Rwanda 2020 Human Rights Report
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Chapter 2 Political Background
Chapter 2 Political Background Early History The area presently occupied by Rwanda has been inhabited since the 1300s. By the 17th century a kingdom was established inhabited by Hutus, Tutsis and Twa. Rwanda first became a German protectorate in 1884, and under the name Ruanda-Urundi, became part of German East Africa in 1890. After the First World War, it came under Belgian administration under a League of Nations mandate, and after World War II Ruanda-Urundi became a UN trust territory with Belgium as the administrative authority. Towards Independence After the Second World War, Rwanda continued to be administered by Belgium. In 1959, as the independence movement gathered pace, the ruling Tutsi elite formed a political party, Union Nationale Rwandaise. The Belgian authorities encouraged the Hutu majority also to aspire to political power and, in the same year, a rival party, Parti de l’émancipation du peuple Hutu (Parmehutu), was established. As the 1960 local elections approached, Parmehutu initiated a Hutu uprising resulting in the death of many Tutsis and forcing King Kigeri V and tens of thousands of Tutsis to flee into exile in Uganda and Burundi. In 1961 the monarchy was abolished. Independent Rwanda Rwanda achieved independence from Belgium in 1962, with Parmehutu leader Gregoire Kayibanda as President; many more Tutsis left the country and those who remained faced continuing state-sponsored violence and institutionalised discrimination. The most serious eruption of violence at this time was triggered in 1963 by an incursion from Burundi of exiled Rwandan Tutsis and resulted in the death of at least 15,000 Tutsis at the hands of Hutu gangs. -
IN SEARCH of Africa's Greatest Safaris
IN SEARCH of Africa's Greatest Safaris A S E R I E S O F L I F E C H A N G I N G J O U R N E Y S T H A T L E A V E A F R I C A ' S W I L D L I F E I N A B E T T E R P L A C E Who We Are Vayeni is owned and run by Luke & Suzanne Brown. Together they have built a formidable reputation for seeking out the finest safari experiences Africa can offer and combining these into cathartic experiences for the most judicious travellers. Luke and Suzanne also co- founded the Zambesia Conservation Alliance together with Luke's brother Robin. Through Zambesia their goal is to successfully assist Africa's increasingly threatened habitats and wildlife. Where We Take You East Africa Indian Ocean Islands Southern Africa Antarctica Comfort Between Destinations All journeys include a private jet between destinations & a dedicated, highly acclaimed African specialist guide throughout. CA AFRI EAST NDS ISLA CEAN AN O INDI ly p s e S e e E d d f i o R v a s U o . h r f e c S p o d i r A l t e r r a E c o a e e R n h w S t e S T d n S e i d y ' c v e T t e I la e c F p s e n I n s r R e n A l o u d c o n u J o re b atu ign S S OU T HE IND RN IA AF N R OC ICA ch of EA In Sear N ISL ICA AN T AFR DS EAS FRICA ERN A DS ECRETS UTH SLAN ZAMBESIA'S S SO EAN I N OC A INDIA CTIC NTAR A A vast & rich region of s, s, wildlife presided over by the o d of in r rgest African elephant herd 7 h pa s la ch R o le r T , e a on the planet. -
Thematisch Ambtsbericht Over Mensenrechten En Justitie in Rwanda
Thematisch ambtsbericht over mensenrechten en justitie in Rwanda Datum 18 augustus 2016 Pagina 1 van 67 Thematisch ambtsbericht | augustus 2016 Colofon Plaats Den Haag Opgesteld door Directie Sub-Sahara Afrika (DAF) Pagina 2 van 67 Thematisch ambtsbericht | augustus 2016 Inhoudsopgave Colofon ......................................................................................................2 Inhoudsopgave ............................................................................................3 1 Mensenrechten......................................................................................... 6 1.1 Algemene mensenrechtensituatie....................................................................6 1.2 Mishandeling en foltering.............................................................................11 1.2.1 Wetgeving ................................................................................................11 1.2.2 Foltering door militairen ..............................................................................12 1.2.3 Mishandeling door de politie.........................................................................14 1.2.4 Local Defence Forces ..................................................................................14 1.2.5 Toezicht en hulpverlening ............................................................................15 1.3 Verdwijningen ...........................................................................................16 1.4 Buitengerechtelijke executies en moorden......................................................18 -
ARMING RWANDA the Arms Trade and Human Rights Abuses in the Rwandan War
HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH ARMS PROJECT January 1994 Vol. 6, Issue 1 ARMING RWANDA The Arms Trade and Human Rights Abuses in the Rwandan War Contents MapMap...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 3 IntroductionIntroduction....................................................................................................................................................................................4 Summary of Key Findings ........................................................................................................................................................ 5 Summary of Recommendations .......................................................................................................................................... 6 I. Historical Background to the WarWar......................................................................................................................................7 The Banyarwanda and Uganda..............................................................................................................................................7 Rwanda and the Habyarimana Regime............................................................................................................................ 9 II. The Record on Human RightsRights..............................................................................................................................................11 -
The International Response to Conflict and Genocide:Lessom from the Rwanda Experience
The International Response to Conflict and Genocide: Lessons from the Rwanda Experience March 1996 Published by: Steering Committee of the Joint Evaluation of Emergency Assistance to Rwanda Editor: David Millwood Cover illustrations: Kiure F. Msangi Graphic design: Designgrafik, Copenhagen Prepress: Dansk Klich‚, Copenhagen Printing: Strandberg Grafisk, Odense ISBN: 87-7265-335-3 (Synthesis Report) ISBN: 87-7265-331-0 (1. Historical Perspective: Some Explanatory Factors) ISBN: 87-7265-332-9 (2. Early Warning and Conflict Management) ISBN: 87-7265-333-7 (3. Humanitarian Aid and Effects) ISBN: 87-7265-334-5 (4. Rebuilding Post-War Rwanda) This publication may be reproduced for free distribution and may be quoted provided the source - Joint Evaluation of Emergency Assistance to Rwanda - is mentioned. The report is printed on G-print Matt, a wood-free, medium-coated paper. G-print is manufactured without the use of chlorine and marked with the Nordic Swan, licence-no. 304 022. 2 The International Response to Conflict and Genocide: Lessons from the Rwanda Experience Study 2 Early Warning and Conflict Management by Howard Adelman York University Toronto, Canada Astri Suhrke Chr. Michelsen Institute Bergen, Norway with contributions by Bruce Jones London School of Economics, U.K. Joint Evaluation of Emergency Assistance to Rwanda 3 Contents Preface 5 Executive Summary 8 Acknowledgements 11 Introduction 12 Chapter 1: The Festering Refugee Problem 17 Chapter 2: Civil War, Civil Violence and International Response 20 (1 October 1990 - 4 August -
Nyamwasa-Q-And-A.Pdf
CASE OVERVIEW Consortium for Refugees and Migrants Rights in South Africa v President of the Republic of South Africa and Others On 29 and 30 October 2012 CoRMSA will argue before the North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria that former Rwandan general and suspected war criminal, Faustin Kayumba Nyamwasa, is not eligible for refugee status. This case is supported by the Southern Africa Litigation Centre and CoRMSA is represented by the Wits Law Clinic. 1. What is this case about? This case concerns the judicial review of the decision of the South African authorities to grant refugee status to a former Rwandan general and suspected war criminal, Faustin Kayumba Nyamwasa, in June 2010. This case is being brought by the Consortium for Refugees and Migrants Rights in South Africa (CoRMSA) and is supported by the Southern Africa Litigation Centre (SALC). It raises a number of issues, including: ▪ The proper interpretation and administration of South Africa’s Refugees Act in accordance with international law; ▪ The intersection between refugee law and international criminal law and the detection and apprehension of persons accused of international crimes; ▪ South Africa’s obligation to ensure that it does not become a safe haven for perpetrators of international crimes; ▪ South Africa’s constitutional mandate to ensure accountable, transparent and rational decision making. This case will be heard on 29 and 30 October by Judge Mngqibisa-Thusi of the North Gauteng High Court in Pretoria. 2. Who is Faustin Kayumba Nyamwasa? Nyamwasa is a Rwandan national and former general in the Rwandan Patriotic Army (RPA). Nyamwasa was a high-ranking member of the RPA between 1990 and 1998, during which time he was in command of troops stationed on the border between the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and Rwanda. -
B-8-2016-1064 EN.Pdf
European Parliament 2014-2019 Plenary sitting B8-1064/2016 4.10.2016 MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION with request for inclusion in the agenda for a debate on cases of breaches of human rights, democracy and the rule of law pursuant to Rule 135 of the Rules of Procedure on Rwanda, the case of Victoire Ingabire (2016/2910(RSP)) Charles Tannock, Mark Demesmaeker, Tomasz Piotr Poręba, Ryszard Antoni Legutko, Ryszard Czarnecki, Karol Karski, Anna Elżbieta Fotyga, Arne Gericke, Notis Marias, Angel Dzhambazki, Ruža Tomašić, Monica Macovei, Branislav Škripek on behalf of the ECR Group RE\P8_B(2016)1064_EN.docx PE589.653v01-00 EN United in diversity EN B8-1064/2016 European Parliament resolution on Rwanda, the case of Victoire Ingabire (2016/2910(RSP)) The European Parliament, – having regard to its resolution of 23 May 2013 on Rwanda: case of Victoire Ingabire, – having regard to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, - having regard to the African Charter on Human and Peoples Rights, - having regard to the African Charter on Democracy, Elections and Governance, - having regard to the instruments of the United Nations and the African Commission on Human and People’s Rights, in particular the Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Fair Trial and Legal Assistance in Africa, - having regard to the UN Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or degrading Treatment or Punishment, - having regard to the Cotonou Agreement, – having regard to Rule 135 of its Rules of Procedure, A. whereas Victoire Ingabire in 2010, after 16 years in exile in the Netherlands, President of the Unified Democratic Forces (UDF), a coalition of Rwandan opposition parties, returned to Rwanda to run in the presidential election and was barred from standing in this election against the de facto leader of Rwanda since 1994, Paul Kagame; after the elections was arrested on 14 October 2010; B. -
L'opposante Victoire Ingabire Libérée De Prison
A la une / International Rwanda L'opposante Victoire Ingabire libérée de prison Une des principales figures de l'opposition rwandaise, Victoire Ingabire, est sortie de prison, hier, dans le cadre de la libération anticipée de plus de 2 000 prisonniers décidée la veille par le président Paul Kagame qui dirige son pays d'une main de fer depuis près d'un quart de siècle. “Je remercie le Président qui a permis cette libération”, a dit l'opposante alors qu'elle quittait la prison de Mageragere dans la capitale rwandaise, Kigali. “J'espère que cela marque le début de l'ouverture de l'espace politique au Rwanda”, a-t-elle ajouté, appelant M. Kagame à “libérer d'autres prisonniers politiques”. La libération surprise de 2 140 détenus, dont Mme Ingabire et le chanteur Kizito Mihigo, a été décidée lors d'un conseil des ministres, vendredi, au cours duquel une mesure de grâce présidentielle a été approuvée. “Le conseil des ministres présidé par le président Paul Kagame a approuvé, aujourd'hui, la libération anticipée de 2140 condamnés auxquels les dispositions de la loi leur donnaient droit”, a précisé un communiqué du ministère de la Justice. “Parmi eux figurent M. Kizito Mihigo et Mme Victoire Ingabire Umuhoza, dont le reste de la peine a été commuée par prérogative présidentielle à la suite de leurs dernières demandes de clémence déposées en juin de cette année”, a ajouté le texte. Mme Ingabire avait été arrêtée en 2010 peu de temps après son retour au Rwanda alors qu'elle voulait se présenter à la présidentielle contre Paul Kagame comme candidate du parti des Forces démocratiques unifiées (FDU- Inkingi), une formation d'opposition non reconnue par les autorités de Kigali. -
Rwanda – Ett Land Med Stora Utmaningar Med Etniska Motsättningar En Fallstudie Om Rwanda Och Subkulturell Pluralism
Kandidatuppsats Rwanda – ett land med stora utmaningar med etniska motsättningar En fallstudie om Rwanda och subkulturell pluralism Författare: Lina Hedberg Handledare: Patric Lindgren Examinator: Martin Nilsson Termin: VT20 Ämne: Statsvetenskap Nivå: Kandidat Kurskod: 2SK31E Abstract The purpose of the study is to investigate if the presence of subcultural pluralism has affected Rwanda’s democratisation negatively. The study’s question is therefore: Are subcultural pluralism an explanation of Rwanda’s low degree of democracy? To answer this, I have chosen to do an explanatory case study and the study is theory consuming. The study’s theoretical framework consists of Robert A Dahls part theory about subcultural pluralism from his work Polyarchy. Other materials used in the study is secondary material which is used to describe Rwanda’s political history. Another important source is Freedom House “Freedom in the world”- reports about Rwanda from the period 1995-2019. The analysis shows that Rwanda do not meet Robert A Dahls three criteria’s about subcultural pluralism. If a country meets his criteria’s they have a good chance of democratization even though they have a high degree of subcultural pluralism. If the country does not meet his criteria’s they have a low chance to democratize. The study shows that Rwanda's leading party RPF has adopted several measures that have complicated the oppositions situation to operate in the country and Rwanda's subcultural groups hutu and twa are excluded from political processes. The result shows that Rwanda has low chances of democratisation. It also shows that subcultural pluralism is one explanation to the country’s low degree of democracy. -
Seventeen Years After the 1994 War and Genocide
COUNTRIES AT THE CROSSROADS COUNTRIES AT THE CROSSROADS 2011: RWANDA 1 TIMOTHY LONGMAN INTRODUCTION Seventeen years after the 1994 war and genocide that killed an estimated 800,000 people, Rwanda has made significant progress on stability and economic development but remains highly authoritarian, a country where dissent is not tolerated and regime critics are harassed, arrested, and sometimes killed. Even as the regime has gained international praise for good governance and competent economic management, the Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF) and President Paul Kagame have tightened their control of Rwanda‘s social and political life. The executive branch dominates the government, with neither parliament nor the judiciary providing any real check on presidential power. By preventing serious opposition, Kagame and the RPF used the 2008 parliamentary and 2010 presidential elections to consolidate their power, winning overwhelming majorities. The 1994 genocide remains a central point of departure for public policy, and the government regularly invokes the need to prevent future ethnic violence as justification for restrictions on civil liberties. A 2001 law against ―divisionism‖ and a 2008 law against ―genocide ideology‖ have been used to stifle free speech by equating criticism of the regime with support for ethnic hatred. Government domination of civil society remains intense, and few vestiges of the independent press remain following several years of intense suppression. Even average citizens must censor their conversations, since open discussion of ethnicity is regarded as divisionism and can lead to imprisonment. Overwhelmingly focused on prosecuting genocide crimes since 1995, the justice system has begun to shift its concentration to ordinary criminal matters. -
Rwamakuba Ictr-98-44C-T
International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda Tribunal pénal international pour le Rwanda UNITED NATIONS NATIONS UNIES OR: ENG TRIAL CHAMBER III Before Judge: Dennis C. M. Byron, Presiding Karin Hökborg Gberdao Gustave Kam Registrar: Adama Dieng Date: 20 September 2006 THE PROSECUTOR v. André RWAMAKUBA Case No. ICTR-98-44C-T JUDGEMENT Office of the Prosecutor: Defence Counsel Dior Fall David Hooper and Andreas O’Shea Iain Morley Adama Niane Tamara Cummings-John Judgement 20 September 2006 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION .....................................................................................................................................................................3 CHAPTER I – CHARGES AGAINST THE ACCUSED...................................................................................................6 CHAPTER II - FINDINGS ....................................................................................................................................................13 I. RULES ON EVIDENTIARY MATTERS.................................................................................................................13 I.1. Presumption of Innocence......................................................................................................................................13 I.2. Chamber’s Discretionary power in the Appreciation of the Evidence ...........................................................14 II. FACTUAL FINDINGS .................................................................................................................................................14 -
Report on the Rwanda Media Experience After The
IMS assessment mission: The Rwanda media experience from the genocide International Media Support • Report • March 2003 Monique Alexis, IMS Consultant Ines Mpambara, Co-director of Rwanda’s School of Journalism Contents 1 Introduction ............................................................................. 3 1.1 Background for the mission .............................................................................3 1.2 Mission Objectives..........................................................................................3 1.3 Method and Scope of work ..............................................................................3 1.4 Structure of the report....................................................................................4 2 The Rwandan Context............................................................... 5 2.1 Political background .......................................................................................5 3 The media and the genocide ................................................... 10 3.1 Historical development of the Rwandan media before the genocide .................... 10 3.2 The media during the genocide: the hate media............................................... 14 4 The media after the genocide ................................................. 19 4.1 Reconstruction of a destroyed media sector (1994 - 2003)................................ 19 4.2 Today: Absence of pluralism and constant threats and pressures ....................... 20 4.3 The new Press Law and the High Press Council