More Inconsistencies and Injustice in Victoire Ingabire's Trial.

Press ReleaseNovember 2, 2011

Yesterday, at the request of the National Prosecution Authority, the High Court of Kigali denied the defence counsel of Ms. Victoire Ingabire Umuhoza, Chairperson of the FDU-Inkingi opposition party, the right to cross-examine the prosecution's “key witnesses.”  The court ordered the defence counsel to pre-submit a list of questions in order to decide on their relevance and allow adequate time for the preparation of witnesses' responses. Today, Barrister Ian Edwards, one of the lawyers for Ms. Victoire Ingabire Umuhoza, submitted to the court a list of questions but stressed his worries
about a covering up the truth mostly owing to the court's decision not to allow witnesses to respond directly in open session. There is a high risk of making them rehearse their answers. This gives an impression to encourage their lies confirmed by several contradictions in their statements before the court.

Fearing those questions will create difficulties for his protégés, the prosecution demanded the court to grant them the right not to respond to the questions, allegedly because the cross-examination of the
co-accused witnesses is not allowed under te Rwandan law. They will prepare only for the questions the court will allow.

Defence counsel Gatera Gashabana described the prosecutor's fears as unfounded if the protégés are honest and committed to reveal the truth. “If they really decided to tell the truth without any pressure, nothing explains this amount of fear as the prosecution claims they are trustworthy”? He also wondered why the prosecution is acting in-lieu of the defence counsel for the co-accused. In response, the prosecutor insisted he had the responsibility to defend those pleading guilty for the sake of justice, especially to make sure they avoid alleged traps set by the defence counsel.

The court order to pre-submit cross-examination questions for adequate preparation is not backed by any legal aspect obligating the defence counsel to do so. Barrister Ian Edwards asked why the cross-examinees could not take a few questions right away since they insisted they knew the truth. He also
asked why the prosecution was preventing the witnesses from answering a few questions to which they already had direct answers so that the court could filter questions for preparation with regard to those they did not have direct answers for.
The presiding judge overruled the objection and confirmed that such a system of cross-examination is not a must in Rwandan law. The defence may only ask questions about topics discussed in this hearing if they need more information.

As a result of the court and prosecutor’s behaviour throughout these proceedings it is impossible to believe Ms. Victoire Ingabire Umuhoza will recieve a fair trial.


For the FDU-Inkingi,

Boniface Twagirimana
Interim Vice-President