Link

CAMPAIGN FOR JUSTICE FOR HABYALIMANA AND NTARYAMIRA

24 Apr

CAMPAIGN FOR JUSTICE FOR HABYALIMANA AND NTARYAMIRA

Source: rwandansrights.org

Justice for Habyalimana & Ntaryamira Campaign

Advertisements

Pourquoi j’ai commémoré le 06 avril ?/ KUKI NAGIYE KWIBUKA UWA 06 MATA?

19 Apr

Vérité, Mémoire, Justice et prévention

Pourquoi j’ai commémoré le 06 avril ?

Parce que je considère que le 06/04/1994 restera à jamais tristement mémorable dans les annales de l’histoire politique du Rwanda ;

Parce que je suis intimement convaincu que l’attentat du 06/04/1994, en emportant les Présidents Juvénal Habyarimana du Rwanda et son homologue Cyprien Ntaryamira du Burundi sans épargner tout l’équipage de l’avion qui les transportait, aura déclenché des événements qui ont tout chamboulé dans ma propre vie et dans celles des millions d’autres tant au Rwanda que dans la région voire dans le monde entier.

Bien que je refuse obstinément toute démarche qui tenterait de justifier ou d’atténuer, par quelque procédé que ce soit, l’extermination des Tutsi du Rwanda, une « solution » annoncée, relayée par les médias et fièrement revendiquée par des autorités de l’Etat rwandais qui sont allés jusqu’à l’assimiler à une œuvre patriotique ;

J’estime cependant, en mon âme et conscience, qu’il serait malhonnête et injuste d’ignorer ou de minimiser, pour quelque motif que ce soit, les victimes Hutu massacrées par les mêmes hordes d’assassins que celles dont la besogne essentielle était de purifier le Rwanda des ennemis et leurs complices tels qu’on désignait les Tutsi en général et des Hutu opposants réels ou supposés au régime d’alors.

Je me suis rendu le soir du 07 avril 2006 au Palais de justice où se déroulait la cérémonie de commémoration du génocide des Tutsi organisée par l’Association Ibuka. Je n’y ai pourtant passé qu’une petite demi-heure, le temps d’écouter deux allocutions prononcées avec une émotion palpable face aux centaines de bougies allumées par les rescapés venus nombreux pour l’occasion comme chaque année à la même date et au même lieu. Une toute petite demi-heure, le temps de me faire agresser verbalement par un employé de l’ambassade du Rwanda mon pays, visiblement choqué par ma présence, la veille, au Mémorial du génocide rwandais érigé dans la Commune de Woluwé saint Pierre, où étaient venus se recueillir, dans le calme et la discipline, 150 compatriotes presque tous Hutu, à l’initiative des associations rwandaises COSAR et CLIR.

« Comment peux-tu oser venir ici commémorer le génocide des Tutsi alors que tu étais hier à Woluwé Saint Pierre aux côtés des Bahutu? » me dit mon « agresseur » du jour non sans un brin d’énervement. Et un vieil ami journaliste de s’interposer aussitôt, histoire de calmer les esprits. Mais j’avais eu le temps de répliquer faisant remarquer à mon interlocuteur qu’à Kigali, les choses se passaient sans heurts. « Allez-vous protester contre le fait qu’après avoir joyeusement partagé un plat de maïs, Kagame, Rucagu, Bazivamo, Mukezamfura, Gatsinzi(j’aurais pu en citer davantage), soient assis côte à côte pour commémorer le génocide de 1994 ?». Je n’ai pas eu de réponse à ma question. Nous nous sommes donc séparés sur un score nul !

De quel crédit pourrait-on jouir quand, concomitamment, on prétend sceller la « réconciliation » à Kigali tout en semant la zizanie et la discorde dans les rangs de la diaspora rwandaise disséminée en Afrique, en Europe et en Amérique ?

Par quelle magie le Gouvernement FPR se consacrerait-il à l’unité tout en poussant ses ambassadeurs à entretenir ou à alimenter la division ? Serait-ce la fameuse vieille devise du « diviser pour régner » ? La diaspora rwandaise devrait pouvoir compter, dans pareilles circonstances, sur ses propres unificateurs.

Allons-nous ériger au Rwanda un Hutuland et un Tutsiland et dresser un mur de fer entre les deux composantes d’une même Nation fondée sur le même patrimoine linguistique et culturel ? Comment arriver à distinguer ces « homelands » respectifs quand ils n’existent que dans l’imagination florissante et débordante de certains esprits diversement qualifiables?

Quand nous n’agissons pas en Caen, nous imitons Ponce Pilate !

Face au drame national, les Rwandais savent se défiler. Avec une facilité désarmante, nous nous prêtons trop souvent au jeu de la malice qui frise légèreté et irresponsabilité.

Le régime de Juvénal Habyarimana ayant été dominé par une clique originaire du Nord, les Bakiga seraient donc responsables de toute la tragédie et devraient, seuls, et en tant que tels, en supporter toutes les conséquences ! C’est ce que tente d’accréditer dans l’opinion certains compatriotes selon lesquels, les autres Hutu n’auraient rien à se reprocher.

Les rebelles Tutsi du FPR ayant attaqué le pays en octobre 1990 et très probablement exécuté l’attentat du 06/04/1994, ils doivent assumer tout ce qui a suivi, estiment les autres, dans une ultime tentative de disculper les Gouvernements Hutu de leurs écrasantes responsabilités.

Le Rwanda ayant été colonisé par la Belgique dont l’influence se fera, peu à peu, supplanter par celle de la France, les Rwandais n’y seraient pour rien, ce sont les blancs qui ont tout fomenté ! N’oublions pas ceux qui réduisent ce drame à un coup monté par la domination anglo-saxonne.

Dans une telle perspective, tous seraient « innocents » et personne ne serait finalement « coupable ».

« Innocentes » ces autorités nationales, préfectorales, communales et autres hommes et femmes des médias qui, dans le but d’optimaliser le « travail », auront massivement mobilisé la population en l’incitant à commettre des crimes.

« Inoffensifs » ces militaires et ces gendarmes qui, au lieu de repousser l’armée d’en face, préférèrent participer à la « solution finale » quand ils n’y furent pas plus ou moins contraints.

« Enfants de chœur » ces rebelles du FPR qui, pour accélérer leur marche vers la victoire, et, dans une volonté freinée de domination, n’hésitèrent pas à mitrailler et à bombarder des camps où se concentraient des milliers de civils sans armes.

Seule serait finalement responsable cette Communauté internationale dont, jusqu’au bout, les deux belligérants se disputeront les faveurs. En tête de peloton et particulièrement coupable, cette « méchante » France qui, en pleine guerre et alors que le génocide est presque consommé, conçut et monta une mission militaro humanitaire, la fameuse opération « Turquoise » qui aurait pu empêcher et qui, en tout cas, gêna ou retarda la victoire des ex-rebelles !

C’est pourquoi face à tant de victimes, il y a en définitive, ce qui est paradoxal, si peu de regrets. Kofi Annan pour l’ONU, Madeleine Albright et Bill Clinton pour les Etats-Unis, Louis Michel et Guy Verhofstadt pour la Belgique… Reste cette France si « fière » à laquelle Kagame reprocha vivement sa véhémence.

Pour le reste et c’est pour moi l’essentiel, on attend toujours le repentir des deux principaux belligérants. Coté des « vaincus », l’ex-Premier Ministre Jean Kambanda, jugé et condamné par le TPIR, aurait exprimé ses regrets avant de se raviser, arguant que ceux-ci lui auraient été extorqués dans des conditions « illégales » et par des méthodes contestables. Côté des « vainqueurs » par contre, aucun repentir de la part du FPR et de son Chef qui se posent plutôt en victimes et revendiquent avec arrogance d’avoir arrêté le génocide. Ce qui, au regard de la réalité, semble absolument surréaliste.

Ca doit se savoir !

J’ai remarqué tant à Woluwé Saint Pierre qu’au Palais de justice, des enfants de 12 ans ou parfois moins. Des jeunes de 15 à 25 ans ou plus, visages perplexes reflétant une incompréhension au bord de la révolte. Je les ai observés et cela m’a donné à réfléchir.

Quel héritage politique, dans les conditions actuelles, entendrions-nous léguer à ces jeunes générations et à celles de demain ? Comment peut-on persévérer dans ces politiques irresponsables et criminelles qui figent ou poussent des personnes voire des pans entiers de la société dans des positions dangereuses ? De manière diverse, bien que parfois maladroitement, les Rwandais, toutes catégories confondues, réclament de plus en plus un espace de dialogue. C’est qu’ils se sentent à l’étroit dans ces catégories imposées et convenues sans que personne n’ait cru nécessaire de recueillir leur avis. Ils étouffent sous cette chape de plomb sous laquelle ploie un peuple privé de parole et de liberté. Ils aspirent à la discussion et au débat. Ils veulent savoir et comprendre ce qui leur est arrivé.

Puis-je réitérer une seule proposition au Président de la République ? Je pense qu’il est temps d’ouvrir les yeux et les oreilles afin d’entendre la clameur du peuple. Ce peuple tant manipulé, brisé et meurtri et sur lequel une classe politique irresponsable tente aujourd’hui de se décharger notamment à travers les « gacaca », cet instrument au service de l’Etat FPR par lequel il croit, impunément, imposer une justice à sens unique. Ce peuple veut désormais vivre et vivre libre.

Je suggère au Président qui, le temps d’une campagne électorale, assimila le Rwanda à sa propre maison, d’en concéder à son peuple au moins un compartiment dans lequel celui-ci pourrait se retrouver et se réconcilier avec lui-même et avec sa tragique histoire.

Avec mes amis du Partenariat-Intwari, j’ai constamment plaidé pour des solutions pacifiques au conflit intra rwandais dont les répercussions régionales ont déjà coûté plusieurs millions de vies humaines tant au Rwanda qu’en République démocratique du Congo. Tout en restant attaché au règlement pacifique des conflits, je tiens aujourd’hui à dire à Paul Kagame que s’il devrait persister dans son attitude méprisante et autiste par rapport aux doléances de son peuple, celui-ci n’aurait alors d’autre choix que d’investir toute la maison au lieu de se contenter d’un simple compartiment.

Car en toute honnêteté,

Si exiger que la lumière soit faite sur l’attentat du 06/04/1994 ;

Si s’interroger à haute voix sur les auteurs de cet attentat en leur déniant toute prétention de réconcilier le peuple rwandais ;

Si se remémorer cet attentat comme l’événement qui fit basculer le Rwanda et la région des Grands Lacs dans une tragédie indicible ;

Si penser que la mémoire des victimes Tutsi du génocide ne peut exclure celle de leurs compatriotes Hutu broyés par la même machine à tuer ainsi que les milliers de Hutu innocents victimes des massacres encore non qualifiés de l’ex-rébellion du FPR ;

Si revenir sur les massacres perpétrés contre les réfugiés rwandais dont des femmes et des enfants en ex-Zaïre, Hutu dans leur majorité, et exiger que justice soit rendue ;

Si estimer que dans la tragédie rwandaise et régionale les responsabilités sont largement partagées ;

Si refuser de céder au simplisme criminel qui tente cyniquement d’enfermer le peuple rwandais en deux camps absolument inconciliables à savoir celui des méchants(Hutu) et celui des bons(Tutsi) ;

Si rejeter fermement ce schéma grotesque qui voudrait que seuls les Hutu qui acceptent de faire allégeance au FPR obtiennent la grâce d’être blanchis quand ceux qui rompent avec lui ou qui refusent d’y adhérer sont automatiquement assimilés aux « interahamwe » et aux « génocidaires » ;

Si considérer que le Général Major Paul Kagame est un autocrate dangereux et soupçonné de pires crimes de guerre ;

Si contester un ordre établi car injuste et inique ;

Si sans distinction, tous ceux et celles qui osent bousculer ces schémas convenus doivent être inculpés de négationnisme ou de révisionnisme du génocide de 1994, alors je devrais l’être et j’assumerai.

J’assume totalement mon geste que je dédie à la mémoire de tous les innocents, de quelque bord qu’ils soient qui, sans haine ni rancune, ont péri injustement de la folie meurtrière de leurs semblables. Une folie encouragée et encadrée par un Etat indigne de ce nom, et par des belligérants qui tous, dans leurs choix politiques, tactiques et stratégiques, auront dramatiquement dépassé les bornes. Une folie face à laquelle, lâche et démissionnaire, cette même Communauté internationale semble aujourd’hui chercher à imposer aux Rwandais la dictature des vainqueurs, feignant d’ignorer qu’aucun armistice crédible ne fut signé dans la guerre du Rwanda.

Je dédie ce geste à tous ceux et celles qui, parmi nos concitoyens ou parmi les amis sincères du Rwanda, se battent pour l’émergence dans ce pays dévasté, d’une fraternité nouvelle, une société plus juste et plus tolérante. Je pense particulièrement ici au Col Luc Marchal dont la présence à la cérémonie du 06/04 aura suscité tant de réactions de condamnation dans les médias. Cet homme est l’une des personnalités victimes de leur obstination à exiger l’éclatement de toute la vérité au sujet du génocide de 1994. Plaise au ciel que le débat belgo belge sur ce génocide ne compromette définitivement l’avènement de la vérité!

Ce geste, je le dédie à ces millions de rwandaises et de rwandais qui, nés de mariages entre Hutu et Tutsi, ne savent plus à quels saints se vouer dans cette histoire de fous dont nous semblons tous des otages.

Je le dédie à nos compatriotes Batwa, eux aussi frappés de plein fouet par la tragédie nationale mais dont la faiblesse numérique et peu d’ambitions politiques consacrent l’isolement voire l’exclusion de la société.

J’en appelle enfin à la conscience de tous pour qu’on se garde de politiser les souffrances indescriptibles subies ou infligées par nos concitoyens. Malgré la guerre, le génocide et tous les autres crimes abominables qui l’ont accompagné, les Rwandais sont condamnés à vivre ensemble, pour le meilleur et pour le pire. N’en déplaise à ceux qui, sans doute dans une tentative d’échapper à ce dilemme insoutenable consécutif à l’innommable, prétendent se débarrasser de leur terre natale par des procédés les uns plus ridicules que les autres.

Entre temps, sur les collines du Rwanda, les humbles paysans de notre pays nous donnent une cinglante leçon de vie, marquée de courage, de patience et de patriotisme. Ces veuves et ces orphelins qui, démunis, trouvent encore des ressources de discuter de l’organisation de leur vie au village et de l’avenir de leurs enfants. Ces jeunes, désoeuvrés et sans la moindre certitude pour leur avenir qui, envers et contre tout, persévèrent en espérant des lendemains qui chantent. Ces vieilles personnes complètement abandonnées qui, dans un élan de sagesse, s’efforcent de laisser aux jeunes générations une image moins pessimiste de la vie.

Mais que se passe-t-il donc dans la classe politique rwandaise et chez nos chères élites? Que concocte-t-on au sein de la société civile rwandaise? Devrait-on se réjouir de ce que le corps militaire, l’administration politique et le monde universitaire soient ni plus ni moins que des foules organisées ? Peut-on s’accommoder de partis politiques irresponsables qui ne feraient que rivaliser de zèle clientéliste auprès du parti Etat ? Que faire en face d’une certaine opposition qui, sans préciser ses objectifs et sans présenter la moindre alternative au régime en place, s’accroche au futile exercice de la dénonciation, allant jusqu’à user de l’injure et de l’invective moins à l’endroit de ses adversaires naturels que contre d’autres opposants traités de « traîtres » ?

Je m’incline respectueusement, encore une fois, en mémoire de toutes les victimes innocentes de la tragédie rwandaise et régionale. Et j’invite tous mes compatriotes à prendre garde de ne pas succomber à la dangereuse tentation du repli communautariste voire nationaliste afin qu’ensemble, nous reconstruisions une Nation pacifique et prospère, et qu’au-delà, nous puissions contribuer, de façon déterminante, au redressement de l’Afrique.

Puissions-nous, dans les jours, les mois et les années qui viennent, nous unir davantage pour un Hommage authentiquement national qui soit à la hauteur de l’honneur, de la dignité et de la reconnaissance que nous devons à toutes les victimes innocentes.

Déo Mushayidi
08/04/2006

KUKI NAGIYE KWIBUKA UWA 06 MATA?

Kubera ko nzirikana ukuntu itariki ya 06 mata 1994 idateze kuzibagirana bibaho mu mateka ya politiki y’u Rwanda ;

Kubera ko nemera ndashidikanya ko igikorwa cy’ububisha cyo kuwa 06/04/1994, mu guhitana ba Perezida Yuvenali Habyarimana w’u Rwanda na mugenzi we w’u Burundi Sipiriyani Ntaryamira kitaretse n’abandi bose bari kumwe mu ndege, cyakomye imbarutso y’amahano yateje impinduka mu buzima bwanjye bwite no mu bw’abandi bantu benshi babarirwa mu ma miliyoni haba mu Rwanda cyangwa mu karere ndetse no ku isi hose ;

Nubwo namagana bidasubirwaho umugambi wose waba ugamije gusobanura cyangwa koroshya, mu buryo ubwo ari bwo bwose, itsembabatutsi mu Rwanda, « umuti » wari watangajwe, ukamamazwa mu binyamakuru ndetse bamwe mu bategetsi ba Leta bakawogezanya ishema ryinshi bakagera n’aho bawita igikorwa kigaragaza gukunda igihugu ;

Nyamara ndahamya, mu mutimanama wanjye, ko byaba ari ubuhemu n’akarengane, kwirengagiza cyangwa gupfobya, mu buryo ubwo ari bwo bwose, abahutu b’inzirakarengane na bo batikijwe na ya migirigiri y’abicanyi yari ishinzwe « akazi » ko gukiza u Rwanda abanzi n’ibyitso byabo nk’uko bitaga abatutsi muri rusange n’abahutu batavugaga rumwe n’ubutegetsi bw’icyo gihe cyangwa se bafatwaga gutyo.

Ku mugoroba wo kuwa 07 mata 2006 nagiye mu muhango wo kwibuka itsembabatutsi wari wateguwe na Ibuka kuri « Palais de justice » i Buruseli. Nahamaze igice cy’isaha gusa, igihe cyo gutega amatwi abantu babiri bavuze amagambo yarangwaga n’agahinda n’igishyika cyinshi bijyanye n’uwo munsi, hagati y’ama « bougies » menshi cyane y’abarokotse bari baje ari benshi muri uwo muhango nk’uko bisanzwe bigenda buri mwaka kuri iyo tariki n’aho hantu.

Muri icyo gice cy’isaha ariko, nasagariwe n’umukozi wa Ambasade y’u Rwanda mu Bubiligi wagaragazaga ko yarakajwe cyane no kuba kuwa 06/04/2006 nari nagiye mu muhango wabereye mu bwitonzi n’umutuzo, imbere y’urwibutso rwa genocide rwandais rwubatswe muri Komine ya Woluwe Saint-Pierre, wari ugamije kwibuka inzirakarengane zose zatikijwe kuva kuwa 06/04/1994 ukaba wari wateguwe n’abanyarwanda biganjemo abahutu bibumbiye mu mashyirahamwe COSAR na CLIR.

Maze nyakunsagarira wavuganaga umujinya mwinshi ati : « Ni gute ushobora gutinyuka ukaza hano kwibuka genocide y’abatutsi n’ukuntu ejo wari wagiye Woluwe Saint-Pierre kwifatanya n’abahutu ? Nuko umunyamakuru w’inshuti yanjye twari kumwe aba atwitambitse hagati adusaba kugabanya amashagaga. Ariko nari narangije gusubiza nyakumbaza mwereka ko i Kigali ibintu nk’ibyo bikorwa nta kibazo kihabaye. Nti « Ese ubu muzigaragambya murwanye ukuntu Kagame, Rucagu, Bazivamo, Mukezamfura, Gatsinzi(nashoboraga no kongeraho abandi), nyuma yo gusangira ibigori, bajyana kwibuka genocide yo muri 1994 ? ». Nta gisubizo nabonye ku kibazo cyanjye. Twatandukanye rero ari ubusa ku busa !

Rubanda yakugirira ikihe cyizere mu gihe wemeza ko uharanira ubwiyunge mu banyarwanda baba mu Rwanda kandi ukagaruka ugakwiza amazimwe n’amacakubiri mu banyarwanda bo hanze, haba muri Afrika, mu Burayi no muri Amerika ?

Ni ubuhe bufindo FPR yaba ikoresha mu guharanira ubumwe mu gihe igaruka igakoresha ba ambasaderi bayo kubiba amacakubiri ? Yaba se ari ya ntego ya « mbateranye nkunde mbategeke » ? Bibaye ari ibyo, n’abanyarwanda bo hanze bagombye kwisunga ababo bunzi.

Ubu se tugiye guca u Rwanda mo kabiri, igipande cy’abahutu n’ikindi cy’abatutsi hanyuma twubake n’urukuta rw’umutamenwa rutandukanya ibipande byombi kandi bisangiye umurage umwe w’ururimi n’umuco? Ibyo bipande twazajya tumenya tubitandukanya dute ko mu by’ukuri nta bibaho usibye gusa muri bamwe barangwa n’inganzo ntindi kandi zinyuranye?

Iyo tutitwaye nka Gahini, twigana Ponsiyo Pilato!
Imbere y’amahano yadusenyeye igihugu, abanyarwanda bakunze kurangwa no kwigira nyoni nyinshi. Usanga bitworoheye cyane gukoresha amayeri n’uburyarya birangwa no gukina mu bikomeye no kudaha inshingano zacu agaciro zikwiye.

Kubera ko ubutegetsi bwa Yuvenali Habyarimana bwari bushingiye ku gatsiko k’abantu baturukaga mu majyaruguru y’u Rwanda, abakiga bagombye kuba ari bo babazwa iby’amarorerwa yose kandi na none bakaba ari na bo bonyine bahamwa n’ingaruka zayo!

Ibyo ni byo bamwe mu bavandimwe bacu b’abanyarwanda bagerageza gukwiza hose, basa n’abasobanura ko abandi bahutu nta cyo bagombye kubazwa.

Kuba inyeshyamba z’abatutsi zarateye igihugu mu kwakira 1990 kandi bikaba bishoboka cyane ko ari na zo zasohoje umugambi mubisha kuwa 06/04/1994, ni zo zagombye kubazwa ibyakurikiyeho byose! Ibyo bikavugwa n’abandi mu rwego rwo kugerageza gukingira ikibaba za Leta mputu ku ruhare rwazo ruremereye zagize mu mahano yo mu Rwanda.

Kubera ko u Rwanda rwakoronijwe n’Ububiligi n’ubwo bwagiye busimburwa n’Ubufaransa, byose byabazwa abazungu kuko ari bo babikoze! Hakaba rero n’abemeza ko twazize umutego watezwe na ba gashakabuhake b’abongereza bafatanije n’abanyamerika.

Ukurikije ibyo, bose baba ari “abere” bityo rero hakaba hatagombye kubaho umuntu n’umwe ukurikiranwaho icyaha!

Babaye “abere” ba bategetsi bose bo ku nzego z’Igihugu, iza Perefegitura, Komini n’izindi zose kimwe n’abandi nka ba bagabo n’abagore bo mu itangazamakuru batahwemye guhamagarira abaturage “umurimo” babashishikariza ubwicanyi!

Bazabe “abere” ba basirikare n’abajandarume bahisemo gufatanya n’abandi “gukora” aho guhangana n’umwanzi barwanaga!

Bazabe barabaye “abana b’umutima” za nyeshyamba za FPR zahisemo “kusonga mbele” zigamije intsinzi ya gisirikare maze mu irari ryazo rikabije ryo gutegeka, ntizitinye gusuka ibisasu bikomeye ku nkambi zabaga zisendereye ibihumbi n’ibihumbi by’abaturage batagira intwaro!

Mbese ubwo nyirabayazana yaba Umuryango mpuzamahanga dore ko impande zombi nk’uko zari zihanganye zitigeze zihwema na gato kurushanwa amacenga zirwanira icyizere cy’ayo mahanga. Ku isonga rero hakaba “ubutindi” bw’Ubufaransa bwahengereye urugamba rugeze mu mahina kandi genocide iri hafi kurangira bukiha kwiterera mu bitabureba bwitwaje icyiswe “opération Turquoise” yashoboraga kuburizamo, kubangamira cyangwa se igakerereza intsinzi y’inyeshyamba za FPR nk’uko byagenze!

Ni yo mpamvu biteye impungenge ukuntu imbere y’inzirakarengane zitabarika, abagaragaza “kwicuza” imyitwarire yabo muri biriya bihe bakomeje kuba mbarwa. Na none habayeho Kofi Annan wasabye imbabazi mu kimbo cya Loni(ONU), hataho Madeleine Albright na Bill Clinton mu izina rya Leta zunze ubumwe za Amerika, haza ndetse na Louis Michel na Guy Verhofstadt mu izina ry’Ububiligi… Hakaba rero hasigaye bwa Bufaransa “bwirata” nk’uko Kagame yabwiyamye.

Nyamara ariko, kandi jye mbona ari byo byihutirwa, turacyategereje ko za mpande zombi zari zihanganye zakwicuza zigasaba imbabazi. Ku ruhande rw’”abatsinzwe”, Kambanda Yohani wahoze ari Minisitiri w’intebe wa Guverinoma y’abatabazi, akaba yarakatiwe n’urukiko mpuzamahanga ku Rwanda rukorera Arusha muri Tanzaniya, yaba yarigeze “kwicuza” ariko ngo yaje kwisubiraho avuga ko ibyo yari yemeye yari yabihatiwe kandi ngo hakoreshejwe uburyo bunyuranye n’amategeko. Naho ku ruhande rw’”abatsinze”, nta kwicuza na mba FPR n’umukuru wayo Pawulo Kagame bari bagaragaza, dore ko ahubwo bahora bigamba bakivuga imyato ngo bahagaritse genocide. Nyamara washyira mu gaciro, ugasanga bitangaje kandi nta shingiro bifite ahubwo ari agashinyaguro.

Bigombe bimenyekane!
Haba Woluwe Saint-Pierre(06/04/06), haba no kuri Palais de justice(07/04/06), nahabonye abana bafite imyaka nka 12 cyangwa ndetse munsi yayo. Mpabona urubyiruko rw’abasore n’inkumi bari hagati y’imyaka 15 na 25 cyangwa se irengaho. Mu maso yabo harangwaga ubwijime no kudasobanukirwa kandi ukabona basa n’abari hafi kwigaragambya. Narabitegereje bituma nibaza byinshi.

Muri ibi bihe bikomeye turimo, ni uwuhe murage wa politiki tuzasigira urwo rubyiruko rw’ubu n’urw’ejo hazaza ? Mbese ni kuki twakomeza za politiki mbisha zishingiye ku kubiba amacakubiri mu banyarwanda, bamwe ndetse tukabaha akato tugamije kubavutsa amahirwe yo kujya inama n’abandi ngo ejo batavaho bahindura imyumvire yabo ? Mu buryo bunyuranye, n’ubwo rimwe na rimwe hari abatandukira, muri rusange abanyarwanda bo mu ngeri zose bahagurukiye gusaba urubuga rw’ibiganiro byaguye bakunze kwita « rukokoma ». Barabiterwa ahanini no kubura ubwisanzure kubera ukuntu babayeho, n’uburyo bategetswe batagishijwe inama. Barabiterwa no kubura ubuhumekero kubera ukuntu batsikamiwe n’ubutegetsi bw’igitugu bubanigana ijambo bukababuza kwishyira bakizana. Barifuza gusangira ijambo no kujya impaka, bagashaka kumenya no gusobanukirwa amahano bahuye na yo.

Hari inama imwe nifuzaga kugira Perezida wa Repubulika. Ndatekereza ko igihe cyari kigeze ngo afungure amaso n’amatwi maze yiyumvire isahinda ya rubanda. Iyo rubanda yakomeje kugirwa igikoresho, bakayigaraguza agati, ari ko bayitikiza uko bashatse n’igihe bashakiye, none abanyapolitiki badashyira mu gaciro bakaba bayisiganya bitwaje za gacaca, igikoresho cya Leta ya FPR yibwira ko izakomeza, nta shiti, guca imanza zibogamye kandi zibasira uruhande rumwe rw’abanyarwanda. Iyo rubanda yarambiwe agasuzuguro ikaba ishaka kubaho mu mutuzo yishyira ikizana.

Ndagira inama Perezida watinyutse, mu gihe yiyamazaga muri 2003, kugereranya u Rwanda n’inzu yiyubakiye, nkaba namusaba kureba uko yafatamo nibura icyumba kimwe akagiha rubanda kugira ngo abaturage babone urubuga rwo kwicaramo, gucoceramo ibibazo no kubishakira ibisubizo, bityo bafumbire ubwiyunge buhamye kandi burambye nyuma y’amarorerwa yaranze amateka y’igihugu.

Mfatanije na bagenzi banjye muri Partenariat-Intwari, twaharaniye iteka ko ubushyamirane burangwa mu banyarwanda bukaba bwaradukiriye n’abaturanyi nka Kongo bwakemurwa mu nzira z’amahoro. Nubwo nkomeje kwemera inzira z’imishyikirano mu gucyemura amakimbirane, ndifuza kumenyesha Pawulo Kagame ko mu gihe yaba akomeje izima rye rirangwa n’agasuzuguro ndetse no kwirengagiza ibyifuzo bya rubanda, nta kundi byagenda uretse ko aho kumusaba icyumba, iyo rubanda izahagurukira rimwe ikigarurira « inzu » yose.

Kubera ko mu by’ukuri :

Niba guharanira ko ukuri ku ihanurwa ry’indege ryo kuwa 06/04/1994 gushyirwa ahabona;

Niba gutinyuka kwibaza ku mugaragaro abakoze icyo gikorwa cy’ububisha badakwiye guhirahira ngo bibwire ko bashobora kunga abanyarwanda;

Niba kwibuka ubwo bubisha nk’igikorwa cyaroshye igihugu n’akarere kose mu marorerwa atagira urugero;

Niba kwiyumvisha ko kwibuka no guha icyubahiro inzirakarengane z’abatutsi zazize genocide bitagombye kwibagiza abavandimwe babo b’abahutu batikiriye hamwe kimwe n’ibihumbi by’abahutu bazize ubwicanyi butari bwahabwa inyito bwakozwe na FPR;

Niba gushyira mu majwi no gusaba ubutabera ku itikizwa ry’impunzi z’abanyarwanda zabaga muri Kongo barimo abagore n’abana kandi bakaba bari biganje mo abahutu;

Niba guhamya ko impande zinyuranye zagiye zigira uruhare rutandukanye mu mahano yoretse u Rwanda n’akarere;

Niba kubangamira umugambi mubisha wo kurema mu banyarwanda ibipande bibiri bizahora bihanganye ubuziraherezo, maze “ababi” bakaba abahutu naho ”abeza” bakaba abatutsi;

Niba kwerura ukarwanya uwo mupango w’amacakubiri wifuza ko abahutu bemeye kuyoboka FPR bahindurwa “abere” naho abayivuyemo cyangwa abanze kuyiyoboka bagahindurwa “interahamwe” cyangwa se “abajenosideri”(génocidaires);

Niba gufata Géneral Major Pawulo Kagame nk’umunyagitugu ukoresha iterabwoba kandi ucyekwaho ibyaha bikomeye by’intambara;

Niba kwamagana ubutegetsi buriho kubera ko burenganya kandi bugahemuka;

Niba buri muntu wese utinyutse kunenga no kurwanya ubwo buryo bwose budahwitse agomba kuregwa “guhakana”(nier) no “guhindura”(réviser) génocide yo muri 1994, ubwo nanjye nagombye gukurikiranwa kandi mbaye mbyemeye hakiri kare.

Igikorwa cyanjye ndakiyemeje kandi ngituye inzirakarengane zose aho ziva zikagera, zatashye nta rwango nta n’inzigo ku mutima, zikaba zarazize ubugome n’ubwicanyi butagira uko buvugwa bw’abavandimwe babo bari basangiye igihugu. Ubugome n’ubwicanyi byatewe inkunga kandi bikayoborwa n’ingirwa leta kimwe n’impande zombi zarwanaga, buri rwose mu ngamba zarwo rukaba rwaragiye rufata ibyemezo byaje gutuma n’amazi arenga inkombe. Ubugome n’ubwicanyi bwareberewe n’Umuryango mpuzamahanga wahabaye ikigwari none ukaba usa n’ugerageza gutsindira abanyarwanda ubutegetsi bw’igitugu n’iterabwoba by’abatsinze, wiyibagije ko nta masezerano nyakuri yo kurangiza intambara yigeze asinywa hagati y’ibipande byombi by’ingabo.

Icyo gikorwa cyanjye ngituye abanyarwanda bose n’nshuti z’u Rwanda zitarangwaho uburyarya, baharanira ko mu Rwanda rworetswe n’amahano, hagaruka ubuvandimwe hagati y’abarutuye, igihugu kikarangwa n’ubutabera nyabwo no kwihanganirana.

Aha ndashaka kuvuga cyane cyane nka Colonel Luc Marchal(yayoboraga umutwe w’abasirikare b’ababiligi muri Minuar) umaze iminsi atotezwa mu binyamakuru azira ko yagaragaye mu muhango wo kwibuka wabaye kuwa 06/04/2006. Uwo mugabo ari mu bantu bazira ko biyemeje kurwana inkundura bagamije ko ukuri kose kuri genocide yo muri 1994 kwashyirwa ahagaragara. Imana iratube hafi kugira ngo impaka mbirigi ku kibazo cy’u Rwanda zitavaho zituvutsa burundu kumenya ukuri dukeneye.

Icyo gikorwa ngituye za miliyoni z’abanyarwanda n’abanyarwandakazi bakomoka ku mirongoranire hagati y’amoko yombi y’abahutu n’abatutsi, ubu bakaba barabuze amajyo kubera ukuntu ubushyamirane bw’ayo moko busa n’ibisazi bukaba bwaratwokamye ku buryo twahindutse nk’ingwate.

Icyo gikorwa kandi ngituye n’abavandimwe bacu b’abatwa, kuko na bo amahano yo mu Rwanda yabasigiye ibisare nubwo kuba ari bake cyane kandi bakaba batagaragaza kenshi inyota y’ubutegetsi bituma babaho nk’abahawe akato mu gihugu.

Nsabye buri wese n’umutimanama we ngo twirinde gukoresha agahinda n’ibyago by’abavandimwe nk’iturufu ya politiki. Nubwo habaye intambara, itsembabwoko n’andi marorerwa ateye ubwoba yariherekeje, nta kundi byagenda abanyarwanda bagomba kubana bagasangira akabisi n’agahiye. Kabone n’aho bamwe, mu kugerageza kwivana mu mutego w’ayo mahano yose, bagerageza kwitandukanya n’igihugu cyabo bakoresheje uburyo bunyuranye ariko bwose budahwitse.

Hagati aho, ku misozi babaho yo mu Rwanda, abahinzi n’aborozi bo mu gihugu cyacu ntibahwema kuduha isomo ry’ubuzima, rirangwa n’ubutwari, ubwihangane n’urukundo rw’igihugu. Abo bapfakazi n’imfubyi basigaye buri buri ariko bakabona intege zo kujya impaka mu rwego rw’imibereho y’abana babo. Urwo rubyiruko ruzonzwe n’ubushomeri kandi rukaba rutabona neza ejo hazaza uko hazaba hifashe ariko rugakomeza umurego rwizeye ko ibyiza biri imbere. Abo basaza n’abakecuru babaye impabe nyamara mu bwitonzi n’ubushishozi bidasanzwe, bakirinda gusigira abato umurage mubi wo kwiheba mu buzima.

Ariko se byifashe bite mu banyapolitiki b’abanyarwanda cyangwa mu ntiti zacu? Baraduteganyiriza iki mu mashyirahamwe anyuranye bakunze kwita société civile? Ubu se hari uwakwishimira kubona igisirikare, ubutegetsi bwa politiki na za kaminuza byarahindutse nk’ibivunge? Hari uwakwizera amashyaka adashyira mu gaciro ahubwo akaba arushanwa gutera ivi imbere ya Cyama ihatse Leta, iryo bakavuze bakarihakishwa? Tugire dute imbere y’imyitwarire ya bamwe mu batavuga rumwe na Guverinoma ya FPR, ntibagaragaze neza intego bafite, ahubwo bagahora banenganenga baterekana igishya bazanye, ndetse rimwe na rimwe bakanakoresha ibitutsi n’imvugo nyandagazi byibasira bagenzi babo bita “abagambanyi” kurusha abo bagahanganye.

Mu cyubahiro cyinshi, nongeye kunamira inzirakarengane zose zazize amahano yoretse u Rwanda n’akarere. Kandi nsabye abanyarwanda bose dusangiye igihugu ngo bitonde bo kugwa mu mutego w’ubwironde ubwo ari bwo bwose, maze twisanire igihugu tukigaruremo amahoro n’uburumbuke ndetse kizanagire uruhare rugaragara mu kuzahura no guteza Afrika imbere.

Ndifuza ko mu minsi, amezi n’imyaka biri imbere, twazarushaho kwifatanya maze tugaha Icyubahiro gishyitse kandi koko mu rwego rw’igihugu cyose, kijyanye n’agaciro, urukundo n’ishimwe bikwiye inzirakarengane zose.

Déo Mushayidi
08/04/2006

Source: http://mushayidi.populus.org

Ministerial meeting reviews timeline for solving Rwandan refugee situation

19 Apr

Briefing Notes, 19 April 2013

This is a summary of what was said by UNHCR spokesperson Adrian Edwards – to whom quoted text may be attributed – at the press briefing, on 19 April 2013, at the Palais des Nations in Geneva.

African countries hosting large numbers of Rwandan refugees and Rwanda itself have reiterated their commitment to resolving the protracted Rwandan refugee situation in line with a Comprehensive Strategy that was announced by UNHCR in October 2009.

At a Ministerial meeting in Pretoria, delegations from Burundi, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Kenya, Malawi, Mozambique, the Republic of the Congo, Rwanda, South Africa, Uganda, Zambia, and Zimbabwe reviewed progress in promoting the voluntary repatriation and reintegration of Rwandan refugees. Included in the discussion was extending the possibility of local integration or alternative legal status in the country of asylum, the key components of the Comprehensive Strategy.

The Strategy also provides for the cessation of refugee status for Rwandan refugees remaining in exile, and who fled their country before 31 December 1998.

The meeting was co-chaired by UNHCR’s Africa Bureau Director, George Okoth-Obbo and Volker Türk, the refugee agency’s Director of International Protection.

The first Ministerial meeting on the Strategy, in Geneva on 9 December 2011, had agreed with a recommendation for States to consider giving effect to the so-called cessation clauses of refugee status as of 30 June 2013. Cessation clauses are built into the 1951 Refugee Convention and the 1969 Organization of African Unity Refugee Convention. They provide for refugee status to end once fundamental and durable changes have taken place in the country of origin and the circumstances that led to flight no longer exist.

The 1994 Rwanda genocide and its aftermath and armed clashes in northwestern Rwanda in 1997 and 1998 – the last time the country experienced generalized violence – produced more than 3.5 million Rwandan refugees.

Most have since returned to Rwanda, including recently, 12,000 mainly from Democratic Republic of Congo. An estimated 100,000 Rwandan refugees remain in exile.

Highlighting the different progress and the challenges which remain, Governments at the meeting unanimously reconfirmed their commitment to resolving this protracted refugee situation through, principally, stepping up efforts to promote repatriation which thus far has remained very limited. They also agreed to pursue feasible local integration opportunities, including facilitating for the refugees to attain alternative status in their countries of asylum including citizenship through naturalization.

With cessation of refugee status – the issue that attracted most debate – it became clear during the meeting that not all states were ready to invoke a general application of the cessation clauses by 30 June 2013 in line with the strategy recommendation.

Some States have been implementing steps towards applying the cessation clauses by end June or indicated that they are in a position to do so, and that they will continue to work towards that goal assuming necessary conditions are met.

Others underscored that for various legal, access, logistical, practical or other considerations, they are not in a position to apply the cessation clauses by the end of June, or will in any case not do so.

Others specified that for the time being they will concentrate on taking forward other components of the strategy, namely voluntary repatriation and local integration.

Whether in those cases in which one or more States move ahead with the invocation of the cessation clauses or continue to consider applying them, it is clear that this will be done on a “case by case” basis or by “differentiated” approach.

All States confirmed that before and after that time, they will continue to work to help those who want to repatriate. Those who opt to repatriate but can legally remain in their current countries of asylum through alternative legal status including naturalization, will also be helped.

Rwanda’s delegation outlined a number of steps it has taken and will continue to implement to support the respective solutions. These include issuing national passports for Rwandans who opt to stay in their current host countries.

For the past five years, UNHCR has been working to solve protracted refugee situations in Africa. Cessation of refugee status for Sierra Leonean refugees took place in 2008 and for Angolan and Liberian refugees on 30 June last year.

For further information on this topic, please contact:

  • In Nairobi (Regional), Kitty McKinsey on mobile +254 735 337 608
  • In Pretoria (Regional) Tina Ghelli on mobile +27 827 70 41 89
  • In Pretoria (on mission), Fatoumata Lejeune-Kaba on mobile +41 79 249 34 83

Source: UNHCR.ORG

Rwanda seeks to block talk of war crimes court at UN

15 Apr

14.04.2013

By Tim Witcher (AFP)

UN Security Council members vote on sanctions against North Korea at the UN headquarters in New York, March 7, 2013 (AFP/File, Emmanuel Dunand)

UNITED NATIONS — The United Nations has been hit by a second war crimes court dispute in a week with Rwanda trying to stop the UN Security Council praising the International Criminal Court.

The storm comes only days after the United States boycotted a UN General Assembly debate where Serbia’s president launched a fierce attack on international war crimes courts.

Rwanda is organizing a Security Council meeting Monday on conflict prevention in Africa when traditionally the 15-member body would release a statement.

The seven ICC members on the council — Argentina, Australia, Britain, France, Guatemala, Luxembourg and South Korea — insist on acknowledging the work of the court in ending impunity for war crimes, diplomats said.

Rwanda said it would not accept a statement which mentions the ICC which it has strongly criticized, according to diplomats.

Rwanda is the council president for April and its Foreign Minister Louise Mushikiwabo will chair the meeting with UN leader Ban Ki-moon also attending. It is expected to highlight its own experiences in bringing stability since the 1994 genocide in which more than 800,000 people died.

ICC members on the council wanted a statement which stresses “the important role of the International Criminal Court and reiterates the importance of cooperation with the court,” said a copy obtained by AFP.

“Rwanda said it would rather have no statement at all than one which mentions the ICC,” said a UN diplomat, speaking on condition of anonymity. “It is a strange position for a country which is organizing the meeting.”

“There is a clear divide in the council, seven-seven, on the ICC issue,” Rwanda’s deputy UN ambassador Olivier Nduhungirehe told AFP.

He said a compromise could be found before Monday’s meeting. But western diplomats said this was unlikely.

“Given their own tragic circumstances, this is just shameful behaviour by Rwanda,” said Richard Dicker, justice specialist for Human Rights Watch.

The rights group has has been strongly criticized by the Rwandan government for its reporting on the nation. Rwanda has also slammed the ICC and the international tribunal set up to handle its genocide cases.

About half of African nations are ICC signatories but Rwanda is among a hard core who complain about its tactics. “The ICC is a political court and we have never believed in its jurisdiction,” Rwanda’s foreign minister said last month.

Rwanda’s Justice Minister Tharcisse Karugarama took up the attacks against international tribunals at a UN General Assembly meeting on internationl justice on Wednesday.

Karugarama said his country felt “betrayed” by the International Criminal Tribunal on Rwanda that handled major cases after the 1994 genocide.

The United States boycotted the General Assembly meeting which was marked by a fierce attack on the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia by Serbia’s President Tomislav Nikolic. He said there was “a systematic atmosphere of lynch-mobbing of everything that is Serbian.”

The comments were strongly criticized by the European Union. And UN leader Ban strongly defended the growing role of international justice at the meeting.

The international tribunals have “ushered in an age of accountability,” Ban said.

Tensions over international justice dispute could worsen. The 20th anniversary of the Security Council’s call for the creation of the Yugoslavia tribunal is in May and some countries want a special anniversary meeting.

Source: AFP

Why Blair and Buffett are wrong about giving international aid to Rwanda

13 Apr

Friday 12 April 2013

By criticising the UN expert report, the former British prime minister is hampering the peace process in the eastern Congo

Tony Blair with Paul Kagame, the Rwandan president in 2011. Photograph: Steve Terill/AFP/Getty Images

When a UN Group of Experts report found that Rwanda was supporting rebels fighting a deadly conflict in the eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), a number of countries including the US and Britain cut or suspended foreign aid in protest.

Rwandan President Paul Kagame steadfastly denied supporting the Congo militias that have been wreaking havoc along the Rwanda-Congo border, but the evidence was strong enough to convince even some of Kagame’s biggest supporters that the western powers needed to send a message of disapproval.

That didn’t include Howard Buffett, Warren Buffett‘s son, or Tony Blair. Buffett and Blair argued against the move, contending that reducing aidto Rwanda would just cause more harm than good to the unstable Great Lakes region of central Africa.

“Cutting aid does nothing to address the underlying issues driving conflict in the region, it only ensures that the Rwandan people will suffer — and risks further destabilizing an already troubled region,” Blair and Buffett wrote in a recent Foreign Policy article

This was followed by a report from the Howard G Buffett Foundationechoing the same points. The report went further by questioning the reliability of the UN experts – the group that originally reported evidence that the Rwandan government was supporting rebels in the eastern DRC.

It’s worth noting that the Buffett Foundation report was written by unknown authors and using unnamed sources. It attacks the UN experts and then makes the case that pointing fingers is counterproductive. Says the report; “Our Foundation is not interested in apportioning blame for what we view is a fundamental failure in the GoE process in 2012….”

“We will let the report – and the information on our website – speak for itself,” replied the foundation’s chief of staff, Ann Kelly when asked about the unnamed contributors.

Lake Partners Strategy Consultants and the Crumpton Group LLC are listed as organisations that worked on the report, but they too were unwilling to talk about the report or how they reached their conclusions.

So, I spoke to regional experts about the report both on and off the record and a consensus emerged. The Buffett Foundation report is simply inaccurate, they said. Despite its imperfections, the UN expert report provides sufficient evidence to prove Rwanda’s connection to the armed rebels in the DRC. Since the US and British governments have long been big supporters of Paul Kagame’s Rwanda, it’s reasonable to conclude it would have taken convincing evidence to prompt a suspension of foreign aid.

Many east Africa experts say Rwanda continues to destabilise the region and sap resources for reform. The actions by the international community and the ongoing UN peace talks and framework provide an opportunity to engage in meaningful change for the DRC, many say. Ensuring its success means preventing rebellion and holding all supporters accountable, these experts told me.

Meddling in the DRC

Accusations have been leveled at Rwanda in the past for its meddling in the region. Former Rwandan ambassador to Washington, Theogene Rudasingwa, explained to Newsweek in a January article how the Rwandan government extracted money out of the DRC:

“After the first Congo war, money began coming in through military channels and never entered the coffers of the Rwandan state,” says Rudasingwa, Kagame’s former lieutenant. “It is RPF (Rwandan Patriotic Front, Kagame’s party) money, and Kagame is the only one who knows how much money it is—or how it is spent. In meetings it was often said, ‘For Rwanda to be strong, Congo must be weak, and the Congolese must be divided.'”

In 2012, the anonymous group of UN experts found evidence that the M23 rebels benefited from coordination with and support from the Rwandan military. Further, the report cited that the level of support went all the way up to the Rwandan defence minister. The UK reacted promptly by withholding £16 million in aid promised to Rwanda. International development secretary Justine Greening announced the suspension of £21m in planned budget support for Rwanda at the end of November.

Military aid totaling $200,000 was withheld by the United States when the information first emerged in July, but sanctions stopped there. Human Rights groups joined members of Congress in December imploring the Obama Administration to put pressure on Rwanda. Germany held back €21 million in planned aid and the EU suspended €70 million in planned budgetary support.

“This is not a matter of aid stopping because of advocacy efforts, explained Aaron Hall, associate director of Research for the Enough Project. “Aid stopped because there was credible information from state intelligence reports that showed these connections are real and that Rwanda was in violation of the UN Arms Embargo on Congo and implicated in destabilising a neighboring state.”

A reliance on aid likely affords Rwanda the opportunity to spend money on arming and supporting the M23 rebellion, said academic Laura Seay in a blog post responding to Blair and Buffett’s FP article.

Blair and Buffett also ignore the fact that having so much aid support frees up other resources for the Rwandan government to use in its military adventures in the Congo. Were Rwanda not wasting money on supporting the M23, Kigali would be able to fund many of the excellent development initiatives that were previously funded with aid dollars.

Other nations reacted to the report by withholding or delaying portions of aid to Rwanda. For a country that relies on foreign aid to account for over 40% of its budget, the cuts were a significant action by the international community. According to experts that I spoke with, the disruption in aid flows to Rwanda are working to the extent that Rwanda is no longer supporting the M23 rebels and is participating in the regional peace framework.

The aid cuts are having a direct economic impact. The Rwandan finance ministry revised its GDP growth expectation down from 7.8% to 6.3%, reported the Economist.

Too Much Finger Pointing?

The Buffett Foundation report makes it clear that it does not have interest in assigning blame.

“Our Foundation is not interested in apportioning blame for what we view is a fundamental failure in the GoE process in 2012; we will leave the point-counterpoint on questions of fact to others,” says the only bold section in the report’s introduction.

It calls for the cooperation between regional, state and international actors in order to resolve the many problems that exist in the DRC. Kagame has taken a similar tactic when asked about the issue of Rwanda’s involvement in the M23 rebellion.

“The blame game doesn’t help anyone,” said Kagame to Christiane Amanpour when she confronted him about Rwanda’s involvement. “It’s not just an issue of M23 or one other problem. It’s a number of problems that are together that we need to sort out.”

Former US assistant secretary of state for African affairs Jendayi Frazer made the same case to Al Jazeera saying, “I think the key issue here is to look forward and see how to resolve this. The pointing of fingers has never helped to resolve the crisis in the Great Lakes region.”

According to the Buffett Foundation report, the UN experts place too much attention on the role of Rwanda and not enough on the systemic problems in the region. Hall refuted this, saying that the mandate of the UN experts is to track illegal arms trafficking and trade to rebel groups.

Jason Stearns, director of the Rift Valley Institute’s Usalama Project, agreed with Hall, adding: “The (report) does place most weight on the M23, but I think that is fair, given that this rebellion was the largest source of instability in the region in 2012. But the GoE does spill a lot of ink discussing criminal networks within the Congolese army, as well as support to other armed groups.”

Stearns added that there are questions to be raised about the lack of collaboration with the UN peacekeeping mission and the governments of Uganda and Rwanda. However, the Buffett Foundation does nothing to carry out a “serious” evaluation of the UN report. There is room for improvement in the report, he says, but the broad conclusions are basically sound.

The Buffett report also points to the breakdown of the relationship between the UN experts and the governments of Rwanda and Uganda. “It is not significant who was first to withdraw cooperation,” it says. “The failure in process undermines the credibility of the findings, limiting potential policy prescriptions that could reduce violence in the Great Lakes region.”

Stearns refuted this, saying that the breakdown of the relationship may have been tied to the fact that the experts uncovered information that Rwanda and Uganda did not like. Journalist David Aronson took a stronger tone in accusing Rwanda for the breakdown in its relationship with the group:

“[T]here’s zero doubt about who broke off the relationship between the GoE and the Rwandan government. The Rwandans did,” wrote Aronson in his blog.

The Way Forward

The attempt to discredit the experts’ report and shift the conversation away from Rwanda’s involvement in the DRC has worked to some extent. Donors are responding by channeling aid through non-government actors. Greening announced at the start of March that £16 million in UK aid money will make its way to humanitarian groups working in Rwanda rather than the government. Germany also reversed course and unblocked the $26 million it suspended in 2012.

Critics of the Buffett Foundation report agree that the causes of instability in the DRC are multifaceted and require a host of solutions. “The Congolese government has certainly played a very negative role in the conflict, often arming armed groups and failing to crack down on criminal networks within its own security forces,” explained Stearns.

That means that any lasting peace deal will require engagement from a diverse sets of interests with the Congolese government. “It appears as if the government in the first line is not interested in reforms. The non-existence of any meaningful security sector reform approaches tells the tale,” said Christoph Vogel, Mercator Fellow on international affairs.

“I have not witnessed any peace effort in DRC so far, that has tried to – either by carrots or sticks – seriously embrace political elites that have been engaging in incitement, funding, or protection of illegal and armed activity in the DRC.”

Congolese experts argue that the continued rebellions make it difficult for such reforms. “[I]gnoring Rwanda’s role in the Kivus as a source of conflict will make the situation worse, not better. And continuing to fund a government that spends its own resources on rebels who rape women and conscript child soldiers is unconscionable for most taxpayers in donor states,” said Seay.

A UN led regional framework was signed in Addis Ababa by 11 African countries, including the DRC, Rwanda and Uganda, in February. Despite the challenges, there is a feeling of optimism in response to the UN framework. With neighbouring countries participating and the global community engaged, it appears that now is the time to take permanent steps towards peace.

“There is a unique opportunity given the engagement locally, regionally and internationally to change the security situation in the DR Congo through the UN framework,” says Hall.

Source: The Guardian

Rwanda: Opposition leader’s right to a fair trial in jeopardy

25 Mar

25 March 2013

Victoire Ingabire was convicted on charges of conspiracy to harm the authorities using terrorism© AFP/Getty Images

Rwandan opposition leader Victoire Ingabire must be allowed an appeal that meets international fair trial standards after being convicted and sentenced to eight years’ imprisonment in October 2012, said Amnesty International in a new report released today.

The appeal, due to open today, must rectify a number of problems which occurred in the trial, as documented in Justice in Jeopardy: The first instance trial of Victoire Ingabire.

“Victoire Ingabire’s initial trial was flawed and international standards were flouted,” said Sarah Jackson, Acting Deputy Director of Amnesty International’s Africa Programme.

Ingabire, President of the United Democratic Forces (FDU-Inkingi) was convicted and sentenced to eight years in prison on 30 October 2012, on charges of conspiracy to harm the authorities using terrorism and minimizing the 1994 genocide.

From the start of investigations, President Paul Kagame made public statements in the media and through Twitter on Ingabire’s alleged culpability which were at odds with her right to the presumption of innocence.

The terrorism charges were based in large part on confessions that came after a period of military detention in Camp Kami where torture is alleged to be used and the court did not effectively investigate this.

“Amnesty International has documented allegations of torture and ill-treatment of individuals in Camp Kami. The fact that at least two men tried alongside Victoire Ingabire were detained there for months before incriminating her is cause for serious concern and needs to be looked into.”

Amnesty International observed most of the trial from September 2011 to April 2012 and recorded numerous instances where Ingabire was treated unfairly.

The judges appeared confrontational towards the defence and the defendant was regularly interrupted or reprimanded by the judges. Evidence put forward by the defence and the prosecution was treated differently: the defence’s evidence was repeatedly called into question, whereas basic questions in relation to the prosecution’s evidence were not asked.

The speech-related charges at the start of the trial were based on vague and imprecise laws punishing “genocide ideology” and “discrimination and sectarianism” and the defence would have found it difficult to decipher how her conduct was criminal.

These laws were introduced to restrict speech that could promote hatred in the years following the 1994 genocide. However, the vague wording of these laws has been misused to criminalize freedom of expression and dissent.

“Looking at the evidence in the trial, Amnesty International cannot see how Victoire Ingabire intended to incite ethnic hatred or violence,” said Jackson.

“The government has pledged to revise the “genocide ideology” law in line with Rwanda’s obligations under international law,” added Jackson. “Following through on this would be a positive move.”

The judicial authorities must now provide Ingabire with an appeal trial which complies with international fair trial standards.

“Critics of the Rwandan authorities have been harassed, intimidated and imprisoned. A fair appeal will show that political trials will be dealt with independently,” concluded Jackson.

Justice in Jeopardy: The first instance trial of Victoire Ingabire focuses on the fairness of the proceedings and the court’s capacity to try the case in line with international standards.  The organization has not taken a position on Ingabire’s culpability.

Ingabire, President of FDU-Inkingi, came to Rwanda in January 2010 to participate in the 2010 presidential elections.

Ingabire was brought to trial with Vital Uwumuremyi, Tharcisse Nditurende, Noel Habiyaremye and Jean Marie Vianney Karuta, all former members of the Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda (FDLR), an armed group operating in eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC).

The prosecution alleged that she conspired with them to form an armed group called the Coalition of Democratic Forces (CDF) whose objective was to destabilize Rwanda. All four pleaded guilty, made confessions and sought leniency from the court.

Source: Amnesty International

DR Congo’s Bosco Ntaganda in ICC custody

22 Mar

22 March 2013

Congolese war crimes suspect Bosco Ntaganda has left Rwanda and is on the way to The Hague in the custody of the International Criminal Court.

Bosco Ntaganda, who handed himself in to the US embassy in Kigali, addresses a news conference in January 2009. Photograph: STR/Reuters

Gen Ntaganda, a key figure in the conflict in eastern DR Congo, surrendered to the US embassy in Kigali on Monday.

The ICC has charged him with 10 counts of war crimes and crimes against humanity, which Gen Ntaganda denies.

A date for his first appearance before judges is expected to be set soon.

Gen Ntaganda is the first suspect to surrender himself voluntarily to the ICC’s custody.

“This is a good day for victims in the DRC and for international justice,” said ICC chief prosecutor Fatou Bensouda.

“Today those who have long suffered at the hands of Bosco Ntaganda can look forward to the future and the prospect of justice secured.”

Known as “The Terminator”, Gen Ntaganda has fought for a number of rebel groups as well as the Congolese army.

Most recently, he was believed to be one of the leaders of the M23 rebel movement, which has been fighting government troops in the east.

He is accused of seven counts of war crimes and three counts of crimes against humanity allegedly committed in Ituri, DR Congo, between 2002-2003. The charges include enlisting child soldiers, murder, rape and sexual slavery.

The DR Congo government has said that Gen Ntaganda, who comes from the Tutsi ethnic group, crossed into Rwanda on Saturday after he and some of his followers were defeated by a rival faction of the M23 group.

Eastern DR Congo has long suffered from high levels of violence linked to ethnic rivalries and competition for the control of mineral resources.

Source: BBC

Bosco Ntaganda: Kagame promises to help transfer to ICC

21 Mar

21 March 2013

Bosco Ntaganda has been wanted by the ICC since 2006

Rwanda’s President Paul Kagame has given his backing for the speedy transfer of Congolese war crimes suspect Bosco Ntaganda to the International Criminal Court (ICC).

Known as “The Terminator”, he surrendered to the US embassy in Kigali on Monday.

Rwanda would help facilitate his transfer to The Hague “as fast as possible”, Mr Kagame said.

Gen Ntaganda has been a key figure in the conflict in eastern DR Congo.

The ICC has charged him with 10 counts of war crimes and crimes against humanity, accusing him of using child soldiers, keeping women as sex slaves and participating in the murder of at least 800 people in 2002 and 2003.

Gen Ntaganda denies the charges.

Transfer ‘within days’

He has fought for various rebel groups as well as the Congolese army in a country riven by ethnic divisions and a battle for control of its mineral resources.

Most recently, he was believed to be one of the leaders of the M23 rebel movement, which is fighting government troops in the east.

He has also fought for the army of Rwanda, which denies UN accusations that it backs the M23.

“We will work to make what the US embassy needs in relation to Bosco Ntaganda’s case happen as fast as possible,” Mr Kagame said in a statement.

His comments came a day after US assistant secretary of state for African affairs, Johnny Carson, said it was important that Gen Ntaganda’s movement from the embassy to the airport was “in no way inhibited”.

Mr Carson said he hoped that ICC officials, who were en route to Rwanda, would be allowed into the country.

Neither Rwanda nor the US recognise the ICC.

On Wednesday, the court’s chief prosecutor, Fatou Bensouda, said she expected Gen Ntaganda to be handed over in “a couple of days”.

The ICC issued an arrest warrant for Gen Ntaganda seven years ago.

The DR Congo government said Gen Ntaganda, who comes from the Tutsi ethnic group, crossed into Rwanda on Saturday after he and some of his followers were defeated by a rival faction of the M23 group.

Rwanda denies helping Gen Ntaganda to flee DR Congo, or arranging his surrender to the US embassy, which is near the defence ministry in Kigali.

Rwanda’s government is also dominated by Tutsis and Gen Ntaganda fought with the former rebels who are now in power in Kigali.

Source: BBC

Rwanda refuses visas for two U.N. Congo sanctions experts

19 Mar

By Louis Charbonneau

UNITED NATIONS | Tue Mar 19, 2013 10:21pm GMT

(Reuters) – Rwanda has refused to issue entry visas to two members of a U.N. expert panel that accused Kigali last year of arming rebels in eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo, describing them as biased, Rwandan and other diplomats said on Tuesday.

Several U.N. diplomats, speaking on condition of anonymity, disputed the allegations of bias.

The U.N. Security Council’s Group of Experts, which monitors compliance with sanctions and an arms embargo on Congo, said in a report last year that Rwanda’s defence minister was commanding the M23 revolt in Congo and that Rwanda was arming the rebels and supporting them with troops. It also accused Uganda of supporting M23.

Rwanda’s government was furious about the experts’ report, as was the Ugandan government, and denied the allegations. U.N. officials and Security Council diplomats, however, said the Rwandan denials were not credible.

A Rwandan diplomat confirmed the refusal to issue entry visas to Bernard Leloup of Belgium and Marie Plamadiala of Moldova. Several council diplomats dismissed the Rwandan allegations of bias, saying they suspected Kigali may be getting revenge over the group’s revelations about M23’s Rwandan links.

“We told the DRC (Congo) sanctions committee … that no visa will issued to both of them,” Rwanda’s deputy U.N. ambassador, Olivier Nduhungirehe, told Reuters. He was referring to the Security Council’s Congo sanctions committee.

Several diplomats said the other four members of the expert group are currently in the Rwandan capital Kigali for discussions with the government regarding the panel’s continued investigation of Rwanda’s role in supporting M23.

Britain, France and the United States are among the countries that have urged Kigali to cooperate with all six members of the expert panel, council diplomats said, adding that they hoped Rwanda would relent.

Last year’s report by the Group of Experts caused significant grief for Rwanda. The United States, Sweden, the Netherlands, Britain and the European Union reacted to the experts’ accusations by suspending some aid to Rwanda, which relies on donors for about 40 percent of its budget.

ACCUSATIONS OF BIAS

The Rwandan U.N. mission prepared a memo complaining about Leloup and Plamadiala. In that memo, obtained by Reuters from a diplomatic source, Rwanda accused Leloup of “a clear pattern of a deeply-seated bias against the GoR (government of Rwanda).”

The memo said Plamadiala has “no demonstrated expertise” suitable to being a member of the expert panel and “demonstrates inappropriate professional boundaries not befitting a U.N. expert.”

Despite Rwanda’s complaints, U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon reappointed Leloup and Plamadiala to the expert group.

The U.N. press office did not have an immediate response to the question of whether the Rwandan memo complaining about the two experts had been received by Ban’s office.

Plamadiala declined to comment in an email to Reuters. Leloup did not respond to an emailed request for comment.

Last year, Rwanda accused the Group of Experts’ coordinator, Steve Hege of the United States, of bias and leaking information to the media. Several council diplomats told Reuters those allegations about Hege were unfounded. The experts’ new coordinator is Emilie Serralta of France.

Recently the M23 rebellion started to implode, U.N. diplomats and officials say. Hundreds of Congolese M23 rebels loyal to warlord Bosco Ntaganda fled into neighbouring Rwanda or surrendered to U.N. peacekeepers over the weekend after being routed by a rival faction.

Ntaganda, the fugitive Rwandan-born former Congolese general, walked into the U.S. Embassy in Rwanda on Monday and asked to be transferred to the International Criminal Court, where he faces war crimes charges racked up during the rebellion.

African leaders signed a U.N.-mediated regional accord late last month aimed at ending two decades of conflict in eastern Congo and paving the way for the possible creation of a U.N. intervention force to combat armed groups.

(Reporting By Louis Charbonneau; Editing by Paul Simao)

Source: Reuters

Will Bosco Ntaganda’s surrender bring peace to DR Congo?

19 Mar

19 March 2013

By Farouk Chothia, BBC Africa

On the retreat in the battlefield, wanted war crimes suspect and Congolese rebel leader Bosco Ntaganda has raised the white flag, fleeing to Rwanda and handing himself into the US embassy in Kigali.

Known as “the Terminator”, over the last two decades Gen Ntaganda has fought for several rebel groups in eastern Democratic Republic of Congo as well as serving as a general in the Congolese army – and is wanted by the International Criminal Court on allegations of war crimes and crimes against humanity.

It is unclear why he has chosen to surrender to the ICC – or why he chose Washington’s embassy in Rwanda – neither the US nor Rwanda recognise the tribunal, unlike many other states in Africa and Europe.

But they will now have to co-operate with the ICC so that he can be transferred to The Hague to stand trial – or risk a diplomatic outcry at a time when the United Nations is spearheading new efforts to end the conflict in a country two-thirds the size of western Europe.

Despite denials by Rwanda’s government, DR Congo has repeatedly accused it of backing Gen Ntaganda.

“The fact that he showed up in Kigali raises a lot of questions. He could have also showed up in Uganda [another neighbour of DR Congo], but he decided to do that in Kigali,” Thierry Vircoulon, of the think-tank International Crisis Group, told the BBC.

“Was it because it was the only way out or because he also wanted to embarrass his former sponsor?”

‘Shot at’

Born in Rwanda and raised in DR Congo, Gen Ntaganda and President Paul Kagame’s government in Kigali were once staunch allies, bound together by ethnic ties – both come from the minority Tutsi ethnic group which feels threatened since the genocide that saw hard-line Hutu militias kill some 800,000 people in Rwanda in 1994.

Gen Ntaganda fought for Mr Kagame against Rwanda’s Hutu-led government in the early 1990s.

After Mr Kagame took power in 1994, Bosco Ntaganda served as a bulwark in eastern DR Congo against the Hutu militias that took refuge there after being driven out of Rwanda at the end of the genocide.

Gen Ntaganda also fought the Congolese government, accusing it of oppressing DR Congo’s own Tutsi population living in the east, near the border with Rwanda.

He fled to the US embassy after his M23 rebel movement, which was formed last year after an army mutiny, split last month.

The M23 rebel movement has been hit by fighting between rival factions

There was heavy fighting between rival factions in eastern DR Congo, which reportedly left Gen Ntaganda on the back foot.

It is not clear what caused the split, but forces loyal to Gen Ntaganda and ousted M23 political head Jean-Marie Runiga appeared to lose ground to troops allied with the movement’s military chief Sultani Makenga.

An ally of Col Makenga, Col Innocent “India Queen” Kahina, told Associated Press news agency that he saw Gen Ntaganda in the battlefield last week.

“We shot at him, but he got away,” Col Kahina is quoted as saying.

“Apparently, he thought an almost sure prison sentence was better than his other options,” DR Congo analyst Jason Stearns writes on his blog.

Mr Vircoulon says Rwanda will be worried about Gen Ntaganda appearing in the dock at The Hague.

“He will have a lot of things to say at the ICC and his testimony may potentially be very damaging and could have huge consequences for Kigali.”

For New York-based pressure group Human Rights Watch (HRW), should Gen Ntaganda stand trial, it would help end the culture of impunity in DR Congo.

“Ntaganda’s appearance in the dock at a fair and credible trial of the ICC would send a strong message to other abusers that they too may face justice one day,” HRW Africa researcher Ida Sawyer said.

The DR Congo conflict has been a major focus of the ICC since its formation more than a decade ago, with two cases finalised so far – the acquittal of militia leader Mathieu Ngudjolo Chui in December 2012 and the sentencing some six months earlier of his rival, Thomas Lubanga, to 14 years in jail for recruiting children into his rebel army in 2002 and 2003.

Gen Ntaganda was once allied with Lubanga, serving as his chief of staff in the Union of Congolese Patriots (UPC) rebel group.

The ICC issued an arrest warrant for Gen Ntaganda in 2006, accusing him of committing atrocities, along with Lubanga, in 2002 and 2003 – charges that are unrelated to the latest conflict involving the M23.

With more charges added against Gen Ntaganda in 2012, he now faces 10 counts of war crimes and crimes against humanity.

‘Meat on bones’

While Lubanga was captured by the DR Congo government in 2006 and put on trial, Gen Ntaganda evaded arrest and was integrated into the Congolese army.

But fighters loyal to him defected from the army last year after DR Congo’s President Joseph Kabila hinted that the Congolese authorities would put the general on trial.

His appearance at the US embassy suggests the Rwandan government forced him to hand himself in, says Mr Stearns.

“Or he was so afraid of what would happen if they arrested him (or Makenga got a hold of him) that he made a run for the embassy?” he asks.

Despite the ICC’s efforts to punish rebel leaders and various peace initiatives spearheaded by foreign governments – and 19,000 UN troops on the ground, violence has continued in eastern DR Congo – a largely lawless area hit by ethnic conflict and a battle over its mineral resources.

Currently, Uganda is mediating between the government and the M23 to end the conflict that has left hundreds of thousands homeless since last year, while UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon has appointed former Irish president Mary Robinson as his special envoy to the region.

Her appointment on Monday followed the signing of an agreement last month by 11 African leaders – including Mr Kagame, Mr Kabila and Uganda’s President Yoweri Museveni – to help end the conflict in eastern DR Congo and possibly set up a special African Union intervention brigade.

“I plan to work closely with the leaders of the region to ensure that the presence of combatants in their territories is addressed by their respective governments, in the context of the Peace, Security and Cooperation Framework [signed by the leaders],” Ms Robinson said.

“In this respect, I call on states of the region to work with the International Criminal Court,” she added.

Some analysts believe that with diplomatic pressure on Rwanda growing, it could not give refuge to Gen Ntaganda, leaving him with no option but to surrender in the face of the setbacks his forces suffered in the latest fighting.

Mr Stearns doubts that the conflict will end anytime soon, saying the agreement reached by African leaders was “very vague”.

“Robinson will have to put meat on its bones. However, if Kabila manages to strike a deal with Makenga’s M23, then logic of the framework [agreement] could easily fray,” he writes.

“Kabila thought it was necessary to sign up to a relatively intrusive deal in order to bring an end to the M23 threat.”

With the M23 splitting and Gen Ntaganda surrendering, DR Congo’s government may be feeling more buoyant, but there is no room for complacency in international efforts to achieve peace – there are enough battle-hardened men in the region to fill the vacuum left by Gen Ntaganda.

Source: BBC Africa