BBC News
27 May 2011
By Mary Harper
A Rwandan opposition party has accused the Rwandan government of forcing people to exhume the bodies of relatives killed during the country's 1994 genocide.
The authorities say the remains should be brought together at memorial sites so people never forget the killings.
Despite repeated requests by the BBC neither the information minister nor Rwanda's Commission Against Genocide Ideology have responded to the allegation.
'No choice'
A representative of the newly-formed opposition Rwandan National Congress, Jonathan Musonera, said that he had personally been affected by the government's order.
"The authorities issued instructions for us to dig up the remains of our relatives and take them to the genocide memorial sites," he said.
"My family refused, but the government said if we didn't do it, they would send prisoners to exhume the remains.
"We had no choice. My relatives dug up the bodies and gave them to the authorities who took them to the memorial sites."
Mr Musonera said exhuming the remains of his family has haunted him and that he believes they deserve to be buried with dignity at a place where they can be visited by those who survived.
The Rwandan Genocide Survivors Association, which is close to the government, supports the policy of exhuming the remains.
"All the remains should be kept at memorial sites so that we can keep showing that the genocide happened," said Jean-Pierre Dusingizemungu, head of the association.
He added that the bodies should be preserved properly so that they can be displayed in this way for a long time.
There are several genocide memorial sites in Rwanda. The biggest, in the capital Kigali, displays the skulls and other remains of some 200,000 people.
Authorities want the remains of every victim to be shown in public in order to emphasise the scale and horror of the genocide.
But many of those being asked to dig up the remains of those they lost 17 years ago would prefer them to rest in peace.
Editor's Note: Rwanda's National Commission for the Fight against Genocide (CNLG) and IBUKA have denied the claims.
28 May, 2011
27 May, 2011
ICTR REFUSES TO IMPOSE RESTRICTIONS TO GENERAL NDINDILIYIMANA'S LIBERTY.
Hirondelle News Agency
26 May 2011
The International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) has declined to impose conditions on the liberty of former Rwandan Chief of Staff of the Gendarmerie, General Augustin Ndindiliyimana, pending the prosecution's decision to appeal against the judgement delivered in his case a week ago.
On May 17, 2011, a Trial Chamber convicted Ndindiliyimana of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes, but ordered his immediate release after sentencing him to the time he already spent in detention since his arrest on January 29, 2000 in Belgium.
In its decision dated May 20, 2011, on a motion seeking restriction measures against the general pending the appeal process, the Chamber found that the prosecution's reasons in support of its request were without merit.
"The Chamber is not satisfied that the prosecution has provided reasonable basis to support its claim that there was a high risk Ndindiliyimana could abscond should the prosecutor file an appeal," it said.
According to the Chamber, the right to liberty is a fundamental human right, the infringement of which must be justified and proportionate.
It noted that Ndindiliyimana was already subjected to significant "de facto" restrictions on his movement and consultations with the registry revealed that he was currently residing in a Tribunal safe house.
"In these circumstances, the Chamber considers the prosecution's requests for further restrictions on his liberty to be unreasonable and without merit. The Chamber is not satisfied that there is sufficient justification to order any restrictive conditions on Ndindiliyimana's liberty," it further said.
However, the Chamber found advisable and in the interest of justice for Ndindiliyimana to be available and accessible in the event the prosecution files its notice of appeal.
"The Chamber, therefore, advises that should Ndindiliyimana seek to change his present residence before the expiration of the period for filling a notice of appeal, or should he wish to travel outside Arusha or seek to obtain travel documents, he should inform the Tribunal as well as his counsel immediately and in advance," it said.
In its motion, the prosecution had sought for restrictions on Ndindiliyimana's liberty to ensure his availability to respond should the prosecutor decide to appeal.
The prosecution claimed that Ndindiliyimana did not surrender voluntarily to the Tribunal and it was a difficult process to arrest him in Belgium. Hence, the prosecution alleged, without conditions, there was a high risk for him to escape.
However, the defence was opposed to the motion, submitting that there was no basis to impose any restrictions on Ndindiliyimana's liberty. Contrary to the prosecution's assertions, the defence showed that Ndindiliyimana surrendered to ICTR authorities of his own volition and refuted the claims he would flee.
26 May 2011
The International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) has declined to impose conditions on the liberty of former Rwandan Chief of Staff of the Gendarmerie, General Augustin Ndindiliyimana, pending the prosecution's decision to appeal against the judgement delivered in his case a week ago.
On May 17, 2011, a Trial Chamber convicted Ndindiliyimana of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes, but ordered his immediate release after sentencing him to the time he already spent in detention since his arrest on January 29, 2000 in Belgium.
In its decision dated May 20, 2011, on a motion seeking restriction measures against the general pending the appeal process, the Chamber found that the prosecution's reasons in support of its request were without merit.
"The Chamber is not satisfied that the prosecution has provided reasonable basis to support its claim that there was a high risk Ndindiliyimana could abscond should the prosecutor file an appeal," it said.
According to the Chamber, the right to liberty is a fundamental human right, the infringement of which must be justified and proportionate.
It noted that Ndindiliyimana was already subjected to significant "de facto" restrictions on his movement and consultations with the registry revealed that he was currently residing in a Tribunal safe house.
"In these circumstances, the Chamber considers the prosecution's requests for further restrictions on his liberty to be unreasonable and without merit. The Chamber is not satisfied that there is sufficient justification to order any restrictive conditions on Ndindiliyimana's liberty," it further said.
However, the Chamber found advisable and in the interest of justice for Ndindiliyimana to be available and accessible in the event the prosecution files its notice of appeal.
"The Chamber, therefore, advises that should Ndindiliyimana seek to change his present residence before the expiration of the period for filling a notice of appeal, or should he wish to travel outside Arusha or seek to obtain travel documents, he should inform the Tribunal as well as his counsel immediately and in advance," it said.
In its motion, the prosecution had sought for restrictions on Ndindiliyimana's liberty to ensure his availability to respond should the prosecutor decide to appeal.
The prosecution claimed that Ndindiliyimana did not surrender voluntarily to the Tribunal and it was a difficult process to arrest him in Belgium. Hence, the prosecution alleged, without conditions, there was a high risk for him to escape.
However, the defence was opposed to the motion, submitting that there was no basis to impose any restrictions on Ndindiliyimana's liberty. Contrary to the prosecution's assertions, the defence showed that Ndindiliyimana surrendered to ICTR authorities of his own volition and refuted the claims he would flee.
25 May, 2011
BRITISH FOREIGN MINISTER VISITS ICTR.
Hirondelle News Agency/WNJ
24 May 2011
British Foreign Office Minister, Henry Bellingham Tuesday visited the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR).
According to an ICTR press release, the Foreign Minister, who was accompanied by the British High Commissioner to Tanzania, Diane Corner, held talks with ICTR senior officials including President Dennis Byron and Chief Prosecutor Hassan Bubacar Jallow.
ICTR administrators, ‘'Briefed the minister on the current development at the ICTR and in particular on the Tribunal's completion strategy and the establishment of the International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals.''
Minister Bellingham on his side commended the work of the Tribunal in promoting international criminal justice and fighting culture of impunity as well as bringing to justice those who played leading role in the genocide in Rwanda.
He also visited the United Nations Detention Facility (UNDF) which houses a total of 35 detainees.
24 May 2011
British Foreign Office Minister, Henry Bellingham Tuesday visited the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR).
According to an ICTR press release, the Foreign Minister, who was accompanied by the British High Commissioner to Tanzania, Diane Corner, held talks with ICTR senior officials including President Dennis Byron and Chief Prosecutor Hassan Bubacar Jallow.
ICTR administrators, ‘'Briefed the minister on the current development at the ICTR and in particular on the Tribunal's completion strategy and the establishment of the International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals.''
Minister Bellingham on his side commended the work of the Tribunal in promoting international criminal justice and fighting culture of impunity as well as bringing to justice those who played leading role in the genocide in Rwanda.
He also visited the United Nations Detention Facility (UNDF) which houses a total of 35 detainees.
Rwandan government official admits force used in anti-thatch hut "nyakatsi" campaign.
Survival International
25 May 2011
The official in charge of Rwanda’s controversial policy to eradicate all thatched roofs in the country by the end of this month has admitted that ‘sometimes we apply some force’.
The admission came after hundreds of Twitter users responded to Survival’s condemnation of the destruction of Batwa (Pygmy) houses, which has left many of Rwanda’s most marginalized people without shelter.
The government, which is also active on Twitter, has tweeted that the anti-thatch programme ‘is about decent housing for all, no one is left homeless.’
The official overseeing the anti-thatch programme, Augustine Kampayana, told journalists, ‘for anyone to still be in nyakatsi [thatched houses] up to now only means that it is in their general attitudes to prefer to live in grass thatched houses. Some of them just do not want to change, but we cannot let these drag everyone else back.’
One Batwa man, whose house has been destroyed and who is living in cramped conditions with ten other families, said last week, ‘it’s a catastrophic life which resembles that of a refugee.’
The UN’s Racial Discrimination committee last month urged the Rwandan government to ‘facilitate access to adequate housing for the Batwa, particularly by avoiding forced evictions without consultation and without offering alternative housing.’
Although some Batwa families have been given new houses, many are still waiting and are forced to live in the open, according to COPORWA, Rwanda’s Batwa organization. Rwanda’s Batwa continue to face racism and discrimination on a daily basis. Most eke out a meager living as wage laborers or potters after their communities were forced from their forest homes to create national parks free from human habitation.
25 May 2011
The official in charge of Rwanda’s controversial policy to eradicate all thatched roofs in the country by the end of this month has admitted that ‘sometimes we apply some force’.
The admission came after hundreds of Twitter users responded to Survival’s condemnation of the destruction of Batwa (Pygmy) houses, which has left many of Rwanda’s most marginalized people without shelter.
The government, which is also active on Twitter, has tweeted that the anti-thatch programme ‘is about decent housing for all, no one is left homeless.’
The official overseeing the anti-thatch programme, Augustine Kampayana, told journalists, ‘for anyone to still be in nyakatsi [thatched houses] up to now only means that it is in their general attitudes to prefer to live in grass thatched houses. Some of them just do not want to change, but we cannot let these drag everyone else back.’
One Batwa man, whose house has been destroyed and who is living in cramped conditions with ten other families, said last week, ‘it’s a catastrophic life which resembles that of a refugee.’
The UN’s Racial Discrimination committee last month urged the Rwandan government to ‘facilitate access to adequate housing for the Batwa, particularly by avoiding forced evictions without consultation and without offering alternative housing.’
Although some Batwa families have been given new houses, many are still waiting and are forced to live in the open, according to COPORWA, Rwanda’s Batwa organization. Rwanda’s Batwa continue to face racism and discrimination on a daily basis. Most eke out a meager living as wage laborers or potters after their communities were forced from their forest homes to create national parks free from human habitation.
23 May, 2011
Inspection of Ingabire's Netherland's belongings causes great worry over precident.
Radio Netherlands
23 May 2011
By Anneke Verbraeken, Rotterdam
Will Ingabire’s belongings be sent to Rwanda or not? This question was raised during a session at the Court of Rotterdam on 20 May 2011. And will the fact that a Rwandan prosecutor has been through Ingabire’s documents in the Netherlands, have consequences for people mentioned in it?
The British newspaper 'The Independent' reported last week that Rwanda is preparing attacks against at least two members of the Rwandan opposition living in the United Kingdom.
In mid-December of 2010, Ingabire’s home in Zevenhuizen was searched upon Rwanda's request. Two computers and documents - amongst others - were confiscated. The house search provoked surprised reactions because, in the same week, the Dutch ministry of Foreign Affairs cut aid to Rwanda. The decision was based on the fact that the country lacks political freedom and freedom of speech.
According to the prosecutor’s spokesperson “inspection is normal procedure. An inspection does not mean that the documents are authorised to be distributed/copied.”
Dutch parliamentarian Joël Voordewind of the small Orthodox Christian party (Christen Unie), has questions over the issue in parliament. He did not know Rwanda was going to check on Ingabire's belongings. Now, he feels frustrated. "This goes beyong all rules. Unacceptable! The promises of the minister are not respected."
After the search in December, Dutch Foreign Minister Uri Rosenthal promised MP Voordewind that parliament would inform him if Ingabire's belongings are sent to Rwanda.
The recent threats against Rwandan opposition members in the United Kingdom show the urgency of this affair, Voordewind says. "These kind of threats could also take place in The Netherlands, after the search of Ingabire's house."
Ingabire’s husband Lin Muyizere also warned the Ministry of Justice that inspection by Rwanda could have big consequences for opposition members, in and outside the Netherlands. The Dutch public prosecutor has not reacted until now. The judge will decide before the 1st of June whether Ingabire's possession will be sent or not to Rwanda.
23 May 2011
By Anneke Verbraeken, Rotterdam
Will Ingabire’s belongings be sent to Rwanda or not? This question was raised during a session at the Court of Rotterdam on 20 May 2011. And will the fact that a Rwandan prosecutor has been through Ingabire’s documents in the Netherlands, have consequences for people mentioned in it?
The British newspaper 'The Independent' reported last week that Rwanda is preparing attacks against at least two members of the Rwandan opposition living in the United Kingdom.
In mid-December of 2010, Ingabire’s home in Zevenhuizen was searched upon Rwanda's request. Two computers and documents - amongst others - were confiscated. The house search provoked surprised reactions because, in the same week, the Dutch ministry of Foreign Affairs cut aid to Rwanda. The decision was based on the fact that the country lacks political freedom and freedom of speech.
According to the prosecutor’s spokesperson “inspection is normal procedure. An inspection does not mean that the documents are authorised to be distributed/copied.”
Dutch parliamentarian Joël Voordewind of the small Orthodox Christian party (Christen Unie), has questions over the issue in parliament. He did not know Rwanda was going to check on Ingabire's belongings. Now, he feels frustrated. "This goes beyong all rules. Unacceptable! The promises of the minister are not respected."
After the search in December, Dutch Foreign Minister Uri Rosenthal promised MP Voordewind that parliament would inform him if Ingabire's belongings are sent to Rwanda.
The recent threats against Rwandan opposition members in the United Kingdom show the urgency of this affair, Voordewind says. "These kind of threats could also take place in The Netherlands, after the search of Ingabire's house."
Ingabire’s husband Lin Muyizere also warned the Ministry of Justice that inspection by Rwanda could have big consequences for opposition members, in and outside the Netherlands. The Dutch public prosecutor has not reacted until now. The judge will decide before the 1st of June whether Ingabire's possession will be sent or not to Rwanda.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
