Download pdf - PETITION OF RWANDAN REFUGEES AND ASYLUM SEEKERS LIVING IN UGANDA TO UNHCR OVER THE PREMATURE AND UNGROUNDED INVOCATION OF THE CESSATION CLAUSE

RWANDAN REFUGEES AND ASYLUM

SEEKERS

COMMUN

ITY IN UGANDA

2011

PETITION OF RWANDAN REFUGEES AND ASYLUM SEEKERS LIVING IN

UGANDA TO UNHCR OVER THE PREM

ATURE AND UNGROUNDED

INVOCATION OF CESSATION CLAUSE TO OUR REFUGEE STATUS

Through this petition, we express our great memory to: 1. Charles Ingabire gunned down in the night of 30

November to 1 December 2011 in Bukesa/Kampala after UNHCR have ridden roughshod over his concern of insecurity.

2. Niyonzima Eric ( Murdered on 29 September 2010) 3. Ndahiro Aloys (killed on 14 July 2010) 4. Mukangarambe Mélanie (killed on 14 July 2010) 5. Mutuyimana Agnes (killed on 14 July 2010) 6. Muhire (killed on 14 July 2010) 7. Mukeshimana (killed on 14 July 2010) 8. Mutoni (killed on 14 July 2010) 9. Nyirakamana (killed on 14 July 2010) 10. Mukamana (killed on 14 July 2010) 11. Mugisha Silas (killed on 14 July 2010) 12. Kanamugire Jean Paul (killed on 14 July 2010) 13. Dusingizimana Pacifique (killed on 14 July 2010) 14. Kimonyo (killed on 14 July 2010) 15. Hategekimana Jean Marie 16. All Rwandan refugees assassinated or massacred by RPF

Regime all over the world. 17. All Rwandan refugees who lost their lives and health

after being forcefully deported to Rwanda or after being returned to Rwanda following bogus rhetoric to persuade them.

For any contact: C/O Refugee Law Project or FAHAMU Refugee Program Tel. +256(0) 414 343 556 +44 (0) 1865 424 697 E-‐mail: [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] P.O. Box 33903 Kampala, Uganda or 298 Banbury Road, Flat 2 Oxford OX2 7ED United Kingdom

Fax: +256 (0) 414 346 491

mailto:[email protected]



PETITION OF RWANDAN REFUGEES AND ASYLUM SEEKERS LIVING IN UGANDA TO UNITED NATIONS HIGH COMMISSIONER FOR REFUGEES (UNHCR) OVER THE PREMATURE AND UNGROUNDED INVOCATION OF CESSATION CLAUSE TO OUR REFUGEE STATUS

In memory of CHARLES INGABIRE who was kicked out of UNHCR Safe House and thrown in the jaws of death by UNHCR-Uganda Protection Unity. CHARLES INGABIRE was shot dead in the night of 30 November to 1 December 2011 in Kampala.

7 December 2011

Page 2 of 90

To: His Excellency Mr. António GUTERRES THE UNITED NATIONS HIGH COMMISSIONER FOR REFUGEES P.O. Box 2500 CH-‐1211 Genève 2 Dépôt SWITZERLAND PETITION OF RWANDAN REFUGEES AND ASYLUM SEEKERS LIVING IN UGANDA TO UNITED NATIONS HIGH COMMISSIONER FOR REFUGEES (UNHCR) OVER THE PREMATURE AND UNGROUNDED INVOCATION OF THE CESSATION CLAUSE TO OUR REFUGEE STATUS

I. INTRODUCTION The elemental purpose of this petition is to call on United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) to unconditionally and forthwith suspend its decision of prematurely

ocation is completely ungrounded. It is subtly utilized as a shortcut which will not therefore lead to durable solution to the intractable problem of Rwandan refugees. Throughout of this petition; we shed the light to the reality in Rwanda, and to ongoing persecutions, threats to our safety and ill treatments we are victimized with in Uganda where we are discriminated against owing to our nationality which has become a bone of contention and a source of trouble. Further still, this petition is to call on:

-‐ UNHCR to stick on its mandate and international obligations by desisting from promoting murky political agreements with the regime of Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF). This petition is also to call on UNHCR Staff Members to desist from riding roughshod over our well-‐founded concerns for protection and from pushing us to return to a country where we will undoubtedly face persecutions. UNHCR should make sure that it is not going to throw the victims of RPF atrocities in the death jaws as it happened in the past when UNHCR colluded with RPF and condone its atrocities by prematurely promoting repatriation, by groundlessly refusing to grant to us legal protection, by hunting down refugees and by forcefully deporting them back to Rwanda.

-‐ UNHCR to request the Government of Uganda (GoU) and/or to some individuals within the GoU to stick to its international obligations and to its 2006 Refugee Act. The GoU should follow the line and political integrity of its Minister of Relief, Disaster Preparedness and Refugees, Honorable Dr. Steven MALLINGA, by putting an end on all mistreatments against us, inter alia, refoulement, ultimatums, verbal abuse, deadlines, anti-‐Rwandan refugee rhetoric, destruction of crops and huts, restriction of access to humanitarian assistance, bars on



7 December 2011

Page 3 of 90

granting of refugee status, killings, abductions, money extortions, arbitrary arrests and/or imprisonments, and starvation.

-‐ UNHCR to demand the RPF Regime to desist from being an insuperable obstacle to transparent democratic rule of law which is a cornerstone to end all current forms of persecution. These persecutions are not only making return dangerous, but also generating new many refugees. RPF Regime should also desist from sowing ethnic animosity, from distributing firearms in civilians household and from promoting bellicose violence which could end in genocide in the future. In addition, the RPF Regime should put an end to its policies of killing, of maiming and of haunting Rwandan refugees living abroad.

Rwandan Refugee Community in Uganda hopes that this petition will be received by the UNHCR and other key stakeholders as a useful contribution to the review and adjournment of this

petition is based on reality and truth as we are bona fide victims of RPF atrocities to know what is right to save our lives as well as for the betterment of our already jeopardized living. Even if UNHCR officials, in order to leave us caught in a cleft stick, intentionally avoided to clarify to us about the cessation clause among the six cessation clauses outlined in the Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees (1951 Refugee Convention) -‐ which is going to be applied; we developed umstances Cessation

Article 1C. (5) of the 1951 Geneva Convention: This Convention shall cease to apply to any person falling under the terms of section A1 if: He can no longer, because the circumstances in connexion with which he has been recognized as a refugee have ceased to exist, continue to refuse to avail himself of the protection of the country of his nationality; Provided that this paragraph shall not apply to a refugee falling

1 Article 1: D A. shall apply to any person who: (1) Has been considered a refugee under the Arrangements of 12 May 1926 and 30 June 1928 or under the Conventions of 28 October 1933 and 10 February 1938, the Protocol of 14 September 1939 or the Constitution of the International Refugee Organization; Decisions of non-‐eligibility taken by the International Refugee Organization during the period of its activities shall not prevent the status of refugee being accorded to persons who fulfill the conditions of paragraph 2 of this section; (2) As a result of events occurring before 1 January 1951 and owing to well-‐founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality and is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country; or who, not having a nationality and being outside the country of his former habitual residence as a result of such events, is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to return to it. In the case of a person who has more

the country of h ch of the countries of which he is a national, and a person shall not be deemed to be lacking the protection of the country of his nationality if, without any valid reason based on well-‐founded fear, he has not availed himself of the protection of one of the countries of which he is a national.



7 December 2011

Page 4 of 90

under section A(1) of this article who is able to invoke compelling reasons arising out of previous persecution for refusing to avail himself of the protection of the country of nationality. Through this petition, we express our great memory to:

1. Charles Ingabire gunned down in the night of 30 November to 1 December 2011 in Bukesa/Kampala after UNHCR rode roughshod over his well-‐founded claims for protection.

2. Niyonzima Eric gunned down on 29 September 2010 in Makindye/ Kampala by a Rwandan operative, Lieutenant Philemon RUZIBIZA.

3. Ndahiro Aloys strangulated by Rwandan Operatives on 14 July 2010 in Nakivale Settlement Center.

4. Mukangarambe Mélanie shot dead by Ugandan Police on 14 July 2010 Settlement Center.

5. Mugenzi shot dead by Ugandan Police on 14 July 2010 Nakivale Settlement Center. 6. Mutuyimana Agnes disenwombed on 14 July 2010 in Nakivale Settlement Center. 7. Muhire who died trying to jump off the truck on 14 July 2010 in Nakivale Settlement

Center. 8. Mukeshimana who was flattened during the stampede on 14 July 2010 in Nakivale

Settlement Center. 9. Mutoni who was flattened during the stampede on 14 July 2010 in Nakivale Settlement

Center. 10. Nyirakamana Cecile who died of injuries on 14 July 2010 in Nakivale Settlement Center. 11. Mukamana (with her two children) who died following beatings by Ugandan Police while

she was trying to rescue her kids from the stampeded crowd on 14 July 2010 in Nakivale Settlement Center.

12. Mugisha Silas who was shot by Ugandan Police in the neck and waist on 14 July 2010 in Nakivale Settlement Center.

13. Kanamugire Jean Paul who died following floggings by Ugandan Police on 14 July 2010 in Nakivale Settlement Center.

14. Dusingizimana Pacifique who died while trying to leap from the truck on 14 July 2010 in Nakivale Settlement Center.

15. Kimonyo who died following of mutilation of his genitals by a barbed wire on 14 July 2010 in Nakivale Settlement Center.

16. Hategekimana Jean Marie intentionally murdered by Semanda, a UNHCR driver, on 18 February 2010 in Kyangwali Settlement Center.

17. All Rwandan refugees assassinated or massacred by RPF Regime all over the world. 18. All Rwandan refugees who lost their lives and health after being forcefully deported to

Rwanda or after being returned to Rwanda following bogus rhetoric to persuade them.



7 December 2011

Page 5 of 90

II. INSUPERABLE OBSTACLES TO RETURN

democratic elections; declaration of amnesty; repeal of oppressive laws, such as the genocide ideology law; dismantling of former security services; respect for fundamental freedoms; access to courts and fair and open trials; the rule of law generally; quick restoration of land and property rights, and sufficient means of livelihoods. All these have to be addressed, each

on its own, before cessation is considered : Dr. Barbara Harrell-‐Bond 2

II.1. NO RIGHT TO LIFE

-‐full barrel by slowly scooping it with a spoon. Subsequently,

no neighbor will yell at you because they will not be any erosion caused by the water from the :

General Paul KAGAME, President of Rwanda and Chairman of the ruling party, addressing to the army in 1995, a year before perpetrating genocide against Hutu refugees in the

Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC)3 Since 1990, RPF has been promoting and implementing policies and practices which aim to take away the lives of innocent Rwandans. RPF continues to resort both to systematic planned killings against Hutu elites and moderate Tutsis, and to mass killings against Hutu population.

II.1.A. Genocidal Mass Killings Against Hutus

a) October 1990 April 1994 These mass killings were firstly perpetrated by RPF in the northeastern region of Rwanda since 1994 especially in the regions of Byumba, Umutara and Ruhengeri.4 There, RPF showed its pre-‐meditated agenda and plan of ethnic cleansing against Hutus in these regions to make a vital space for Tutsis returnees.5 These mass killings were also accompanied with terrorist bomb attacks on urban areas.

b) April 1994 Today While Hutu extremists were genocidally slaying Tutsis and moderate Hutus, RPF continued its agenda to butcher Hutus for the creation of vital space for Tutsis from April 1994. The region of

2 http: // www.theeastafrican.co.ke/news/-‐/2558/1229902/-‐/nkvn792/-‐/index.html 3 When General Kagame uttered this clause, he was referring to the Rwanda as a barrel, Hutus as water and the International Community as the neighbors and slow genocide against Hutus as slow scooping. 4 -‐ Commission of Amnesty International 1992-‐1993 Pages 71-‐72 5



7 December 2011

Page 6 of 90

Umutara, Kibungo, Bugesera and Byumba turned into the theater of unspeakable massacres.6 Every locality under RPF control became forthwith a bloodbath. For example: the massacre perpetrated at Groupe Scolaire of Kirwa, in Save region, at Kabgayi, Rushashi, Gikongoro, Kibuye, Gisenyi, Gitarama, Bugesera, Ruhengeri, Kigali City etc. the victims were massacred during public meetings convened by RPF, during raids on villages or during house to house searches as it was confirmed by the then UNHCR spokesperson, Ruper Colville.7 RPF did not put an end on these mass killings against Hutus even after the seizure of power. In response to these killings significant; segments of people fled into hiding in swamps, bush areas, banana plantations and other areas of difficult access to RPA soldiers. RPA soldiers, in some cases accompanied by civilian Tutsi surrogates armed with spears and other manual weapons, actively pursued the hidden populations through;

Sudden, apparently well-‐coordinated attacks with gun fire; Silent attacks in which hidden groups were killed with manual weapons; Burning swamps areas to prompt movements by civilians who were then killed; Periods, in which operations were suspended, followed by invitations to the hidden

families to return home in peace. Shortly thereafter, the villages were attacked and returnees killed.8

Massacres against Hutus in Kibeho IDP Camp on 22 April 1995, on Musanze IDP Camp in November 1994, Ndaba and Rugabano IDP Camps in October 1994, and Nyacyonga, Rubengera, Birambo, Musango and Ndago IDP Camps added a point of contention about RPF hostility against Hutu refugees.9 Meanwhile the returnees were not spared.10 In order to annihilate Hutu community, for RPF, it was not sufficient to only kill internal people. It was necessary to cross the border and export the genocide against Hutu refugees in DRC (the Ex-‐Zaire) between 1996 and 2003. Hutu Congolese and Hutu Burundian refugees were not spared.11

6 Rwanda. Les violations des Droits 7 AFP AA 1234/171056 GMT MAY 94 8 Gersony Report: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gersony_Report http://rwandinfo.com/eng/unearthed-‐the-‐un-‐%E2%80%9Cgersony-‐report%E2%80%9D-‐on-‐ rwandan-‐rpf-‐rpa-‐mass-‐killings-‐in-‐1994/ 9 Human Rights Watch Africa Communiqué, December 1994 10 Pages 14, 15, 29, 30, 31,and 32 11http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Countries/ZR/DRC_MAPPING_REPORT_FINAL_EN.pdf

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gersony_Report

http://rwandinfo.com/eng/unearthed-the-un-%E2%80%9Cgersony-report%E2%80%9D-on-



7 December 2011

Page 7 of 90

Back in Rwanda, the regions of Ruhengeri, Gisenyi, Kibuye, Cyangugu and Gitarama were the theatre of other genocidal killings against Hutu civilians between 1996 and 2000.12 And many innocent civilians were killed in Eastern region of Rwanda, only because they were Hutus.13 On 17 July 2004, in reprisal to the killing of 4 genocide survivors, 38 Hutus were extra-‐judicially executed by lethal injection in the military hospital of Kaduha by a group of nurses supervised by Major Dr. Jules Mugabo, also known as Mushingantahe. The mass killings against Hutus are currently perpetrated through suffocation and harsh health conditions in overcrowded secret dungeons, through starvation,14 and through poisoning. This has caused the dearth of 20 inmates in Ntsinda prison in 2009.15 Many of these fatal detention houses are declared military zones not to be accessed by outsiders. 16 And these solitary confinement centers are a hell where the lives of innocent people are lost per diem.17 As it was heard from the lips of Colonel Dan Munyuza, these genocidal killings are being perpetrated with the aim to annihilate and exponentially reduce the number of Hutu community in Rwanda.18

II.1.B. Planned systematic assassinations against Hutus, moderate Tutsis, human rights activists, journalists and legitimate political opponents

When it comes to potential opponents (in politics, economics, business, etc.) and freedom of expression aspirants, RPF resorts to assassination regardless of ethnic belonging. Even Tutsis and moderate Hutus who are survivors of 1994 genocide are not spared. In order to keep their oppressive hegemony, RPF is targeting scholars, intellectuals, traders, etc. Every one who could be a potential beacon to call on people to get rid of the dictatorial regime of RPF is eliminated so that the Rwandan people are held in obscurity, ethnic polarization, fear, mistrust to each other, terror and ignorance. Another targeted group is composed by people who are seen by RPF as:

Embarrassing witnesses of unspeakable crimes committed by RPF; People who are claiming for their properties grabbed by RPF politico-‐military officers or

by RPF-‐backed people;

12 http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/asset/AFR47/032/1997/en/0f834c89-‐e9b8-‐11dd-‐935f-‐7f9f204ae31f/afr470321997en.html 13 http://www.rwasta.net/uploads/media/COMMUNIQUE-‐n_3-‐96-‐Rushashi.pdf 14 http://www.mdrwi.org/rapports%20et%20doc/divers/rapport%20rud.htm 15 Ibid. 16 Military Barracks of Gako, of Kami, of Gabiro, of Camp Muhoza and of Kanombe. Kwa gacinya, Kinigi, Camp GP, undergrounds of Ministry of Defense Building, Ku Kabindi, Nyungwe forest, Iwawa Island, etc. 17 http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/01/world/africa/01rwanda.html?_r=1 18 Testimony of a former bodyguard of Col Dan Munyuza. The bodyguard is currently looking for asylum in Uganda.

http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/asset/AFR47/032/1997/en/0f834c89-e9b8-11dd-935f-

http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/asset/AFR47/032/1997/en/0f834c89-e9b8-11dd-935f-

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/01/world/africa/01rwanda.html?_r=1



7 December 2011

Page 8 of 90

People who are declining RPF proposals to testify concocted charges against RPF opponents;

RPF soldiers who rebut the orders to kill innocent people. One of the first victims of this RPF agenda were Mr. Emmanuel Gapyisi assassinated on 18 May 1993 and Gatabazi Félicien assassinated on 21 February 1994. General Paul Kagame remains to be also the suspect number one for triggering the 1994 genocide by assassinating the former President Juvenal Habyarimana as long as Kagame and RPF are continuously rebutting or minimizing and setting up insuperable obstacles to serious neutral investigations into the assassination of Habyarimana.19 Among the victims, it figures the former Mayor of Commune Giti, Mr. Edouard Sebushumba, who fought against Hutu extremists in 1994 to save lives of Tutsis. After the seizure of power by RPF, he criticized the atrocities committed by RPF, and the consequence was that he was murdered by RPF. On 5 March 2000, Assiel Kabera, a genocide survivor, was assassinated owing to his critics to Kagame. In 2003, Major Augustin Cyiza and Leonard Hitimana were abducted by RPF elements. Until now, the RPF regime has refused to unveil whether they are interned incommunicado or they were slain. The recent typical examples are the assassination against Mr. André Kaggwa Rwisereka, the vice chairman of the opposition party GREEN PARTY. His corpse was found in Butare with the head almost decapitated on 24 July 2010. In addition of Mr. Semadwinga Ntare who was assassinated on 21 June 2011 in Gisenyi. On 24 June was assassinated fallowing his investigation into the murder attempt against Lt. Gen. Kayumba Nyamwasa who is a refugee in South Africa. On 15 September 2011, an agent of Criminal Intelligence Department attempted to assassinate the chairman in Kicukiro District of an opposition party, Parti Social Imberakuri (PS Imberakuri), Mr. Eric Nshimiyimana. These kinds of extra-‐judicial executions, abductions, assassinations or forced disappearances are being committed in every sector and almost every month20. In many cases family members including children are also murdered immediately or at a later date.

19 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-‐africa-‐15165641 20Human Rights Watch, There Will Be No Trial, Police Killings of Detainees and the Imposition of Collective Punishments, July 2007.



7 December 2011

Page 9 of 90

Furthermore, foreign nationals, who are viewed as by RPF as embarrassing witnesses, are not spared. It is in this context that on 17 October 1997, Father Claude Simard was killed and Father Guy Pinard on 2 February 1997, three Spanish employees of the non government organization Medicos del Mundo were killed by RPF on 18 January 1997, Father Curick Vjechoslav from Croatia assassinated in Kigali in 1998, and Father Duchamp, a Canadian. On 31 October 1996, RPF Soldiers killed 4 Spanish religious, namely; Servando Mayor Garcia, Julio Rodriguez Jorge, Miguel Angel Isla Lucio and Fernando de la Fuente. On 29 October 1996, Mgr. Christophe Muhinzirwa was murdered after being tortured by RPF Commandos because he criticized and denounced the genocide that was being perpetrated by RPF in Zaire.21

II.1.C. RPF TRICKS TO HIDE AND/OR MINIMIZE ITS CRIMES22

The corpses of the victims are crammed in mass graves and burned with petrol. Later, the remains of bones and ashes are made vanish.

The cadavers are crammed into trucks and carried away to secret places. These bodies are either buried in mass graves or dumped in lakes and rivers.

Sometimes, the remains are exhumed and then buried in dignity after passing them out to be of Tutsi victims of 1994 Genocide.23

To pose insuperable obstacles to serious investigations.24 To kill and imprison the witnesses of these crimes.

II.2. ETHNIC DISCRIMINATION AGAINST HUTU COMMUNITY

II.2.A. Exclusion from governance, decision making and security bodies

Rwanda is tightly ruled by an ethnocentric clique, from the Tutsi Minority Community. This callous clique makes up an informal cartel which possesses real power. Then, few figureheads from the Hutu Community are recruited to form the formal fictitious government which has no real power to lure the International Community. It is very common to see or hear members of this clique condescending to Hutus and humiliating Hutus by calling them (Hutus) .25 This condescending clique recruits Hutus on basis of unquestioning and blind loyalty, rather than on the basis of merit and competence.26

21 http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christophe_Munzihirwa 22 http://www.miller-‐mccune.com/politics/what-‐really-‐happened-‐in-‐rwanda-‐3432/ 23The bones of 300 Hutus killed by RPF were exhumed in Tumba Sector/Butare in April 2009. They were buried in Gisozi Genocide Memorial Site. 24 http://www.miller-‐mccune.com/politics/what-‐really-‐happened-‐in-‐rwanda-‐3432/ 25 http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Countries/ZR/DRC_MAPPING_REPORT_FINAL_EN.pdf 26 Rwanda Briefing, by General Kayumba Nyamwasa, Dr. Theogene Rudasingwa, Colonel Patrick Karegeya and Gera The authoritarian character of the government is compounded by its narrow political base. The Rwanda state has all the trappings of a democratic system of government, but real power lies in the hands of the President and a small group of military officers and a handful of civilians. As will

http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christophe_Munzihirwa



7 December 2011

Page 10 of 90

The RPF, under General Paul Kagame, has failed to expand its popular base. The Hutu Community is marginalized from a meaningful share of power. The Hutus who serve in government are only surrogates of the RPF which lack legitimacy in their community. They are kept in office, often for very brief periods, for the sole purpose of giving the government an appearance of embracing political pluralism. The Hutu Community perceives the RPF as an instrument of political domination by the minority. The government is not considered legitimate.27 The ethnic breakdown of the current Rwandan government shows Tutsis hold a preponderant percentage of senior positions. Hutus in very senior positions often hold relatively little really authority and are twinned with senior Tutsis who exercise real power. The military and security agencies are fully controlled by Tutsis. These armed forces are misused to oppress and kill Rwandans.28 RPF regime has many tools to persuade Hutus to unwilling to serve high positions for fear of being, one day, brought low, kicked out of office and then thrown in dungeons. Among these tools there are Gacaca Courts and the Genocide Ideology Law. The latter, by definition, is only manifested by Hutus. These discriminatory tools are also used to stifle really opposition parties led by Hutus or moderate Tutsis. Once again Hutu identity and its association with genocide are being used as a tool of ongoing political repression and imposition of collective punishments. Notwithstanding of the rhetoric of moving beyond ethnicity, it is clear that ethnic identities

sues are even much stronger than before, and RPF regime is encouraging it.29

ravenousness for the presidency and RPF callous ethnocentric ifictitious faltering attempts to expand its base and to build a constituency in the Hutu be elaborated on later in this paper, Rwanda has two parallel governments, an informal one and a formal one. The formal government is controlled by the informal one. The President and the inner circle of his close associates that monopolizes political power and marginalizes and excludes the Hutu community of Rwanda from political participation constitute the informal government. The membership of the informal government that

27 Ibid. Page 16. 28 -‐ Habumuremyi Pierre Damien: the current Prime Minister, a Hutu. He ostensibly occupies the 2nd most powerful position in Rwandan government. Like his predecessor, Mr. Bernard MAKUZA, HABUMUREMYI defers in all matter, small and great, to General Kagame. -‐ Sheikh Musa Fazil Harelimana, a Hutu. He is the Minister of Internal Security. He defers to Secretary General. -‐ Aloysia Cyanzayire: Supreme Court President. The vice president Sam Rugege is much the public face of the

Court and holds the administrative authority. -‐ Ntawukuriryayo Jean Damascene and Makuza Bernard are respectively the president and vice president of

the senate, but the real power in the senate is held by Tito Rutaremara. 29 Refugee Law Project (RLP), Social Science Research Council (SSRC) and International Refugee Rights Initiative (IRRI), Dangerous Impasse, Rwandan Refugees in Uganda. CITIZENSHIP AND DISPLACEMENT IN THE GREAT LAKES REGION. WORKING PAPER NO. 4 JUNE 2010 Page 43



7 December 2011

Page 11 of 90

Community and they condemned the RPF to the status of a party representing the interests of a minority ethnic group that can only stay in power through discrimination, brutal coercion and violence. This is also epitomized by the mass killings, reflecting genocide and ethnic cleansing against Hutu Community, perpetrated by RPF and the systematic harassment of legitimate Hutu leaders, who were part of the post-‐genocide transitional Government and/or of the RPF founding days during late 1980s, resulted in most of them fleeing to exile. The unlucky ones were assassinated and a few are marginalized and banished to obscurity in Rwanda. If the RPF regime is ever to surmount the challenges and divides of Rwandan society it must put an end on all dehumanizing mistreatments against Hutus and commence to share really authority with Hutus at a much greater degree than it does now. This agenda of lowering and intimidating Hutus, who are holding ostensible senior positions without authority, is also muting them over the exactions committed at the hands of RPF politico-‐military officers against Hutus who are being reduced to second stratum citizens in general.

II.2.B. Annihilation and Elimination

a) Mass Killings and Selective Assassinations30 Since October 1990, RPF has been perpetrating both mass killings and selective assassination against Hutus. Moderate Tutsis are murdered only in the context of selective assassinations. For mass killings, the list is long. Massacres by RPF soldiers and cadres against Hutu population in the former commune of Muvumba in October 1994 epitomize the RPF agenda of ethnic cleansing against the Hutu community with the aim to reverse the numeral composition of Rwandan population. These killings continued to be perpetrated in the communes of Bwisige, Cyumba, Kivuye, Kigombe, Mukarange, Ngarama, Butaro, Cyeru, Mutura, Kirambo, etc. That is why RPF put insuperable obstacles in the way against the conduct of investigations by international human rights team across the area under RPF control in 1993 and against the publication of the report elaborated by United Nations Mission in Rwanda in early months of 1994.31 In 1994, while Hutus extremists were genocidally slaying Tutsis and moderate Hutus, RPF was indiscriminately massacring innocent Hutu civilians in regions of Umutara, Byumba, Ruhengeri, Bugesera, Gitarama, Kigali etc.32 These mass killings continued after the seizure of power by RPF. This bellicose ethnocentric politico-‐military organization continued to massacre Hutus en mass throughout the country.

30 http://www.miller-‐mccune.com/politics/what-‐really-‐happened-‐in-‐rwanda-‐3432/ 31 Amnesty International, Rwanda: Killings and Abduction by the RPA. AI Index: 47/16/94, 14 October 1994. 32 http: www.musabyimana.be/les-‐criminels-‐presumes-‐du-‐fpr FPR/APR. s. Desouter et F. Reyntjens

http://www.musabyimana.be/les-criminels-presumes-du-fpr



7 December 2011

Page 12 of 90

These massacres were perpetrated during meetings convened by RPF, during house-‐to-‐house searches, during attacks on villages, during ambushes on returnees, during raids on IDPs, during slaughters and during extra judicial executions in detention centers.33 In 1995, RPF massacred an estimated number of 8 000 Hutu IDPs in Kibeho. Then in 1996, as it was not sufficient for RPF to only slaughter internal Hutus, RPF troops crossed the borders inside the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) to genocidally decimate at least 200 000 Hutu refugees.34 While perpetrating genocide crimes in DRC, RPF simultaneously committed mass killings against Hutus in Rwanda; especially in the regions of Ruhengeri, Gisenyi, Cyangugu, Kibuye, and Gitarama.35 Given the RPF hate campaign to sow ethnic animosity, hatred and suspicions between Hutu and Tutsi Communities, given the brutality and bellicose ilk of RPF in order to maintain power, given the current covert operations to cow every major male Tutsi into possession of fire arms and given the coercion of RPF and IBUKA to Tutsis to spy and enlist all Hutus; there are conclusive evidences that RPF regime will commit other genocidal mass killings in the future.36 Regarding selective and targeted assassinations and murder, Hutus are not only the victims, but also moderate Tutsis as it is enlightened in Chapter II.1.B. of this petition.

b) No Justice for Hutus The ruling regime is setting up all possible barriers to prevent Hutus from accessing to equal justice. This injustice has resulted into the lack of a legal mechanism for Hutus to pursue cases against RPF-‐backed perpetrators who murdered their relatives. These perpetrators are instead rewarded by President KAGAME with powerful positions. The judicial system has consequently become a discrimination and repression tool to silence Hutus who are complaining for the prosecution against RPF-‐backed perpetrators who slew and continue to slay innocent Hutus. Any Hutu who challenges the ruling regime for the justice implementation in favour of Hutus who were genocidally slain by RPF is branded a or by

33 http: www.rwandinfo.com/documents/gersony_report.pdf 34 http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Countries/ZR/DRC_MAPPING_REPORT_FINAL_EN.pdf 35 -‐ Integrated Regional information Network for Central and Eastern: IRIN Update 374 for 13 March 1998. -‐ Amnesty International. Document Rwanda: Massacres of Unarmed Civilians Escalate: news service 140/97. AI Index: 47/29/97, & august 1997. 36 Tutsis, who are rebutting these illicit covert policies, are murdered, interned and the lucky ones opt for exile.

http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Countries/ZR/DRC_MAPPING_REPORT_FINAL_EN.pdf



7 December 2011

Page 13 of 90

One of the serious failures of the judiciary is its failure to provide equal justice to all victims of serious crimes committed since October 1990 up to date. RPF political-‐military officers killed hundreds of thousands of people since October 1990. They also carried out other horrible killings, inside and outside the country after the RPF had gained full control of the country. Conventional tribunals, including Gacaca Courts, have not prosecuted RPF crimes. Initially, in 2001, gacaca courts had jurisdiction over crimes against humanity and war crimes, in addition to genocide crimes. But the following year, as Gacaca courts began their work, General Kagame stepped in and acted against prosecution of crimes committed by RPF politico-‐military officers and explained that RPF crimes were merely isolated incidents of revenge, despite evidence to the contrary which is continued to be substantiated by the ongoing discriminatory and oppressive persecutions committed at the hands of RPF. Amendments to the Gacaca laws in 2004 protected perpetrators attached to RPF from being dealt by the jurisdiction of the courts and a national campaign by RPF followed to make sure that these crimes were not discussed in Gacaca. 17 years after the 1994 genocide, Rwandans who suffered or lost relatives at the hands of the RPF are still waiting for justice.37 This regime is only using the judicial system as an instrument of political white wash over serious crimes against humanity, over war crimes and over genocide crimes perpetrated by RPF against Hutus. The system is increasingly vulnerable to manipulation by those on power. With inadequate procedural obstacles and the overly politicized courts, people are living under constant threat of being falsely accused. The judiciary is continuing to be managed and controlled by people who are therefore responsible of several crimes. Moreover, due to this culture of impunity, the army and police are perpetuating to commit extrajudicial executions and they are covered up by the ruling regime which is interfering in judicial activities.38 This non-‐independent partial judicial system has no goal of combating the impunity regardless of ethnical affiliation. Instead, it has the goal of misusing law provisions and abusing power to dragoon opponents of Undoubtedly, our reasons of flight are still justifiable because there are surely no prospects of rebuilding trust and justice at any level unless forces of law and order, and authority are in democratic neutral hands. There is no broadly credible independent adjudicator to determine and implement the neutrality in ethnical motivated and sensitive trials. There is neither transparency nor honesty in the environment within which the judiciary functions.

37 Human Rights Watch, Rwanda Justice Compromised. -‐Based Gacaca Courts May 2011. Page 5 38 Human Rights Watch, Killings in Eastern Rwanda, January 2007



7 December 2011

Page 14 of 90

The overseeing of Gacaca by RPF, through IBUKA,39 has weakened the system. Gacaca is no longer a community-‐based conflict-‐resolution mechanism, but part of a centrally-‐organized state machine, which puts the investigative power of the state at the service of the prosecution while prohibiting legal assistance to the accused. The accused is restricted from openly and freely defending themselves as any comment to prove the truth is referred by the manipulated judges as stirring up divisions or as espousing the genocide ideology or revisionism. Trials are seriously flawed, private individuals and RPF Regime authorities manipulate the course of justice: Gacaca has become politicized over the years. Real miscarriages of justice, corruption and procedural irregularities, substantiated by the manipulation of Gacaca to settle personal and political scores, are worsening ethnic animosities. In addition, there is no room for appeal and the courts are just ruled by personal hate and RPF envy to annihilate Hutus. The Gacaca process is reinforcing the notion of collective assumption of guilt, of second class citizen and of inequitable justice on Hutus. The defendants (all Hutus) are not given adequate legal protection. The untrained manipulated judges are neither entirely impartial nor free from political influence; and that without robust rules of existence, accusations of involvement are used to settle personal vendettas and to exacerbate the haunt against Hutus in general.40 These courts can never reconcile the Rwandan society; they will continue to radicalize ethnic polarization and tensions as far as the crimes committed against Hutus are excluded from the procedures.

c) Internment Internment is one of the machinations of RPF to accelerate decimation of Hutu Community. This RPF regime is always resorting to concocting genocide-‐related crimes in order to keep as many as possible people of this community behind the bars. To culminate this murky tokenism by pretending that it is for justice implementation, Gacaca Courts are misused as a shortcut to cramp Hutus in overcrowded detention houses. Many of the victims are subjected to pre-‐trial detention of 17 years. In many dungeons people are forced to stand all the time to the point it was necessary to mutilate their lower limbs. It is during these detentions that they are fed with food mixed with glass debris or with lead residues to cause their death at a later date. At the end of the day people are losing their lives or simply disappear while incarcerated in jails. It is after being ensured that the victims are at the verge of death that the presidential amnesties are declared or Gacaca Courts acquit them.

39 Genocide survivors association is, in reality, working as a Tutsi exclusively made up cartel. 40 Human Rights Watch, justice compromised: the -‐Based Gacaca Courts (New York, HRW, 2011.



7 December 2011

Page 15 of 90

Accusations of being in connections with rebel movements are also fabricated to eventually imprison people who were too young in 1994 to have participated in the Rwandan Genocide. Another tokenism to keep Hthrown behind the bars for a period of at least 10 years.

The genocide and the swirl of guilt, heart-‐searching and recriminations that have surrounded it have provided a ready context for the marginalization of Hutus. Intrinsically, the essence fueling the killing of RPF against Hutus is not only vengeance, but also mainly the RPF purpose to reduce Hutu to minority community as it was heard from the mouth of Gen. Kagame in a speech written on the beginning of Chapter II.1. That is why RPF commenced mass killings against Hutus as early as 1990. This new form of genocide is different of 19consists of killing quietly in silence as one woman said n 1994 but there is another happening. It is the one of imprisoning people and then they disappear, and employing people and not paying them, which is a form of slavery. Like Gacaca, they convict you for 30 years, which means you have no rights left; and Hutu is the only target 41

d) Enslavement and impoverishment

d.i) Institutionalized slavery

One of the strategies of RPF to annihilate Hutus consists in to force them to be enrolled in military service. After receiving minimal training, they are sent to the front into RPF international wars where they are used as human shields. Hutus, who survive, are poorly paid and the families of the deceased ones are receiving no compensation.

Another group of able bodied Hutus are subjected to forced labor in Congolese mines where the transit camp to that hell is Iwawa Island.

The last group is subjected to the slavery inside the country into physical exhausting works known as Works for Public Interests: a kind of institutionalized slavery where the victims have to work either for the state or for the Tutsi families. After being sentenced in an unfair trial tainted with intimidating coercion, the victim is impelled to concede and to entreat for forgiveness. 42 Even those who have satisfactorily completed their forced labor are kept in forced labor camps for a longer time continuing to be working as slaves. Several victims of this institutionalized slavery told Human Rights Watch that they regarded the so-‐called community service program as a form of forced labor and that they felt exploited by the RPF Regime. Others complained about the conditions in camps and, in particular, that they do not receive 41RLP, SSRC, IRRI, Dangerous Impasse, Rwandan Refugees in Uganda. CITIZENSHIP AND DISPLACEMENT IN THE GREAT LAKES REGION. WORKING PAPER NO. 4 JUNE 2010 Page 43 42 Human Rights Watch, There Will Be no Trial, police Killings of Detainees and the Imposition of Collective Punishments, Pages 27, 28, and 29.



7 December 2011

Page 16 of 90

enough food to sustain them in carrying out the long hours of exhausting manual work. In the course of one interview in a camp, an interviewee revealed that he had completed his so-‐called community service sentence but had not yet been released. As Human Rights Watch tried to follow up with the interviewee, a high-‐ranking government official who had overheard the remarks promptly escorted the Human Rights Watch researchers away from the camp.43

d.ii) Impoverishment

This stratagem is used in different form to forbid Hutus from accessing to self-‐reliance. The overwhelming number of Hutus is discriminated against in the sector of employment. It is impossible for a Hutu to be employed in public or private sector for a well-‐paid post without being, at a later date, humiliated and kicked out fallowing an unfair trial consisting in concocted charges.

The overwhelming of majority Hutus is jobless owing to the discrimination against them in the sector of employment. It is extremely difficult and even absolutely impossible for a Hutu to obtain a well-‐paying job. Hutus are running petty and informal businesses, which are therefore hindered by numerous heavy taxes imposed by RPF. Public services jobs and educational scholarships are allocated with reference to ethnicity, rather than competence and merit

Another category of Hutus are farmers who are impelled to sell their produces through RPF-‐controlled and Tutsi-‐managed co-‐operatives. These co-‐operatives set levies without allowing Hutu farmers to bargain. After selling produces, these farmers are also compelled to financially contribute for the profit of RPF. In many cases, the weights of the produces are lowered by the cooperative management on the day of payment. The victims have their backs on wall because they have nowhere else to sell their produces due to the tokenism politics of monoculture. Many Hutus have seen the lands requisitioned because they have refused to pay the impelled contribution.

By adopting the policy of abandoning grants of scholarship, the heavily affected community is

are paid either by the government or by their own families which are financially stable.

Always in this line of impoverishing Hutus, RPF is making sure that many Hutus are interned for a period of at least of 5 years without trial. This is a subtle straitjacket of preventing victims from working for their financial needs and inducing their families to extreme poverty since family members are impelled to spend much time in affairs related to the arbitrary detention

43 Human Rights Watch, Rwanda Justice Compromised. -‐Based Gacaca Courts May 2011. Page 79



7 December 2011

Page 17 of 90

without working. The regime is continuously refusing to compensate the victims as it is recommended by the Article 9 (5)44 of the International Convention on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and Article 5 of ACHPR)45

Hutus have not rights on their properties. They are particularly victimized by the current policy of kicking out of Kigali City. After demolishing their houses, they are evicted prior to be poorly indemnified. This is what has been happening from 1994, especially in the eastern region of Rwanda where Hutus were stripped of their lands and then murdered once they attempt to complain for their properties. This agenda is being currently implemented throughout the country. The arable lands are seized by Tutsis and there are extralegal confiscations of these lands by RPF officials or their supporters. This is the case of the Hutu farmers in Gikongoro. They were evicted out of their lands and their lands were forcefully confiscated by RPF and allocated to a Tutsi tycoon for tea plantation. The farmers never received any compensation. Also in Bugarama valley, Hutu farmers of rice saw their fields being confiscated by General Wilson Gumisiriza since July 2011. Farmers who dare to complain are currently abducted and go missing.

The agriculture sector which is employing 90% of Hutu population (80% of national population) is only allocated 3% of the national budget. The Hutu farmers who are surviving on agriculture, their efforts are hindered by the stealth taxes compelled to them.

The RPF inner circle is making sure that Hutus are excluded from lucrative and extensive portfolio. There are grafts in the use of development assistance, and there is no transparency to

private funding flows are because the overwhelming majority is impoverished and is not benefiting from these voodoo economics. This kind of discriminatory impoverishment and economic benefits which are skewed toward an ethnic segment are stirring resentment, funding local tensions, increasing economic vulnerability, polarizing mutual suspicion and feeding fear along ethnic lines.

This RPF agenda of deliberately impoverishing Hutus is making part of RPF policy to reduce them in permanent poverty so that it could be easy for RPF to maliciously and easily manipulate them for its political tokenism.

44 ICCPR Article 9(5): Anyone who has been the victim of unlawful arrest or detention shall have an enforceable right to compensation. 45 ACHPR Article 5: Every individual shall have the right to the respect of the dignity inherent in a human being and to the recognition of his legal status. All forms of exploitation and degradation of man particularly slavery, slave trade, torture, cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment and treatment shall be prohibited.



7 December 2011

Page 18 of 90

In-‐prevented from providing for his or her basic economic needs owing to their race, to their political opinion or to their desire for freedom of expression; that person should be considered to be in need of international protection.

e) Incrimination

Another bone of contention in RPF agenda is to make Hutus live in permanent guilt conscience.

Hutus feel perpetrators.

Always with this aim to stifle Hutus, genocide-‐related crimes are daily invented to haunt Hutus.

was quoted in one pro-‐RPF newspaper when they wrote: mean we mean Hutu tribalists within and outside Rwanda. And of course we do not mean that every Hutu is a tribalist, just like we know there also are Tutsi tribalists; but for the purposes of this editorial

46 Stigmatization of Hutus, collective attribution of guilt to Hutus, marginalization of Hutus and heart-‐searching against Hutus are symptoms of the exacerbating fragility of national unity. Ethnicity is being used as a basis for repression. The genocide ideologies, legacy of guilt, collaboration with rebel movements, collective conjectures of guilt and recrimination -‐that are surrounding ethnicity-‐ are being used by RPF as a smokescreen for ethnic discrimination against Hutus, particularly through the association of Hutu identity with genocide and through the promotion of anti-‐Hutu stereotypes.

Hutus are not only victims of collective incrimination in regard of trumped up genocide-‐related charges; they are also victimized by the current attitude of RPF to falsely accuse all Hutus of being responsible of any suffering inflicted to a Tutsi. The subsequent punishments are always humiliating and aiming to demonstrate to Hutus that they are of lower stratum than Tutsis.47

Although evidences collected by impartial observers cast serious doubts on each of these assertions, the more important point to stress is the aim on the side of Tutsi extremists who are ruling the country, to substitute collective guilt for individual responsibility, and to affix the

Genocidaire to the whole Hutu Community.

46 June 2009. 47 Human Rights Watch, There Will Be No Trial, Police killings of Detainees and the Imposition of collective Punishments.



7 December 2011

Page 19 of 90

f) Second stratum citizens

It also evolves the question of citizenship. Whilst in Rwanda, Hutus are marginalized to the point of being a second-‐hand citizen. This is evidenced by elimination and exclusion from political process. Also by negligent legal system that only safeguards the interests of Tutsis due to the institutionalized refusal to handle the cases of Hutus that have been and that are being slain.

Any Hutu who questions and challenges the ruling regime over their wrongdoings perpetrated by RPF is directly at potential risks of being charged with concocted genocide-‐related crimes. This is falling also into the policy of RPF of stratification by suffocating all young promising Hutus so that there is insurance of ruling many years without threat.

A sort of caste system is definitely there and those who have been accustomed to being on top are ready to do anything, including killing, to maintain the social and political order as it is. For Hutus there is imposed resentment of the inferior social status. The current regime is essentially dominated by Tutsis and all positions of real power in military and administrative institutions are held by Tutsis who are making sure the benefits are favoring Tutsis over Hutus. The current RPF Regime places also less value on the lives of the many moderate Hutus who

1994 genocide. It means that Tutsis are the only valued victims of the tragedy that took away the lives of both Tutsis and moderate Hutus. On this bone of contention, the president of SOS Racisme, Mr. Dominique SOPO,48 was quoted saying that to invoke the blood of Hutus is dirtying the blood of Tutsis.49 The genocide survivor fund (FARG) especially has provided valuable assistance to many

excludes Tutsi women who were married to Hutu before the genocide and children of such marriages, as well as Hutu widows who lost their Tutsi husbands during the genocide. Hutu men and their wives or children who were injured or killed do not qualify as survivors, even if they were killed trying to protect Tutsi. One Tutsi widow married to a Hutu man who died during the genocide lamented the fact that she could not receive medical care even though she was handicapped as a result of injuries suffered during the genocide. Another Tutsi widow with children remained homeless after being denied of FARG assistance for the same reason. FARG officials refuted Human Rights

48 O eign backers and paid lobbyists. 49See Les Sept Controverses Rwandaises, By Hervé Cheuzeville. 1 August 2011.



7 December 2011

Page 20 of 90

NGOs working with these vulnerable groups documented a number of such cases. Allegations of corruption and mismanagement of funds in FARG have left many genocide survivors

Likewise, IBUKAwomen married to Hutu, and does not provide assistance to Hutu at all. One Tutsi woman said:

will not help me because my children are Hutu. They refuse to give me the certificate of a survivor because I was married to a Hutu. Now I am sick with HIV as a result of being raped during the genocide, and I do not have money to continue to get medicine. My children find the situation unfair. Their father was killed because of their mother and yet they are not seen as victims of the genocide. 50

It is important to note that those who denounce such discriminatory machinations are also subjected to concocted charges of Genocide Revisionism, Genocide Ideology or of Genocide Minimization. The issue of war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide crimes committed by RPF is excluded from the proceedings of any courts.51 Even those Hutus who are currently killed are not receiving any form of justice, once it is found out that the perpetrator is a Tutsi.52 There is no burial in dignity for Hutus massacred by RPF. Their bones are nowadays buried after being

water used to wash the unearthed bones. By law, those who are falsely convicted by Gacaca are also stripped of certain civil rights, including the rights to vote, the rights to engage in military or public service, and the rights to be a teacher or work in the medical profession.53 It is also substantial to note that it is not only Hutus who have suffered discrimination. Moderate Tutsis are also victimized, especially when they refuse to join hands with RPF in its 50 Human Rights Watch, Rwanda Justice Compromised. -‐Based Gacaca Courts May 2011. Pages 81-‐82 51 Even prosecutions of Tutsis who are currently killing Hutus are banned. See Human Rights Watch, Kllings in Eastern Rwanda, January 2007. 52 Human Rights Watch, Killings in Eastern Rwanda, January 2007. 53 2004 Gacaca Law, Article 76; 2007 Gacaca Law, Article15. Category 1 offenders suffered a total and permanent loss of these rights; category 2 offenders could have certain of these rights removed for a fixed period or indefinitely. Many courts believed that the loss of civic rights was automatic and therefore did not order this penalty in judgments, leaving hundreds of thousands of Rwandans perceived as unable to vote or work in the

Monitoring of the Gacaca Courts, Judgment Phase: Analytical Report No. 2, October 2005-‐ http://www.asf.be/publications/Rwanda_MonitoringGacaca_RapportAnalytique2_EN.pdf

-‐ http://www.asf.be/publications/publication_rwanda_Rapport_analytique_GacacaII_EN.pdf



7 December 2011

Page 21 of 90

agenda to annihilate Hutus as a whole community. Another group which is victimized is made up of people who crossed the lines laid by RPF between two communities to marry a spouse from a different community. Their offspring are also not tolerated. In practiceagenda to reduce Hutus to social, economical and political minority with the aim to eventually reverse the numerical composition of Rwandan population. To sum up, there is a subtle form of apartheid against Hutus to circumvent foreign attention.

II.3. NO NATIONAL RECONCILIATION The lingering and deep-‐seated ethnic tensions and prejudices are fed by the discriminatory stratifying policies of RPF against Hutus, and in some cases against moderate Tutsis. This discrimination is implemented by the rogue and ethnocentric RPF politico-‐military officials as well as the callous clique around Gen. Kagame.

a corrosive effect on mutual trust in a society already fragile after the interethnic killings and these practices run

continue to divide Rwandan society along the lines of the ethnicity and to fuel conflict. The likelihood of a recurrence of violent conflict, including even the possibility of genocide, is very

-‐date, to find a fair and peaceful settlement of the issues that divide our communities, has grave domestic and foreign implications.54 RPF is sowing ethnic animosity whereas Rwandan society is not composed by ethnic groups, our society is instead composed by communities which share the same culture, customs and sophisticated language and which lived together for centuries. Unfortunately, all regimes (monarchic, colonial, republican) that ruled our motherland to date have resorted to use ethnicity as a tool of control and of maintaining hegemony. And RPF is also resorting to this ethnic notion in attempt to maintain hegemony by platform of This ethnic polarization is systematically sowed by RPF and openly practiced throughout high circles and hill community levels; notwithstanding of the ostensible campaign for national reconciliation which is turning a blind eye on Hutus plights, and which is also failing to openly address the deep-‐rooted grievances of both sides and to equitably put an end on mutual suspicion and fear along ethnic lines.55 As Dr. Nkiko NSENGIMANA said; there are victims on both sides, the necessity is to reconcile the victims on both sides and to prosecute masterminds

54 Rwanda Briefing, by General Kayumba Nyamwasa, Dr. Theogene Rudasingwa, Colonel Patrick Karegeya and Gerald Gahima. Page 36. August 2010. 55Rwanda: Assessing Risks to Stability, Jennifer G. Cooke. Center for Strategic and International Studies, Page 3



7 December 2011

Page 22 of 90

perpetrators on both sides and re-‐educate the executioners-‐perpetrators who have committed crimes without thorough pre-‐meditation.56 The ethnicity is being used directly or implicitly-‐ as a functional and tangible means of creating polarization within communities and as an instrument of control.57 The Gacaca Courts did nothing else out of fueling and exacerbating ethnic animosity. According to one judge, people were reluctant to speak out in response to false testimonies for fear of being accused themselves. Hutu whose relatives were killed and property destroyed by RPF soldiers and cadres are unable to raise these cases, which left them frustrated and disappointed with the process. Consequently, there have been implicit pact among some Hutus not to denounce other Hutus as a response to perception and consideration that some Tutsis are also making a pact to suffocate claims of Hutus over the atrocities committed by Tutsis against Hutus and also by the fact that there is a dearth of Tutsis who defend Hutus who are falsely accused owing to fear of subsequent social ostracism and of persecution by RPF. Another thorn in the throat of reconciliation; it is the way memorials are conducted in Rwanda by promoting collective assumption of guilty and discrimination against Hutus, by preventing Hutus from mourning for theirs massacred by RPF and by fueling ethnic divisions. The type of remembering only on Tutsis and looking down on the deaths of Hutus, either caused by Hutus extremists or Tutsi extremists, is more tantamount to an open wound that is slowly going septic. Memorials are an important part of any recovery and reconstruction process in the aftermath of mass atrocity. However it should be done in such a way to heal and prevent the same thing from happening again. The RPF Regime refusal to compensate victims of 1994 Genocide, who lost their relatives or who were injured and/or raped, is also polarizing Rwandan society. RPF Regime is instructing Tutsi survivors of 1994 Genocide that the only way to get compensations is to testify trumped up charges against Hutus as a trick to extort money from them (Hutus) under the cover of compensation of destroyed properties. Further more you cannot predict reconciliation as long as the genocide is misused as a smokescreen for RPF to promote discriminatory repressive measures against not only Hutus, but also moderate Tutsi. In addition, reconciliation cannot come about where there is neither truth nor justice, or worse still, when the judiciary is intended to reflect the ambitions of one of the perpetrators, who is currently the ruler. Hence, the more RPF is misusing the courts to reduce Hutus to second stratum citizens, the more the Hutu-‐Tutsi divide is getting unbridgeable and the more the menaces of inter-‐ethnic violence are knocking on the door.

56 Nkiko Nsengimana, Geneva Conference on ICTR. http: www.grandslacs.net/doc/3355.pdf 57 Dangerous Impasse, RLP, IRRI and SSRC, Page 37



7 December 2011

Page 23 of 90

58 in an attempt to ensure the hegemony and precarious control of a minority.59 It is important to bear in mind that the long term stability of a country depends upon a governing system of a government that eventually shares really authority with the majority, and works for the nation and for the protection of the minority.

While RPF regime ostensibly presents itself as a champion of national unity and equal opportunity, by de-‐emphasizing ethnic identity and opening position throughout society to those of skill and merit; its tokenism is well known in Rwanda. RPF is responsible of the lingering feeling of ethnic identity as we, bona fide Rwandans, are aware that the policy in practice is that RPF is keen to ethnicity and is yet to abandon this politics. Consequently, many Rwandans continue to see each other through ethnic lenses and to distrust persons of different community. It is shocking to see the very disdain ethnocentric Tutsis, backed by RPF, have for Hutus, and how RPF reads the riot act to every Hutu for even the most mundane infraction. These RPF extremists still relish talking about how the former Deputy Mayor of Kigali City, Mr. Rutabayiru Anastase, violently compelled his daughter to have abortion because her fiancé was a Hutu.60

The constituency of RPF of trusted Tutsis, the current covert distribution of firearms households, and marginalization and condescension against Hutus are factual conclusive evidences that the regime of General Kagame is a polarizing figure, whose continued hegemony is only certain to lead to potential inter-‐ethnic risks of generalized violence, even recurrence of genocidal killings in years to come.61

For a sustainable and durable reconciliation, it should be truth about all crimes perpetrated regardless of neither political nor ethnic affiliation. Hence, the perpetrators, including those under RPF wings, should be brought before independent effective tribunals. Until this happens, the potential for ethnic aligned violence to be reignited will remain, and our motherland is likely to once again erupt into violence if RPF and General Kagame are continuing to stick on their egocentric short-‐sighted visions based on ethnicity.62

58 Nowadays RPF through its militia wing known as INTORE, they are secretly distributing firearms in Tutsis families. Every able bodied Tutsi male is now cowed in possession of a firearm. 59 -‐210 Page 199. 60 The discourse of Senator Antoine Mugesera addressing to Tutsi survivors of genocide in April 2011. During the same speech, Mr. Mugesera briefed Tutsi youth to keep on spying Hutus and he warned Tutsi women married to Hutu, to consider their husband as purulent wounds. 61 Rwanda Briefing by General Kayumba Nyamwasa, Colonel Patrick Karegeya, Theogene Rudasingwa and Gerald Gahima, Page 29, august 2010. 62 Human Rights Watch, Killings in Eastern Rwanda, January 2007



7 December 2011

Page 24 of 90

II.4. POLITICAL OPPRESSION

There is more to Rwanda and General Paul Kagame than new buildings, clean streets, and ostensible efficient RPF Regime than what General care to admit. Rwanda is essentially a hard -‐line, one-‐party, secretive police state with a façade of security. The ruling party, RPF, has shut up space for political participation. The RPF does not tolerate political opposition or open competition for power. The RPF Regime ensures its monopoly of power by means of draconian restrictions on the exercise of the fundamental human rights of citizens. The press, civil society and opposition parties are deprived of freedom to operate freely. General Kagame and RPF depend on repression to stay in power. The consolidation of the dictatorship is achieved through highly rigged and manipulated

that are widely known to have been undemocratic and unfair.63 RPF is using its repressive brutal tactics to silence all Rwandans, to stifle open constructive debate and to persuade them to only peddle RPF-‐instructed propaganda. This is aiming to narrow political space and leaving outsiders believing that Rwanda is a stable country. This authoritarian regime is both unable and unwilling to manage or to allow genuine political competition and debate. And this is leading the country to collapse as it may ultimately radicalize opponents, who will find other means to challenge the regime if not open discourse is not an option.64

In the midst of the state poor performance and bad governance policy, there is the totalitarian nature of the regime which wants to control and dictate everything and everyone. RPF is constraining and controlling the legislature, the judiciary, the media and the civil society. These institutions are unable to fulfill their potentially stabilizing role as formal channels for national debate and peaceful political competition. This controversial goes even to other political parties that are allowed to operate, but only provided that they comply uncomplainingly with RPF. Otherwise they face dissolution. And then all parties must belong to the forum which in practice is under the control of RPF and RPF dictates its deliberations.

General Kagame is ethnocentric, corrupt and authoritarian. He uses repression and ethnic discrimination against Hutus to ensure his continued monopoly of power.65 To keep the President Kagame in power, state institutions violate the most fundamental human rights of the people, including the right to life and the integrity of the person. State security institutions enjoy impunity for grave human rights violations against critics and opponents of the regime.

63 http://usun.state.gov/briefing/statements/2011/177743.htm 64 Rwanda: Assessing Risks to Stability; Jennifer Cook. CSIS Africa Program. Page 2 65 Rwanda, Where Souls Turn to Dust, My Journey from Exile to Legacy, Dr. Patick Habamenshi. August 2006.



7 December 2011

Page 25 of 90

President Kag f the state to support his greed for absolute power and monetary gain is criminalizing the fabric of the Rwandan state.66 Since 1994, RPF has resorted to all possible repressive means to suppress all genuine and efficient political opponents to ensure itself the monopoly. RPF has been imprisoning, assassinating and forcing into exile all political opponent figures and the rest of Rwandans have become cowed and quiescent. The list of political figures who were subjected to this cruelty is endless. We only comment on the recent cases that are therefore preventing us from returning.

Mr. André Kaggwa Rwisereka: the late Vice President of the Rwanda Green Party was found dead on 14 July 2010 in Butare with his head almost decapitated.

Lt. Gen. Kayumba Nyamwasa: the former Chief of Military Staff narrowly survived assassination attempt in the country of asylum, South Africa, on 19 June 2010. On 22 September 2011, at the time we were writing this petition, the South African Police foiled another ploy to assassinate Gen Kayumba. Gen. Kayumba is hunted down by Gen. Kagame and his intelligence apparatus after they (General Kayumba and colleagues) released a scathing critique, Rwanda Briefing, authoritarianism and describing a state apparatus controlled by a small clique of ethnocentric loyalists drawn exclusively from the Tutsi minority group.

On 15 September 2011, at the time we were garnering ideas for this petition; the chairman of Parti Social Imberakuri in Kicukiro District, Mr. Eric Nshimyumuremyi, narrowly survived assassination attempt by a DMI agent when he was deadly shot in the chest. None knows the aftermath of the victim as police denied anyone to get access to the ward where it was said that he was receiving medical treatments.

On 20 October 2011, the Interim General Secretary of United Democratic Forces-‐INKINGI (UDF-‐INKINGI), Mr. Sylvain SIBOMANA, was abducted by State Intelligence agents, a short time after being harassed by some agents in addition of harassments by the Police Chief, Superintendant Bertin MUTEZINTARE, who therefore declared that Ms. INGABIRE UMUHOZA deserves to be gunned down.

Mrs. Victoire Ingabire Umuhoza: the chairperson of United Democratic Forces-‐INKINGI is currently serving an internment since 14 October 2010 in Kigali Maximum Prison. RPF Regime is interfering in her judicial case as there are conclusive evidences that Mrs.

66 Rwanda Briefing by General Nyamwasa Kayumba, Colonel Patrick Karegeya, Dr. Rudaingwa Theogene and Gerald Gahima, August 2010



7 December 2011

Page 26 of 90

popularly embraced by the overwhelming majority of Rwandans for the desire of national reconciliation, of political freedom and of economic development evenly dist

Mr. Bernard Ntaganda: the founder and chairperson of PS Imberakuri was also interned since 11 February 2011. During the internment, he was inflicted to all kind of torture and inhuman treatments to the point he is currently losing his eyesight as the RPF regime refused the detainee right to medical treatments. Since 27 November 2011 up to date, authorities of Kigali Central Prison refused the family of Mr. Ntaganda and other people to visit Mr. Ntaganda. The leaked information proves that Mr. Ntaganda is currently under torture of three-‐piece tying.

-‐Imanzi. This survivor of Rwandan Genocide is interned fallowing his heroic fight for genuine national reconciliation and unity as an effective way to prevent cycles of inter-‐ethnic violence.

It is also substantial to bear in mind that the list of the political activists, who are being killed, imprisoned or forced, is endless for this year alone.67This is the proof of how the record of human rights in Rwanda remains poor and how the rights of citizens to change the government are violently restricted as potential effective leaders are assassinated, interned or forced into exile.

It is also worthy to comment about the plaguing coercion to join RPF where RPF is extorting money from every working citizen. To avoid being sacked from their jobs, stripped of properties, overtaxed in their businesses, abducted, interned, murdered or forced into exile; every Rwandan swear allegiance to RPF. The political parties that participate in the RPF-‐dominated government do not have any slight power or decision making in government. They are merely appointed for the purposes of lending legitimacy to RPF Regime by giving the appearance of political plurality and competition. The RPF power to control the population,

the ruling regime. These armed forces are misused in a way which is undoubtedly leading to the collapse of the nation.

This brutal and egocentric nature of RPF is making also the country surviving on voodoo economics which are misperceived and misinterpreted to be spectacular. The base of the economy is tiny because the overwhelming Rwandans are impoverished. Rwandans, who have already misquoted these voodoo economics, are impoverished as the economic benefits are skewed toward a tiny segment of population based on political and ethnic favoritism. 67 Amnesty International, Déclaration Publique. Rwanda. Respecter la Liaux Détentions Arbitraires et aux Disparitions forcées, 7 juin 2011.



7 December 2011

Page 27 of 90

With the conduct of the current government and its dictatorial standpoint, it is unlikely that anything will change soon as far as people who remain committed to fighting for dignity, justice and equality before the law in our motherland are continuously targeted by RPF. The explicitly violent and repressive way by which RPF deals with legitimate opposition and sincere critical civil society has turned Rwanda into one part totalitarianism. This Ongoing repression in Rwanda is not only preventing us from returning, but also it is generating new refugees.

II.5. NO DEMOCRATIC ELECTIONS

outlawed or prevented from registering and their leadership, their supporters along with journalists were arrested on concocted charges, including divisionism, promoting genocide ideology, and threatening national security. André Kaggwa Rwisereka, the vice president of Rwanda Green Party, was assassinated less than a month before the election, which Gen

: Dr. Nkiko Nsengimana, the Coordinator of the Political Platform RNC-‐UDF INKINGI68

Prior to any elections; the police, security services and the army increase oppression against any genuine potential opponents of the RPF. Genuine opposition parties get denied of registration and security and administrative agencies make it difficult for independent candidates to register. In addition, the RPF monopolizes the government-‐owned media during the elections. The RPF regime uses intimidation, smear campaigns and insults to silence opponents, whether they are international NGOs, civil society, newspapers or political parties. Intimidation against government opponents go to the extent of making threats of physical violence including death. In one speech, the RPF President, General Paul Kagame, threatened that those opposed to t ground The Constitution and other laws make it not just difficult, but in-‐essence impossible for the opposition to form political parties and to compete for political power, thereby creating a

leaders of opposition political parties in the lead-‐up to the 2010 presidential elections, as part

accusations had been used for similar ends in the 2003 and 2010 presidential elections.69 Individuals calling for justice for victims of crimes committed by RPF soldiers in 1994 or attempting to challenge the ruling party in presidential elections in 2010 faced public denunciation and, in some cases, formal criminal accusations. RPF Regime officials publicly accused political opponents Victoire Ingabire and Bernard Ntaganda as well as outspoken critic

68 Joint memorandum of UDF-‐INKINGI and RNC to His Excellency Antonio Guterres over the premature invocation of the cessation clause. 69 SAFER TO STAY 47/005/2010 Amnesty International, Pages 8 and 22. August 2010.



7 December 2011

Page 28 of 90

with these crimes.70 As it is written in Rwanda Briefing; Rwanda holds regular elections, but their outcome is pre-‐determined because of the legal, administrative and physical obstacles that the RPF has put in place to deny opposition to compete for power. There is no meaningful competition for political power between the RPF and other political parties and thus no real opportunity to change the government through elections. Elections are systematically manipulated and heavily conditioned by the RPF in order to ensure its victory. Elections are usually rigged so mtime to give the satellite or proxy parties that serve to give the RPF some legitimacy enough votes to meet the threshold requirements for representation in Parliament. The repression that the RPF has used to entrench itself in power continues to this day. People who are perceived as posing a potential challenge to the RPF in Rwandan politics are subjected to persecution that makes their political activities impossib 71 The co-‐called election which are taking place in Rwanda are marred with massive fraud, ballot stuffing, manipulation of the process, intimidations etc. On 8 August 2010, the previous day of elections, people were stripped of their voting cards and were ordered to return on the very day of elections as early as 05:00 AM. That was when they retook their cards, but this time the

Yatoye 72 That is why in many parts of the country, the election process have ended before 10:00 am. During the elections period 30 newspapers, radio stations and journals were suspended. All serious challengers for the presidency were prevented from running.73

International human rights workers are declared persona non grata in run up to elections periods as the RPF regime diminishes space for freedom of expression and association by continuously clamping down political opponents and journalists.74

The process of electing the Rwanda legislature and the legal framework that regulates its operation nature serve to entrench autocratic rule. The Rwandan Parliament does not derive its legitimacy from the electorate. RPF and its allies lack fair, transparent and democratic mechanisms for choosing candidates to represent them. The process by which parties chose candidates is flawed and corrupted. Individuals are put on lists through unclear and 70 Human Rights Watch, Rwanda Justice Compromised. -‐Based Gacaca Courts May 2011.Pages 32-‐33 71 RWANDA BRIEFING by General Kayumba Nyamwasa, Col. Patrick Karegeya, Dr. Theogene Rudasingwa and Gerald Gahima. Page 12. August 2010. 72 73 www.unhcr.org/refworld/dicid/4e3fa949c.html 74 Amnesty International Public Statement. Rwanda: End human Rights Clampdown Before Presidential Elections, 24 April 2010



7 December 2011

Page 29 of 90

undemocratic ways. Because of the corrupt ways in which they are appointed, legislators are not independent. Instead of becoming representatives of the people, legislators act as Kagame functionaries for fear of being dismissed. During the senatorial elections of 26 September 2011, RPF tightened its control over civic and political bodies by restricting other candidates to have a say or presents their candidature. The government seriously increased restriction on press freedom and party activists, while extralegal violence had a chilling effect on candidates who were not under RPF flagbearership. The fear that was boiling in the hearts of Rwandans in the run up of these senatorial elections can be only explained by the picture of the almost decapitated remains of late A. K. Rwisereka, the gunned down cadaver of J. L. Rugambage and the horrible torture and cruel treatments against interned political opponents.75

During the elections people are herded and cowed to legitimize the disguised bloody discriminatory autocratic rule of RPF where the only choice they have on their voting papers is RPF. Hence there is no way to anticipate peaceful and stable political change in a foreseeable future with the current RPF violent rigging and manipulation of the process of elections.

II.6. NO FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION AND OF ASSOCIATION

The RPF has imposed numerous tyrannical legal restrictions and informal controls on the media and the RPF Regime is intimidating independent journalists. Independent news papers are banned. The High Council of the Media an RPF-‐controlling machine on the media-‐ is only suspending and closing independent media capable of criticizing the RPF regime. RPF is increasing internet penetration and phone calls interception.

form of a political broadside, more often than For example, the act of criticizing the ruling regime as a totalitarian regime muzzling the opposition, the press, freedom of association and of speech; is accused of divisionism. 76 This expansive interpretation of

criminalizes dissenting voices and speech permitted by international conventions. It restricts debates about freedom of association and expression in Rwanda.77 The threats, intimidations and other persecution at the hands of the security services have created a climate whereby journalists exercise straitjacket of self-‐censorship in order to avoid the wrath of the security services. The law ostensibly guarantees freedom of the press, but the 75 Amnesty International, Pre-‐elections Attacks on Rwandan politicians and journalists Condemned, 5 August 2010. 76 Rwandan Senate, Rwanda: Genocide Ideology and Strategies for its Eradication, 2006, page 19. 77 47/005/2010 Amnesty International, Pages 20. August 2010.



7 December 2011

Page 30 of 90

media remains tightly controlled by the RPF Regime. Media outlets are either state-‐controlled, co-‐opted or constantly under siege. RPF has used the curbs on the media to suppress criticism or dissent. The security services sometimes co-‐opt independent journalists by bribing them with money. Journalists who refuse to toe the line or be co-‐opted have often been subjected to threats and intimidation. The Kagame regime uses trumped up criminal charges to intimidate journalists who express dissenting or critical views.78 Recently, for their desire to enjoy freedom of expression, the result is that:

Charles Ingabire, the Editor of online Inyenyeri News and of the magazine UKURI was assassinated in the night of 30 November to 1 December 2011 in Kampala where he was living as a refugee since 2007.

murdered on 24 June 2010.

respectively sentenced to seventeen and seven years on 4 February 2011.

Didas Gasana, Charles Kabonero, Rwango Kadafi, Robert Sebufilira, Furaha and Dominique Makeli; and Jean Bosco Gasasira and

Robert

The freedom of expression is severely restricted. Any criticism of RPF regime is criminalized and that is why Rwanda ranks 169th out of 178 on the ranking of Reporters Without Borders to prove its place, inter alia, the worst countries in terms of press freedom.

Public workers are not allowed to unionize and the list of essential services in which strikes are not allowed is excessively long. RPF continues to pressure unions in subtle and indirect ways. All rural farmers are imposed to belong to RPF-‐controlled co-‐operatives which, in turn, set levies on produces. The farmers are not allowed for bargaining.

The civil society organizations operating in Rwanda are those that submit to the RPF wishes and actively promote its policy. The RPF regime exercises intense control over the non-‐governmental sector by both overt and covert methods. Civil society as a whole operates under very tight restrictions. Civil society groups which do not toe the RPF line are not allowed to operate freely. Civil society organizations speak publicly and influence decision-‐making only when their views are in line with those of the RPF and its regime. Independent human rights organizations, in particular, have been a target of the security services. Human rights groups have been subjected to harassment, intimidation and persecution of such intensity that most of

78 http://en.rsf.org/rwanda-‐bimonthly-‐decides-‐to-‐suspend-‐31-‐08-‐2011,40877.html

http://en.rsf.org/rwanda-bimonthly-decides-to-suspend-31-08-2011,40877.html



7 December 2011

Page 31 of 90

them have ceased operations and their members have been driven to exile. Independent human rights organizations -‐like LOPRODHOR, Human Rights Watch, AMNESTY International etc-‐ have been dismantled, or their officials declared persona non grata prior to be kicked out of the country; other organizations, like UNHCR, have been infiltrated by individuals close to the RPF .79 Others, worn down by constant threats to their safety, have simply opted out of struggle.

II.7. TYRANICAL AND OPRESSIVE LAWS

RPF regime is continuously misusing, manipulating and modifying the constitution to drive hate propaganda, to exacerbate ethnic tensions, to oppress political opponents and to annihilate Hutu Community and in some extent moderate Tutsis. The UN Human Rights Committee criticized Rwanda in 2009 for excessive restrictions on media freedom through use of

and stated that Rwanda should cease to punish so-‐called acts of 80

The laws on Genocide Ideology, on Sectarianism (Divisionism) and on Denial of Genocide are liberally used by RPF to suppress a wide range of positive performances deemed critical of RPF Regime in its agenda to widen the sense of discrimination against Hutus and injustice inflicted to the majority of the population. s raft of repressive legislation

exerts a chilling effect on numerous aspects of daily life in Rwanda and curtails n rights. 81 The chilling effect and the cumulative result of these laws, as well as the way they are applied in practice, cause people who are yet to have any action taken against them fear to exercise their rights to freedom of expression and refrain from expressing views which are legal. Several people interviewed by Amnesty International raised their concerns that legitimate criticism of the

82 RPF Regime officials have used these accusations

, all of which are proscribed by the Rwandan Constitution and a 2003 law punishing genocide as tools to quash debate on sensitive issues, silence independent opinion and criticism, and pursue political opponents.83

79 Human Rights First, A Decade of Unrest, Page 50. 80 UN Human Rights Committee, Consideration of reports submitted by States parties under article 40 of the Covenant, Ninety-‐Fifth Session, New York, 31 March 2009, CCPR/C/RWA/CO/3. 81 Article 19, Comment on the Law Relating to the Punishment of the Crime of Genocide Ideology in Rwanda, September 2009, page 4, paragraph 8. 82 47/005/2010 Amnesty International, Page 26. August 2010. 83 Human Rights Watch, Rwanda Justice Compromised. -‐Based Gacaca Courts May 2011. Page 32



7 December 2011

Page 32 of 90

Examples of the vague language as well as the broad scope include terminology such as

84 These broad and ill-‐defined laws have created a vague legal framework which is misused to criminalize criticism of the RPF Regime and legitimate dissent. This has included suppressing calls for the prosecution of war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide crimes committed by the RPF. The Rwandan Senate in

calls for prosecutions of RPF war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide crimes and challenging the detention of Hutus without adequate investigation detained on the basis of some simple accusation

85

fficult task. As early as 2006, two years before the law was passed, a Senate report stated that it was not easy to provide a

86 Even the comments made by the RPF Regime in response to the 2004 European Union D

are unclear and have done nothing to assuage the oppressiveness of the laws.87 Further still, a number of Rwandans with specialist knowledge of Rwandan law,

84 The genocide ideology is an aggregate of thoughts characterized by conduct, speeches, documents and other acts aiming at exterminating or inciting others to exterminate people basing (sic) on ethnic group, origin, nationality, region, color, physical appearance, sex, language, religion or political opinion, committed in normal periods or during war. Article 3: Characteristics of the crime of genocide ideology The crime of genocide ideology is characterized in any behavior manifested by acts aimed at dehumanizing (sic) a person or a group of persons with the same characteristics in the following manner:

1. Threatening, intimidating, degrading through defamatory (sic) speeches, documents or actions which aim at propounding wickedness or inciting hatred;

2. boasting, despising, degrading creating (sic) confusion aiming at negating the genocide which occurred, stirring (sic) up ill feelings, taking revenge, altering testimony or evidence for the genocide which occurred;

3. Killing, planning to kill or attempting to kill someone for purposes of furthering genocide ideology.

85 Rwandan Senate, Rwanda: Genocide Ideology and Strategies for its Eradication, 2006, Pages.18-‐19. 86 Rwandan Senate, Rwanda: Genocide Ideology and Strategies for its Eradication, 2006, Page 16.

and the Rwandan people are clear about the meaning and the content of these Kinyarwanda terms 87 idation and Cooption of Human Rights Defenders 2001



7 December 2011

Page 33 of 90

including lawyers an

context and in Rwandan language. However, RPF Regime has an aim of promoting such confusing, tyrannical, oppressive and ambiguous laws in order to continue to commit its crimes and persecutions under the cover of laws and its policy of gradual and slow annihilation against legitimate political opponents in general and Hutu Community in particular. That is why when Amnesty International requested

Public Prosecution Authority responded that they did not hold such records. Neither was Amnesty International able to obtain these from the Inspector General of Courts. Amnesty International also requested this information in a July 2010 letter to the Minister of Justice, with no avails.88

included murder, poisoning, manslaughter, beating and causing injury, arson, destruction of property, killing of animals, denial of genocide and revisionism, discrimination and divisionism,

used to prosecute such.89 However, no member of Tutsi Community, who has committed such crimes against a member of Hutu Community, is held accountable on grounds of genocide ideology.

perception that most accused come from Hutu community. One academic researcher in 2005 found that local officials in two

communities almost arbitrarily branded he victims were Tutsis.90 Amnesty International has only documented one case of a Hutu who attempted to bring chat being called a Hutu by a Tutsi neighbour. After attempting to press charges, the file was investigated by the police, but dropped by the prosecution.91 In the run-‐up to the 2010 elections, legitimate political dissent was conf

the freedom of expression and of association, and to the work of human rights defenders and of journalists critical of the regime. Individuals have 88 Amnesty International; SAFER TO STAY SILENT:

. Index: AFR 47/005/2010. Page 19, August 2010. 89 Ibid. Page 19 90 Eugenia Zorbas, Reconciliation in Post-‐Genocide Rwanda: Discourse and Practice, PhD thesis, London School of

l of Genocide Research, 11(1), March 2009, Page 108, footnote 72. 91 Amnesty International; SAFER TO STAY SILENT:

. Index: AFR 47/005/2010. Pages 24-‐25 , August 2010.



7 December 2011

Page 34 of 90

exploited gaps in the law for personal gain, including the discrediting of Hutu workers in the

charges based on flimsy evidence resulted in acquittals, but after the falsely accused victim has suffered of and impacted by the RPF impoverishing discriminatory policy by spending several months in pre-‐trial detention without working while exhausting family finances which are already in critical conditions. These oppressive laws equate criticism of the crimes perpetrated by RPF with denial of the genocide, and are misused to make accusations against numerous individuals and organizations without recourse to due process. A number of human rights activists, of RPF critics, of Hutus and moderate Tutsis, and of political opponents are being either driven into exile or interned. These laws are pushing also several NGOs to curtail drastically their activities.92

The laws No. 18/2008 of 23 July 2008 relating to the punishment of the crime of Genocide Ideology and No. 47/2001 of 18 December 2001 relating to crimes of Ethnicism and Divisionism are described in a broad manner where applications have negative effect of stifling debate on prosecution of RPF crimes and on its political activities. According to Amnesty International:

, but rarely pursued in courts, are open to interpretation and abuse. It violates the rights of freedom expression and association as it is enshrined in the ICCPR and ACHPR 93

Another law which is repressive, it is the law relating to land requisitioning and confiscation which strips refugees and their family members, who are living in Rwanda, of the rights on their properties in Rwanda.

These repressive laws are set up in a manner to suffocate any criticism of and challenge to RPF. It is because of these laws that the national reconciliation is undermined. And it is also on the basis of these draconian laws that all genuine political opponents are interned, Hutus are discriminated against, the independent media is silenced and human rights groups are suffocated.94

For the erection of these laws, the International Human Rights Instruments are not acting as guide. The only aspect taken into consideration, while setting up these tyrannical laws, it is RPF agenda to strangulate Rwandans with its iron fist. Subsequently, laws, and even the constitution, are continuously modified and/or transformed only to serve and to worsen RPF

92 Amnesty InDétentions Arbitraires et aux Disparitions Forcées 93 Amnesty International, 2004. Rwanda: Enduring the Legacy of war and Genocide. 94 http: www.unhcr.org/refworld/docid/474e895a1e.html



7 December 2011

Page 35 of 90

tyrannical, discriminatory and dictatorial rule. These oppressive laws are not only forbidding refugees from returning to our homeland, they are also generating new refugees.

II.8. TORTURE AND CRUEL, INHUMAN AND DEGRADING TREATMENTS

Here are some torture and cruel treatments committed by Rwanda Defence Forces (RDF), by RPF, by Directorate of Military Intelligence (DMI) and by Criminal Investigation Department (CID). These kinds of torture are especially reigning in jails and other clandestine dungeons like Camp Muhoza, Camp Kami, Gabiro, Ku Kabindi, Kwa Gacinya,Iwawa Island etc:

Agafuni: the hands of the victims are tied with a rusted flex. With a used hoe, they hit onto the skull of the victim with a heavy straight blow (one or several time) until the brain is out of the skull. On many cases the brain is kept in a tug by the highest present RPF/RDF/DMI/CID officer for unknown reasons. The psychological suffering before the execution is very haunting.

Akandonyi: hands and legs of the victims are tied with rusted flex. The hands are tied behind the back; and the legs are folded toward the backs with the arms. The flex is tightly rolled around the victims arms from wrists up to the level above the elbows until the chest is stretched to curvature. The victim is laid down onto the belly in the shape of a bow. The victim is left there until s/he dies generally by asphyxiation.95

Gusomya: water boarding.

Mutilation of ears, toes, fingers, hands, arms, legs and genitals. Eventually, the victim is forced to eat the mutilated parts. After eating the mutilated parts, the victim is compelled to spend several days in a chamber where cold water is dumped. The victim is then impelled to relieve him/herself on the spot

Squeeze testicles with a rubber band and then pierce testicles or clitoris with a needle.

Sauna: many people are cramped in a metallic container which, in turn, is heated with fire. The victims are roasted alive inside the container to death.

ist and put in hands.

95 Sometimes, they tie the legs behind the back and the victim is hung up from the framework. This kind of torture

. Even if the victim survives death, s/he continues to sustain purulent wounds on the ares of ankles and wrists.



7 December 2011

Page 36 of 90

Swimming pool: victims are lumped in a house where water is poured to the waists of inmates. And the water pool is electrocuted.

To feed inmates with food mixed either with glass debris or lead residues. The victims die at a later date of health complications or cancer. The victims are mainly the inmates who are granted the presidential amnesties.

To force parents to have sex with their offspring.

To disenwomb pregnant women and compel the victim to eat the foetus.

To flog the victim to death.

To fry alive babies with palm oil and compel the parents to eat the fried baby.

To confine toddlers and teenagers for scientific experiments.96

Rape and slay the victim forthwith.

Psychical pressure.

To pour petrol inside the ears of the victim and set fire inside the ears.

To compel the victim drink petrol and then insert a heated iron bar into the belly through the anus. The victim dies when the belly bursts.

To compel Hutus drink waste water used to wash unearthed remains (bones) of the victims of 1994 genocide.

To dig inside the vagina of the victim until she dies.

To pour flour of red pepper into the vagina of the victim.

To squeeze genitals of the victim.

To turn the victim upside down with legs akimbo and flog her clitoris until she bleeds profusely sometimes to death.

To cram people inside overcrowded jails. Detainees are unable to lie down in cramped conditions and the risk of epidemics and mortality is very high, especially because they

96 Some of the children victims of experiments are now living in Orphelinat Noël de Nyundo. The eldest is about 18 years old and he is not able to speak. These minors were confined in Birunga National Park for scientific experiments after being forcefully returned from DR Congo.



7 December 2011

Page 37 of 90

are refused of access to clean water, food, latrines or health care. It has necessitated to amputate legs of some prisoners compelled to stand in those cramped and filth conditions for weeks, even months, on end.97

Starvation: inmates are starved for several days and then compelled to drink salty waste water. This inhuman treatment has made 20 inmates lose their lives in Gitarama prison in 2009.

To intern people under the program known as which is in fact where the victim

is prohibited from having contact with any other person.

II.9. NON INDEPENDENT AND MANIPULATED JUDICIAL SYSTEM

The functioning of the justice system is constrained by one very important factor: absence of judicial independence. The judiciary enjoys nominal independence under the constitution and laws of Rwanda. General Kagame and RPF, through the control that he exercises over the Senate Chamber of the legislature, controls most senior judges (including the Supreme Court) and through them, the rest of the judiciary. The RPF compels all members of the judiciary to owe allegiance to RPF; to participate in activities of the party and to pay financial contributions

murky political operations. Lack of an independent and impartial judiciary is probably the greatest constraint to the development of democracy in Rwanda. Law enforcement and judicial institutions rarely investigate and prosecute gross human rights abuses by the security forces, and when they do, proceedings are undertaken to protect rather to punish perpetrators. Judicial and law enforcement authorities are used to persecute RPF critics and opponents through trumped up charges of genocide, revisionism, genocide ideology, corruption, terrorism and more recently, immoral conduct. Especially, in political motivated cases, the accused are denied the right to confront witnesses against him or her. Denying an accused the right to follow witness testimony implicating him or her in an offense and the right to cross-‐examine those witnesses clearly violated the right of these individuals to defend themselves.

who were genocidally slain by RPF is branded a or by The ruling regime is setting up all possible barriers to prevent Hutus from access to equal justice. This injustice has resulted into the lack of a legal mechanism for victims of RPF crimes to pursue cases against RPF-‐backed perpetrators who murdered their relatives. These perpetrators are instead

97 Special Report of the International Committee of the Red Cross



7 December 2011

Page 38 of 90

rewarded by General KAGAME with powerful positions. The judicial system has consequently become a discrimination and repression tool to silence people who are complaining for the prosecution against RPF-‐backed perpetrators who slew and continue to slay innocent Rwandans. The judiciary is there only to implement the RPF strangulation where public

insinuate guilt before accused individuals are brought to trial. RPF-‐remote-‐controlled judges demonstrate preconceived notions of guilt or treat the accused as if he or she is guilty from the outset of trial. Often these types of cases involved judges making disparaging remarks or using a hostile tone toward the accused. Judges at both the trial and revision stages show overt hostility to the accused, frequently interrupting her/his testimony and that of her/his witnesses. The system is increasingly vulnerable to manipulation by those on power. With inadequate procedural safeguards in place and the overly politicized functions of the courts, people are living in fear of being falsely accused. This non-‐independent partial judicial system has no goal of combating the impunity regardless of ethnical affiliation. Instead, it has the goal of misusing law provisions and abusing power to

nic group in general. The judiciary is continuing to be managed and controlled by people who are therefore responsible of several crimes.

Due to RPF control of all mechanism, including the judiciary, and also due to RPF repression against genuine political opponents; the judiciary is misused as an oppression tool against political opponents. There is no broadly credible independent adjudicator to determine and implement the neutrality in political motivated and sensitive trials. Neither there is transparency nor honesty in the environment within the judiciary functions.

Another judicial system which is compromised is Gacaca. RPF, through IBUKA, overseeing of Gacaca has weakened the system. Gacaca is no longer a community-‐based conflict resolution mechanism, but part of a RPF centrally-‐organized tool of oppression against Hutus that put the investigative power of the state at the service of partial jury while prohibiting legal assistance for the accused who, in turn, is restricted to openly and freely defending himself as any comment to prove the truth is referred as stirring up divisions or as espousing genocide ideology.98

When Gacaca began, local communities around the country attended trials in huge numbers. Judges turned up early and appeared motivated to perform their duties. Rwandans were

98 Human Rights Watch Rwanda Justice Compromised. -‐Based Gacaca Courts May 2011



7 December 2011

Page 39 of 90

curious to see how the process would unfold. This level of enthusiastic involvement has declined sharply over the years. Manipulation of some trials, with private citizens using Gacaca to try to settle scores or RPF and IBUKA using it to silence critics and to haunt Hutu Community, as well as inappropriate influence exerted by other actors such as district coordinators, further contributed to a certain level of disillusionment. Local community members who witnessed the events of 1994 and knew what really happened would participate in the trials and would step in to denounce false testimony by other community members and partiality by the RPF-‐manipulated judges. Contrary to these expectations, however, Rwandans who witnessed unfair or biased proceedings decided not to speak out because they were afraid of the potential repercussions (ranging from criminal prosecution to social ostracism) and instead passively participated in the gacaca process. Without active popular participation, trials were more easily manipulated and did not always reveal the truth about events in local communities.99 A number of persons interviewed by

imprisoned if they spoke in defense of accused persons or denounced genocide testimony. With geimprisonment for repeat offenders and those previously convicted of genocide, the perceived risks were high and unlikely to prompt lone voices for the defense to come forward.100 Gacaca Courts obstruct the right of an accused to call witnesses in their defence, including refusing to hear witnesses who are physically present. The accused is denied to confront witnesses against him/her and in some cases the accused is not allowed to follow her/his own trial.101 The Gacaca process is reinforcing the notion of collective guilt, of second class citizens and of inequitable justice on Hutu Community. The defendants (all Hutus) are not given adequate legal protections. The untrained manipulated judges are neither entirely impartial nor free from political influence; and that without robust rules of evidence; accusations of involvement are used to settle collective incrimination. In other to have the huge number of Hutus being falsely accused; the prospect of reduced sentences and benefit from better prison conditions for those who confessed is used to compel people to falsely implicate and to wrongfully denounce other individuals singled out and pre-‐selected by IBUKA and RPF. The refusal to falsely implicate other innocent Hutu individuals is a factor for rejecting even genuine confession and to inflict the subject to harsh conditions of imprisonment as well as to longer detention term. Many trials take place at an alarming speed with some individuals sentenced to life imprisonment in trials lasting less than an hour. 99 Ibid. Page 4 100 Ibid. Page 43. 101 Country Reports on http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2009/af/135971.htm



7 December 2011

Page 40 of 90

Hutus cannot seek justice for crimes committed by the RPF. Rwandans hesitate to openly discuss this question, in part because they are afraid of what will happen to them if they speak to outside observers. It is unfair that the loss of lives at the hands of the RPF remain

. The gacaca process had insincere aims and was designed to impose a sense of collective guilt on all Hutus. Gacaca is a means of targeting Hutus. The gacaca process was not likely to break the cycle of impunity and had instead only caused more problems. Gacaca proceedings are tainted also by its failure to provide information on the charges against the accused. In many cases, summonses did not contain enough information about the charges

the aim to leave the accused unable to prepare a defence, where charges were specified, they usually consisted of general accusatspecific incident or crime. In several particularly troubling cases, individuals were informed that

the hearing that they themselves were accused. The gacaca laws are also silent on whether an accused has the right to receive supplemental information from gacaca or local administrative officials in advance of their trial. In others, individuals were compelled to pay to obtain information on charges pending against them. In May 2008, Gacaca courts were entitled with a duty, which was beforehand to be tried by conventional courts, of trying rape cases. Afterwards, there was a covert training of women survivors of genocide of how to testify trumped up charges of rape against Hutu elites and businessmen. At the end of the covert training the RPF regime unexpectedly announced the resumption of Gacaca proceedings in October 2010. By 2008, and perhaps even earlier according to some, le Secretariat National pour les Juridictions Gacaca (SNJG) had become

irregularities. Its failure to respond to increasing reports of misuse of gacaca for personal, ethnical and political ends was particularly serious.102

under the ICCPR and concluded that the Gacaca system did not operate in accordance with basic fair trial rules. The Committee raised particular concerns about the protection of the rights of the accused and the impartiality of judges.103 The UN Human Rights Committee, in its General Comment on Article 14, in reference to the presumption of innfrom prejudging the outcome of a trial. Yet senior RPF Regime officials and pro-‐RPF media have

102 Human Rights Watch, Rwanda Justice Compromised. -‐Based Gacaca Courts May 2011. Page 131 103 Covenant, CCPR/C/RWA/CO/3, May 7, 2009, http://www.ccprcentre.org/doc/ICCPR/AR/A_64_40(Vol%20I)_Eng.pdf (accessed April 27, 2010), Page. 48.



7 December 2011

Page 41 of 90

at times repeatedly and publicly labeled persons as guilty of genocide-‐related crimes before their Gacaca trials were concluded, and in some cases even before the individuals were formally charged in Gacaca. Most often this occurred in high-‐profile cases against political opponents or critics of the regime. Such statements created an atmosphere in which it was difficult to ensure that a person would be presumed innocent and would be judged solely on the basis of evidence presented at his or her trial.104 In his views, Peter UVIN asserts:

How to decide on a policy towards the gacaca proposal?....[I]t is clear that the proposal is simultaneously extremely promising and very dangerous; long thought-‐out and full of uncertainty; locally owned and weakly socially implanted; containing the seeds of reconciliation and potentially leading to increased conflict; preparing a decrease in the (current) prison population while possibly leading to increases in new detainees. There is no way to be sure of anything: it is a giant bet for the Rwandan authorities and population, as it would be for any donor supporting it (with th[e] difference that for donors it is not a matter of life and death, whereas for the Rwandans it is.105

All these positive aspects underscored by Peter Uvin, they are the values and goals that ordinary Rwandans -‐Twa, Tutsis and Hutus alike-‐ were expecting from Gacaca and wanted to be achieved through this community-‐based initiative when they attended trials in huge numbers at the commencement of Gacaca Courts. Unfortunately we are disappointed by RPF shady political agenda to use Gacaca as both a tool and a shortcut for political oppression, and for marginalization, annihilation and discrimination against Hutus. Consequently, Gacaca proceedings ended in regrettable shortcomings, inter alia, some underlined by Peter UVIN.

form of the injustice by the Judiciary. Undoubtedly, our reasons of flight are still justifiable because there are surely no prospects of rebuilding trust and justice at any level unless forces of law and order, and authority are in democratic neutral hands.

II.10. NO AMNESTY

The declaration of amnesties and mass release of prisoners are only intended to deceive the International Community. In many cases, people are released after being poisoned so that they ought to die at a later date. Others are reduced to handicaps after series of torture.

104 Human Rights Watch, Rwanda Justice Compromised. -‐Based Gacaca Courts May 2011. Page 31 (See also UN Human Rights Committee, General Comment No.32, Article 14: Right to equality for courts and tribunals and to a fair trial, 23 August 2007, CCPR/C/GC/32, paragraph 30) 105 uspects of Participation in the Genocide and the Page 12 http://fletcher.tufts.edu/faculty/uvin/pdfs/reports/Boutmans.pdf

http://fletcher.tufts.edu/faculty/uvin/pdfs/reports/Boutmans.pdf



7 December 2011

Page 42 of 90

Another group is subjected to physical exhausting institutionalized slavery to weaken them so that the victims would not be able to work for their families after release.

The last group is sent to the so-‐ -‐education, where they undergo all kind of degrading and dehumanizing treatments. The last two groups are mostly retried and re-‐thrown in dungeons at a later date.

II.11. OPPRESSIVE SECURITY SERVICES

The Rwandan Security Services are misused by RPF to oppress Rwandan citizens in order to

to massacre, intern, abduct and threaten returnees and living-‐abroad refugee.

Repression has again become particularly acute in recent months. There have been abductions, assassination attempts, killings and enforced disappearances of members of the press and political opposition within and outside Rwanda. A climate of fear and terror is increasingly engulfing the nation because of the oppressiveness of a plethora of official and informal security services. The notorious Directorate of Military Intelligence (DMI) and Criminal Investigation Department (CID) agents are torturing and cruelly degrading inmates. They are the same agents who are responsible of selective eliminations of Rwandans who are viewed as potential challengers of

innocent Rwandans or to make them disappear without a trace.

As the authors of Rwanda Briefing wrote: An atmosphere of palpable fear (far exceeding the worst that was experienced even during the notorious dictatorship of President Idi Amin of Uganda, where many Rwandeses had sought asylum) has enveloped the country. Rwanda has degenerated into a criminal state. Victims of human rights violations committed against persons considered to be opponents of the government do not have an opportunity for seeking redress from the courts. Agents of the state are, to this day, still able to commit grave human rights abuses (killings, torture, and disappearances) without fear of being held accountable. In fact, impunity for human rights violations is now far more deeply entrenched than it h 106 The current military and police high officers are the ones who perpetrated war crime, crimes against humanity and genocide crimes. These are also instructing the new recruits to follow

106 RWANDA BRIEFING, By General Kayumba Nyamwasa, Col. Patrick Karegeya, Dr. Theogene Rudasingwa and Gerald Gahima. Page 18. August 2010.



7 December 2011

Page 43 of 90

their foot prints. The new recruits are committing extrajudicial executions and impose punishments by flogging all Hutu residents of an area where a Tutsi is menaced.

Nowadays, National Police and RDF elements, under instruction of Gen. Gumisiriza, are abducting Rwandan citizens in southwestern region (Ex-‐Cyangugu). These people are persecuted because they resisted to forced confiscation of their land.

police custody since November 2006. The then Commissioner General of Police, Andrew Rwigamba, commented in June 2007 on a spate of extrajudicial executions in police custody, a

involved in these cases were of extreme criminal character ready to die for their genocide

107 The rights of Rwandans are being changed to animals by RPF and its armed forces108. The

citizens. They sometimes operate in numberless cars and many persons whom RPF is intending to get rid of are arrested and taken away by those cars. DMI agents have many ways of garnering people and then disappear with them. They represent a sign of threat. For the last 17 years, people continued to leave Rwanda and seek asylum, because the armed forces are not safeguarding the security of nationals, rather protecting the ethnocentric dictatorship of RPF with brutality and violence.109

power to control the regime through democracy. These armed forces are misused in a way which is undoubtedly prone to the collapse of the nation.

II.12. PERSECUTION AGAINST RETURNEES

before any kind of peace has : Dr. Barbara Harrell-‐Bond in Along the Way Home

107 Statement sent by Commissioner General of Rwanda National Police Andrew Rwigamba to Human Rights Watch researcher There

Police Killings of Detainees and the Imposition of Collective Punishments, Volume 19, No. 10 (A), July 2007, page 34. 108 Human Rights Watch, There Will Be No trial, Police Killings of Detainees and the imposition of collective Punishments 109 http: www.misna.org/fr/economie-‐et-‐politique/membre-‐de-‐lopposition-‐relache



7 December 2011

Page 44 of 90

RPF regime has been characterized by reprisals against returnees since 1994 onwards. The returnees are generally persecuted on grounds of political opinion and of ethnicity. Furthermore, a returnee cannot complain for justice over either her/his relatives killed by RPF or her/his properties grabbed by RPF officials or by RPF-‐backed individuals, let alone exercising their political rights. If s/he does so, the result is death, disappearance or arbitrary imprisonment. The consequence is that many returnees are unable to establish sustainable livelihoods as they are also subjected to RPF discriminatory impoverishment agenda. And those orphans, who fled the country after RPF killed their parents, are receiving no assistance.

One such case involved the prosecution of a failed asylum seeker for statements made abroad. Such cases, in the context of public statements by the regime officials insinuating guilt of individuals before trial, contribute to the broader chilling effect and do little to instill trust and confidence in return. There appears to be an emerging pattern of Rwandans being prosecuted on their made in exile or as part of asylum proceedings abroad. The cases that Amnesty International documented took place between November 2009 and May 2010.110 As Amnesty International considers; prosecutions under a broad and ill-‐defined law run counter

Rwandans abroad, including refugees and asylum-‐seekers, to return to Rwanda voluntarily. Aw regime knows that returns are important for political stability. Such cases do little to assuage the fears of Rwandans abroad that they could return in safety. Aware of this, a diplomat representing a donor state

international standards could be an important pre-‐requisite for movement towards declaring or Rwandans in the Great Lakes Region.111

Many of those returnees, who have returned to Rwanda after misleading sensitization campaigns marred with intimidation and distorted information about the current or actual situation in Rwanda or in utmost case by forced repatriation, have made their way back into exile and testified about how they found there were silent killings in Rwanda. They say how people are abducted, killed or subjected to disappearance by DMI/CID or by other RPF-‐sponsored paramilitary groups (Intore, Local Defence Forces etc.). Many people who were returned on 31 July 2009 from Uganda confirmed of how IBUKA and INTORE groups framed any male above of 18 years old to be either a genocidaire or a rebel. Those singled never came 110 AFR 47/005/2010 Amnesty International, Pages 8 and 22. August 2010. 111 AFR 47/005/2010 Amnesty International, Page 23. August 2010.



7 December 2011

Page 45 of 90

back.112 The commandant of Kyangwali Settlement Centre, Mr. Fred Kiwanuka, testified of how he was chocked to see people, he accompanied on their way returning to Rwanda, were violently flogged on their arrival at the border. Because of these persecutions, many returnees are making their way back to Uganda. And the GoU and UNHCR Country Office are refusing to heed to their claims and to register them by avowing that they no longer have right to apply for refugee status. Upon arrival in their districts, all able bodied men are singled and interned. The victims are killed, interned, tortured or forced to disappearance. The remaining part is subjected to discriminatory impoverishment where as RPF Regime has garnered funds from international aid agencies by pretending that funds are for a frame development (EDPRS). The refusal of the government to allow the World Bank, last year, to conduct a research about economic situation in family households has proved the tokenism behind the EDPRS.113 A small sample is manipulated, after intimidation, to deceive the International Community and refugees by peddling versions briefed by RPF.114 The local authorities are briefed to enlist every returnee so that those who are spared of forthwith persecutions at their arrival are made potential targets at a later date of the already existing persecutions enshrined in Sub-‐Chapters II.1. to II.11. of this petition. These machinations are carried out through the ostensible programs, called Registration at the Transit Centers, medical screenings or communication to local officials to receive returnees. And then the lives of returnees are daily threatened by continual espionage by DMI/CID agents, RPF cadres, and INTORE/IBUKA Mobs under the so called MONITORING PROGRAM. At their arrival, returnees are not restituted of their properties; especially those grabbed by RPF officials or by RPF backed officials. Returnees are ostracized in schools, at medical centers, in sector of employment and by the administration. For a returnee, to think about political rights means to exacerbate the persecution. This is epitomized by the case of Mrs. Victoire UMUHOZA INGABIRE. Returnees are killed, interned or abducted when they demand participation in democratic debate and the management of public affairs.115

112 RLP, SSRC, IRRI, Dangerous Impasse, Rwandan Refugees in Uganda. CITIZENSHIP AND DISPLACEMENT IN THE GREAT LAKES REGION. WORKING PAPER NO. 4 JUNE 2010 Page 33. 113Remaking Rwanda: State Building and Human Rights after Mass Violence (Critical Human Rights) Edited by Scott Straus and Lars Waldorf. May 2011 114 Human Rights First, Decade of Unrest Page 28. 115 RAPPORT DE LA VISITE EXPLORATOIRE EFFECTUEE AU RWANDA PAR LA DELEGATION DES COMBATTANTS ET LEURS DEPANDANTS DE RUD/RPR DU 23 AU 28 JANVIER 2009.



7 December 2011

Page 46 of 90

The RPF regime is claiming that it repatriated 3 354 735 refugees without giving account of those killed by its troops inside and outside the country, of those who are interned and of those who are disappearing at the hands of RPF armed wings. The RPF regime should also give account of how they were repatriated. It is important to bear in mind that many were repatriated by violating all four pre-‐conditions for a voluntary repatriation.116 The RPF regime should also give numbers of those who are fleeing the country, either for the first time or for more than once. These serial killings against returnees were also confirmed by several international human rights groups and independent scholars.117UNHCR is aware of how returnees are stripped of their properties and of how are being persecuted once they try to complain for their rights.118 However UNHCR has been muted by RPF over the violations of rights of returnees.119

II.13 THE RPF MACHINATIONS TO HAUNT REFUGEES

Time has been changing quickly, time changed quickly, we were not able to do our work properly. Yes. We should have finished our wrath in them (Refugees) so that they have a

souvenir from Rwanda. Even those who escaped from us and cross over the border. Now they are currently coming back and welcomed. What makes me sad it is that we did not have time

to pursue and block them crossing the border : The speech of General Kagame of 7 April 2007 while presiding the 13th Ceremony

commemorating the genocide in Murambi, Southern Province.

asylum across the border, we told them we would come after them and request answers. Those who were supposed to come home, we repatriated them. Those who were supposed to

be shot, we shot them. We have done it as promised : The speech of General Kagame of 13 April 2010 while presiding the swearing in ceremony of

high ranking military officers before the Parliament.

116 Those four pre-‐conditions are: (1) tripartite agreement, (2) fundamental change of circumstances in country of origin (Rwanda), (3) voluntary nature of the decision to return and (4) return in safety and dignity. 117 -‐ Human Rights Watch. RWANDA: A NEW CATASTROPHE? Increased International Efforts Required to Punish Genocide and Prevent further Bloodshed Pages 10-‐11. -‐ -‐ Robert Gersony, Oral Presentation to the Commission of Experts on October 10, 1994 Page 13-‐14. 118 RLP, SSRC, IRRI, Dangerous Impasse, Rwandan Refugees in Uganda. CITIZENSHIP AND DISPLACEMENT IN THE GREAT LAKES REGION. WORKING PAPER NO. 4 JUNE 2010 Page 33 119 Ibid. Page 35.



7 December 2011

Page 47 of 90

: The speech of General Kagame of 13 April 2010 while presiding the swearing in ceremony of

high ranking military officers before the Parliament.

II.13.A. General Case This RPF agenda to haunt refugees commenced in 1994. UNHCR field offices in Uganda, Tanzania, DRC, Kenya and Burundi had confirmed on several times the apprehension of Rwandan operatives with firearms by host countries security services.120 And one of the letters of Gen. Kagame has confirmed RPF intention to kill en masse or slowly Rwandan refugees.121 These killings had at first instance targeted IDPs throughout the country.122 This agenda to massacre IDPs got culminated on 22 April 1995, when RPF troops massacred in one single day at least 8000 IDPs including.123 For RPF it was not enough to massacre people inside the country, they crossed the border into DRC to continue their killings of refugees when more than 200 000 Hutus refugees were genocidally massacred by RPF between 1996 and 2003.124 Meanwhile RPF continued its agenda to assassinate refugees abroad.125 RPF regime continues to threaten the security of Rwandan refugees who remain in exile worldwide. For the recent cases:

Rwandan operatives attempted assassination on Lt. Gen. Kayumba Nyamwasa a Rwandan refugee living in South Africa. On 22 September 2011. Recently, the South African Police foiled another assassination attempt against Lt. Gen. Kayumba Nyamwasa

On 12 May 2011, the London Metropolitan Police Service noticed to two Rwandan refugees, Jonathan Musonera and Rene Mugenzi, that RPF regime poses an imminent threat to their security.

120 Letter of Mark Prustalis to Refugee International: Rwandan refugees in Tanzania 17 May 1994 121 Letter of General Kagame to the former President of Burundi, Mr. Jean Baptiste Bagaza, written on 10 August 1994. 122 Ndaba, Rugabano, Musange, Nyacyonga, Byumba Rwesero, Kabgayi etc. 123 The Kibeho Massacre: As It Happened by Nigel Clayton 124 http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Countries/ZR/DRC_MAPPING_REPORT_FINAL_EN.pdf 125 Colonel Ttheoneste Lizinde, Seth Sendashonga, Nsengiyumva and other numerous Rwandan refugees were assassinated in Uganda, Tanzania, Kenya, Congo, DRC, Belgium, Burundi, Cameroon etc

http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Countries/ZR/DRC_MAPPING_REPORT_FINAL_EN.pdf



7 December 2011

Page 48 of 90

When RPF regime finds out that it is difficult to assassinate a certain refugee, they resort to sentence in absentia. That is why many refugees are actually sentenced in absentia to more than 15 years either by Gacaca Courts or by other courts.126 This is added to the fact that RPF continues to frame refugees to be genecidaires who are running away from accountability. This must be seen as one of the epitomes of RPF dastardly policies. They are using the legacy of 1994 genocide as a tool of discredit and hunt by the perpetrators (RPF) against the victims (refugees). The Rwandan regime maintains an overly hostile attitude towards Rwandan refugees because refugees are viewed by RPF as people who are divulging the hidden reality about the reigning subtle situation under the discriminatory dictatorial rule of RPF. That is why the RPF regime continues to consider the fact of granting refugee status as hostile because it is struggling to cover up its crimes. Yet refugee communities are made up with the majority of those who are eye witnesses and survivors of RPF exactions. Moreover, in what must be seen as the epitome of RPF dastardly policies; RPF is increasingly using the legacy of 1994 Genocide as a tool of discredit and of hunt by the perpetrators (RPF) against innocent victims (refugees). The same is true for trumping up other genocide-‐related against refugees, we are falsely

both vaguely defined by law to prohibit constructive truthful ideas and statements. And they s likely to lead to another mass ethnic violence

campaign to denounce refugees as suspects of these crimes, often receiving significant pro-‐RPF media coverage, has further called into question not only the essence behind the push for premature invocation of the cessation clause, but also the extent to which a person facing trial can effectively enjoy a presumption of innocence.127 With the continuity of this hostility against Rwandan refugees, RPF has resorted to forceful coliving in Rwanda, have no rights on these properties and are imprisoned if they present to Rwandan authorities a written authorization signed by a refugee to manage the properties.128

126RLP, SSRC, IRRI, Dangerous Impasse, Rwandan Refugees in Uganda. CITIZENSHIP AND DISPLACEMENT IN THE GREAT LAKES REGION. WORKING PAPER NO. 4 JUNE 2010 Page 33. 127 Human Rights Watch, Rwanda Justice Compromised. -‐Based Gacaca Courts May 2011. Pages 31-‐32 and Pages 56-‐64. 128 Articles 3, 15 and 82 of the law relating to land requisitioning and confiscation.



7 December 2011

Page 49 of 90

Further still, in order to lure the International Community that there is no more new asylum seekers; RDF patrol units are currently searching, intercepting and ambushing new asylum seekers who are trying to clandestinely flee Rwanda . These operations are carried out in all areas close to borders of Rwanda and neighboring countries. Thos who get apprehended are killed, are detained incommunicado in nearby military barracks or subjected to forced disappearance.129 RPF is using statements made abroad by refugees, while applying for refugee status, as a basis to trump up charges against refugees.130 Hence, RPF regime is applying for membership in UNHCR Executive Committee as a short cut to have access to the statements made by refugees in order to plan further persecutions against potential returnees and those who will be left without international protection after the premature implementation of the cessation clause on 30 June 2010. This hostility is also fed by the fact that RPF regime is aware that Rwandan refugees do not believe in its tokenism after numerous deceptions that have even taken away the lives of the returnees. The motives behind the RPF Regime push for repatriation of Rwandan refugee and the premature invocation of the cessation clause are not to provide to us national protection and to share the burden with the International Community. Rather, RPF Regime is struggling to cover up war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide crimes committed at the hands of its politico-‐military officers. And also the regime is aiming to conceal to the International Community the ongoing persecutions in Rwanda. After expelling all international human rights groups out of the county and after killing, interning or silencing independent journalists and legitimate political opponents; refugees are the only remaining source of information of what is happening in Rwanda.

129 This information is confirmed by new asylum seekers in Uganda who managed to escape. 130

2010. Pages 8, 22, 23, and 24.



7 December 2011

Page 50 of 90

General Kagame. The picture of Rwandan refugees massacred by RPF soldiers in Kibeho on 22 April 1995.

II.13.B. Uganda Chapter

es, UNHCR is aware that the security of Rwandan refugees in Uganda is extremely threatened by Rwandan intelligence operatives. There so, I was once personally threatened and nearly assaulted by Rwandan agents in light of my conviction to fulfill fairly my scopes by

protecting refugees, including Rwandan refugees : Mr. George KUCHIO, the UNHCR Senior Protection Officer131

For Ugandan case, Rwandan refugees in Uganda continue to be living in fear of attacks, abduction and assassination.

On 21 January 2010, a Rwandan refugee survived a murder attempt by Rwandan operatives in Kawaala/Kampala Uganda.132

131 These words were said during the meeting of 18 February 2010, between UNHCR Protection unity and the urban community of Rwandan refugees at Antonio Guterres Community Center when Mr. Kuchio was answering to the question about UNHCR measures to encounter threats to physical safet of Rwandan refugees orchestrated by Rwandan state Operatives in Uganda. 132 http://www.unhcr.org/cgi-‐bin/texis/vtx/refdaily?pass=463ef21123&id=4c2adaec5



7 December 2011

Page 51 of 90

In June 2010, Dominique Makeli survived abduction by Rwandan operatives in Kampala.133

On 14 July 2010, during the forced deportation of Rwandan refugees, a group of Rwandan agents strangled to death a Rwandan refugee, late Ndahiro Aloys, in the yard of OPM/UNHCR offices in Nakivale Refugee Camp.134

On 1 September 2011, Gen. Marcel Gatsinzi, the Rwandan Minister in charge of refugees, pressurized and threatened a researcher, who was conducting a research on Rwandan refugees, to reveal testimonies of Rwandan refugees to RPF.

During the time we were garnering ideas for and writing this petition, many Rwandan refugees were threatened with Rwandan-‐speaking anonymous phone calls in attempt to persuade them not to sign this petition.

During the sensitization meetings, Rwandan authorities threatened to browbeat those who will refuse to return. On 19 September 2011, prior to mock UNHCR over its fear to face firearms, General Frank Mugambage, the Rwandan ambassador in Uganda, threatened to use gunpoint as it happened on 14 July 2010. Still, during the sensitization meeting of 8 July 2009 in Nakivale Settlement Center, the mayor of Nyagatare resorted to collective assumption of guilty by framing Rwandan refugees to be genocidaires who deserve to be slain. Furthermore, he threatened to use deportation by gunpoint as it happened in DRC and Tanzania.

In 2010, Mr. John Bosco Gasasira survived an abduction attempt by Rwandan operatives in Kampala and two journalists survived also abductions in August 2011.135

On 29 September 2010, Niyonzima Eric was murdered by a Rwandan operative, called Lieutenant Philemon RUZIBIZA, in Makindye/Kampala.

On 21 June 2011, a Rwandan refugee136, who was working as the secretary for this petition, was abducted by Rwandan operatives in Bukesa/Kampala. The victim was found in the swamp of Namugongo and the papers with 458 signatures we have so far collected for this petition got grabbed by the Rwandan-‐speaking assailants. The victim was also raped and she is now pregnant following the rape.

On 11 November 2011, Rumumba Patrice was arbitrarily arrested by a UPDF137 Officer138 who told Rumumba that RPF Regime paid him (the UPDF Officer) to forcefully deport him to Rwanda. The UPDF officer impelled Rumumba to pay 3 millions of

133 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10479882 134 http://www.pambazuka.org/en/category/action/67065 135 http://en.rsf.org/rwanda-‐unhcr-‐urged-‐to-‐review-‐decision-‐to-‐11-‐10-‐2011,41158.html 136 Name is withheld because the victim is fearing ostracism and because she is aware that UNHCR is unwilling to do anything to help. 137 138 Name withheld due to security concern of Rumumba Patrice.

http://www.pambazuka.org/en/category/action/67065

http://en.rsf.org/rwanda-unhcr-urged-to-review-decision-to-11-10-2011,41158.html



7 December 2011

Page 52 of 90

Ugandan shillings (1200 US Dollars) in order to survive deportation. Rumumba managed to pay only 1 000 000 million of Ugandan shillings. For the moment, the UPDF Officer is continuously threatening Rumumba with death and deportation threats if he would fail to give the remaining balance.

On 19 November 2011, Uwantege Marie Chantal was kidnapped by Rwandan operatives who were accompanied by other individuals dressed in Ugandan police uniform. The Rwandan operatives waved to Uwantege a paper written by the Rwanda Commission for Reconciliation and Unity, telling her that she is wanted in Rwanda. They left her in a restaurant and ran away after realizing that they could be spotted by Ugandan Police.

On the night of 30 November to 1 December 2011, Charles INGABIRE was assassinated by Rwandan operatives in Bukesa/Kampala. Ingabire has been receiving many threats from Rwandan operatives to the point his laptop was grabbed by Rwandan operatives two months earlier. Ingabire was housed in UNHCR Protection House in May 2010 as a remedy to grant his security which was threatened by Rwandan State Operatives. After a few months, UNHCR Protection Unity threw him out of the house and he was told by UNHCR officials that the only solution for Rwandans is to go home.

After the assassination of INGABIRE, Rwandan operatives continued to threaten Rwandan refugees.139

Now, RPF regime is using Rwandan spies, disguised as Rwandan or Congolese refugees, to track whereabouts of genuine Rwandan refugees, to poison Rwandan refugees and sow ethnic divisions among community of Rwandan refugees in Uganda.140 And the camps are infiltrated by Rwandan intelligence moles.141 The Rwandan High Commissioner in Uganda, Major General Frank Mugambage, and his intelligence head, Mr. Ngarambe John, are continuing to threaten our security by monitoring and spying our movements. They even pay fellow refugees to poison us and/or reveal our whereabouts. RPF is using a trick aiming for the cancellation of the refugee status of the victims.142 Rwandan spies are enlisting bona fide Rwandan refugees, extorting money from refugees and sensitizing refugees to join a fictitious rebel group, called the Army of the King. These machinations are coordinated by two DMI agents, respectively Lt. Jean de Dieu Ntivunwa and Lt. James

139 http://www.monitor.co.ug/News/National/-‐/688334/1283664/-‐/bg7wmez/-‐/ 140 -‐ Felix Basiime, Arrested Rwandans Accused of Espionage. Daily Monitor -‐ List of Most Wanted Rwandan Scribes Leaks, Red Pepper, Friday, February 18, 2011. Page 5. 141 Human Rights First, Decade of Unrest, Pages 50 and 51. 142 Refugees are forbidden by the article 3(1) of the 1969 OAU Convention and by Section 35 (e) of the 2006 Uganda Refugee Act to engage in political activities against country of origin, host country or any other African country.



7 December 2011

Page 53 of 90

Munyandinda. The later is using the pseudonym of Captain James Mugisha.143 In other case, a certain NDAYISABA Jean Damascène is giving money to Rwandan nationals who are either refugees or not. The money receivers are instructed to lure other refugees to repatriation and to give information about refugees. Then, the targets are coerced to go back to Rwanda; those who refuse are subjected to threats and abduction by Captain Gatabazi. Now, investigations have uncovered scandals where Rwandan state informers and agents infiltrate refugee communities and work undercover to hunt down bona fide Rwandan refugees.144 Our communities, which are essentially made up of critics and survivors of RPF Regime, are falsely accused and publically branded as genocide perpetrators. We, legitimate refugees, are framed and neutralized by a regime whose holders have international arrest warrants against them On 12 September 2010, a Rwandan refugee managed to discover a paper written by the intelligence unity of the Rwandan Embassy in Uganda. The paper details in Rwandan language-‐ tactics to be used to harm the welfare of Rwandan refugees in Uganda. This ethnic division sowing paper also coaches fake Rwandan refugees how to strategically and tactically disorganize our community in Uganda. The paper instructs that the key weapons to be used are to sow ethnic tensions, confusion and aggressive delusion prior to get rid of beacons. This presence of Rwandan spies who are monitoring our activities is exacerbating the negative image of RPF and is increasing suspicions on the motives of RPF to push for return. 145 Rwandan operatives operate freely in Uganda because most of them had grown up here and continue to have close connections throughout Uganda with every institution of governance. However, many of these abductions of Rwandan refugees in Uganda take place with the complicity of Ugandan authorities.146 This collusion resulted into the disappearance of the file server at the Office of the Prime Minister, Directorate of Refugees where it is suspected that

143 http://www.afroamerica.net/AfricaGL/2011/10/01/rwandan-‐intelligence-‐services-‐behind-‐so-‐called-‐king-‐kigelis-‐army/ 144 During the meetings of Refugee Eligibility Commission of 7-‐10 December 2010 and of 3-‐5 November 2010, GoU and UNHCR discovered a number of Rwandan operatives, disguised as Rwandan or Congolese refugees, working with the Rwandan embassy in Uganda to spy on and threaten legitimate Rwandan refugees. Unfortunately, no protective measures were taken to grant safety of victims. 145 RLP, SSRC, IRRI, Dangerous Impasse, Rwandan Refugees in Uganda. CITIZENSHIP AND DISPLACEMENT IN THE GREAT LAKES REGION. WORKING PAPER NO. 4 JUNE 2010 Page 44 146 Dr. Barbara Harrell-‐Bond, Cessation Clause: Uganda Style



7 December 2011

Page 54 of 90

RPF regime is behind the disappearance, given its continuous espionage on Rwandan refugees.147 Our community is perpetually under surveillance and effectively under attacks by fake Rwandan or Congolese refugees working as moles. These moles are sending names of bona fide refugees to the ever-‐updcases against refugees.148 Now we have also managed to uncover and proved to UNHCR a conspiracy where fake Rwandan refugees infiltrate Uganda and work undercover to hunt down critics and survivors of the RPF Regime in general and in particular with the aim to neutralize our leaders so that leaders could be killed or brought back to Rwanda. This conspiracy spins around networks of informers and agents; and it encapsulates all the machinations of the growing push to strip our refugee status. The fact we are viewed as critics and survivors of the atrocities of the RPF regime, we are coerced to return to Rwanda by joint persuasions from some authorities of GoU and UNHCR in collaboration with the RPF Regime by threatening to strip us of our refugee status and deport us every time we raise a voice for the recognition of the version of reality. The RPF regime is also sowing xenophobic animosity in Ugandan host communities against Rwandan refugees where Ugandan or foreign backers of RPF are calling on host communities to ostracize Rwandan refugees by luring them (host communities) that we are ill-‐fated culprits who will bring to Uganda troubles. Especially, Radio West is working with RPF to peddle these hatred stereotypes.149 Consequently, we are living in permanent fear and it is negatively affecting our livelihoods because we are unable to work freely due to concerns of our security or due to the ban of the GoU on farming. We are systematically and absolutely prevented from providing for our basic needs based on the continuous threats to our safety which refrain us to have an identifiable and stable work to earn a certain survival. We are compelled in dependence where we can neither determine our socio-‐economic status nor pursue any development to sustain a decent living. It represents a significant obstacle to leading life and achieving self sufficiency owing to ensued economic hardships. To conclude, we are caught between a hard place and the rock as our security is threatened by RPF regime, yet UNHCR and GoU are pushing for repatriation and refusing to grant us respectively legal and physical protection.

147 http: www.voanews.com/centyralafrica on 14 August 2010 148 See also , RLP, IRRI and SSRI, Dangerous Impasse, Page 44. 149 http: www.refugeelawproject.org/working%20papers/RLP%20WP8.pdf

http://www.voanews.com/centyralafrica



7 December 2011

Page 55 of 90

III. UGANDA: WE SHOULD DISPOSE OF RWANDAN REFUGEES

relocated elsewhere. This is the government position, UNHCR knows about it and they should arrange with Rwandan refugees and take them to another country :

Prof. Tarsis Kabwegyere, Former Minister of Disaster, of Preparedness, Relief and Refugees.150

The GoU agenda to browbeat Rwandan refugees began as early as 1996 when many Rwandan refugees disappeared at the hands of Ugandan Intelligence Agencies and Police, in many cases

151 The persecutions by GoU exacerbated after the signing of the Tripartite Agreement152 of 22nd April 2009. Since then, there are cases of Rwandan refugees being abducted from their homes and places of business, and subjected to threats, floggings, torture and harsh interrogations. Evidence exists that some are initially arrested by Ugandan police on minor trumped up charges such as trespass, theft etc. Others are arbitrarily arrested by agents of ESO/ISO153 and then subjected to torture before being turned to Rwandan intelligence services or prior to disappear completely. Few of the surviving victims are having their lives saved by money extortion and, in many cases, the victims properties are unlawfully appropriated by the Ugandan Security Services Officers.154 Further still, the ongoing repatriation exercise is tainted with push factors which violate and disrespect the voluntary nature of repatriation. During the sensitization meetings, Ugandan authorities threaten to reduce Rwandan refugees to downtrodden people.155 These threats ended in barrowing RPF discriminatory and persecutory tactics like impoverishment and starvation against Rwandan refugees. The GoU barred Rwandan refugees from accessing land for cultivation: the only basic income generating activity in refugee camps. In collaboration with UNHCR, food rations are halved, assistance removed and children turned

150 IRIN, Uganda starves Rwandan Refugees to Force Them Return to Rwanda, July 19th, 2010. 151 Amnesty International, Rwanda: Enduring the Legacy of Genocide and War, April 5th, 2004. 152 The Tripartite Commission is made by the GoU, UNHCR and RPF Regime 153 External Security Organization/Internal Security Organization. 154 Many of these cases are turned away or unanswered by the UNHCR Protection Unity, in particular, Mr. George KUCHIO, without any decent explanation. 155 During a sensitization meeting of 8th July 2009, one official of the Office of the Prime Minister in charge of refugees said that for a Rwandan refugee to remain in Uganda will be like a camel to pass to pass through a eye of a needle.



7 December 2011

Page 56 of 90

away from school.156 In fact, they are making life extremely miserable to induce us to return back to Rwanda against our will.157 Worse still, UNHCR and OPM officials are covering up the case of murder perpetrated by a UNHCR Staff Member who deliberately took away the life of an innocent Rwandan refugee child by asserting that Rwandan refugees have no more rights in Uganda.158 Always with the aim to deter Rwandan refugees (who are fleeing the RPF persecutions on grounds of ethnic discrimination, political oppression and clampdown on legitimate freedoms) from applying for refugee status, GoU is rejecting the applications of Rwandan refugees at the high rate,159 to the point the victims of torture, with conclusive evidences, are not spared.160 This barrier is obviously a machination to implement RPF ambitions by deceiving the International Community that the number of new Rwandan asylum seekers is exponentially reducing. Consequently, it ended in premature invocation of the cessation clause, an act that will never constitute a durable solution to Rwandan refugees. GoU is granting refugee status to a very few Rwandan Refugees, but with a trick to strip us of the refugee status at a later date after the premature invocation of the cessation clause. The trick consists in granting refugee status to us only on grounds of , whereas the reality is that the overwhelming majority of Rwandan refugees are fleeing Rwanda because the RPF regime is persecuting them on grounds of ethnic discrimination against Hutu Community. Eventually, the victims will not be able to defend themselves as to why they cannot return to Rwanda based on political grounds because they did not get involved in any political activity. Another group, which is completely turned away, is made up by those returnees who made their way back in Uganda after being persecuted by RPF upon their arrival in Rwanda. GoU and 156 -‐ In May 2011 (through InterAid: a UNHCR implementing partner) UNHCR granted partial scholarships to refugee children of all nationalities in Uganda, except Rwandan refugees. -‐ In September 2011, (through Windle Trust Uganda: a UNHCR educational partner) UNHCR selected students, to be granted higher education scholarships, proportionally from all other nationalities except Rwandan refugees. 157 In Kyaka II Settlement Centre, Ugandan Authorities destroyed huts and crops of Rwandan refugees prior to arbitrarily arrest some who showed that they cannot return to Rwanda owing to well-‐founded fears of persecutions upon arrival in Rwanda. 158 On 19 February 2010, Hategekimana Jean Marie was murdered by a UNHCR driver, called SEMANDA, who intentionally rolled the lorry over the head of Hategekimana. Parents of the victim are being threatened by Ugandan and UNHCR officials with forced deportation if they may dare to complain. 159 REC Meeting of 7-‐10 October 2010 only 24 urban Rwandan asylum seekers out of 85 were granted refugee status; REC Meeting of 3-‐5 November 2010 only 35 urban Rwandan asylum seekers out of 92 were granted refugee status; REC Meeting of 19-‐22 July 2011 only 25 urban Rwandan asylum seekers out of 60 were granted refugee status. Even if we do not give exact numbers, the rate of rejection is extremely higher for living-‐in-‐camp Rwandan refugees. 160 For example, Rwandan refugees and asylum seekers who were rejected before being forcefully deported back to Rwanda on 14 July 2010 were given less than five minutes by the Refugee Eligibility Committee to explain their reasons to flee Rwanda.



7 December 2011

Page 57 of 90

UNHCR are refusing to lodge their cases in order to deceive the International Community that the return is successful. These insuperable obstacles by UNHCR and GoU are inducing many Rwandan refugees to disguise themselves as Congolese refugees or as Ugandans.161 In addition of the forced deportation of more than 3 000 Rwandan refugees and asylum seekers from Kibati-‐Nakivale Settlement Centre in October 2007; all these above mentioned push factors ended in the on 14 July 2010 when Rwandan refugees and asylum seekers in Nakivale and Kyaka II Settlement Centers were lured by Ugandan authorities with food distribution, with declaration of the results of refugee status applications, with registration of new asylum seekers and with hearing protection claims. At the end, Rwandan refugees were rounded up by Ugandan police and Rwandan Intelligence Agents. During the subsequent forced deportation;

more than 1700 Rwandans ( refugees and asylum seekers alike) were refouled to Rwanda where many of them were subjected, forthwith or at a later date, to persecutions;

at least 15 people lost their lives ( 1 strangulated to death by Rwandan agents, 3 were shot dead by Ugandan police162, 2 died of injuries caused by police beatings, 1 disenwombed, 4 flattened during the stampede, 2 died trying to leap from trucks, 1 whose genitals were mutilated by the barbed wire and I died of injuries);

at least 39 children were separated from their parents; at least 19 Rwandans granted refugee status were forcefully deported; members of at least 6 families were separated; and at least 5 children were deported to Rwanda leaving their parents behind in Uganda.163

In an attempt to conceal and reduce the number and causes of the deaths, GoU refused to our community to burry in dignity our compatriots who lost their lives during this refoulement. Children, whose parents were either forcefully deported or killed, are receiving no assistance from UNHCR or GoU. These neglected children are surviving on critical means of fellow Rwandan refugees who are therefore starving fallowing the drastic impoverishing measure imposed to us by GoU.

161 http://www.monitor.co.ug/News/National/-‐/688334/797072/-‐/w1e3kq/-‐/index.html 162 Africa Review, Rwandan Refugees Shot as Uganda Pushed Them Back, Wednesday, 18 August 2010. http:wwwafricareview.com/News/Rwandan%20refugees%20shot%20dead/-‐/825442/958378/-‐/3x7hha/-‐/3index.html 163 http://www.pambazuka.org/en/category/action/67065

http://www.monitor.co.ug/News/National/-/688334/797072/-/w1e3kq/-/index.html

http://www.pambazuka.org/en/category/action/67065



7 December 2011

Page 58 of 90

Consequence of forced Repatriation against Rwandan

Refugees: Kanamugire Jean Paul who died of beatings by Ugandan Police on 14 July 2010, during the forced deportation of Rwandan refugees and asylum seekers.

Contrarily to the assertions of Ugandan authorities that people, who were forcibly deported on 14 July 2010, were only asylum seekers whose all procedures for refugee status application were exhausted; it is obvious that the subsection (2) of section 23 of the 2006 Uganda Refugee Act was not respected.164

164 2006 Uganda Refugee Act Section 23(2): Where a person has exhausted the right of appeal in relation to an application and refugee status has not been granted, that applicant shall be allowed to stay in Uganda for a period not exceeding ninety days to enable her/him to seek asylum or admission to a country of her/his choice.



7 December 2011

Page 59 of 90

Those deportees were mainly of the group of 1300 persons who fled to Uganda in April 2010 and whose applications for refugee status were screened by the Refugee Eligibility Committee between 3 May and 3 July 2010. The Tripartite Commission also met during that period on 8 May 2010. Yet it is important to notice that one Ugandan Official groundlessly dismissed their claims even before the Refugee Eligibility Committee could sit for the screening and the determination of their applications.165

Those deportees were not given an opportunity to stay in Uganda for a period of more than ninety days to enable them to seek asylum in other country of their choice after the rejection of their appeals, as it is provided by 2006 Uganda Refugee Act, Section 23, Subsection (2).166 Furthermore, the applicants were not provided with copies of the statements of the reasons of rejection by the Refugee Eligibility Committee as it is required by the Section 20, Subsection (4) of the 2006 Uganda Refugee Act.167

Contrarily to the provision of Section 42 Subsection (1) (a) of the 2006 Uganda Refugee Act168, Uganda opted to deport them to a country where the subjects might face persecutions on accounts of ethnical belonging, of political opinion, etc. Thus, it is very substantial to find out if the members of Refugee Eligibility Committee were not among the members of the Appeals Board who rejected the appeals of the deportees because it is prohibited by the Section 16 Subsection (3) of the 2006 Uganda Refugee Act.169

As a measure to implement a deportation policy against Rwandan refugees, Uganda and UNHCR are refusing to reassess the claims of cyclers. I.e. those people who made their way back to Uganda to seek again asylum after being persecuted upon their arrival in Rwanda by the ruling regime.

165 3000 Rwandans Flee to Uganda, The New Vision, Thursday, 29 April 2010, Page 12 166 See footnote 162. 167 2006 Uganda Refugee Act Section 20(4): Where an application is rejected under subsection (2) of this section, the Eligibility Committee shall state the reasons for its decision in writing and the applicant shall be provided with a copy of the statement. 1682006 Uganda Refugee Act Section 42: Extradition, return of a refugee, etc. (1) Notwithstanding the provisions of any other law, no person shall be refused entry into Uganda, expelled,

extradited or returned from Uganda to any other country or subjected to any similar measures if, as result of such refusal, expulsion, return or other measure, that person is compelled to return to or remain in a country where-‐

(a) S/he may be subjected to persecution on account of race, religion, sex, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion. (2) Where necessary, the minister shall take such steps as s/he considers appropriate to ensure that a person

referred to in subsection (1) of this section gets admission into another country of his/her choice. 169 Section 16: Refugee Appeals Board (3) A member of the Eligibility Committee shall not be a member of the Appeals Board.



7 December 2011

Page 60 of 90

The continual denial by GoU officials that on 14 July 2010 no refugee was forcefully deported was denounced by the UNHCR country representative in Uganda, Mr. Kai Nielsen. He said: biggest worry is that amongst those rounded up are genuine refugees. In the process, families

170

The GoU is violating the Article 12 (5) of the African Charter on Human and Peoples Rights (ACHPR), because they are resorting on mass expulsions of non-‐nationals (Rwandan Refugees) on the basis of nationality and ethnicity.171

Further more in absence of evidence, Prof. Tarsis KABWEGYERE; unfoundedly accused Rwandan Refugees to be criminals172. We are always treated as culprits who are running away from justice. This has resulted into perpetuated ethnic stereotypes and it is gradually becoming an excuse for Ugandan authorities to violate our rights. In the other hand, this kind of unfounded collective incrimination has been a pretence always advanced by RPF to genocidally massacre Hutu refugees.

These discriminatory measures against Rwandan refugees have been also approved by the UNHCR Uganda Representative, Mr. Kai NIELSEN. Sudanese, Somalis, and Kenyans. But they have this particular bilateral agreement with

: He said.173

The increasing militarization of the management of Rwandan refugees and sacrifice by GoU of adhesion to international standards for political reckonings with RPF are violating the principle of non-‐refoulement , making us live in constant fear and uncertainty worried that one day, if not night, we could be forcefully deported back to Rwanda or be killed. Moreover, we are cynical of the handling of the residual cases by UNHCR officials fallowing of their ill-‐treatments.

We live under perpetual fear because we are hunted down and we are at potential risks of

regime by threatening to deport us back to Rwanda and/or by asserting that we have no reasons to retain our refugee status. There is literally and practically a war on us in Uganda. GoU and UNHCR are very aware of widespread violations of gross human rights in Rwanda which legitimate our fears to return to Rwanda. Still, they are unwilling to recognize the version of reality and they are continuously increasing push factors to impose us to return to a country ruled by a regime which is sending operatives to threaten our security even in the country of refuge.

170 The New York Times, Rwandan Refugees Forced from Uganda, by John Kron, 17 July 2010. 171 ACHPR Article 12(5): The mass expulsion of non-‐nationals shall be prohibited. Mass expulsion shall be that which is aimed at national, racial, ethnic or religious groups. 172 Reuters, Uganda Defends Deportation of Rwandan Refugees, July 20, 2010 173 The New York Times, Rwandan Refugees Forced from Uganda, by John Kron, 17 July 2010).



7 December 2011

Page 61 of 90

The standpoint and position of the current Minister of Relief, Disaster Preparedness and Refugees, Hon. Dr. Steven Mallinga, are of integrity and of sticking on international standards to protect refugees regardless of their origins. He is really concerned of protection of refugees and integral implementation of legal provisions; unfortunately, the Integrity of Hon. Dr. Mallinga is hindered by ongoing wantonness and push to prematurely apply the cessation clause and is not having any impact to reverse the plight we are inflicted to. This is akin to UNHCR: The UNHCR representative in Uganda, Mr. Kai Nielsen, has strongly condemned discriminatory ill-‐treatments against us in Uganda, but the on-‐the-‐ground UNHCR officials are not reaching out to us; they are instead continuing to increase shady push factors to induce us to go back to Rwanda.174

IV. UNHCR: TO RESORT TO TOKENISM, TO CIRCUMVENTION, TO DISCRIMINATION AGAINST RWANDAN REFUGEES, TO COLLUSION WITH PERPETRATORS (RPF), TO COERCIVE REPATRIATION, TO PREMATURE AND UNGROUNDED INVOCATION OF THE CESSATION CLAUSE, AND TO CONDONING ATROCITIES BY RPF AS SHORTCUTS

TO OVERCOME THE INTRACTABLE PROBLEM OF RWANDAN REFUGEES

referred to a voluntary repatriation, integration in host country or

refugees; repatriation is only mentioned in negative terms, that is. States are forbidden to return someone to the country where they feared persecutions. Repatriation is to be

with forced return of Rwandan refugees since 1996 : Dr. Harrell-‐Bond: Along the Way Home.

IV.1. BRIEF BACKGROUND

The politicization of protection of Rwandan refugees emanates not only from Uganda and RPF

Rwanda and DR Congo, and to respond effectively to the refugee emergency which ensued, for example, is making UNHCR to eagerly look for a shortcut whether through the activities and policies which are illegal or shady. This results in their proneness to overlook shortcomings in governance and gross human rights violation in Rwanda.

The UNHCR attitude to turn a blind eye on RPF atrocities and then push us for repatriation commenced in 1994 when the report elaborated by Robert Gersony was concealed.175 The

174 The New Vision, Minister warns on forceful return of refugees by MARY KARUGABA, Tuesday, 5th July 2011. 175 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gersony_Report http://rwandinfo.com/documents/Gersony_Report.pdf

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gersony_Report

http://rwandinfo.com/documents/Gersony_Report.pdf



7 December 2011

Page 62 of 90

result was that RPF felt as given green light to perpetuate on perpetration of genocidal killings against Hutu refugees. The fallowing year, RPF massacred at least 8000 IDPs in Kibeho Camp on 22 April 1995.176

The year of 1996 coincided with two main atrocities against Rwandan refugees: (1) forced deportation from Tanzania and DR Congo and (2) genocide against Rwandan Hutu refugees by RPF troops, by Burundian troops and by their proxy Congolese rebel groups in DR Congo. At the risks of seeing the history repeating itself, UNHCR is currently aiming to strip us of our refugee status by using the euphemism of as it used the term whereas it was in reality ; when UNHCR was paying a bounty of 10 American Dollars to any Zairian who brought in a Rwandan refugee or who divulged hideout of a Rwandan refugee. This man hunt operations by paid bounty by UNHCR speeded up the genocide against Rwandan refugees committed by RPF troops and increased the number of victims as many Rwandan refugees lost their lives fallowing these man hunt operations.177

And in Tanzania in 1996, there were Tanzanian forces, with full cooperation of UNHCR, which forcefully drove Rwandan refugees back to a country ruled by people whose atrocities were described by Gersony as of genocide.

As the RPF regime is struggling to eliminate any potential aye witness of this genocide in DR Congo, and then the communities of Rwandan refugees are mainly made up of those eye witnesses, UNHCR is helping the regime in this murky ploy by stripping us of any kind of international protection in order to return us, the victims, into the hands of the persecutors, hence the perpetrators of the crimes we are victimised with.

In 1997, UNHCR hired a Malian airplane which was used to forcefully take Rwandan refugees from Franceville Town of Gabon to Kigali International Airport. On their arrival, the deportees were taken to torture chambers and undergrounds at Gikondo Industrial Area. Those deportees underwent inhumane treatments. They were degraded to the level that they were fed on their waste. Some of them lost their lives and many of them disappeared.

IV.2. IMPOSED AND COERCIVE REPATRIATION

For the moment, UNHCR is promoting the repatriation without taking into consideration three of four pre-‐conditions for UNHCR to participate in voluntary repatriation exercise. In practice, the only pre-‐condition taken into consideration is the tripartite agreement between the host country, the country of origin and UNHCR.178 It is important to notice that the country of origin

176 http://www.anzacday.org.au/history/peacekeeping/anecdotes/kibeho.html http://www.rar.org.au/documents/book_massacre_rwanda_o%27halloran_mar10.pdf 177 UMUTESI Béatrice. Surviving the Slaughter, University of Wisconsin, 2004 178 These four pre-‐conditions are: Fundamental change of circumstances, voluntary nature of the decision to return, return in safety and tripartite agreement

http://www.anzacday.org.au/history/peacekeeping/anecdotes/kibeho.html

http://www.rar.org.au/documents/book_massacre_rwanda_o%27halloran_mar10.pdf



7 December 2011

Page 63 of 90

is ruled by a regime which is hostile to us. That is why they resorted to peremptory pressures and fabricated versions to have UNHCR participating in these shady operations.

Contrarily to the Conclusion Number 40 Paragraph b of the UNHCR Executive Committee,179 the voluntariness of return and guarantees of safety upon arrival are not respected, let alone the principle of safe return. This action, by UNHCR, of not recognizing the version of reality is highly leaving us in vulnerable situation. These assumptions must be re-‐evaluated and must recognize the fact that conditions to make return durable are yet to be found in Rwanda. And despite the poor conditions we are living in, we will remain in exile until political and social situations in Rwanda are really conducive to return.

When the UNHCR Senior Protection Officer, Mr. George KUCHIO, ill-‐advises us to return to Rwanda, it is a connivance at not recognizing the version of reality and it is a trap aiming to strip our refugee status at the end of this year by pretending that we refused to avail ourselves to the protection of the country of our nationality; after unfoundedly pretending that the circumstances in connection with which we were recognized as refugees ceased to exist. Undoubtedly, it is a purposeful trick to get rid of us because we persist on denouncing human rights violations, atrocities and wrongdoings that are being committed against Rwandan refugees in Uganda.180

Meaningfully, we still have well-‐founded fears of being persecuted once we would recklessly comply with ironic ill-‐advices of Mr. KUCHIO to return to Rwanda which constitute also push factors-‐ and we still need international protection as Rwandan refugees.

slay us in the country of refuge?

This ongoing repatriation should never be referred to as a durable solution.

IV.3. GROUNDLESS REFUSAL TO GRANT TO US PROTECTION AND RESETTLEMENT TO A THIRD COUNTRY= CONDONING THREATS TO OUR SAFETY BY RPF

179 Conclusion 40 paragraph b of the UNHCR Executive Committee: The repatriation of refugees should only take place at their freely expressed wish; the voluntary and individual character of repatriation of refugees and the need for it to be carried out under conditions of absolute safety, preferably to the place of residence of the refugee in his country of origin, should always be respected; 180 Worse still, UNHCR officials are covering up the case of murder perpetrated by a UNHCR Staff Member who deliberately took away the life of innocent Rwandan refugee child, Jean Marie HATEGEKIMANA, by asserting that Rwandan refugees have no more rights in Uganda. On 19 February 2010, Hategekimana Jean Marie was murdered by a UNHCR driver, called SEMANDA, who intentionally rolled the lorry over the head of Hategekimana. Parents of the victim are being threatened by Ugandan and UNHCR officials with forced deportation if they may dare to complain. The parents were even flogged.



7 December 2011

Page 64 of 90

We are currently caught between the rock and the hard place because UNHCR is intentionally refusing to drive protective response while there are reliable evidences of how our stay in Uganda and our security are at stake due to direct threats from Rwandan operatives and some Ugandan authorities. It is very dangerous and questionable if we will meet UNHCR criteria for protection on the day we will be killed, on the day we will be forcefully deported or on the day we will be abducted and subjected to forced disappearance.

UNHCR has been always lying to us that it is petitioning the GoU to lift the ban on Rwandan refugees to access land for cultivation;181 but it was during the Tripartite Meeting of 13 May 2010 that UNHCR, in connection with the GoU and RPF Regime, re-‐emphasized the ban by the signature of the UNHCR Country Representative. It is obvious UNHCR has been promoting machinations tantamount to violations of the principle of non-‐refoulement, which are accompanied with withdrawal of rations and services and with restrictions of income generating opportunities.

In addition, the fact of not responding to our letters of appeal made to UNHCR Protection Unity is leaving us frustrated at the lack of communication. There is a clear assumption of UNHCR Officials that if they remain silent to our claims, we will finally get tired and discouraged to eventually succumb to UNHCR subtle murky persuasive collusions with RPF.

Always with this shady purpose to hold us in limbo, Mr. George KUCHIO and his lieutenants are riding roughshod over our well-‐founded claims of protection fallowing dearth of our physical safety owing to serious threats orchestrated by Rwandan operatives or some Ugandan authorities; let alone women-‐at-‐risk, unaccompanied and separated minors, and survivors of torture and violence.182 This resulted into the assassination of Charles INGABIRE in the night of 30 November to 1 December 2011. Ingabire was put up in May 2010 in the Safe House of UNHCR in Kampala as a measure to grant to him protection over his security which was threatened by Rwandan State Operatives in Uganda. After few months, Mr. George KUCHIO evicted him from the safe house and threw Ingabire into the jaws of death by groundlessly

threats by Rwandan operatives, inter alia; the threat to stop his online journalism inyenyerinews.com after his laptop was grabbed by Rwandan operatives two months before the assassination. In May 2011, we asked Mr. KUCHIO if we would meet criteria for resettlement after being killed or abducted: a question he never responded. Until in the evening of 2 December 2011, Mr. Kuchio continued to deny being aware of the assassination of Ingabire whereas he was informed by Rwandan refugees by telephone in the morning of the same day.183 181 During the meeting with Rwandan refugees on 11 July 2011, Mr. John KILOWOKO, a UNHCR Protection Officer, said that UNHCR is petitioning GoU to lift the ban on cultivation 182 For the survivors of torture and/or violence, committed either by Rwandan Security Agents or Ugandan Security Agents, UNHCR Uganda has requested to the African Center for Treatment of Victims of Torture and Violence (ACTV) to not provide medical reports to Rwandan victims. 183 http://www.bbc.co.uk/gahuza/audio_console.shtml?programme=glak1830



7 December 2011

Page 65 of 90

For the case of Hategekimana Jean Marie who was murdered by a UNHCR driver, Mr. SEMANDA; UNHCR officials resorted to ignore the case and to frighten the parents with forced deportation.

Another case took place in July 2007, when a Rwandan refugee, called Ndayambaje Godfroi was abducted by Ugandan Security Agents and since then Ndayambaje went missing. When his wife, Kankindi Bernadette, approached Ugandan Police for investigation, she was arbitrarily arrested by Ugandan Military, who severely beat her up prior to unwarrantedly detain her at Wandegeya Police Station for nine days. It required intervention of Refugee Law Project and of Amnesty International to release her. When Mr. KUCHIO took office, he forced Mrs. Kankindi, who is nowadays suffering from trauma, to go to live in the camp where she cannot receive any medical assistance, where Rwandans are banned from cultivation and where deportation can be easily carried out. This happened also to the wife of Niyonzima Eric who was killed on 29 September 2010 by Lieutenant RUZIBIZA. These are few cases among other numerous cases.

The utmost problem is that UNHCR is allowing for unconventional mistreatments against Rwandan refugees. Actions that out rightly defy our rights are pursued with the acquiescence and collusion of UNHCR. For example, Rwandan refugees, whose security and stay in Uganda are threatened by Rwandan operatives and in some cases jointly with Ugandan security services agents, are not accorded any protective response by UNHCR; instead the victims are impelled by Mr. KUCHIO to return to Rwanda. Mr. KUCHIO is groundlessly asserting that the factors which actuated their flights do not pertain today. However, he never answered to the question of giving at least one well-‐founded reason to substantiate his rhetorics. UNHCR Protection Unity is aware that we are at risk of:

Immediate or long term threat of refoulement to the country ruled by perpetrators whose atrocities pushed us into exile, and whose current persecutions and attitude anguish us in exile;

Threat of arbitrary arrest and of forced deportation or unwarranted detention fallowing the unwillingness of Ugandan authorities to heed to our claims by insisting that there is no reason to flee Rwanda and in addition, also due to their antagonism against us;

The untenable ilk of asylum in Uganda owing to violations of our human rights and xenophobic attitudes of Ugandan hostile groups whose members are related to RPF adherents; and

Threats to our physical safety and violations of our human rights due to continuous killings, assassinations, espionage and hunts against us by Rwandan State Operatives.

Yet UNHCR is promoting regrettable approaches to refuse to us appropriate attention by leaving us out on a limb and frustrated; a situation which facilitates Rwandan operatives to continue to aggress us. These operatives are facilitated by porous borders and connection they have with UNHCR and Ugandan officials.



7 December 2011

Page 66 of 90

Result of discrimination by UNHCR against Rwandan refugees and condoning RPF atrocities by UNHCR: The body of INGABIRE CHARLES lying down on the floor in Mulago Hospital Mortuary after being gunned down. Ingabire was assassinated after UNHCR rode roughshod over his case and threw him out of the Safe House.

IV.4. CONDONING AND COLLUSION

On 22 July 2010 during the meeting between UNHCR and Urban Rwandan Refugees, Mr. KUCHIO, the UNHCR Senior Protection Officer, admitted that he personally asked to GoU to forcefully deport Rwandan refugees on 14 July 2010. Yet, UNHCR is denying to have been in knowledge of the forced deportation. Moreover, UNHCR is an active participant and partner in Tripartite Commission, in sensitization meetings and in refugee status determination. The participation in the latter contributes in rejections of applications of Rwandan asylum seekers at a very high rate and the rejected



7 December 2011

Page 67 of 90

Rwandans are not provided with any other protective response by UNHCR where it is obvious that they are victims of political reckonings and ties between RPF and Uganda.

Road Map to the premature application and invocation of the cessation clause: Deter Rwandan refugees to get justice: Hategekimana Jean Marie after being intentionally murdered by Semanda; a UNHCR Driver. The parents were threatened with forced deportation to Rwanda if they would raise a voice. It is also important to bear in mind that since March 2009, no Rwandan refugee was granted refugee status on grounds of ethnic discrimination. The GoU is only granting refugee status to the majority on grounds of political opinion and to the very few persons on the grounds of freedom of expression. How an ordinary bloke Rwandan refugee will be able to assign the reasons as to why s/he cannot return to Rwanda basing on political opinion? We are fleeing our country mainly due to the injustice of Gacaca courts, due to annihilative eliminating practices, due to genocide-‐related-‐concocting-‐charges operations of IBUKA, due to anti-‐Hutu stereotypes, due to impossibility to access to justice over the crimes perpetrated by RPF and due to difficult to re-‐access of property. All of these persecutions end in arbitrary arrests and/or extra-‐judicial executions and are only against Hutus and in some cases against moderate Tutsis.



7 December 2011

Page 68 of 90

After being granted of the impunity and partiality by the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda over the crimes they committed, now RPF has used UNHCR to have the hand on survivors and on potential charge witnesses of those atrocities who are under international protection as well as to have a hand on their statements. The subjects will be slowly killed, abducted or interned at a later date after the return. Those who will insist by remaining abroad will be hunted down, abducted and apprehended after the issue of arrest warrants based on bogus charges as long as there will be no international protection for them. Our rights are also violated as Mr. KUCHIO and his lieutenants work in a way of condoning menaces by the Rwandan State Operatives who are killing, abducting, attempting to murder and threatening the safety of Rwandan refugees in Uganda. The UNHCR officials are telling us that there is no protection for Rwandans refugees whose security is threatened by Rwandan operatives as they say that the only solution is to go back to Rwanda. And in some cases, Rwandan refugees who are asking of protection are insulted by UNHCR Protection Officers to be insane. Furthermore, the UNHCR Senior Protection Officer in Uganda, Mr. George Kuchio, and his lieutenants are coercing us to return to a country where our life, safety and freedom will be endangered. These UNHCR officers are repetitively and groundlessly asserting that our refugee status is no longer pertaining and they are saying that the only solution UNHCR has for Rwandan refugees, whose security is directly threatened by Rwandan operatives, is returning to Rwanda.184

184 At the time we were writing this petition, a UNHCR Officer in Nakivale Settlement Centre, called Collin, was officiously spreading unsigned tracts with UNHCR-‐Rwanda logo and untitled and ambiguous papers about the restitution of land in Rwanda. The papers with UNHCR logo holds a sentence which saysparticularity of the migration governing laws in a certain country; it could be a forced deportation to the country



7 December 2011

Page 69 of 90

The truck used by Mr. Semanda to murder Hategekimana. Thereafter, the murder case was covered up by UNHCR and OPM officials only because the victim is a Rwandan refugee.



7 December 2011

Page 70 of 90

IV.5. DISCRIMINATION AND CIRCUMVENTION

UNHCR, to induce to push us to return, has resorted to discrimination against Rwandan refugees. The denial of humanitarian assistance against Rwandan refugees only is arbitrarily and contrarily to the principle of non-‐discrimination in the protection of basic rights. We are completely hopeless and having our backs on the wall. Unable to return to Rwanda, unable to access to Ugandan citizenship, typically not considered eligible for resettlement to a third country; we are caught in a cleft stick as our nationality has become a terrible liability and a factor to be troubled by UNHCR Officials.185 UNHCR-‐implementing partners, in particular INTERAID Uganda, are excluding Rwandan refugees children among people to be granted schooling financial aid. In April 2011, 51 children were granted 80 000 Ugandan shillings each one as a help for schooling needs. All nationalities we In September 2011, Windle Trust, another UNHCR Partner, accorded to other nationalities higher education scholarships, except those of Rwandan origin. Worse still, children, whose parents were either killed or forcefully deported to Rwanda on 14 July 2010, are left out on a limb as UNHCR refused to accord to them any minimal assistance solely because they are of Rwandan origins. To more jeopardize our stay in Uganda, UNHCR-‐Uganda is ordering the medical centers which treated Rwandan refugees of torture injuries to do not provide medical reports, which could be used as evidences in applying for refugee status or any other procedure. Given the discrimination, ill-‐treatments, wantonness, prejudice and mishandling against us currently committed at the hands of UNHCR Officials in Uganda, we are cynical about UNHCR approaches, and we not have any slight confidence and trust in the same officials as they are likely to be also the ones to assess the claims of us; Rwandan refugees who are unable to return owing to our well-‐founded fears of persecutions.

IV.6. PREMATURE AND COMPLETELY UNGROUNDED INVOCATION OF THE CESSATION CLAUSE

The four components of strategy to promote voluntary return and the invocation of the cessation clause, outlined in the letter of 23 December 2009 written by His Excellency Mr.

185 RLP, SSRC, IRRI, Dangerous Impasse, Rwandan Refugees in Uganda. CITIZENSHIP AND DISPLACEMENT IN THE GREAT LAKES REGION. WORKING PAPER NO. 4, JUNE 2010 . Pages 46-‐47



7 December 2011

Page 71 of 90

disrespected during this all period in regard of ill-‐treatments against Rwandan refugees and returnees by UNHCR officials in Uganda and Rwanda.186 The last component, which consists of

was conducted in a way consisting in pushing Rwandan refugees for repatriation against our will and in violating our rights by putting into practice the cessation clause before its promulgation. The voluntary nature of repatriation is being violated as UNHCR officials resorted to push factors and to inducing discriminatory machinations against Rwandan refugees, inter alia, refusing to grant legal protection and resettlement to a third country to Rwandan refugees, to apply the cessation clause before its promulgation, to groundlessly assert that our refugee status is no longer justifiable and reasonable, to menace us with coercive repatriation, to refuse to us of any assistance, to frighten us with officious tracts, etc. The rights of us, Rwandan refugees who are unable to return to Rwanda, are also violated as Mr. KUCHIO and his lieutenants work in a way favoring the Rwandan State Operatives who are killing, abducting, attempting to murder and threatening the safety of Rwandan refugees in Uganda. The UNHCR officials are telling us that there is no protection for Rwandans refugees whose security is threatened by Rwandan operatives as they say that the only solution is to go back to Rwanda. For those who returned to Rwanda, UNHCR-‐Rwanda is doing nothing to integrate them and ensure that return is durable and sustainable. They (returnees) are persecuted forthwith or at a later date. Some of them were tortured, some were abducted, some were interned prior to be or after being subjected to injustice by the judiciary and some were forced to disappearance by Rwandan Security Services. Instead this office is only elaborating pro-‐RPF reports which are prejudicing the International Community and which are being used as get-‐in-‐through-‐the-‐backdoor to help RPF in taking back into its jurisdictions victims of its persecutions and atrocities.187 UNHCR-‐Rwanda is working as a peddling lobbyist machine for RPF.

186 Those four components are:

1. Actively enhancing the voluntary repatriation of Rwandan refugees remaining in countries of asylum; 2. Implementing effective reintegration projects in the country of origin to ensure that return is durable and

sustainable, noting that the number of returnees intending to return have special needs that require specific attention;

3. Securing the rights of Rwandese refugees who would be unable to return to Rwanda; and 4. Working on a road map of actions leading to the invocation of the cessation clause which could take

effect by 31 December 2011. 187 The report elaborated by UNHCR-‐Rwanda, which was entitled

emphasized that, in Rwanda, there the presence of functioning governing authorities, the presence of



7 December 2011

Page 72 of 90

Consequently, many of the returnees are making their way back to Uganda where UNHCR-‐Uganda refuses to receive them and assess their claims: a critical attempt to mislead the International Community that the Paragraph 12 of UNHCR Guidelines on the Application of the Cessation Clause (here after UNHCR Guidelines) was met by pretending that there was large scale spontaneous repatriation of refugees to Rwanda as an indicator of fundamental changes which are occurring in Rwanda.188 These are the actions chosen by UNHCR to work on the road map that led to the premature invocation of the cessation clause. On 18 February 2010, Mr. George KUCHIO convened a meeting with Urban Community of Rwandan Refugees. During the meeting, he said that UNHCR Geneva has thoroughly examined the situation in Rwanda and found conclusive evidences that it is premature to invoke the

to the refugee status of Rwandan Refugees. He said that in Rwanda there are ongoing persecutions on the grounds of ethnic discrimination against Hutus, of political oppression and of complete absence of freedom of expression. He raised also the concerns about tyrannical laws, lack of rights to life, oppressive security services, non-‐independent judiciary, etc. He said that UNHCR would never invoke the cessation clause, unless the RPF Regime puts an end to such kind of persecutions. Mr. KUCHIO promised to inform our community if there are changes before any decision could be taken. Regrettably, the cessation clause was promulgated without that Mr. KUCHIO informed us about fundamental, durable and stable changes that took place between 18 February 2010 and 7 October 2011 when UNHCR and RPF Regime jointly promulgated the invocation of cessation clause to our refugee status. basic structures of administration and the existence of adequate infrastructures to enable residents to exercise their rights to a basic livelihood. This report never commented on serious violations of human rights committed at the hands of the current governing authorities. It never commented about tyrannical oppressive laws which are misused to oppress political opposition and to discriminate against Hutu community. Ipso facto, the report failed to comment about the plaguing injustice by the judiciary which is used as a political whitewash tool over the unspeakable crimes committed at the hands of RPF/RPA/RDF politico-‐military officers and also about how the judiciary is used as a discriminatory repressive tool to annihilate Hutu community and political opponents. Worse still, this report, with the collusion of UNHCR Staffers, failed to speak about the discriminatory impoverishment against Hutu community to the point the victims are unable to exercise their rights to a basic livelihood. It is important to bear in mind that some of UNHCR-‐RWANDA Staffers are RPF adherents who have also committed several crimes and some are taking active role in trumping up charges against innocent civilians in Gacaca Courts and other conventional courts. 188 UNHCR Guidelines Paragraph 12: Large-‐scale spontaneous repatriation of refugees may be an indicator of changes that are occurring or have occurred in the country of origin. Where the return of former refugees would be likely to generate fresh tension in the country of origin, however, this itself could signal an absence of effective, fundamental change. Similarly, where the particular circumstances leading to flight or to non-‐return have changed, only to be replaced by different circumstances which may also give rise to refugee status, Article 1C(5) or (6) cannot be invoked.



7 December 2011

Page 73 of 90

With the aim to leave us caught in a cleft stick, when we ask UNHCR officials about the fundamental durable and stable changes in Rwanda that pushed UNHCR to invoke the cessation clause whereas there are conclusive evidences of ongoing persecutions in Rwanda, they reply to us that they will forward our questions to their supervisors and to UNHCR-‐Rwanda. But until now, the cessation clause was prematurely invoked without giving us an answer to those questions. Instead they opted to resort on vague and ambiguous rhetoric whereas the Paragraph 1 of the UNHCR Guidelines on the Application of the Cessation Clause recommends that this application should be carried out in clearly defined conditions.189

In addition, because UNHCR-‐Uganda Officials are aware that in making assessment of Rwanda, the pseudo-‐motives they are advancing to cease our refugee status are not objective and verifiable190, they avoided to include bona fide Rwandan refugees in Uganda in the consultative process since 2009: a violation of the UNHCR Guidelines Paragraph 25 (iii).191

Prior to strip us of our refugee status and cow us into submission to repatriation, we hope UNHCR will provide to us effective and practical remedies to the following questions:

1. How , to enable citizens to enjoy the rights to livelihoods, could be sustainable whereas the majority of its citizens are impoverished due to overriding ethnic discrimination?

2. Can Rwanda be peaceful while RPF regime continues to be repressive and bellicose, and the majority of Rwandans considers the ruling regime to be illegitimate?

189 UNHCR Guidelines Paragraph 1: The 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees

an individual is determined to be a refugee, their status is maintained unless they fall within the terms of the cessation clauses or their status is cancelled or revoked.1 Under Article 1C of the 1951 Convention, refugee status may cease either through the actions of the refugee(contained in sub-‐paragraphs 1 to 4), such as by re-‐establishment in his or her country of origin,2 or through fundamental changes in the objective circumstances in the country of origin upon which refugee status was based (sub-‐paragraphs 5 and 6). The latter are commonly

elines are concerned only with the latter provisions. 190 UNHCR Guidelines paragraph 25(I): As mentioned earlier, a declaration of general cessation has potentially serious consequences for recognized refugees. It acknowledges loss of refugee status and the rights that accompany that status, and it may contemplate the return of persons to their countries of origin. Thus, the following procedural aspects should be observed: General considerations: (i) In making an assessment of the country of origin, States an make sure in an objective and verifiable way above, this assessment should include consideration of a range of factors, including the general human rights situation. 191 UNHCR Guidelines Paragraph 25 (iii): It is important that both the declaration process and implementation plans to be consultative and transparent, involving in particular UNHCR, given its supervisory role NGOs and refugees should also be included in this consultative processwhere feasible, be facilitated to examine conditions there, as well as an examination of the situation of refugees who have already returned voluntarily.



7 December 2011

Page 74 of 90

3. How should citizens respond when rulers mistake the state to be their personal estate and deprive the overwhelming majority of Rwandans of their rights?192

4. Until when will UNHCR continue to yield to RPF pressures and murky political ambitions whereas it is proved that its pro-‐RPF conclusions are being perceived by RPF as a green light to perpetuate atrocities, genocidal massacres, assassinations and persecutions?

5. How can we return to a country ruled by a sociopathic, ethnocentric, bellicose and callous dictator (General Paul Kagame) who calls us (refugees) human wastes to be excreted? Who regrets to have failed to exterminate us all?

6. How in the future UNHCR will respond to Rwandans where Rwandan refugees, whose refugee status is going to be prematurely ceased by UNHCR, will be among the victims

other inter-‐ethnic mass violence that could be fueled by RPF at any time? (As, on 17 November 2011. Dr. Katrina Lantos said:

).193

UNHCR figures among the members of the International Community who re-‐affirm the pledge by standing by while repressive regimes commit atrocities and by saving the

lives of the people who are prone to genocidal mass killings and also prone to selective assassinations. However, the way UNHCR is backing RPF regime by prematurely invoking the cessation clause is a complete complicity to throw victims in the jaws of the perpetrators who are yet to be held accountable of their crimes. The well documented gross human rights violations that are being committed in Rwanda are sufficient indices to continue grant international protection to survivors who slightly managed to escape the RPF iron hand and seek asylum abroad.194

Contrarily to Paragraph 40 of the UNHCR Note on the Cessation Clause, this premature and ungrounded application of the cessation clause is used as a shortcut by UNHCR to overcome problem of Rwandan refugees marked with failures to come up with effective solution since 1959 in general and in particular, since 1994.195

192 See the speech of General Kagame on 26 November 2011 at Nduba in Gasabo District. General Kagame threatened to kill any Rwandan who may raise the voice for democratic rule and respect of human rights. http://editions-‐sources-‐du-‐nil.over-‐blog.com/article-‐susan-‐rice-‐est-‐malade-‐faut-‐il-‐un-‐cours-‐d-‐education-‐civique-‐pour-‐le-‐president-‐kagame-‐90267903.html 193 http://www.lantosfoundation.org/2011_HRPrize_Katrina_Lantos_Swett_Remarks.asp 194 agraph 8: Given that the application of the cessation clauses would result in the withdrawal of refugee status, the clauses should be interpreted in a restrictive way, taking into account the guidance contained in the UNHCR Handbook on Procedures and Criteria for Determining Refugee Status insufficiently grounded application of the cessation clauses can have extremely serious consequences as refugees who need to remain in the country of asylum may be forced to do so illegally, or may be threatened with refoulement. 195 : Cessation of refugee status, however, should not be used as a short-‐cut to overcome an intractable refugee problem. Where an



7 December 2011

Page 75 of 90

The UNHCR Cessation Guidelines set out three basic conditions to be met in order to justify cessation of refugee status under Article 1C (5). Changes must be fundamental, stable and durable, and effective protection must be available in the country of origin. For this very fact, in Rwanda, there are not even temporary changes. What is reigning in Rwanda, under RPF dictatorship, is continuity of persecutions in a subtle way. Many Rwandans, including recent returnees, are fleeing the country because of these forms of persecutions. UNHCR recommends that changes must be of a fundamental nature so as to allow a person to re-‐avail him-‐ or herself of the protection of the country of origin. If a particular cause of fear of persecution existed, the elimination of such cause is important, but all the relevant factors must be taken into consideration as circumstances in a country having led to persecution often are closely inter-‐linked. The oppressiveness of security services, which are supposed to grant physical protection to citizens, is linked to political oppression, to absence of personal and collective freedoms, and to ethnic discrimination against Hutus. This is the environment that UNHCR considered to have changed to stability and to where to throw us.

Changes in Rwanda, which are promulgated by RPF adherents and foreign backers who have infiltrated UNHCR, need to be given much thorough examination before to call for the application of the cessation clause. Otherwise, UNHCR-‐Geneva risks to be misled that the situation is stable. This is especially important because RPF took power through bloodbath and it continues to believe in bellicose violence which is masked by graft and corruption. This nature of RPF Regime is blocking the process of genuine reconciliation let alone political stability. It is important to assess the situation in Rwanda in connection with Paragraph 14 of UNHCR Guidelines.196 Under such circumstances the subtle form of discrimination against Hutus should be carefully examined and the human rights situation has to be assessed in connection as well as political rights. Here, persons with integrity, who may be involved in such assessment and examination, should be very protected by the International Community because they will be potential target of RPF killing machine and/or victims of trumped up charges.

UNHCR-‐Uganda has never assessed our claims in an objective and verifiable way. Consequently they are abusing their authority by asserting that the situation which justified the granting of our refugee status has ceased to exist. The availability of effective protection in Rwanda, in

unjustified or premature application of a cessation clause results in the forced return of any refugee, the consequences could be extremely serious, leading to further displacement within the country of origin or renewed displacement outside, as well as risks to life and personal security. 196 UNHCR Guidelines Paragraph 14: A longer period of time will need to have elapsed before the durability of change can be tested where the changes have taken place violently, for instance, through the overthrow of a regime. Under the latter circumstances, the human rights situation needs to be especially carefully assessed. The process of national reconstruction must be given sufficient time to take hold and any peace arrangements with opposing militant groups must be carefully monitored. This is particularly relevant after conflicts involving different ethnic groups, since progress towards genuine reconciliation has often proven difficult in such cases. Unless national reconciliation clearly starts to take root and real peace is restored, political changes which have occurred may not be firmly established.



7 December 2011

Page 76 of 90

particular issues of safety, in addition of new risks of persecution, and rights to a basic livelihood have not been considered by the UNHCR. In practice, this murky approach has, since 2009, led to the systematic covert revocation of our refugee status. The widespread oppression of security service and discriminatory dictatorial ilk of RPF Regime are not regarded as relevant arguments against the application of cessation clause by UNHCR. It is making victims of RPF persecutions to believe that UNHCR is one of these organizations and institutions that are backing RPF.

persecutions in Rwanda. Unfortunately, no appropriate neutral analysis was made to cover all factors which had made our fear of persecution well-‐founded. Typically, this is supposed to mean a far-‐reaching political change, including democratic elections, reforms of non-‐oppressive structures of the State, to hold accountable perpetrators whose atrocities pushed us into exile and [re]establishment of protection against the actions which caused us to leave. There are examples in the existing RPF Regime mal-‐practice in which this approach is explicitly suffocated. For instance, state institutions are neither functioning in accordance with the rule of law nor in compliance with human rights obligations nor general physical and social safety. That is why the cessation of our refugee status is premature and is a fragrant violation of the most basic human rights and humanitarian principles because the recurrence of previous dangers of persecution and new dangers of persecutions are undoubted.197

It is concluded by all persons, organizations and states characterized with integrity that it is cessation clause in the case of refugees

originating from Rwanda, in view of the highly oppressive actions of all state structures under RPF Regime, as well as of the continuing external displacement due to violence, to torture and inhuman degrading cruel mistreatments, to political oppression, to ethnic discrimination, to tyrannical oppressive laws, to complete absence of freedom of expression and of association, to dearth of right to life, and to serious human rights violations.

IV.7. QUESTIONS WE NEED A CLARIFICATION FROM UNHCR

The UNHCR Executive Committee Conclusion No. 69, Paragraph 2, reads that the application of the cessation clause in the 1951 Convention rests exclusively with the Contracting States.198 And the UNHCR Executive Committee Conclusion No. 69, Paragraph 5(a) says: "in taking any decision on application of the Ceased Circumstances Cessation Clause, States must carefully assess the fundamental character of the changes in the country of nationality or origin 197 See Letter of Rwandan refugees in Uganda to His Excellency Mr. Antonio Guterres. Page 4, 30 October 2009. 198 The UNHCR Executive Committee Conclusion No. 69, Paragraph 2: Taking into account that the application of the cessation clause(s) in the 1951 Convention rests exclusively with the Contracting States, but that the High Commissioner should be appropriately involved, in keeping with the role of the High Commissioner in supervising the application of the provisions of the 1951 Convention as provided for in Article 35 of that Convention.



7 December 2011

Page 77 of 90

including the general human rights situation, as well as the particular cause of fear of persecution, in order to make sure in an objective and verifiable way that the situation which justified the granting of refugee status has ceased to exist".199 In the UNHCR Guidelines Paragraph 25 (ii), it says:" Countries of asylum are the ones to bear the burden to demonstrate there has been a fundamental, stable and durable change in country of origin and that the invocation of Article 1C (5) is appropriate. 200 Yet, in the joint communiqué of UNHCR and RPF Regime dated 7 October 2011 last paragraph, it says: " UNHCR will recommend States that they invoke the cessation clause by 31 December 2011 effective on 30 June 2012. And in the e-‐mail of 1 August 2011, a Senior Ugandan Officer in charge of refugees wrote: "cessation clause and eventual loss of status is not a Uganda thing, it is global and we wait to be advised." So;

1. Why is UNHCR actively calling and applying the cessation where as it is an exclusive job of states, where as the States are the ones to bear the burden?201

199 The UNHCR Executive Committee Conclusion No. 69, Paragraph 5 (a) Stresses that, in taking any decision on application of the cessation clauses based on "ceased circumstances", States must carefully assess the fundamental character of the changes in the country of nationality or origin, including the general human rights situation, as well as the particular cause of fear of persecution, in order to make sure in an objective and verifiable way that the situation which justified the granting of refugee status has ceased to exist; 200UNHCR Guidelines Paragraph 25 ( ii): The burden rests on the country of asylum to demonstrate that there has been a fundamental, stable and durable change in the country of origin and that invocation of Article 1C(5) or (6) is appropriate. There may be instances where certain groups should be excluded from the application of general cessation because they remain at risk of persecution. 201 Article 35 of The 1951 Geneva Convention only give UNHCR a supervisory role that limits it to a passive role of declaring whether States have or have not fulfilled their obligations, not an active role of recommending that States take such actions as invoking cessation. Article 35 of Geneva Convention: -‐ Co-‐operation of the national authorities with the United Nations 1. The Contracting States undertake to co-‐operate with the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, or any other agency of the United Nations which may succeed it, in the exercise of its functions, and shall in particular facilitate its duty of supervising the application of the provisions of this Convention. 2. In order to enable the Office of the High Commissioner or any other agency of the United Nations which may succeed it, to make reports to the competent organs of the United Nations, the Contracting States undertake to provide them in the appropriate form with information and statistical data requested concerning: ( a ) The condition of refugees, ( b ) The implementation of this Convention, and (c) Laws, regulations and decrees which are, or may hereafter be, in force relating to refugees.



7 December 2011

Page 78 of 90

2. If the application of the Cessation clause rests exclusively with Contracting States, why UNHCR is recommending states to invoke the cessation?

3. Has UNHCR turned into a lobbying group for RPF Regime? 4. Why Uganda, as a Contracting state, is waiting to be advised where as it is a burden of

Uganda to demonstrate those fundamental, durable and stable changes? 5. Has any Contracting state carefully assessed the situation in Rwanda or it is UNHCR

which is elaborating pro-‐RPF condoning reports? 6. Why none from GoU has talked to us about their assessment of the situation in

Rwanda where as it is their burden?

Fur nio Guterres of 23 December 2009 to the then Rwandan Minister of Local Government, Mr. James Musoni. Mr. Guterres wrote that he has designated a coordinator within UNHCR to facilitate the process of invocation of the Cessation Clause and to provide the focused leadership and support which is required.

1. Who is that coordinator? 2. If the coordinator is already designated, why UNHCR cannot inform us about his/her

activities where her/his assessment and decision could save our lives or could expose us to the risks of death?

Still, the joint communiqué of RPF Regime and UNHCR of 7 December 2011 said that scopes and modalities of the implementation of the cessation declaration were to be communicated in fallowing weeks;

1. Why now after 2 months UNHCR has not yet communicated to us about those scopes and modalities?

IV.8. DIRE CONSEQUENCES OF THIS PREMATURE INVOCATION OF THE CESSATION CLAUSE

To have positive sequels of any invocation of the cessation clause, the country of origin should be first of all be under democratic leadership with authorities who value the basic human rights. Unfortunately Rwanda under RPF Regime, with General Kagame at the top, is totally reflecting the opposite as Dr. Theogene Rudasingwa said: unity of Rwandans, democracy, respect of human rights and other fundamental freedoms, the rule of law, power sharing, integrated and accountable security institutions with a national character, and resolving the problem of refugees once and for all. That is what is lacking in

202 To emphasize that this premature implementation of cessation clause will end in dire consequences, it is neither a result of expectation nor of prediction. It is instead based on

202 Daily Monitor: Ex-‐aide accuses Kagame over death of Habyarimana, by Tabu Butagira. Wednesday, 5 October 2011. Page 29.



7 December 2011

Page 79 of 90

factual substantive evidences, given the RPF policy to maintain hegemony by oppressive dictatorship and violent ethnic discrimination. The prevailing situation in Rwanda reflects the contrary of the UNHCR pivotal pillars to articulate that the invocation and implementation of the ceased circumstances cessation clause would have constructive and positive repercussions. In Rwanda, there are not even temporary changes, let alone fundamental changes. What is prevailing in Rwanda, it is the continuity and exacerbation of persecutions on the ground of ethnic discrimination, political oppression and suffocation of freedom of expression. This is further more epitomized by the shortcomings, which occurred whenever -‐since July 1994-‐ UNHCR endorsed forced deportation, refoulement, violent return and pushes for repatriation against Rwandan refugees, inter alia, genocidal mass killings against Hutus, selective assassinations against both moderate Tutsis and Hutus, family separations, internment, torture, disappearances, etc. The history will surely repeat itself this time too because the previous risks of persecutions have not disappeared and because the current holders of power in RPF Regime are the ones who orchestrated persecutions and perpetrated crimes which confine us in exile, and the perpetrators are being promoted, rewarded and handed more power, which they are abusing, instead of being held accountable of their crimes. The first consequence of this premature and ungrounded invocation of the cessation clause was the assassination of Charles INGABIRE. If the threat of the application of the cessation clause was not around the corner, INGABIRE would have been granted resettlement to a third country as a measure to grant his security which was threatened by Rwandan State Operatives. Unfortunately, UNHCR was eager to prematurely apply the cessation clause and they resorted

203 Another consequence of this premature invocation of the cessation clause will be the cynical misapplication of the third sentence of Article 1 C (5) of the 1951 Geneva Convention.204 UNHCR officials in Uganda, who have been therefore applying the cessation clause before its promulgation, will groundlessly dismiss our-‐well founded fears of persecutions upon return. Then they will assert that they withdrew our refugee status because we refused to avail ourselves of the protection of country of origin prior to call on GoU to resort on refoulement as Mr. Kuchio did against Rwandan refugees and asylum seekers who were refouled on 14 July

203 UNHCR Complicity Cited in Murder of Rwanda Journalist. http://salem-‐news.com/articles/december032011/rwanda-‐death-‐threats-‐tk.php 204 1951 Geneva Convention Article 1 C (5): This Convention shall cease to apply to any person falling under the terms of section A if: S/He can no longer, because the circumstances in connection with which he has been recognized as a refugee have ceased to exist, continue to refuse to avail himself of the protection of the country of his nationality; Provided that this paragraph shall not apply to a refugee falling under section A(1) of this article who is able to invoke compelling reasons arising out of previous persecution for refusing to avail himself of the protection of the country of nationality;

http://salem-news.com/articles/december032011/rwanda-death-threats-tk.php



7 December 2011

Page 80 of 90

2010: an action which ended in deaths of at least 15 innocent Rwandans, refugees and asylum seekers alike. And UNHCR-‐Uganda lied to the world by peddling fabricated version which says that only two people died attempting to leap from the trucks. Therefore, those trucks deported our fellows to Rwanda in complete absence of safety and dignity. Given the way UNHCR has been disrespecting the four components outlined in the letter of 23

205 the practices to implement this premature application of the cessation clause are promoted in a manner inconsistent with the goal of durable solutions. Given also the ambiguous confusing terms used by UNHCR officials in Uganda vis-‐à-‐vis this premature application of the cessation clause and the shady obscure motives around it, this premature and ungrounded application of the cessation clause will result in uncertain status for us as we are being compelled to return to a country ruled by authorities who are perpetrators of crimes, of atrocities and of persecutions which pushed us into flight and which are languishing us in exile. As it happened to Rwandan refuges recently taken back to Rwanda, after this premature invocation of the cessation clause, the lucky ones to manage to escape RPF iron hand will be confined in cycles of return and flight: a breach to the Paragraph 6 of the UNHCR Guidelines.206 This premature application of cessation will place us in an extremely vulnerable situation. It will lead to the loss of our confidence in UNHCR, to the tragic loss of rights attached to refugee status, to risk our life and limb and to return to a country where living conditions are uncertain in regard of ongoing impoverishing discrimination against Hutus. The fact that UNHCR never requires our consent and never considers our viewpoint and given the discriminatory ill-‐treatments against us by UNHCR-‐Uganda Officials; there is undoubted unfair termination of the rights which accompany our refugee status which will confine us in a vulnerable situation to finally be devoured by the perpetrators (RPF) who are looking for any possible way to harm our welfare as there are uncontroversial clear perspectives that UNHCR officials in Uganda have no goal to secure our rights as Rwandan refugees who are unable to return to Rwanda. 205 See Sub-‐Chapter IV.6. of this petition. 206 UNHCR Guidelines Paragraph 6: When interpreting the cessation clauses, it is important to bear in mind the broad durable solutions context of refugee protection informing the object and purpose of these numerous Executive Committee Conclusions affirm that the 1951 Convention and principles of refugee protection look to durable solutions for refugees. Accordingly, cessation practices should be developed in a manner consistent with the goal of durable solutions. Cessation should therefore not result in persons residing in a host State with an uncertain status. It should not result either in persons being compelled to return to a volatile situation, as this would undermine the likelihood of a durable solution and could also cause additional or renewed instability in an otherwise improving situation, thus risking future refugee flows. Acknowledging these considerations ensures refugees do not face involuntary return to situations that might again produce flight and a need for refugee status. It supports the principle that conditions within the country of origin must have changed in a profound and enduring manner before cessation clauses can be applied.



7 December 2011

Page 81 of 90

V. RECOMMENDATIONS TO UNHCR

1. Given the substantive fact, based on conclusive evidences, that this invocation of the Ceased Circumstances Cessation Clause to our refugee status by 31 December 2011 and its implementation by 30 June 2012 is premature and completely ungrounded;

2. Given the ongoing persecutions on the grounds of political oppression, of ethnic discrimination against Hutus and of complete absence of freedoms of expression and association; all committed at the hands of RPF Regime and which are therefore generating new refugees who are currently fleeing persecutions akin to those we fled;

3. Given the violation of voluntary nature of repatriation, especially by UNHCR Staff Members in Uganda, whereby the term has been replaced by the terms

in the mismanagement of repatriation of Rwandan refugees;

We request to UNHCR to unconditionally and forthwith suspend this premature and ungrounded invocation of the cessation clause to our refugee status.

to our refugee

status in the future, UNHCR should make sure and prove to us and to the International Community that:

1. Before calling for return, there is sustainable, durable and fundamental establishment of peace in Rwanda.

2. UNHCR has called on UN Secretary General, on UN General Assembly and on UN Security Council to appoint an affective neutral investigating body over the crimes committed by RPF and its wings as well as its allies inside and outside Rwanda since October 1990 up to date. The investigating body should be given powers to summon any witnesses, regardless of their position, to testify. Its terms of reference should include making recommendations on any action to be taken against those responsible and prevent a recurrence of the abuses. The findings of the inquiry should be made public as soon as they have been completed. The findings should then be submitted to a competent, independent and impartial court of law to try those found by the inquiry to have been involved in perpetrating the crimes. Failure by the UNHCR to call for an open inquiry into those crimes and the promotion by UNHCR of premature invocation of the cessation clause, by leaving the victims at the mercy of perpetrators, are to be interpreted by us and other credible members of the International Community as indicating UNHCR approval and condoning of violence by RPF against innocent people.

3. UNHCR has publically given the information about the sequel of the Rwandan refugees victims captured and brought in by Zairians during the operations of man hunt by paid



7 December 2011

Page 82 of 90

bounty by UNHCR in Ex-‐Zaire; the sequel of the victims forcefully deported to Rwanda from Gabon by airplanes hired by UNHCR; the sequel of Rwandan refugees forcefully deported to Rwanda in October 2007 from Nakivale (Kibati Group) and the sequel of Rwandan refugees and asylum seekers forcefully deported to Rwanda on 14 July 2010 from Nakivale and Kyaka II settlement Centers.

4. ot premature and ungrounded; and moreover, its application is not used as a shortcut to overcome the intractable problem of Rwandan refugees.

5. The exercise is not tainted by and promoted following murky political machinations in order to avoid the perpetrators (RPF) to have a hand on victims (Rwandan refugees).

6. Rwandan refugees, whose well-‐founded claims of protection were wantonly and baselessly rejected by Mr. George KUCHIO and his lieutenants prior to declare to them that are not people of concern by groundlessly writing that their reasons of flight are no longer pertaining, get another appropriate assessment of their claims in order to avoid the recurrence of the forced deportation and killings of 14 July 2010 whereby the victims were previously declared by UNHCR as not being people of concern too.

7. Mr. Kuchio is not resorting to push factors by unlawfully and unreasonably stripping us of our refugee status by groundlessly declaring that our refugee status is no longer justifiable and reasonable prior to ironically ill-‐advising us to return to a country ruled by a regime which is sending operatives to kill us even in the country of refuge. Hence, to make sure that every decision taken for Rwandan refugees and asylum seekers in Uganda is for granting our security, our safety, our dignity, our rights and our legitimate freedom.

8. UNHCR-‐Uganda Protection Unity Staff Members are not insulting us to be insane. 9. Rwandan refugees in Uganda are re-‐enlisted for resettlement to a third country as a

durable solution because their stay in Uganda is untenable fallowing direct and continuous threats to their physical safety. The list should also include Rwandan refugees who are in the category of women-‐at-‐risk, of unaccompanied and separated minors, and of victims of torture and violence.

10. Children, whose parents were either killed or forcefully deported to Rwanda on 14 July 2010, get appropriate assistance.

11. Our knowledge, views, standpoint and decisions are respected and taken into consideration as long as are based on conclusive evidences and are reflecting the version of reality.

12. UNHCR is not yielding in to the pressure of state members notwithstanding their economic and political power. Instead UNHCR should call on these members to share the burden by looking for a real durable solution to the intractable problem of Rwandan refugees.

13. Investigations and interviews made by UNHCR-‐Rwanda are not monitored by RPF and are not conducted by pro-‐RPF moles that have infiltrated UNHCR.

14. Before initiating ceased circumstances cessation to our refugee status, the sources of information upon which it draws are broad and are including information from foreign



7 December 2011

Page 83 of 90

ministries and diplomatic missions of democratic neutral countries and organizations, from specialized non-‐government organizations (like Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, Refugee Law Project, International Refugee Rights Initiative, Reporters Sans Frontières, Social Science Research Council, Fahamu Refugee Program, Jesuit Refugee Service, Ligue des Droits de la persone dans la Région des Grands Lacs, Center for Static and International Studies, Center de Lutte contre Injustice et au Rwanda), from scholars and experts on Rwanda ( like Dr. Barbara Harrell-‐Bond, Peter Erlinder, Chris Dolan, Chrispus Moses Okello, Keneth Roth, Bill Frelick, Merrilles Smith, Willy Mukendi, Dr. Nkiko Nsengimana, Filip Reytnjens, Dr. Theogene Rudasingwa, Joseph Matata, Jenniffer G. Cooke, Joseph Sebarenzi Kabuye, Olivia Buenos, Pierre Péan, Dismas Nkunda, Timothy Longman,Godwin Buwa Mindrea , etc), from the independent effective credible press and from testimonies of Rwandan refugees with conclusive evidences.207

15. The Cessation Clause is invoked after the erection in Rwanda of security forces which should use the United Nations Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials and the United Nations Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials as basic texts for the training of security personnel in human rights, in addition to training about the basic humanitarian standards contained in the Geneva Conventions. The Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials stipulates that law enforcement officials (whether police or military) should respect and protect human dignity and defend and safeguard human rights. In addition, members of the security forces should receive training in international human rights standards and in the provisions of national legislation both concerning the use of firearms and force, and concerning detention procedures and the treatment of prisoners.

16. UNHCR has worked effectively to put an end on inhumane treatments we are inflicted to, inter alia, reduction in or denial of food rations, ban on access to land for cultivation, wanton denial of protection, arbitrary arrests and detentions, push for repatriation, torture, arbitrary detentions, abductions, starvation, discrimination against us, ungrounded rejections of our application for refugee status, to ride roughshod over our serious concerns of protection by UNHCR Protection Unity, forced deportation, verbal abuse, killings, family separations, money extortions, threat to forced deportation, collective incrimination etc.

17. UNHCR has stopped from ordering other organizations to withdraw or reduce assistance to us. As it did with World Food Program to reduce food, with Windle Trust to withdraw educational assistance, with ACTV to refuse to provide to us medical reports, etc.

18. UNHCR provides clear information to us about the object and purpose of every exercise (screening, assessment, sensitization, repatriation, application of the cessation clause, meetings, etc). Here, UNHCR should also support NGOs to work with us to ensure impartial information.

207 If a fair hearing is provided to us, we can introduce general evidence (like this petition) from several credible sources, as well as evidences concerning our own situation, such us personal testimony and testimony or letters from friends and family members.



7 December 2011

Page 84 of 90

19. UNHCR has rejected the RPF Regime application for a seat within the UNHCR Executive Committee. This application may be reviewed in the future once our homeland is under a democratic and non-‐oppressive government which is no longer threatening the security of Rwandan refugees living abroad and which is granting successful, durable and stable return of refugees.

20. UNHCR has established a procedure for an independent review of the current premature and completely ungrounded invocation of the cessation clause by taking into consideration the question of facts and law.208

21. UNHCR should first of all make public the findings of the report elaborated by Robert Gersony and ensure that the culprits are prosecuted and that the victims are compensated.

22. UNHCR should take into consideration and stick to all four pre-‐conditions for UNHCR to participate in voluntary repatriation exercise.

23. UNHCR should make sure that all cases of crimes committed against Rwandan refugees in Uganda are investigated and the investigations are concluded. The culprits who are responsible should be brought before justice and victims compensated. The UNHCR Staff Members who are accomplices in covering up the cases should also be prosecuted.

24. UNHCR should conduct meticulous investigation into the practices of discrimination against Rwandan refugees by some of its Staff Members. And those who found guilty should see their contracts ended prior to pursue them into a court of law as a way to put and und on culture of impunity.

25. UNHCR has thoroughly and clearly described categories of persons who are particularly in need of protection. Every case should be examined on its individual merits for the application of the cessation clause. Among those who should be considered for special attention are:

(1) Members of the political opposition, including members of political parties both inside and outside Rwanda;

(2) Persons associated with, or imputed to have been associated with, former governments of Rwanda and their family members;

(3) Persons fearing victimization within the Gacaca Community Justice process due to their particular circumstances;

(4) Persons who, or whose family members, have previously suffered egregious human rights violations perpetrated by RPF, inter alia, crimes against humanity, war crimes, genocide crimes, torture, internment, rape, illegal appropriation, assassination, murder, etc.

(5) Eye-‐witnesses of atrocities committed by RPF; (6) Victims and potential victims of persecutions on ground of ethnic discrimination

against Hutus as well as moderate Tutsis who rebut RPF ethnocentric policies; (7) Aspirants of freedom of expression, of association, etc.

208 See also Fahamu Networks for Social Justice, Fahamu Refugee Programme. Rwanda: Cessation of Refugee Status is Unwarranted. Memorandum of Fact and Laws. September 20, 2011



7 December 2011

Page 85 of 90

(8) Persons with the aim and intention to sue before a court of law RPF politico-‐military officers.

Hence we would like to ask UNHCR to call for the application of cessation clause after there is in Rwanda a government which is: I. Democratically elected in transparency where the modernization of the nation goes in

pair with democratic control which is exercised through a balance of power and an educated electorate informed through free advanced media.

II. In addition of accepting responsibility of RPF for carrying out impartial investigations into past killings of civilians by RPF, it is urgent that the government will set up a commission of inquiry with specific responsibility to investigate reports of human rights violations committed by RPF both inside and outside of Rwanda. The commission of inquiry should be composed of people known for their independence and impartiality and should be asked to investigate the allegations mentioned in this petition and those reported elsewhere, either published by other organizations or the media, or made by private individuals. The commission could also ask United Nations investigators to assist in carrying the inquiries. All investigations should be consistent with the international standards to prevent recurrence of genocide, extrajudicial, arbitrary and summary killings.

III. Ordering RPF politico-‐military officers and state agents not to interfere in Gacaca Proceedings and trials by Conventional Courts.

IV. Ordering all police, military and state agents to refrain from conducting unlawful arrests and detentions. The government should prosecute security agents suspected of such conduct and compensate persons unlawfully arrested and detained. The security forces should desist from ill-‐treating any citizen, including political opponents, and should investigate all allegations of such behaviour, including the use of any kind of torture mentioned in this petition.

V. Is not denying or explaining away, without thorough independent investigation, allegations of serious human rights violations by its security forces. Instead, as matter of priority, the government should be placing its security forces, which have responsibility for arrests and detentions, under effective judicial and administrative control to comply with national and international law and accountable for their actions to the courts under the rule of law.

VI. Has stopped the policy of using camps for so-‐amps and ensure, where possible, that

community service is performed in the local communities, rather than in camps, to facilitate reintegration of prisoners into their communities.



7 December 2011

Page 86 of 90

VII. Ensuring that convicted prisoners and persons participating in community service are released as soon as their sentence has been served and compensate persons not released on time;

VIII. lived through the genocide and were targeted or lost family members (i) because either they are Tutsi or their relatives were Tutsi or (ii) because they opposed the killings or tried to protect Tutsis; ensure that all such survivors are eligible for the government-‐run program of assistance to genocide survivors (provided they meet the other requisite criteria).

IX. Providing victims of sexual violence with trauma counseling and other assistance programs.

X. Ordering credible investigations and allow prosecution of members of the RPF responsible for war crimes, crimes of genocide and crimes against humanity committed inside or outside of Rwanda

XI. Ensuring that any new allegations of genocide are properly reviewed by trained prosecutors and judges before a person is prosecuted in the conventional courts.

XII. Verifying that no person has been prosecuted twice for the same crime and review all convictions where a person was tried both before a gacaca jurisdiction and a conventional court, or in at least two different gacaca jurisdictions in connection with the same events to identify and rectify violations of double jeopardy.

XIII. Reviewing all cases in which Gacaca Courts convicted persons solely for their status of being a Hutu; confirm that each case contains adequate evidence of intent and criminal conduct to support the conviction. The government should compensate the victims of wrongful detention and unlawful arrest as it is required by Article 9(5) of the ICCPR.209

XIV. Drawing up lists of damages suffered by victims of all killings since October 1990 (including bodily injured, loss of relatives and related costs) and to pass them on to a government compensation fund which is yet to be established.

XV. Has implemented a judicial system and police which, in their turn, presume innocence, protect the rights of detainees and grant right to a fair trial for persons accused of any crime.

XVI.

law that allows the government to deter hate speech where needed, but also protects the right of freedom of expression enshrined in international conventions. Such a law would contribute to enabling an environment for the fulfillment of other human rights. To achieve this, the review must encompass other legislation that impacts on freedom of expression

to ensure that other laws are not misused in its place. Legal amendments and government commitments that should be only limited on paper but also there is a must of undertaking enough

209 ICCPR Article 9 (5): Anyone who has been the victim of unlawful arrest or detention shall have an enforceable right to compensation.



7 December 2011

Page 87 of 90

initiatives to stem the chilling effect of current legislation. This will require public statements from the government, as well as a review of the cases of individuals

demonstrating a new approach to freedom of expression. There is therefore an urgent need for Rwanda to engage in a much more honest appraisal of its history, including the 1994 genocide and violence that preceded and followed it. This must translate into equal access to justice for all regardless of ethnicity or other factors, and the reform of the law and practice related to the current

obligations, but would seem to exacerbate the ill the RPF Regime purports to treat.210 XVII. Instructs to its officials, other than the persecution, to avoid commenting on the guilt or

innocence of individuals prosecuted under revised hate speech laws before the cases come to trial. The government should make sure that RPF politico-‐military officers who are guilty of hate speeches and practices are held responsible.

XVIII. Is ensuring freedom and security of workers of human rights groups in Rwanda, such as LIPRODHOR, LDGL, Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, Reporters Sans Frontières, etc. the government should also allow other groups which could help in monitoring successful and durable reintegration in Rwanda, such as Refugee Law Project, IRRI, Fahamu Refugee Program, Jesuit Refugee Service, etc.

XIX. Releases all children unfairly sentenced under the current genocide ideology law and ensures that children who could be found guilty under the revised hate speech law are not imprisoned. Instead, they are re-‐educated, rehabilitated and counseled in a constructive manner.

XX. Has already released all current political prisoners and opened real political and democratic space. The government should have built truly national institutions that are genuinely independent of the ruling party and that are efficiently functioning according to the rule of law. The judicial system should be credible and impartial to help adjudicate fairly political, social and economic tensions.

XXI. Is honouring its international human rights obligations, including those within the African human rights system that refer to the rights of returning populations. Article 5 of the Organisation of African Unity (OAU) Convention Governing the Specific Problems of Refugees in Africa (OAU Refugee Convention),211 for example, sets outs a framework for

210 RLP, SSRC, IRRI, Dangerous Impasse, Rwandan Refugees in Uganda. CITIZENSHIP AND DISPLACEMENT IN THE GREAT LAKES REGION. WORKING PAPER NO. 4 JUNE 2010 Page 4. 211 Article 5 of 1969 OAU Convention:

1. The essentially voluntary character of repatriation shall be respected in all cases and no refugee shall be repatriated against his will.

2. The country of asylum, in collaboration with the country of origin, shall make adequate arrangements for the safe return of refugees who request repatriation.

3. The country of origin, on receiving back refugees, shall facilitate their resettlement and grant them the full rights and privileges of nationals of the country, and subject them to the same obligations.

4. Refugees who voluntarily return to their country shall in no way be penalized for having left it for any of the reasons giving rise to refugee situations. Whenever necessary, an appeal shall be made through national information media and through the Administrative Secretary-‐General of the OAU, inviting



7 December 2011

Page 88 of 90

privileges of nationals of the country. XXII. Is putting in place measures that also fulfill the more detailed undertakings, inter alia,

mechanisms for settling disputes relating to the property of returnees, ensuring security and protection of returnees, political rights of returnees, justice over crimes perpetrated by the current regime, compensations to returnees who suffered body injuries, torture, properties destruction, loss of family members, and improving the lives of returnees

nt policy. XXIII. Is providing to UNHCR and NGOs adequate freedom to carry out their activities and also

political support to ensure the effective operations of returnees monitoring and assistance mechanism in community hills at least for a period of 5 years. That government should also be supported to take vigorous steps to ensure adequate protection for those who wish to return to our motherland and to strengthen the security for returning refugees.

XXIV. Has reformed the law surrounding property, land and inheritance and restitution for confiscated land either by RPF-‐backed individuals or by the RPF Regime itself.

XXV. Grants that returning refugees are not prosecuted for statements made while they were in exile and protected under the ICCPR.212

XXVI. Restituting the land to owners whose lands were unlawfully appropriated by RPF politico-‐military officers or by RPF-‐backed individuals, in particular those who were victimized during the ethnic cleansing massacres.

XXVII. Is allowing to unearth and burry in dignity bones of victims of RPF massacres, whether inside or outside the country. Their relatives should also have right to remembrance, to mourn and to access to justice. All barriers to prevent members of Hutu from having access to justice should be lifted. Furthermore, Gacaca Procedures should be reviewed to allow really participation of communities by ensuring independence and competence of judges. All interference of politicians should be punished and Gacaca Courts should also deal with the crimes committed by RPF. Gacaca Jurisdictions should also work in a way to reconcile Rwandan society.

XXVIII. Shares real power with all Rwandan composing groups and make sure that the democratically elected formal government is holding real power. The clique of Tutsis around Kagame should be dismantled and its members pursued into the court of law over power abuses, atrocities, grafts, and other crimes they committed.

refugees to return home and giving assurance that the new circumstances prevailing in their country of origin will enable them to return without risk and to take up a normal and peaceful life without fear of being disturbed or punished, and that the text of such appeal should be given to refugees and clearly explained to them by their country of asylum.

5. Refugees who freely decide to return to their homeland, as a result of such assurances or on their own initiative, shall be given every possible assistance by the country of asylum, the country of origin, voluntary agencies and international and intergovernmental organizations, to facilitate their return.

212 Amnesty International. SAFER TO STAY SILENT. The Chilling Effect of



7 December 2011

Page 89 of 90

XXIX. Has put an end to all forms of annihilating Hutu community and eliminating its members, inter alia, mass killings, internment, collective incrimination, discrimination, stratification, swirl of guilt, heart searching, recrimination, enslavement, impoverishment etc. The government should make sure that the ongoing hate campaign by RPF to sow ethnic animosity is cut out and the campaigners are brought before an independent effective court of law.

XXX. Has set up a commission of truth and reconciliation which will really working for the unity of Rwandans by taking into consideration all victims and by avoiding recurrence of further inter-‐community killings. The commission should make sure that the ruling

should ensure that memorials are held in such way to prevention of further violence, of reconstruction and of healing.

XXXI. Is allowing free political space and democratic elections. The government should also respect the independence of institutions, moreover, the Legislative and the Judiciary. Political parties should work freely without interference of the ruling party into internal affairs. The government should unconditionally release all political prisoners and let them enjoy their political and civic rights provided by the ICCPR. Hence, the economic benefits should be evenly shared among all Rwandans regardless of their political orientations or their ethnic belonging.

XXXII. Grants the holding of free and transparent elections. The elections should be conducted in a climate free of fraud, ballot stuffing, manipulation of the process, intimidations, assassinations, forced disappearance, abductions, etc.

XXXIII. Is creating an environment where freedom of expression and of association is respected and promoted in a legitimate way to ensure free society. The media, civil society and NGOs should have the rights to work without any straightjacket censorship from government officials.

XXXIV. Has stopped all forms of torture and inhuman degrading treatments outlined in Sub-‐Chapter II.8.

XXXV. Has prepared Gacaca Courts in a very though-‐out way to make the proposal promising, locally owned, containing the seeds of reconciliation and potentially leading to decrease in the current prison population.

XXXVI. Has erected security forces that will work to protect citizens and their fundamental human rights and members of security services who are responsible of gross human rights violations should be brought before justice.

XXXVII. Ensures sustainable integration of returnees by restituting their properties. Returnees who fled the country after the killing of their relatives, after being subjected to torture, after being injured, after being arbitrary detained for a long time; should receive both justice and compensation. The returnees should also enjoy their political, civic, economic and other rights provided by international human rights instruments and returnees should be considered for recruitment in security services like any other Rwandan citizen without any discriminatory condition. The orphans-‐returnees whose



7 December 2011

Page 90 of 90

ath is linked with their flight and whose parents were killed in the RPF campaign to haunt refugees abroad should be provided with special attention.

XXXVIII. Has put an end of all forms of haunting Rwandan refugees abroad promoted by the current RPF Regime. The government should call on the collaboration of the International Community to make sure that those who are responsible of killing, maiming and haunting refugees under the cover of the current regime are prosecuted.

Furthermore, we would like to ask to UNHCR to entreat the GoU to:

A. Put an end on inhumane treatments we are inflicted to, inter alia, reduction in or denial of food rations, ban on access to land for cultivation, wanton denial of protection, arbitrary arrests, push for repatriation, torture, arbitrary detentions, abductions, starvation, discrimination against us, ungrounded rejections of our applications for refugee status, to ride roughshod over our serious concerns of protection, forced deportation, verbal abuse, killings, family separations, etc.

B. Respect the voluntary nature of repatriation by desisting from promoting machinations persecutory and discriminatory impoverishment against Rwandan

refugees. The GoU should also not yield in to RPF pressures and grafts. Individuals from Uganda State institutions should also stop from menacing our safety.

C. Grant to us refugee status also on grounds of ethnic discrimination as it makes the pivotal factor to push us into exile. The GoU should also assess the claims of returnees who are making their way back to Uganda owing to persecutions they (returnees) faced in Rwanda.

D. Make sure that the conviction of Hon. Dr. Steven Mallinga to stick on international obligations in granting protection to refugees is not cut out by some Ugandan individuals in charge of refugees who are mistreating Rwandan refugees.

E. Allocate to us land for cultivation in refugee settlements as it is allocated to other nationalities, lift ban on cultivation, to let our community burry in dignity the bodies of our compatriots killed on 14 July 2010 and put an end to all forms of push factors.

YOURS SINCERELY, THE UNDERSIGNED MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY OF RWANDAN REFUGEES AND ASYLUM SEEKERS IN UGANDA: