By Nkunda Rwanda

Amid twitter battles between President Paul Kagame and journalists, there are credible reports suggesting that the Rwandan leader is seeking to eliminate his opponents living in Britain. The report first surfaced during the British royal weeding when the Rwandan envoy was given a warning.

According to a letter sent to two individuals by the London Metropolitan Police the attacks “could come in any form” including, “unconventional means”. The police further warn them to “Take such remedial action as you see fit to increase your own safety measures, e.g. house burglar alarms, change of daily routines, always walk with an associate,” adding that, “It may even be that you decide that it is more appropriate for you to leave the area for the foreseeable future.”

Speculations about this event have dominated discussion on Rwanda. The speculations fall into twofold: (1) whether the threats are credible, (2) whether the Rwanda government would pursue such an agenda clearly putting at risk her excellent relation with Britain. In my view, both speculations seem naïve and fail to appreciate the complexity of the Rwandan crisis. On one hand the Rwandan leader has carefully cultivated a brilliant media image; on the other hand his heavy handedness and contempt for democratic procedure is nothing new.

A simple question that needs to be asked and answered is why some people are still unwilling to believe that Kagame is a brutal leader, despite overwhelming evidence. If, as the UN Mapping report posits, the man is suspected of having committed genocide, would any other crime be too monstrous in his view? Even if we are to argue that the Mapping report is speculative, are we short of examples in which he has ordered the assassination of opponents? Certainly no one would say so. Just within the last one year, there are horrifying reports of assassination. The first one is that of journalist Jean Leonard Rugambage, whose car was sprayed with bullets in the city of Kigali during the day light. Another one is Denis Semadingwa, a protégé of Laurent Nkunda assassinated in the town of Gisenyi. Lastly, the vice president of the green party was found beheaded just months prior to the general elections. In all the cases above, the families put the blame squarely on the Kagame regime.

The successful assassinations of Seth Sendashonga and Theoneste Lizinde both in the streets of Nairobi are examples where Rwanda jeopardized international cooperation to commit extrajudicial in a foreign country. Following the assassination of Sendashonga, the Rwandan ambassador in Kenya was expelled and the embassy closed. News has it that Lizinde, who had fallen out with Kagame was among the few people who attended Kagame’s high command meeting approving the assassination of President Juvenal Habyarimana. He was clearly a legitimate target in his view. Most recently, Rwanda has pursued Gen. Kayumba Nyamwasa in South Africa a major trade partner with Rwanda. Even more unthinkable is the timing: the fact that it was carried out during the world cup a time when South Africa was painfully trying to reassure the world of its ability to contain crime. South Africa would react by recalling its ambassador for “further consultations”.

Reacting to the news, Mathew Sinclair of the UK Tax Payers Alliance wrote, “What is really shocking though is that in a very real sense, our money is supporting the Government suspected of plotting murder in London.” My hope is that Britain will not merely terminate aid, which is sometimes easy and cowardly. I hope that they will use their aid as leverage for democratic progress including freedom of speech.

It seems that Gourevitch found it inconvenient to acknowledge the acts of terrorism committed by Kagame and RPF/A, nor did he find it necessary to hold Kagame and the RPF/A responsible for it, as journalists so often do. And now he’s claiming, he’s not in Kagame’s pockets, peddling Kagame’s propaganda. Has he read his own work?

He did not find it convenient to inform the world, that Kagame and the RPF/A took up arms and killed and displaced Rwandan families for four years before the genocide or in what barbaric and heartless manner their deaths were carried out. Acknowledging that, and informing the world of such blasphemy would have thwarted his efforts of stigmatizing an entire group of people victimized by the same people he lauds, and would have meant that he would have had to report on the subsequent possible genocide that happened in the Congo. It was Philip Gourevitch who stigmatized aid organizations that provided aid to refugees in the Congo including food and water, after they survived Kagame’s terrorist organization’s (RPF) slaughter in Rwanda. Had Gourevitch had his way, the survivors of Kagame’s RPF’s slaughter, needed to have starved to death. How dare they retain life! And I’m not talking about the ostensible genocidaires (some of whom currently work for Kagame it turns out – Guest post coming soon!! ).

I suppose it is why Gourevitch found it satisfying that Kagame’s RPF followed them into the Congo, and slaughtered them. Why else would he have rationalized it, rather than calling international attention to it to be stopped? For Kagame to be deposed? But reporting on that, would have conflicted with the type of falsified image he was constructing, the one that elevated a terrorist organization to hero status, solidifying Kagame’s hold on the area, and on which Gourevitch has since benefited immensely both personally and professionally. And let me remind readers once again, that the slaughtered in the Congo, constituted majority women, children, and the elderly, according to the U.N.

In his response to Tristan, Gourevitch asserts that he reported on Kagame’s crimes. But rather, he defended Kagame with each key stroke, rationalized Kagame’s massive crimes against humanity, and defended Kagame’s rights to massively kill Rwandans and Congolese (reported by U.N. majority of whom were women, elderly, and childern), in the Congo. Even in his response to Tristan McConnell, Gourevitch attempts to minimize Kagame’s crimes, despite the overwhelming testimony and evidence, that Kagame has wrecked havoc in the Congo. Missing among the evidence and testimony, were Philip Gourevitch’s personal testimony of what he experienced on the ground, as he watched Kageme’s terrorist organization slaughter Rwandan refugees, and Congolese nationals while he dissuaded aid organizations from feeding them, exacerbating their demise. What he instead reported, was Kagame’s terrorist organization, exercise its justified right (according to Gourevitch and Kagame) to attack another country, and fight Kagame’s battles inside another country’s territory, and he was all too happy to report it, defend it, and inform the world about their organized and systemic killings, with a positive spin.

Can Philip Gourevitch effectively be considered an accessory to mass murder and genocide in Central Africa? How much damage has his award winning work done to the people of Central Africa? Is Philip Gourevitch truly interested in the people of Central Africa or his own prestige? If he is interested in the people, why does he continue to spin for Kagame, and to minimize Kagame’s crimes rather than facing them head on, and calling a spade a spade? Why does he resort to personal attacks of his critics, rather than their work? Why does he continue to undermine Kagame’s opposition and anyone who poses a real threat to not only Kagame’s falsified image (thanks Gourevitch!) but to Kagame’s power hold and an end to Kagame’s mass murder and impunity (thanks again Gourevitch!!)? And when will he finally, FINALLY, do the right thing, and put Kagame’s image, of which he is mostly responsible, in its proper context?

I wonder what Gourevitch was doing  between 1990 and 1994. Did he see Kagame’s RPF attack of a peaceful country as just another African tragic war that he did not need to get involved? Or did he not see a financial profitability opportunity? How would Gourevitch rationalize Kagame’s invasion of the Congo to the Congelese women and children? Would he convince them that they are genocidaires? Has Gourevitch come face to face with Kagame’s victims? Does he consider their stories to be unimportant enough to be told? Does he not wish to inform the world that their blight is important? That they matter? That Kagame should be brought to justice? What does Gourevitch say about the 6 million dead?

How much more will his upcoming book glorify Kagame at the expense of Central African people’s lives?

A friend of the Rwandan leader, it makes sense that Stephen Kinzer would turn a blind eye to such massive crime as serious as crimes against humanity. How else would he maintain a good relationship standing with Kagame, and the continued sale of his book, A Thousand Hills: Rwanda’s Rebirth and the Man Who Dreamed It? But I did not expect him to stoop so low as to imply that colonialism, dictatorship, lack of democracy, state controlled media/journalism, repression, politically motivated incarceration and detention of critics, exiling of opponents, and other such privileges are not only good for Rwandans, but that they are a right which Human Rights Watch seems to be interfering with. With human rights champions like these…no wonder six million people are dead in the Congo, while writers sell books glorifying genocidaires and covering up for their crimes.

In a disingenuous attempt to deflect from his support of a genocidal regime, Stephen Kinzer backtracks on some of his statements, in a calculated and destructive way. Kinzer writes another article, claiming now, that the Rwandan leader is “authoritarian” because he refuses to listen to his former partners in crime (no pun intended) and fellow war criminals. Before this surprising piece of writing, Kinzer had claimed that “authoritarianism” is what Rwandans needed and in fact embraced it. But now, Kinzer claims Kagame should listen to these war criminals (at least certainly Kayumba Nyamwasa), because, wait for it….they used to work together and Kagame used to trust them. And because not listening to them, Kagame creates more enemies who are openly critical.

Did Kinzer seriously miss the part where Kagame waged a war on two three (we remember you too Uganda) different countries multiple times and committed possible genocide in one of the countries and arguably both? How enough is that to create enemies? It’s more important that Kagame listen to prominent opponents who used to work with him than the millions of voiceless victims and witness of Kagame’s brutality or other human rights defenders according to Kinzer. And it makes sense. Kagame’s fellow war criminals do carry his secrets after all, which they might spill, thereby exposing both Kagame for the crimes he committed, and Kinzer for his cover up.  It’s also the reason that rather than advocate for the release of  jailed “alleged” collaborators with terrorist groups like Victoire Ingabire, and genocide survivor and dissident Deo Mushayidi, Kinzer advises Kagame to rely on proven and indicted war criminals instead.

Does Kinzer truly have Rwandans in his mind and heart? Or is he mostly interested in the continued success of genocidaire Kagame, and the continued uninterrupted sales of his book? Kinzer makes no mention of Victoire Umuhoza or other political prisoners, makes no mention of murdered opposition candidate and independent journalists, makes no mention of the possible genocide in the Congo, but instead advises Kagame to reconcile with his fellow war criminals, because they are prominent, and he used to trust them.

Dear Stephen Kinzer, are you serious? You would trust Kayumba Nyamwasa, indicted by two different independent judicial systems for war crimes and crimes against humanity, to provide insight into democracy and recovery from war and genocide? You would trust Karegeya on matters of free states before trusting unfairly jailed Bernard Ntaganda, or Victoire Ingabire Umuhoza, a mother and peaceful resistant, and someone who has never committed crimes against humanity against anyone? You would advise Kagame to reconcile with other war criminals, at least cut their sentences short (by your implication that the sentences are “severe”) before reconciling with Deo Mushayidi who lost all his family members in the genocide? You would recommend Kagame take advice from top prosecutor, responsible for countless infractions in Rwanda, Gerald Gahima to be trusted with matters of reconciliation and democracy before Deo Mushayidi?

Really?

Are you serious?

Are you trying to help the people of Rwanda or did I miss something? You do realize that when some of these people worked with Kagame they were killing people right?

In a recent article, Stephen Kinzer chose the latter. He informs us that he finally broke with the human rights community once they published and publicized Kagame’s crimes. Kinzer says:

The place where I finally broke with my former human-rights comrades was Rwanda.

Kinzer says that admiration from other dictators (referred to in the article as ‘other heads of states in africa’ ) and their attendance of Kagame’s inauguration are proof that Kagame is not a brutal repressive dictator. Either Kinzer forgot that Kagame was the biggest threat to democracy in his country at the run-up of the elections, or he supports the kind of sham election that excludes all viable opposition parties, imprisons opposition leaders, and exiles and murders independent journalists. Kinzer clarifies his position by informing readers of his support for this kind of repression from an African leader. Kinzer continues,

By my standards, this authoritarian regime is the best thing that has happened to Rwanda since colonialists arrived a century ago. My own experience tells me that people in Rwanda are happy with it, thrilled at their future prospects, and not angry that there is not a wide enough range of newspapers or political parties.

With a straight face he says that. He mis-characterizes what rights Rwanda’s been violating as justified since they were demanded in the context of “ethnicity,” disregarding the fact that any time Kagame and company are faced with any threat for democracy they reduce everything down to “ethnic” divisionism and imprison those who threaten them with  democratic ideals. Kinzer is okay with that. He also believes that instead of documenting human rights violations, Human Rights Watch should instead sycophantically praise Rwanda. It would be funny, if it weren’t so serious. Just ask this guy. Kinzer doesn’t believe the guy deserves his right to life as an opposition figure to Kagame.

Kinzer continues,

Human Rights Watch wants Rwandans to be able to speak freely about their ethnic hatreds, and to allow political parties connected with the defeated genocide army to campaign freely for power. (emphasis mine)

Kinzer is afraid of democracy in Rwanda. Democracy in Rwanda is a threat to Kagame, and a threat to Kagame is not only a threat to Kinzer’s credibility and pay check. Kinzer, so shamelessly imperialistic has the gall to say that by calling out human rights violations in Rwanda, Human Rights Watch is leading Rwanda on the path to another genocide instead. He forgets that Kagame is the one continuing his genocidal plan which he started 20 years ago.

It has come to this: all that is necessary for another genocide to happen in Rwanda is for the Rwandan government to follow the path recommended by Human Rights Watch.

But where was Stephen Kinzer in 1990 when Kagame attacked a peaceful nation and started a four year war that culminated in the genocide of 1994, and out for more blood, continued and committed genocide in the Congo? Where was Stephen Kinzer when the RPF violated the Arusha peace accords which would allow them to return to Rwanda peacefully, and campaign freely within the country as another political opposition party? This is the same right Kagame and Kinzer are denying other Rwandans who are doing it peacefully and not forcing a peace agreement by the gun unlike Kagame and the RPF. Where was Kinzer when the RPF assassinated two heads of states? Where was Kinzer when the RPF refused international intervention to stop the genocide and the war violence, but instead prolonged the conflict until they had secured the whole country? Where was Kinzer when the RPF and Kagame went into the Congo and committed genocide there? Where was Kinzer in 1996? 1998? 2000? And subsequent years when Kagame’s army ravished the Congo, with only the Congolese people as the real loser of each one of their incursions? Where was Kinzer when the UN released a mapping report documenting the most serious human rights  violations in the Democratic Republic of Congo between 1993 and 2003, where an alleged possible genocide was committed by Rwandan troops?

And most importantly, where is Kinzer today? Where is his altruistic non colonial and non imperialistic proclivities for defending human rights instead of businesses? I have not seen Kinzer speak out on behalf of Congolese. Instead he defends Kagame’s right to deny others rights, and to violate their human rights, and commit crimes against humanity against them.

Is Kinzer really interested in human rights? Or is he interested in human rights violations profit? He praises the most recent Human Rights Watch appointment because it’s “potentially” one that will remain silent on Kagame’s crimes. Kinzer is happy with Rwandans living under a dictatorship, without any ability to express their free political will, nor their right to oppose the opposition, or the right to express their thoughts and ideas on political repression. According to Kinzer and his western prescriptions, lowering their standards, demanding less from an oppressor is not only good for Rwandans, it is RIGHT.

And somehow, in this twisted world we live in, Human Rights Watch is the imperialist, according to altruistic and benevolent human rights defenders like Kinzer.

Earlier in the year, Kagame’s biggest thorn in his side touched down in Kigali. And since then, it’s been nothing but a downward spiral for Kagame. A self-identified Hutu, Victoire Ingabire Umuhoza went to challenge Kagame and the RPF for the presidency of Rwanda. She was attacked by a mob, had her goods stolen (and returned), and her party was prevented from registering to take part in the elections. She was put on house arrest, and was subsquently placed in a maximum security prison, where she remains today. The other presidential hopeful, Bernard Ntaganda of the party PS-Imberakuri was also arrested, along with dissident Deo Mushayidi. Left and right news papers were closed down, writers, editors, and publishers exiled, and even murdered. An American law professor and ICTR lawyer was arrested in Rwanda but eventually released due to diplomatic pressures. He is now wanted back in Rwanda “Dead or Alive.’ Eventually, an “election” did take place, where Kagame of RPF ran against himself and won against himself with a 93% of the vote. In a bizarre move, a war crimes prosecutor, attended his inauguration, and not for reasons you might expect, but to attempt to gather heads of states against another African war criminal. Among his other bizarre and ironic guests were Congolese President Kabila. And that was all just inside Rwanda.

Though Rwanda, Kagame, and the RPF were being reckless (a very generous term) within the country, the story abroad was another matter. When Kagame visited a Oklahoma Christian University in the USA he was not only met with demonstrators, but was served with a lawsuit for his crimes in Rwanda and Congo.  He allegedly had to take a back door route to get into the university due to the demonstrators. When he visited Spain in the middle of the Summer, the Prime Minister of Spain Zapatero not only refused to meet with him but he was met with a crowd of protesters as well. In August, a UN Mapping Report document the most serious violations to take place in the Democratic Republic of Congo between 1993 and 2003 was leaked to the press. The Report alleged that Rwandan troops may have committed “possible genocide” within DRC during that period. The same report was later released in October, alleging the same crimes. In September, a Spanish delegation arrived to protest Kagame’s Millenium Goals co-chairship with the Spanish president Zapatero. When he went to Europe for the European Development Days, Kagame was met with a fervor of protestors, passionately demonstrating against his crimes in crimes in Central Africa. Kagame was so humiliated he left without giving his planned speech. The Netherlands withheld their aid from Rwanda, driving home the point that it is not alright for criminals to be rewarded. And finally, a French judge filed charged against Kagame’s allies.

It was a quiet year for Back To My Roots, but a very big one for hits against Kagame, his army, and his party’s reputation, integrity, and credibility. The furor is abundant. And though he continues to receive support from his western “friends” their blind support only serves to reinforce their complicity in his crimes.

Here is to an even stronger year ahead for progress against Kagame’s RPF their associates. It’s a lot of work, but the momentum is building.

Related: 2008 Year in Review

Democracy Watch Rwanda

Cry For Freedom in Rwanda

The Rising Continent

The Proxy Lake

And honorable mention to Friends of Evil. A transparent PR move by the Rwandan govt to “expose” genocide deniers, or in reality, those committed to challenging, and exposing the Kagame war machine. Starting with Kagame and his army’s responsibility in war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide crimes, in Rwanda and Congo. Really, the blog was put up to deny the RPF’s crimes, both in Rwanda, and Congo. Ironic.

ETA: All Blogs have been added to the “Rwanda in Focus” feed on the right hand side of my blog, formerly named “Hidden Notes About Rwanda” and will also be added to blogroll. Check them out, read them, and spread them.

I will be in and out periodically. For readers interested in keeping up with BTMR, I recommend you subscribe both to the posts and the comments to keep up with happenings.

I expect a lot more developments coming out of Rwanda in 2011. So this is the year to keep your eyes out for the news, and watch as Kagame slowly shrivels, combusts, and eventually destructs.

A few posts are on the way. So again, due to fact that there might not be regular updates, please subscribe so you will know when the blog has been updated.

Other than that, see you in the comments section!

a blatant pretense or deception, esp. something so full of pretense as to be a travesty.

Can anyone truly argue that such an event is what is slated to take place in Rwanda on August 9th, 2010? Some are calling it an “election” while others are simply calling it a “sham” election to signify the false pretense under which this event is happening.

To be frank, there are no election happening in Rwanda. It’s a charades, where everyone will play their part, some voluntarily – dictator Kagame as the landslide winner (a resounding cheery yessss from the ghosts of millions perished by his gun and rule – note sarcasm) with unwavering support from involuntary “supportive” citizens, while the “opposition” take their place, and somberly accept their “loss.” Does one even need popcorn to enjoy this charades? Perhaps Kagame will throw in a few more assassinations and jailing of legitimate opponents to make it more interesting. Maybe he’ll up the ante and actually target a non Rwandan, non African, non Black person. But as it stands, worldwide audiences will watch him “win” and he’ll feign surprise that after all this time and his crimes, his citizens still love him. A humbling experience for a man like himself (who can claim more deaths on his hands in such a short period of time as himself?).

Like every good charades, the August 9th event is meant to entertain. But for Kagame, it’s also meant to re-establish him as the only candidate for Rwandans within the international community. The media will be there, ready to accept and to convince the world that the charades truly is reality. And many will buy into it, giving Kagame blind and loyal support, without an sense of the destruction he’ll cause on top of what he’s already done.

That citizens will be forced to leave their homes and cast ballots for their oppressor in record numbers is sadistic at best and torture at worst. But to allow them their dignity and human rights, at least by abstaining from casting votes “for” the murderer that destroyed their lives and killed their family members would be an inconvenience to the successful execution of the charades for the entertainment of the world wide audience.

Though I’m not tuning in for the charades (I already know what happens and how), I’ll be here the following day, playing my part, feigning surprise that Kagame won once again and that his citizens truly do love him (note sarcasm).

———————-

People often say, “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.” As a Rwandan Genocide survivor, I would not be alive if not for good people who stood up, advocated for, and protected me, facilitating my ultimate survival amidst the deafening silence of the international community. I was nine-years-old when I found myself caught in a maelstrom of violence that threatened to destroy everything I knew and held dear. And in many ways, all of those things, including family, friends, neighbors, home, and communities were destroyed.

I remember having a group of men wrap me in a blanket and smuggling me to a safe house in a different neighborhood. Petrified, I watched as these men accosted and negotiated with my would-be killers on a daily basis to save my life. I watched in horror and helplessness as my mother and brother were taken from my sister, young cousin and I to be killed. My mother and brother were told they had reached the end of their lives, and were then given tools to dig their own graves. Through the intervention of old friends, strangers, and new allies, my mother and brother’s lives were spared, and our family was reunited.

I cannot imagine how my life would have been different had these individuals not intervened. They placed themselves and their families in danger by advocating for us. In our darkest moments I witnessed the zenith of human compassion. I saw the beauty and potential of the human spirit when good people unite for a good cause. Farmers, street kids, courageous women with children raised their voices against a group of evil doers. Through their acts of solidarity, lives were spared. My faith in humanity was reassured even in the midst of so much violence, death, and destruction. Sadly though, the international community remained silent about what was taking place in my country.

As I watch today the increasingly disturbing downward spiral in my country of birth, I am once again reminded of the international community’s complicity and silence in the destruction of an entire nation. In recent times, when the first woman ever to run for president in my country was attacked by a mob, there was silence. While local newspapers were shut down, their writers exiled, and others incarcerated, I witnessed nothing but shrugs from the international community. When Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International reported on the growing repression and jailing of an increasing number of people based on vague laws applied to political opponents of the ruling regime, I saw nothing but rationalization from the international community.

Recently, Peter Erlinder, an American lawyer and professor who is representing a hopeful presidential candidate, was jailed in Rwanda. His arrest and subsequent charges were based on his work as a defense lawyer at the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda in Arusha, Tanzania. He stands accused of genocide ideology and negationism, the same crimes of which his client is also accused. As a genocide survivor, I take genocide crimes very seriously and strongly believe that each and every perpetrator of these crimes should be brought to justice and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. I also believe that each accused deserves and must be accorded a fair trial. The right to a fair trial and due process is a highly valued universal principle. Therefore I am perplexed by the silence around the professor’s arrest, and the length of time it took the international community to intervene.

Due to Rwanda’s economic progress, some of which is unfortunately derived from Congolese minerals and “supply side economics,” human rights abuses are mere inconveniences to those strictly focused on economic growth. While Rwanda has become one of the most praised and progressive economies in Africa, the international community has watched it ravage neighboring Democratic Republic of Congo with impunity. An estimated six million Congolese lives have been claimed, and tragically, half of those deaths are children under the age of five.

The Rwandan Genocide was catastrophic. I know… I was there. And I survived. However, it should not be used as a pretext for repressing freedom of others and destroying innocent lives. Although the international community still remains silent in the face of all these grotesque abuses and human rights violations within and outside of Rwanda, the potential positive impact the international community could have on the situation should not be underestimated.

I witnessed first hand the power of good people who cared for a frightened 9 year old girl and her family. Everyday people opened their mouths and raised their voices. My family, especially my mother and brother, was spared because of ordinary people’s courageous acts of generosity. I am eternally grateful to have lived to share my story. With all that is taking place in Rwanda today, especially the present-day eerie similarities to the pre-1994 genocide period, will the international community intervene now? One can only imagine the millions of lives that could be saved.

Alice Gatebuke is a Rwandan Genocide and war survivor, Cornell University graduate, and a human rights activist. She can be reached at gatebuke.alice@gmail.com.

Chebeya was found dead on June 2 in Kinshasa (DR Congo), in his car after he had been summoned for a meeting with Police Chief General John Numbi. Activists who saw Chebeya in the morgue say that he had blood in his face and was bruised.  General Numbi, well known for his human rights abuses, murder and for his association with Rwandan President Paul Kagame and Rwandan General James Kabarebe was suspended from his duties with the Congolese police. It is unclear whether there will be an independent investigation into this, but the involvement of Numbi in his death would not be surprising given the general’s past and the multiple threats received by Chebeye from police and authorities over the years.

The Joseph Kabila clique in power cannot be trusted to carry out an impartial investigations as they are close to General Numbi. The government in Kinshasa will require enourmous amount of pressure to come close to carrying out a meaningful investigation. Surprisingly, there have been no demonstrations in Kinshasa demanding such investigation. Are Congolese people that terrified in Kinshasa. If this was in Eastern Congo where militias, and foreign governments troops and their proxy rebels continue to abuse the population, kill and rape women on a daily basis, it would be understandable. However, the lack of action from the masses in Kinshasa is surprising.

The human rights activist community and the world community at large has lost an excellent advocate at a young age of 47. In the activist community, there is hope that the perpetrators will be brought to justice. However, Chebeye cannot be replaced by any procedure. This crime was indeed a crime against the world.

Consider the case of Professor Peter Erlinder, a William Mitchell College of Law professor who went to Rwanda as a hired attorney for presidential hopeful Victoire Ingabire Umuhoza.  After a week in the country, Erlinder was arrested and accused of the same crimes as his client. Mind you, Erlinder’s alleged crimes were committed outside of Rwanda. Due to the conditions of the prison in Rwanda, Erlinder has  gotten ill and the Rwandan government may be cooking up a plan to assassinate him. That seems the only way out with a small victory for the Rwandan government as the charges against Erlinder are weak at best.

The US State Department and the US Embassy in Rwanda have been negligent at best. Below is the State Department’s response to Erlinder’s case in a press briefing yesterday:

“QUESTION: Do you have any update on the status of this American lawyer who was arrested in Rwanda? There are some reports that he tried to kill himself in prison this morning.

MR. CROWLEY: I can’t say.

QUESTION: And apparently, his wife or his family is trying to – is seeking a meeting here at the State Department.

MR. CROWLEY: All I can tell you is that we have visited and spoken with Peter Erlinder. He was taken to the hospital this morning and remained there overnight for observation. His U.S. and Rwandan attorneys have had access to him and we expect that due process will be accorded by the Rwandans in a timely and transparent way.

QUESTION: Do you know why he was taken to the hospital?

MR. CROWLEY: I do not.”

The State Department and the embassy are happy to allow Rwanda to jail an American citizen without charges, and the US representatives in Rwanda are hugging the jailers and doing nothing to secure the release of their constituent. The Obama administration and espicially the State Department must step up their game and demand the release of professor Erlinder or else explain how hundreds of millions of dollars of American taxpayers spent on Kagame’s dictatorial regime, the North Korea of Africa, are being used to imprison and possibly kill American citizens.

Peter Erlinder knows he has broken through a manufactured and impenetrable level of obstruction created to protect Kagame and his aids. Through total commitment and perseverance, Peter discovered a central and hidden key truth that exposed the gross human rights violations, and life destruction committed by Kagame in the Great Lakes Region of Africa but also exposed those who helped Kagame make it a reality. Peter, through a fierce battle, continues to commit himself and his life to what he knows is the truth, and he is being punished for it. And not punished for exposing the truth, but punished so that the real evil culprits continue to roam the world with impunity.

While they celebrate however, I hope the world takes note on what kind of person Kagame truly is, and how cruel and insidious he is. His true colors are showing, creating a perfect opportunity to open up dialogue and discuss frankly what happened in Rwanda in 1994 and for goodness sakes STOP PROTECTING AND REWARDING A CRIMINAL. The truth is, Kagame was no savior but an aggressor. He killed millions of people, and millions more died as a result of his aggression. Kagame should be charged and jailed for genocide crimes, crimes against humanity, and even genocide ideology. Holding Peter Erlinder hostage is his only way out of a conundrum he created around himself. But it’s only an illusion.

They say a thief day’s are numbered, 40 to be exact, and while the simple minded might prematurely conclude that Peter is the thief, they could not be any more wrong. Kagame has gotten away with horrific crimes for the past 20 years. But time and truth are catching up to him. Unbeknownst to him, jailing Professor Erlinder not only lent more credibility to the lawyer’s work, but exposed it to millions of people around the world who were unaware of the type of crimes Kagame has been hiding. Kagame has inadvertently placed himself in the court of public opinion as more and more discover layer by layer the information compiled by Professor Peter Erlinder. Through a tactical error, Kagame placed himself at a strict disadvantage by committing the first act of aggression. And this has always been Kagame’s way; committing the first act of aggression. He attacked a peaceful nation (twice – Rwanda and Congo), assassinated two Presidents (Rwandan and Burundian), and jailed Peter Erlinder unprovoked, as Peter was there to work on a human rights case for Victoire Umuhoza. And the publicity could not come at a worst time for Kagame.

So have your short lived “victory” enemies of peace, but it will be over in the blink of an eye. Should anything happen to Peter Erlinder under your watch, beware. The world is tuned in, watching your every move, analyzing your every word, and getting educated on the Professors work. So beware, should anything happen to the professor, you will only be immortalizing him in martyrdom, expediting your own self destruction.

It’s disappointing that the US government is not doing more to demand Peter Erlinder’s freedom. However, as difficult as it may be for all peace loving people out there to imagine, there is a silver lining in all of this.

Peter is a people’s champion. Working against an institutional oppression designed to maintain inequality and exploitation. His courage to attack such a pervasive an insidious institution, also known as Kagame, empowers other victims around the world, formerly petrified of speaking out to raise their voices in unison and defend their beloved human rights idol. People have the courage to denounce, and challenge fabricated stories that perpetuate the destruction of human life, all because Peter Erlinder stood with the vulnerable people.

So do not fret. Kagame has awakened a sleeping beast, and the movement to expose him, and to bring him to justice is only getting started. He has no idea what he has done.

We stand with you Professor. In solidarity. For peace. For Human Rights. For truth.

The Rwandan government under Paul Kagame has a history of assassinating opponents, dissidents, as well as regular Rwandan citizens using poison. Some prisoners have been fed broken glass causing them to die of illness resulting from consuming such. Former government officials such as Seth Sendashonga and Theoneste Lizinde have been killed by death squads outside of Rwanda. Consider that Rwanda’s general prosecutor Martin Ngoga refuted the reports of  suicide.  Martin Ngoga is not alone as Erlinder’s family, colleagues, and friends have all rejected the notion that he would commit suicide. They have all testified to his strength of character and mental toughness. Many Rwandan nationals especially on social networking sites such as facebook have raised the suspicion that the reports this morning are a prelude to an assassination by the Rwandan government. Notorious for various killing methods, Paul Kagame’s government is responsible for the death of 5 million innocent Congolese citizens who have been killed since Rwanda’s invasion of Congo in 1996.

It appears the US embassy as well as the larger US government have left Erlinder to the lions in Rwanda hungry for his blood. Silence on the part of the US State Department has been deadly. It seems as though the US government is happy to sit by and allow their citizen to rot in a prison where no developed country has ever extradited an individuals, including those suspected of genocide. The UN International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, England, France as well as other countries have all declined to extradite anyone to Rwanda, citing an unfair judicial system. Yet, no word has been heard from Secretary of State Hillary Clinton or anyone in the Obama administration.

Erlinder traveled to Rwanda on May 23 to represent opposition leader Mrs. Victoire Ingabire Umuhoza who has been accused of Genocide Ideology as well.  Mrs. Ingabire Umuhoza plans to run in the upcoming Rwandan Presidential election, provided the Rwandan government finally allows her to run.  However, her efforts as well as other government opponents’ effors to register for election have been blocked at every turn by the Rwandan government. Dictator Paul Kagame is guaranteed to win an uncontested election this August.

Article from: http://mrzine.monthlyreview.org/2010/hp290510.html

The May 28 arrest of the U.S. attorney Peter Erlinder by the Paul Kagame dictatorship in Rwanda reveals much about this regime that is routinely sanitized in establishment U.S. and Western intellectual life and media coverage.  But if we use Erlinder’s arrest to call attention to some less well-known facts, a much grimmer scenario about Kagame than as a “man of the hour in modern Africa,” who “offers such encouraging hope for the continent’s future” (Stephen Kinzer),² comes to light.

For one thing, Kagame does not like free elections, and he has avoided or emasculated them assiduously.  Erlinder arrived in Kigali on May 23 to take up the legal representation of Victoire Ingabire, a Hutu expatriate who had spent the past 16 years in the Netherlands, but who immediately upon her return to Rwanda in January was regarded as the leading opposition figure, though her United Democratic Forces hadn’t been able to register as an official party.  The Kagame regime arrested her on April 21, and charged her with “association with a terrorist group; propagating genocide ideology; negationism and ethnic divisionism.”³  As 2010 is an election year in Rwanda (now scheduled for August 9), this should help Kagame once again to avoid any meaningful electoral contest.

In 2003, Rwanda’s last election year, opposition parties, candidates, and media not only weren’t welcomed, they wound up harassed, shut-down, arrested, exiled, and disappeared.  In 2002, Kagame’s main rival at the time, a Hutu and former President Pasteur Bizimungu, was arrested and charged with “divisionism,” a kind of Kagame-speak that means to provide political choices other than the one-party Kagame dictatorship.  In 2003, the Hutu former Prime Minister Faustin Twagiramungu was permitted onto the presidential ballot but prevented from campaigning, and his Democratic Republic Movement (MDR) banned altogether; he and his MDR were also accused of “divisionism.”

The official August 25 presidential vote that year reported 94% for Kagame.  In a country whose population then, as now, as at the start of 1994, was majority Hutu by roughly a 6-to-1 margin over the Tutsi, only Kagame’s intimidation and repression of Rwanda’s civil society, and his election-rigging, could have produced a result like this.  Thus when Peter Erlinder spoke in late April about the arrest of Victoire Ingabire as a “carbon-copy of Kagame’s tactics in 2003, when all serious political challengers were jailed or driven from the country,” and when he likened the charges against her (and now against himself as well) to “trumped-up political thought-crimes . . . arising from the ‘crime’ of publicly objecting to the Kagame military dictatorship and Kagame’s version of Rwandan civil war history,”⁴ this was what he meant.

The Arusha Accords of August 1993 had stipulated that national elections be held in Rwanda by no later than 1995, but this was precluded by the military takeover of Rwanda by Kagame and his Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF) in April-July 1994, which allowed the minority Tutsi faction (less than 15 percent) to seize power by force.

The allegation of “genocide denial” has been an important instrument of Kagame’s rule, with potentially rival politicians, or in fact any Kagame target, so accused and pushed out of the way.  According to news accounts during the first 24 hours after his arrest, Erlinder, a lead defense counsel before the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda and a former president of the National Lawyers Guild in New York, “is being charged with denying the Rwandan genocide and was being interrogated . . . at police headquarters in the capital, Kigali. . . .  A police spokesman, Eric Kayingare, said that Mr. Erlinder was accused of ‘denying the genocide’ and ‘negationism’ from statements he had made at the tribunal in Arusha, as well as ‘in his books, in publications’.”⁵  Martin Ngoga, the Prosecutor General of the Kagame regime, told Agence France Presse that Erlinder “denies the genocide in his writings and his speeches.  Worse than that, he has become an organizer of genocide deniers.  If negating [the Tutsi genocide] is not punished in [the United States,] it is punished in Rwanda.  And when he came here he knew that.”⁶

Under Rwanda’s 2003 Constitution,⁷ the “State of Rwanda commits itself to conform to the following fundamental principles and to promote and enforce the respect thereof,” foremost of which is “fighting the ideology of genocide and all its manifestations” (Article 9).  ”Revisionism, negationism and trivialisation of genocide are punishable by the law” (Article 13).  The Rwandan State is so conscious of the political usefulness of “genocide” that its Constitution even creates a National Commission For the Fight Against Genocide (Article 179).

Of course, this is straight out of Kafka, as a compelling case can be made that Kagame and his RPF were the major genocidaires in Rwanda and, in alliance with Uganda’s Yoweri Museveni dictatorship, both under U.S. and U.K. protection, have extended and enlarged their genocidal operations to the neighboring Democratic Republic of Congo.  Peter Erlinder has never denied the fact that mass-atrocity crimes and even genocide were committed in Rwanda, much less that a large number of Tutsi were slaughtered.  But he has shown, with carefully gathered documentary evidence, that an even larger number of Hutu were also slaughtered there, and that Kagame and the RPF were the initiators and main perpetrators of these mass killings.  This, ultimately, is what the charge of “denying the genocide” really means: Like a growing body of researchers, Erlinder rejects the version of the “Rwandan genocide” long since institutionalized within U.S.-, Western-, and RPF-establishment circles.

One of Erlinder’s notable documentary discoveries is an internal memorandum drafted in September 1994 for the eyes of then-U.S. Secretary of State Warren Christopher, in which it was reported that a UN team on the ground in Rwanda “concluded that a pattern of killing had emerged” there, the “[RPF] and Tutsi civilian surrogates [killing] 10,000 or more Hutu civilians per month, with the [RPF] accounting for 95% of the killing.”  This memorandum added that the UN team “speculated that the purpose of the killing was a campaign of ethnic cleansing intended to clear certain areas in the south of Rwanda for Tutsi habitation.  The killings also served to reduce the population of Hutu males and discouraged refugees from returning to claim their lands.”⁸

We may recall that the reported (but contested⁹) massacre of 8,000 military-aged men at Srebrenica in July 1995 led to genocide charges, imprisonment of many Serb officials and military personnel, and huge indignation in the West.  Yet, here is an internal U.S. document alleging “10,000 or more Hutu civilians” butchered per month by Kagame’s forces to cleanse the ground for Tutsi resettlement — and not only is the leading butcher not imprisoned, but his regime continues to bathe in Western support and adulation, and can get away with charging the man who helped expose his crimes with “genocide denial”!

Consider also the five following material facts:

1. The “triggering event” in the mass killings known as the “Rwandan genocide” was the shooting down of the Falcon-50 jet carrying then-Rwandan President Juvenal Habyarimana, then-Burundian President Cyprien Ntaryamira, and ten others on its approach to the Kanombe International Airport in Kigali on the evening of April 6, 1994.  It is now conclusively established that these political assassinations were carried out by Kagame’s forces.  When ICTR investigator Michael Hourigan had assembled compelling evidence showing this, then-ICTR Chief Prosecutor Louise Arbour quashed his investigation on orders from U.S. officials.  This official line of inquiry has been suppressed ever since, though it was amplified and confirmed by the French magistrate Jean-Louis Bruguière, whose own inquiry concluded in late 2006 that Kagame and the RPF, fully aware that they would lose the elections scheduled by the Arusha Accords due to the overwhelming majority enjoyed by the Hutu in the country, opted for the “physical elimination” of Habyarimana and reopening their assault on the Rwandan government to achieve their goal of an RPF-takeover of the country.¹⁰  Although three consecutive U.S. presidential administrations (Clinton’s, Bush’s, and Obama’s) and the establishment U.S. media have been wonderfully cooperative in keeping crucial evidence such as this on the “genocide” out of public sight, the work of Peter Erlinder and his colleagues has been important in the struggle to counter the Western party-line.

2. The important U.S. analysts Christian Davenport and Allan Stam also concluded that more Hutu than Tutsi were killed during the period of the “Rwandan genocide” (April-July, 1994), and that killings on the ground in Rwanda actually “surged” in each area attacked by Kagame’s RPF.¹¹

3. Allan Stam, a former Special Forces soldier as well as an academician, has pointed out that the Kagame-RFP military offensive following the “triggering event” of the “Rwandan genocide” (i.e., the shootdown of the Falcon-50 jet) were closely modeled on the U.S. ground invasion of Iraq during the first Gulf War, and that Kagame’s forces went into mass action within one hour of this event.¹²  (Kagame actually studied at Fort Leavenworth in the United States, and was apparently a quick learner.)

4. Both before and during the “Rwandan genocide,” the United States pressed for the reduction of UN troops in Rwanda.  The Rwandan government urged more UN troops,¹³ but the presence of a larger contingent of UN troops on the ground clearly would have interfered with Kagame’s well-planned and executed military operations.  This points up the likelihood that any pre-planned, organized mass killings were dominated by Kagame’s RPF, and that the U.S. government supported it.

5. Kagame’s forces established control of Rwanda within one hundred days of the triggering event.  This is not consistent with the notion that his was an unplanned defensive reaction and that his ethnic group, the minority Tutsi, was the main victim.

Paul Kagame has used the excuse of pursuing “genocidaires” to justify his regular invasions of the Congo.  The casualties in these operations, coordinated with fellow dictator Yoweri Museveni, have run into the millions.  We believe that Kagame has far outstripped Idi Amin as a mass killer (Amin’s killings are estimated at 100,000-300,000, whereas Kagame’s surely run well over a million civilians).  But Kagame is servicing establishment U.S. and Western interests, and for the past 20 years has therefore received a free pass to rob and kill.

And all the while, Kagame has ridden the wave of fighting against “genocide denial”!  Hopefully, he has gone too far in using that Kafkaesque gimmick against Peter Erlinder, a notable fighter against both actual genocide and genocide denial.

Endnotes

1  For a much more comprehensive development of the themes discussed here, see Edward S. Herman and David Peterson, “Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of Congo in the Propaganda System,” Monthly Review 60, May, 2010.  Also see Herman and Peterson, The Politics of Genocide (New York: Monthly Review Press, 2010).

2  Quoting Kinzer’s hagiographic words in A Thousand Hills: Rwanda’s Rebirth and the Man Who Dreamed It (Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, 2008), 337.

3  “Rwanda Opposition Chief Held for ‘Genocide Denial’,” Agence France Presse, April 21, 2010.

4  Peter Erlinder quoted in “U.S. Lawyer to Defend Victoire Ingabire: First Female Presidential Candidate in Rwanda — Jailed by President/Gen. Paul Kagame,” News Advisory, International Humanitarian Law Institute, April 23, 2010 (as posted to the BayView website).

5  Josh Kron and Jeffrey Gettleman, “American Lawyer for Opposition Figure Is Arrested in Rwanda,” New York Times, May 29, 2010.

6  “Rwanda Arrests U.S. Lawyer Defending Opposition Figure,” Agence France Presse, May 28, 2010.

7  See Constitution of the Republic of Rwanda, June 4, 2003, and its Amendments, as posted to the website of the Rwandan Ministry of Defense.  Here we note that the word ‘genocide’ appears no fewer than 14 different times in Rwanda’s approx. 16,400-word-long Constitution.

8  George E. Moose, “Human Rights Abuses in Rwanda,” Information Memorandum to The Secretary, U.S. Department of State, undated though clearly drafted between September 17 and 20, 1994.  This document is archived at the Rwanda Documents Project at William Mitchell College of Law, St. Paul, Minnesota, ICTR Military-1 Exhibit, DNT 264.

9  See Edward S. Herman and David Peterson, “The Dismantling of Yugoslavia,” Monthly Review 59, October, 2007, esp. Sect. 5 and Sect. 6, 19-26. 

10  See Jean-Louis Bruguière, Request for the Issuance of International Arrest Warrants, Tribunal de Grande Instance, Paris, France, November 21, 2006, 15-16 (para. 100-103).

11  See Christian Davenport and Allan Stam, Rwandan Political Violence in Space and Time, unpublished manuscript, 2004 (available at Christian Davenport’s personal website > “Project Writings”); and Christian Davenport and Allan C. Stam, “What Really Happened in Rwanda?” Miller-McCune, October 6, 2009.

12  See Allan C. Stam, “Coming to a New Understanding of the Rwanda Genocide,” a lecture before the Gerald R. Ford School of Public Policy, University of Michigan, February 18, 2009.  Beginning at approx. the 22:47 mark, Stam explains: “Now, moments later, the RPF — literally moments, somewhere between 60 and 120 minutes after his plane is shot down, the RPF invades.  Now, we could characterize this invasion as, ‘Wow, a spontaneous reaction to go in and defend our allies’.  The problem is, this invasion looks staggeringly like the United States’ invasion of Iraq in 1991.  It has exactly the same features.  There is a central drive in this case due south towards Kigali, very much like the central drive towards Baghdad.  There is the sweeping left-hook — but in this case because the map is reversed there is the sweeping right-hook.  This is a plan that was not worked out on the back of an envelope.  Fifty-thousand soldiers move into action on two fronts, in a coordinated fashion, ‘spontaneously’?  Tsk.”

13  In the words of Rwandan UN Ambassador Jean-Damascène Bizimana: “[T]he international community does not seem to have acted in an appropriate manner to reply to the anguished appeal of the people of Rwanda.  This question has often been examined from the point of view of the ways and means to withdraw [UNAMIR], without seeking to give the appropriate weight to the concern of those who have always believed, rightly, that, in view of the security situation now prevailing in Rwanda, UNAMIR’s members should be increased to enable it to contribute to the re-establishment of the cease-fire and to assist in the establishment of security conditions that could bring an end to the violence. . . .  The option chosen by the Council, reducing the number of troops in UNAMIR. . . , is not a proper response to this crisis. . . .”  See “The situation concerning Rwanda,” UN Security Council (S/PV.3368), April 21, 1994, 6.

Contacts:

David Gespass, National Lawyers Guild; 205 566-2530

Gena Berglund. International Humanitarian Law Institute of Minnesota; 651 208-7964

Emira Woods, Institute for Policy Studies; 301 523-2979

International Human Rights Advocates join Erlinder family to condemn Rwanda’s arrest of U.S. Attorney Peter Erlinder and demand his immediate release.

Saturday, May 29, 2010 (Washington, DC) –Professor Erlinder, a faculty member at William Mitchell College of Law in the United States and president of  the Association des Avocats de la Defense (ADAD), the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) Defense Lawyers Association, was arrested by the government of Rwanda under the leadership of president Paul Kagame. Peter Erlinder has been arrested in the course of his representation of Rwanda’s opposition leader, Victoire Ingabire.

Erlinder’s arrest was politically motivated and seeks to punish him for fulfilling his responsibilities as a lawyer, to be a vigorous and conscientious advocate for his clients. The Rwandan government and President Kagame must allow fair and public trials. Erlinder’s advocacy is in the finest tradition of the legal profession and every individual and government committed to the rule of law, including the authorities in Rwanda, should applaud his dedication to human rights and international law.

As international human rights activists, we join the Erlinder family to call on the United States government, the United Nations, non-governmental organizations and individuals around the world to prevail upon Rwanda to release Erlinder immediately.  The U.S. has had a special relationship with Rwanda which remains one of the largest recipients of U.S. foreign assistance in Africa.  Given the U.S. government’s expressed commitment to democracy and the rule of law, it is critical that the Obama Administration and the U.S. Congress uphold these values in Rwanda and demand the immediate release of Peter Erlinder, an advocate of justice.

“Professor Erlinder has been acting in the best tradition of the legal profession and has been a vigorous advocate in his representation of his clients. There can be no justice for anyone if the state can silence lawyers for representing defendants it dislikes.  A government that seeks to prevent lawyers from being vigorous advocates for their clients cannot be trusted. The entire National Lawyers Guild is honored by Erlinder’s membership, his leadership as past president and his courageous advocacy.” said David Gespass, president of the National Lawyers Guild.

“The offense Peter is charged with is not based on facts, but on the suppression of free speech in his representation of clients, which undermines the rule of law. His family knows he stands with people who are oppressed by those in power and he encourages people to stand up for justice.” Masako Usui, wife of Peter Erlinder.

“The real issue here seems to be whether the U.S. and the world will stand by and allow my father to be detained and prosecuted for doing his job, as an attorney and advocate for his clients. After a career of defense of others, he needs our help now demanding his immediate release and dismissal of all charges.” said Sarah Erlinder, daughter of Peter Erlinder.

“The International Association of Democratic Lawyers (IADL) is outraged at the arrest of Peter Erlinder in Rwanda.   This arrest violates the rights and privileges of lawyers in discharging their professional responsibilities, constitutes a willful obstruction of the judicial process and is in gross violation of the rights of defense of an accused person,”  said Jeanne Mirer, President, International Association of Democratic Lawyers

May 28, 2010

American Law Professor Arrested in Kigali

The Rwanda News Agency reported today that American law professor C. Peter Erlinder (William and Mitchell College of Law – Minnesota) was arrested over accusations related to negating the Rwandan genocide. The Hotel Rwanda Rusesabagina Foundation deplores this clearly politically motivated arrest, and implores the international community to act quickly and decisively to demand Professor Erlinder’s immediate release from custody.

Erlinder, an outspoken critic of the Kagame regime, is frequently criticized by the Rwandan government. His name recently appeared on a publicized list of foreigners who the Rwandan government allegedly wants silenced for their views. Erlinder traveled to Rwanda last week to defend presidential candidate Victoire Ingabire on the charges brought against her by the Rwandan government. Mrs. Ingabire, a political opponent of current President Kagame, was jailed recently and is currently under house arrest for expressing her political views, which are in opposition to official government policies. Erlinder is also a defense lawyer and leader of the association of defense attorneys defending Rwandan genocide suspects at the International Criminal Tribunal in Arusha, Tanzania. His current trip to Rwanda was intended to provide defense counsel in a peaceful legal process, but with this arrest his human rights, liberty and possibly his person safety are in danger.

Professor Erlinder was reportedly arrested on charges of “genocide negationism,” which means that he disagrees with the official version of the 1994 genocide perpetuated by the current Rwandan regime. This law is frequently applied to silence critics of the regime, including in the past Mrs. Ingabire, Human Rights Watch investigators, and even the BBC.

Immediate action is needed to free Professor Erlinder and guarantee his human rights and personal safety.

According to available information, Professor Peter Erlinder, a Defence attorney at the ICTR, and Professor of Law at William Mitchell College of Law in the United States, was arrested on 28 May in Kigali on the charge of “denying genocide” (genocidal ideology).

Professor Erlinder is in Kigali this week, acting on behalf of his client, Ms. Victoire Ingabire Umuhoza, who is trying to oppose President Kagame in the upcoming August presidential elections, and who has also been charged with “denying genocide.”

Professor Erlinder is Lead Counsel for Major Aloys Ntabakuze in the “Military I” case at the ICTR. He is also one of the organizers of the successful ICTR Defence Conference, held in Brussels, Belgium last weekend.

He is the current President of the ADAD, the ICTR Defense Counsel organization.

We urge all individuals and organizations to urgently contact the Rwandan government, the U.S. Government and others to:

a) Demand the immediate release of Professor Peter Erlinder;

b) Demand Professor Erlinder’s immediate access to counsel;

c) Urge the Rwandan government to drop these fabricated and baseless charges against Professor Erlinder.

Signed: Ad Hoc Organizing Committee for Brussels Conference

William Mitchell is working with the United States Department of State, the U.S. Embassy in Rwanda, and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda to monitor the situation and provide any assistance possible. In addition, we are in contact with representatives from the offices of Sen. Amy Klobuchar, Rep. Betty McCollum, and Rep. Keith Ellison to make them aware of the situation and provide information about Prof. Erlinder’s work in Rwanda.

William Mitchell has a 110-year history of legal education that is engaged with the legal profession, and we support and encourage the legal pursuits of our faculty beyond the college. Prof. Erlinder is in Rwanda to represent Victoire Ingabire, an opposition candidate for President of Rwanda who was arrested over accusations of promoting genocide ideology. In traveling to Rwanda, Prof. Erlinder exemplifies the great tradition of lawyers who take on the representation of unpopular clients and causes. That Prof. Erlinder did so at great personal risk demonstrates the strength of his commitment to justice and due process. We support his commitment to justice, the rule of law, and public service, which are the core of the lawyer’s function in society and values Prof. Erlinder works to instill in the students he teaches at William Mitchell.

We look forward to Prof. Erlinder’s return to the college and will continue to monitor his situation and work with the United Nations and the United States government until the issue is resolved.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
May 28, 2010
1:07 PM

CONTACT: National Lawyers Guild (NLG)
David Gespass, 205-566-2530

Heidi Boghosian, 917-239-4999

NEW YORK – May 28 – The National Lawyers Guild (NLG) demands the immediate release of its former president, Professor Peter Erlinder, whom Rwandan Police arrested early today on charges of “genocide ideology.” He had traveled to Rwanda’s capital, Kigali, on May 23, to join the defense team of Rwandan presidential candidate Victoire Ingabire Umuhoza. Erlinder is reportedly being interrogated at the Rwandan Police Force’s Kacyiru headquarters.

“Professor Erlinder has been acting in the best tradition of the legal profession and has been a vigorous advocate in his representation of Umuhoza. There can be no justice for anyone if the state can silence lawyers for defendants whom it dislikes and a government that seeks to prevent lawyers from being vigorous advocates for their clients cannot be trusted. The entire National Lawyers Guild is honored by his membership and his courageous advocacy,” said David Gespass, the Guild’s president.

Erlinder traveled to Kigali after attending the Second International Criminal Defense Lawyers’ Conference in Brussels. Since his arrival in Kigali, the state-sponsored Rwandan media has been highly critical of Erlinder.

The Rwandan Parliament adopted the “Law Relating to the Punishment of the Crime of Genocide Ideology” (Genocide Ideology Law), on July 23, 2008. It defines genocide ideology broadly, requires no link to any genocidal act, and can be used to include a wide range of legitimate forms of expression, prohibiting speech protected by international conventions such as the Genocide Convention of 1948 and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights 1966.

Sarah Erlinder, Arizona attorney and NLG member said, “My father has made a career defending unpopular people and unpopular speech-and is now being held because of his representation of unpopular clients and analysis of an historical narrative that the Kagame regime considers inconvenient. We can help defend his rights now by drawing U.S. government and media attention to his situation and holding the Rwandan government accountable for his well-being.”

Before leaving for Brussels and then Kigali, Professor Erlinder notified the U.S. State Department, his Minnesota Congressional Representative Betty McCullom, Representative Keith Ellison, and Minnesota Senators Al Franken and Minnesota Senator Amy Klobuchar.

Professor Erlinder is a professor of law at the William Mitchell College of Law. He is a frequent litigator and consultant, often pro bono, in cases involving the death penalty, civil rights, claims of government and police misconduct, and criminal defense of political activists. He is also a frequent news commentator. Erlinder was president of the National Lawyers Guild from 1993-1997, and is a current board member of the NLG Foundation. He has been a defense attorney at the UN International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda since 2003.

The New Times (Kigali)

7 May 2008
Posted to the web 8 May 2008

George Kagame
Kigali

A Rwandan-Canadian researcher, Dr. Jean-Paul Kimonyo, is expected to launch a book on the Rwanda Genocide next week.

The book titled “Rwanda, un Genocide Populaire” (“Rwanda; The Popular Genocide”), was released last week, is written in French was has its was written by and was published by a French publishing house Karthala.

“I carried out personal enquiries while the genocide was happening and I became concerned at the swiftness with which the entire population of a country was wiped; this motivated me to write the book,” Kimonyo said Tuesday during an interview.

He said the main purpose of the book was to give an insight as to why so many people participated in the Genocide yet there was no infrastructural mechanism to concentrate the victims before they were killed as had been the case of Nazi Germany.

“Rwanda is a small country; it was possible that when the Tutsi were targeted for murder, they could have escaped to neighbouring states. The entire population was mobilized to prevent victims from escaping,” he said.

Kimonyo who currently manages a private consultancy firm, was a member of the seven-man commission of inquiry that was charged with adducing evidence on the role France might have played in the Genocide which left over one million Rwandans dead.

Speaking about the recent arrest warrants against Rwandan military officers, he said that his book does not directly respond to the warrants but said that it answers the motivation behind the warrants.

“The Genocide was caused by extreme factors that combined together at a certain time and place but the ideology began as far back as 1959,” he said.

A PhD holder in political science from the University of Québéc in Canada, Kimonyo has written other books including a collection called Revue Critique des interpretations du conflit Rwandais, 2000.

28 April 2008
Posted to the web 29 April 2008

James Buyinza
Kigali

A Parliamentary Committee will today release a report on their recent anti-genocide ideology campaign in primary and secondary schools, the Vice Speaker of the Lower Chamber of Parliament, Denis Polisi has said.

“The report will be thoroughly scrutinized by lawmakers and then we shall make recommendations,” Polisi revealed on Monday. He said that the recommendations would include devising stringent measures to end the genocide ideology in schools.

“We want to save the young generation from the bad ideology of genocide; that’s why we must double efforts to see that young people are not spoiled,” explained the lawmaker.

“All Deputies were out of office until March to campaign against the genocide ideology in schools and see what can be done to save the young generation,” Polisi added.

“After a thorough discussion of the report, the recommendations will be forwarded to the cabinet.

He explained that the campaign covered all schools across the country with lawmakers personally meeting students and teachers.

The campaign was launched early this year when both primary and secondary schools had began the academic year.

The launch of the campaign was part of the resolutions made by legislators during an extraordinary session that was held in camera last year.

In late 2007, a parliamentary probe committee report revealed damning revelations of cases of genocide ideology in many secondary schools. It came up with a list of eleven schools that were leading in cases of genocide ideology countrywide.

The shocking details prompted legislators to summon the two former Education ministers Jean d’Arc Mujawamariya and Joseph Murekeraho to explain why the ministry had failed to contain genocide ideology in schools.

Mujawamariya and Murekeraho narrowly survived a vote of no confidence by the Lower House, thanks to last month’s cabinet reshuffle, which saw the former transferred to the Ministry of Gender and the latter appointed to head a new teachers’ fund.

Their successors have vowed to eliminate genocide ideology from schools.

He said that the Rwandan genocide was not solely a Rwandan issue. “It is an East African, and infact an African issue, requiring African solutions,” he stressed.

In fighting the culture of impunity, he stated, much depended on the level of state co-operation, however, adding that those states which fail in their responsibilities need to be encouraged and ultimately coerced into compliance.

Well the problem between Hutu and Tutsi extends further than just Rwanda, I feel that these statements make genocide seem like an “African problem”. Also by couching the issue in geographic localities it stops people from understanding the universality of the issue.

On a separate issue, Rwanda will not finish the trials without the assistance of other countries. Yet, the political and social climates in other nations may not be conducive to effective and fair trials.  The DRC for example is not a fair and just nation nor do they look kindly on the Rwandan government. How then would they be effective in carrying out trials?

As far as I can recollect, I don’t remember any other genocide trials occurring in nations outside of where the crimes occurred. Is there precedent for this sort of argument? I’d love to know what you think and if you think this is possible way to stop the problem or a idealistic solution with no real potential!

By failing to do so, we diminish ourselves and squander the moral authority we gained – gained not only because Jews are commanded to remember, but because Germany owned up to its crimes.

The Armenians and the Jews have much in common: atrocities, expulsion, our own languages and cultures, and schisms within our faiths. But we Jews have been spared one grievous harm: as Berenbaum has noted, the fact that Germany acknowledged the Holocaust enabled the Jews to commemorate it appropriately – not to argue about whether it happened.

The Museum to be called the Armenian Genocide Museum of America will be housed down 14th street approximately 20 minutes by foot from the current Holocaust museum and only a few blocks from the White House. The museum purports to serve as the prototype for modern crimes against humanity, including the Holocause, Cambodia, Rwanda and Darfur. The museum organizers hope its strategic location and message will position itself to ensure that the White House remembers and focuses on the Armenian genocide.

In a town so infused with museums and causes. I’m not sure location near the White House will have much of an effect on policy makers. It may however be a way to highlight their cause to the millions of tourists who flood through each year.

I just thought I would take a moment to highlight the museum because I only recently learned about its construction. I wonder though what DC will be like if there is a museum dedicated to every genocide. Should we not create an amalgamated museum to effectively study all genocide and to alert people to the existence of the myriad of cross cutting phenomenon? Would it be more effective? Most interesting? More promising for the future? I’d love to hear your responses.