HOME-ACCUEIL - ENGLISH - FRANCAIS - KINYARWANDA

Human Rights Council adopts Universal Periodic Review outcome on Rwanda

Amnesty International welcomes Rwanda�s support of the majority of recommendations made during the review, in particular all the recommendations to protect and respect freedom of expression, including by reviewing and revising existing legislation.

In this respect, the organization urges Rwanda to publicly announce a timeframe for revising the genocide ideology law as well as for the consideration of amendments to the media law by Parliament. It also strongly encourages Rwanda to review related laws and amend the sectarianism law in line with international standards.

Amnesty International is concerned that despite Rwanda�s recognition of the shortcomings of the genocide ideology law, the authorities continue to use it to prosecute government critics, including journalists. It urges Rwanda to ensure that legislative changes are accompanied by prompt reviews of past cases – including of opposition politicians and journalists convicted to lengthy prison sentences for merely expressing their opinions without advocating violence.

Amnesty International also urges Rwanda to uphold its commitment to undertake credible investigations into reports of harassment of journalists and to prosecute where the evidence warrants. Rwanda could demonstrate this commitment by re-opening investigations into the killing of journalist Jean-Leonard Rugambage on 24 June 2010 and by following all leads.

Abductions, enforced disappearances and incommunicado detention – rare in Rwanda in recent years – increased in 2010 as the authorities investigated a spate of grenade attacks. Amnesty International deeply regrets Rwanda�s rejection of the recommendation to investigate cases of arbitrary arrest and detention, and enforced disappearances. Rwanda states that it intends to ratify the Convention on the Protection of Enforced Disappearances, yet remains unwilling to investigate such cases.

Amnesty International urges Rwanda to determine the whereabouts and fate of any individual subjected to enforced disappearance. Anyone arbitrarily detained should be granted access to a lawyer and charged with a recognizable criminal offence, or released. Those held incommunicado should be given access to relatives and lawyers. It also calls on Rwanda to respond promptly to communications from human rights organizations and family members regarding such cases.

Amnesty International welcomes Rwanda�s acceptance of recommendations to issue a standing invitation to the UN Special Procedures and urge the government to act on this without delay.

Background

The UN Human Rights Council adopted the outcome of the Universal Periodic Review of Rwanda on 7 June 2011 at its 17th session.

[Amnesty International]

by Amnesty International

UNSAFE TO SPEAK OUT:
RESTRICTIONS ON FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION IN RWANDA

Rwanda: Unsafe to Speak Out

Freedom of expression in Rwanda has been unduly restricted for many years. The months leading up to the August 2010 presidential elections, which President Paul Kagame won with 93 per cent of the vote, were marked by a clampdown on freedom of expression. The Rwandan government has expressed a commitment to review laws which criminalize criticism, but recent trials of journalists and opposition politicians suggest that Rwanda�s clampdown on critics shows no sign of abating.

The Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF), in power since the 1994 genocide, tightly controls political space, civil society and the media, contending that this is necessary to prevent renewed violence. Human rights defenders, journalists and political opponents cannot openly and publicly criticize the authorities. People who do speak out risk prosecution and imprisonment.

Restrictions on freedom of association and expression prevented new opposition parties from contesting the August 2010 elections. During this period, journalists were subjected to criminal sanctions for defamation. The Rwandan government did not respond constructively to criticism but rather tried to stamp it out.

CRIMINALIZING CRITICISM

Vague and sweeping laws on �divisionism� and �genocide ideology� were introduced in Rwanda in the decade after the 1994 genocide. Up to 800,000 Rwandans were killed in the genocide, mostly ethnic Tutsi, but also Hutu who opposed the organized killing. The laws prohibit hate speech, but are broadly drafted so that they criminalize expression that does not amount to hate speech, including legitimate criticism of the government. The laws contravene Rwanda�s regional and international human rights obligations and commitments to freedom of expression, and the vague wording is deliberately exploited to violate human rights.

In its August 2010 report, Safer to stay silent: The chilling effect of Rwanda�s laws on �genocide ideology� and �sectarianism� (Index: AFR 47/005/2010), Amnesty International described how the vague wording of these laws is misused to criminalize criticism of the government and legitimate dissent by opposition politicians, human rights activists and journalists.

Amnesty International found that many Rwandans, even those with specialist knowledge of Rwandan law including lawyers and human rights workers, were unable to precisely define �genocide ideology�. Even judges, the professionals charged with applying the law, noted that the law was broad and abstract.

At a local level, individuals appear to use �genocide ideology� accusations to settle personal disputes. These laws allow for the criminal punishment even of children under 12, as well as parents, guardians or teachers convicted of �inoculating� a child with �genocide ideology�. Sentences for convicted adults range from 10 to 25 years� imprisonment.

GOVERNMENT COMMITMENTS TO LEGISLATIVE REFORM

The Rwandan government expressed a commitment in April 2010 to review the �genocide ideology� law. During Rwanda�s Universal Periodic Review at the UN Human Rights Council in January 2011, the Rwandan government reiterated this commitment and indicated that the 2009 media law, which unduly restricts freedom of expression, was also up for review.

Despite their recognition of the shortcomings of the �genocide ideology� law, the government continues to use it to prosecute individuals for legitimate criticism. It remains unclear whether the �divisionism� law, similarly used to silence critics, will also be revised. Since the elections, individuals have also been convicted of threatening state security, another charge carrying a heavy prison sentence, for criticizing the government.

MEDIA CLAMPDOWN BEFORE THE ELECTIONS

The government clamped down on critics before the August 2010 presidential elections. They used regulatory sanctions, restrictive laws and criminal defamation cases to close down media outlets critical of the government.

The Rwandan Media High Council, a regulatory body close to the ruling party, suspended two private Kinyarwanda language newspapers, Umuseso and Umuvugizi, from April to October 2010. It then called for their indefinite closure claiming that some of their articles threatened national security.

Jean-Bosco Gasasira, editor of Umuvugizi, and Didas Gasana, editor of Umuseso, fled Rwanda in April and May 2010 respectively after receiving threats.

OPPOSITION POLITICIAN IMPRISONED

Rwandan opposition leader and founding president of the opposition Ideal Social Party (PS-Imberakuri), Bernard Ntaganda, was jailed on 11 February 2011 on politically motivated charges. He was sentenced to four years� imprisonment after being convicted of breaching state security, of �divisionism� for public speeches criticizing government policies ahead of the elections, and of attempting to plan an �unauthorized� demonstration. Bernard Ntaganda appealed against his conviction.

Bernard Ntaganda�s conviction is part of a wider and concerning trend to prosecute individuals with threatening national security for legitimate criticism of the government. His prosecution for threatening state security and �divisionism� was based solely on his speeches criticizing government policies. The prosecution had requested a 10-year prison sentence for these two charges and contended that �paint[ing] a negative image of state authority� could cause the population to rebel and create unrest.

Bernard Ntaganda was arrested at dawn on 24 June 2010 � the first day that presidential candidates could register for the elections � and just hours before a demonstration planned by his party in the capital, Kigali. Although Bernard Ntaganda had requested authorization to hold the demonstration, according to the prosecution the authorities had attempted to notify him that it was banned only on the day before it was due to take place. The defence said the demonstrators were unaware of the ban.

The Ideal Social Party (PS-Imberakuri) was the only new party which successfully secured registration. It was later infiltrated by dissident members who decided not to field a candidate in the elections.

Bernard Ntaganda was called before the Senate in late 2009 to respond to �genocide ideology� accusations. In April 2010, the Senate�s political commission said they felt such accusations were well founded.

The government should immediately and unconditionally release Bernard Ntaganda, imprisoned for expressing his opinion without advocating violence.

JOURNALISTS IMPRISONED

Agnes Nkusi Uwimana, editor of the private Kinyarwanda newspaper Umurabyo, and her deputy editor, Saidati Mukakibibi, were sentenced on 5 February 2011 to 17 and seven years in prison respectively for opinion pieces published before the elections. Both women appealed against their conviction.

Agnes Nkusi Uwimana was found guilty of threatening state security, �genocide ideology�, �divisionism� and defamation, and Saidati Mukakibibi was found guilty of threatening state security. The two women were prosecuted over several articles in which they criticized government policies and made corruption allegations against senior government officials, including President Kagame. The articles also made references to the prevailing feeling of insecurity before the elections and contended that there were growing divisions within the security forces.

Before prosecution, Agnes Nkusi Uwimana was called before the Rwandan Media High Council to respond to allegations that her articles were defamatory.

The government should immediately and unconditionally release Agnes Nkusi Uwimana and Saidati Mukakibibi, imprisoned for exercising their right to freedom of expression without advocating violence.

JOURNALIST MURDERED

Rwandan journalist and deputy editor of the Kinyarwanda newspaper Umuvugizi, Jean-Leonard Rugambage, was shot dead outside his home in Kigali at 10pm on 24 June 2010. He was the first Rwandan journalist to be murdered in recent years.

Jean-Leonard Rugambage had been investigating the shooting in the same month of the exiled former head of the Rwandan army, Kayumba Nyamwasa, in South Africa. Earlier on 24 June, Umuvugizi had published an online article alleging that Rwandan intelligence officials were linked to the shooting. In the days before his murder, Jean-Leonard Rugambage told colleagues that he felt surveillance over him had intensified.

There is no evidence that Rwandan police have explored those leads into the killing of Jean-Leonard Rugambage that pointed towards it being politically motivated. Within days of the murder, two suspects were arrested. In October, they were convicted of the murder and sentenced to life imprisonment. They claimed that Jean-Leonard Rugambage had killed one of their family members during the 1994 genocide. A case had been brought against Jean-Leonard Rugambage on these same allegations in 2005 before a gacaca court (community tribunals to expedite trials of the vast majority of people suspected of participation in the genocide) after he published an article critical of gacaca. However, it was dropped for lack of evidence.

Amnesty International believes that the government should re-open the investigation by establishing an independent commission of enquiry) into the killing of Jean-Leonard Rugambage with a view to investigating all possible leads.

OPPOSITION POLITICIAN MURDERED

On 14 July 2010, Andr� Kagwa Rwisereka, vice-president of the opposition Democratic Green Party, was found dead in Butare, southern Rwanda. He had been beheaded.

Andr� Kagwa Rwisereka, who left the RPF to create the Democratic Green Party, had told colleagues in the weeks before his murder that he was concerned for his security. Other Democratic Green Party members said they had also received threats.

No one has been brought to justice for Andr� Kagwa Rwisereka�s murder. The police opened investigations, but the prosecution claim to have insufficient evidence to press charges. Amnesty International calls on the government to establish an independent commission of inquiry into Andr� Kagwa Rwisereka�s death.

[AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL]

Amnesty International is calling on President Kagame to allow opposition politicians, journalists and human rights defenders to express their views without fear for their safety.

On 3 June 2011 Amnesty International will launch a short campaign document calling on the Rwandan authorities to review �genocide ideology� and �sectarianism� laws that are being used to suppress political dissent and stifle freedom of speech in the country.

The months leading up to the August 2010 presidential elections, which President Kagame won with 93 per cent of the vote, were marked by a clampdown on freedom of expression through regulatory sanctions, restrictive laws and criminal defamation cases.

The Rwandan government has expressed a commitment to review laws which are used to criminalize criticism, but recent trials of journalists and opposition politicians suggest that Rwanda�s critics still face prosecution and imprisonment.

Amnesty International is calling on President Kagame to allow opposition politicians, journalists and human rights defenders to express their views without fear for their safety.

[Amnesty International]

The international human rights watchdog has called for the unconditional release of Rwandan opposition leader Bernard Ntaganda jailed on Friday on politically motivated charges.

Bernard Ntaganda, president of the Ideal Social Party (PS-Imberakuri) party, was sentenced to 4 years imprisonment after being found guilty of breaching state security, of �divisionism� for holding public speeches criticizing government policies ahead of last year�s elections, and attempting to plan an �unauthorized� demonstration.

Ntaganda had been arrested at dawn on 24 June 2010 – the first day that presidential candidates could register for the elections � and remanded in pre-trial detention.

Restrictions on freedom of association and expression prevented new opposition parties from contesting the August 2010 presidential elections.

Ntaganda�s prosecution for threatening state security and �divisionism� was based solely on his speeches criticizing government policies.

The prosecution had requested a 10 year jail sentence for these two charges and contended that �painting a negative image of state authority� could cause the population to rebel and create unrest.

�The ruling once again criminalizes peaceful dissent�, said Amnesty International�s Africa Programme Director, Erwin van der Borght.

�The growing trend in Rwanda to convict individuals of threatening national security for criticizing government policies is deeply concerning and in violation of Rwanda�s obligations under international human rights law�.

Last week, two Rwandan journalists, Agnes Uwimana and Saidati Mukakibibi, were found guilty of threatening state security for opinion pieces critical of government policies published before last year�s elections.� They were sentenced to 17 and 7 years respectively.

Vague and sweeping laws on �divisionism� and �genocide ideology� were introduced in Rwanda in the decade after the 1994 genocide.

Up to 800,000 Rwandans were killed in the genocide, mostly ethnic Tutsi, but also Hutu who opposed the organized killing.

The laws prohibit hate speech, but are broadly drafted so that they criminalize expression that does not amount to hate speech, including legitimate criticism of the government.

The Rwandan government expressed a commitment in April 2010 to review the �genocide ideology� law, but it is unclear whether the �divisionism� law will also be revised.

Alice Muhirwa, Martin Ntavuka and Sylvain Sibomana of the United Democratic Forces-Inkingi (FDU-Inkingi) were found guilty of conspiring to participate in demonstrations on 24 June 2010 without authorization.� They were fined 100,000 Rwandan francs.

The prosecution had requested a two month jail sentence.

Theobald Mutarambirwa of PS-Imberakuri and Theoneste Sibomana of FDU-Inkingi, also charged with conspiring to participate in demonstrations without authorization, will be tried separately.

The opposition politicians were arrested on 24 June 2010.

Some of the FDU-Inkingi members were arrested near the Ministry of Justice in the capital, Kigali, where they had gathered to request the registration of their party.

Some of the PS-Imberakuri members were arrested outside the US Embassy, where they had gone to enlist help following Ntaganda�s arrest.

Although the opposition members were convicted of conspiracy to participate in demonstrations without authorization, Amnesty International has found no evidence that they either resorted to, or intended to resort to, violence.

The government failed to put forward any legitimate justification for banning the demonstration.

Ntaganda had requested authorization to hold the demonstration.

The prosecution said the authorities had attempted to notify Bernard Ntaganda that the demonstration was banned, the day before it was due to take place.

But the defence said the demonstrators were unaware of the move.

Those arrested were later released on bail, after spending days in police detention and reportedly being subjected to ill-treatment such as being beaten and handcuffed to each other, even when they went to the toilet.

�Instead of jailing individuals for planning a demonstration, the government should have taken steps to allow for peaceful protest before the elections,� said Erwin van der Borght.

Restrictions on freedom of association prevented new opposition parties from contesting the elections, which President Kagame won with 93 per cent of the vote.

PS-Imberakuri had secured registration, but was subsequently infiltrated by dissident members, who decided not to field a candidate.

Ntaganda was called before the Rwandan Senate in late 2009 to respond to �genocide ideology� accusations.� In April 2010, the Senate�s political commission said they felt such accusations were well-founded.

For further information please contact the Amnesty International press office on +44 7778 472 126.

by David Barouski.
Adapted from the article “Leaked: Rwandan Secret Services� Plan to Eliminate Victoire Ingabire” posted on “The Proxy Lake,” blog on�17 October 2010.[1]

Introduction

The Rwandan Department of Military Intelligence (DMI), in collaboration with the Rwandan national police, allegedly masterminded a conspiracy to indict and eventually eliminate Madame Victoire Ingabire Umuhoza, Chairperson of an unregistered Rwandan opposition party, the United Democratic Forces (FDU)-Inkingi.� The alleged plan was initiated by leveling a new criminal charge against Madame Ingabire.� The charge claims that she collaborates with a newly formed armed group affiliated with her political party.

This information comes from Umuvugizi, a Rwandan local newspaper that recently had its six-month government-imposed ban lifted after the suspension�s time period expired.[2]� The article containing the allegations was published on Sunday, 17 October 2010.

Rwandan officials also allege that Mr. Paul Rusesabagina, the famous figure depicted in the Hollywood film �Hotel Rwanda,� is also involved, which Mr. Rusesabagina strongly denies.

Based on a tip-off from an informant allegedly inside Rwandan President Paul Kagame�s DMI, Umuvugizi�s exiled Chief Editor Jean-Bosco Gasasira[3] claims the alleged plot against Madame Ingabire was engineered by Colonel Dan Munyuza of the Rwandan Defense Forces (RDF). �He was allegedly assisted by General Paul Rwarakabije, a former senior officer of the Rwandan gendarmerie during the regime of the late President Juvenal Habyarimana.

After fleeing to (then) Zaire in 1994, General Rwarakabije eventually became a senior commander in the Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda (FDLR), a non-state armed group that opposes the Rwandan government.

After defecting and repatriating back to Rwanda, he eventually became a commissioner in Rwanda’s Demobilization and Reintegration Commission, which deals with repatriating and reintegrating Rwandan citizens who were members of opposing non-state armed groups.

General Rwarakabije was allegedly asked to find people willing to play a role in the alleged plot by acting as witnesses to validate the accusations against Madame Ingabire in court and secure her conviction. �He was allegedly tasked with recruiting Hutu that were once members of the FDLR that could be convinced to collaborate with the Rwandan government.

The article claimed, �General Rwarakabije picked one of his men from FRDL (sic!), a certain Major (Vital) Uwumuremyi, who arrived in Rwanda a few months ago with his group. �Once in Rwanda, he was given a mission to return to Congo to spy on his comrades. He carried out his secret mission on several occasions before they were able to trust him. �Information we have confirms that he received a large amount of money to convince him and be confident.�[4]

Original Targets?

The article said it is believed that after former RDF General Kayumba Nyamwasa and the former head of the external division of the DMI, Colonel Patrick Karegeya, defected and fled Rwanda for South Africa, the DMI decided to accuse them both of being accomplices to acts of terrorism in Rwanda.� These accusations followed a series of grenade attacks in Kigali, the capital of Rwanda.� With domestic criminal charges leveled against them, the Rwandan government demanded they be sent back to Rwanda to stand trial.

Allegedly, the plan was to isolate and demonize them because both men still maintain strong support within the RDF and with some civilian members of President Kagame�s political party, the Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF). President Kagame perceives this as a direct threat to his rule because their political influence could divide the RDF and military institutions, presenting the theoretical possibility of an internal coup.� There are soldiers in the army and some civilians in the Rwandan government who have grown disillusioned with President Kagame�s rule and/or cultivated close personal ties with General Nyamwasa and/or Colonel Karegeya from their days as fellow refugees in Uganda and/or by serving with them when they were members of Uganda�s army in the late 1980s and/or when they were together in the Rwandan military.

To try and stop internal divisions from growing, several key RDF officials were arrested.� Other soldiers suspected of having loyalties to General Nyamwasa and/or Colonel Karegeya were shipped away from Rwanda to Darfur.[5] �Leadership positions in the RDF and civilian government posts were reshuffled.� Some civilian government officials related to arrested soldiers and soldiers suspected of collaborating with General Nyamwasa and Colonel Karegeya were removed from their positions.� Most of the civilian government positions were filled by aspiring politicians that were eager to act as proverbial �Yes Men� for President Kagame in order to advance their personal political careers.� The higher-ranking RDF soldiers who were not kept in prison but were suspected of collaboration or dissent were transferred to new appointments that required more administrative work and reduced their direct contact with sympathetic fellow RDF soldiers. �This allowed President Kagame and his loyal members in the DMI an opportunity to keep a closer eye on their activities.� President Kagame also raised the salaries of his presidential guards as extra insurance.

A Recycled Plan?

The Umuvugizi article goes on to say, �When this strategy did not work as planned as South Africa refused to extradite both generals,[6] the plan was redirected at Mme Victoire Ingabire Umuhoza�s arrest, using agent Major Uwumuremyi, especially because her earlier accusations were widely seen as false.�

Other commentators and analysts�believe the re-arrest is a case of diversionary scapegoating politics intended to deflect attention away from the recently released UN Mapping Report that details widespread, systematic crimes committed by various state and non-state armed actors in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) over the time period of 1993-2003.� The Rwandan army, allied with the late Laurent Kabila’s Alliance of Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Congo-Zaire (ADFL-CZ), was singled out as committing the most serious international crimes; crimes the report clearly states may constitute genocide.[7]

Another potential factor in the targeting of Madame Ingabire is simply the regime’s long-standing penchant for retaliating against all those who oppose them.

Madame Victoire Ingabire�s Crisis

Very shortly after Madame Ingabire returned to her home country�of Rwanda in January 2010,�she visited the Gisozi genocide memorial. �Before she left the memorial, she publicly called for the prosecution of war crimes and crimes against humanity committed against Hutu in 1994, which is part of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda�s (ICTR) mandate.[8]� She also said there should be a commemoration of Hutu victims killed during 1994.[9]

Victoire Ingabire at Gisozi Memorial 16 Jan 2010;

As a result of her comments, she was arrested and accused of genocide ideology, divisionism and genocide denial as well as collaborating with the FDLR.� She was granted bail on these charges but put under strict house arrest and constant surveillance. �She could not leave Kigali by order of the judge.� She also had to report to the local police headquarters regularly for interrogation.

In her re-arrest, the charges against her were amended.� She is now also accused of participating in the formation of a new armed group to oppose the Rwandan government, the Coalition of Democratic Forces (CDF), alleged to be the armed wing of her political party. �Mr. Jean-Bosco Gasasira claims this new charge is fabricated.� He says the DMI conspired to invent the CDF and even issued fake �official� press releases to give the charges perceived legitimacy.� These documents will be used as evidence against her in court.

According to Umuvugizi, �Secret services carefully planned Victoire Ingabire�s case.� When the conspiracy was properly set, the plan was submitted to Kagame who accepted it.� He immediately started to stress that it is not illegal to indict an opposition figure when they are guilty.� He passed on the plan to the police and the prosecutor�s office so that they can start acting on it.� Agent Uwumuremyi was already prepared to falsely accuse Victoire Ingabire of participating in the formation of the army group.�

Umuvugizi�s alleged inside source also stated that, �Victoire Ingabire will be given a slow killer type of poison that will put an end to her political career.� At the same time, agents of special intelligence in diplomatic missions in Rwanda are working hard to convince ambassadors that Victoire Ingabire was part of the terrorist army group.�

Elections, the 2003 Constitution and Rwanda�s Democratic Deficit

Some of the original charges against Madame Ingabire stem from controversial amendments to the 2003 Rwandan constitution.� The RPF has a pattern of consolidating their power during election years.� They accomplish this by passing key legislative initiatives prior to the elections in order to create new laws that can be used as a means to further close off political space.

The 2003 presidential election legitimized Paul Kagame’s position as Rwanda�s president in the eyes of the international community despite numerous elections observers uncovering widespread evidence of various forms of electoral fraud and rigging.[10]

The 2003 elections formally established what some political scientists would term an �illiberal democracy.�� Shortly after the 2003 presidential and parliamentary elections, the RPF replaced the 1991 Rwandan constitution.� The new constitution made “denial” and “minimalization” of the 1994 genocide a crime punishable by law. �It also set forth the crime of inciting “divisionism,” which is often leveled against dissidents and political opponents who talk about or talk in terms of ethnicity in Rwanda. �These terms are all very vaguely defined, allow for a great deal of subjectivity, and provide a potential soft power tool of oppression for the regime.� These laws were legitimized through public diplomacy as part of the regime’s national reconciliation strategy and, they claimed, to help prevent another genocide from taking place.

The new constitution was adopted by referendum during the same general time period�the (then) Chief Prosecutor of the ICTR, Ms. Carla del Ponte, was being forced out of her position at the United Nations due to political pressure applied by the United Kingdom and the United States.� She was conducting investigations into crimes allegedly committed by the RPF in 1994 so that she could bring the perpetrators to trial at the ICTR.[11]

In 2008, the RPF scored a resounding victory in parliamentary elections. The RPF-controlled alliance won 42 of the 53 directly elected seats in the lower house, the Chamber of Deputies. The remaining directly elected seats went to the Social Democratic Party, or PSD (seven), and the Liberal Party, or PL (four). Of the 27 seats that are not directly elected, 24 are set aside for women appointed by the National Women’s Council, two to youth representatives appointed by the National Youth Council, and one to represent the disabled chosen by the National Disabled Council. The voting record of the PSD, PL, and the various appointed members of the lower house in matters of presidential policy show consistent voting in lock-step with the RPF-led coalition. Thus, there�is no opposition to any legislation designated as important by the president.

The members of Rwanda’s upper house, the Senate, are not directly elected by the citizens. �12 are elected by provincial and sector councils, eight are directly appointed by the president (officially to ensure representation for�marginalized communities), four are appointed by the Forum of Political Formations and two are elected by the staff of the Rwandan universities.� Most individuals, members of the organizations and government institution officials that appoint/elect senators are either RPF party members or follow RPF recommendations.� Naturally, the RPF currently holds the majority in the Senate and a democratic deficit is apparent.

Rwanda has a semi-presidential system with a directly elected president and indirectly elected cabinet headed by a prime minister. �However, executive power, officially and unofficially, lies firmly with the Head of State, the president.

The current Rwandan government system is highly authoritarian (some�argue totalitarian). �The president formulates legislation with the advice of his cabinet and trusted advisors then introduces it into parliament. �Given the RPF-alliance majority, the fact RPF party members are bound by the Oath of Oneness and some parliament members� fear the consequences of opposing RPF legislation, RPF power-holders, especially President Kagame, have the ability to push through legislation that tightens their grip on power and erodes the separation of powers with relative ease.

Parliament members are deterred from debating bills and developing their own independent legislation, resulting in a lack of representation for the needs of all the Rwandan people, especially the primarily agriculturalist rural population, which is predominantly Hutu.

2008 Constitutional Amendments

In 2008, the RPF further solidified its grip on power by passing constitutional amendments that created the infamous and vague “genocide ideology” law, a law largely disconnected from the crime of genocide itself.�The non-governmental�organization (NGO)�Article 19 claims the law�is rendered�illegitimate by international law on the grounds Rwanda ratified the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.[12] �However, the treaty’s protection can be restricted if there is a threat to national security, public order, and/or public health.[13] �This is why those who are accused of genocide ideology are also�charged with “divisionism” (the prosecutor claims�the accused poses a danger of inciting ethnic-based political violence and thus constitutes a national security threat)�and/or a charge that pertains directly to national security (aiding a terrorist group, etc.)�to prevent the defense from using this argument in court.

Some elements of the international community are very critical of Rwanda’s genocide ideology law because of the fact it can be easily used as a way to stifle political opposition and dissidents. It was this law that was applied to some of the charges leveled against Madame Ingabire, opposition figure Mr. Deogratias Mushayidi,[14] and also against Professor Peter Erlinder, an American defense attorney who went to Rwanda to defend Madame Ingabire and was subsequently arrested.� He was charged with genocide denial and posing a threat to national security. �He was eventually released on medical grounds following enormous international pressure placed on the Rwandan government.� However, Rwanda�s Prosecutor General, Mr. Martin Ngoga, has threatened to call upon Professor Erlinder to return to Rwanda and stand trial for genocide denial now that the exact terms of the immunity extended to him by the ICTR as a defense attorney are known.[15]

Due to international criticism, President Kagame�s government accepted a review of the genocide ideology law by international human rights organizations. Amnesty International, one of the reviewers, wrote a report heavily criticizing it as fundamentally flawed.� Justice Minister Tharcisse Karugarama has stated that the government is going to alter the genocide ideology law, but thus far the Cabinet has yet to follow through.[16]

There is a�rapidly growing realization by many countries�that some Rwandans who sought political asylum abroad and are now accused of crimes and indicted by the Rwandan government back home are really�innocent victims of politically-motivated charges.� In many cases, the Rwandan government’s requests for trial extradition have been refused on grounds that the accused will not receive a fair trial in Rwanda.� For the same reason, the ICTR has, thus far, refused to transfer its cases to be tried in Rwandan domestic courts.[17]

The Rwandan constitution was also amended so that the 1994 genocide must henceforth be referred to specifically as the “Genocide of the Tutsi,” and thus set in law that the Tutsi are viewed as the true survivors and entrenched in constitutional law the government’s version of exactly what they claim happened during 1994.[18] �A rough template for this amendment was provided by the ICTR’s unprecedented�judicial notice of 2006.[19] � By defining the events of 1994 and the genocide in such explicit terms, the Rwandan government can stifle differing viewpoints on the subject and deter discussion, effectively preventing anyone from voicing scrutiny of the events of 1994.

The amendment promotes self-censorship and aides in the closure of some political cleavages opposition parties can exploit. �Anyone who claims that anything happened or did not happen according to the Rwandan constitutional version of history can be charged in Rwanda with genocidal ideology, revisionism, negationism, and/or other related charges.� No discussion of any alleged RPF crimes committed during 1994 is allowed as a result of the amendment.� To discuss these alleged crimes could result in being charged. [20] �The amendments also act to deter would-be Rwandan witnesses testifying against the RPF in court. �Additional implications of this amendment on Rwandan society and its effect on the country�s reconciliation efforts are many and beyond the scope of this article.

Another constitutional amendment in 2008 extended diplomatic immunity to all former presidents of Rwanda. �This is intended to protect President Kagame from international prosecution via the French and Spanish arrest warrants that accuse President Kagame of crimes by international law. �The French and Spanish courts are currently unable to try him due to his diplomatic immunity as a sitting president.[21]

Media and Rwandan Law

To augment these constitutional amendments, the RPF also pushed through a media law in May 2008. �It allowed these amendments to be applied in an explicit way to�Rwandan media outlets.� The law defined very strict penalties for journalists found guilty of spreading “divisionism” in their writings and/or verbal statements.� It caused self-censorship, restricted opposing viewpoints, led to the suspension of media outlets critical of the Rwandan government, and stifled freedom of speech.� This provides the Rwandan government effective control over the framing and discourse of Rwandan ethnic identity, Rwandan history, reconciliation efforts, and news through pro-RPF and state-owned media outlets that dominate Rwandan communication mediums.� Reporters Without Borders ranked Rwanda 169th out of 178 countries in press freedom for the year 2010.[22]

Rwanda�s Media High Council (MHC), formerly known as the High Council of the Press,�was created by a 2002 law and Presidential Decree.� The MHC is mandated to enforce penalties,�suspend media outlets,�and set the rules that allow media outlets to register and operate in the country.�The MHC is comprised of a Board of Directors and an Executive Secretariat appointed by the Prime Minister and is�”supervised” by the Ministry of Information.� Both�bodies are comprised primarily of RPF party members loyal to the party’s Chairman, President Paul Kagame.� The MHC’s suppression of the freedom of speech was considered so flagrant and abusive of power that the United Kingdom recently suspended all of its funding for the MHC.[23]� However, the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP)�still provides funding.[24]

Some journalists of government critical media outlets, like Umuseso and Newsline Chief Editor Didas Gasana, fled the country following numerous police�interrogations and threats.� His deputy editor, Mr. Jean-Leonard Rugambage, stayed in the country and continued to report news critical of the RPF.� After writing a story alleging the Rwandan government was directly responsible for the attempted assassination of self-exiled General Kayumba Nyamwasa in South Africa, Mr. Rugambage was gunned down right in front of his home on 24 June 2010.� Rwandan police arrested two suspects for the murder.� One confessed in court while the other man who allegedly planned the murder was set free in August following an appeal. �However, some people still believe the arrests and trial were a staged affair and the real killers still roam free with impunity.

The 2010 Election and Recent Legislative�Initiatives

In the context of this article, Rwanda�s political climate in 2010 is not much different from 2003 and 2008 as it appears the RPF seeks to deepen its hold on power through the legislative system once again.� In the pre-election period, members of parliament sought to pass a bill that would allow them powers to interpret the law instead of the Supreme Court.� This legislation was tabled after a constitutional amendment was proposed that would allow “the authentic interpretation of laws shall be done by both Chambers of Parliament acting jointly after the Supreme Court has given an opinion on the matter…”[25]

According to research done by the Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative (CHRI) prior to Rwanda�s admittance into the Commonwealth, few of Rwanda�s judges are independent and a constitutional amendment to Article 162 of 2008 put the National Prosecuting Authority under the Minister of Justice’s purview and allows him to directly intervene in the prosecution process by giving specific orders if he wishes.[26] �Most judges are members of the RPF party bound to loyalty by their Oath of Oneness.� Supreme Court judges are appointed by the cabinet and approved by the Senate.� In 2008, a constitutional amendment removed a Supreme Court judge’s life tenure.� As stated earlier, the Senate majority is held by the RPF.� Rwandan sources claim that President Kagame, in his capacities as Chairman of the RPF and chief executive, is able to push through the cabinet’s nominees with ease.� Additionally, Rwandan sources who wish to remain anonymous claim judicial independence is also often compromised by the outside influence of President Kagame and other influential RPF members, especially when the case is a political-related trial.

The Rwandan parliament currently has a full schedule of legislation. The schedule includes a debate over how to establish Rwanda�s Military University.� There will also be a bill to amend the constitution that will be introduced into the lower house by two deputies of the small Ideal Democratic Party (PDI), Mr. Abbas Mukama and Mr. Omar Hamidou, that will abolish presidential term limits. �His party is also tabling another amendment that would reduce presidential terms from the current seven year mandate to five years.� The PDI is led by Sheikh Musa Fazil Harelimana, who was Vice President of the Electoral Commission during the 2003 presidential polls. �Sheikh Harelimana was eventually appointed Governor of the Western Province and is currently the Internal Security Minister.[27] �PDI member Al Hajj Andre Habib Bumaya fled Rwanda in March after a long-standing falling out with President Kagame.

Other Opposition Parties

The major difference between the 2003 and 2010 presidential elections was the presence of real opposition parties who, although two of them were unregistered because of political maneuvering by Rwandan state institutions,[28] openly challenged the RPF on several key domestic and regional�issues.� Following the 2010 election, many Rwandans expected the RPF to retaliate in some way against those who opposed them. �Given the events that occurred during the run-up to the elections, there was great fear about how this retaliation would manifest, especially given that the retaliation is usually carried out with the principles of collective guilt and collective punishment.

The FDU-Inkingi was not the only party to challenge the RPF.� The Democratic Green Party of Rwanda, comprised of many former RPF members, has many individuals that allegedly continue to receive threats from Rwandan security forces post-election.� The party’s leader, Mr. Frank Habineza, was forced to publicly appear weak as the result of a plan to humiliate and discredit him and the party.� Rwanda’s Minister of Education, Dr. Charles Murigande, threatened to take legal action over certain statements that were made if Mr. Habineza did not issue a public apology.[29]� Dr. Murigande demanded Mr. Habineza publicly say the statements were false and he also had to ask all media outlets to immediately retract the corresponding statements he gave. �With no political leverage and fearing harsher retaliation against himself and other party members if he did not cooperate, Mr. Habineza complied fully with Dr. Murigande’s request.

Bernard Ntaganda Allegedly Approached by President Kagame

Another opposition leader, Mr. Bernard Ntaganda, Chairman of the Socialist Party (PS)-Imberakuri, is in a similar situation to Madame Ingabire.� He is also in prison charged with genocide ideology, divisionism, terrorism, and organizing illegal public gatherings.� He was denied bail.� As the international community began putting pressure on President Kagame to stop oppressing opposition parties, Umuvugizi�s informant claimed that President Kagame allegedly devised a plan to approach Mr. Ntaganda and convince him to character assassinate Madame Ingabire. �The alleged plan was to lure Mr. Ntaganda to the government’s side as they allegedly did with other opposition politicians such as Senator Stanley Safari, who the paper claimed helped discredit members of their own parties in exchange for government posts.� In the case of Mr. Safari, the RPF eventually turned against him.� He was dismissed from his post as a senator after a gacaca court sentenced him to life imprisonment for allegedly killing Tutsi in Butare during 1994. �He fled before the trial sentencing and is currently in exile.

The article stated Mr. Ntaganda was originally approached while he was in prison. �He was asked to sign official statements apologizing to President Kagame and to publicly disown Madame Ingabire. �The PS-Imberakuri party is allied with the FDU-Inkingi and the Democratic Green Party of Rwanda in the Permanent Consultative Council of Opposition Parties. �In exchange, he allegedly was to be released from prison and rewarded with an important post in the newly elected government. �The informant claimed that Mr. Ntaganda was called to the �1930� prison director�s office one night to meet with those in charge of convincing him. �It is claimed that he was taken outside the prison several times as coercion to try and convince him. However, Mr. Ntaganda categorically refused to sign the statements. �As punishment, he was transferred to solitary confinement under atrocious conditions.[30]� He went on a hunger strike to protest and quickly fell gravely ill. �Sources claim he was admitted to Kigali�s King Faycal Hospital.

Rwandan Politics

President Kagame constantly repeats to the press that it is not illegal to arrest and bring someone before a court of law who allegedly threatens national security. �This statement was heard in his speech during the recent cabinet swearing-in ceremony. President Kagame seeks to convince the international community that the unregistered opposition parties are comprised only of individuals with questionable backgrounds that pose an imminent and serious threat to Rwandan national security and reconciliation efforts. �He also complained that some countries are hypocritical for asking him to allow space for political opposition while they, in their own respective democratic countries, punish politicians who hold certain political views. �Using the example of Dutch politician Geert Wilders, President Kagame said, �We know that they (The Netherlands) arrested a member of parliament because of his anti-Muslim views, but they condemn our arrest of those with genocide ideology?�

In Rwanda’s political arena, one man, the Democratic Green Party of Rwanda’s Vice President Andre Kagwa Rwisereka, paid the ultimate price for his oppositional political beliefs and convictions.� Mr. Rwisereka�s nearly decapitated body was found near Butare on 14 July 2010.��As with Mr. Rugambage’s murder case, a suspect was arrested by Rwandan police but many people are skeptical of the investigation�s integrity. �A number of official statements the Rwandan police made about Mr. Rwisereka’s murder investigation have been soundly refuted.[31]

Whether Madame Ingabire and/or Mr. Ntaganda�also end up paying the ultimate price for their respective political beliefs remains to be seen and the outcome is partially dependent on the actions (or lack thereof) taken immediately by individuals of good will, associations, NGOs, multilateral institutions and sovereign governments who categorically value freedom, democracy, and the rule of law for all.� Now that the presidential election is over and the initial fervor caused by the release of the UN Mapping Report has seemingly passed, the so-called mainstream press no longer seems to be much interested in the small African country. �However,�political opponents and critics of the regime continue to be oppressed.� It is not just experienced by an American lawyer and professor with the National Lawyers Guild and several law associations behind him.�The majority of victims are Rwandan nationals who have limited to no�resources.� The international community and Rwanda’s key donor/allied states have been shamefully silent post-election about the situation in Rwanda.� Many donor/allied states still continue to support the regime in various capacities, allowing the state of affairs described in this article (which is the current status quo in Rwanda) to continue with impunity, sending the regime a message that they can continue to engage in these practices out of sight without fear of penalties.� This is very problematic because sustaining the current political climate in Rwanda will sow the seeds for future conflict on a potentially large scale.

[1] http://www.theproxylake.com/2010/10/leaked-secret-services-to-eliminate-victoire-ingabire/.� Accessed 24 October 2010.

[2] The original Umuvugizi article written�by Mr. Jean-Bosco Gasasira in Kinyarwanda is available at: http://www.umuvugizi.com/artviewer.php?ArtID=0000000303.

[3] Mr. Gasasira was acquitted by the Kigali High Court in absentia of defamation and invasion of privacy in September following an appeal.� He had already fled the country when the verdict was given.

[4] There have been numerous allegations that the Rwandan government has produced coached witnesses for trials.� For some further information, see: International Criminal Tribunal of Rwanda.� �ICTR-ADAD Submissions as Amicus Curiae.�� Case No. ICTR-2000-551. �The Prosecutor vs. Ildephonse Hategekimana.� 10 April 2008.� pg. 10-11; Reyntjens, Filip.� �Expert Report for the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda.�� Case No. ICTR-96-15-I.� The Prosecutor vs. Joseph Kanyabashi.� 19 October 2007.� pg. 15-16; International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda.� �Joseph Nzirorera�s Motion to Recall Witness BTH.�� Case No. ICTR-98-44-T.� The Prosecutor vs. Joseph Nzirorera.� 3 March 2008; International Criminal Court for Rwanda.� �Decision on Witness GFR�s Recantation of His Evidence.�� Case No. ICTR-00-56-T.� The Prosecutor vs. Augustin Ndindiliyimana, Francois-Xavier Nzuwonemeye, Innocent Sagahutu and Augustin Bizimungu.� 10 February 2010. (Documents available upon request.)

[5] Rwanda is the second largest troop contributor to the joint African Union/United Nations Mission in Darfur (UNAMID).� They have over 3,200 soldiers and police on the ground.� Rwandan General Patrick Nyamvumba is the mission�s Force Commander. (African Union � United Nations Mission in Darfur.� �Rwandan President Receives UNAMID JSR.�� Press Release.� UNAMID PR/010-2010.� 2 March 2010.� http://unamid.unmissions.org/Default.aspx?tabid=899&ctl=Details&mid=1072&ItemID=7929.� Accessed 25 October 2010.

[6] South Africa does not have an extradition treaty with Rwanda and both individuals have official refugee status in South Africa.

[7] The “leaked” and “official” versions of the report, along with the official responses of the governments of Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of the Congo, can be found at http://www.friendsofthecongo.org/resource-center/united-nations-report.html.

[8] United Nations Security Council.� �Resolution 955 (1994).�� S/RES/955.� 8 November 1994.� pg. 2.

[9] �Rwanda Urged to Ensure Opposition Leader Receives Fair Trial.�� Amnesty International.� 28 April 2010.� http://www.amnesty.org/en/news-and-updates/rwanda-urged-ensure-opposition-leader-receives-fair-trial-2010-04-28.� Accessed 24 October 2010.

[10] The following are important�reports on the 2003 presidential/parliamentary or the 2008 Rwandan parliamentary elections:

A. Darby, Orrvar and Ingrid Samset.� �Rwanda: Presidential and Parliamentary Elections 2003.�� Norwegian Institute of Human Rights (NORDEM).� December 2003.� http://www.cmi.no/publications/file/1770-rwanda-presidential-and-parliamentary-elections.pdf.

B. �Rwanda: Run-up to Presidential Elections Marred by Threats and Harassment.�� Amnesty International.� AFR 47/010/2003.� 21 August 2003.� http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/info/AFR47/010/2003.

C. �National Democratic Institute (NDI) Assessment of Rwanda�s Pre-election Political Environment and the Role ��of Political Parties.�� National Democratic Institute.� 22 September 2003.� http://www.ndi.org/node/14548.

D. �Preparing for Elections: Tightening Security in the Name of Unity.�� Human Rights Watch.��� May 2003.� http://www.hrw.org/en/reports/2003/05/08/preparing-elections.

E. �Republic of Rwanda � Final Report: Legislative Elections to the Chamber of Deputies 15-18 September 2008.�� European Union Election Observer Mission to Rwanda.� 26 January 2009.� http://www.eueomrwanda.org/EN/Final_Report.html.

[11] Del Ponte, Carla and Chuck Sudetic.� �Madame Prosecutor: Confrontations with Humanity�s Worst Criminals and the Culture of Impunity.� ��2009.� Other Press: New York, NY.� pg. 223-239.

[12] The full text of the Convention can be viewed at: http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/ccpr.htm.

[13] Article 19.� �Comment on the Law Relating to the Punishment of the Crime of Genocide Ideology in Rwanda.�� September 2009.�� http://www.article19.org/pdfs/analysis/rwanda-comment-on-the-law-relating-to-the-punishment-of-the-crime-of-genocid.pdf.

[14] Mr. Mushayidi was acquitted of genocide ideology, divisionism, revisionism, and collaborating with a terrorist group (FDLR).� However, he was convicted of being a threat to national security, inciting violence, and using forged documents.� He was sentenced to life in prison on 17 September 2010.

[15] International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda.� �Decision on Aloys Ntabakuze�s Motion for Injunctions Against the Government of Rwanda Regarding the Arrest and Investigation of Lead Counsel Peter Erlinder.�� Case No. ICTR-98-41-A.� The Prosecutor vs. Theoneste Bagosora, Aloys Ntabakuze and Anatole Nsengiyumva.� 6 October 2010.� (Document available upon request.)

[16] �Rwandan Cabinet Reviews Genocide Ideology Law,� Radio France Internationale.� 11 August 2010.

[17] The Amnesty International report is available at: http://www.amnesty.org/en/news-and-updates/report/vague-laws-used-criminalise-criticism-government-rwanda-2010-08-31.� An earlier report on the current shortcomings of the Rwandan judicial system written by Human Rights Watch can be found at: http://www.hrw.org/node/62098.

[18] Government of the Republic of Rwanda.� �Genocide.�� http://www.gov.rw/page.php?id_article=19.� Accessed 24 October 2010.

[19] International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda.� �ICTR Appeals Chamber Takes Judicial Notice of Genocide in Rwanda.�� Press Release.� ICTR/INFO-9-2-481.EN.� 20 June 2006.� http://69.94.11.53/ENGLISH/PRESSREL/2006/481.htm.� Accessed 24 October 2010.

[20] Some of the Rwandan national ICTR defense investigators carrying out their official mandates were either intimidated or arrested and rendered unable to continue their work. (International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda.� �ICTR-ADAD Submissions as Amicus Curiae: The Prosecutor vs. Ildephonse Hategekimana.�� Case No. ICTR-2000-551.� 10 April 2008.� Pg. 9-10.)� Document available upon request.

[21] Government of the Republic of Rwanda.� �Ex-presidents Given Immunity.�� 18 July 2008.� http://www.gov.rw/sub.php?page=print&id_article=23.� Accessed 24 October 2010.

Note: Mr. Gasasira�s positive comments were made while he was not in exile and feared for his life if he challenged the regime.

[22] �Press Freedom Index 2010.�� Reporters Without Borders.� October 2010.� http://en.rsf.org/press-freedom-index-2010,1034.html.� Accessed 24 October 2010.

[23] House of Commons Debate.� 7 July 2010.� c353.� http://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2010-07-07a.353.1.� Accessed 24 October 2010.

[24] United Nations Development Programme.� �Rwanda: Programme for Strengthening Good Governance.�� 2007.� http://www.undp.org.rw/Democratic-project46259.html?id=112.� Accessed 24 October 2010.

[25] “MPs Seek Powers to Interpret the Law,� Edwin Musoni.� The New Times.� 11 February 2010.

[26] Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative.� �Rwanda�s Application for Membership of the Commonwealth: Report and Recommendations of the Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative.�� August 2009.� pg. 46.� http://www.humanrightsinitiative.org/publications/hradvocacy/rwanda’s_application_for_membership_of_the_commonwealth.pdf.

[27] �PDI Wants Presidential 7-year Term Reduced.�� Rwandan News Agency. http://www.rwandagateway.org/spip.php?article797.� Accessed 24 October 2010.

[28] The PS-Imburakuri is an officially registered political party in Rwanda.

[29] Permanent Consultative Council of Opposition Parties in Rwanda.� �Rwandan Opposition Calls for a Transitional Government of National Unity.�� Press Release.� 31 August 2010.� http://rwandagreendemocrats.org/spip.php?article103.� Accessed 25 October 2010.

[30] For further information on conditions inside Rwandan prisons, see: Tertsakian, Carina.� �Le Chateau: The Lives of Prisoners in Rwanda.�� 2008.� Arves Books: London, UK.

[31] �Rwanda: Allow Independent Autopsy of Opposition Politician.�� Human Rights Watch.� 21 July 2010. http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2010/07/20/rwanda-allow-independent-autopsy-opposition-politician.� Accessed 24 October 2010.

A court in Rwanda Tuesday denied bail to Victoire Ingabire, an opposition leader arrested earlier this month, a statement from the prosecutor’s office said.

“The Gasabo Intermediate Court refused Victoire Ingabire bail on charges that include collaborating with a terrorist organisation,” the statement said.

“In public, Victoire Ingabire masquerades as a politician. But behind the scenes she operates as a terrorist leader and financier,” chief prosecutor Martin Ngoga was quoted as saying.

Ingabire, the leader of the unregistered United Democratic Forces (FDU), was arrested October 14 in Kigali on the basis of information given by a former military officer for “organising a terrorist group”.

According to police, the officer, who was arrested the day before Ingabire on the Rwanda-DR Congo border, said he had received her assistance to “set up a military wing of the FDU”.

“Mr Ngoga said that Ms. Ingabire’s personal safety is assured throughout the judicial process and that she will receive a fair trial,” the statement said. Ngoga thanked countries in the region for their collaboration and urged other countries from which Rwanda had requested information, including Belgium, the Netherlands, Switzerland and the United States to cooperate in what he called “this far-reaching terrorist investigation”.

Ingabire, who has appealed the court decision, was first arrested in April on accusations of associating with a terrorist group, denying genocide, promoting genocide ideology and division.

Key among those accusations is her alleged association with the DR Congo-based Hutu rebels Kigali blames for involvement in the genocide.

After her release, she was placed under police investigation and barred from travelling outside the capital Kigali pending trial.

Authorities also barred her attempts to register the FDU and run for the August 9 presidential election which was resoundingly won by President Paul Kagame.

In the Netherlands, the family of Ingabire is worried. Ingabires daughter Raissa (21) : “I fear for her destiny. I know her situation. I know how she’s suffering. Since she has been arrested, I did not talk to her. I cannot write her.”

[ANP/AFP/RNW]

By Kezio-Musoke-David

Kigali – The Tanzania-based international tribunal hearing the cases of Rwandan genocide suspects urged the central African nation on Friday not to prosecute a U.S. lawyer over a charge of genocide denial. Rwanda’s chief prosecutor Martin Ngoga on Wednesday said American lawyer Peter Erlinder could be summoned within two weeks. Denying the 1994 genocide, during which about 800,000 ethnic Tutsis and moderate Hutus were butchered to death, is a crime in Rwanda.

Roland Amoussouga, spokesman for the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR), said Rwanda would have to respect Erlinder’s court immunity if the charges related to his work at the tribunal.

“Rwanda has the right to go ahead and prosecute Erlinder. However, they have also committed to respect the functional immunity he has at the tribunal,” Amoussouga told Reuters by telephone from the court’s base in Arusha.

“Prosecution can only go on if it is in relation to his private work and not with work related to the ICTR,” Amoussouga said.

Rwanda arrested Erlinder on charges of genocide denial in May when he flew to the country to defend opposition leader Victoire Ingabire, who had been arrested over accusations of belonging to a terrorist group and promoting genocide ideology.

Erlinder was released on bail on health grounds a month later although the charges remained. Ngoga said at the time the charges related remarks made in earlier statements and publications but did not cite specific comments.

Ngoga said Rwanda would turn to Interpol if Erlinder failed to respond to an eventual summons.

“He is a lawyer and he knows the consequences of jumping bail,” the chief prosecutor told an ICTR news conference on Wednesday.

Under a 2003 law, persons condemned for denying or grossly minimising genocide, attempting to justify genocide or destroy evidence related to it are liable to a minimum of 10 years and a maximum of 20 in prison.

Rwanda last week re-arrested Ingabire who was barred from standing in August’s presidential election which Kagame won by a landslide.

Members of her unregistered United Democratic Forces (UDF) party fear for her health and said she had been visited by a paramedic on Friday. “We call again for a medical parole without any further delay,” UDF said in a statement.

[Reuters]

by the PPC.

The Permanent Consultative Council of Opposition Parties in Rwanda-PCC, which brings together the United Democratic Forces, Democratic Green Party of Rwanda and the Social Party Imberakuri, is calling for a Transitional Government of National Unity involving all stakeholders which will organize free and fair elections. We once again urgently call for the release of all political prisoners, opening up of political space and an International Inquiry into the death of the Green Party�s Vice President, Andre KAGWA RWISEREKA.

All the three opposition parties were blocked from participating in the past concluded presidential elections which the incumbent rigged with over 93% after running with stooge candidates. General Paul KAGAME refused to register the Democratic Green Party of Rwanda after a whole year of risky peaceful struggle that was started on 14th August 2009. He also refused to register the United Democratic Forces-FDU Inkingi and imprisoned its leader Ms. Victoire Ingabire in April 2010, she was later released on bail but still under an extended house arrest.

The ruling Rwandan Patriotic Front used all strategies to block the opposition from registering and participating in the elections. Some of which were very violent, like the sabotage of the Green Party congress of 30th October 2009, where the party delegates from all over the country were beaten up by armed state operatives and the meeting banned by police on grounds of trumped up security reasons. Similar events also happened to Ms.Victoire Ingabire Leader of FDU-Inkingi, she was beaten up in a Government office early in the year and has been charged on politically motivated crimes, such as harboring the genocide ideology and collaboration with a terrorist group.

The Social Party Imberakuri had managed to get registered in July 2009, but was later broken up into several factions, one of them now in the Government�s Political Parties Forum. Its Founding President, Maitre Bernard NTAGANDA is in prison since 24th June 2010.

On 11th August 2010, the Democratic Green Party of Rwanda� was much alarmed and shocked by the statements from the Rwandan Minister of Education, Dr. Charles MURIGANDE, that the Green Party� Vice President had died in a car accident.

In the same statement the Minister said that if opposition colleague Victoire Ingabire died in a car accident, that this should not be blamed on the Government of Rwanda.� The same day, 11th August, Victoire survived a car accident on her way back home.

Frank Habineza, faced both physical and indirect threats this year, he also received death threats, this was also published in UMUSESO Newspaper late February 2010 that he was going to be killed within 60 days. Although, this did not happen, his Vice President was decapitated.

URGENT CALL FOR ACTION:

• We urgently call for urgent direct talks between the ruling block and the genuine opposition parties for a Transitional Government of National Unity involving all stakeholders which will organize free and fair elections. We believe that this will be the only solution to achieve sustainable peace in Rwanda.
• We demand an immediate release from Prison of Mr. Bernard NTAGANDA, who was detained on 24th June 2010
• We demand an immediate release and drop of all charges against Ms. Victoire INGABIRE, she is under extended house arrest since April 2010
• We demand immediate release of Ms. Seraphine MUKAMANA a suffering mother in Kigali Maximum prison, since November 2009, she is the Green Party�s Kigali City Coordinator.
• We demand immediate release of Mr. Martin NTAVUKA, FDU INKINGI District leader in KIGALI capital City.
• We demand an immediate trial of the killers of Mr.Andre KAGWA RWISEREKA (Vice President of the Green Democratic Party of Rwanda) and we still call for an international independent inquiry into the death of Mr. RWISEREKA and an independent autopsy as Human Rights Watch has already requested.
• We call for the release of all political prisoners, these include Mr. Charles NTAKIRUTINKA (since 2001, the former minister in the Rwandan government, is serving a 10-year sentence, he was charged for helping launch the Democratic Party for Renewal (PDR-Ubuyanja, Parti D�mocratique du Renouveau) in collaboration with the Former President Pasteur BIZIMUNGU), Dr. Th�oneste NIYITEGEKA (former presidential aspirant in the 2003 elections), Mr. Deogratias MUSHAYIDI (PDP IMANZI leader.
• We call for the opening up of political space and registration of all opposition parties.

Considering the whole dimension of the leaked UN report accusing Rwanda of possible genocide in Congo, we encourage the United Nations and the International Community to move forward and to bring to book the responsible of wholesale war crimes and crimes against humanity.� The impunity is one of the key factor of the unrest in the African great Lakes region.

We call for the use of non-violent means to solve Rwandan problems and request all Rwandans not to use violence.

Issued at Kigali, 31st August 2010

Mrs. Victoire INGABIRE UMUHOZA
Chairperson, United Democratic Forces, FDU INKINGI

Mr. Frank HABINEZA
Founding President, Democratic Green Party of Rwanda

Mr. Theobald MUTARAMBIRWA
Secretary General, PS Imberakuri

Kigali – Responding to demands from Amnesty International that the new government must urgently review their “vague ‘genocide ideology’ and ‘sectarianism’ laws” allegedly used to suppress political dissent, the Justice Ministry says it has such a plan but not because of outside pressure.

Rwanda does not make laws to please Amnesty International or any other outsiders, said Justice Minister Tharcisse Karugarama.

The London-based rights group said in a report Tuesday that the loose wording was being misused to criminalise criticism of the government and legitimate opposition.

�The ambiguity of the ‘genocide ideology’ and ‘sectarianism’ laws mean Rwandans live in fear of being punished for saying the wrong thing,” said Erwin van der Borght, Africa Programme director at Amnesty International.

“Most take the safe option of staying silent.”

In a 116-page report, Amnesty says its research based on information from local civil society, judges and lawyers, the two laws were found to be troubling.

But speaking Tuesday morning to the BBC, the Justice Minister Karugarama accused Amnesty International of making baseless allegations without doing any research on the impact of the laws.

�What census have they carried�Are they the spokesperson of the Rwandan people?� said Karugarama, describing the allegations from the group as �wild�.

Government announced in April that it was reviewing the Genocide Ideology law. RNA also reported recently that Karugarama had invited campaigns groups including Amnesty International to give their ideas on the preferred changes.

The complaints against the sectarianism law are just coming up.

Karugarama said: �We do not make laws to satisfy Amnesty International or any other organization�we make laws to satisfy our legal and national requirements.�

Cabinet has engaged two unnamed academic institutions to help with the review of the Genocide law. Karugarama has commissioned two independent groups to look at the law. One is an academic institution in north America, the other a group in Europe.

Available figures suggest some 900 people are in jail over the contested Genocide law.

[ARI-RNA]

Rwanda: “Living in fear of saying the wrong thing”

New Amnesty report criticises vague Rwanda laws

Amnesty International has today [31 August] urged Rwanda�s new government to review its vague laws of �genocide ideology� and �sectarianism� which can lead to imprisonment for up to 25 years.

In its new report entitled �Safer to Stay Silent: The Chilling Effect of Rwanda�s Laws on �Genocide Ideology� and �Sectarianism� Amnesty raised concerns that the laws are being used to suppress political dissent and stifle freedom of speech.

It details how the vague wording of these laws is misused to criminalise criticism of the government and dissent by opposition politicians, human rights activists and journalists.

Amnesty International�s Africa Programme Director, Erwin van der Borght said:

�The ambiguity of the �genocide ideology� and �sectarianism� law means Rwandans live in fear of being punished for saying the wrong thing. Most take the safe option of staying silent.�

Amnesty International found that many Rwandans, even those with specialist knowledge of Rwandan law, were unable to precisely define �genocide ideology�. Even judges noted that the law was broad and abstract.

Accusations of �genocide ideology� have also been used to settle personal disputes. Current laws allow for the criminal punishment of children as young as 12, accused of genocide ideology. Parents, guardians and teachers can all face the threat of �inoculating� a child with �genocide ideology�.

Sentences for convicted adults range from 10 to 25 years� imprisonment.

The �genocide ideology� and �sectarianism� laws were introduced to restrict speech that could promote hatred in the decade following the 1994 genocide. While prohibiting hate speech is a legitimate aim, the approach used by the Rwandan Government has violated international law.

The Rwandan government announced a review of the �genocide ideology� law in April 2010. The government should also launch a review of the �sectarianism� law and demonstrate a new approach to freedom of expression in order to stem the chilling effect of past legislation.

Amnesty International is urging the Rwandan government to significantly amend the laws, to publicly express a commitment to freedom of expression, to review past convictions and to train police and prosecutors on how to investigate accusations.

Erwin van der Borght added:

�We hope that the government review will result in a meaningful revision of the �genocide ideology� and �sectarianism� laws, so that freedom of expression is protected both on paper and in practice.�

Notes to Editors

� Rwanda�s �genocide ideology� law was promulgated in 2008 and the �sectarianism� law was promulgated in 2001.

� According to government figures, there were 1,034 trials related to �genocide ideology� in 2007-2008. These were prosecuted under charges ranging from assassinations to damage to cattle.

� According to government figures, 435 �genocide ideology� cases were tried at first instance in 2009.

� In the lead-up to the 9 August presidential elections two opposition candidates were arrested and charged, among other things, with �genocide ideology�. A newspaper editor was also arrested on the same charge.

� The BBC and VOA have both been accused of disseminating �genocide ideology� by the government. These accusations led to the suspension of the BBC Kinyarwanda service for two months from April 2009.

[Amnesty International]