Tag: Human Rights Watch

Is it Judgment Day for Rwanda?

Writing for FP.com, James Traub asks if this is the time that Paul Kagame, an erstwhile friend of the West, should be asked real questions and asked about those incidents in his country’s past, which remain unanswered. Referring heavily to a UN report leaked recently to the press, he wonders if Rwanda and President Kagame should continue to escape real questions because they are regarded close allies to those who are meant to do the questioning?

Anneke Van Woudenberg, an authority on the Great Lakes region with Human Rights Watch, told me that, thanks to allies like the United States and Britain, “any attempt to present the information contained in this report has been blocked, subverted, or really discouraged.” And that, in turn, has emboldened the Rwandans. “The report starkly shows the consequences of a culture of impunity,” she says. “You see the same crimes being committed again and again. And we’re continuing to document those same abuses today. This is the kind of horrific cycle you get when you bury the truth, when you don’t hold perpetrators to account.” For this reason, Van Woudenberg views the report as a document of “immense historical importance.”

It is not simply Rwanda’s suffering that has bought it the protection of powerful states. “They have made themselves indispensable,” says Fabienne Hara, a vice president of the International Crisis Group with long experience in the region. Washington has come to regard Rwanda as a “little military machine” to provide peacekeepers throughout the region (thus the seriousness of Rwanda’s threat to withdraw its troops) and as a friendly “entry point” for intelligence and regional diplomacy — a Central African Ethiopia. What’s more, Kagame has turned Rwanda into an extraordinary success story, with a bustling economy, sound finances, and a highly effective military. And all he has asked in exchange — like Israel — is protection from international judgment as he makes his way in his very dangerous neighborhood.

There is disagreement among experts about how policymakers should wield the study. Hara and Van Woudenberg would like to see Washington and London press Kagame to limit his meddling in eastern Congo. Phil Clark, an Oxford University researcher and regional scholar, fears that the report’s publication will widen fissures within the ruling elite in Kigali and thus imperil Kagame’s hold on power. Whoever succeeds Kagame is likely to be a less-stabilizing figure, he argues.

Perhaps the report should have appeared a year from now, or a year ago. What matters is that the United Nations will place its imprimatur on allegations that have been circulating for years. Rwanda’s friends have allowed the country, quite literally, to get away with murder. That tidy transaction must now come to an end. Rwanda is an important U.S. ally — but allies, too, need to be held to account.

Rwandan Election: Doubts About the Poster Boy

Rwanda’s president Paul Kagame, long the darling of western donors, is widely expected to win August’s presidential polls, the second since the 1994 genocide. But is his success down to pure popularity, or because of an apparent crackdown on voices of dissent?

Rwanda’s president Paul Kagame, long the darling of western donors, is widely expected to win August’s presidential polls, the second since the 1994 genocide. But is his success down to pure popularity, or because of an apparent crackdown on voices of dissent?

Paul Kagame stands at a podium in an open-air stadium in Rwanda’s capital, Kigali, where terrified thousands sought refuge from the men with the machetes as the killing started exactly sixteen years earlier.

It is Genocide Memorial Day, April 7, 2010, and the president is talking about turning grief to strength and determination. So far he has spoken mostly in Kinyarwandan, his nation’s language, but without warning he switches to English.

What he says next is clearly directed at the suited dignitaries representing the world’s diplomatic missions, the donors who together pump roughly $700million into his country annually, or a little less than half its budget.

‘Political space, freedom of expression, press freedom, who are these giving anyone here lessons, honestly?’ Kagame asks, softly, seemingly genuinely puzzled, as applause breaks out behind him. ‘These Rwandans…are as free, as happy, as proud of themselves like they have never been.’

On the surface, Kagame is a poster boy for the west’s aid policies, an African leader who stamps on corruption, who uses international help to educate children, treat the sick, repair roads and boost business.

Former United States President Bill Clinton last year recognised his ‘public service’ with a Clinton Global Citizen Award. Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair is an unpaid and enthusiastic advisor to his government. Blair’s successor, David Cameron and senior members of the British Conservative party have for the last four years spent part of their summer recess building schools across Rwanda, and cosying up to its President.

So, why, at an event charged with the memories of sixteen years ago, is Kagame appearing to bite the hands that help feed his people? The reason is another date, August 9, when Rwandans vote in only their second democratic presidential election since the genocide.

UGLY EVENTS

In the lead-up to polling, a series of ugly events has focused the international spotlight on Kagame in a way that has never happened before. He suspended two popular independent newspapers, Umuseso and Umuvugizi, described by the New York-based Committee to Protect Journalists as ‘the only critical media voices left in the country’.

A week later, Victoire Ingabire, head of the opposition Unitied Democratic Forces, returned from exile in Holland and was promptly arrested and charged with denying the genocide, among other indictments. She has been bailed, but is under house arrest. Her American lawyer, Peter Erlinder, was arrested too, also accused of genocide denial, and only released on medical grounds after three weeks.

A second presidential hopeful, Bernard Ntaganda, is in prison awaiting trial on four charges, including terrorism. A Human Rights Watch researcher was expelled from the country over alleged visa irregularities.

Only three opposition parties have been allowed to nominate presidential candidates. They are accused of at best being strategically soft on Kagame’s ruling Rwandan Patriotic Front, at worst, being its proxies. ‘There is nothing we can do, we have supporters, we are ready to contest the election, but we cannot because we cannot register,’ said Frank Habineza, leader of the Democratic Green Party of Rwanda.

Most seriously, a reporter from one of the banned newspapers, Jean-Leonard Rugambage, was shot dead outside his house on the evening of June 24.

Earlier in the day, a story he had written appeared online, alleging Rwandan security force involvement in the apparent assassination attempt of a disaffected army general – and former ally of Kagame’s – in South Africa.General Kayumba Nyamwasa, who reportedly fled Rwanda earlier this year afraid for his life, is expected to survive his injuries.

Two other army generals have been arrested in Rwanda, one for corruption, another for immoral conduct. Both were accused of links to a series of mysterious grenade attacks which killed one person and risk frightening-off tourists, who supply the largest share of the country’s foreign exchange earnings.

The vice-president of the opposition Democratic Green Party of Rwanda was found dead near his abandoned car on July 15, in what authorities said was a robbery. But his Green party colleagues immediately voiced suspicions that this too was a political killing. Kagame’s government has angrily denied any involvement in the deaths or shootings.

WESTERN WORRIES

‘It is strange. Why, if he has all this support, will he not allow opposition and then trounce them at the polls,’ asked a Kigali-based European diplomat. ‘Clearly all this other stuff is not the kind of press we were expecting out of Rwanda in the run-up to the elections.’

Certainly not, agreed US President Barack Obama’s point-man for Africa, Assistant Secretary of State Johnnie Carson. In testimony to the US House Foreign Affairs subcommittee on Africa, he said: ‘The political environment ahead of the election has been riddled
by a series of worrying actions taken by the Government of Rwanda, which appear to be attempts to restrict the freedom of expression.’

Carson’s comments came as something of a pleasant surprise to those frustrated at a lack of international pressure on a leader who, they felt, was being allowed to run his nation like a dictatorship.

‘Carson’s statement was significant, and encouraging,’ said Carina Tertsakian, the Human Rights Watch staffer whose Rwanda visa was cancelled. ‘Sadly so far we have seen very little will on the part of western donors to deal with this issue, we’ve seen nothing like that coming out of the UK, for example, which is by far the biggest European donor and main supporter of the Rwandan government. We hope for more [international pressure], but we’re not seeing it yet.’

But this is exactly the kind of attention that irritates Kagame that prompted his puzzled statements on Genocide Memorial Day. Much of the concern, from human rights organisations and media freedom advocates, centres on the accusation that the government uses the charge of denying the genocide as a political tool to silence critics.

Britain’s new coalition government has said it is watching the run-up to Rwanda’s election closely. Speaking to The World Today during a visit to Nairobi, Andrew Mitchell, the International Development Secretary, said Britain was Rwanda’s ‘good, but candid, friend’ and that he had raised concerns publicly and privately with the government in Kigali.

‘There are real issues about ethnicity in a country which saw over eight hundred thousand people murdered principally by machete and single shot in ninety days,’ he said.

‘You have an incredible legacy to balance between the desire of the survivors for revenge and the rights of the Hutu people to live in peace. I think we in the west should be respectful of that very difficult situation in arriving at conclusions about how the Rwandans handle it.

‘I’m not saying that the restriction on political space should go unchallenged, far from it. But I think that they are entitled to be cut quite a lot of slack in addressing ethnic issues which have the power to be deeply destabilising in a country with Rwanda’s history.’

From holding an iron grip on a generally supportive military, the same army which he led from exile into Rwanda to stop the genocide sixteen years ago, Kagame is now facing dissent among some senior officers.

There are accusations that political patronage is spread too thin. Or that control of privatised state assets is being passed to too small an inner circle.

But critics claim, discuss this and the strong arm of the state will find you. Further, they question the long term sustainability of what is, in essence, the world’s first real experiment in post-genocide state reconstruction.

Kagame’s unspoken theory is that if people are richer, they are less likely to fight because they will have far more to lose.

But that is not proven, and what if another seven years of firmly keeping the lid on dissent means that, come the next election, the pot is boiling and ready to explode?

‘It shouldn’t be us raising these issues, but as a Rwandan, what can you do’, asks Tertsakian. ‘As soon as you say anything, you are arrested and accused of genocide ideology, or threatened with it, or forced into exile.’

That is to entirely miss the point, counter Kagame’s supporters. ‘For Rwandans, guarding against genocide ideology is a matter of core national security,’ said Andrew Wallis, an advisor to Kagame’s government and author of Silent Accomplice: The Untold Story of France’s Role in the Rwandan Genocide.

‘Kagame feels that if you have a western-type full freedom of expression, that will allow revisionism, genocide denial, and that can lead to genocide itself. It’s still too soon since 1994. The feeling is, give the guy a break.’

BEST FOR BUSINESS

And Kagame’s record – human rights concerns aside – is impressive. A country utterly on its knees sixteen years ago, where neighbours had turned on neighbours, teachers on pupils, churchmen on congregations, is now among Africa’smost successful.

Since Kagame was first democratically elected – privately saying his models for how to run his country were South Korea and Singapore -economic growth has averaged above eight percent, and this year the World Bank named it as the world’s best business reformer.

Kigali aims to become a regional hub for conferencing and the service industry. Broadband internet cables are snaking up and down the hills.

Primary schooling is now free, extra teachers are being hired, new universities planned. Subsistence farmers – still eighty percent of the eleven million population – are advised on modern techniques and organic fertilisers.

Rwanda became only the second non-Anglophone country – after Mozambique – to join the Commonwealth last year, and Kagame has come to something of a rapprochement with the French, whom he long accused of favouring the Hutu genocidaires before and during 1994’s horrors.

Both moves are aimed at broadening Rwanda’s business partnerships. Beijing is being courted, but is unlikely to be as big a player as elsewhere in Africa because Rwanda has few minerals.

So, it is clear that Kagame will win re-election this year. For many Rwanda-watchers, the more fascinating contest will be the next presidential polls, in 2017. The president is unlikely to stand again, but as yet there is no clue as to his successor.

‘The question is whether Rwanda is ready for a Western-style democracy, and the answer at this point probably is no,’ said Wallis. ‘He has been called many things, but one is for sure: Kagame is a man of immense vision, and that vision is being impressively implemented. Why must outsiders keep pushing their theories of how to run a country onto Rwanda?’

‘Give him another seven years to bequeath a country where everyone’s too busy making money to risk anything like 1994, and then, perhaps, that will be time for true multipartyism. It’s far from sure, though.’

Mike Pflanz, Correspondent, East, West and Central Africa, Daily Telergaph, in Nairobi

Rwanda: Stop Attacks on Journalists, Opponents

(New York, June 26, 2010) – Insecurity and political repression are increasing in advance of Rwanda’s August 2010 presidential elections, Human Rights Watch warned today.  In the last two days, an independent journalist has been killed, the leader of an opposition party has been detained by the police, and other opposition party members have been arrested.

“The security situation is rapidly deteriorating,” said Rona Peligal, Africa director at Human Rights Watch. “With only 45 days left before the election, the government is lashing out to silence its opponents and critics.”

The Rwandan government should investigate all incidents of violence and ensure that opposition activists and journalists are able to carry out their legitimate activities in safety, Human Rights Watch said.

Jean-Léonard Rugambage, a journalist for the newspaper Umuvugizi, was shot dead shortly after 10 p.m. on June 24 outside his home in Nyamirambo, in the capital, Kigali. His colleagues and other sources in Rwanda told Human Rights Watch that the assailant appeared to be waiting for the journalist as he returned home.

As Rugambage drove up to his gate, a man approached his car and fired several shots at close range, hitting him in the head and chest. Rugambage died on the spot. The assailant then drove off. Police arrived on the scene and took Rugambage’s body to the police hospital in Kacyiru for autopsy. The police stated on June 25 that they were investigating his death.

Umuvugizi, an independent newspaper that has often been critical of the government, had published an article online on the morning Rugambage was killed, alleging that the Rwandan government was behind the attempted murder of a former Rwandan general, Faustin Kayumba Nyamwasa, in South Africa on June 19, and implicating senior officials.  General Kayumba, once a close ally of President Paul Kagame and a former chief-of-staff of the Rwandan army, has become an increasingly outspoken critic of the government since fleeing to South Africa in February 2010.  Umuvugizi’s editor said that Rugambage had been investigating the murder attempt on Kayumba and had reported being under increased surveillance in the days leading up to his death.

“We are shocked and saddened by the death of this courageous journalist,” Peligal said.  “Freedom of expression is already severely restricted in Rwanda, but the death of Rugambage is a further chilling blow to investigative journalism and, more broadly, to freedom of expression in the country.”

Human Rights Watch called on the Rwandan authorities to ensure that those responsible for Rugambage’s murder are brought to justice without delay, and to ensure the security and protection of other journalists.

In the early hours of June 24, police entered the house of Bernard Ntaganda, leader of the opposition party PS-Imberakuri, and took him away for questioning.  He has spent two days in police custody and is believed to be detained at Kicukiro police station.  The exact accusations against him are not confirmed, but it is thought that the police have questioned him, among other things, about his alleged involvement in an attempted arson attack on the house of former party vice-president, Christine Mukabunani, and inciting ethnic divisions.

Members of the PS-Imberakuri reported that the police raided Ntaganda’s house and the party’s office and took away documents and other belongings. By June 25, the party’s flag and sign had been taken down from their office.

Later on the morning of June 24, several members of PS-Imberakuri were rounded up by the police and taken into custody after they gathered outside the US embassy; they had gone there to ask for help following Ntaganda’s arrest. Some were released, but several, including the party’s secretary-general, Théobald Mutarambirwa, remained in detention in various locations in Kigali on June 25.

Also on the morning of June 24, police arrested several members of the FDU-Inkingi opposition party, who had gathered outside the Justice Ministry to protest a court case against their party president, Victoire Ingabire.  Most were released on June 25, but the party’s secretary-general, Sylvain Sibomana, treasurer, Alice Muhirwa, and Kigali representative, Théoneste Sibomana, were still in detention at the police station in Kicukiro on June 26. Some FDU-Inkingi members reported that when the police broke up their gathering, the police told them that they should stop being members of the party. Police also surrounded Ingabire’s house at about 6 a.m. on June 24, and stayed there for most of the day.

Members of both parties reported being beaten by the police.

On June 25, the Commissioner General of Police issued a statement saying that about 40 individuals had attempted to hold a demonstration without a permit, that 22 people had been arrested and questioned, 14 had been released and eight were being held for further questioning.

“These incidents are occurring at the very moment that parties are putting forward candidates for the presidential elections,” Peligal said.  “The government is ensuring that opposition parties are unable to function and are excluded from the political process.”

Intimidation of Independent Media

The killing of Rugambage was not the first incident of violence against journalists.  In February 2007, a group of assailants attacked Umuvugizi’s editor, Jean-Bosco Gasasira, in a near fatal incident outside his house, after he spoke out at a presidential news conference about the harassment of journalists. No one has been brought to justice for the attack.

In July 2009, the information minister publicly declared that “the days of the destructive press are numbered,” referring to Umuvugizi and a second independent newspaper, Umuseso. Within 24 hours, the national prosecutor’s office had summoned Gasasira to answer allegations of defamation, a criminal offense punishable with imprisonment. Gasasira was convicted and sentenced to pay a large fine. Umuseso faced similar defamation charges for exposing scandals involving public figures. In February, a court sentenced its former editor, Charles Kabonero, to a year in prison and the current editor, Didas Gasana, and a reporter, Richard Kayigamba, to six months each. The editors of both newspapers have fled the country after receiving repeated threats.

On April 13, the Media High Council, a government-aligned body in charge of regulating the media, suspended Umuseso and Umuvuzigi for six months, and then called for their definitive closure. It alleged, among other things, that some of their articles constituted a threat to national security.  The newspapers’ appeal against the suspension is still pending. The suspension has effectively shut down most independent reporting in advance of the elections, since Umuseso and Umuvugizi were among the very few active independent newspapers left in Rwanda. Umuvugizi has since posted an electronic version of its newspaper, but access to its website has been blocked inside Rwanda.

Obstruction of Opposition Parties

Incidents of harassment and intimidation of members of opposition parties have steadily increased in the months leading up to the August elections.  Ntaganda and Ingabire, as well as their party members, have been especially targeted. Unless the situation changes in the very near future, none of the three main opposition parties (PS-Imberakuri, FDU-Inkingi, and the Democratic Green Party of Rwanda) will be able to take part in the elections.  Parties and independent candidates must submit their candidacies to the National Electoral Commission by July 2.

Rwanda: Government Denies Visa to Rights Researcher in Crackdown on Dissent

(New York, April 23, 2010) – The Rwandan government’s decision to deny a work visa to Human Rights Watch’s representative in Kigali demonstrates a pattern of increasing restrictions on free expression in Rwanda in advance of August’s presidential elections, Human Rights Watch said today.  Human Rights Watch will appeal the decision and continue working on human rights issues in Rwanda.

“In the last few weeks, we have seen repeated intimidation, harassment, and obstruction of opposition parties, journalists, and civil society in Rwanda,” said Georgette Gagnon, Africa director at Human Rights Watch. “The Rwandan government is doing everything it can to silence critical voices and independent reporting before the elections.”

On April 23, 2010, officials from the Directorate General of Immigration informed Carina Tertsakian, Human Rights Watch’s senior researcher on Rwanda, that she would not be granted a work visa. They alleged that there were anomalies in her visa application, specifically signatures and dates on the documents she had submitted.

Staff at Human Rights Watch’s headquarters in New York had attested in writing to the authenticity of all the documents and signatures, but the immigration officials described their explanations as “unsatisfactory.” However, they had not made any attempt to contact Human Rights Watch’s headquarters or the individuals whose signatures they had queried.

The immigration officials refused to put their decision in writing. They told Tertsakian that as a British national, she could not exceed her 90-day legal stay in the country, which expires on April 24.

Gagnon was in Kigali the week of April 19 to try to meet Rwandan officials about this matter. Kenneth Roth, executive director at Human Rights Watch, sent a private letter to President Paul Kagame setting out in detail concerns at the handling of Tertsakian’s visa application and reiterating that all the documents submitted in the original and second application were authentic. Rwandan immigration officials did not respond to Gagnon’s requests for a meeting.

Human Rights Watch has been working on Rwanda since before the 1994 genocide. However, in the past two years, the Rwandan government has increasingly obstructed the work of the organization. In September and December 2008, it twice blocked the entry of the late Alison Des Forges, a renowned Rwanda expert and Human Rights Watch’s senior advisor on the Great Lakes region. In the last few weeks, Rwandan government rhetoric against human rights organizations has increased, with senior officials singling out Human Rights Watch for particularly fierce public criticism. There has also been an increase in articles hostile to Human Rights Watch in pro-government media.

Background

Rejection of work visa application

Carina Tertsakian, a British national, arrived in Rwanda on January 25, 2010, and was initially granted a work visa. On March 3, immigration officials questioned her on the paperwork relating to her visa application, pointing to a mistaken date and alleging differences in her colleagues’ signatures on the documents. They confiscated her passport. The following day, they summoned her again with a new set of questions, relating, once again, to dates and signatures.

On March 8, Tertsakian was formally summoned by the police Criminal Investigations Department (CID) to appear the following day. The police told her that she was suspected of using forged documents and questioned her on the same points as those raised by the immigration officials. By then, Human Rights Watch had submitted two letters from its headquarters, confirming that all the documents were authentic. The officials did not appear to take these letters into account.

On March 10, immigration officials returned Tertsakian’s passport, but had cancelled her work visa. The immigration officials refused to provide a written explanation for this cancellation; they told her she could submit a second visa application.

On March 16, Tertsakian submitted a second application, with a notarized affidavit from Human Rights Watch’s Legal Director attesting to the veracity and authenticity of all the documents. More than a month passed before there was any response to the second application – the usual turnaround time is three days. Rwandan immigration officials communicated their visa denial to Tertsakian on April 23, the day before her legal stay in Rwanda was due to expire.

Crackdown on freedom of expression

These developments take place against a backdrop of increasing intolerance of dissent and criticism in the run-up to presidential elections in August.

Members of opposition parties have been harassed, threatened, and intimidated. Two of the new opposition parties – the FDU-Inkingi and the Democratic Green Party of Rwanda – have been prevented from registering and have been repeatedly obstructed by the authorities. Meetings of the Democratic Green Party and the PS-Imberakuri (a third opposition party) have been disrupted several times, sometimes violently. The PS-Imberakuri eventually managed to register, but has since been hijacked by “dissident members” widely believed to have been manipulated by the ruling Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF) to silence the party’s president, Bernard Ntaganda.  Ntaganda himself was summoned before the Senate at the end of 2009 on accusations of “genocide ideology.” He has not been charged, but in April 2010, members of the Senate’s political commission expressed their view that these accusations were well-founded.

Victoire Ingabire, leader of the FDU-Inkingi, has been questioned by the police on six occasions since February 2010 (she returned to Rwanda in January 2010 after many years in exile), effectively paralyzing her party’s activities. In March, police stopped her at the airport and prevented her from travelling. On April 21, she was arrested and charged with “genocide ideology,” “divisionism,” and collaboration with terrorist groups, including the Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda  (Forces démocratiques pour la libération du Rwanda – FDLR), an armed group active in the Democratic Republic of Congo, composed in part of individuals who took part in the 1994 genocide. Ingabire was released on bail on April 22, but is not allowed to leave the country or to go outside the capital, Kigali. There has been an unrelenting public campaign against her in the pro-government media, relating primarily to public statements in which she criticized the government and called for justice for killings of Hutu by the RPF.

Journalists have also faced numerous problems in the course of their work. The two independent newspapers, Umuseso and Umuvugizi, have been sued for defamation, a criminal offense punishable with imprisonment. Both cases are currently at the appeal stage. On April 13, the Media High Council, a government-aligned body responsible for regulating the media, suspended the two newspapers for six months. Umuseso and Umuvugizi are among the few independent media left in Rwanda; both have published articles critical of the government.

More broadly, Human Rights Watch says many ordinary Rwandans feel unable to express their opinions openly. Those who voice criticism of the government or its policies risk being labelled opponents, accused of being in league with opposition parties or with people who allegedly want to topple the government, or accused of “genocide ideology” – a vaguely defined criminal offense which carries penalties of 10 to 25 years’ imprisonment.

After years of intimidation of civil society activists, there are very few independent human rights organizations left in Rwanda. Those who are still trying to document human rights abuses are facing constant threats and obstacles. For example, in the run-up to the 2008 parliamentary elections, the League for Human Rights in the Great Lakes Region (Ligue des droits de la personne dans la région des Grands Lacs – LDGL) was prevented from deploying its full election observer mission and was attacked by the National Electoral Commission before its report even came out. Members of the human rights organization LIPRODHOR have also faced serious threats over several years, causing many of their key members to leave the country for their own safety, and leaving the organization significantly weakened.

For more Human Rights Watch reporting on Rwanda, please visit:

http://www.hrw.org/africa/rwanda

For more information, please contact:

In New York, Georgette Gagnon (English): +1-917-535-0375 (mobile)

In Washington DC, Jon Elliott: (English, French): +1-202-612-4348; or +1-917-379-0713 (mobile)

Paul Kagame: The monster out of a “hero”

NICK WADHAMS – NAIROBI (Time)

President Paul Kagame of Rwanda is often lauded around the world for pulling his country out of the mire of genocide 16 years ago. But Rwandan opposition leaders, diplomats and rights activists fear Kagame is now cracking down on his opponents ahead of national elections in August. They cite two prominent examples: Charles Kabonero, a Rwandan newspaper editor, sits in exile in Uganda, doing internships with civil society groups; and Victoire Ingabire, an opposition politician, sits in a different sort of exile, unable to leave Rwanda’s capital Kigali, until a trial against her ends.

The banning of Kabonero’s Umuseso newspaper earlier this month and Ingabire’s arrest on Wednesday were only the most recent in a series of actions — including a military shakeup, arrests and the decision by many ambassadors, opposition leaders and rights activists to go into exile — that have western diplomats and regional experts worried that Kagame may be purging supposed enemies and cutting out potential threats before the vote.

“Things are not good,” Kabonero, whose Umuseso was shut down for six months on April 13, tells TIME. “We are seeing a situation where the government is doing everything it can to instill fear, and to make sure that the opposition doesn’t have the opportunity to access the public.”

Rwanda has come an incredibly long way since the genocide, which saw Hutus slaughter 800,000 Tutsis and moderate Hutus in just three months. But opposition figures say they believe Kagame is now preying on fears of another genocide to crush the opposition. He won 95% of the vote in 2003 elections that were seen as flawed.

They point to the “genocide ideology” law that is meant to keep people from fanning ethnic hatred, but which critics say has been used to stifle dissent.

Kagame is a conundrum to western diplomats, who say that despite his flaws, Rwanda’s president has fought to control corruption and has expanded the economy. “This is a country that has a vision, this is a country that has made miraculous progress since 1994,” said a western official in Rwanda, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak with the press. “On the other hand, there’s the issue of democracy. And there it gets a lot more complicated.”

Kagame’s attitude toward dissent was thrust into the spotlight when Victoire Ingabire, leader of the opposition United Democratic Forces, was arrested Wednesday, after returning to the country in January. She was charged with associating with a terrorist group and propagating “genocide ideology” for comments she made at a genocide memorial event in which she said Hutu victims of the genocide must also not be forgotten. Ingabire said she is innocent and simply wants to start a dialogue that has been stifled for years. The government and some western officials, speaking to TIME anonymously, fear she is essentially using ethnicity to win support among fellow Hutus. Her party has not been allowed to register and it seems unlikely so far that she will be allowed to run for the presidency.

“What we say is that the government will use the genocide for political ends,” Ingabire tells TIME by phone from Rwanda. “If we say ‘Hutus were also victims,’ for the government, this is genocide ideology. There was a genocide but there were also other crimes in Rwanda, there were crimes against humanity, and we have to remember all the victims of this tragedy.”

Similar accusations of stirring hatred and inciting violence were leveled against the two newspapers that were banned earlier this month. Kabonero’s Umuseso and another opposition newspaper Umuvugizi had been critical of the government in the past. The Media High Council, a nominally independent body, said they had insulted Kagame, incited insubordination among the police and army, and stirred fear. The council’s executive secretary, Patrice Mulama, says that in Rwanda — where pro-Hutu radio played such a huge role in fanning the genocide — the media must be especially careful not to provoke tension.

“We didn’t do this because we wanted to suppress media freedom but we did it because freedom comes with responsibility,” Mulama tells TIME. “We want to ensure that there is media freedom but that the people who practice journalism do it responsibly. There is no freedom that can be accepted if it infringes on the rights of the others or where it endangers the safety of citizens and incites the public to violence.”

The latest sign of the crackdown came late Friday. That was when the New York-based rights group Human Rights Watch announced that the Rwandan government had denied a work permit to its new researcher there, Carina Tertsakian. She was on a three-month visa that expires Saturday. According to Human Rights Watch, the government said there were “anomalies” in Tertsakian’s application, a claim the group denies. It claims that the decision is part of a government strategy of targeting individuals rather than risking international condemnation by kicking out the rights watchdog itself.

“It’s a blow for Human Rights Watch and is part of a broader pattern of what’s going on Rwanda,” says Georgette Gagnon, Africa Director at Human Rights Watch. “The Government has chosen to go after an individual because they think it is easier than going after the organization and is less likely to draw attention from the international community. Human Rights Watch will appeal the decision and will continue working on human rights in Rwanda.”

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1984315,00.html#ixzz0m3Q2YXNU

From Gatsinzi to Kabarebe and now Umuseso, what exactly is Paul Kagame’s ultimate motive?

Anyone who has been following events in Rwanda over the last few weeks will agree with me that it is now clear what President Paul Kagame really wants. A safer Rwanda! A Rwanda, where there is no political upheaval, no opposition politics, no sentimental politicians, no old friends, no dissent and above all, no critical newspapers to report the prevailing ‘peace and tranquillity’.

Presidential elections will go ahead as planned in August and when the dust has settled in September, those still living will witness a sympathetic, loving and caring president, a head of state ready to forgive and forget as he embarks on another seven year term as head of state. How cool is that!.

Gen Marcel Gatsinzi will be hauled to court to answer the genocide charges that continue to linger around his back before being thrown into jail. Lt. Gen Charles Kayonga will be sent to Rwanda’s Pentagon and given a few challenging but less empowering tasks and Gen Kabarebe will most likely retire. Rwandans will have a newly elected leader and The New Times will struggle not to lead with a headline that reads: PK rigs to set new world record!

The High Council of the Press will come up with yet another silly document which Patrice Mulama, posing in front of cameras will read confirming that Umuseso and Umuvugizi newspapers have been reinstated. It will be business as usual and the international community will continue to pour money into Rwanda with the aim of ending poverty and fostering economic development.

Right path? Don’t ask me for I really don’t know. What is clear though is that Paul Kagame, having commanded the forces that he says ended the genocide and helped restore order in chaotic Rwanda, has embarked on a self destructing campaign. He will stop at nothing to make himself clear and louder to all that Rwanda belongs to him and only he knows what is good for the country. He does not even appear bothered by the idea of ruling the country as if it is some family ranch, because according to what he knows, he is popular, charismatic and knows his country’s history better than anyone else. And who are we to challenge him? What exactly do we know? To him we are rejects who should either shut up or put up with whatever nonsense being paraded as long as we rise up at the end of the day to toss to the monsieur- only this time, in English!

Make no mistake the president is in charge. When coup rumours went around a month ago he was very stern as he was precise in his assurances to his audience that Rwanda will never have a coup. “A coup in Rwanda, never…not here,” he said. If that was a statement that lacked the marrow, he made certain a few days ago with impromptu changes in the army. Gen Gatsinzi, the hitherto docile Defence Minister was dropped for a close friend (former friend some will argue) Gen. James Kabarebe.

Lt. Gen Charles Kayonga, who many basing their conviction on local media reports thought was under house arrest, got in to replace Gen. Kabarebe. Some will argue this was a tactical move by the man in charge. Technically demote the popular Gen Kabarebe by making him defence minister and bring Kayonga closer in a more demanding position where he can be checked on and made very busy to even think of a coup.

Am not very knowledgeable about the finer intricacies of army changes but speculation has never been my speciality either. It is very plausible though that it is much easier to look after and maintain an eye on a chief of defence forces than it is to someone who is head of land forces. For the sake of the issue at hand, I will take what the official version is and leave the rest to you my readers. Fortunately, there is even no official version of the changes, just a routine reshuffle.

Political temperatures in Kigali continue to rise. Kagame continues to impress. He seems very popular with the wanainchi or at least looks so whenever he pays them visits. Opposition politics in Rwanda remains a far cry. Those who have dared to challenge the establishment now find themselves in limbo fearing not only for their lives but at the moment for their political parties as well.

Victoire Ingabire has been summoned to the Criminal Investigations Department  more times than she has been allowed to go to church unattended. She is religious but the government would rather she was not. Religious people get to meet others when they go to church. And when you don’t want someone to mix with others for fear that they will talk about their political agenda, you so wish they were pagans.

Frank Habineza, another of the political hopefuls, a former Rwandese Patriotic Front member who broke ranks to form the Democratic Green Party of Rwanda – a party whose registration seems to bother Kagame more than the poverty in the country – is not having it smooth either. He has on several occasions been in the news complaining about scary emails and intimidating phone calls from state agents who continue to threaten him unless he gets out of politics.

Bernard Ntaganda who until a week ago was party chairman for Rwanda’s only vocal political party PS-Imberakuri was successfully ousted by a party wrangle within his own party that many believe was orchestrated by the ruling Rwanda Patriotic Front.

With these under control, in dissaray, under investigation or currently being accused of one or several offences, Kagame will definitely emerge as the one and only presidential candidate come August. He will achieve what he has set out to achieve – rule Rwanda – forever and as long as the elections are held at the hindsight of local and international observers, we will have no legal reason to believe that his victory was manipulated.

The media, which in such an environment would have provided credible evidence as to the real situation on the ground has been manipulated. Those like Umuseso, who have not been so keen at accepting government tokens have now been suspended. The six months suspension effectively rules out Umuseso in the media life of Rwandans until, well, after the elections. If that is not calculated then I stand to be corrected as to whether Kagame is not preparing himself as the father figure and self appointed Lord of Rwanda, he wishes and claims to be.

Rwandan president rejects human rights criticism

(CNN) — Rwandan President Paul Kagame hit back Monday at human rights activists who say he’s behaving like an autocrat and fueling a bloody civil war in Rwanda’s neighbor, Congo.

“If you are talking about people in the human rights community from outside… I have an issue with this,” Kagame said, 16 years after he was hailed as a hero for ending a genocide that killed at least 800,000 people.

“You tend to make a judgment of a country, 11 million people, on what a couple of people have said and (they) don’t take into account what Rwandans say.”

Kagame added, “Nobody has asked the Rwandans … it’s as if they don’t matter in the eyes of the human rights people. It’s our own decisions in the end.”

He said everyone in Rwanda has to play by the rules and be accountable. “There has to be leadership to make things move in the right direction,” Kagame stated.

Kagame’s comments came a month after the New York-based group, Human Rights Watch, said opposition activists are facing increasing threats, attacks, and harassment ahead of Rwanda’s presidential election in August.

Human Rights Watch said opposition party members have suffered serious intimidation by individuals and institutions close to the government and Kagame’s ruling Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF).

The RPF took power in 1994 after its army swept into the capital of Kigali and overthrew the Hutu-dominated government responsible for the massacre of hundreds of thousands of Rwandans, most of them members of the minority Tutsi community.

In the aftermath of the 100-day genocide, the fastest in modern history, Kagame transformed his country, turning it into one of the fastest growing nations in Africa and — in the view of some — a model of economic and social development.

Kagame said Rwanda has made significant progress in erasing some of the scars left behind after the tragedy.

“That’s why the country is stable. That’s why the country is moving on. That’s why the country is developing.”

Kagame insisted he has nothing to do with the continuing civil war in mineral-rich Congo, even though he acknowledged that Rwandan troops intervened there a decade ago in an attempt to stop rebel groups from returning to Rwanda.

The war became the largest and most destructive conflict in African history, costing more than 5 million lives, as various groups and foreign armies fought for control of Congo’s land and mineral resources.

“I cannot be blamed for the problems of Congo or any other country,” Kagame said. “There are the Congolese who have their own country, who are supposed to manage it, who are supposed to govern it. It has nothing to do with me.”