U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

27–012PDF 2017

RWANDA: DEMOCRACY THWARTED

HEARING

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON AFRICA, GLOBAL HEALTH, 

GLOBAL HUMAN RIGHTS, AND 

INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS

FIRST SESSION

SEPTEMBER 27, 2017

Serial No. 115–70

Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Affairs

(

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.foreignaffairs.house.gov/ or

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/

(II)

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS 

EDWARD R. ROYCE, California, Chairman 

CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey 

ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida 

DANA ROHRABACHER, California 

STEVE CHABOT, Ohio 

JOE WILSON, South Carolina 

MICHAEL T. MCCAUL, Texas 

TED POE, Texas 

DARRELL E. ISSA, California 

TOM MARINO, Pennsylvania 

JEFF DUNCAN, South Carolina 

MO BROOKS, Alabama 

PAUL COOK, California 

SCOTT PERRY, Pennsylvania 

RON DESANTIS, Florida 

MARK MEADOWS, North Carolina 

TED S. YOHO, Florida 

ADAM KINZINGER, Illinois 

LEE M. ZELDIN, New York 

DANIEL M. DONOVAN, JR., New York 

F. JAMES SENSENBRENNER, JR., 

Wisconsin 

ANN WAGNER, Missouri 

BRIAN J. MAST, Florida 

FRANCIS ROONEY, Florida 

BRIAN K. FITZPATRICK, Pennsylvania 

THOMAS A. GARRETT, JR., Virginia 

ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York 

BRAD SHERMAN, California 

GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York 

ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey 

GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia 

THEODORE E. DEUTCH, Florida 

KAREN BASS, California 

WILLIAM R. KEATING, Massachusetts 

DAVID N. CICILLINE, Rhode Island 

AMI BERA, California 

LOIS FRANKEL, Florida 

TULSI GABBARD, Hawaii 

JOAQUIN CASTRO, Texas 

ROBIN L. KELLY, Illinois 

BRENDAN F. BOYLE, Pennsylvania 

DINA TITUS, Nevada 

NORMA J. TORRES, California 

BRADLEY SCOTT SCHNEIDER, Illinois 

THOMAS R. SUOZZI, New York 

ADRIANO ESPAILLAT, New York 

TED LIEU, California

AMY PORTER, Chief of Staff THOMAS SHEEHY, Staff Director

JASON STEINBAUM, Democratic Staff Director 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON AFRICA, GLOBAL HEALTH, GLOBAL HUMAN RIGHTS, AND

INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS

CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey, Chairman 

MARK MEADOWS, North Carolina 

DANIEL M. DONOVAN, JR., New York 

F. JAMES SENSENBRENNER, JR., 

Wisconsin 

THOMAS A. GARRETT, JR., Virginia 

KAREN BASS, California 

AMI BERA, California 

JOAQUIN CASTRO, Texas 

THOMAS R. SUOZZI, New York 

(III)

C O N T E N T S 

Page

WITNESSES 

The Honorable Donald Yamamoto, Acting Assistant Secretary, Bureau of 

African Affairs, U.S. Department of State ......................................................... 4

Mr. David Himbara, coordinator for Canada, Democracy in Rwanda Now ........ 19

Major Robert Higiro, Rwanda Defense Force, Retired, coordinator for the 

United States, Democracy in Rwanda Now ....................................................... 26

Mr. Mike Jobbins, manager, Africa Programs, Search for Common Ground ..... 31

Mr. Adotei Akwei, managing director, Government Relations, Amnesty International United States ......................................................................................... 41

LETTERS, STATEMENTS, ETC., SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING 

The Honorable Donald Yamamoto: Prepared statement ...................................... 8

Mr. David Himbara: Prepared statement .............................................................. 23

Major Robert Higiro: Prepared statement ............................................................. 28

Mr. Mike Jobbins: Prepared statement ................................................................. 35

Mr. Adotei Akwei: Prepared statement ................................................................. 44

APPENDIX 

Hearing notice .......................................................................................................... 60

Hearing minutes ...................................................................................................... 61

Questions submitted for the record by the Honorable Christopher H. Smith, 

a Representative in Congress from the State of New Jersey, and chairman, 

Subcommittee on Africa, Global Health, Global Human Rights, and International Organizations, and written responses from: 

The Honorable Donald Yamamoto ...................................................................... 62

Mr. David Himbara .............................................................................................. 66

Major Robert Higiro ............................................................................................. 67

Mr. Mike Jobbins ................................................................................................. 68

Mr. Adotei Akwei ................................................................................................. 71

(1)

RWANDA: DEMOCRACY THWARTED 

WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 27, 2017

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

SUBCOMMITTEE ON AFRICA, GLOBAL HEALTH,

GLOBAL HUMAN RIGHTS, AND INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS,

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS,

Washington, DC. 

The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 3:00 p.m., in room 

2200 Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Christopher H. Smith 

(chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. 

Mr. SMITH. The subcommittee will come to order, and good afternoon to everybody. 

Rwanda is an important African ally. We know it. They have 

been for a very long time. This East African nation has been a valuable contributor to peacekeeping in Africa and is the sixth largest 

troop and police contributor to U.N. missions. 

However, reports have increased about the status of human 

rights and rule of law inside Rwanda and its efforts to silence critics living abroad. 

This hearing will continue to examine the future of democracy 

and the rule of law in Rwanda in light of persistent criticism of its 

government’s behavior at home and on the international stage. 

Rwanda is a constitutional republic dominated by a very strong 

presidency. In 2015, the country held a constitutional referendum 

in which an estimated 98 percent of registered voters participated. 

Approximately 98 percent of those who voted endorsed a set of 

amendments that included provisions that would allow the President to run for up to three additional terms in office, meaning Paul 

Kagame could be President for more than 20 more years. 

His election to a third term in August 2017 was achieved with 

99 percent of the vote. A popular politician in the United States 

and most other countries would be unlikely in most circumstances 

to win nearly 100 percent of the vote in a free, fair, and competitive 

election. 

Consequently, it is difficult to believe that even someone as widely admired as President Kagame could have been that popular. 

Such suspicion is stoked by reports of vote irregularities and actions by the Rwandan Government to restrain opposition activism 

and enact stringent controls on opposition activism including legal 

restrictions on civil liberties and stringent controls on the free flow 

of information. 

2

An example of why there is skepticism about the nature of free 

elections in Rwanda is the case of businesswoman Diane Rwigara, 

who ran as a critic of Kagame. 

Days after she launched her campaign, nude photos allegedly of 

her were leaked onto the internet in an attempt to discredit her. 

She said she would not be intimidated and continued her campaign. 

On July 7th, the National Electoral Commission disqualified her 

and two other candidates on technical grounds, alleging they had 

not collected enough valid signatures. 

Amnesty International said that the election would be held in a 

climate of fear and repression, and the Commission’s decision was 

criticized by the U.S. State Department as well as the European 

Union. 

Following the election, Rwigara launched an activist group called 

the People’s Salvation movement to challenge the regime on its 

human rights record, saying that the country’s Parliament is little 

more than a rubber stamp. 

Within days, her home was raided and she was arrested for forgery and tax evasion. Within days, although she was released, 

Rwigara was rearrested for forgery and offenses against state security. Her mothers and her sisters were also subsequently arrested 

for tax evasion. 

This is not the only case of harsh punishment of those who 

criticise the Kagame government. David Himbara, one of our witnesses today, was a close advisor to President Kagame and has an 

inside view of how this government deals with those seen as failing 

the government or those who disagree with it. 

He testified on the inner workings of the Kagame government at 

our May 20, 2015 hearing on Rwanda. Another witness at that 

May 2015 hearing was Robert Higiro, who told a chilling account 

of being solicited to commit murders of two formerly high-ranking 

military and security officials. 

That account was backed by authenticated recordings of 

Rwanda’s security chief offering large sums of money for the murders. In fact, after Mr. Higiro testified about his offer, he had to 

move from Belgium to the United States because his life was in 

danger. 

Both of our Rwandan witnesses have new information today that 

will be important for our Government’s policy toward Rwanda. 

During a staff delegation to South Africa last year, two of my 

staff spoke with officials of the Government of South Africa, which 

was highly offended that the Rwandan Government would be involved in the murder of a dissident on New Year’s Eve 2013. 

My staff also spoke with Rwandan refugees in South Africa who 

reported being afraid of officials at the Rwandan Embassy in South 

Africa who said they had threatened them for seeking asylum. 

Again, Rwanda is not your typical dictatorship in which all people suffer under an unpopular leader who does not provide for social services or security. 

Many Rwandans apparently generally feel the government is acting in their interests, especially providing for interethnic harmony. 

It is this anomaly that we seek to better understand in part 

through this hearing today. My office has compiled a report on our 

3

Government’s human rights issues with Rwanda and we are due 

to discuss these matters with them further. 

We would be a poor ally if we did not caution the Rwandan Government about human rights abuses which the international community cites. 

And so I would just conclude, in reading over all the testimony 

I just thought there were a number of important points made by 

all of our witnesses. But Amnesty International, I think, really 

brought home the fact that numerous journalists have been imprisoned. The Rwandan Government continues to suppress the independence and freedom of the media. This is from their testimony 

for today. 

They also point out that the international community including 

the Clinton, the Bush, and the Obama administrations have been 

at best half-hearted in confronting President Kagame and pressing 

the Rwandan Government to reform its policy regarding human 

rights and political space. 

I would like to now yield to my friend and colleague, Karen Bass. 

Ms. BASS. Thank you, Mr. Chair. 

As always, thank you for your leadership in holding today’s hearing on developments in Rwanda, especially regarding examining 

democratic practices. 

While Rwanda is geographically a small nation, its condition and 

role in the stability of the Great Lakes region is critical. 

I also want to thank our distinguished witnesses today including 

the Honorable Donald Yamamoto. We are happy you’re here representing the State Department. I do hope you won’t be acting forever. 

Several members of the Rwanda diaspora and the international 

human rights community—I look forward to hearing your various 

perspectives on both the successes and challenges of democracy in 

Rwanda. 

Chairman Smith, I believe, very clearly laid out many of the 

challenges and while I know that there are many challenges across 

Africa and while it is very important to address the challenges and 

concerns it is also important to talk about where there have been 

some positive developments, especially given Rwanda’s history. 

Rwanda experienced a very dark time in ’94 when over 800,000 

people lost their lives. The aftermath of the ’94 genocide left the 

physical infrastructure and political institutions destroyed. 

The country lost skilled human resources and was left with a dilapidated economy. Since that time, Rwanda has exhibited a rare 

degree of internal stability and economic growth in a sub region 

marked by armed conflict and violent transfers of power. 

Over the last 23 years, Rwanda has sought to change the course 

of the nation and embarked on an active effort to improve citizens’ 

health, boost agricultural output, promote investment, and increase 

women’s participation. 

I do have to note that Rwanda is a world leader in women’s representation with over 64 percent of Parliament being women, and 

that is compared to the United States, which is 18 percent. 

Additionally, Rwanda has experienced an average of 7.6 percent 

growth per year over the last decade and this is in part due to the 

pro investor policies, and Rwanda scores very well on the World 

4

Bank’s Doing Business Report, ranking 56 out of 190 economies assessed in 2017 and number two in sub-Saharan Africa. 

According to the WHO, the World Health Organization, between 

1990 and 2016 life expectancy increased from 48 to 66 years. The 

mortality rate of children fell from 152 to 42 deaths per 1,000 live 

births and the maternal mortality rate decreased from 1,300 deaths 

to 290 per 100,000. Literacy levels in the country for both men and 

women are at nearly 70 percent. 

Rwanda also plays a major role in peacekeeping across Africa 

and Rwandan troops participate in multiple U.N. and African 

Union missions. 

Rwanda’s peacekeepers are reportedly particularly valued because of their training and discipline. So the country has come a 

long way. 

In spite of the progress, though, there has been a great deal of 

concern over Rwanda’s history of unilateral intervention in the sub 

region and about restrictive political environment. 

Rwanda has the potential to be a strong regional leader but to 

do this, like all countries, it must continue to address its internal 

challenges. 

For the country’s own success, it should create a space for freedom of expression, ensure the free flow of information in the country and seek A.U. or U.N. authorization or mediation when dealing 

with neighboring countries. 

I yield back my time, Mr. Chair. 

Mr. SMITH. I would like to now welcome back to the subcommittee the very distinguished Donald Y. Yamamoto, who is 

serving as the acting Assistant Secretary of State in the Bureau of 

African Affairs at the U.S. Department of State. 

He has served as the Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of 

State in the Bureau of African Affairs from 2003 to 2006. He was 

responsible for coordinating U.S. policy toward more than 20 countries in East and Central Africa. 

He served as U.S. Ambassador to Ethiopia from 2006 to 2009 

and U.S. Ambassador to the Republic of Djibouti from 2000 to 

2003, and he has testified many, many times before this committee 

and he is more than welcome. 

Mr. Ambassador, please proceed as you would like. 

STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE DONALD YAMAMOTO, ACTING ASSISTANT SECRETARY, BUREAU OF AFRICAN AFFAIRS, 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

Mr. YAMAMOTO. Thank you very much. I submit the longer form 

for the record. 

Mr. SMITH. Sure. Without objection, so ordered. 

Mr. YAMAMOTO. Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member Bass, 

thank you for the invitation today. 

Since the United States has a very close and complex relationship with Rwanda, since rebuilding the country in 1994 genocide, 

over the last 23 years Rwanda has made remarkable gains in recovering from this tragedy. 

At the same time, Rwanda’s record in the areas of human rights 

and democracy, while improved in some areas, remains a concern. 

5

U.S. policy toward Rwanda seeks to support those areas where 

the government continues to make progress and urges the government to effect change where it needs to do more, especially in the 

expanding space of political dialogue and competition to take steps 

toward democratic transition of power. 

Since the genocide, Rwanda’s progress in the fields of health and 

development have been dramatic and we have been proud to partner in this process. 

Over the last decade, child mortality has been reduced by twothirds. Life expectancy has risen to 641⁄2 years of age by 2016. 

HIV prevalence has dropped from a little under 5 percent to 3 

percent in the same period, and with support for the President’s 

Emergency Plan for AIDS and Relief, PEPFAR, the Government of 

Rwanda has reduced HIV transmission to newborns to just 2 percent. 

Likewise, the economic growth and opportunity have been important aspects of our partnership with Rwanda over the past—over 

the past 20 years. 

In the last two decades, Rwanda’s economic growth has averaged 

about 7 to 8 percent, making it one of the leading countries, according to the World Bank. 

Rwanda is a major contributor to regional peace and security. It 

is now the fifth largest contributor to peacekeeping operations, and 

of course third in police operations. Rwandan troops are regionally 

respected and disciplined and participate in peacekeeping operations. 

In South Sudan, Rwanda recently deployed additional peacekeeping troops as part of the U.N.’s Regional Protection Force and 

Rwanda is a priority partner in reforming the African Union so 

that it is better prepared to resolve regional conflicts. And President Kagame will take over the rotating chairmanship of the African Union in January 2018. 

Despite these positive areas, we continue to have concerns—serious concerns about weak democratic institutions, freedom of 

speech, respect for human rights in Rwanda. 

There have been several important developments since the subcommittee’s last similarly-themed hearing on Rwanda in May 2015. 

In December 2015, Rwanda’s voters approved a package of constitutional amendments including one that enabled President 

Kagame to stay in power beyond the two-term limit contained in 

Rwanda’s constitution. 

In the run-up of that decision, we engaged in extensive public 

and private diplomacy, urging the President to honor the commitment he made in respect to term limits when he first assumed office. 

The constitutional amendments allowed President Kagame, who 

had been in office since 2000, to run for a third term. 

We continue to publically and privately emphasize our conviction 

that constitutional transition of power are essential for strong democracies everywhere and the efforts by incumbents to change 

rules to stay in power will weaken democratic institutions and undermine long-term stability. 

6

The August 4th Presidential elections illustrate that democracy 

in Rwanda remains far from perfect. As you know, the President 

was reelected in an official tally of nearly 99 percent of the vote. 

In the August 5th statement, we said we were disturbed by the 

voting irregularities we had observed and reiterated our longstanding concerns over the integrity of the vote-counting process. 

Three aspiring candidates were disqualified before the election 

and we expressed concern of the lack of transparency in the process. 

We noted in our statement we hoped that these concerns will be 

addressed before the 2018 parliamentary elections. Compared to 

the previous Presidential elections in 2010, however, we noted 

some progress. 

This was the first election in which the Democratic Green Party, 

the main registered opposition party in Rwanda, was allowed to 

participate. 

The Rwandan media has reported on the harassment of some opposition candidates and government officials took action to address 

complaints some cases by arresting local officials. 

Since the election, Rwandan officials have targeted several political opposition figures for questioning or arrest, and we are concerned by, and are following closely, the case of Diane Rwigara, one 

of the three disqualified Presidential aspirants. Police raided her 

home on August 29th, arrested Ms. Rwigara and two of her family 

members on September 23. We understand that the Rwandan authorities have until September 28th to press charges. In addition, 

we are following the arrests of at least 10 officials and members 

of an unregistered opposition party earlier this month. The cases 

suggest that tight restrictions remain on political competition and 

critics of the ruling party. 

Other serious human rights violations have been cited in our reports to Congress and include arbitrary and unlawful killings, the 

security forces’ disregard for the rule of law, restrictions on civil society organizations, government interference with the press. Over 

the years, Rwandans have reported to us the disappearance and 

suspected death of family members at the hands of the Rwandan 

security services. NGOs critical of the government are routinely denied registration to operate in the country. Government officials 

have also questioned, threatened, and arrested journalists who express critical views on sensitive topics. The government has used 

law criminalizing genocide ideology and divisionism along with national security provisions to suppress dissent, prosecute journalists, 

and pressure human rights groups to refrain from investigating 

and reporting on the findings. 

The administration continues to take action to address these 

human rights situations in Rwanda. In March 2017, our Ambassador in Kigali initiated quarterly high-level dialogues with the 

government on civil society and media freedom. 

USAID supports a number of targeted activities to promote the 

rule of law. Some areas where we continue to work include 

strengthening local NGO capacity to engage in policymaking improvements and to laws governing NGOs, increasing the capacity 

and skills of the media to provide independent impartial information, and skills training for judges. 

7

Rwanda benefits from the African Growth and Opportunity Act 

(AGOA) and we have raised concerns to the Rwandan Government 

regarding harassment of political opposition leaders and NGOs as 

well as restrictions on media freedom with the context of AGOA eligibility. 

We are responding to Rwanda’s request for help to combat trafficking in persons, including improving prosecution skills and closing gaps, and over the last decade we have worked closely with the 

Rwandan Government, civil society, private sector to combat child 

labor and thanks to our partnership, approximately 5,000 children 

were removed from child labor in Rwanda’s tea-growing districts 

between 2015 and 2017 alone. 

I would like to note some good news with respect to human 

rights and governance in Rwanda. The Government of Rwanda 

holds public officials accountable for corrupt practices including 

through prosecution. 

Rwanda has also prioritized the fight against gender-based violence and generally respects the rights of LGBTI persons. 

Women leaders are promoted as evidenced by the fact, as the 

Congresswoman stated, that 63 percent of Parliament members 

and 40 percent of cabinet officials are female. 

Human rights are part and parcel of our ongoing dialogue at all 

levels of the Rwandan Government and our consistent message remains that allowing opposition figures, journalists, and civil society 

to contribute to Rwanda’s future is crucial to building a knowledgebased economy and government seeks to foster. 

This includes ensuring freedom of expression, press freedom, 

ability of citizens to criticize the government and ruling party without fear of threats or violence or intimidation. 

And with that, I defer to you, Mr. Congressman. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Yamamoto follows:]

8


27012a-1.eps

Statement by Acting Assistant Secretary Donald Yamamoto, 

Bureau of African Affairs 

"Rwanda: Democracy Thwarted" 

House Foreign Affairs Committee 

Subcommittee on Africa, Global Health, Global Human Rights, 

and International Organizations 

Wednesday, September 27,2017, 3:00PM 

Mr. Chainnan, Ranking Member Bass, and Members of the Committee, 

Thank you for the invitation to testify today on U.S. etiorts to support democracy 

in Rwanda. Democracy, along with good govemance, is one ofthe four strategic 

purposes that guide our engagement with our African partners, together with 

increasing economic growth and investment, advancing peace and security, and 

countering the scourge of terrorism. 

The United States has a close but complex relationship with Rwanda. The cmmtry 

has striven to rebuild after the 1994 genocide in which more than 800,000 people 

were killed in the span of about 100 days. Over the past 23 years, Rwanda has 

made remarkable gains in recovering from this tragedy. 

At the same time, Rwanda's record in the areas of human rights and democracy, 

while improved in some areas, remains a concern. U.S. policy toward Rwanda 

seeks to support those areas where the govermnent continues to make progress, and 

urges the govemment to affect change where it needs to do more, especially in 

expanding space for political dialogue and competition, and to take steps toward a 

democratic transition of power. 

Since the genocide, Rwanda's progress in the fields of health and development has 

been drmnatic, m1d we have been a proud partner in this process. Over the last 

decade child mortality has been reduced by two-thirds, and life expectancy has 

risen from 49 years in 1995 to 64.5 in 2016. HIV/AIDS prevalence mnong adults 

has dropped from4.7%to 3.1% in the sm11e time period. With support trom the 

President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPF AR), the Govemment of 

Rwanda has also reduced HIV transmission to newboms to just two percent. 

Likewise, economic growth and opportunity have been important aspects of our 

partnership with Rwanda for over 20 years. From 2000 to 2015, Rwanda's 

economic growth averaged between 7 and 8 percent, and Rwanda currently ranks 
9


27012a-2.eps

56th out of 190 countries in the World Bank's Ease of Doing Business Index- the 

second-highest in Africa. Rwanda has become a model in leveraging development 

assistance into concrete results for its people and has reduced its dependence on 

foreign assistance by more than half in the last decade. 

Rwanda is also a major contributor to regional peace and security. It is the fifthlargest contributor of peacekeepers in the world- remarkable for a com1try of just 

under 12 million people. Rwandan troops are regionally respected and disciplined, 

and they have participated in UN peacekeeping operations in the Central African 

Republic, Sudan, Haiti, and Mali, among others. In South Sudan, Rwanda recently 

deployed additional peacekeeping troops as part of the UN's Regional Protection 

Force. Rwanda is a priority partner in tl1e Africa Peacekeeping Rapid Response 

Partnership (APRRP) and has been a leader in refom1ing the African Union so that 

it is better prepared to resolve regional conflicts. President Kagame will take over 

the rotating chairmanship of the AU in January 2018 for the following year. 

Despite these positive areas, we continue to have serious concerns about weak 

democratic institutions, freedom of speech, and respect for human rights in 

Rwanda. There have been several important developments since this 

Subcommittee's last similarly-themed hearing on Rwanda in May 2015. 

In December 2015, Rwandan voters approved a package of constitutional 

amendments including one that enabled President Kagame to stay in power beyond 

the two-term limit contained in Rwanda's constitution. In the nm-up to that 

decision, we engaged in extensive public and private diplomacy, urging President 

Kagame to honor the commitment he had made to respect term limits when he first 

assumed oftice. The constitutional amendments allowed President Kagame, who 

has been in oftice since 2000, to run tor a third ten11, which he has since done (and 

won). He could potentially stay in office until 2034, when he will tum 77 years 

old. Immediately after the referendum's passage, we publicly expressed deep 

disappointment with President Kagame's decision. We continue to publicly and 

privately emphasize our conviction that constitutional transitions of power are 

essential for strong democracies everywhere, and that efforts by incwnbents to 

change rules to stay in power weaken democratic institutions and m1dermine longtenD stability. 

The August 4 presidential elections illustrate that democracy in Rwanda remains 

far from perfect. As you know, President Kagame was re-elected with an official 

tally of nearly 99 percent of the vote, in an election with notable shortcomings. In 

an August 5 statement, we said we were disturbed by the voting irregularities we 

-2-
10


27012a-3.eps

observed and reiterated long-standing concems over the integrity ofthe votecounting process. Three aspiring candidates were disqualified before the election, 

and we expressed concem with the lack of transparency in that process. As we 

noted in our statement, we hope that these concerns will be addressed before the 

2018 parliamentary elections. 

Compared to the previous presidential elections in 2010, however, we noted some 

progress. This was the first election in which the Democratic Green Party, the 

main registered opposition party in Rwanda, was allowed to participate. The 

Rwandan media also reported on the harassment of some opposition candidates, 

and government officials took action to address those complaints - in some cases 

by arresting local officials. 

Since the election, Rwandan authorities have targeted several political opposition 

figures tor questioning or arrest. We are concerned by and are following closely 

the case of Diane Rwigara, one ofthe three disqualified presidential aspirants. 

Police raided her home on August 29 and arrested Ms. Rwigara and two of her 

family members on September 23. We understand the Rwandan authorities have 

m1til September 28 to press charges. In addition, we are also following the arrests 

of at least ten officials and members of an unregistered opposition party earlier this 

month. These cases suggest that tight restrictions remain on political competition 

and critics of the ruling party. 

Other serious hmnan rights violations we have cited in our reports to Congress 

include arbitrary or unlawful killings; security forces' disregard for the rule oflaw; 

restrictions on civil society organizations; and government interference with the 

press. Over the years, Rwandans have reported to us the disappearance and 

suspected deaths of family members at the hands ofRwandan security services. 

NGOs critical ofthe government are routinely denied registration to operate in the 

country. Government officials have also questioned, threatened, and arrested 

journalists who expressed critical views on sensitive topics. The government has 

used laws criminalizing genocide ideology and divisionism, along with national 

security provisions, to suppress dissent, prosecute journalists, and pressure human 

rights groups to refrain from investigating and reporting on their findings. 

The Administration continues to take action to address the htm1m1 rights situation 

in Rwanda: 

• In March 2017, our Ambassador in Kigali initiated a quarterly high-level 

dialogue with the government on civil society and media freedom issues. 

-3-
11


27012a-4.eps

• USAlD supports a number of targeted activities to promote the rule oflaw, 

access to justice, and the responsible growth of civil society and the media. 

• Some areas where we continue to work include strengthening local NGO 

capacity to engage in policy making, improvements to laws governing 

NGOs, increasing the capacity and skills of the media to provide 

independent and impartial information, and skills training for judges. 

• Rwanda benefits from the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA), 

and we have raised concems to the Rwandan government regarding 

harassment of political opposition leaders and NGOs as well as restrictions 

on media freedom within the context of AGOA's eligibility criteria. 

• We are responding to Rwanda's request for help to combat trafficking in 

persons, including by improving prosecutorial skills and closing gaps in 

investigative capacity. 

• Over the last decade we have worked closely with the Rwandan goverm11ent, 

civil society, and the private sector to combat child labor. Thanks to our 

partnership, approximately 5,000 children were removed from child labor in 

Rwanda's tea-growing districts between 2015 and 2017 alone. 

T would also like to note some good news with respect to human rights and 

governance in Rwanda. The Goverlll11ent of Rwanda holds public officials 

accountable for corrupt practices, including through prosecution. Rwanda has also 

prioritized the fight against gender-based violence and generally respects the rights 

of LGBTl persons. Women leaders are promoted, as evidenced by the fact that 63 

percent of Parliament members and 40 percent of cabinet officials are female. 

Human rights are part and parcel of our ongoing dialogue at all levels of the 

Rwandan goverm11ent. Our consistent message remains that allowing opposition 

figures, journalists, and civil society to contribute toR wanda's future is crucial to 

building the knowledge-based economy the gove=ent seeks to foster. This 

includes ensuring freedom of expression, press freedoms, and the ability of citizens 

to criticize the government and ruling party without fear of threats, violence, or 

intimidation. 

From private engagement to public statements, we have raised and will continue to 

raise these issues- not just because it is the right thing to do, but because we 

firmly believe that Rwanda's ability to sustain the gains achieved over the last 23 

years depends on building an inclusive society that protects the rights of all of its 

citizens. 

-4-
12


27012a-5.eps

The goverm11ent and people of Rwanda have reasons to be hopeful as the country 

continues to build a brighter future linked to peace and economic development. 

The United States will continue to work in partnership with all Rwandans to 

support progress in security and development, and to strengthen transparent 

democratic institutions that welcome criticism and embrace diverse views. 

Thank you, and I look forward to your questions. 

-5-
13

Mr. SMITH. Thank you so much, Mr. Ambassador. 

Let me begin by asking, did you, did the department, consider 

the elections to be free, fair, and transparent? You note that there 

is some progress. 

You note that the Democratic Green Party, which got less than 

1 percent—I presume far less than that in the election—rather 

than the other parties that might have had a more robust showing 

on election day, as some progress and you also point out that 

Rwandan media—you don’t say whether or not we independently 

verified it—reported on harassment of some opposition candidates 

and that government officials took action to address those complaints. 

Is that all true or is it just something that was in the local papers? Because you did point out in the next paragraph, since the 

election Rwandan authorities have targeted—what a word, targeted—several political opposition figures for questioning or arrest. 

So those who weren’t happy with the results couldn’t participate 

the way they ought to have been able to and now get further retaliation after the election. I don’t see why that is progress. 

Mr. YAMAMOTO. Thank you, Mr.—thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

So our relationship with Rwanda is one of a mixed relationship 

on the issue of democratic concerns and human rights issues. 

But if we look at one issue—area is if the elections were completely free, open, fair, and transparent in a U.S. context would 

President Kagame win that election and the answer is he has——

Mr. SMITH. I don’t think that is the question to ask. I think it 

should be whether or not the process was free, fair, and transparent and then let the people decide. 

Mr. YAMAMOTO. Right. So after the Presidential elections we had 

made a statement saying that we noted irregularities in the process and that is an issue that we had raised with the government 

and also looked at ways in which we could work with the Government of Rwanda to improve the process in the elections. 

Let me also state that one positive point for the electoral process 

since 2010 is that we did have the registration of the Democratic 

Green Party and also the first debate—political debate for the presidency. 

Mr. SMITH. But his numbers, obviously—President Kagame’s—

have gone up to the point where they are almost 100 percent so 

any sense that things are trending toward more openness, transparency, would you be able to say here and now that it was a free 

and fair election? Yes or no? 

Mr. YAMAMOTO. And the answer is more complex and the issue 

is that in our statement that we had stated that we had concerns 

with the process of the elections because of the irregularities that 

we noted and——

Mr. SMITH. Like, what were the irregularities? 

Mr. YAMAMOTO. The irregularities concerned the process and procedures and the issue of having 98.9 percent of the vote, that in 

itself denotes or relates to information of irregularities. 

Mr. SMITH. And candidates were excluded from participation in 

an arbitrary and capricious manner? Yes? 

Mr. YAMAMOTO. Yes. 

14

Mr. SMITH. Why can’t we just simply say it wasn’t free, it wasn’t 

fair, wasn’t transparent? 

Mr. YAMAMOTO. That the—because on the overall issues that we 

noted the irregularities and we noticed good points and bad points, 

and so there is a process. 

And what we hope to achieve in our overall relationship with 

Rwanda is that this is a reliable partnership and that we want to 

move it in a forward posture and that is what——

Mr. SMITH. I agree on behalf of the people we should do everything we can health wise, and everything to be of assistance, even 

with dictatorships. 

But I don’t think we should look askance and not call it for what 

it is. If it is a sham election we ought to call it a sham election. 

You can’t say that? 

Mr. YAMAMOTO. And we agree with you. We agree with you 100 

percent. 

Mr. SMITH. That it is a sham election or——

Mr. YAMAMOTO. That we look at elections and judge it by the 

standards of a free, fair, transparent election process and when 

there are irregularities we will call it out and that is what we did 

in August. 

Mr. SMITH. But at the end of the day, a judgment has to be made 

based on the evidence. But you cannot or will not make the decision that it was not free, not fair, and not transparent. 

Mr. YAMAMOTO. It was not a transparent process. I mean, it was 

not a—irregularities in the process of the election. 

Mr. SMITH. At the end of the day, was it free and fair? No? Yes? 

Mr. YAMAMOTO. Again, Mr. Chairman, it becomes a very complex 

process. 

Mr. SMITH. Okay. I am not sure why you can’t make a judgment. 

It is disappointing. 

Human Rights Watch has documented that poor people—critics 

of government decisions regarding land disputes and suspected 

petty criminals have been arbitrarily arrested, held in illegal detention centers, and in some cases executed, forcefully disappeared, 

tortured, and mistreated. These tactics ensure that citizens are 

afraid to speak out against the government,’’ and they go through 

what you would call one irregularity after another. Again, I don’t 

know why the judgment can’t be made that this was not a free and 

fair election. 

Amnesty International points out in their comments quite extensively that the Rwandan Government continues to suppress the 

independence and freedom of the media. Numerous journalists 

have been imprisoned, harassed, and even killed while many more 

have fled into exile over the years. Then they give specific examples on that. 

These actions mirror previous media crackdowns. Is there a 

media crackdown? Was there before the election, during the election, and after the election? 

Mr. YAMAMOTO. Let me go to your first question, Mr. Chairman. 

So first is on the voting and the vote count irregularities that we 

observed on the August 4th Presidential elections. We are not 

able—we are unable to assess this election as free and fair so that 

is our original statement. 

15

We have communicated our observations and assessment to the 

Rwandan Government. On the issues of human rights abuse during 

the procedures and process of the elections before, during, and 

after, we are concerned with any reports of human rights. 

We have started, through our Ambassador, through our Embassy, engaging with the government at all levels on these issues 

and we express our concerns. 

Mr. SMITH. And, again, if I could, with all due respect, Mr. Ambassador, we have had human rights dialogues in places like Vietnam for years. 

They have been a cul-de-sac where people meet, nothing happens—a venting of disagreements—and then they are used as an 

excuse for not calling out Vietnam for its egregious abuses whether 

it be as a CPC country or as a violator with regards to trafficking. 

The dialogues are important but they can’t be a substitute for 

calling it the way it is in a forum like this or anywhere else, particularly after the election. 

Ninety-nine percent. One party is given the green light, which 

was destined to lose massively. I don’t see that as progress when 

so many others were disqualified. 

So I would take issue with your assessment of some progress. I 

think, if anything, it is regression, given his even better outcome 

that he had in the polls. 

Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch documented 

just how brutal this was. 

As a matter of fact, Amnesty International said in their testimony during the 23 years that the Rwandan Patriotic Front has 

ruled the country there has been an unwavering often brutal campaign against government critics and human rights defenders. 

This campaign has included a tax on political opposition members including arrest, detention, disappearance and killings, restrictions on the media, and activities of civil society and the creation of a climate of fear. 

And now, as you have testified, since the election Rwanda authorities have targeted several political opposition figures for questioning or arrest. I mean, he’s not even satisfied that he got his 

outcome. Now he has to go after them and crush them now. 

Mr. YAMAMOTO. You know, as I said, Mr. Chairman, that the relationship is complex but it is also a mixed record and I know your 

position and we respect it and do emphasize that we, as the government, are committed to looking at the concerns that you have 

raised today and that we have raised them as well directly with 

the government, and we continue to raise them and to work with 

them to improve those areas where we believe that we can make 

a difference. 

And in some areas the Rwandan Government has made dramatic 

increases from child labor issues to allowing opposition parties to 

debates to accepting recommendations from the peer group under 

the U.N. operations and to look at. So we note that there is 

progress but there are, obviously, areas that we still need to work 

on and we are doing that. 

Mr. SMITH. Let me ask you one final question. Major Robert 

Higiro, obviously, testified before. He is here today, and he was not 

believed at first by the State Department and I know you have to 

16

do your due diligence and I deeply respect that. My understanding 

is that you came to the conclusion that he had a credible case when 

he came forward and said that he was offered money—$1 million—

to assassinate a general and a colonel who had fled Rwanda to 

South Africa. 

In his testimony today, he thanks America profusely. He had a 

death threat against him when he was living in Belgium and now 

has come to the United States. 

He points out in his testimony that members of the opposition 

parties and the media continue to disappear. Present tense—not 

past tense, present tense. 

How do you assess his revelations and this idea that members 

of the opposition parties and media continue to disappear? 

Mr. YAMAMOTO. You know, our position remains very clear. We 

have received the book from Mr. Higiro and I will diligently read 

that in detail. 

But, again, we remain concerned by the history of Rwanda’s 

treatment of opposition people and the issues that were raised by 

Mr. Higiro and others, those are issues and concerns that we will 

pursue and follow and follow up on. 

And, again, on the other side, for the Rwandan side, is we continue to help Rwanda build strong democratic institutions and 

those—that is really fundamentally the bottom line is to build 

those institutions which can address those concerns that we have 

raised and continue to raise and those are issues that we share 

with you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. SMITH. But, again, on those institutions, you’re talking about 

an electoral process that is egregiously flawed, where is the success 

in building that institution? It just facilitates a 99 percent vote. 

Mr. YAMAMOTO. We have faith and confidence that through 

these—through our efforts that we will be able to work with this 

government and also others because we do see positive developments and through, I think——

Mr. SMITH. Do you see a change of attitude on the part of President Kagame? 

Mr. YAMAMOTO. I think that in certain areas we have seen improvement. In other areas, we see——

Mr. SMITH. He will be there until 2034, right? 

Mr. YAMAMOTO. Under the changes in the constitution if he gets 

elected two more times, sure. 

Ms. BASS. Thank you. 

Mr. Ambassador, what role, if any, should the U.S. play in supporting Rwanda’s stability and efforts to improve the quality of 

lives of Rwandan citizens and what role should Congress play? 

Mr. YAMAMOTO. First of all, we extend our deep appreciation to 

you, Madam Congresswoman, and to you, Mr. Chairman, for all the 

efforts and issues you have raised to highlight the concerns that 

you have on Africa but also on a wide range of issues. 

So the stability of not just Rwanda but of the region and the 

states is critical not only to the security of that area but also stability and concern for the entire continent, and also it goes into our 

national strategic interest. 

So let me say to your question is what is it that we would like 

to achieve? We would like to see a stable democratic country which 

17

respects the rights of the citizens, respects the rights and freedoms 

of a free press and that it helps with the education opportunities 

and opportunities in general of its people. 

Ms. BASS. So what are we doing in that regard, especially in regard to democracy and governance? 

Mr. YAMAMOTO. To that end, we have several USAID programs. 

I think our development and assistance and assistance overall is 

about $159 million a year. 

On the one hand, on security side, the Rwandans have remained 

extremely supportive and a very good partner in peacekeeping operations and troops. 

On the side of health care, you cited, Madam Congresswoman, of 

the tremendous changes that they have made through health care, 

through HIV/AIDS progress. 

Ms. BASS. Yes. 

Mr. YAMAMOTO And also on women playing a constructive role in 

society, and also girls education and women entrepreneurs. Those 

are areas that are positive and really stand as symbol for other 

countries as well. 

Ms. BASS. So in terms of our democracy and governance? 

Mr. YAMAMOTO. And our democracy and governance is to create 

strong institutions and, again——

Ms. BASS. We have specific programs. I worry about this specific 

area because I know in the proposed cuts, if I am not mistaken, 

this takes a major hit. 

Mr. YAMAMOTO. And that does. Rwanda’s democratic institutions 

are still developing. We believe that and we need to focus more on 

creating those strong institutions which can carry between this 

President and to the next President and also for successive leaderships. 

That is what we want to achieve and I think those are the objectives and goals that we are committed to along with our NGO partners and also our discussions with the Government of Rwanda. 

Ms. BASS. So to what extent is Rwanda’s continued development 

progress contingent on continued donor aid or how much is independent? 

Mr. YAMAMOTO. In other words, to tie assistance to benchmarks 

for development and—so on health care you can’t set—the benchmark is progress and that progress is clear and evident——

Ms. BASS. Right. 

Mr. YAMAMOTO [continuing]. From livelihood and length of life 

expectancy and health care and HIV/AIDS. When you talk about 

development and human rights and democratic values, we have 

laws in place from our AGOA trading investments. 

There is an aspect on democracy and human rights. As you 

know, we have written letters of warning to the government on 

human rights issues. 

On the other issue is we have the Child Soldier Protection Act 

(CSPA) law and then the other law that the Congress has passed 

on the 2017 Appropriations Act. 

So those are areas that we look at and say that these are areas 

that we can hold the Government of Rwanda accountable. So, for 

instance, we had suspended FMF—foreign military financing. We 

had suspended IMET—military education. And, really, this is——

18

Ms. BASS. What about direct military assistance? 

Mr. YAMAMOTO. And direct military. We had not——

Ms. BASS. We suspended it. We suspended education and we suspended——

Mr. YAMAMOTO. The FMF. Right. But in this past year we have 

not renewed FMF but we have renewed—we have continued with 

IMET because really in that——

Ms. BASS. What did you say IMET was again? 

Mr. YAMAMOTO. International Military Education Training program. 

Ms. BASS. Uh-huh. 

Mr. YAMAMOTO. So the IMET program really is, in many ways, 

our—it is in our national interest as well because by taking Rwandan troops and officers to the United States——

Ms. BASS. Yes. 

Mr. YAMAMOTO [continuing]. To give them an education on 

human rights, that makes them a better officer. 

Ms. BASS. Thank you. 

Mr. SMITH. Thank you very much, Ms. Bass. 

Just one final question. The State Department has long declined 

to accept the various U.N. reports of Rwandan involvement in the 

smuggling of resources from the Democratic Republic of the Congo 

or its support for militia inside the country. What is the view of 

the department today? There are two reports on that. 

Mr. YAMAMOTO. So we—so we continue monitoring the conflict 

minerals in the Congo, which countries and operations are developing, from foreign countries to regional states, et cetera, and 

Rwanda has been in—in that area have been very supportive, passing laws to monitor the conflict minerals and we have been working with the Rwandan Government to reinforce those laws and also 

to criminalize any individuals who has engaged in illegal or illicit 

trading. 

Mr. SMITH. And, again, getting back, briefly, to Robert Higiro, 

does the State Department believe him to be credible? 

Mr. YAMAMOTO. I respect Mr. Higiro very much. I think the position he held as an advisor to President Kagame and the words that 

he presents in his testimony as the next witness I stand ready to 

listen to what he is going to present and the concerns of human 

rights, et cetera, we will continue to look into those issues. 

Mr. SMITH. Now, this is Major Robert Higiro, who, again, was offered $1 million to kill. So you believe he’s credible? 

Mr. YAMAMOTO. I respect him as an individual who has had a 

senior position in the government and his issues of human rights 

abuse or other concerns is an issue that we will look into and we 

will work with him. 

Mr. SMITH. Because David Himbara was very high up with the 

government but it is the major who was offered this incentive to 

murder people. So you believe they are both credible? 

Mr. YAMAMOTO. So let me—we will stand and listen to his testimony today and we will have other—further conversations later 

with him. 

Mr. SMITH. Thank you very much, Mr. Ambassador. 

Mr. YAMAMOTO. And thank you, Mr. Chairman and Madam Congresswoman——

19

Mr. SMITH. Thank you. 

Mr. YAMAMOTO [continuing]. Not only for having this hearing but 

also for your concern, and we remain committed to working with 

you because I think we share a very commonality in what we want 

to achieve. 

Thank you very much. 

Mr. SMITH. Thank you so very much, Mr. Ambassador. 

I’d like to now invite to the witness table, first beginning with 

David Himbara, who is coordinator for Canada at Democracy in 

Rwanda Now. 

As a former close aide to President Paul Kagame, Mr. Himbara 

held a leading role focused on socioeconomic development in Rwanda. Tasked with improving national competitiveness, he spearheaded efforts that ultimately improved Rwanda’s ranking in the 

World Bank’s annual Doing Business Report. He’s an author and 

his latest book is ‘‘Kagame’s Killing Fields.’’

Next, we will hear from Robert Higiro, who is coordinator for the 

United States at Democracy in Rwanda Now. Prior to moving to 

the United States, he served as a major in the Rwandan Defense 

Force. 

He was part of the force that took control of Kigali in 1994 that 

toppled the then-Hutu government and helped bring an end to the 

genocide in Rwanda. 

After his decommission, he was tasked by the Rwandan Government with assassinating officials and dissidents that fell out of 

favor with the Kagame regime. Instead of following those orders, 

Major Higiro went to the press and unveiled the plot at great risk 

to himself. It led to his being insecure in Belgium and the need for 

him to move to the United States for his own personal security. 

We will then hear from Mr. Mike Jobbins, who serves as the Africa Program’s manager for Search for Common Ground. He previously worked in Search for Common Ground field programs in 

the DRC in Burundi where he supported the startup and management projects on SGBV prevention, refugee reintegration, security 

sector reform, and post-war governance. 

Mr. Jobbins has led field missions in humanitarian and emergency settings in North Katanga, North Kivu, Equateur provinces 

of the DRC. He also testified previously before this subcommittee. 

And then we will hear from Adotei Akwei, who serves in the government relations office for Amnesty International. Mr. Adotei is a 

political analyst and experienced advocate and campaigner, a U.S. 

foreign security policy advisor as well as an advocate for rightsbased approach to ending poverty with field experience in Africa as 

well as in Asia. 

He is also a regular spokesman for Amnesty International USA, 

for print, radio, and television in the United States, Europe, and 

Africa and he, too, is welcome back to our committee. 

Mr. David Himbara, if you would begin. 

STATEMENT OF MR. DAVID HIMBARA, COORDINATOR FOR 

CANADA, DEMOCRACY IN RWANDA NOW 

Mr. HIMBARA. Chairman Smith, Ranking Member Karen Bass, 

ladies and gentlemen, I thank you very much indeed for giving 

20

me—giving me the opportunity to talk about democracy and human 

rights in Rwanda. 

I would like to talk about three things. First, I want to give the 

context of the recent elections. Then number two, I want to talk 

about the elections themselves, and then number three, I wish to 

talk about post-elections. 

The context of the elections in Rwanda was the constitutional 

amendment made in 2015. The constitutional amendment did two 

things. One, it removed a very, very important part of the previous 

constitution which said that, I quote, ‘‘under no circumstances 

should President of Rwanda serve more than two 7-year terms.’’ 

Why was this in the original constitution? 

It was in the original constitution because, historically, since 

independence, each leader in Rwanda has come through violence 

and then was removed by violence, and each of those Presidents—

and the main ones have been three—in their terms each one managed to win elections by 98 percent. So this is not just a Kagame 

issue. All of them. 

And, of course, as I said, they became a power unto themselves 

and we have not had any peaceful transfer of power in Rwanda. 

So that was the importance of that clause that under no circumstances. This is what was removed by the amendment so now 

President Kagame can stay in power until 2034. 

Now, there was something even worse than that. There is something even worse than that in the amendment. In the new constitution they inserted what we call Article 114 and it is called exemption from prosecution for a former head of state. 

The article reads, ‘‘A former President of the republic cannot be 

prosecuted for treason or serious and deliberate violation of the 

constitution when no legal proceedings in respect of that offense 

were brought against him while in office.’’

Well, of course, it cannot be brought against him while he’s in 

office because he has immunity. So Kagame has immunized himself 

even after he leaves power. 

This article basically gives him license to commit any crimes 

without any consequences. How do we explain this? By the way, incidentally, I must say with a bit of sick humor these amendments 

are being made by the women majority of Parliament. These are 

women in the majority of Parliament at work. 

So the numbers of women is great but the quality of work they 

do is rubber stamping the worst possible. Okay. 

So why is he doing this? We already know that even to come 

here in the United States Kagame had to be given immunity. 

The Obama administration asserted immunity for him because 

there are already cases about the alleged role in the shooting down 

of the previous President. This is the background behind this. 

But we also know that currently in the International Court of 

Justice there is a quote by Congo that accuses Kagame the crime 

of killing 3.5 million people. Rwanda and Uganda were both taken 

to this court. 

Uganda pleaded its case and lost and is paying reparations. 

Rwanda denied jurisdiction of the court. 

So this case won’t disappear. It is sitting in there somewhere. So 

that is the context. That is the context. 

21

Then the elections themselves—I don’t have to say much because 

a lot was covered—99 percent out of 96 voter turnout. This begins 

now to take us closer to the situation of North Korea. But, incidentally, this clause that frees Kagame from any prosecution, I have 

looked at the worst dictatorships. I have not found any such protection. 

Now, the elections themselves—I want to quote the British Ambassador. The British Ambassador was among the observers of the 

elections so I quote him. 

He says that, ‘‘Along with other international observers, I personally saw irregularities with the counting of ballots and voter tabulation.’’

And then he concludes, ‘‘We are concerned by the arrests and it 

is concerning to see the targeting of opposition figures.’’ This is the 

British Ambassador in Rwanda. 

So I really don’t have much to say but now let me talk about 

post-elections. Post-election is now revenge. It is a period of revenge. It is a revenge big time, and revenge has a single in particular—Diane Shima Rwigara. 

Why her? Why her? There are a number of reasons why her. 

First of all, she is the one who dared to raise issues of democracy, 

issues of human rights, issues of moral corruption, and by moral 

corruption she was saying that even in this economic miracle people talk about the ruling party itself has accumulated so much 

wealth that its conglomerate, Crystal Ventures, is now worth $500 

million while the same government punishes and destroys other 

businesses. 

Rwigara’s own father was killed 2 years ago in a serious accident. When the family protested, the government moved on and demolished their hotel. 

A month ago, another hotel, a competitor to the ruling party—

Tower Hotel—was demolished in broad daylight. Just 2 days ago, 

the leading Rwandan businessman, Tribert Rujugiro Ayabatwa, his 

$20 million Union Trade Center was seized and auctioned for $8 

million. 

So I guess I am running out of time. I see some signals there. 

So in conclusion, what we have here is a very costly experiment. 

Even those people who talk about the good things—the women in 

parliament—by the way, those women are—no one has voted. That 

Parliament is a list compiled by the ruling party—the senators, 

half of them appointed. 

Don’t confuse the senators in Rwanda with the senators in 

United States or Congress people. No. These are lists—party lists. 

Those who are not elected by the President, they are elected by 

people he has appointed in other institutions. 

Business success, absolutely not. Yes, if we talk about the President traveling in a $60 million plane rented from his own business 

at the taxpayers’ cost, if that is success—I don’t think so. 

So what should the United States be doing? I think the United 

States, in my view, has overcompensated. During the Clinton years 

during genocide, the government stood by while terrible crimes 

were committed. 

Then comes Kagame. So now we have gone overboard. He can do 

no wrong. I think that it is time that we take a closer look. We are 

22

not asking by any means to say stop health support or stop education. No. But the same military that you are supporting is the 

same military that is killing its own people. 

So what is good with a military that is doing great in the full 

when it is mowing down people in Rwanda and Congo? There is a 

problem there. 

I will simply say this. But first of all, I conclude by thanking you 

very much for having this hearing but also let me thank the Congress because I believe that in the budget law of 2017 there is a 

clause in there that says that for any government in the Great 

Lakes region to receive military support the State Department 

must verify if this government—if any government is causing 

havoc—they are not using those words—is causing havoc in the 

neighborhood. 

So I think you ought to hold your State Department accountable 

to see if they are doing this because we know for sure that causing 

havoc in Burundi or in Congo has not stopped, which I am sure my 

colleague here will say more about. 

I thank you so much for giving me a few minutes to talk. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Himbara follows:]

23


27012b-1.eps

Testimony of David Himbara, House Foreign Affairs Committee Subcommittee on African Affairs, 

September 27, 2017 

RWANDA: DEMOCRACY THWARTED 

Chairman Chris Smith, Ranking Member Karen Bass, and Members of the Committee: 

Thank you very much indeed for providing me with the opportunity to address the 

Committee on democracy and human rights in my country, Rwanda. Let me begin my testimony 

with the August 2017 presidential election won by the incumbent President Paull<agame, by a 

purported 99% in voter turnout of 98%. Among those unconvinced by this extraordinary result 

were the main bilateral financiers of the Kagame regime- namely, the United States and the 

United Kingdom. For the United States, the State Department said that it was "concerned by the 

lack of transparency in determining the eligibility of prospective candidates." The State 

Department added that "we are disturbed by irregularities observed during voting and reiterate 

long-standing concerns over the integrity of the vote-tabulation process."' The United l<ingdom 

was even direct. The British High Commissioner in Rwanda stated that he was concerned by 

"the lack of clarity in the registration process for candidates which appear to have made it 

impossible for certain credible candidates to register." He further stated that "along with 

other international observers, I personally saw irregularities with the counting of ballots and 

vote tabulation." He concluded that he was "concerned by the arrests" in recent weeks and 

that "It is concerning to see the targeting of opposition figures.'' 2 

Let me illustrate what the American and British governments are saying with the story 

of Diane Shima Rwigara. This story best demonstrates how the Rwandan state, under President 

Paul Kagame's rule, is determined to stamp out democracy and its advocates. But this account is 

also about courage, audacity, and determination to confront brute power at personal risk. 

1 US State Department, "Presidential Election in Rwanda," August 5, 2017, 

William Gelling, the UK High Commissioner to Rwanda and Burundi, "International Day of Democracy," 

September 15, 2017, bJ:.!ps:/ /wwwcgm;, uk/gover~rnent/sQ_eechf':.?finternational-day-of-democracy 

ll 
24


27012b-2.eps

The Diane Rwigara story began in May 2017 when she announced plans to seek the 

Rwandan presidency. Her motivation to enter politics was to fight for democracy, free speech, 

justice, poverty and moral corruption. She asserted that she would no longer live in fear of the 

ruling party's violence that affects all Rwandans. Diane denounced politicians in Rwanda and 

Africa that change constitutions to cling to power. She raised the issue of rulers living like kings 

and queens while most Rwandans live in mass poverty. She criticized Kagame and his ruling 

Rwandan Patriotic Front for acquiring a US$500 million business empire, Crystal Venture, based 

on cronyism, while terrorizing genuine businesspeople. 

Diane Rwigara knew what she was talking about. Two years earlier her own father had 

died in a mysterious car accident. When her family demanded an official investigation, the 

government demolished the family's hotel. Diane had also observed many cases whereby 

business persons lost their assets on Kagame's orders. One such case is Tribert Rujugiro's US$20 

million shopping mall, which was illegally seized by Kagame. 

Diana's audacity was unthinkable in Kagame's Rwanda. Most of her compatriots were 

stunned by her courage. The regime hit back by denying her the right to compete for high office. 

But Diane Rwigara would not be silenced. She persisted with her peaceful fight for 

democracy and human rights. After being blocked for competing for the presidency, she launched 

a democracy movement. She formed a "People Salvation Movement" with a goal of sensitizing 

Rwandans about their rights. She would also continue to criticize the human rights abuses of the 

ruling party, the Rwanda Patriotic Front (RPF). 

Kagame would have none of it. After angrily referring to Diane Rwigara as "a failed 

presidential candidate" who does not have immunity from prosecution, the Rwandan security 

forces raided the Rwigara home. She was locked up in her house along with her entire family for 

nearly a month. Each day Diane, her mother, and sister would be dragged to Rwanda intelligence 

headquarters for questioning for over 15 hours. Then on September 24, 2017, Diane, her mother 

Adeline, and her sister Anne, were arrested. They were charged with "offences against state 

security and other offences." 

That sums up the political environment in Rwanda. There is no space for democracy or 

human rights in Rwanda. In prison, Diane Rwigara will join others who tried to challenge 

21 
25


27012b-3.eps

Kagame's dictatorship. She will find people like Victoire lngabire Umuhoza. She will find Deo 

Mushayidi, and many known and unknown political activists. Diane will find families of 

former intelligence chief, Patrick Karegeya, who was assassinated in South Africa three years ago. 

She will find families of former army chief of staff, Kayumba Nyamwasa, who has survived four 

assassination attempts. Democracy in Rwanda is very problematic. The 2015 amendment to the 

Rwandan constitutional made matters worse by giving a green light to incumbent head of state 

to commit crimes and get away with it. Article 114 on the "Exemption from prosecution for a 

former president of the Republic" asserts: 

"A former President of the Republic cannot be prosecuted for treason or serious and 

deliberate violation of the Constitution when no legal proceedings in respect of that 

offence were brought against him or her while in office." 3 

Meanwhile the 2015 Rwandan constitution permits Kagame to stay in power until2034. 

What should the United States do to assist the people of Rwanda? As the top foreign aiddonor to Rwanda at $128 million in 2016,4 United States can at least isolate Kagame and his 

regime. The US State Department rightly condemned the August 2017 flawed elections that 

extended l<agame's rule. This is not enough. The United States should do more than merely 

calling l<agame out on his repression of the Rwandan people. The US should cut off nonessential 

support to Kagame such as military aid. Further, we call upon the American government to 

pressure the Kagame regime to free the Rwigara family and other political prisoners immediately. 

After all, one ofthe Rwigaras, Anne, is an American citizen. 

I thank you for your kind attention. 

3 Republic of Rwanda, "Constitution of Rwanda, 2015," 

b!tP_il}t/WW.!llliJlLL§t.gov. rvJ/flleadmir /Law and Recru!Jtion2i.Qfficial J19.zette_llq_2f!_eci<J_L..Qf_f4. 12,_2015 2 

USAI D, "The History of USAID/Rwanda," Dttp~:l/wwlN.USJid.gov/hlstcfrus~;idrw;:md~ 

31 
26

Mr. SMITH. Mr. Himbara, thank you so very much for your testimony. 

I would like to now recognize Robert Higiro. 

STATEMENT OF MAJOR ROBERT HIGIRO, RWANDA DEFENSE 

FORCE, RETIRED, COORDINATOR FOR THE UNITED STATES, 

DEMOCRACY IN RWANDA NOW 

Major HIGIRO. Chairman Smith, Ranking Member Bass, members of the subcommittee, ladies and gentlemen, good afternoon. 

I thank you for giving me the opportunity to give testimony on 

democracy and human rights in Rwanda. I wish to give evidence. 

My purpose today is to give evidence to the fact that democracy in 

Rwanda is impossible because of the environment that exists in the 

country right now. The commander-in-chief of the Rwandan security forces are part of the problem. Their purpose is not to provide 

security, but, rather to kill Rwandans and cause chaos in the region. 

Let me begin with President Kagame himself. He is on the record 

after the 2016 State Department report when they are concerned 

by disappearances saying, those who talk about disappearances are 

wasting time. As he puts it, ‘‘We will shoot them, if possible, in 

broad daylight.’’ That is the President saying it; I am just quoting 

him. It is not my words; it is his words. We have seen the followup of his senior commanders, brigade commanders, division commanders, echoing the same tone, especially in the western region. 

In the 2016 State Department’s Human Rights Report, it gives 

the most recent relatives in Rwanda. An increasing number of people have disappeared or have been reported missing since May 

2015. That is since our previous hearing. Many of the cases occurred in Rubavu district in the Western Province. According to 

Human Rights Watch reports, most of these people were detained 

by Rwanda Defence Forces, and we believe that they are in military custody. Witnesses saw some of the local authorities participating in this activity. One was the executive Secretary in Rubavu 

district by the name of Mugisha. He was seen taking part in those 

who were forcibly being kidnapped together with security agents. 

Imam Mohamed Mugemangango was shot and killed while in custody. At least half a dozen of people have been murdered by the 

security forces while in prison. 

Extrajudicial killings recently increased as the security forces 

cleared the capital of Kigali and major towns of poor people, unemployed, and the homeless. Authorities are rounding up poor people 

and arbitrarily detaining them in transit centers. They have transit 

centers across the country. In its 2017 report, Human Rights 

Watch proved chilling details of extrajudicial killing of 37 

Rwandans suspected of petty offenses such as stealing bananas or 

a car or a motorcycle in the Western Province. That was between 

July 2016 and 2017. Soldiers have continued to arrest and shoot 

most of the victims in what appears to be an officially-sanctioned 

strategy by the government. 

The claims by the state against Rwandans never stop, and this 

includes dissidents, those inside the country, and they go as far as 

Europe. That is why I am here. I try to travel as far as possible; 

they still come for you. We will get a chance to elaborate on that. 

27

Rwanda’s destabilization of neighboring countries has also not 

stopped, particularly in the Democratic Republic of Congo and Burundi. In 2013 in DRC, Rwanda disarmed over 770 M23 Congolese 

rebel combatants it had previously sponsored to take over the eastern part of the DRC. After the defeat of M23, over 770 crossed into 

Rwanda, the same number, and were detained in Ngoma. According to the 2016 State Department report, the same number mysteriously vanished. There can be no doubt about their role; they are 

Rwanda’s proxy army used to destabilize the neighbors. 

In the case of Burundi, Rwanda stands accused of recruiting Burundian refugees into the armed groups who seek to overthrow the 

government of President Pierre Nkurunziza. In its report, ‘‘Asylum 

Betrayed: Recruitment of Burundian Refugees in Rwanda,’’ the 

Refugees International rebuked Rwanda in the following terms: 

‘‘The Rwandan Government must act at once to ensure the civilian 

and humanitarian character of asylum and protected refugees from 

recruitment by non-state armed actors. To that end, it must ensure 

that all efforts to recruit Burundian refugees into armed groups—

whether on or emanating from Rwandan territory, and whether 

committed by Burundian or Rwandan nationals—cease immediately.’’ That was Refugees International. ‘‘Rwanda must also affirm publicly that the recruitment of refugees into non-state armed 

groups on its territory is a violation of international and Rwandan 

law.’’

Mr. Chairman, I can’t repeat what has been said, whether it is 

on the peace prospect or the corruption. That is why I want to conclude by thanking you once again for conducting this congressional 

hearing on Rwanda. We trust that the United States, being the 

main donor to Rwanda, will make its support conditional to ending 

terror on its own people and the region. 

Thank you very much. 

[The prepared statement of Major Higiro follows:]

28


27012c-1.eps

Testimony of Major, Robert Higiro: Subcommittee on Africa, Global Health, Global Human 

Rights, and International Organizations 

U.S. House of Representatives 

Sept, 27th 20 17. 

Chairman Smith, Ranking Member Bass, Members of the Subcommittee, Ladies and Gentlemen. 

Good afternoon. 

Thank you very much for inviting me here once again, as l had the privilege of addressing you in 

May 2015. l want to thank you for what the government of the United States did for me after l 

appeared before this Committee two years ago. In my 2015 testimony, l gave details of how, 

after serving as a major in the Rwandan military, the Rwandan intelligence had offered me US$! 

million to assassinate General Kayumba Nyamwasa and Colonel Patrick Karegeya who had fled 

Rwanda to South Africa. The repression of critical voices inside Rwanda, dissidents and real or 

perceived critics outside the country in neighboring Uganda, Tanzania and Kenya, South Africa 

and Europe have been victims of attacks and threats. In connection with my testimony of 2015 

the United States' officials relocated me to the United States after learning that the government 

of Rwanda was attempting to kill me in Belgium. l have since been living in the United States 

and am most thankful for the generosity of the American people. 

Mr Chairman, since 2015, the government of Rwanda has become increasingly authoritarian and 

violent. Its security forces continue to murder Rwandans and destabilize neighboring countries. 

In May 2015, l mentioned the extra-judicial assassinations of Patrick Karegeya in South Africa, 

but also of Assinapol Rwigara, a Rwandan businessman and Dr Emmanuel Gasakure, the private 

cardiologist of President Kagame, both killed in Rwanda. These assassinations are linked to the 

corruption of the regime. President Kagame owns all businesses in the country, either through 

private companies held by front men or through companies belonging to the ruling party, 

primarily Crystal Ventures. Any individual challenging this state of affair or competing with 

President's Kagame business interests is eliminated. Since then the families of these men were 

harassed. Five members of Patrick Karegeya's family disappeared, allegedly secretly detained: 

Goretti Kabuto, Mutsinzi Eric, Mwine Amos, Kabanza Edward and Gashaija Jotham. 

Unconfirmed reports indicate that Kabanza Edward may have been killed. Recently, Diane 

Rwigara, who publicly opposed President Kagame and denounced these murders was arrested 

together with her mother and two siblings. 

Members of opposition parties and the media also continue to "disappear." For example, 

Tlluminee Tragena, a member of the unregistered United Democratic Forces (FDU)-Tnkingi party, 

disappeared in 2015. Unconfirmed reports suggest she was killed in detention. In August 2017, 

the entire leadership of this FDU party vanished. Members or sympathizers of the Rwanda 

National Congress (RNC), the political party working outside Rwanda are systematically 

targeted. 

The 2016 State Department's Human Rights report confirmed unlawful killings in the country. 

An increasing number of people have disappeared or have been reported missing since May 2015 

in Rwanda. Many of the cases occurred in Rubavu district, in Western Province. According to 
29


27012c-2.eps

Human Rights Watch reports, most of these people were detained by Rwanda Defence Force 

(RDF) soldiers and we believe they are in military custody. Witnesses saw the executive 

secretary ofGisenyi sector, Honore Mugisha, taking part in arrests of people who were forcibly 

kidnapped together with security agents. Imam Mohamed Mugemangango was shot and killed 

while he was in custody- At least half a dozen of people have been murdered by the security 

forces while in prison. 

Extrajudicial killings recently increased as the security forces cleared the capital city of Kigali 

and major towns of poor people, unemployed, and the homeless. Authorities are rounding up 

poor people and arbitrarily detaining them in "transit centers" across the country. In its 2017 

report, Human Rights Watch proved chilling details of extrajudicial killing of 37 Rwandans 

suspected of petty offences such as stealing bananas, a cow, or a motorcycle in Rwanda's 

Western Province between July 2016 and March 2017. Soldiers arbitrarily arrested and shot most 

of the victims, in what appears to be an officially sanctioned strategy. These killings, carried out 

by and with the backing of state agents, are a blatant violation of both Rwandan law and 

international human rights law. 

Rwanda's destabilization of neighboring countries has also not stopped, particularly, in the 

Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), and Burundi. In 2013 in DRC, Rwanda disarmed over 

770 M23 Congolese rebel combatants it had previously sponsored to take over the eastern part of 

Democratic Republic of Congo. After the defeat ofM23, over 770 crossed into Rwanda and 

were detained in Ngoma. According to the 2016 State Department, the 770 combatants 

mysteriously vanished. There can be no doubt about their role- they are Rwanda's proxy army 

used to destabilize the neighbors. 

In the case of Burundi, Rwanda stand accused of recruiting Burundian refugees into the armed 

groups who seek to overthrow the government of President Pierre Nkurunziza. In its report, 

"Asylum Betrayed: Recruitment of Burundian Refugees in Rwanda", Refugees International 

rebuked Rwanda in the following tenns: "The Rwandan government must act at once to ensure 

the civilian and humanitarian character of asylum and protect refugees from recruitment by nonstate armed actors. To that end, it must ensure that all efforts to recruit Burundian refugees into 

armed groups-whether on or emanating from Rwandan territory, and whether committed by 

Burundian or Rwandan nationals- cease immediately. Rwanda must also affirm publicly that the 

recruitment of refugees into non-state armed groups on its territory is a violation of international 

and Rwandan law." 

Mr Chairman, the Rwandan security forces pretend to defend human rights as peacekeepers in 

other countries, yet they kill their own people. Today, the Rwanda security forces are fractious 

and unstable. Many high ranking officers are detained: four military colonels, Colonel Claude 

Mugabo, Gishaije Emmanuel, Peter Kalimba and Emmanuel Rugazora were recently arrested 

and taken to unknown locations. Their Commander in chief, General. Paul Kagame is always 

seen wearing bulletproof vests and is surrounded by a wall of security. He openly acknowledges 

violence against Rwandan people. In June 2014, for instance, after the U.S State Department said 

it was deeply concerned by the arrests and disappearance of dozens of Rwandans, Kagame had 

the following to say: "Those who talk about disappearances .. we will continue to arrest more 

suspects and if possible shoot them in broad daylight those who intend to destabilize our 
30


27012c-3.eps

country" Mr. Chainnan, if Rwanda's strong man is himself afraid of his own people and 

military, what is he afraid of:' On most grounds Rwanda is back where it was in the months 

before the 1994 genocide. Are we going to blame ourselves again for not having taken action" 

Mr Chainnan, 1 conclude by thanking you once again for conducting this congressional hearing 

on Rwanda. We trust that the United States, being the main donor to Rwanda, will make its 

support conditional to ending terror on its own people and on the people on the region. 
31

Mr. SMITH. Major Higiro, thank you very much for your testimony and for your insights. 

I would like to now recognize Mr. Jobbins. 

STATEMENT OF MR. MIKE JOBBINS, MANAGER, AFRICA 

PROGRAMS, SEARCH FOR COMMON GROUND 

Mr. JOBBINS. Thank you. Chairman Smith, Ranking Member 

Bass, and guests, it is an honor to join you today, and I thank you 

for the work and to shine a candle to the crises facing Africa and 

its Great Lakes region. I have been before you before on Burundi 

and CAR and greatly appreciate you maintaining the attention 

there. 

My name is Mike Jobbins, and for the last 9 years I have worked 

with Search for Common Ground throughout Africa and around the 

world. Search is a conflict transformation organization and we 

work to support peace, reconciliation, and inclusive governance 

here in America and in 44 countries around the world. 

The testimony that follows is informed by my experience with 

Search, but the opinions are my own, and I ask that the written 

testimony be entered into the record. 

Mr. SMITH. Without objection, so ordered. 

Mr. JOBBINS. Search was founded on the philosophy that conflict 

is an inevitable part of human societies, and our aim is to promote 

the positive aspects of conflict through dialogue, inclusive decisionmaking, and creative thinking, while preventing the negative aspects, including violence, oppression, and humanitarian suffering. 

We prioritized the Great Lakes beginning in 1995, opening our 

first office in Bujumbura, as the region was wracked by one of the 

worst periods of destructive conflict that the recent history has 

seen, and made a long-term commitment, expanding to Rwanda in 

2006, with the aim of supporting inclusive decision-making and reconciliation efforts following the tragic genocide. 

Over the past decade, Search worked with Rwanda media, government, civil society, and local communities to support reconciliation; address land disputes; build a capacity of civil society and 

government institutions, with a particular focus on youth and 

women in rural areas. And in preparing today, I was asked to 

speak specifically to our work in Rwanda focused on economic and 

social rights, particularly around land as well as on supporting reconciliation and post-conflict governance on the ground that affect 

ordinary Rwandans in the country. And so, my testimony will focus 

primarily on those topics. 

To set the scene, Rwanda is the most densely populated country 

in Africa, as has been noted. To bring that home, it is slightly 

smaller than the state of Maryland with twice as many people, 

nearly all of whom are dependent on subsistence agriculture, and 

the population is growing quickly. When I started first working 

with Rwanda 10 years ago, there were 9 million Rwandans. Today 

there are 12 million. And that is 33 percent grown in just 10 years. 

So, it is growing quickly and the underlying math is very clear. 

Rwandans needed, and still need, rapid economic diversification 

and growth as well a system to effectively manage land disputes 

and competition and the stresses that rural populations were feeling as population grows and resources became depleted. 

32

And yet, despite the structural challenges in a dense, landlocked, 

and post-conflict country, Rwanda experienced a dramatic economic 

transformation. In the last 15 years, according to the World Bank 

numbers, the economy has quintupled with the GDP growing from 

$1.3 billion to $8.3 billion a year, and a lot of that has been driven 

by a transition away from a subsistence economy and commodity 

exports and toward greater value-added services, cognizant and relevant to sort of the stresses on rural agriculture. 

Economic growth has been facilitated, as Congresswoman Bass 

highlighted, by a regulatory environment that supports business 

and entrepreneurship in line with the government’s Vision 2020. At 

the same time, in the context of scarcity, disputes over the allocation, access, and ownership of land remain the most common cause 

of conflict for ordinary Rwandans. The government has tried to address this issue by adopting policies and putting in place local conflict mediators known as Abunzi. These mediators are put on the 

frontlines of solving serious disputes among stressed rural populations faced with large caseloads, varying degrees of training, and 

confronted with serious social obstacles, particularly around gender. While women are legally entitled to inherit property and, as 

noted, there has been a great emphasis on women’s political participation, the right isn’t always necessarily recognized or respected 

in practice, due to traditional norms and struggles that ordinary 

rural women have to access justice. 

And so, to support alternative dispute resolution, Search 

partnered with the Ministry of Justice to support 4,000 Abunzi mediators, including female Abunzi, to support and train community 

resource people who could serve as advocates for the socioeconomic 

rights of marginalized groups and particularly for women, and to 

produce radio programming to ensure that rural residents understand land laws and policies and have the opportunity to ask questions and raise concerns, and finally, to build problem-solving 

skills, so that communities and families can address land conflicts 

themselves without referring to overstretching the justice system. 

At the same time, it is clear that, given demographic pressure, 

agriculture in its current form will not sustain Rwanda’s growing 

population. There has been an important focus from the government and from its international partners on developing alternative 

livelihoods and trying to ensure equal access to opportunities, particularly for rural youth and women to benefit from the economic 

transformation. But, as in all societies undergoing rapid high-technology economic change, the poorest and least educated struggle to 

take advantage of the new opportunities in the service-oriented, 

globalized, and educationally-intensive economy. 

Impediments faced by Rwandans include a lack of information 

and access to opportunities, a lack of capital and education to seize 

those opportunities, and a lack of exposure to role models and examples of entrepreneurship to roll those out and take them to 

scale. And so, looking forward, alternative livelihoods are critical 

and the kinds of partnerships of the kind we have been developing 

with the private sector and media to help ensure that Rwandans 

from the lowest socioeconomic brackets have information access to 

take advantage of the opportunities available. 

33

In terms of reconciliation and post-conflict governance, Rwanda’s 

recovery from the horrific genocide 23 years ago has been held as 

a modern-day success story, both in reconciliation and good governance. Some of the statistics have been thrown out earlier. I would 

also add that Rwanda ranks 44th on Transparency International’s 

Corruption Perceptions Index, some of the best scores of any African country. 

And this has been achieved through a governance model that focuses on and prioritizes professional, results-oriented, and technocratic governance with strong central leadership in policymaking 

and implementation. The strong coordinating role that the central 

government plays across society has helped stamp out petty corruption and drive a coherent policy vision and agenda. 

But Vision 2020 also establishes a vision for decentralization and 

ownership, local ownership, of government policy. Ordinary local officials face the difficult task in balancing the emphasis on efficiency 

and results with the need for the more cumbersome process of creating opportunities for citizen inputs, engagement in explaining 

policies to ordinary people. The best Rwandan administrators establish two-way communications with their citizens to tell and 

shape policy implementation, but in other circumstances citizens 

struggle to find a window to feed into decision-making in an environment where there is not a robust policy discussion. 

Socially, Rwanda has made admirable progress in reconciling 

citizens from different backgrounds who have to live together in 

their communities, despite the atrocities of the past. Hundreds of 

thousands of people have been punished for crimes committed, and 

on a day-to-day level, many people are moving on with their lives. 

At the same time, barely a generation has passed, a short timeframe to overcome the horror that has been experienced. And while 

the country has set aside ethnic identity in favor of national unity, 

recovery naturally takes time and there is an awful lot that remains to be done over the generations to come. 

Media and civil society are absolutely critical to creating the 

space for dialog, both about the past and about the policy issues 

to lay a bedrock for sustainable peace, participatory government, 

and effective long-term governance. Since 2006, we have built 

strong partnerships with local government and independent radio 

outlets and focused on building alliances based on shared interests. 

But it is imperative that there are capable organizations to facilitate sensitive dialogs on air and in person in an open environment, 

so to strengthen the capacity of media and civil society to work 

with authorities, and work with authorities themselves to engage 

the population in a constructive and inclusive manner. 

In view of these few observations—and I am happy to share 

more—I want to make four recommendations, in conclusion, for 

U.S. policy. First, sustaining U.S. diplomatic engagement in Rwanda and the region is vital. I think there is unanimity from everyone 

in the room on that point. Although there are many competing demands for attention in the Great Lakes region alone, and let alone 

across Africa, this region can’t be forgotten and it deserves a highlevel focus within the region, adequate staffing and resources, both 

within the regional bureaus as well as within Embassies and 

USAID missions across the region. 

34

While it may seem remote to many Americans, the horrors of 

genocide, civil war, and humanitarian crises that have been unleashed, and are still being unleashed in many parts of central Africa, have cost far too many lives, but also cost far too many dollars 

in international assistance focused on short-term palliation of 

chronic crises, rather than putting the region and its people on a 

path to a greater recovery. 

Second, there are some things that the U.S. Government and the 

Congress should learn from the experience of conflict and recovery 

in Rwanda. Many conflict countries and fragile contacts have been 

beset by seesawing international attention focused on immediate 

short-term recovery, but not sustaining a holistic engagement to 

economic recovery, political participation, or reconciliation that are 

needed to sustainably transition from fragility. That is something 

that needs administrative action, but also congressional action to 

authorize and to support holistic approaches to conflict and fragility in the Great Lakes Region and beyond. 

We recognize and appreciate the leadership that the Congress 

has shown on women, peace, and security, and salute the bill that 

just passed earlier this week. We also recognize the Eli Wiesel 

Genocide and Atrocities Prevention Act, which has been introduced 

back in May and can really make good on the U.S. commitment to 

Never Again. 

Third, regional economic integration is critical, given the context 

of population density across the region and the need for radical economic transformation and a shared economic transformation. It is 

very clear that regional cooperation, which at the moment is quite 

beset between Rwanda, Burundi, DRC, and beyond, requires better 

cooperation across borders, but also people-to-people reconciliation 

to stabilize the wider region. 

Finally, it is absolutely critical that the U.S. Government continue its support and accompaniment of Rwanda in overcoming the 

legacy of genocide and in reconciling itself to the horrific events of 

the past. Even though Rwanda has made much progress in dealing 

with the aftermath of genocide and the series of massacres that 

have marked its history, the horrific past and the related trauma 

still affect other avenues to a lasting peace and stability in Rwanda 

and in the region. Atrocities of this history and their consequences 

should pave the way to a much more open society where conflicts 

and differences can be dealt with openly and through dialog. The 

U.S. Congress should focus its engagement in working with the 

Rwandan Government in supporting the Rwandan people to build 

a brighter future and to achieve this goal together. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Jobbins follows:]

35


27012d-1.eps

House Foreign Affairs Committee 

Sub-Committee on Africa, Global Healtlt, 

Global Human Rights, and httemational Organizations 

Hearing on 

R\\anda: Democracy Thwarted? 

September 27'h, 2017- 3 00 p.m. 

2200 Rayburn House Office Building 

Statement of Mr. Mike Job bins 

Director of Global Affairs and Partnerships 

Search for Common Ground 

Chairman Smith, Ranking Member Bass, Members of the Committee, and distinguished guests, it is an 

honor to join you today. TI1a11k you for convening this importm1t hearing and for maintaining a focus on 

Africa· s Great Lakes Region in general, and on Rwanda in particular. 

I am the Director of Global Affairs with Search for Common Ground (Search), one of the largest 

organizations dedicated to transfom1ing conflict in the Great Lakes region and around the \Vorld. Search 

was founded upon the philosophy that conflict is an inevitable part of human societies and is neither good 

nor bad. Problem-solving requires constructh-e debate and differences of opinion- beh\een men and 

\vomen. behveen groups. political ideologies. religions. or regions - and is the only \Yay that any society 

can ad,.ance. But while constructive conflict can lead to more inclush-e development and social outcomes, 

destructive conflict lead to violence. oppression and is the primary cause of extreme poverty and 

humanitarian need. 

Search began its work in the Great Lakes in 1995, amidst one of the worst periods ofdcstmctivc conflict 

in recent history. Search began vvorking in Burundi amidst that country· s ci\--il \Yar, looking at similar 

dynamics to those that fueled R\vanda ·s horrific genocide and supporting Bunmdians seeking to chart a 

different path, where media could bring people together and heal divides rather than ignite tensions and 

spark ,,-iolcnce. Recognizing the shared challenges and important regional factors driving conflict 

throughout the Great Lakes, Search expanded its work to the Democratic Republic of Congo in 200 I and 

Rwanda in 2006 with the aim of supporting inclusive decision-making and reconciliation efforts. 

Over the past decade. Search has worked closely \\ith Rvvandan govemment, media, civil society. and 

local communities to support reconciliation, address land disputes, and build the capacity of civil society 

and govenunent institutions \Vith a focus on youth. Search works \Yith R\vandan partners including 

Governmen( 1 civil societ:, ~md media outlets across the countryi1 with support of grants from the U.S. 

government.m European govenunents,1

v UNICEF. as \\ell as private philm1thropists a11d foundations. 

While my testimony is infonned by the time 1 have spent \Vith Search, the opinions and perspectives are 

my own. 
36


27012d-2.eps

Tvv-cnty-thrcc years fOllO\ving rhc genocide. R\Yanda has seen imprcssiYc economic gro,vth and a 

conc:.:rt-.::d ~ffort from n;J_tional and inh.'mational actors to heal \Vonnds and r.::bui1d communiti~.~s, and has 

been held up as a model of recoYery· and reconcJh::ttinn. In the last decade_ the country has faced three 

broad challenges: first, how to chart a path to economic growth overcoming the steep stmctural 

challenges that the country faced, second, hmv to establish post-conflict governance, and third how to 

ensure security nationally_ vvith the regional implications in the troubled Great Lakes. I \Yill tOcus my 

remarks on progress in these three sectors. \vith particular attention to \Yomen' s participation, before 

offering a fevY recommendations for U.S. policy. 

A Rapidly Transforming Economy and Agriculture Sector to Meet the Needs of a Grmving Population 

R~.Yanda has dramatic 0conomic grmvth. In the last 15 

from L3 lo 8.3 dollars per vear. The Rwcmd•m 

and the \vidcr world. fmcmct access has grmn1 250%) since and more 

from trade.~' Tv1m.:-h ofR,,·anda"s economic grmvlh has lx:cn driven 

su!JSi,;terrce t::cononiy and commodity exports tO\vards servJces 

environment that supports business and entrepreneurship 

r.:conomic n.Jbrms. 

This rapid gro\\1h has been even more striking considering the stmctural challenges that the country 

faced. Rwanda is landlocked. one of the most densely populated countries in the \Vorld and heavily 

dependent on subsistence agriculture. To illustrate the challenge: the lTN CS(imatcs that Rvvm1da's 

population \viH nearly doub1J by 2050."1 At the same time, the Tntcrnational Food Research 

ln~'titutc forecasts that staple due to snil dnnate change 

Tlus is a J\1orc is under 20 

productiYity arc 

in1t~nTIS of health, development_ and 1ht~ s.;;curity of the country as a \Yho1e.'·' 1 

Addre.ssing, In this context of land scarcity, over the a1Jocation, accef..s. and 

0\Hlership of land the most common cause of conflict 

has tried to address this issue adopting ne\Y 

knmnt a:-; Ahun;:;i -.uJ m:mdatc on r~scarch has tbund that 

ap]JroxitlnatelY 80C!i,) of the cases they deal 1,vith are rdated to land. 11u::se local mediators are on the 

access to justice 

For example, \Yhilc ;,vomcn arc entitled to inherit 

or respected in practice norms and limited acc0ss 

to leaving them and the1r children 

on incorporating \Yorncn into the 

starting to producL' some ._;arly results in terms of ~upporting \Vomcn-s equal 

To supportaltemativc dispute resolution (ADR) in tl1is sector. Search partnered \\ith the of 

Justice w and coaching to 4JJOO Abunzi community mcd1ators. includtng 

\Vomcn's Council to identif-y and train community resource people who 

could ~ervc as rcuhocates for marginalized groups, and particularly for \\-Omen, as they tried to assert their 

rights to property ru1d inheritance. Search has also been producing radio programming to ensure that rural 

residents had access to information on the latest land laws and policies and the opportunity to ask 

questions and raise concerns and conduct participatory theater pertOnnances that encouraged creative 

problem-solving so that families and communities could address land conflicts thcmsehes, without 

needing the involvement of the over-burdened justice system. This partnership has thus far yielded 

promising results. For example, Search conducted a recent study in Gisagara District that and found an 

85% satisfaction rate \vith female mediators, ru1d that \\'Omen's emerging leadership as Abunzi was 

opening entry points for their involvement in community decision-making fora. including \vithin churches 

and other social settings. 
37


27012d-3.eps

an on 

opJlOTtulll """ - panicularly tOr mral 

in all socicti~s undergoing 

transformation, the least-educated struggle to tak0 ach-antagG ofnc\v OPIJUILWtm<:s 

sen,ices-on..::nted, and higher-tt'chnology econ•Jmy. lmpedn11ents a lack ofinfonnation 

and access to opportunities, capital and education to seize opportnmtics. and a lack of exposure to role 

models and c;.;:<:trnplcs of cntr(.)plcm:nrship. Looking for\\-ard, emphasizing alternative livelihoods, and 

vvith an approach that recognizes the diverse needs and interests of the Rwandan population in this are~ 

will be critical if Rwanda is going to meet its t:Lrget of becoming a middle-income countr;. 

Scarc·h has worked vvith the R\\m1dan business c01mnunit:. radio. and tckYision to help cxt(:nd and 

opportunities crcmed by the ncvY cc.onomy. Search vyorkcd \vith Rivandan rncdia producers 

to a weekly radio show highlighting vocational training and entrepreneurship opportunities and 

feature creatii·e economic undertakings of young people. particularly aimed at rural audiences. Search 

also created Zamuka. a reality TV shmY akin to America's S'hark Tank. which featured contestants 

learning the challenges, strategies. and paths to create a successful business. As one of the first TV reality 

shows produced in Rvvanda by Rvvandans, it succeeded in harnessing the diverse initiatives undenvay to 

support economic development. creating more information-sharing and cohesion among the various 

actors trying to support this sector.L' 

E.•itabli.\1ring E:flective and Citizen Participation in Post-Cm~flict Governance 

countries on the 

the Wc>rld flank's 

go·,ernrurce on the continent. lt ranks ·+4t:1 out of 168 

Perceptions Index."' and 62 out of lf\9 in 

8nsincss report'\ some best scores of any African country At the 

aJ.mirable in reconciling c]tiLens tl:om 

have to live together in [heir communities \\-hat role the;- in the genocide. 

thousands have heen punished fhr cnmcs 

moving At the same Lim~. not even 25 

overcome the horror that the countr:-- expe-rienced. Vlbi1e count0 h:1s set aside ethnic identity in favor 

of national unity as Rwandans, recovery natumll: tahcs time and HKtny still struggle \\ith trauma, 

AccountahiLity, und participation R\Yanda has achie·vcd these successes through a 

govenKmce that focuses on professional, results-oriented ~md technocratic governance Yi--11h strong 

central leadership in and The strong coordinating role tl1at th~ central 

sta1np out corruption and driven a coher~nt 

are .:m emphasis on effickncy and to 

impetus to create opportumties for ci[izen and explain The best administrators creak 

'" mdO\\ s fOr citizens to tailor and mother cJrcumstances. R\\andan 

citizens stmggle to tind a \VindmY io ;md sometimes fed that policies arc made 

despite them, mther than for their benefit. 

Search has partnered \\ith the Ministry of Local Government to foster inclusive and participatory 

governance to improve development outcomes \Yith a particular focus on t\vo-way communications and 

the relationship bet\Yeen local officials and citizens in the context of national policy refonn. Jointly. 

Search has trained officials in ditierent districts to support them on how to identit~, and manage rumors, 

build more active communications strategies. and work with local radio stations to provide better access 

to infonnation and platforn1s for dialogue that can inforn1 government about citizen concerns and 

feedback on existing policies. This partnership aims to reduce the need for top-down policy enforcement, 

towards better communication and alignment between officials and ordinal) citizens around common 

long-tenn interests improving sustainability through OV\11ership and participation. 
38


27012d-4.eps

Media and civil society have a key role to play in promoting sustainable peace and inclusive gm.·ernancc. 

Yet they face internal challenges that prevent them from fulfilling this role. Search has been working with 

the media sector since it began \Yorking in R\Yanda in 2006. and it has built strong partnerships ·with both 

government and independent outlets that have common interests of mission and purpose at their core. 

rather than transactional exchanges. Civil society in general, and media in particular. remain a critical 

partner_ Search will continue to leverage its Common Ground approach to strengthen the capacity of 

media and civil society to engage \vith the authorities and \vith the population in a constmctive and 

inclusive manner. Search's experience has shown that investing in promoting diversity in the media sector 

can yield positive results. Search aims for inclusion in a11 of its media programs-at the national and 

regional level, seeking to include diverse perspectives and experiences to broaden listeners' 

understanding of a particular issue or concept. 

narli,·imllil>n One of the other areas of dramatic 

the highest 

ranks the world Cor the equali(y of acces~ to 

U.S. ranked nnd hos equal pmrticipa.tion 

remarkable. against the """.,,1; ,;"'"'I 

'"ays to t11e at the highest 

in rural areas \\here man; R\\andan wom.en face discrimination and ""ithin 

Search has been \vorking \Yith the "Mini:Tiry of Gender and Fan1ily as \Yell as \Yo men leaders in ciyil 

society and in the media to help build the confidence and legitimacy to play a mea.nlngful role in decisionmaking processes beyond the top level of politics 

High level representation has not yet been 

vvomen report that they have experienced 

violence in the past 

gender-based 

;:md inclusion: over a third of 

""'' m'wu.o to improve the quality and availability of \Vomen 1s voices within the 

media sector. especially in the newsroom reporting (rather than human-interest. or '\\omen's" issues). 

reached more than 2.5 million Rwandan listeners and found that more than three quarters of listeners 

across the region found that public access to good quality programs on gender and \\·omen's rights had 

increased 

Building Stahili(v in the Wider Region 

At the regional kvcl. the Great Lakes and Central Africa remain Rwru1da 's relations 

vvith its continue to be 

Burundi the Democratic Republic 

Burundi have worsened since the Burw1di 

to 

are lncreaslng, dlrectly nnpacnng the minlmal 

have for price shocks. These tensions are particularly pett: traders. the 

maJority arc \Vom~.:n. vd1o cam th0ir smTiva1 sl:lling agricultural pmduc:ts across Lhc bordn.·'' 1 

Further, R\Yanda ls hosting more th.:;m X?,OOO Burundians, the de1mo;rr2cnhic 

crls.es and humanitarian calls to action m Somalia. and the 

attention and limit.:d rcsourc..:s to J1-:;o att.:nd io the Bunmdian situation and 

support ns ~n the could also lead to furtha manlpulation. 

movements of the econom:'l, cross-border violence that could 

con11ict, especially as the DRC is heading to\\ards a contentious electoral process. 

To address mism1derstandings and stereotypes in the \vider region. Search developed a live regional callin program. Generation Grands Lacs ran for nearly 10 years and reached millions from Matadi to Kigali. 
39


27012d-5.eps

highlighting young people-s voices from Rwanda. Burundi and DRC as they sought to discuss and search 

for solutions to some of the region's long-running problems; evaluations found that the radio program 

reduced people's stereotypes about each other and contributed to better understanding and relationships 

between divided groups. Rwanda is an island of stability in a chronically fragile region. but long-tenn 

peace and economic grm:yth for citizens throughout the wider Great Lakes Region relics on the entire 

region transitioning a\vay from the legacy of violence and chronic fragihty. and building a shared and 

inclusive future. 

Key Recommendations 

In \-ie\v of these observations. I will conclude vvith four reconunendations for U.S. policy. 

First, sustam U.S. (IIplomatJc engagement m R~-t·anda and the Great Lakes Regwn 1s vital. Although there 

arc many competing interests and areas for the U.S. and the intemational community. the Great Lakes 

Region must not be forgotten and deserves high-Ic,.-d diplomatic attention. While the region may seem 

remote to many Americans, the horrors of genocide. civil \Var, and humanitarian crises that have been 

unleashed upon the citizens of Rwanda DRC, Bumndi, Uganda. South Sudan, and the Central African 

Republic in recent years continue to cost far too many lives and massive amounts of international 

assistance focused on saving lives rather than promoting gro\\th. R\vanda is part of that context and 

sustained diplomatic engagement is required both to sustain the U.S.-R\vanda partnership. and vvithin the 

vvider region. This is particularl~r true as President Kagame assumes the African Union Presidency in 

January. and as the U.S. continues to work \Yith the region to support peace etiorts in areas that are 

experiencing accentuated crises. 

Second, learn lessons from Rwanda for other complex emergencies. R\\-·anda has made impressive gains 

in terms of security, development and reconciliation, but challenges still remain. Rwanda \Yill continue to 

face dense population yet limited economic opportunities as a land-locked, resource-limited country: high 

expectations of economic gro\\-th and sen ice delivery: and where the legacy of trauma still impedes 

collaborative problem-solving. Other fragile contexts in the region have been beset by see-sm\-ing 

international attention and a lack of support for transitioning from emergency post-conflict assistance to 

reconciliation and economic recovery. At the same time, some of the legislation currently being 

considered by Congress. including the Elie \Viesel Genocide and Atrocities Prevention Act, seem to be 

promising ,,-indows to improve our 0\\-n govemment's ability to respond to crises and prevent genocide. 

Third, strengthen regional economic integration. Population density and environmental shocks pose 

existential threats to the entire Great Lakes Region. Sustaining the needed economic gro\\1h in R\vanda, 

and achie\· ing gro\\ th in its neighbors, relies upon integration. Yet recent events hme shown some of the 

weoknesses of regional structures. The Economic Conununitv for the Great Lakes which brought together 

Rwanda, Bumndi and DRC to address issues of common interests is not currently functioning. The 

lCGLR and the East African Comnumity offer windows and frameworks for cooperation. but as recent 

conflicts within the region show. economic cooperation needs to be complemented by efforts that meet 

citizens- basic needs. support people-to-people reconciliation efforts, and lay the groundwork for dealing 

with the legacies ofthe past 

Finally, continue to support and accompany Rwanda tn overcoming the legac_.:v of the genoctde and 

reconcNing tlse[f"with the horrUlc events (?f"lhe past. E\·en though Rwanda is making much progress in 

dealing with the aftermath of the genocide and a series of the massacres which marked its history. its 

horrit1c past and its related trauma still affect other avenues to lasting peace and stability in Rwanda and 

in the whole region. Atrocities of this histof) and their consequences in the aftennath should pa\-e \vays 

to a much more open society, where conflicts and differences arc dealt with openly and through dialogue. 

The U.S. Congress should tOcus its engagement in working with the Rwandan Gm,-ernment and 

supporting the Rwandan people to build a bright future. 
40


27012d-6.eps

1 Key Government partners include the Ministry of Justice, Ministry of Gender and Family Promotion, 

Ministry of Local Government, the National Commission for Unity and Reconciliation, the Rwanda Natural 

Resources Authority, and the Media High Council. 

"Media partners include the Rwanda Broadcast Authority, Radio lshingiro, Radio lsangano, Radio lzuba, 

Radio Salus, Radio lsango Star, Contact FM, Radio and TV 10, and Radio Huguka. 

"'This includes U.S. Agency for International Development's Office of Conflict Management and 

Mitigation, the U.S. Department of State's Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor, and the U.S. 

Institute of Peace 

"Including the Belgian, British, Dutch, Finish, and Swedish governments, as well as the European Union 

v World Bank. f't:£Ll.!f1?_~;;g~~fi!i:Z.£11'fl!1l- Washington, DC September 2017. 

vi United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs. ".k'!!.9.!..((i.l:~c_JiliJ{?:Il!:!.!f.F!!.!?0llZ~'QL'?__:?{)_1j_~ 

f!'.varHJa Totftl.E2i2Yli2tl.D!) PQfb1!J.!lJsUc PrQjOf:itf;;L_::_~." DESA/Populations Division. 2017. 

'"National Institute of Statistics of Rwanda. ''Thematic Report: Population Size, Structure and Distribution" 

Fourth and Housing Census of Rwanda. Kigali, January 2014. 

of this institution was published South African NGO Accord in : Mutisi, 
41

Mr. SMITH. Thank you very much. 

Mr. Akwei? 

STATEMENT OF MR. ADOTEI AKWEI, MANAGING DIRECTOR, 

GOVERNMENT RELATIONS, AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL 

UNITED STATES 

Mr. AKWEI. Thank you. I would like to thank you both for this 

opportunity to speak before your committee and, also, to acknowledge and thank your consistent engagement and leadership on 

issues related to Africa, human rights, and U.S.-Africa policy, 

which has been, and continues to be, essential and greatly appreciated. 

Amnesty International is a global human rights movement established in 1961 with 7 million members and supporters. We have a 

presence in 70 countries and have offices in Dakar, Nairobi, Johannesburg, and Abuja. We have been working to improve the respect 

and protection of human rights in Rwanda since the early 1970s. 

Amnesty does not take a position on the type of political system 

a country may have. It is our belief that fundamental human rights 

must be guaranteed and upheld by all political systems. We do consider the rights associated with elections such as freedom of expression, association, assembly, among others, to be critical not 

only to the election itself, but also to the overall health of open political space. The way governments engage with critics and voices 

of dissent, how they interact with civil society and treat human 

rights defenders are critical indicators that go beyond a single election. 

With your permission, I would like to ask that our written testimony be submitted to the record. 

Mr. SMITH. Without objection, so ordered. 

Mr. AKWEI. The August 4th elections granted incumbent Paul 

Kagame his third term in office. This followed the referendum in 

2015 which changed the constitution, allowing President Kagame 

to stand again in 2017 and for two further terms, should he desire 

to do so. In 2010, President Kagame won 93 percent of the vote; 

in 2017, he won 99 percent. 

During the 23 years the Rwandan Patriotic Front has ruled the 

country there has been an unwavering and often brutal campaign 

against government critics and human rights defenders. This campaign has included a tax on political opposition members, including 

arrest, detention, disappearances and killings; restrictions on the 

media and the activities of civil society organizations, and the creation of a climate of fear. These concerns have been echoed by 

other human rights groups and the United States Department of 

State, which noted in its 2016 report: Government harassment, arrests, and abuse of political opponents, human rights advocates, individuals perceived to be a threat to government control and social 

order, restrictions on the media and the civil liberties. The attacks 

and the campaign have included, as mentioned above, attacks on 

the political opposition and, of course, the restrictions on the media 

and civil society. 

In 2010, Amnesty reported that the authorities tightly controlled 

political space in advance of the 2010 elections. Freedom of expression was unduly restricted by broad laws on genocide ideology. 

42

Human rights defenders continued to exercise self-censorship to 

avoid confrontation with the authorities, and conventional courts 

still fell short of fair trial standards. 

In 2011, we reported that authorities restricted freedom of expression and association. Media outlets that criticized the government were closed down, editors fled, human rights defenders faced 

intimidation, investigations into killings were inadequate. 

In 2012, Amnesty reported that the Rwandan Government increasingly prosecuted individuals for criticizing government policies 

and that there was a rise in unlawful detentions. Violations included restrictions that were imposed on freedom of expression arrests, unfair convictions of opposition politicians and of journalists. 

In 2013, Amnesty reported that the government still continued 

to stifle legitimate freedom of expression and associations; that the 

illegal detention and allegations of torture by Rwandan military intelligence were not investigated. This was the same year that the 

Rwandan Government was also found by the U.N. group of experts 

to have provided military support to the M23 armed group in the 

neighboring Democratic Republic of the Congo, which was linked to 

rape, extrajudicial execution, and the use of child soldiers. 

The government’s crackdown and restrictions on expression, assembly, association, repression of journalists, human rights defenders, and member of the opposition parties who openly criticized the 

ruling government, use of unfair trials, and unlawful detentions 

were raised in our reports of 2014, 2015, and 2016. In 2017, we reported on the severe restrictions that we thought were going to 

color and shape the run-up to the elections. This was the result of 

over many years of the same types of actions. 

It is time for the international community to press the Rwandan 

Government to change. Some have argued that Rwanda is still 

emerging from the 1994 genocide. Others have argued that, because Rwanda is doing well economically, the current administration should be given more latitude. These arguments must be rejected as they will subvert the common obligation to stand for 

rights accepted to be universal and that countries have committed 

themselves to, including Rwanda. 

Amnesty International has called upon the Government of Rwanda to embark upon a longer-term reform process, to open up political space before the 2024 elections and, as you mentioned, before 

the 2018 parliamentary elections, and strengthen basic protections 

of rights beyond those. 

The concerns I have outlined impact more than the next election, 

and addressing them will require more than a temporary easing of 

some laws, the release of a few people, or even the permission to 

register a political party or NGO. The assault on defenders and political space is quickening, and Rwanda is becoming a role model 

for the wrong things as opposed to the right things. It is not good 

for Africa. It is not good for the United States or for the global community, as history is littered with many examples of countries 

where political intolerance has led to political conflicts, and that 

has been extremely damaging. The global community failed Rwanda once before. It should not do so again. 

Specifically, we would like to suggest that Congress and the 

Trump administration call on President Kagame and the GovernVerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:54 Nov 07, 2017 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\_AGH\092717\27012 SHIRL
43

ment of Rwanda to prevent and ease restrictions on or the harassment of members of the political opposition, their supporters, on 

journalists, and human rights defenders, and establish an independent judicial investigative mechanism into serious violations of 

freedom of expression, assembly, and association. We have named 

a number of specific individuals who have disappeared that should 

be investigated. 

Congress and the administration should also urge the Rwanda 

Government to decriminalize defamation offenses and the review of 

the Rwanda penal code. We would also urge the United States to 

call on the Rwandan Government to reform the law on public assemblies and to remove the requirement for prior authorization for 

public assemblies and, instead, a regime of prior notification. 

We would also urge Congress to maintain and increase funding 

for programs focused on building respect for human rights, the rule 

of law, and independence of the judiciary. I would like to echo my 

colleague from Search who raised the issue of building the capacity 

of civil society and the media. These are critical institutions and 

have to play their role in establishing, along with the Rwandan 

Government, good governance, human rights, and respect for the 

rule of law. 

I will stop there. Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Akwei follows:]

44


27012e-1.eps

The State of Human Rights in Rwanda 

Statement by Amnesty International USA 

before the House Subcommittee on Africa, Global Health, Global Human Rights and 

International Organizations 

Prepared by Adotei Akwei 1 

September 29, 2017 

Chairman Smith, Ranking Member Bass and other members of the Subcommittee, on behalf of 

Amnesty International USA I would like to thank you for the opportunity to testify before this 

Committee. Your consistent engagement and leadership on issues related to Africa, human 

rights and US Africa policy has been and continues to be essential to making sure that issues 

and developments in the continent receive the attention they deserve, and in 2017 this 

function has become even more critical. 

Amnesty International is a global human rights movement established in 1961 with 7 million 

members, offices in Dakar, Nairobi, Johannesburg, Abuja and a presence in 70 countries. We 

have been working to improve the respect and protection of human rights in Rwanda since the 

early 1970s. 

Amnesty International does not take a position on the type of political system a country may 

have. It is our belief that fundamental human rights must be guaranteed and upheld by all 

political systems. We do consider the rights associated with elections such as freedom of 

expression, association, assembly among others, to be critical- not only to the election itself 

but also to the overall health of open political space. The way governments engage with critics 

and voices of dissent, how they interact with civil society and treat human rights defenders are 

critical indicators that go beyond a single election. With your permission, I would like to share 

our analysis and recommendations regarding the state of human rights in Rwanda for the 

record and look forward to discussing ways in which the United States and the international 

community can help Rwanda change course and avoid the further erosion of rights that has 

become a defining characteristic of the RPF administration. 

1 *With the help of Dr. Ken Harrow, Alana Smith, Essowe Telou, Rachel Nicholson and Christian Rumu 
45


27012e-2.eps

Background 

The August 4 elections granted incumbent President Paul Kagame his third term in office. This 

followed a referendum in 2015 which changed the constitution, allowing President Kagame to 

stand again in 2017 and for two further terms should he so wish. During the 23 years that the 

Rwandan Patriotic Front has ruled the country there has been an unwavering, often brutal 

campaign against government critics and human rights defenders. 

This campaign has included attacks on political opposition members including arrest, detention, 

disappearances and killings, restrictions on the media and the activities of civil society 

organizations and the creation of a climate of fear. These concerns have been echoed by other 

human rights organizations and the US Department of State which noted in its 2016 report that 

The most important human rights problems were government harassment, arrest, and abuse of political 

opponents, human rights advocates, and individuals perceived to pose a threat to government control 

and social order; security forces' disregard for the rule of law,· and restrictions on media freedom and civil 

liberties. Due to restrictions on the registration and operation of opposition parties, citizens did not have 

the ability to change their government through free and fair elections. 

Other major human rights problems included arbitrary or unlawful killings; torture and harsh conditions 

in prisons and detention centers,· arbitrary arrest; prolonged pretrial detention; government infringement 

on citizens' privacy rights and on freedoms of speech, assembly, and association; government restrictions 

on and harassment of some local and international nongovernmental organizations {NGOs}, particularly 

organizations that monitored and reported on human rights and media freedoms; some reports of 

trafficking in persons; and government restrictions on labor rights,· and child labor. 

The government in many cases took steps to prosecute or punish officials who committed abuses, 

including within the security services, but impunity involving civilian officials and the SSF was a problem. 2 

Sadly, assessments of the government's performance regarding respecting human rights in lead 

up to the 2017 elections have not improved. Key human rights violations included 

Attacks on Political Opposition 

The government has actively cracked down on political opposition groups over many years. 

On September 23, Diana Rwigara, along with her mother and sister, was arrested by Rwandan 

police accused of offenses against state security and forgery. Rwigara had tried to run against 

Kagame in the August 2017 elections before being disqualified. Shortly after she declared her 

intention to stand she was subjected to a smear campaign on social media. 

2 Rwanda, Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for 2016, Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor, March 2017 
46


27012e-3.eps

Unregistered opposition political party FDU-Inkingi has faced numerous restrictions since its 

president, Victoire lngabire's, return to Rwanda in 2010 to attempt to stand in the 2010 

presidential election. On the day of her return, she made a speech in which she discussed the 

lack of recognition of Hut us that had been killed during the genocide. She was sentenced to 8 

years of prison for: "conspiracy to harm the existing authority and the constitutional principles 

using terrorism, armed violence or any other type of violence" and "grossly minimizing the 

genocide." Amnesty International is not in a position to assess the validity or otherwise ofthe 

terrorism-related charges in this case. During the trial, the judges showed open hostility toward 

her and constantly interrupted her despite the fact that the evidence used to convict her was 

linked to the legitimate expression of her ideas as guaranteed under the African Charter for 

Human and Peoples' Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. When 

she appealed her conviction to the Supreme Court on the basis of unfair trial, the Court said her 

claims were unfounded and lengthened her imprisonment to 15 years for spreading lies in 

order to incite the population to revolt against the current government. _ 

In March 2016, another member of the FDU-Inkingi party, llluminee lragena, went missing, and 

another, Leonille Gasengayire was arrested for inciting insurrection, but was later acquitted. 

Both members were known to have visited Victoire lngabire in prison. In September 2017, the 

party's vice-president Boniface Twagirimana, along with Leonille Gasengayire and several other 

members were arrested, accused of links to armed groups operating in a neighboring country. 

Other opposition party figures such as members of P5-lmberakuri have previously been 

arrested and found guilty of "divisionism" for criticizing government policies. This follows the 

murder ofthe vice-president ofthe Green Party in 2010 and disappearances of various 

members. 

Restrictions on Independent Media and Civil Society 

The Rwandan government continues to suppress the independence and freedom of the media. 

Numerous journalists have been imprisoned, harassed and even killed, while many more have 

fled into exile over the years. 

In 2016, at least three journalists were briefly detained after investigating sensitive issues, such 

as corruption or possible suspicious deaths on the part of the Rwandan government. The 

government also impedes the work of NGOs in the country through excessive registration 

procedures. 

The BBC Kinyarwanda services were indefinitely suspended by the Rwanda Utilities Regulatory 

Authority (RURAl on 29 May 2015 after the broadcast of the documentary Rwanda's Untold 

Story, on the grounds that it violated Rwandan laws on genocide denial, revisionism, inciting 

hatred and divisionism. 

The editor of Umurabyo, an independent Kinyarwanda-language newspaper, and her colleague 

were convicted in February 2011 on the grounds of articles they had written criticizing 

government policies and making corruption allegations against senior government officials, 
47


27012e-4.eps

including President Kagame. While both were eventually released their incarceration is a 

chilling example of what journalists and human rights defenders in Rwanda risk for doing their 

jobs. 

These actions mirror previous media crackdowns. The government suspended the newspaper 

Umuvugizi and another private Kinyarwanda-language newspaper Umuseso from April to 

October 2010, the same period as the 2010 elections. The Rwanda Media High Council then 

called for their indefinite closure claiming that some of their articles threatened national 

security. 

Conclusions 

Member of the Subcommittee, in 2010 President Kagame won 93% of the vote. In 2017 he won 

99%. The concerns listed above are just some examples of the patterns of repression over the 

23-year rule of the RPF. 

In 2010, Amnesty reported that authorities tightly controlled political space in advance of the 

2010 presidential elections, freedom of expression was unduly restricted by broad laws on 

genocide ideology, human rights defenders continued to exercise self-censorship to avoid 

confrontations with the authorities, and conventional courts still fell short of fair trial 

standards. 

In 2011, we reported that the authorities restricted freedom of expression and association 

before presidential elections in August that year. Media outlets that criticized the government 

were closed down and editors fled Rwanda. Human rights defenders faced intimidation. 

Investigations into killings were inadequate. In 2012 Amnesty reported that the Rwandan 

government increasingly prosecuted individuals for criticizing government policies and that 

there was a rise in unlawful detentions. Violations included restrictions that were imposed on 

freedom of expression and the arrests and unfair convictions of opposition politicians and 

journalists. In 2013, Amnesty reported that the government continued to stifle legitimate 

freedom of expression and association and that the illegal detention and allegations oftorture 

by Rwandan military intelligence were not investigated. That year the Rwandan government 

was also found by the UN Group of Experts to have provided military support to the M23 armed 

group in the neighboring Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) which was linked to rape, 

extrajudicial execution and the use of child soldiers. The government's crackdown and 

restriction on freedom of expression, assembly and association, repression of journalists, 

human rights defenders, and members of opposition parties who openly criticized the ruling 

government, use of unfair trials and unlawful detentions were raised in our Annual Human 

Rights Reports for 2014 2015 and 2016. 

In 2017, we again reported on the severe restrictions human rights defenders, media and 

opposition politicians on their rights to freedom of expression, association and peaceful 

assembly in the run-up to elections this year and over many years. 
48


27012e-5.eps

The international community including the Clinton, Bush and Obama administrations have been 

at best half-hearted in confronting President Kagame and pressing the Rwandan government to 

reform its policies regarding human rights and political space. The Obama administration did 

press the Rwandan government and military to end their support of M23 but US leadership on 

human rights reform inside Rwanda has been at best tepid. 

Some have argued that Rwanda is still emerging from the 1994 genocide. Others have argued 

that because Rwanda is doing well economically the current administration should be given 

more latitude. This argument must be rejected as it subverts our common obligation to protect 

and stand for rights that that have been adopted as universal. 

Amnesty International has called on the Government of Rwanda to embark upon a longer-term 

reform process to open up political space before the 2024 elections. We expect the US 

government to support this call. 

Policy Recommendations 

Mr. Chairman, members of the subcommittee, the United States Government and the 

international community must speak up in defense of human rights defenders, journalists and 

civil society in Rwanda. Specifically, the United States should 

1. Call on President Kagame and the government of Rwanda to prevent restrictions on, or 

harassment of, opposition candidates, their supporters, journalists and human rights 

defenders and establish an independent judicial investigative mechanism into serious 

violations of freedom of expression, assembly and association in past and present, 

including the murders of Andre Kagwa Rwisereka, Jean Leonard Rugambage and Jean 

Damascene Habarugira, as well as the disappearances of llluminee lragena and Jean 

Damascene Munyeshyaka; 

2. Urge the Rwandan government to decriminalize defamation offences in the review of 

the Rwandan penal code; 

Call upon the Rwandan government to reform the Law on Public Assemblies to remove 

the requirement for prior authorization for public assemblies and instead adopt a 

regime of prior notification. 

Increase US funding for programs focused on building respect for human rights, the rule of law 

and independence of the judiciary. 
49

Mr. SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Akwei. And thank you, all of you, for 

your tremendous input today. I do have a few questions I would 

like to ask. 

One, I am concerned—and I have deep respect for Ambassador 

Yamamoto—that we seem to be overvaluing, the State Department, 

the U.S. Government, some facts like the participation of the 

Democratic Green Party, which got approximately 1 percent of the 

vote. Others who wanted to participate were precluded that opportunity, and then, as he said, the holding to account of the harassment of opposition candidates that was reported in the Rwandan 

media. Whether or not that is true, I still don’t know. Was it a report, a false report, a sensational report that, oh, we are holding 

officials to account? That is not clear. 

But, even in his own testimony, he goes on to say, as I quoted 

earlier, ‘‘Since the election, Rwandan authorities have targeted several political opposition figures for questioning and arrest.’’ And 

then, he goes on and, accurately, quotes from the Country Reports 

on Human Rights Practices, pointing out arbitrary or unlawful 

killings by security forces, disregard for the rule of law, restrictions 

on civil society organizations, government interference with the 

press, which Mr. Akwei again and others have already made in 

their testimonies in terms of the crackdown on journalists. It is 

hard to call that some progress, frankly, when it seems to be going 

in the precisely opposite direction, where the percentage of the vote 

claimed by the President goes even higher than the previous one, 

and he is in for life based on the constitutional changes. 

Your thoughts on that? Because I think we sometimes turn the 

page far too quickly, if it should be turned at all, and we are willing to look at one little seemingly bright, shiny object that we can, 

then, cling to, and it is a surface appeal argument. It has surface 

appeal that the Green Party participated, but what about all the 

others? It is a talking point that a lobbyist might want to push forward to a less-than-critical set of eyes and ears. So, I am concerned 

about that. Your thoughts on that, overvaluing this what I think 

is regression, not progress, by the Kagame regime? 

Secondly, as you pointed out, Mr. Himbara—and I should have 

asked the Ambassador; I will by way of a written question—when 

you pointed out and brought further attention to Article 114, which 

gives immunity, which often means impunity. Because if you are 

not going to be held accountable ever for anything you do in office, 

including rape, having your soldiers rape and kill and extrajudicial 

killings, and the like, you are above the law completely for life. 

That needs to be much more further emphasized in our bilateral 

relations and, hopefully, in a multilateral way with Rwandans. If 

any of you would like to comment on that? 

And I thought your point, Mr. Akwei—and I quoted it earlier, 

but it bears repeating—when you say, and you have so brilliantly, 

reported on severe restrictions on human rights defenders and the 

media, and the like, and you have done it painstakingly. You also 

point out that the international community, including the Clinton, 

George W. Bush, Barack Obama administrations, has been, at best, 

halfhearted in confronting President Kagame and pressing the 

Rwandan Government to reform its policy regarding human rights 

and political space. Those kinds of omissions on the part of biparVerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:54 Nov 07, 2017 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\_AGH\092717\27012 SHIRL
50

tisan administrations is unconscionable because at the end of the 

day people get killed, women get raped and abused, people go to 

prison, journalists get harassed, and the people don’t get the truth 

because it has a chilling effect on what they write. 

So, if you could speak to that as well? Because now we have a 

new administration. It doesn’t have all of its people in place yet. 

But we need to say clearly and unmistakably to the new White 

House: Don’t repeat the bipartisan error of the past, because we 

will get the same outcome. We will get more impunity. So, whoever 

would like to go first? Yes? 

Mr. HIMBARA. Mr. Chairman, very often we talk about a smoking 

gun. I think Article 114 is a smoking gun. Article 14, as you said, 

it is an opportunity. I wrote, in preparation for this hearing, I 

wrote—or I read as many constitutions as I could find anywhere, 

including even the constitution of the Democratic Republic of North 

Korea. I could not find a constitution that gives a green light to a 

head of state, not only to commit crimes while in office, but also 

after he has left office. So, I would assume that he is probably 

thinking that, after he leaves office, he will probably put in a puppet that would refuse to enforce international laws and say, ‘‘Look, 

you can’t touch him here. He’s here.’’

Because, as I said, there are cases here already in the U.S. And 

in the U.S., this is a country where even a sitting President can 

face law. So, really, the United States or even the United Kingdom, 

this is a country that—Rwanda is a member of the Commonwealth. 

How does the Commonwealth allow a country that gives a green 

light to criminality on the part of the head of state and get out of 

it? 

So, here I would say that we should begin right there. We can 

plan for the removal, because either you want to be President and 

lead and build the economy and do these wonderful things, empower women—that is great. But, if you make a mistake, you cannot be above the law. 

Thank you. 

Major HIGIRO. Yes, thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Normally, I like to go into the details of, if what Mr. Jobbins just 

said, if what the State Department just said is true, whether it is 

government building institutions in Rwanda—so, what is the problem? Why is it that things are not working? 

I asked him before he started that, if Rwanda can really develop 

so quick like they are saying—it is a landlocked country, we have 

neighbors—how do they do it? How do it that Burundi can’t copy 

that, or Tanzania, or Uganda, or the DRC? What is the magic? And 

if there is no issue, why are we here? 

So, I like bringing to this committee exactly what I am worried 

about. One, prisons criminalize Rwandans. And we all know when 

you push people to the wall what happens. How did we get to 

1994? What really happened to get to 1994? It is this: We talk 

about issues and people choose which side they want to be on. They 

choose which truth they want to bring up. Personally, I can talk 

about the genocide because I was there. Sometimes Rwandans talk 

about the genocide; people have different views. But, when it comes 

to me as a soldier who tried to rescue people during genocide, I 

fought for 3 months before we took over. I know exactly what hapVerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:54 Nov 07, 2017 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\_AGH\092717\27012 SHIRL
51

pened. I know how the Tutsis were being killed. I know of the 

crimes. 

Then, we have what happened from 1994 to date. Again, I saw 

it until 2010, when I was decommissioned. I was serving the 

United Nations. I was a peacekeeper. I had two tours in Darfur, 

one as a commander of soldiers, another one as a staff officer heading the sector’s information. 

I know, too, that. I know how they work. I know the discipline 

of the Rwandan soldiers. I know where it comes from. And what 

I have been striving to give you and the State Department, and 

other elements of the government, is the truth. What people have 

to do with it is not up to me. But Kagame knows all this. He knows 

we are going to come here and make good speeches, talk about the 

corruption, and, you know, he will say corruption is everywhere in 

the world. 

And most of the people who still go to Rwanda—it doesn’t matter 

where you are working; it doesn’t matter where you come from; it 

doesn’t matter if you are Rwandan—in most cases, they will never 

criticize Rwanda. Do you know why? Because that is their end. 

The previous region representative of the Great Lakes region, he 

failed to do his job. You either say what he is telling you or don’t 

come back. And it doesn’t matter which level they are on. 

Now criminalizing Rwandans is in two ways. The Hutus, if you 

follow deeply, most of them are reluctant to talk about the current 

situation. Why? The moment you do that you become a genocider. 

Therefore, we have had cases for the Hutus, and some of them 

have been deported from the United States, have tried to engage 

with the United States Government about these cases. We are not 

saying we are supporting those who participate in genocide, no. We 

are saying we need fair justice. Try them here, right? Because 

there is no justice in Rwanda. No, that is the problem. 

So, the Hutus have to keep quiet because they are genociders—

that is it; no defense at all—everybody, even those who are born 

today. Kagame himself said, even if they are children, they have 

to be responsible for their parents’ crimes. So, up to when are 

Hutus going to be free? We don’t know as long as he is still living. 

Now the second criminalization of Rwandans is the Tutsis. Today 

the opposition political parties in the diaspora, some of them have 

sympathizers inside the country, have raised the paranoia in the 

country to the government. So, even these recent arrests—for example, Diane Rwigara, I am very sure soon you will hear that she 

is part of those political parties. 

We have a group of five political parties who form the coalition, 

and it is increasingly becoming stronger and, you know, they are 

gaining voice. I have spoken this or discussed this with the State 

Department because we always say, what is the alternative? 

Should we just say Kagame is bad and that is it? No. Rwandans 

have alternatives. They have seen that there is no Hutu government which is going to work; there is no Tutsi government which 

is going to work. That country was made for them both. 

The reconciliation he talked about is a fake reconciliation. There 

is no way you can say that there is reconciliation in Rwanda. By 

picking a Hutu to become a prime minister every single time or 

52

some of them—he changed them in the middle of the term—does 

not mean reconciliation. 

When Kagame has rallies in the western region where it is predominantly Hutu, when the Hutus show, it is a military operation. 

They start beating them up and driving them to the scene around 

midnight when Kagame is going to appear the next day around 

3:00. Yes, that is what happens. 

So, everything we see is a shawl. What they do, what Rwandans 

are concerned about, the Rwandan Government is concerned with 

two issues. When you get $400 million and you construct a trade 

center, a convention center, $400 million, what you are doing is 

protecting, showing the image of the country, right? Because $400 

million can do a lot to the population, build schoolhouses, water, 

everything that they are lacking in the interior. So, the image of 

the country, that is what they show everybody who goes to Rwanda. 

Two, the image of the President, it is only him who can do it, 

no one else. That is what they fight for. If you don’t do it, that is 

it. Now, today it is not about the Hutus and Tutsis; it is everybody. 

We have concerns with what is happening to families of these 

people who have already been killed, as has been mentioned. We 

have issues in the military. Four colonels were recently arrested 

and taken to unknown locations. It is in my submitted report. 

Many generals and colonels are out of a job. 

And that is why I say that where we are today in Rwanda is 

where we were just before 1994. Suppose anything happened in 

Rwanda. Suppose Kagame got sick and died. What happens with 

all this tension? 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. JOBBINS. Thanks for the question. 

Just to focus on two things, I think one is, as we look at political 

discourse and the political life in Rwanda today, the way that we 

engage on these questions is fundamentally conflict and reconciliation. There is no such thing as a success in conflict resolution or 

reconciliation, neither here in America nor Europe nor anywhere. 

It is an ongoing process. Every political environment needs continual support to engage and develop a discourse that is healthy to 

participatory decision-making and to engagement. And Rwanda is 

no different from those. 

I think, particularly as we look at the political life of ordinary 

Rwandans, to view as sort of a dichotomous absolutely success or 

absolutely failure misses some of the nuance that characterizes 

every society where we live and work. 

Mr. SMITH. If you don’t mind yielding briefly, my thought was 

that we give undue value, excessive applause to extraordinarily 

minor steps, while the steps backwards are very profound. 

Mr. JOBBINS. Thanks. No, I absolutely——

Mr. SMITH. It is almost a straw man to think that any of us 

think we are perfect—there is no perfection. We strive to it, but 

when things are going in the wrong direction—that was the essence of the question. 

Mr. JOBBINS. So, thanks. I really appreciate that. 

What I wanted to sort of just underscore is, one of the things 

that is at least most vexing to us is, as we look at land, which is 

53

a life-and-death issue to ordinary Rwandans, the degree to which 

citizens understand necessarily the policies that impact them and 

have an opportunity to input into them is a continual process and 

quite uneven in terms of the way in which local governments, the 

way in which media, and others engage with citizens and lay that 

groundwork in bedrock for an informed policy debate. 

And so, beyond sort of the policy and the political debates around 

elections, one of the things that we look for, and particularly in the 

U.S. focus on democracy in governance and the partnership with 

Rwanda in the context of dwindling resources, as Congresswoman 

Bass highlighted, is ensuring that there is adequate attention on 

building civil society capacity, supporting media, to cultivate and to 

build a context of constructive political discourse, both around development but also around the decisions that government takes. 

That is something that is in line with the vision that has been laid 

out by the government, but one where we see a need for continued 

improvement. 

I think there is almost no place on earth, I might say, where the 

media environment has played a more negative role in the genocide. It was certainly profound thinking for our own organization 

how we engage in the role that media plays in societies. And almost no place where the social discourse has been as inflamed, and 

deliberately inflamed. And so, there is almost no place on earth 

where more attention needs to be paid to carving out and rebuilding a constructive media space, a constructive civil society, and free 

expression space; for citizens to really own and contribute to their 

own development in partnership with their government, but also in 

partnership with civil society and with other actors. 

Mr. AKWEI. Thank you very much for the questions. I think I will 

just try to focus on the record of the previous administrations, 

which I know you, in particular, and Congresswoman Bass have 

fought very hard to try to correct. 

A very good colleague and Africa expert once told me that good 

friends don’t let their friends do bad things to themselves. And I 

think this is what happened, that there was, as one of the previous 

panelists mentioned, there was an overcompensation after 1994. 

There were regional tensions that were genuine and credible, and 

the Rwandan Patriotic Fund had the capacity and the ability to basically be a force for stability. But that was also accompanied by 

what Representative Bass said were genuine, incredibly impressive 

numbers in terms of economic, social, and cultural rights progress. 

No one is disputing that. 

The challenge, I think, was that it became an ‘‘either/or.’’ In 

other words, you are either in support of what was seen as an economic superstar, and any criticism of that was seen as a criticism 

of everything, which is extremely unfortunate because, what government and what country cannot have flaws as well as successes? 

Africa is no different. 

I think this has also become part, unfortunately, of the mindset 

of the government, that critiques or questions about certain policies 

tend to be equated with critiques about the government itself, 

whether legitimate or not. And that has descended into a reticence 

going back to the Clinton administration and the Bush administrations and the Obama administration, where there was a reluctance, 

54

or it was almost a struggle to get them to challenge and to actually 

take the Department of State reports, which consistently documented the shortcomings, and do something about it. 

And I think your point is right, we may not have the luxury to 

discuss the past, but we have the present and the future. The 

Trump administration has to adopt a different tact because, as our 

colleagues have said, the pressure is building. There are trends 

now where the political space is closing, and Rwanda is usually referred to as the epicenter. That, I think, is extremely alarming because, as one of my colleagues just said, wasn’t that similar to 

where we were just before 1994, when there was no space and no 

ability to engage in dialog? Not simplifying things, but that is not 

where we want to go back to. 

Ms. BASS. Thank you, Mr. Chair. 

I wanted to ask in terms of the government and from the perspective of the U.S. what type of external pressure and which messengers tend to have the most positive impact. I would ask that of 

Mr. Jobbins. 

Mr. JOBBINS. Thanks a lot. 

I think in terms of what we see as being constructive, the challenge is there is a risk in overestimating the role that external 

players and external pressure can play on shifting a political environment or in assuming that all that is needed is political will, 

rather than also forging a political way. 

And so, even though I think some of my colleagues have spoken 

about the concerns about public discourse, self-censorship, like 

Adotei highlighted, but that is also about encouraging positive 

models, supporting examples of how citizens have engaged in creating role models that can craft and foster constructive participation from citizens to their own development and to the ultimate 

sort of you contribute to political life. 

Ms. BASS. So, let me ask you a little bit about that, because I 

believe your organization is engaged in some of that. And so, I 

wanted to know how you would assess the progress of reconciliation and peace building in Rwanda and how it might compare 

with other countries in the region. 

Mr. JOBBINS. Sure, absolutely. 

I think, as many of you know, Rwanda has taken a very different 

tact; for example, its colleagues or the neighbor to the south in Burundi. There has been a very strong consensus forged in Rwanda 

to move beyond an identification of the past with Hutus and Tutsis, 

craft a national identity that we are all Rwandans. That is something that characterizes Rwandan society today. It is something 

that I believe, from interactions with Rwandans myself and others, 

it seems to be something that is broadly accepted. 

We have worked with NURC, the National Union and Reconciliation Council. And it is one that is obviously a different tact from 

how, for example, we deal with difference here in America. Here 

we talk explicitly about racial differences. We also talk about our 

own history in a way that is different, for example, from Brazil 

that has experienced similar differences. Every society deals and 

defines—whether it is class, religion, race, ethnicity, the divisions 

that make it up are phrased differently and understood differently 

as a legacy of history, as a legacy of culture, and as a deliberate 

55

choice about the vocabulary that people choose to use to describe 

themselves and to describe their neighbors. 

The push toward reconciliation, and to move beyond that framing, from all that we can see, appears to be in the surveys that we 

have done, is quite genuine and felt by ordinary Rwandans. The 

memory of the genocide, the desire to prevent that, again, animates 

political life, but that doesn’t mean that there is not path dependency. That doesn’t meant that where you are today is completely 

divorced from where your family was 25 years ago. And so, there 

is a degree of differences linked to the past that can only be really 

addressed with dialog. 

Ms. BASS. I know that they are going to call votes in a minute, 

but I appreciate that. 

Mr. Higiro, I think I heard you say that some of the opponents 

of Kagame have been deported from the U.S.? Did you say that? 

Major HIGIRO. No, it was not the opponents. The Hutus who 

have cases linked to genocide crimes, yes, which have been fabricated. 

Ms. BASS. Oh, I see. 

Major HIGIRO. Yes. 

Ms. BASS. They were deported from here? 

Major HIGIRO. Yes. 

Ms. BASS. Recently? 

Major HIGIRO. It is about a few months. 

Ms. BASS. Okay. 

Major HIGIRO. The last case I know at least is a few months. 

Ms. BASS. I don’t think certainly anybody in this room feels that 

there is not a ton of problems that have to be dealt with in Rwanda. As I stated in the beginning, I think our chairman laid it all 

out. 

But I am concerned, though, that if you paint a country as completely negative in this political environment that we are in, where 

they are calling for, the administration is calling for a 30 percent 

cut in the State Department, that you can have a situation where 

people just walk away, too. I don’t think that that would be positive on any account. People have to feel as though there is some 

hope. Otherwise, what is the point? 

So, those are my only questions. I do have to say, though, that 

I thought it was rather unfortunate that you seem to be pretty 

dismissive of the women parliamentarians in Rwanda, who I meet 

with. They come here, as I meet with parliamentarians and women 

leaders from around the world. I don’t doubt the fact that it might 

be a rubberstamp, but I don’t think that the women view themselves as irrelevant. I do think that women around the world do 

look at that number and think that it is pretty impressive. 

I yield back my time. 

Mr. SMITH. Thank you. 

I will just ask one final thought, or question, I should say. Many 

have mentioned, including our Ambassador, the plight of Diane 

Rwigara. If I have this correct, she has pointed out that, she has 

criticized Kagame and his ruling Rwanda Patriot Front for acquiring a $500 million business empire, Crystal Ventures. 

I introduced a bill just the other day, this week, on Azerbaijan’s 

ongoing and egregious human rights abuses, particularly political 

56

prisoners. When I introduced the similar bill in the last Congress, 

and it was roundly criticized by the Baku government, I had met 

in Azerbaijan a journalist, Khadija, who had exposed Aliyev’s corruption. She was a reporter for Radio Free Europe. We had a hearing when she was incarcerated, and the head of Radio Free Europe 

came to this room and testified. She was eventually freed. I don’t 

know how free she remains. But journalists who take that kind of 

risk—she had gotten a 71⁄2-year prison sentence—but no mention 

was made by the White House to protest it, although Radio Free 

Europe did, thank God. 

I often find when you raise an issue that is country-specific, they 

somehow think you have some ill will toward that country. And 

certainly Azerbaijan did that. Vietnam does it routinely when I introduce the Vietnam Human Rights Act, which has passed three 

times in the U.S. House. It never got past the Senate. When I 

wrote the Belarus Democracy Act of 2004, which held Lukashenko’s 

government to account and imposed visa denials and very significant economic sanctions against his businesses, he denounced it. 

And I was just in Belarus a few months ago. And we are getting 

the same kind of pushback from Rwanda, that somehow we are singling out. And I do it with China. I have done it with many countries around the world where I have had country-specific human 

rights bills, some of which have become law, like Belarus, and now, 

the most recent one this week was on Azerbaijan. Last time, like 

I said, it was roundly and derisively criticized by the Baku government. Kagame has got the same view. This has nothing whatsoever 

to do with anything but compassion and empathy and concern for 

the people of Rwanda—they deserve better. 

So, my question is—we have talked about the human rights situation, the attacks on journalists, the attacks on individual people, 

the attacks on Mr. Higiro and the threats that he faced. My question is, do we know if Paul Kagame has amassed a fortune anywhere? We often find even Yasser Arafat—who was supposedly 

fighting tooth and nail on behalf of the Palestinian people—upon 

his death, we learned that he amassed a fortune that would have 

been well utilized for the people under Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) control. And, yes, he was a rich man, and we find that 

all over the world. 

So, do you have any information or could you, if necessary, get 

back to the committee, about Kagame’s personal fortune? Does he 

have one? Yes? 

Mr. HIMBARA. When the Panama Papers came out, I think it was 

last year, something extraordinary happened. He is the only President in Africa that I know of that featured his assistants. And I 

say it was extraordinary because elsewhere there was uproar about 

the Panama Papers. But, because of the situation in Uganda, no 

single paper would even dare discuss the Panama Papers. It took 

nothing. 

Mr. SMITH. For the record, what was contained within the Panama Papers? 

Mr. HIMBARA. Oh, what was concerned is that he had, they have 

offshore accounts that operate aircraft, private aircraft. Now we 

know that in Crystal Ventures, Crystal Ventures is Kagame, and 

57

RPF don’t deny that Crystal Ventures exists. Crystal Ventures has 

more employees than even the central government. This is open. 

Crystal Ventures thrives on cronyism, basically, contracts from 

the government. Any opposition, any competition to Crystal Ventures, destroyed. So, what is going on there is that, even with clean 

records of corruption, see, what the report is about is petty corruption. But, when we talk about institutionalized corruption, then we 

are talking about something else. 

The Crystal Ventures is open. Crystal Ventures has aircraft; this is known, $60 million apiece. And what do these two aircrafts do? 

They shuttle the President. So, the President basically rents his 

aircraft from—so, there is Kagame, the President, renting aircraft 

from Kagame, the chairman of Crystal Ventures. 

What is extraordinary is that all this is in the open. Now the 

problem is no media in Rwanda would dare talk about this, but foreign media is doing this. I refer to The Economist. Two months 

ago, I think the title is—no, I forgot, but I will send you. I will 

refer it to the committee. 

The case of Crystal Ventures, the case of, you know, like transferal of public resources from the government to Crystal Ventures, 

even these loans he spoke about them, $4 million, that has built 

the convention center. Government went into debt for that money, 

but, suddenly, the owners of these hotels are who? Crystal Ventures. 

Major HIGIRO. Mr. Chairman, we have evidence of offshore accounts which we can always bring to your office. 

Mr. SMITH. We will ask the State Department if they have any 

knowledge of any personal corruption for President Kagame and 

whether or not he has accumulated wealth that would not be commensurate with the job of a President. 

Anybody else like to add? But I do have to run. We have only 

a few minutes left. 

We deeply appreciate your testimony, your insights. It helps enlighten, especially with the new administration. So, thank you so 

very, very much. 

The hearing is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 5:03 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.] 

(59)

A P P E N D I X 

MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

60

f


27012n.eps

SUBCOMMITTEE HEARING NOTICE 

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS 

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

WASHINGTON. DC 20515-6128 

Subcommittee on Africa, Global Health, Global Human Rights, and International Organizations 

Christopher H. Smith (R-NJ), Chairman 

September 26, 2017 

TO: MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS 

You are respectfully requested to attend an OPEN hearing of the Commitlee on Foreign Affairs. to be held b~ the 

Subcommittee Africa, Global Health. Global Human Rights, and International Organizations in Room 2200 of the R.'lyburn House 

Office Building (and available live on the Committee '\Vcbsitc at lill.u.://'i'li\"" .ForCig[JftJ1.mJ!!l!-lS.:. "OY): 

DATE: 

TIME: 

SUBJECT: 

WITNESSES: 

Wednesday, Scptcmbcr27, 2017 

3:00pm 

Rvvanda: Democracy Thvrartcd 

Panell 

The Honorable Domld Yamamoto 

Acting Assistant Secretary 

Bureau of African Affairs 

U.S. Department of State 

Panel TI 

Mr. David Himbam 

Coordinator for Canada 

Democracy in R\\anda No\\ 

M;_~jor Robert Higiro, Rwanda Defense Force. Retired 

Coordinator for the U nitcd States 

Democracy in R\\anda No\\ 

Mr. Mike Jobbins 

Manager 

Africa Progmms 

Search for Common Ground 

Mr. Adotci Akwci 

Managing Director 

Government Relations 

Amnesty lntematioml United States 

By Direction of the Chairman 
61

f


27012m.eps

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS 

MINUTES OF SUBCQj\1J\1ITTRF. ON Africa, frf(lhnl Hen/til, Global Human Rigf1ts, nmt Jmenttrtiouaf Organl?;atfons J l RA RTN G 

Day Wednesday 1Jatc ___ _:_:9/.-='2e.::7/.:.::1:.:_7 ___ Room. ___ 2=2:..:0:..:0 __ _ 

Storting Time ----"3":0'-'0"'p"'ll"-l __ };nding Time _ __,5:..::~03,1~"~"--

Recesses ~---. _J (___to __ ) (___to __ ) (___to __ ) (___to __ ) (___to____) (___to __ ) 

Presidinf( Membcr(s) 

Smith 

Check all ofthefollowin;; that app(1•: 

Open Session 0 Rxecnlive !£!!>sed) Session D Televised D 

TITLE OF HEARING: 

Rwanda: nemocracy Tfnvartetf 

SUBCOMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT: 

Bass 

Electronically Reconl£f!jtaped) D 

Stenographic Record LLJ 

NON-SUBCOMMITTRE MEMBERS PRESENT: (Mark ll'ilh w1 *({they a;·e not members of:tii/1 commillee) 

HRARTNG WITNESSES: Same as meeting notice attadtcd? Yes GJ NoD 

{If "no", please list below and include Iitle, agency, department, or organization.) 

STATEMRNTS FOR THE RECORD: (List m1y slatements submitted for the record) 

Hach witness .mbmitted written statement for the record 

QFRs sent on 10/.'i/17 

TIME SCHEDULED TO RECONVRNR ___ _ 

or 

TIME ADJOURNED _____ _ 

/ ; J~~ 

' / k! . -:----- S~licommittee Staff Associate 
62


27012f-1.eps

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Acting Assistant Secretary Donald Yamamoto by 

Representative Chris Smith (#I to #4) 

Subcommittee on Africa, Global Health, Global Human Rights, and International Organizations 

September 27, 2017 

Question!: 

Why has the State Department not taken a tougher line on human rights violations in Rwanda 

over the past decade? Does it involve concern over losing the Rwandan partnership in 

peacekeeping? 

Answer 1: 

The State Department has repeatedly expressed our concerns about human rights in 

Rwanda. In both public and private, we have called on the Government of Rwanda to respect 

human rights and fundamental freedoms- such as the rights to freedom of expression, peaceful 

assembly, and freedom of association- and to protect all persons from arbitrary arrest or 

detention. For example, we publicly expressed concern on August 5 over voting irregularities 

observed during the August 4 election, the integrity of the vote-counting process, and the lack of 

transparency in determining the eligibility of prospective candidates. We have also raised 

concerns regarding harassment of opposition leaders; security forces' disregard for the rule of 

law; and undue restrictions on NGOs, media freedom, and civil liberties. Our annual human 

rights and trafficking-in-persons reports for Rwanda candidly report our findings. We have also 

underscored these concerns within the context of the eligibility criteria for the African Growth 

and Opportunity Act. Rwanda is an important partner in peacekeeping cooperation, but this does 

not diminish our concern over human rights violations and abuses in Rwanda or our willingness 

to act upon those concerns. 
63


27012f-2.eps

Question 2: 

During the 1990s, Paul Kagame was labelled one of Africa's "new leaders." To what extent has 

he lived up to the expectations that led to that designation? 

Answer 2: 

Under President Kagame, Rwanda has made remarkable gains in the fields of health, 

poverty reduction, access to education, and economic development. President Kagame's datadriven approach to development initiatives and the accountability he demands from his 

government have made Rwanda a model in leveraging development assistance into concrete 

results for its people. Rwanda has also reduced its dependence on foreign assistance by more 

than half in the last decade. At the same time, we are concerned by President Kagame's 

authoritarian leadership and the Government of Rwanda's intolerance for dissent, including 

restrictions on freedom of expression, press freedom, and the right of peaceful assembly. We are 

also concerned about the repression of opposition leaders, journalists, and human rights 

defenders. In January 2016, the State Department expressed public disappointment with 

President Kagame's decision to seek a third term, and we continue to press him on his plans for a 

democratic transition. 
64


27012f-3.eps

Question 3: 

In his testimony, Mike Jobbins of Search for Common Ground recommends continued U.S. 

engagement with Rwanda in the East Africa region. How successful has our two countries' 

alliance been in addressing regional issues" 

Answer3: 

Rwanda has been an important contributor to peace and security on the continent. 

Rwanda is the fifth-largest contributor of peacekeepers in the world. Rwandan troops have 

participated in cJN peacekeeping operations in the Central African Republic, Sudan, and Mali. 

Tn South Sudan, Rwanda recently deployed additional peacekeeping troops as part of the UN's 

Regional Protection Force. Rwandan troops are disciplined and regionally respected. Rwanda is 

a priority partner in the Africa Peacekeeping Rapid Response Partnership (APRRP), and in the 

African Union (AU), it has been a leader in pressing for reforms so that the AU is better prepared 

to resolve regional conflicts At the same time, we acknowledge that Rwanda has had a difficult 

relationship with its immediate neighbors in the past. These relations have improved over the 

past few years, as evidenced by the adoption of a three-country single visa for Rwanda, Uganda, 

and Kenya in 2014 and the reduction of trade and non-trade barriers under the aegis of the East 

Africa Community. We are committed to ensuring that these relations further develop to support 

the region's development, security, and stability. 
65

f


27012f-4.eps

Question 4: 

The State Department long declined to accept the various UN reports on Rwandan involvement 

in smuggling of resources from the Democratic Republic of the Congo or support for militia 

inside that country. Is the view in the Department of Rwandan involvement on these issues any 

different today? 

Answer 4: 

The State Department has now and in the past, taken UN reports very seriously, including 

the various Group of Experts' reports on the Democratic Republic of the Congo. These and 

other credible reports of Rwandan support for the M23 -an anned rebel group that committed 

trafficking crimes through the forcible and fraudulent recruitment and use of children and menled the United States to suspend military assistance to Rwanda and downgrade Rwanda to Tier 2 

Watch List in the annual Trafficking in Persons Report in 2013. Pressure from the United States 

and the international community led Rwanda to cease its support to the M23 in 2013. In 

September 2014, President Obama certified that Rwandan assistance to the M23 had ceased, and 

U.S. military assistance to Rwanda resumed. We support international efforts to curb illegal 

smuggling of resources in the Great Lakes region, as this trafficking contributes to criminality, 

supports militias and rebel movements, and adds to insecurity throughout the region. We remain 

committed to the mandate of the Group of Experts, including their recent reporting on resource 

smuggling. 
66

f


27012g.eps

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Mr. David Himbara by 

Representative Chris Smith 

Subcommittee on Africa, Global Health, Global Human Rights, and International Organizations 

September 27, 2017 

,!lir. Ilavid Himbara. Coordinaior for Canada~ Democr:!cy in Rwanda Now 

QLEST!ON: According to vour both th~ United States and Kingdom found 

serious fauli with the reelection Pre,ident Krrgame. Why dn you think more 

made of chat view after the elections were declared to be lainted0 

rmvrRARA: The United States and the United 

election I) 

that the Auf,'l!St 2017 rewere barred from elections: 

and the UK have not done about 

and goes back lo business 

the two countries have invested i11 Kagame tw in 

dictatorship does not pay in long 

QTTSTION 

and the 2017 

goverrrment 

20 I :i referendum 

of the Kagame 

HI'VIBARA: Leading political opposition personalities arc in prison in ~xile- and some 

Diane Shima Rwigam latest victim to throvm in jail for 

Diane Shima Rwigara, her Adeline Rwigara, and Anne 

of plotting to overthrow the regime. This is the environment in 

elections and to the constitution. He the only 

on the Rwandan people. 

QUESTION Tfthc United Slates cuts off militmy aid to Rwanda. wouldn '! 

Rwanda's involvement in missions? Don't think that 

not been taken the Cnited States to 

m:VrBARA: Thcre arc many African that receive military support from the United 

Stales. These include countries that not atrocities rm their own people or don't cause 

havoc in like Rwanda docs. II not as if Africa that 

There Tanzania, Kenya, South At1·ica, Ghana, :vJalawL Zambia, 

are democratic nmiom thm have capable armies partner with in peacekeeping. Tt docs not 

make an army in peacekeeping abroad 1vhile the same CPTIJy makes w-ar at 

htnne in the 
67

f


27012h.eps

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Mr. Robert Hi giro by 

Representative Chris Smith 

Subcommittee on Africa, Global Health, Global Human Rights, and International Organizations 

September 27, 2017 

:Mr, Robert Uigiro. Coordinatol' for United Stairs, Democran in Rwanda Now 

1. You cite in your testimony the disappearances of political opponents of President 

Kagame. Why has this not been given wider attention on the international stage? 

(a). The international community was compromised for failing to stop genocide and Mr. Kagame 

uses it to attack anybody who calls him out. (b). The false narrative of a developmental state 

(Rwanda) has been hyped over the years (World Bank, TMF, and donor countries). They are shy 

to retract themselves (praises) having realized the lie. Others are dying for a 'success' story to 

justify aid. (c). Rwanda has been categorized as a United States ally and sometimes human rights 

issues are overlooked not to annoy allies. (d). Rwanda runs numerous well-funded PR firms who 

constantly challenge critics and keep helping on 'positive' propaganda. They dominate the social 

media and print overwhelming criticisms. 

2. You have described Rwandan government destabilization of the Democratic Republic of 

the Congo and Burundi and the assassinations of Rwandan dissidents in other countries. 

Why have these governments or regional organizations, including the African Union, not 

done more to counter these actions by the Kagame government? 

(a). A number of countries have deported Rwanda diplomats (Uganda, Kenya, Democratic 

Republic of Congo, Burundi, Sweden, Germany, France & South Africa). Four people were 

tried and sentenced to 8 years in South Africa. (b). The Mrican Union is now dominated by 

dictators; some governments are doing the same in their own countries. There is no moral 

authority for most of them to call out the government of Rwanda. 

3. You say that Rwanda is back in a climate that existed prior to the 1994 genocide. Can 

yon describe what you mean by that allegation? 

(a). Mr. Kagame's predecessor President Habyarimana was scoring 98% in elections and so is 

President Kagame. So, political space is closed for peaceful transfer of power. Rwandans may 

resort to violence as was the case in 1990. 

(b). Amendment of constitution virtually making Mr. Paul Kagame president for life, just like 

how the previous president Juvenal Habyarimana's tenure was also uncertain and people 

supported war because peaceful means were not possible. (c). Militarization of the population 

and creation of auxiliary forces work like former president Habyarimana's militia and they may 

massacre people in case of challenge to the regime. (d). Imprisonment, killings and 

disappearances were common occurrences during the 1990s, but it is more prevalent now. The 

state of fear and terror is even more felt now than the people felt in the 1990s. (e). The question 

of refugees, which prompted the Rwandan Patriotic Front to take arms is the same condition that 

obtains now. Rwanda is churning out more refugees and this is recipe for potential violence. 
68


27012i-1.eps

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Mr. Mike Jobbins by 

Representative Chris Smith 

Subcommittee on Africa, Global Health, Global Human Rights, and International Organizations 

September 27, 2017 

Mr. Mike Job bins, Manager, Africa Programs, Search for Common Ground 

Question: The image many people have ofRvvanda is of an authmit:'lrian state that seeks to punish those 

considered dissidents. Ho'\vever. you describe a country in which reconciliation is a primary goal 

throughout the country. How can '\Ve square these t\vo images ofRv,randa? 

Answer: Twenty-three years after the genocide. history is still a daily part of Rwandan public life and 

culture. T11e tramna of the genocide is still ±elt very deeply and while there has been great progress, it is a 

process that is by no means finished. Many Rwandans do believe there is a risk of resurgence. The 2010 

Rwanda Reconciliation Barometer, compiled and released by the National Unity and Reconciliation 

Commission surveyed Rvvandans on reconciliation and what progress they saw on some of the commoncited root causes: 

"The results show that an overwhelming majority of respondents (97.9%) do ±eel that the way in 

which history vvas conveyed from one generation to another has contributed to major divisions in 

society, and as a result 94.7% indicated that they felt that the current approach to its teaching is 

far more conducive to the promotion of reconciliation. A considerable majority (87.0%) also 

agreed that in the sixteen years following the genocide most of the major issues related to its 

causes and consequences have been frankly discussed and understood. A somewhat lower level of 

agreement (59.3%) was registered for the statement, which proposed that conflicts between 

members of the political elite has been effectively managed. Agreement levels for those that 

agreed with the suggestion that ""many of Rwanda's conflicts can be blamed on ethnic 

manipulation" (69.7%). are also less emphatic than those for most of the other statements. A 

result, which may be of concern and should be taken note of, is the fact that 39.9% of respondents 

agreed that "'although it is against the law. some Rwandans would try to commit genocide again. 

if conditions were favourable"'. This docs raise questions about respondents' sense of human 

security and may need further probing." 

Reconciliation in R\vanda- as in many places where \Ve \Vork- is a long-tenn process of healing social 

rifts, and requires investment by government, civil society, media and the wider citizenry to build 

relationships at every level: in the cells and districts, as well as within the national political space. The 

majority of Rwandans actively work towards reconciliation and are engaged in the effort of making sure 

that the past docs not repeat itself An open society is central to fostering reconciliation, where citizens 

can ±eel con±ident to discuss the legacies of the past and resolve future conflicts. This requires support 

from every level, including the National Unity and Reconciliation Commission. civil society 

organizations (CSOs) and non-govemmcntal organizations (NGOs) like Search for Common Ground. 
69


27012i-2.eps

Question: Your organization \Vorks on alten1ative dispute resolution_ as you stated, training the Abunzi 

community mediators. Along with the gacaca traditional courts process used for genocide trials, do you 

think Rwandan dispute reconciliation procedures can be translated to other countries? 

Answer: Generally speaking, the dispute reconciliation processes carried out in R\vanda can be translated 

to other countries, and there arc a lot of lessons to !cam. Every society is unique, and relying on local 

traditional institutions- and what functionally works in daily life -is critical to supporting local dispute 

resolution. In Rwanda. the ahunzi play this role. At the smne time, most observers would reCQb>nize that 

any Altemative Dispute Resolution (ADR) institution, whether govemmental, non-govemmental. or 

traditional. would need ongoing training and support. We provide both direct support. as well as to their 

role within the wider system. In Rwanda we provide training and coaching directly to the ahunzi. but also 

work with the Ministry of Justice to ensure that there is a coordination between the two. One of the key 

results that we have seen in Rwanda is the benefit that training has had on ensuring women· s participation 

within the abunzi institution, and build skills and public confidence in women mediators. In Gisagara, for 

example, we saw that after training and support. 85% ofthc public felt confident in women mediators. 

The role that traditional and infonnal institutions cm1 play in resolving disputes and preventing conflicts 

from escalating is often neglected. We also work with the judiJya of Sudan and South Sudan. traditional 

leaders in the Democratic Republic of Congo. and the hashingantahc in Bumndi to provide ADR 

services. Elsewhere, we've seen other kinds of informal structures step into these roles that are not 

''traditional'' but still provide access to justice. including paralegal-type mediation organizations in Niger 

and Chad that focus on farmer-herder disputes and Comites de Paix et de Mediation (CPM<) in the 

Central Africm1 Republic which link community, traditional and religious leaders to rcsohc disputes. 

None of these institutions are perfect, like all other elements of society, they have been warped by war 

m1d struggle to involve youth, women, and minority populations. Y ct. they arc often able to deliver justice 

practically in areas outside of the courts and resohe thomy land m1d other local disputes. 

Question: Rwanda portrays itself as a rapidly overcrowded country, and you cite UN estimates of a 

doubling of the population by 2050. How efficiently is Rwanda using all of its territory. especially mral 

areas, for development that can prevent overcrowding in cities and towns? 

Answer: Rwanda docs not have quite the san1c urban migration challenge as other African countries, in 

the sense that there is not the smnc overwhelming move towards the capital. However. it docs ±ace the 

challenge that most of the population (armmd 85%) relies on subsistence agriculture. which is not 

sustainable with a growing population. Land usc mm1agcmcnt m1d plmming is a central component of 

Vision 2020. which writes: 

"Land use management is a fundan1ental tool in development. As Rwanda is characterized by 

acute lm1d shortage, a land usc plan has been developed to ensure its optimal utilization in urbm1 

and rural development. Currently, Rwanda's scarce land resources still face a challenge of 

ineffective translation of the developed lm1d usc master plan into sector strategic plm1s and district 

development plans. In the coming years. Rwanda will ensure that every development plm1 is 

guided by the land usc master plan_ The recent land tenure regularization vvill increase security on 

OV\11ership and improve productive land usage." 
70

f


27012i-3.eps

The government is experimenting with new solutions to address this problem, and Vision 2020 goes on to 

lay out a vision of moving towards grouped settlements (rather than scattered "homestead'' style housing), 

in order to stimulate local industry and eventually support modemized fanning. It lays out: 

"'Rvvanda will continue to pursue a han11onious polic) of organized grouped settlements 

(mnudugudization). Rural settlements organized into active development centres will be further 

equipped with basic infrastructure and services. While this system of settlement will continue to 

serve as an entry point into the development of non-agricultural income generating activities. land 

consolidation vvill be emphasized so as to create adequate space for moden1 and viable fam1ing.'-

This is an ambitious vision and transformation of daily lives. Like I noted in my testimony, one of the 

critical challenges in rolling out this vision lies in how well local administrators can incorporate citizen 

input into tl1e way tllat these policies are practically applied and shaped, while also cohering with tlle 

overall roll out. To tl1at end. media, ci vii society, and oilier vectors of citizen input arc critical within tl1e 

wider policy rollout. 
71


27012j-1.eps

Questions for the Record Submitted to 

Mr. Adotei Akwei by 

Representative Chris Smith 

Subcommittee on Africa, Global Health, Global Human Rights, and International Organizations 

September 27, 2017 

Mr. Adotei Akwei, Deputy Director, National Advocacy and Government Relations, Amnesty 

International USA 

You describe an authoritarian government that has created a climate of fear. If a Rwandan citizen 

is not involved in politics or advocacy, would he or she still be aware of the climate of fear you 

described? 

It is important to note that it is not only members of political opposition parties that are being 

suppressed. Human Rights Watch (HRW) has reported that soldiers will arbitrarily arrest and shoot 

"suspected thieves, smugglers, and other petty offenders, instead of prosecuting them." Most of the 

suspected thieves are first captured and arrested by civilian authorities and taken to military stations, 

where they are executed by soldiers. In many cases, individuals are captured in front of their family 

members, communities and friends. Audrey Wabwire spoke with Lewis Mudge, a Human Rights Watch 

researcher who stated, "People know this type of detention and torture happens in Rwanda, they are 

just too scared to talk about it openly. The best they can do is hope it doesn't happen to them." 

However, given the deterioration in the rights of free press and a crackdown on journalists and human 

rights defenders cases of extrajudicial killings and arbitrary arrest are rarely reported on. Although the 

Rwandan constitution grants the media the "right to seek, receive, give and broadcast information and 

ideas", the genocide ideology law prohibits any promotion of ideas based on "ethnic, regional, racial, 

religious, language, or other divisive characteristics." This law is often cited when the government 

arrests, threatens, or silences dissenters. Therefore, crackdowns on civil society are often framed as 

combatting insurgency and divisive actions that threatens peace. 
72


27012j-2.eps

Repression in some countries has led to large-scale migration. How significant has migration 

from Rwanda been in the last decade or so, and what were the main reasons for the flight of 

citizens from the country? 

Unfortunately, adequate information about emigration from Rwanda is not available and this is not 

really an area of Amnesty International's competence. 

Still, UN HCR has reported that during the start of 2015, there were a total of 72,642 Rwandan asylum 

seekers living in other countries. However, effective 30 June 2013 UNHCR asked countries to invoke a 

cessation of refugee status for those Rwandans who fled their homeland between 1959 and 1998, 

including the 1994 genocide, on the grounds that the conditions that drove them to seek protection 

abroad no longer exist. Many Rwandan refugees still fear persecution if they return home. Although, 

they can still seek an exemption or local integration, host countries are anxious to send the refugees 

back to Rwanda and are likely to avoid options that enable them to stay. 
73

Æ


27012j-3.eps

You accuse the previous Administration of being lax in its criticism of Rwandan human rights 

violations. What have you seen so far from the current Administration in this regard? Given its 

lack of ties to President Kagame, do you expect there will be a stronger line on such actions? 

It is unlikely that President Trump will make US relations with Rwanda contingent on their human rights 

violations. Instead, it is likely that US policy with Rwanda will be based on the economic success of the 

country and how that success benefits US business or national security interests. President Trump's 

approach is to make sure that American interests come first. Hence, we assume that agreements and 

alliances will be entered into if they're in the interests of America's developmental and national security. 

This could be beneficial for Rwanda as both Presidents Trump and Kagame focus on promoting job 

creation and economic growth. Rwanda is a strong regional partner in Africa: they have one of the 

fastest growing economies in Africa and they contribute troops to UN peacekeeping and AU peace 

operations. Hence, it is possible that President Trump will focus more on the economic success that 

Rwanda has shown than the human rights violations the ruling party has committed.