The Rwandan government has made remarkable strides in infrastructure, the economy, healthcare and gender equity in political representation, but their continued attack on independent thought and criticism is disheartening – and dangerous.
As the August presidential election looms, it is important not only to hail Rwanda's success but also to ask hard questions about government abuse of authority.
The Rwandan government uses charges of "genocidal ideology" and "ethnic divisionism" to attack independent critics and often seems more concerned with political survival than with lasting reconciliation, manipulating the memory of the genocide for political gain. If the Rwandan government is truly committed to promoting unity and fostering long-term reconciliation it should encourage enlightened public discourse about the social construction of ethnicity in Rwanda and stop oppressing political opponents, independent civil society and journalists.
My work years ago as a young lawyer-in-training focusing on post-genocide Rwanda sparked my career in international human rights law. For several years I visited Rwanda on human rights research and fact-finding trips and authored reports based on my fieldwork. This tiny, beautiful, ghost-filled country, where 800,000 people were slaughtered while the international community watched, has stayed with me.
On my first trip to Rwanda seven years ago, I visited a genocide memorial site housed in a church an hour outside of Rwanda's capital. At Ntarama church, roving gangs of genocidaires killed 5,000 men, women and children seeking sanctuary inside. There are places made of stone that carry human memory, that remember where we have been and what we have suffered. I walked into Ntarama church and was confronted with the strong, sad, unrelenting human memory of anguish.
The church remained exactly as it had been following the 1994 attacks. There were holes in the ceiling from grenade fragments, blood splattered on the walls, bones and skulls scattered on the floor among the rubble, sandals, clothes and children's books.
I remember the light from the setting sun entering the church through the grenade holes in the ceiling and settling on the bones that glowed golden and lonely. One of the survivors of the attack said he only lived because the bodies of the dead and dying poured on top of him, like rain. In the trips to Rwanda that followed, I would meet many more survivors who shared similar stories of the struggle to live during those horrifying 100 days.
It is with these images and stories lingering in my mind that I remain mystified at the ease with which the Rwandan government manipulates the memory of the genocide by using the charge of genocidal ideology to stifle opposition and buttress its own power.
As the election draws near, the government has been implicated in recent attacks on journalists and political opponents and their advocates. These attacks include the imprisonment and later release of Peter Erlinder, a U.S. lawyer and International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda defense counsel, and the banning of two independent newspapers: Umuvugizi and Umuseso.
Although the government has denied recent allegations of abuse – including participation in the murder of Umuvugizi editor Jean Leonard Rugambage, and the attempted murder in South Africa of the exiled former army chief of staff Faustin Kayumba Nyamwasa – the authoritarian tendencies of Rwanda's ruling party is not a new phenomenon.
In 2004, following the 2003 elections in which the government was implicated in the forced disappearances of opposition figures, a parliamentary commission issued a scathing report accusing civil society, independent journalists, opposition politicians, human rights defenders, churches, schools and international aid organizations of harboring "genocidal ideology."
I researched and co-authored a report condemning these actions and interviewed a junior Rwandan government official who conceded that "genocidal ideology" had become code for overt criticism of government policy. The parliamentary commission report was shocking in its lack of strong evidence to support such serious charges in a country struggling to realize lasting reconciliation.
Following the release of the 2004 parliamentary report, Rwandan human rights defenders accused of genocidal ideology fled the country fearing for their lives. Many lived in exile in Kampala, Uganda, under the protection of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, until being granted political asylum in Europe and North America. I interviewed several of them – brave individuals who had strong records of advocating for the rights of genocide survivors.
International human rights defenders are also not immune to the government's acrimony. One prime example was the government's treatment of the late, great Alison Des Forges of the U.S.-based Human Rights Watch, who before her untimely death last year was widely regarded as one of the foremost experts on the Rwandan genocide. Her criticisms of the government's increasingly authoritarian streak resulted in the government officially banning her from the country in 2008, despite her unquestionable courage in attempting to draw international attention to the impending genocide in 1994. As the government persists in leveling charges of genocidal ideology with abandon, independent critics continue to flee the country.
Rwanda's "genocidal ideology" and "ethnic divisionism" laws fail to strike an equitable balance between safeguarding freedom of speech while protecting citizens against incitement to violence and discrimination. Instead, these laws silence journalists, politicians and citizens who peacefully advocate political views that differ from those of the ruling party. The government uses these ill-defined crimes and manipulates the memory of the genocide to solidify its power and oppress alternative political viewpoints under the pretense of advancing national unity.
These actions trivialize the genocide and do not honor the Rwandan dead.
Chi Mgbako is clinical associate professor of law and director of the Walter Leitner International Human Rights Clinic at Fordham Law School in New York City.
Comments Post a comment
You start your article by complimenting the achievements the Government has reached. The infrastructure, the economy, health care and gender equality.
My confusion here is how you praise all those successes but at the same time you criticise the government for attacking freedom of its citizens in airing their views independently.
It would be difficult for any government to reach the successes of Rwandan level in a very short period of 16 years just after the genocide without the full support of Rwandans themselves.....The so called free thinkers are even able to be free thinkers in Rwanda because the government has made it possible for them to do so.
There is no any country in history of humankind where with what Rwanda went through 16 years ago had made such progress in every area of development without good leaders and good governance. Rwanda has exceeded the expectations of the whole world and thats why its been compared and expected to practice the same level of democracy the western world has.
Those who formed opposition outside the country, were given a green light to come and challenge the goverment inside the country. They were issued with Rwandan passports and surely supported all the way.
But lets not forget that every country has its laws. The laws of the land passed by the parliament!......I believe everyone can challenge the government's policies as long as they stay within the laws. No one should be above the law simple and clear. Anything other than that is illegal and should be prosecuted.
Uteddy, Well facts are facts. Development has taken place to the surprise of many including Rwandese themselves. But then people have died, and others have gone missing and presumed missing since 1994. Can you tell us who should be held responsible? Who should we ask people like Maj. Alex Ruzindana? Maj. Ciza? Capt. Tega? Seth Sendashonga? Lizinde, and others? How do you explain Rwandese nationals (RDF soldiers) being held in S.Africa suspected to have been involved in the shooting of Kayumba? How do you explain that there is no single voice of dissent moving freely on the clean streets of Kigali? How do you explian that all those who have dared speak out against the Government are either in prison or in exile? And by the way, could that explain the unexplainable speed of development that has not been seen in any other country?
Uteddy, Your critique of this article ironically points to the very reason this article was written and lays bare your problematic view of public criticism and free speech (one the Rwandan government undoubtedly shares). How dare one both praise and critique Rwanda you ask? Excuse me, but in a democracy, citizens do not owe their freedoms to the government.
There is no question that Rwanda and its leadership have taken huge strides to move from a horrific moment in history that threatened the country's very existence. As the author poignantly acknowledged, the country's progress is well documented, especially in light of the present-day manifestations of a genocidal history (the author's description of her walk through the church is enlightening and poetic). However, public criticism of the government not only is a right of Rwandan citizens, but it is also a responsibility. The only way to have better government is to have a critical, watchful citizenry and Rwanda desperately needs continued reforms and the sustained effort to achieve better governance.
The heart of the author's article lies in the government's use of "genocidal ideology" to pursue its aims. Genocide should never exploited and my hope is that Rwanda's government will heed such calls move towards a greater respect for free speech and dissent.
You start your article by complimenting the achievements the Government has reached. The infrastructure, the economy, health care and gender equality.
My confusion here is how you praise all those successes but at the same time you criticise the government for attacking freedom of its citizens in airing their views independently.
It would be difficult for any government to reach the successes of Rwandan level in a very short period of 16 years just after the genocide without the full support of Rwandans themselves.....The so called free thinkers are even able to be free thinkers in Rwanda because the government has made it possible for them to do so.
There is no any country in history of humankind where with what Rwanda went through 16 years ago had made such progress in every area of development without good leaders and good governance. Rwanda has exceeded the expectations of the whole world and thats why its been compared and expected to practice the same level of democracy the western world has.
Those who formed opposition outside the country, were given a green light to come and challenge the goverment inside the country. They were issued with Rwandan passports and surely supported all the way.
But lets not forget that every country has its laws. The laws of the land passed by the parliament!......I believe everyone can challenge the government's policies as long as they stay within the laws. No one should be above the law simple and clear. Anything other than that is illegal and should be prosecuted.
Kagame's forces have killed more than 7 million unarmed civilians in Rwanda and neighboring Congo since October 1990. His regime is full of mass murderers who are scared that as soon as they lose power, they will end up in some court to answer for their crimes. Therefore, they will do whatever it takes to cling to power including killing and jailing defense lawyers, journalists, opposition politicians etc. No surprises there.
See All Comments