The
Ministry of Justice is one of the key ministries
of the Government. After the 1994 Genocide, thousands
of people were imprisoned. Today, around 110,000
are still in prison. In order to ensure a proper
and efficient judgment, you have established the
Gacaca courts, which appear to be quite different
from the classical courts of law. For the sake of
our readers, could you clarify on the functioning
of these courts?
Before explaining the functioning of these courts,
I would like to explain the background. According
to the International Red Cross, there are 110,000
in prison. These numbers are high; over 1,000,000
persons were killed in a space of only three months.
This denotes a high amount of mobilisation, preparation,
and planning to a point whereby a very high number
of people were successfully mobilised. There were
roadblocks everywhere, and people who took refuge
in churches and stadiums were also tracked down
and killed. Immediately after the war, we tried
to face the consequences of the Genocide, but the
main problem that we had was the lack of trained
personnel. Many had been killed and others had fled
to Congo.
Others were in prison. We had to train the IPJ ('Police
Judiciaires' or Legal Police), the prosecutors and
the judges. Another problem we had was the lack
of space. The prisons that were available had been
constructed during the colonial period. As the killings
were widespread, the suspects were many and it was
difficult to accommodate the high number of prisoners.
We therefore used the communal 'cachots' or detention
centres. Normally these are used as a point of transit,
but after the genocide they were used as prisons.
Our donors were reluctant to help us construct prisons,
or enlarge the existing ones.
Our main problem by far was concerning the law.
There was no specific law concerning Genocide. Such
a law was promulgated in August 1996. Yet arrests
had begun in 1994. From 1996 onwards we had tried
to employ the classical traditional justice system,
but it was not successful. Procedures were quite
lengthy. With the high number of prisoners, it would
take many years, let us say over 150, or even 200
years. We have judged around 6,000 people so far.
One should not only consider those in prison. There
are also suspects who are at large. We looked at
the problem in collaboration with other concerned
parties, and sought a solution.
The classical legal system has not worked well with
the Genocide of 1994. Myself I have noticed that
the laws that we use today, that date from the Romano-Germanic
period are not the 'Common Law'. There are laws
that were adopted to apply to normal cases, say
to judge a small number of persons for example one
to four persons or even up to 20 persons who have
committed a crime. However, in 1994, the opposite
occurred. If anyone stood up to condemn the wrongdoing
he was consequently marginalized. The larger majority
was involved in the Genocide. The few who resisted
involvement were considered as wrongdoers. You can
see that the roles had been reversed. It was therefore
impossible to apply the existing laws in this particular
case.
Let us look at acts of complicity. At each crossroads
there was a roadblock. At the roadblocks people
were asked for their identity cards. We had identity
cards that specified one's ethnic identity. If your
card stated you were Tutsi, then you were killed.
If you resembled a Tutsi (we had many cases whereby
Hutus were killed because they resembled Tutsis.
There were certain criteria that were widely accepted
as being determining factors as to whether one was
a Hutu or a Tutsi. As I was saying, there was a
high number of accomplices. Looking at what happened
in our courts, it was practically impossible to
punish everybody. Almost everybody was present at
the roadblocks. In Rwanda, the cellule is an administrative
entity. First of all we have the Prefecture, which
is sub-divided into sectors, and these are sub-divided
into cellules. One cellule had approximately 50
families. In each cellule there was a roadblock,
where there were 50 - 100 persons. Among them, there
were some who were particularly active. This is
why we established categories, according to our
law of 1996. The first category comprises the Planners,
the second category comprises those who actually
committed the killings; the third category also
comprises actual killers, and the fourth category
are those who henceforth controlled the property
of the victims. We noted that this system did not
go hand in hand with the classical law. Procedures
were too long. The proof was in the various testimonies.
We had to go out and look for those who saw what
had happened. It was quite a complicated process.
Here one should not only talk about justice. We
need a form of justice that helps to reconcile the
people. Reconciliation and justice go hand in hand.
One cannot talk about reconciliation without talking
about justice, and vice versa. Therefore we searched
for a fitting solution. There were then proposals
of a participative form of justice. Everyone would
participate in saying the truth, and participate
in searching for solutions. This is necessary because
these people are going to have to live together
on the same hill. This is why we launched the Gacaca
process, whereby entire communities shall participate
in telling the truth. They have selected their judges,
who will number up to 19. The chair shall comprise
19 persons instead of three or one person as is
normally the case in the classical courts of law.
Here in Rwanda we do not have one single judge,
we have three judges who preside over the process
with the magistrate, prosecutor's office and the
lawyers. With Gacaca there will be no lawyers and
we shall listen to the two sides; the plaintiff
and the defendant, the community and the judges.
It shall all depend on the different categories.
The first category, that of the main planners, those
who raped, or those who carried out sexual torture.
These will not be judged by Gacaca courts. They
will be judged by the classical legal system. Those
in the second, third, and fourth will be tried in
Gacaca courts. The second category are those who
killed, but are not in the first category, that
of the planners. There are those who killed and
are not in the first category, though they had the
intention to kill. These include those who penetrated
the churches and first used machine guns, then threw
grenades, then there were the population who carried
'white arms' clubs, machete, spears, such people
penetrated places of refuge, then started to hack
at their survivors, many of whom had very deep wounds.
If the perpetrator was among the attackers in this
case, he had the intention to kill and therefore
was in the second category. If he did not have the
intention to kill he is in the third category. The
fourth category comprises those who guarded the
property, e.g. houses that were devastated, stolen
cows, these are of a very large number; in fact
we have not imprisoned members of this category,
since we cannot imprison everyone. In general, they
first murdered people, then grabbed their property.
Sometimes a group of people killed several members
of one family, then shared among themselves all
the property of their victims. Some would take the
roof, others took the doors, if the victim had cows,
they shared them out.
How do you make sure that the judges will have
the necessary skills to carry out fair trials?
I think there will be no problem there. We have
simplified the whole process. For example, from
the witness testimonies we can know that certain
people did not intend to kill, some only destroyed
people's houses. If someone raped, then he is in
the first category. If he didn't have the intention
to kill, then he is in the third category. There
are three types of sentences. the process is simple.
What is your timeframe for the implementation
of the Gacaca courts?
We are completing the training of the judges. We
shall not immediately begin the trials. There will
first of all be a phase of information collection.
A phase of putting together the dossiers. In each
cellule, people will come together, in order to
hear others tell the story of what happened. How
it all started, who killed, who participated, those
who were killed, those who had their houses burned,
cows taken, etc. Through this information, people
will be categorized. This is the first phase, which
will precede the trials. The second phase shall
begin around the end of May or beginning of June.
The trials should then start just afterwards when
the information collection process is completed
in one cellule. We shall start with the persons
who plead guilty. We have a large number of them.
What will happen to those who plead guilty?
We have had problems with those who pleaded guilty,
because we had not placed them in separate blocks.
Where we have separate blocks for prisoners, there
have been many persons who have confessed their
guilt. Unfortunately the detention centers are cramped,
so it is difficult for them to come out and plead
guilty, especially since they are imprisoned with
people in the first category. Where we have been
able to separate them, we have had very positive
results. Currently, the more we approach the stage
of building up of a case, then more people come
forward to confess. Because we have divided the
sentence into three stages. For example for the
second category there will be a sentence of between
7 and 12 years. If the accused pleads guilty before
this phase, he will get between 12 and 15 years.
If he doesn't it will be 25 years, or life imprisonment.
Most of the accused are now wondering who will fall
in the category of a sentence of 12 - 15 years instead
of 7 - 12 years. So now they are pleading guilty.
I cannot say which percentage. What I can say is
that we have noticed that in the Kigali prison of
Gikondo, over 70% have confessed their crimes. In
some communal detention centres the number has gone
up to 90%.
You just said one cannot speak of Gacaca without
speaking of reconciliation. Today, to what extent
would you describe the courts as a tool for unity
and reconciliation?
They will work together. At the Gacaca courts, people
of one region will come together to talk about what
happened. Here too, it is a question of discussing
a problem, finding a solution together, and this
is what our country needs, after what happened.
Those whose family members are in prison, and those
whose family members were killed as well as the
victims. So this can be a way of reconciling them
and bringing them together. Concerning the accused,
or those imprisoned, we have considerably reduced
the sentence of those who committed the killings
in order to rebuild the country.On the other hand,
we need to assist the survivors. But after what
I have seen, I was in the country before 1994, as
well as during the Genocide, from what I have seen,
there is no reason to be optimistic. |
On
the other hand, the International Criminal Tribunal
for Rwanda based in Arusha was created to judge
the main organizers of the Genocide. The Rwandan
Government has criticized the ICTR for the slowness
of its trials. To your opinion, what could explain
the lack of efficiency from the Arusha tribunal?
They have at their disposal, US$ 90,000,000 funded
by the UN member countries. Ever since 1994, they
have not judged more than 10 persons. I think the
delays stem from the administrative procedures,
for example the journeys, we have always complained
of this problem of delays, concerning the prosecution,
arresting suspects and concerning the Tribunal.
But there are also other problems.
You have also denounced the irregularities existing
within the ICTR. What are the main points you have
noted?
There is the issue of witness protection. Witnesses
are being threatened, some have been killed. They
require protection before, during, and after their
journey to Arusha. It is imperative that those who
travel to Arusha to testify do so in secret. However,
by the time they have traveled, the news is usually
out. They are threatened on arrival, and they continue
to face problems. When I talk about security, I
mean physical and moral security. Moral, especially
when they are facing the bar, at Arusha. I believe
that interrogating someone who is accused of stealing
is not the same as interrogating someone who has
been raped, or who has seen her daughters raped
and killed, then has been raped herself. We have
cases of women who have broken down during the cross
examination of the defence lawyers. When they leave
Arusha, they are threatened by other Rwandans who
accuse them of having testified against their relatives,
or suspect that they have received some money. We
have been complaining of this for many, many years.
But nothing has been done. Before, there was one
single witness protection service. We were then
told that it had been divided into two; protection
of witnesses in charge, and protection of witnesses
who have been discharged. However, it is the same
personnel who are given this responsibility. I feel
that these services should be reorganized.
Has the international community consciousness
of those irregularities and pressures?
We have always informed them, we even wanted to
establish a mixed commission then we were told that
their mandate had been changed but this is not true.
We will nevertheless continue to have a dialogue
on this problem. I have just received a telephone
call from people who are being threatened in this
way. They would like to see me about this. Yesterday,
one came to tell me that out of one group of 5,
3 had already been killed, and himself was being
threatened. They are living in very, very difficult
conditions. Most of the people imprisoned in Arusha
are wealthy. The people in Arusha are not simple
individuals.
They used to have very high profiles. Some were
Ministers, others were Colonels, Majors, etc. They
had a lot of money, and they have influence here,
and also have their families. That is the other
problem. After the problem of delays, the 3rd problem
concerns the Rwandans recruited to work for the
Tribunal. This problem goes hand in hand with the
security of the witnesses. Many people working in
Arusha know about what's going on and can easily
call their acquaintances in Rwanda by phone and
inform them of who is testifying.
There is another point concerning the Tribunal.
I was told that this is the anglo-saxon system.
Myself I prefer the Romano-Germanic system. Because
here the accused have their lawyers, but the civil
party is not represented. Our women, or our witnesses
are totally under the pressure of these lawyers,
but there is nobody to defend them. This is something
that should change.
You have suggested the transfer of the ICTR to
Kigali. What would be the conditions for the ICTR
to accept moving to Rwanda? Abolish death penalty?
That is another aspect altogether. There was a proposal
that some of the accused be transferred here in
Rwanda so as to be tried in Rwandan courts. This
is different from transferring the whole tribunal
here. Because in that case, they would retain their
own legal system. You know that they do not believe
in the death penalty. We here in Rwanda do apply
the death penalty. They told us that if we accepted
to waive the death penalty they would transfer some
of the accused to Rwanda. This is an issue for discussion.
However, I remember a few years ago, when we were
studying the Gacaca process, together with people
from the President's office and people from all
fields, e.g. lawyers, individuals, local authorities,
at one time the former president asked "Who
is for the death penalty, and who is not?"
Only 10 condemned it. The rest said that it is too
early to do so.
In view of the high number of Genocide suspects
who have fled outside the country, what are the
means of co-operation that you have with these countries
in order to find these suspects?
It has become very difficult, even if there was
an extradition treaty. We are sometimes told that
our detention centers are not up to standard. Compare
our conditions with those of countries like France
or Belgium.
We propose three solutions, including the following:
To transfer the accused to Rwanda; something which
has not had a positive response
To judge them, establish special laws with which
to judge them here in Rwanda.
They have been similar cases in Belgium, Switzerland,
I know that in France cases are being prepared.
There are cases of people who've been transferred
to Arusha. We have the example of Rusatira, who
lived in Belgium, who will be transferred to Arusha.
We are still in contact with these countries. Each
time an official visits from these countries - recently
we had the Belgian Secretary of State for International
Cooperation here. We visited the Rilima prison.
From his interview we see that it was a positive
visit. Whenever we get such visitors, we inform
them about what we are doing.
You are today very involved in these trials,
in the reconciliation process, but how would you
describe the political situation as most investors
see it as one of the first criteria for investing
in the country?
I always try to make a comparison. I compare the
situation before, during and after 1994. Just after
1994, we experienced problems, we had problems regarding
security, there were infiltrators and this was creating
problems for investors, for example.
Today, we have one of the highest levels of security
in the region. If you look at Burundi, Congo, even
Uganda, we have a lot of security here. The problem
stems from the perpetrators of the Genocide who
are still at large, outside the country. It is they
who tell people that Rwanda is not safe, one cannot
travel outside Kigali, yet they are not here to
see for themselves. That is why I appreciate your
action. We need to reassure people.
Those refugees who do not dare to return to Rwanda
say all sorts of bad things about our country. You
can see that we are doing all we can. We are promoting
reconciliation, we have established the various
commissions, including the Human Rights Commission,
Economic Commission, even one for Poverty Reduction.
One can even see this in the field. When the infiltrators
fled, they convinced the population to go with them.
Afterwards, the population saw that they had been
duped, and returned to the country. I remember at
one time the price of a Kg of potatoes was 150 Frw.
Now it has dropped to 30 frw. The important thing
is not to talk, but to see the actions on the field,
which show proof of what we are doing.
Regarding business legislation, there is still
no commercial court in Kigali. In those conditions,
how do you intend to protect foreign investments
and how do you assure law enforcement?
The Commercial Court for example. We are in the
process of preparing the Arbitration centres. Once
they arrive they should not have to go to the ordinary
courts and mix with the Genocide trials. There should
be a commercial court to ensure that the process
moves quickly.
With the support of the World Bank, the process
is already in full swing, soon to be presented to
the Cabinet Meeting. For Arbitration centres the
process is completed. But this also is in its advanced
stages. We are establishing a law against corruption.
It is still at the level of parliament. It is still
within the commission, and will soon be presented
to the plenary session. We have many mechanisms
in place, including the Office de l'Auditorat.
On a more personal level, could you tell us how
you came to accept this heavy responsibility as
Minister of Justice?
When the Government offered me this position I could
not refuse it because I was ready to do anything
for my country. I lived in this country before 1994.
I was still quite young. What gives me courage is
the following: In 1994 I was one of the people being
hunted down, but I survived by chance. All my family
and most of my friends were killed. I told myself
that I should do everything so that my children
never have to experience what I went through. The
Rwandans of tomorrow should never have to go through
what we went through in 1994, because at that time
there was a total separation. On the identity cards
whenever the school year ended, students were separated
into two lines, one for Hutus, and one for Tutsis.
They went even as far as 'identifying' hybrids!
We had the RTLM radio which exhorted people not
to intermingle with the 'serpents' as we were called.
Even when we were young, we were told that the Tutsis
were serpents and that their heads should be cut
off. You would see that most of the suspects in
prison are young.
If we continue in the right path, then we shall
have good results. Concerning my career, I first
worked within the Ministry of Public Service. When
I left, around 1985, I went to the National University
and left towards 1990. I then worked in the private
sector. It was difficult to work in the civil service
at the time. I worked as a lawyer for some time,
until 1994. After the war, I worked with the Defense
Ministry. In 1995 I returned to the Ministry of
Justice, where I sat for some tests. By this time,
in order to occupy a senior post, one was obliged
to pass a test. What disturbed me was that afterwards
we were told that Canadians were brought in to mark
the tests, as if Rwandans would not have been able
to do it. I was appointed the Director of Police,
a position which I held till 1999. In 2000 the Ministry
of Justice was joined together with a Ministry which
was at the time attached to the President's Office,
and was called the Ministry of Institutional Affairs.
Right now our Ministry is called the Ministry of
Justice and Institutional Affairs. Then I was appointed
as Minister.
It is not an easy job. You need to come in the morning
to see what we have to deal with. We have people
who were victimized during the 1994 Genocide, we
also have many cases of people who were traumatized,
especially women. We also have women who come concerning
their relatives who are in prison.
We also have other forms of murders and assassinations,
rape of little girls. This is a very serious problem
that we are currently facing. We are in the process
of establishing certain measures. You see, this
started during the Genocide when there were mass
rapes. Since then there are no taboos. However,
when I compare the situation of 1994 and where we
are going, I become optimistic. What is important
is to avoid those who still believe in segregation,
or radios which preach segregation, if at all they
exist. We still have people who would like to see
identity cards based on ethnic identity.
Other than this I am married and have three children.
NOTE: WINNE cannot be held responsible
for the content of unedited transcriptions.
|
