hon. Ntawukuriryayo Jean-Damascene who represented PSD is touted to become the Rwanda Premier Minister in the next government. As I told you long ago, this formula is a calculated move, deliberately crafted by these political vultures so as to entrench political power within their circle. The name of the President of the Liberal party (PL), now the President of the Senate, Dr. Biruta Vincent, circulated in the corridors of power for a while, but was latter discarded because of his weaknesses as well as low political profile. The unexpected and bitter messages came from The Bush House and the Canadian Government. Both messages were not in fact ordinary messages, but a clear warning to Kigali that a new political dispensation is indeed needed. Other highly expected message came from the remaining worst authoritarian leader and his closest friend Kim Jong IL of North Korea. Undoubtedly, this situation has been an acid test for the re-elected President. Consequently, he has recognised the best side of the media and has started a long tirade against critics through the Financial Times. But I wonder!!!!! Why a media predator, be allowed a free ride in media industry?

Finally, dear leaders, we have to work together to weave the threads that will see us celebrating a nation which is not ethnically, regionally divided, a nation that is dedicated to pushing back the frontiers of poverty for all of us. A nation whereby the sun shines for everybody. Otherwise a nation whereby a single clique holds the total economy of the country may lead us to believe that a tsunami of whatever sort is nearby.

Allow me to congratulate you ALL (especially the Africa Faith and Justice Network, Friends of the Congo, Human Right Watch, and all of you) who played unparalleled role during this time of need!!!!!
However, Dear Brothers, Dear Sisters our Brothers and Sisters are still languishing in prisons under awful and unspeakable conditions!!!!! So please, your help is now, today, not tomorrow, the most needed. Most needed especially in this time of darkness. Let’s unite and throw away the yoke of dictatorship. The regime is too ruthless. The President and Founder of PS-Imberakuri and others are still languishing in prison for no reason; others are on security surveillance due to fabricated charges such as Victoire Ingabire of FDU-INKINGI!!!! So please make a pledge and save the entire humanity starting now. “Together we will prevail!!!!!!”
Thanks

Note:
Mr. Karekezi Eduard can be reached via Email at "karekezieduard@yahoo.com".

Push Kagame Harder, Activists Tell Obama

Contacts:
Kitty Kurth, Hotel Rwanda Rusesabagina Foundation 312-617-7288
Friends of the Congo 202-584-6512
Africa Faith and Justice Network 202-884-9780
Email: rwandaelections@gmail.com

(http://afjn.org/focus-campaigns/other/other-crisis-areas/163-great-lakes-region/869-push-kagame-harder-activists-tell-obama.html)

WASHINGTON DC (Wednesday, August 25, 2010): A nation-wide coalition of US activists is calling on President Barack Obama to go beyond recent White House criticism and intensify pressure on the government of newly re-elected Rwandan President Paul Kagame.

On Friday, August 13, a White House spokesperson, the National Security Council’s Mike Hammer, expressed the Obama Administration’s unhappiness about events in Rwanda. Hammer focused his ire on the repressive circumstances and the less-than-credible results of Rwanda's presidential elections on August 9.

The NSC statement made clear the White House view that today’s Rwanda is not a democracy and then went further to dismiss the “development first, democracy later” argument often used to excuse Mr. Kagame’s iron-fisted rule. “Rwanda’s stability and growing prosperity, however, will be difficult to sustain in the absence of broad political debate and open political participation,” Hammer said.

While welcoming Friday’s NSC statement, the advocacy coalition is demanding much tougher action against the Kagame government. Several members specified the tougher policies they want to see in Obama's policy toward Rwanda.

Claude Gatebuke, a Rwandan genocide survivor and a leader in the coalition, linked American aid to improved democratization in Rwanda. He said the group wants President Obama to immediately terminate all military assistance and cooperation and also to freeze the $240 million that the US is scheduled to soon give Mr. Kagame.

"American aid to Rwanda must be nonmilitary. And that nonmilitary American taxpayer money should be unfrozen if, and only if, Mr. Kagame meets two conditions," Gatebuke said.

He outlined the first condition as "immediately widening Rwanda's democratic space which includes: completely freeing all political opponents, critics and the media; scrapping repressive laws; and engaging in good-faith discussions with all stakeholders about the way forward in Rwanda."

Rwanda’s behavior inside the Congo emerged as the coalition’s second condition. Kambale Musavuli, spokesperson for Friends of the Congo, outlined that condition, "In addition to allowing democracy inside Rwanda, General Kagame must be held accountable for his destabilization and looting of the Congo. President Obama must implement the bill he passed as Senator into law, PL 109-456 The Democratic Republic of Congo Relief, Security, and Democracy Promotion Act. That law clearly requires the US government to withhold aid to neighboring countries that destabilize the Congo."

Jacques Bahati of Africa Faith and Justice Network questions Washington’s cozy relations with President Kagame, "It is both mind-boggling and inexplicable how much The Congress and The Obama Administration have coddled the dictatorship in Kigali. Real American interests in Africa are hurt by this embarrassing relationship."

Experts in Washington say past actions by the coalition on behalf of the Rwandan people have seen results. They point to two taken earlier this year.

On April 30, group members organized demonstrations against President Kagame during his Oklahoma Christian University visit. Some reports claimed that the president was forced to use a side entrance.

And three weeks ago, on August 3, the activists organized a packed press briefing at the prestigious National Press Club, a mere stone’s throw from the White House. Unconvinced after hearing out Rwandan Ambassador James Kimonyo, the activists called on President Obama to denounce the August 9 Rwanda elections as sham.

The experts say that the NSC statement is therefore a shot in the arm for the Rwandan people and their struggle for democracy.

Observers also find it significant that both President Obama personally and the NSC statement have pointedly failed to congratulate Mr. Kagame on his electoral victory--something done routinely when Washington is pleased with an ally.

Still some coalition members remain skeptical. They question if the NSC criticism means President Obama is finally moving to add substance to his 2009 Ghana speech when he pledged to support strong institutions in Africa, not strongmen.

Maurice Carney, Executive Director of Friends of the Congo is among the unconvinced. He notes “There is no better litmus test for President Obama keeping his word than how he responds to the quintessential strongman of Central Africa, Paul Kagame. Will the president continue the carte blanche support for Paul Kagame despite his own 2009 rhetoric in Ghana? Or will Mr. Obama engineer a bold shift, from a half century of US support for strongmen, dictators and despots, to assisting and encouraging non-violent, pro-democratic forces and strong institutions?”

“Both Hutus and Tutsis should accept responsibility for the Rwandan genocide” Prof. Peter Erlinder

By Ndze Ntuv Evaristus Tunka, African News Journal
August 10, 2010
Professor Peter Erlinder is no stranger to the international community. He is a distinguished Criminal Defense professor at William Mitchell College of Law, and a lead Defense Council for the UN International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda based in Tanzania. He was recently arrested by the Rwandan government on allegations of 'genocide denial' while defending Victoire Ingabire-a Hutu politician and current presidential candidate who is charged with 'propagating genocide ideology' as well. Prof. Erlinder sat down with The African News Journal's Ndze Ntuv Evaristus Tunka to talk about his ordeal in Rwanda.

ANJ: Thank you for talking with The African News Journal today. Most people might consider you a rogue lawyer, especially from your defense of such personalities as Mohammed Warsame, Sami Al-Arian, and now Victoire Ingabire....


Erlinder: First I do not consider myself a rogue lawyer. I stand for the legal process and for justice. I think it is very important that we allow justice to take its course in any legal issue.

ANJ: So what made you decide to defend Victoire Ingabire?

Erlinder: Well, Victoire Ingabire has argued that both Hutus and Tutsis were responsible for the genocide in Rwanda, and that it was unjust to blame only one side for the genocide. I share this idea, as my research and findings from UN documents, US government documents, and trial documents at the ICTR on what happened in Rwanda show that both the Hutus and the rebel led FDR were responsible for mass killings in Rwanda. I think that all those who were responsible, be they Hutus or Tutsis should face justice.

ANJ: When you were arrested on May 28th, what was going through your mind? What were you thinking?

Erlinder: Well this is something that in order to talk about, I might probably have to spend some time thinking about it, and I'll probably write about it at some point; but I wasn't expecting to be arrested. However once I was arrested, my main concern was not to disappear and my view is that; had I not taken the initiative to force my captives to allow me to talk to the US Embassy, I'm not sure anybody would have known what had happened to me.

ANJ: How were you treated in the Rwandan jail and what were the conditions like?
Erlinder: What I've said to everybody that I have talked to, is that the people in Rwanda treated me quite well. The individuals that were charged with taking care of me treated me well under the circumstances. The conditions in the detention facility I was in were quite difficult per standards; that is no toilets, no beds, no blankets, and no food but this was quite normal to Rwandans, although most Rwandans in jail had family members who would bring them food, and what they needed to survive, but because I didn't have that, and because the US Embassy was not so reliable, my situation was particularly difficult in that situation, but not because I was mistreated, but because I didn't have the support that other detainees had. They kept me in a separate cell and the guards would go out and buy me food on the street so that I could have something to eat and some water to drink and no one beat me or mistreated me. But I saw other people being treated not so well, which made it more difficult for me psychologically, because I was really at the mercy of young kids with AK-47s.

ANJ: There were rumors of reports by Rwandan Prison Officials, stating that you tried to overdose on your medications, while you were behind bars. What is your reaction to these rumors?

Erlinder: Well I don't have any comments on it in detail, but I do have medical problems that if I had been born and raised in Rwanda, I would have probably been dead by forty; but my problems are currently and I'm undergoing treatment, and as long as I get that treatment, then I'll be ok. But being kept indefinitely in detention facilities with that kind of wasn't really possible. That's kind of what the danger was.

ANJ: After your release, the Rwandan government put out an official statement, stating that you were released on medical grounds, and they didn't and have not dropped the charges against you...have you been formally charged by the Rwandan government?

Erlinder: The actual fact is that in the Rwandan system, it's not necessary to be charged to be a suspect. Although I haven't been formally charged, I'm still a formal suspect and the investigation I understand is continuing.

ANJ: Some Rwandans especially the Tutsis, who saw a huge population of their tribesmen murdered during the Rwandan genocide look at you, and might wonder why you are defending opposition leader Victoire Ingabire, who the Kagame regime has charged with alleged genocide denial and promoting genocide ideology. What would you say to them?

Erlinder: The best evidence produced by the Rwandan government/UN prosecutor during 7-years of trial resulted in the Tribunal finding that there was no conspiracy to commit genocide or ethnic killings at the level of the military or government leadership. The Rwandan government is in a difficult position because the majority of the population has a different ethnic and historical background because the leaders in Rwanda now are English speaking Rwandans who actually were raised and even born in Uganda. So that among people who had lived in Rwanda during the time they spoke French rather than English as a European language, the situation is difficult politically. I'm interested in seeing a peaceful democratic development in Rwanda, and I hope that, that happens.

ANJ: With regards to a democratic Rwanda, President Kagame has insisted that since his rise to power, Rwandans have been given the opportunity to participate democratically in the country's politics; that he has encouraged decentralization has ensured a fair representation of women in government; and has secured economic growth for Rwanda. What is your assessment of this assertion?

Erlinder: I think my arrest is a pretty good indication about the range of discussion and debate that is possible in Rwanda. And I do think that the Rwandan government has many accomplishments. Kigali is a beautiful city and far away more developed than it was in 2004, which is the last time I was there. But on the question of opposition parties, there are none that are meaningful, and any significant disagreement with the current government is dangerous and under those circumstances, I think that the Rwandan people are going to have some difficulty in having a meaningful debate. What got Victoire Ingabire arrested was that on the day that she arrived in Rwanda, she went to the genocide memorial and she made note that the Rwandan government says that the umm....I'm using the word 'Rwandan genocide' because its common, not because I understand it the way every one does. She asked the question whether, because the government said it was genocide of Tutsis and moderate Hutus, which would mean that Hutus who defended Tutsis--and there were many; the question was "where is the memorial to the dead Hutus?" The Rwandan government insists that ONLY Tutsi were victims, but describes 1994 as: "a genocide of Tutsi and moderate Hutus" Ingabire got in trouble for pointing out that there are no memorials to Hutu victims, whether "moderate" or not. There are none in the country, and anyone who suggests that Hutus were also victims during that period has the same faith as Victoire Ingabire and-me. And suggesting that both sides committed crimes is a crime, according to the Rwandan government. That's what my arrest shows.

ANJ: Some Rwandans and even some member states of the African Union have questioned why the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) is based in Tanzania; arguing that it would best address crime and issues of the Rwandan genocide if it was housed in Rwanda. What is your reaction to this?

Erlinder: When you've had a civil war, and one side has won the civil war, how can you set up a neutral tribunal of the sort in the country? I don't think that would be possible in any country. And to suggest that it is possible in Africa, I think it's unlikely. Also I want to make it clear, that I have never said that large numbers of Tutsis were not killed. However the most recent evidence, not by me, but by Allan Stam at the University of Michigan and Christian Davenport of Notre Dame. They analyzed all the reports that all the NGOs had, and all the reports that the Rwandan government had, and they came to the conclusion that there were twice as many Hutus killed as Tutsis. We have to think through what really happened. But I can say that from the experience of other countries, if there is a civil war and one side wins the war, it's unlikely that they're going to give the side they defeated the benefit of doubt, and that happened in the US civil war as well. The US controlled the South militarily for twenty years or more and for a long time, it wasn't even possible for us to discuss the idea that the Confederate states had a significant that could be defended, and they were also blamed for everything. When there's a civil war, that's what happens, different sides tell different stories.

ANJ: Are you still the Defense Council for Victoire Ingabire?

Erlinder: No, I was never given the opportunity to defend her. I had applied for accreditation from the Rwandan Bar, and it was never granted, and even when I got to Rwanda to represent her, I was arrested and sent to jail. She does have a different Defense Council, however, I have kept in touch with her every now and then...and would be willing to give her my advice if she requests it.

ANJ: Thank you again for meeting and talking with The African News Journal, and also thank you for your commitment with the ICTR, your stand for justice, and for your continuous defense of the suppressed.

Erlinder: Thank you too, and it was marvelous that the ICTR stood behind me in my time of need. My opinion is that the support I got from around world was significant in my release; and of course, you know that there have been assassinations and the lawyer who replaced me as Ingabire's defense attorney was arrested and tortured, so I consider myself lucky.