Africa Great Lakes Democracy Watch



Welcome to
Africa Great Lakes Democracy Watch Blog. Our objective is to promote the institutions of democracy,social justice,Human Rights,Peace, Freedom of Expression, and Respect to humanity in Rwanda,Uganda,DR Congo, Burundi,Sudan, Tanzania, Kenya,Ethiopia, and Somalia. We strongly believe that Africa will develop if only our presidents stop being rulers of men and become leaders of citizens. We support Breaking the Silence Campaign for DR Congo since we believe the democracy in Rwanda means peace in DRC. Follow this link to learn more about the origin of the war in both Rwanda and DR Congo:http://www.rwandadocumentsproject.net/gsdl/cgi-bin/library


Tuesday, December 28, 2010

ICT for development ‘lacks African voice’

ICT for development ‘lacks African voice’by Afronline

LONDONAfrican academics are being left behind in the rush to research how communication technologies can help development, according to a review of papers in the field.
As a result, key theories in the field are being formed without the influence of African academics, researchers told the Information and Communications Technology and Development 2010 (ICTD2010) conference, in London, United Kingdom, this week (13–16 December).
The team surveyed, for the first time, academic publications in the field of ICTD between 1990 and 2009, using the Thomson Reuters ISI Web of Knowledge.
The researchers also took an in-depth look at research output and themes over a more recent period (2007–2009), including a study of some of the emerging international and African ICTD journals.
African researchers and institutions have contributed just nine per cent of international papers across all ICTD disciplines — although this went up to 13 per cent for some topics such as library science and e-governance. In ‘hard’ sciences, such as computer science, this figure fell to below one per cent.
The research comes at a time of growing interest in how ICTs can boost Africa’s and other developing nations’ development, as highlighted, for example, by the recent mobile health summit held in Washington DC in the United States.
The team, based in South Africa, said that of the nine per cent of publications containing at least one African author, South Africa contributed over a third of the papers, with Botswana and Nigeria contributing 14 and 17 per cent respectively. The number of non-English publications was negligible.
African participation at related international conferences was also low.
Today’s theories of the use of ICT in development are being formed with little African influence,” said Kathleen Diga, co-author of the paper and a researcher at the University of KwaZulu-Natal. “ICTD claims to be participatory but the lack of African contributions undermines this.”
The authors said that some of the causes were generic obstacles to Africans publishing research, such as the emphasis on teaching rather than research as the driver of career success, difficulties accessing international journals, and a claimed Northern bias against Southern authors.
Tim Unwin, UNESCO’s (UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization) chair in Information and Communication Technologies for Development (ICT4D) and organiser of ICTD2010, said that the problems are not limited to Africa.
“We need to do much more to support people from other parts of the world who don’t understand the rules of the game enough to get published in those international journals,” he told SciDev.Net.
Polly Gaster, head of ICT4D at the Eduardo Mondlane University in Mozambique, said that interesting ICT research in Africa is being done at PhD level, and a survey of theses might have produced a more positive picture.
But, she added, they “are remaining as theses and sitting on a library shelf somewhere and that is the end of them”.
By Naomi AntonySciDev. Net
Enhanced by Zemanta

Africa poised for solar lighting boom by Afronline

Africa poised for solar lighting boom by Afronline

NAIROBI - As many as 120 million households in Africa will be living off-grid by 2015, creating one of the world’s largest markets for portable solar lighting in the next five years, according to a report.
Solar Lighting for the Base of the Pyramid Overview of an Emerging Market’ was published by Lighting Africa, a joint International Finance Corporation (IFC) and the World Bank initiative that is developing continent-wide programmes for solar lighting.
The report projects an up to 65 per cent growth rate in sales of portable solar lights, comparable to the recent explosion in mobile phone sales on the continent. Currently, only 0.5 per cent of some 140 million African people living without regular or reliable access to electricity have such lights.
The growth will be fuelled by entrepreneurs using the latest technologies and designing products to suit consumers’ tastes, the report says. But the market could grow even faster if distribution and financing were scaled up, it says.
Arthur Itotia, Lighting Africa programme manager, told SciDev.Net that the initiative does not just aim to light households but also to save people money and reduce the health risks associated with fuel lamps.
“By converting from kerosene to clean energy millions of consumers can improve their health, reduce their spending on expensive fuels and, ultimately, benefit from better illumination and more productive time in their homes, schools and businesses.”
The report also found that an average African household could spend US$225 less a year on kerosene by using solar lighting.
Lighting Africa is helping to build the market for off-grid lighting across Sub-Saharan Africa by investing in consumer education, improving access to financing and looking at new ways to distribute the lighting.
Dana Rysankova, senior energy specialist in the Africa Energy Unit at the World Bank, said that Africa’s high population growth and low levels of access to the grid mean that it will soon surpass Asia in the number of people without electricity.
The lessons learned from Africa, she said, are being used to give advice to other areas.
“For example, Lighting Africa advised another World Bank project in Haiti that was disseminating solar lanterns after the devastating earthquake there,” said Rysankova.
But other experts warn that such noble ideas risk being overridden by market forces especially if left solely in the hands of private sector players.
“Much as the idea is great and tenable, the implementers need to shape the market to allow poor households to buy the lights,” said Simon Mugambi, an independent energy market consultant.
By Dann Okoth - SciDev.Net
Enhanced by Zemanta

Is China greening Africa?

From Pambazuka by Stephen Marks
‘Is China smartening up its environmental and social act in Africa? It certainly wants to be seen as doing just that’, writes Stephen Marks
Is China smartening up its environmental and social act in Africa? It certainly wants to be seen as doing just that. One telling example was the recent Chinese government-sponsored ‘top Chinese enterprises in Africa’ competition, won by China Road and Bridge Corporation [CRBC].

The aim of the award was officially stated as being ‘to commend the contributions by Chinese enterprises in Africa’ and ‘reply to Western criticisms of Chinese enterprises with facts.’ The competition, which was jointly sponsored by the Chinese-African People’s Friendship Association, China Radio International and Africa magazine, kicked off on 22 October with the launch of a website for online voting. According to the website, the winning enterprises should ‘devote significant resources for African countries’ local economy and social development, fulfil corporate social responsibility and make a positive return to the local people of Africa.’

Another Chinese award winner is China Merchants Bank, which in September was declared the winner of the third annual Green Banking Innovation Award. Fifteen leading Chinese commercial banks were judged on their overseas investments as well as corporate governance issues, such as information disclosure, environmental policies and implementation measures. Nine Chinese environmental NGOs came together to conduct the competition – Green Watershed, Friends of Nature, Institute of Public & Environmental Affairs, Green Earth Volunteers, Global Environment Institute, Civil Society Watch, China Development Brief, Green Volunteer League of Chongqing and Hengduan Mountains Research Society.

This trend is not new. In July 2009, in what the Swiss-based international NGO International Rivers called ‘the most significant step yet’ China’s ministries of commerce and environmental protection published draft ‘Guidelines on the Environmental Behavior of Chinese Foreign Investors’. The guidelines emphasise the social and environmental responsibility of Chinese companies and banks abroad, and foresee the creation of appeal mechanisms for ‘local controversial projects.’

But how far does this indicate a likely real shift in the behaviour of Chinese companies on the ground, and how far is it simply a Chinese version of the ‘greenwash’ for which Western companies and governments have themselves long been notorious?

The 15 October incident at a Zambian coal mine, where Chinese supervisors shot and wounded 11 workers in a labour conflict brought back memories of the blast at Zambia’s Chambishi copper mines which killed 49 workers in 2005, followed by the killing of five workers by security guards at the same location a year later.

Of course Chinese companies are often used as a whipping boy for the failure of African governments to apply their own regulations. A www.saiia.org.za/images/stories/pubs/briefings/saia_spb_19_haglund_20100729.pdf].report by the South African Institute for International Affairs (SAIIA) [PDF] in July, three months before the shooting incident, stressed the failure of regulation by the Zambian government, especially its reliance on self-reporting and the influence of close relations between foreign investors and local leaders

There have been signs that African governments have been taking such criticisms on board. In October alone there were reports that Nigeria had closed the Abuja branch of China Civil Engineering Construction Company (CCECC) over its poor health and safety record (as well as another non-Chinese company) and that Mozambique had withdrawn the labour permits of three Chinese found guilty of assaults on workers and other violations of labour and company law in the construction industry.

One common response to the record of some Chinese companies in these areas is to point out that conditions within China are often no better, especially in the mining sector. But here too things seem to be changing. China Daily has reported that – in a pilot programme – underground mine-accident shelters, escape capsules and other emergency facilities are being installed in seven coal mines in Shanxi province. Citing China Youth Daily, the report said a Lu’an Group mine in Changzhi city was the first to install the facilities. The report follows the 16 October deaths of 37 miners trapped by a gas leak at a Pingyu Coal & Electric Company mine in Henan.

International Rivers has pulled no punches in its criticism of Chinese companies and the Chinese government over such issues as the coal mine shootings. Director Peter Bosshard described conditions at the Collum mine as ‘scandalous’ and pointed out that in China’s overseas investment, unlike conditions within China, ‘muzzling public opinion is not usually possible’.

‘If the Chinese government is serious about cleaning up the safety, labor and environmental record of its overseas investors, recommendations and appeals will no longer do the trick’ he concluded. Pointing out that the Chinese government still owns the major companies, he concluded that it should ‘quickly adopt the environmental guidelines for foreign investors, which have lingered in draft stage for too long. It should closely supervise Chinese companies which invest abroad, and crack down on investors which violate Chinese guidelines and local law’.

You might think with this record that International Rivers was the sort of ‘Western NGO’ that China loves to hate. But as Peter Bosshard told , a recent workshop on environmental aspects of China’s engagement in low-income countries the Chinese government wants Chinese firms overseas to be responsible actors and is interested in learning from Western experts on the use of environmental guidelines.

International Rivers has been invited to advise Eximbank and Sinohydro on their environmental policies, and Sinohydro has adopted the recommended guidelines for complaints policy. The Gabonese environmental NGO Brainforest scored a victory when in response to its concerns, Eximbank suspended its support for a massive iron ore development project complete with hydropower dam, railway line and port, which would have violated environmental guidelines and devastated a national park.

On the other hand Sinohydro is going ahead with the much-criticised Gibe 3 dam in Ethiopia which, critics say, violates local laws, and the world’s biggest bank Industrial and Commercial Bank of China, is underwriting a US$500m loan to Chinese companies to buy equipment for the project.

The pessimists would see this as evidence for the ‘greenwash’ theory. But it might be more realistic, and more constructive, to see it as an aspect of a global contestation between elements in government and civil society which see the need to enforce environmental standards, and profit-driven firms, whatever their ownership, who will cut corners when allowed to.

As Peter Bosshard pointed out to the IDS workshop, at least the Chinese government supports moves by Chinese environmental NGOs to encourage Chinese firms to apply Chinese laws and standards in their overseas operations: ‘You would not get far in Switzerland trying to get Swiss firms to apply Swiss law overseas, or in the US either’.

BROUGHT TO YOU BY PAMBAZUKA NEWS

* Stephen Marks is co-ordinator of the Fahamu China in Africa project. A researcher and writer specialising in economic development and environmental issues as they impact on civil society, he has worked as a consultant for a number of international projects.
* Please send comments to editor@pambazuka.org or comment online at Pambazuka News.
Enhanced by Zemanta

Rwanda, Burundi cry foul on Mwapachu succession

East African Community secretary general, Juma Mwapachu. Photo/FILE East African Community secretary general, Juma Mwapachu. Photo/FILE 
By CATHERINE RIUNGU
Posted Monday, December 27 2010 at 00:00

The vacancy created by the impending exit of East African Community Secretary General Juma Mwapachu is dividing the region, between Rwanda and Burundi on the one hand and Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda on the other.
Related Stories
Sources familiar with Rwanda’s President Kagame’s thinking say that the new entrants into the EAC view as “unfortunate and divisive” the arguments advanced by Kenya, Uganda and Tanzania that it is not yet time for a Rwandese or Burundian to lead the EAC — ostensibly because the new member countries are “too young.”
It has not helped that the jostling for the position is being viewed in Kigali and Bujumbura in the light of the warming political ties between Uganda’s President Yoweri Museveni and Kenya’s Prime Minister Raila Odinga.
The latter joined the Ugandan leader on the campaign trail three weeks ago.
“So Kenya wants it — and I think, given what transpired between Museveni and Raila in Uganda, we can understand why they would want the next five years to be in safe hands. But it is idiotic, you cannot have a membership organisation where rights are granted on basis of seniority — even though when it comes to paying contributions, everyone pays the same,” our source said of President Kagame’s feeling about the developments around the secretary general’s position.
Rwanda is making no secret of the fact that it is interested in putting forward a candidate to vie for the post when it falls vacant in April after the incumbent, Mr Mwapachu, a Tanzanian, steps down on rotation.
If this issue is not sorted out amicably, analysts say it could kill “the Community in the popular imagination” if the public thinks that Rwanda and Burundi are being shoved aside.
According to the Treaty establishing the body, the secretary general has to come from a different member state after each 5-year tenure.
Rwanda’s EAC Affairs Minister Monique Mukaruliza was quoted by the Rwandan press as saying that the country was ready for the seat.
“Under the traditional rotation arrangement, it is supposed to be Rwanda or Burundi’s turn to take over,” she said in an article published in the New Times.
“We shall agree with Burundi who comes first because we joined the bloc at the same time, but if Burundi agrees, we shall occupy the chair,” she added.
She argued that the principle of the Treaty for the establishment of the EAC is clear about the occupancy of the post of secretary-general.
Ms Mukaruliza added that according to Article 67 of the treaty, the secretary-general shall be appointed by the Summit upon nomination by the relevant Head of State under the principle of rotation.
Rwanda currently has the youthful lawyer Alloys Mutabingwa as Deputy Secretary-General in charge of Planning and Infrastructure, and the most likely candidate for the post, should Rwanda succeed in its bid for the powerful position.
Enhanced by Zemanta

MR. FRANK HABINEZA FINALLY LEAVES THE OPPOSITION COUNCIL WHEN MS. VICTOIRE INGABIRE TRIAL IS OPENING (28.12.10)

(FDU-INKINGI)
Today, in a long waited Declaration Of The Democratic Green Party of Rwanda, Mr. Frank HABINEZA's party left the Permanent Consultative Council of the opposition parties in Rwanda-PCC.
Today, after Ms. Victoire INGABIRE's lawyer introduced yesterday a request for immediate release because of illegal detention after the expiration of the second 30-day preventive detention, the National Prosecution Authority has petitioned the High Court for the evidential stage of the trial. The defendant has not yet been informed about the official charges pressed against her.
Tomorrow 08:00 AM, the Intermediate Court of GASABO is hearing the lawyer's petition for immediate release. There is no doubt that this is another Prosecutor's trap to fool the Court that the case is already ready for trial in order to maintain Madame Victoire INGABIRE in prison.
The FDU-INKINGI party takes good note of Mr. HABINEZA's painful decision after many months of swings, panic, endless agony and unpredictable political position. This is a relief for all. Knowing the Machiavellian nature of the ruling party RPF and the never honoured iron-and-stick deals, we remain sceptical about this new marriage of convenience. This is the irony of a hunting predator, stalking his prey, waiting for one to go astray and be separated. We are always open to work with all those fighting for democracy, the rule of law, justice and a lasting solution to the Rwandan crisis. Though, Mr. Frank HABINEZA abandons his two co-founders of the PCC in maximum prison for politically motivated charges, we remain proud of what we have achieved together since the creation of the PCC in February 2010. The history will always remember our colleagues who were assassinated, like the late André KAGWA RWISEREKA, his Vice President, and we remain indebted to those courageously enduring the fist of the dictatorship and particularly those in detention like Ms. Victoire INGABIRE UMUHOZA, the Chair of FDU-INKINGI, and Mr. Bernard NTAGANDA, the Founding President of PS IMBERAKURI, or other democracy martyrs.
Sylvain SIBOMANA
FDU-INKINGI
Interim Secretary General.
Enhanced by Zemanta

Rwanda : Le point de vue de Gerald Gahima

From Jambonews 28. déc | Par ruhumuza | Catégorie: A la une, Opinion
Gerald Gahima, membre du RNC
Gerald GahimaCe jeudi 23 décembre 2010, Jambonews TV a rencontré Gerald Gahima dans le cadre de la deuxième édition de l’émission point de vue.
Ancien procureur général du Rwanda et vice-président de la Cour suprême après la prise du pouvoir du FPR en 1994, Gahima est ensemble avec son frère Theogene Rudasignwa, Patrick Karegeya et Kayumba Nyamwasa, l’un des auteurs du « Rwanda Briefing », un document d’une cinquantaine de pages décrivant la situation socio-politique du Rwanda et déconstruisant les mythes autour du président Kagame.
Dans cette interview réalisée en langue anglaise, l’ancien procureur nous a livré ses analyse et témoignage sur une série de questions liées à l’actualité, l’histoire, la politique ou encore la condition des Droits de l’Homme au Rwanda.
D’emblée, notre première question est directe et vise à savoir si d’après ce qu’il sait ou a entendu, le FPR a abattu l’avion du président Habyalimana. Il nous répond qu’il n’en a aucune connaissance à titre personnel, mais qu’il supporte que justice soit faite pour les victimes de cet attentat, qui a,  selon lui, contribué au génocide.
La deuxième question a trait à un autre sujet d’actualité touchant au Rwanda,  le « Mapping report » au sujet des crimes commis au Congo de 1993 à 2003 parmi lesquels des crimes de guerre, crimes contre l’humanité, voire un génocide commis par le FPR contre les réfugiés Hutu.
Rwanda Briefing, cliquer pour voir le document
Rwanda Briefing
Il nous dit que lorsqu’ils étaient au Rwanda, en 1996-1997, ils ne savaient pas ce qui se passait au Congo. Bien sur ils savaient qu’une attaque avait eu lieu contre les camps mais que l’ampleur  des violations des Droits l’homme leur était inconnue. Ce n’est qu’après qu’il ait quitté le Rwanda et en faisant des recherches, qu’il a pris connaissance et conscience de l’ampleur des atrocités commises.
Sa position est que les allégations contenues dans le rapport sont très sérieuses. Il nous fait toutefois savoir qu’il n’a aucune connaissance personnelle d’un éventuel génocide commis, mais qu’il n’y a aucun doute que de terribles atrocités ont été commises contre les réfugiés Hutu et que la communauté internationale et le gouvernement du Rwanda ont le devoir envers ces victimes de rechercher la vérité et d’emmener les responsables de ces atrocités devant la justice.
Lorsque nous lui demandons sa réaction au sujet des autres crimes prétendument commis par le FPR, ceux commis avant 1994 dans les communes de Byumba et de Ruhengeri,  ceux commis en 1994 au cours de son avancée ainsi que ceux commis par le FPR au Rwanda jusqu’en 1998, il tient au préalable à nous donner sa position sur les événements de 1994.
Il nous dit que pour lui un génocide a été commis à l’encontre des Tutsi en 1994, il est d’avis que ce génocide n’a pas été planifié par Habyalimana comme le gouvernement du Rwanda le prétend. Mais qu’après le 7 avril, un groupe de personnes l’a planifié. Et que les victimes de ce génocide sont des rwandais qui ne méritaient pas ce qu’il leur est arrivé et que ces victimes méritent que justice soit faite.
Revenant à la question des crimes commis par le FPR, à nouveau, il nous dit qu’il n y’a aucun doute que des violations des Droits de l’Homme ont été perpétrées par le FPR pendant la guerre.
En ce qui concerne les crimes commis avant 1994 à Byumba et Ruhengeri,  il nous dit que des crimes ont pu être commis, mais qu’à titre personnel, il pense que ces crimes n’ont pas eu la même ampleur que celle invoquée par certains opposants au gouvernement rwandais.
« Des civils innocents ont été tués par le FPR après le 7 avril 1994, ce qui est difficile à connaître, c’est l’ampleur de ces crimes. »
Après le 7 avril, toutefois, il est convaincu que des violations massives des Droits de l’homme ont été commises à l’encontre des Hutu. Il nous fait savoir que des civils innocents ont été tués par le FPR, mais que ce qui est difficile de connaitre, c’est l’ampleur de ces crimes. La raison en est qu’aucune institution au Rwanda ne peut débattre librement de ces crimes à cause de l’influence de l’armée. Il nous rappelle, que plusieurs membres du gouvernement en 1994,  l’ont quitté suite à des désaccords au sujet de ces tueries.
Il nous explique ensuite pourquoi ces crimes n’ont pas été jugés au Rwanda. La raison est que  les soldats sont jugés par les juridictions militaires et que par conséquent, il est impensable que ces juridictions poursuivent des crimes dans lesquels les soldats du FPR qui sont les juges sont impliqués.
Inyumba Aloisea
La seule opportunité pour les victimes de voir justice rendue était le TPIR qui a toutefois échoué à poursuivre ces crimes. Il conclue en disant  que les victimes de ces atrocités méritent justice au même titre que les victimes du génocide.
Inyumba Aloisea, Sénatrice au Rwanda
Nous lui posons ensuite une question en tant qu’ancien procureur général du Rwanda au sujet des listes de génocidaires établies par le gouvernement du FPR.  Ces listes ont étés mises en place pour poursuivre les responsables du génocide et nous lui demandons sa réaction aux critiques de certaines voix qui s’élèvent pour dénoncer le fait que ces listes auraient été instrumentalisées afin de poursuivre des opposants et éteindre toute voix critique.
Il commence par nous expliquer le contexte dans lequel ces listes ont été mises en place.
Ensuite, rejetant les propos d’Inyumba et de Kagame lui attribuant la responsabilité des listes, il précise que  l’établissement des listes a été une politique gouvernementale et non d’un procureur.  Il nous fait savoir qu’à titre personnel,  il a fait ce que la loi lui a demandé et qu’il n’a pas utilisé ces listes pour poursuivre des opposants.
Il nous dit qu’il faut bien comprendre l’objectif des listes qui n’était pas de déterminer la culpabilité d’une personne.  Tout ce que la liste dit, c’est qu’une personne qui s’y trouve  étant donné qu’elle est placée dans la catégorie numéro un des suspects du génocide n’a pas le droit de bénéficier du programme de confession.
Il termine en nous disant qu’on ne peut pas faire des conclusions générales sur les listes, mais que ce qu’il faudrait faire pour établir la vérité serait d’évoquer les personnes au cas par cas et que c’est seulement là  il pourrait être en mesure de répondre si dans tel cas concret, telle personne a été indument placée sur la liste.
«  Le pouvoir judiciaire au Rwanda est utilisé par le gouvernement du FPR afin de faire taire l’opposition. »
Lorsqu’on lui demande ensuite son commentaire au sujet de la loi de 2008 sur l’idéologie du génocide, il nous dit qu’au Rwanda, il y’a une tendance à utiliser des lois telles que celle-là, et celle sur le divisionnisme afin de faire taire toute voix critique. Il nous dit que même lui a été accusé de divisionnisme et d’idéologie du génocide. Il rejoint les conclusions des organisations de défense des Droits de l’Homme selon lesquelles le pouvoir judiciaire au Rwanda est utilisé par le gouvernement du FPR pour faire taire l’opposition.
Kayumba Nyamwasa, membre du RNC
Kayumba NyamwasaInterrogé ensuite au sujet de la démocratie  Rwanda, Gerald Gahima est catégorique, il n’y a pas de démocratie au Rwanda. Il nous explique qu’après la guerre et le génocide en 1994, il avait été convenu qu’une période de transition de 5 ans avait été mise en place afin d’arriver à la démocratie, période qui avait par la suite été prolongée de 4 ans.
Au lieu d’une transition vers la démocratie, cette transition a selon lui renforcé la dictature au Rwanda. Il rajoute que le Rwanda est un pays contrôlé par le FPR et que le FPR lui-même n’est pas démocratique et qu’il est contrôlé par Kagame.  Ce même Kagame qui contrôle également le gouvernement, le parlement et même le pouvoir judiciaire et il souligne qu’au Rwanda, Il n y’a pas d’opposition, pas d’espace politique.
Au sujet de la situation des Droits de l’Homme, son constat est sans appel. Il n’ya aucun doute que la situation des Droits de l’homme s’est améliorée comparée à ce qu’elle était en 1994,95,96 ou 97. Mais la situation reste fortement inquiétante, et il  donne l’exemple des  services de sécurité qui si ils estiment que vous êtes un opposant au gouvernement, peuvent vous faire disparaitre, vous torturer ou encore vous tuer, sans que personne ne leur demande des comptes.
«La réconciliation n’est pas un processus à un sens, si le gouvernement prétend qu’il y’a eu la réconciliation, mais que vous tous êtes encore à l’extérieur, il est évident que la réconciliation n’a pas eu lieu car une réconciliation est bilatérale. »
Interrogé ensuite au sujet de la réconciliation. Il nous répond que la réconciliation n’est pas un processus à un sens. Il n’appartient pas au gouvernement de déclarer que la réconciliation a eu lieu. Car si le gouvernement prétend qu’il y’a eu la réconciliation, mais que vous tous êtes encore à l’extérieur, il est évident que la réconciliation n’a pas eu lieu car une réconciliation est bilatérale.
Les raisons de cet échec, sont pour lui nombreuses, le gouvernement n’a jamais traité  certaines questions fondamentales, comme les violations des Droits de l’Homme perpétrées par le FPR contre les Hutu, la question du  partage du pouvoir, la présence de groupes armés dans d’autres pays etc…
Karegeya Patrick, membre du RNC
Interrogé sur sa perception du dialogue inter rwandais ultra inclusif, il nous répond qu’il la soutient, que c’est une initiative louable. La mettant en comparaison avec le ton du discours de Kagame dans le cadre des assises nationales du dialogue, il constate que le ton utilisé par Kagame n’est pas celui d’un homme qui désire le dialogue avec l’opposition.
Lorsque vient la question du développement, il nous dit que depuis 1994, des efforts certains ont été entrepris dans ce domaine. Il considère que c’est un miracle au regard des événements de 1994 que la Rwanda ne soit pas un état défaillant. Il nuance toutefois ce développement, en disant qu’il n’a favorisé qu’une minorité de la population et que certains éléments indiquent que l’écart entre les riches et les pauvres s’intensifie.
Karegeya PatrickComparant, ce développement à celui sous Habyarimana, il rappelle qu’à cette époque, le gouvernement avait déjà  une haute réputation parmi les donneurs. Ce qu’il amène à conclure que les problèmes du Rwanda sont en réalité liés à la gouvernance et non au développement et tant que les problèmes qui ont miné le Rwanda ne sont pas résolus, le développement tel qu’on le connait peut être détruit en une brève période de temps.
Il dit qu’en réalité le problème qui gangrène le Rwanda n’a pas été résolu malgré le développement qu’on connait. Il souligne ce développement n’est pas viable tant que les problèmes du conflit n’ont pas été résolus.
« Le Burundi est malgré les apparences de loin plus avancé que le Rwanda car les burundais ont réussi à mettre à plat les problèmes ayant été à l’origine du conflit ».
Comparant pour illustrer cette assertion le Rwanda au Burundi, il dit que selon lui, le Burundi est de loin plus avancé que le Rwanda car les burundais ont réussi à mettre à plat leurs problèmes. Même si à vu d’œil le Rwanda est plus développé que le Burundi, la viabilité du développement du Burundi est plus certaine qu’au Rwanda.
Rudasingwa Theogene, membre du RNC
Interrogé au sujet de la marginalisation des Hutus, il précise d’emblée que Kagame essaye de l’opposer aux Tutsi en prétendant qu’il s’est fait le porte parole des Hutu. Il rappelle que malgré les déclarations de Kagame, leur intention n’a jamais été et n’est pas de blâmer les Tutsi pour les défaillances du FPR.
Rudasingwa Theogene
Il précise que pour eux, le gouvernement du Rwanda  n’est pas un gouvernement de Tutsi mais le gouvernement d’un Homme qui s’avère être un tutsi, même si le petit groupe qui entoure cet homme est composé de Tutsi.
Ce qu’ils ont voulu dire par la marginalisation des Hutu est qu’étant donné que le système n’est pas très démocratique, les membres de la communauté Tutsi ont plus facilement accès à ce petit groupe qui détient le pouvoir et ont par là  un accès plus aisé, aux privilèges, aux bourses, aux jobs etc…
A propos de la marginalisation de certains Tutsi également évoquée dans leur document, il répond qu’en réalité c’est la majorité des Tutsi qui sont exclus du système et il nous précise que la solution à ce problème d’exclusion pour lui n’est pas que quelques Hutu participent à la dictature mais que Hutu et Tutsi puissent vivre dans un pays ou ils bénéficient de l’égalité,  vivre dans un pays qui n’exclut personne.
Président Paul Kagame
« Si il y’avait la guerre au Rwanda, Kagame tuerait autant de personnes que nécessaire pour assurer sa victoire »
Interrogé au sujet de l’effrayante perspective de voir à nouveau du sang versé au Rwanda, il nous dit que ce risque est réel si la force devait être utilisée pour aboutir au changement.
Paul Kagame, Président du Rwanda
Si un groupe armé attaquait le Rwanda, il nous dit que de ce qu’ils savent de leur expérience, Kagame tuerait autant de personnes qu’il sera nécessaire pour assurer sa victoire car il se fiche des conséquences.
Il nous demande également d’imaginer ce qui pourrait se passer  à l’encontre des Tutsi, si Kagame était renversé par la violence, eu égard au fait que des personnes ont la fausse impression que l’oppression dont ils sont victimes est le fait des Tutsi en général et non d’un petit groupe de Tutsi ne représentant en rien la majorité.
Il pense qu’il est temps que les gens puisent travailler ensemble afin de construire un avenir commun au lieu de chercher à résoudre nos problèmes par la violence.
Interrogé ensuite au sujet des rumeurs faisant état d’une éventuelle guerre entrain d’être préparée par des membres de son parti, il dément et nous fait savoir qu’ils n’ont aucun contact avec les FDLR ou le CNDP, car ils ne croient pas à la violence, conscients des coûts que cela impliquerait. Ils désirent un changement de la situation par des moyens pacifiques.
Membres du RNC (Rwanda National Congress)L’interview se termine par des questions au sujet des objectifs de leur parti, leurs objectifs nous dit-il sont d’apporter la paix, la liberté et le progrès au Rwanda. Leurs objectifs sont d’être surs que  le conflit du Rwanda est résolu par des moyens pacifiques. Ce que le FPR et le président Kagame n’ont pas su faire et n’ont d’ailleurs pas intérêt à faire.
Membres du RNC (Rwanda National Congress)
Interrogé au sujet des solutions concrètes qu’ils proposent, il nous répond qu’il est possible de pousser le gouvernement à discuter par différentes stratégies qui sont ; la mobilisation des Rwandais aussi bien à l’intérieur qu’à l’extérieur, le rassemblement de toutes les personnes qui se battent pour un changement pacifique ainsi que la mobilisation de la communauté internationale, pas seulement les gouvernements mais aussi la société civile qui peuvent jouer un rôle positif pour faire pression sur le gouvernement du Rwanda pour respecter les Droits de l’Homme.
Il nous dit que même si des personnes comme Victoire Ingabire étaient autorisées à mener des activités politiques au Rwanda, ce ne serait pas possible pour eux de fonctionner si la machine répressive du régime reste en place. La communauté internationale doit des lors faire pression sur le gouvernement pour respecter les Droits fondamentaux.
Lorsque nous lui demandons s’il est optimiste, il nous répond que le processus sera difficile, que cela demande des sacrifices mais des sacrifices qui valent la peine.
« A moins d’un changement, les violences qu’on a connus entre 1994 et 1997 risquent de se reproduire. »
Il nous dit, que lui-même est ses collègues croient avec tout leur cœur qu’ à moins qu’il y’ait un changement, des violences telles que le Rwanda a connues entre 1994 et 1997 des deux côtés, est une réelle possibilité et que c’est une responsabilité d’avertir les gens  et la communauté internationale sur ce risque afin qu’ils puissent prévenir à temps ces violences.
Ruhumuza Mbonyumutwa

Rwanda : Le point de vue de Gerald Gahima en Anglais (1/2)


Rwanda : Le point de vue de Gerald Gahima en Anglais (2/2)


Rwanda : Le point de vue de Gerald Gahima en Kinyarwanda

Enhanced by Zemanta

President Kagame Fails to Sell His Development Style to Europeans.

From the Proxylake by Claire Umurungi

From 4th to 07th December 2010, General Paul Kagame was in Brussels attending the 5th edition of European Development Days. It was a controversial visit for a President accused by the United Nations over grave human right abuses and crime that could be classified as genocide.
President Kagame failed to show up at his Keynote Address on first day of the Development Days. He was replaced by his minister of foreign affairs. His meeting with the Belgian Prime Minister, Yves Leterme was also cancelled for “agenda reasons”.
The outcome of this visit is similar to his last July visit in Madrid where he was due to meet with the Spanish Prime Minister, Mr Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero. We recall that, during the UN’s Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) in Madrid, the Spanish Prime Minister withdrew from a UN-backed meeting with Paul Kagame.
What was he actually expected to contribute to this heads of states meeting. Kagame’s government has developed Kigali. The last time I visited my country, the city looked clean, with glassy buildings, top hotels and large supermarkets well stocked up with western items. This is exactly what western business community, tourists, journalists and diplomats tend to praise about Kagame’s development effort but Kagame’s work has a heavy price.
The so called “Rwandan development miracle” streams from illegal exploitation of Congolese mineral resources. Rwanda-backed mining activities in Congo have caused over six millions of deaths. That is the price for the work he has done only for Kigali city and the welfare of a very tiny group of urban English-speaking people holding 90% of Rwandan economy.
Kigali’s vibrancy reminded me of Johannesburg of 1950 – 1980. The level of inequality and the lack of opportunity that the rest of the Rwandan population is living in today are appalling. Either the elite and rich class in Rwanda is unaware of the level of poverty in rural areas or has no sympathy towards the exploited French-speaking lower class. Don’t expect the western businessman or diplomat to notice but if they do, they are likely to turn a blind eye and mind their interests.
Such insensitivity from the ruling-class of Rwanda is rightly comparable to the white South Africans’ lack of sympathy towards the plight of poverty-stricken legally-segregated non-white population during the apartheid era.
South African Democracy Education Trust, in their book: The Road to Democracy in South Africa: 1960-1970, talks about the Apartheid era as a “time of political arrests by the thousand, loss of employment if one was politically active, bannings and house arrests, widespread police assaults, torture and prosecutions under special apartheid laws, and the use of extensive judicial flogging. It was horrendous time for those sickened by the government juggernaut”.
There is similar pattern in the political climate in Rwanda which is marked with multiple arrests of military officials,  collective arrest and torture of demonstrators, politically motivated incarcerations of the democratic party leaders such as Ms. Victoire INGABIRE of the FDU, Mr. Bernard NTAGANGA of the Social Party  and Mr. Deogratias Mushayidi of PDP and journalist arrest and assassinations.
Paul Kagame’s record on human right violations seem to catch up with him despite his highly financed PR efforts. Prior to his visit in Brussels, Rwandan embassies, External Security and military intelligence operatives were ordered to mobilise as many members of the ruling-party as possible from around Europe where they live posing as refugees, and to sponsor their trip to Brussels in the bid to back up the President’s controversial visit.
There was also a large number of anti Kagame protesters and tracts pointing to the recently released UN experts report named “Mapping  Exercise” in which Paul Kagame’s army is accused to have committed war crimes against Congolese people and what could be classified as crime of genocide against Hutu Refugees in Congo.
Enhanced by Zemanta

Rwanda: Former Aide to Victoire Ingabire Refuses to Falsely Testify

Olivier Rukundo, a Rwandan PhD student in China will soon see his scholarship terminated, his new Rwandan passport request denied. His own embassy is negotiating his deportation to Rwanda, Olivier told newspaper Umuvugizi.
According to the newspaper, he has been under constant pressure from Rwandan embassy in China to hand over copies of his emails with Victoire Ingabire.
Olivier may have been forced to falsely testify, when his email account proved to contain no implicating evidence against the party chairperson.
Olivier Rukundo claims that Rwandan Embassy in China argued him to cooperate otherwise, without his new passport, China, which takes no refugees in its territory and does not hold much respect to human rights, would deport him back home.
Victoire Ingabire Umuhoza, an opposition leader and chairperson of FDU party is currently behind bars, in Rwanda’s 1930 maximum security prison, awaiting trial.
Victoire Ingabire is one of the two candidates who attempted to contest 2010 Rwandan presidential election. Charges against her include association with terrorist groups, threat to national security. She denies all charges.
Her party says that her detention is illegal as her pre-trial detention order expired on 25th December 2010. The case has not yet been transmitted for evidential trial.
Olivier, a student with a government scholarship in China, was one of the two aides accompanying opposition leader, Mrs Victoire Ingabire Umuhoza in January 2010, during her return to Rwanda for presidential election campaign.
He returned to China two weeks later when he learnt that Victoire Ingabire and her team were facing a threat of imminent political motivated arrests
Enhanced by Zemanta

Monday, December 27, 2010

Ms. INGABIRE PRE-TRIAL DETENTION COURT ORDER HAS EXPIRED.

by Victoire Ingabire Umuhoza for President on Monday, December 27, 2010 at 9:47am
Kigali 27th December 2010

PRESS RELEASE

Ms. INGABIRE PRE-TRIAL DETENTION COURT ORDER HAS EXPIRED.

Today, Ms. Victoire INGABIRE's lawyer has requested an immediate release order from the Intermediate Court of GASABO because the pre-trial detention order expired on 25th December 2010. The case has not yet been transmitted for evidential trial. Her detention is illegal.  Paul KAGAME's government has no legal basis to keep her in jail after the expiration of the ordinance. This is another proof of the politically motivated background of this case.

We call upon Rwandans and the international community to send calls and letters demanding the immediate and unconditional release of democracy leader, Ms. Victoire INGABIRE UMUHOZA, Chair of FDU-INKINGI, illegally incarcerated in RWANDA in violation of Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, to which Rwanda is a signatory. She is detained in violation of articles 18 and 19 of the Rwandan Constitution and article 100 of the Rwandan Criminal procedure Law. “An order authorising for preventive detention remains in force for 30 days including the day on which it was delivered. After the expiry of that time, it can be renewed for one month and shall continue in that manner” (art.100, sub-section 3, Preventive Detention, LAW N° 13/2004 OF 17/5/2004 RELATING TO THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, O.G SPECIAL Nº OF 30/07/2004).

“The person's liberty is guaranteed by the State.” (art.18, Constitution). “Every person accused of a crime shall be presumed innocent until his or her guilt has been conclusively proved in accordance with the law in a public and fair hearing in which all the necessary guarantees for defence have been made available. Nobody shall be denied the right to appear before a judge competent by law to hear his or her case”. (art. 19, Constitution).

It is time to see if there is any institution or authority in Rwanda protecting the law or the national constitution.

Sylvain SIBOMANA
FDU-INKINGI
Interim Secretary General.



· · Share
Enhanced by Zemanta

Ingabire’s pre-trial detention court order expired on Christmas

by Sylvain Sibomana.

Ms. Victoire INGABIRE UMUHOZA, Chair of FDU-INKINGI, illegally incarcerated in RWANDA
Kigali – Today 27th December 2010, Ms. Victoire INGABIRE’s lawyer has requested an immediate release order from the Intermediate Court of GASABO because the pre-trial detention order expired on 25th December 2010. The case has not yet been transmitted for evidential trial. Her detention is illegal.  Paul KAGAME’s government has no legal basis to keep her in jail after the expiration of the ordinance. This is another proof of the politically motivated background of this case.
We call upon Rwandans and the international community to send calls and letters demanding the immediate and unconditional release of democracy leader, Ms. Victoire INGABIRE UMUHOZA, Chair of FDU-INKINGI, illegally incarcerated in RWANDA in violation of Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, to which Rwanda is a signatory. She is detained in violation of articles 18 and 19 of the Rwandan Constitution and article 100 of the Rwandan Criminal procedure Law. “An order authorising for preventive detention remains in force for 30 days including the day on which it was delivered. After the expiry of that time, it can be renewed for one month and shall continue in that manner” (art.100, sub-section 3, Preventive Detention, LAW N° 13/2004 OF 17/5/2004 RELATING TO THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, O.G SPECIAL Nº OF 30/07/2004).
“The person’s liberty is guaranteed by the State.” (art.18, Constitution). “Every person accused of a crime shall be presumed innocent until his or her guilt has been conclusively proved in accordance with the law in a public and fair hearing in which all the necessary guarantees for defence have been made available. Nobody shall be denied the right to appear before a judge competent by law to hear his or her case”. (art. 19, Constitution).
It is time to see if there is any institution or authority in Rwanda protecting the law or the national constitution.
Sylvain SIBOMANA
FDU-INKINGI
Interim Secretary General.
Enhanced by Zemanta