Programmes Staff Organisational structure Partners

Capacity building Advocacy Protection

Staff Job openings Internships

Burundi Djibouti Eritrea Ethiopia Kenya Rwanda Somalia/Somaliland Sudan Tanzania Uganda

Current members How to become a member

Our publications Members' publications Key documents

Advocacy material Workshop reports & Resources

Organisations Relevant resources

Protection Advocacy Capacity Building

Rwanda

The pre-election period in Rwanda has been marred by actions aimed at restricting civil and political rights in the country. Human rights activists, journalists and members of the political opposition have of late seen their rights and their space for action restricted.
Opposition party members in Rwanda have faced a series of threats and attacks since the last Commission report, which appear to be linked to the coming elections. An example is Victoire Ingabire who returned to the country after 17 years in exile, to lead a campaign for president as the candidate of the opposition party, FDU- Inkingi. Ingabire was among those accused of the recent bomb attacks in Kigali, Rwand.  Most recently, Ingabire was arrested on 21st April 2010 on charges including genocide ideology and collaborating with a terrorist group- the Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda (FDLR). She has been restricted from travelling outside the capital city, a move that hinders her from campaigning as the August presidential elections draw nearer.1 According to Human Rights Watch, the government has on several occasions used accusations of participation in the genocide as a way of targeting and discrediting its critics.2 Furthermore, two new political parties faced difficulties in obtaining the registration necessary to participate in the presidential elections. Both groups had their meetings interrupted by the police and their party members arrested notably the Party Social Imberakuri.

President Kagame’s willingness to review the Genocide ideology after criticism and pressure from human rights organisation, governments and media, is a positive step in the improvement of the situation in Rwanda. The law which was passed in 2007 has been of particular concern given the rather vague list of criteria it sets down as defining genocide ideology and due the fact that it fails to consider the question of intent in the manifestations of behaviour deemed to fit into this definition. It has been used as a means for government to silence its critics.3  

The LGBTI community in Rwanda continues to face significant challenges. In December 2009 it appeared that the new penal code, which included a provision criminalising the promotion and sensitization of same sex relations- and some versions of which appeared to include the word ‘practice’ thereby criminalizing the act, was tabled for parliament. Nevertheless as a result of significant outcry by national human rights and health organizations and international ones, as well as the diplomatic community on the ground, this provision was removed from the draft.

The space accorded to human rights defenders in Rwanda is limited. The genocide and its consequences continue to influence the human rights community and to shape the discourse used by the authorities to restrict and repress critical defenders.

Human rights activists in working in Rwanda have faced a new assault against their rights of freedom of association. On 23 April 2010, Carina Tertsakian, Human Rights Watch's senior researcher on Rwanda was denied a work visa on the pretext that there was some inconsistencies in her visa application, specifically signatures and dates on the documents she had submitted. The notice was given to her just a day before the 90 days of her legal stay in the country- which raises suspicion. 4 Similarly international and regional rights organisations have recently gone through a re-registration process in Rwanda and have been asked to sign a Memorandum of Understanding with the government; a few organisations which have in the past been criticized by the authorities and faced a range of restrictions on their work have faced significant challenges and delays in their registration process.

The Rwanda government has continued to pursue its attacks on private media outlets and its harassment, intimidation and smear campaign against independent and critical journalists through a range of measures. Private media journalists have faced systematic monitoring rendering their investigative work particularly difficult. Ongoing intimidation and monitoring of the former Chief Editor of Umuseso, Charles Kabonero, lead to his rapid departure from Rwanda in May 2009 based on fears for his safety. Most recently, Charles Kabonero – while in exile, Acting Editor-in-Chief Didas Gasana, and reporter Richard Kayigamba of the Kinyarwanda-language private weekly Umuseso were sentenced to prison over a story reporting on an extramarital affair between the mayor of the capital, Kigali, and a government minister. At the time of writing this report the case was at the stage of a final appeal.

On 19th January 2010, journalists from private media convened in Kigali to elect their representatives to the High Media Council, an agency that monitors and regulates the media and that has acquired significantly more power under the New Media Law of 2009. It had earlier been communicated that each media house would have one representative. However when journalists arrived they found that the pro-governmental New Times and Contact FM had brought with them a disproportionate number of staff members. The eventual candidates Albert Rudatsimburwa of Contact FM and Arthur Asiimwe of the New Times were elected by their own staff members, members of two leading private papers, Umuseso and Umuvugizi, were not invited.5
More recently, two Kinyarwanda newspapers, Umuseso and Umuvigizi, were suspended on 13th April 2010 by the High Media Council, for six months. The legality of the suspension however is questionable. As per the law of August 2009 on the Media, on the procedures of suspension of a press publication, the media houses were not given prior warning. However, the papers were not given any official warning as they learnt of their fate broadcast on governmental media. Legally, the duration of the suspension also raises questions as both papers have never been suspended before and therefore wouldn’t be suspended for more than two weeks; the six month suspension is for papers accused of recidivism. 6 The six months suspension will also ensure that the papers will be unable to cover the elections. Umuseso is appealing against the decision in court on the 11th May 2010. In the meantime the Umuseso journalists have also been summoned by the Central Investigations Department (CID) and charged of amongst other things insulting the head of state and inciting the armed forces into insubordination and mutiny.

The regional media has not been spared the attacks on independent reporting. During a press conference on 3rd March 2010, president Kagame attacked the East African a regional weekly newspaper for an interview it made with Victoire Ingabire and questioned why only uganda journalist based in Uganda were reporting on Rwanda.7