Category: Opinion

On 8 November 2007, the UN General Assembly proclaimed 15 September as the International Day of Democracy, inviting Member States, the United Nations System and other regional, intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations to commemorate this day each year.

Today we look back on yet another year of remarkable events in the story of democracy – a story that continues to be written by people who yearn for dignity and human rights, for an end to corruption, for a say in their future, for jobs, justice and fair share of political power.

The” Arab Spring” is the most recent example of youth, women, and men from all social strata demanding greater space for civic engagement in decision making.

These calls for transformational change were not so much about elections but rather a popular cry for choice, participation, transparency and respect for people’s legitimate quest for democratic space.

These events have reaffirmed the pivotal importance of democratic governance as a system premised on inclusion, participation, non-discrimination and accountability.

Democracies are not born overnight, nor are they constructed by holding one or two elections. Democracies are about acceptance and respect for the principles of equity, participation, transparency and accountability.

It is also about the respect for human rights and the rule of law. This is why the UN supports not only the electoral process but a wide range of democracy initiatives.

Approximately USD 1.5 billion each year is provided through UNDP to support democratic processes around the world, making the United Nations one of the largest providers of technical cooperation for democracy and governance globally.

Interestingly, the United Nations Charter does not include the word “democracy”.The opening words of the UN Charter, “We the Peoples”, however, reflect the fundamental principle of democracy, that the will of the people is the source of legitimacy of sovereign states and therefore of the United Nations as a whole.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted by the General Assembly in 1948, clearly projected the concept of democracy by stating “the will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government.”

The Declaration spells out the rights that are essential for effective political participation. Since its adoption, the Declaration has inspired constitution-making around the world and has contributed greatly to the global acceptance of democracy as a universal value.

The UN considers the following as essential elements of democracy:

• Respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms

• Freedom of association

• Freedom of expression and opinion

• Access to power and its exercise in accordance with the rule of law

• The holding of periodic free and fair elections by universal suffrage and by secret ballot as the expression of the will of the people

• A pluralistic system of political parties and organizations

• The separation of powers

• The independence of the judiciary

• Transparency and accountability in public administration

• Free, independent and pluralistic media

As part of the next Economic Development and Poverty Reduction Strategy (EDPRS 2), the Government of Rwanda acknowledges “Accountable Governance” as a key pillar for the sustainable development of the country.

Many reforms have been put in place or are underway. Prime examples include the adoption of the decentralization policy, the reform of the justice, rule of law and order sector, the public sector reform, and more recently, the media sector reform.

Rwanda is also widely hailed for having the largest percentage of females in parliament world over and for its successful anti-corruption work. Moreover, home grown initiatives such as Gacaca, Abunzi, Ubudehe, Umuganda, have achieved remarkable results.

But the journey doesn’t end there. Reform must continue to be real and progressive. People want a virtuous circle of rights and opportunity under the rule of law, a vibrant civil society, and an enterprising private sector, backed by efficient and accountable state institutions

Inclusive dialogue is crucial and diversity is strength.Stakeholders should work to promote pluralism and protect the rights of all regardless age, sex, race, religion, opinion, etc.

Special attention needs to be paid to women and the youth by putting them at the center of efforts to build democratic futures.
They have been at the forefront of movements for change. They have a right to a real say in governance and decision-making.

In this regard, participation is therefore both a means and a goal such that people are recognized as key actors in their own development rather than passive recipients of commodities and services.

Profound demographic pressures around the world make it imperative to make the voices of the women and young heard. Faced with bleak prospects and unresponsive governments, women and young people will act on their own to reclaim their future.

Underpinning these prerequisites — and essential for long term success — is democracy education, the theme of this year’s observance. It is needed so that all citizens in all nations, in democracies young and old, established or fragile, fully understand their rights and responsibilities.

Rwanda has made important steps towards adherence to international human rights norms by being party to almost all the core international human rights conventions.

Rwanda has also successfully undergone a Universal Peer Review (UPR) of states in the Human Rights Council (HRC) last year.

The upcoming parliamentary elections in September 2013 provide an opportunity for Rwanda to integrate democracy education in the civic education campaign and further provide space for inclusive dialogue to secure Rwanda’s democratic future.

UNDP Rwanda is strongly committed to working with all stakeholders to develop initiatives that elevate democracy education as an integral part of all education initiatives and as a component of long-term governance strategies.

In Rwanda, UNDP partners with the relevant stakeholders in celebrating the International Day of Democracy as part of the Peace and Democracy Week.

This week provides an opportunity for all Rwandans to celebrate the benefits of the peaceful state they have and their valuable investment in a home grown democratic system.

Let us build partnerships to develop and disseminate best practices so that Rwanda can be defined as a cradle of success stories and a role model for other states.

Let us develop a culture of civic participation and education to explore opportunities brought by the various recent reforms and the vision 2020.

In marking this year’s International Day of Democracy, let us use all our energy and creativity to advance this mission.

Author is UN Resident Coordinator/UNDP Resident Representative a.i.

HERE we go again… Human Rights Watch, true to its mantra of “Hating Rwanda Much” has come up with yet another damning report accusing Rwanda, alongside the M23 mutineers, of a “horrific trail of new atrocities in Eastern Congo” defined as large-scale war crimes.

This, of course, reeks of déjà vu… an ‘encore’ of some sort! We have indeed already witnessed the same methodology and media relays with the UN Group of Experts (GoE) report on the matter.

Interestingly enough, the author of the HRW report and Senior Researcher in its Africa Division, Anneke Van Woudenberg, was omnipresent in mainstream media, vouching for a report she didn’t author… or did she? The similarities are too striking to ignore.

On May 31, 2012, Radio France International (RFI) had the civilian and military spokesmen of MONUSCO, Mr. Toure Penangnini and Lt. Col. Mactar Diop, both downplaying the importance of the GoE UN report and highlighting the lack of evidence on Rwanda’s alleged involvement.

Just three days after MONUSCO cleared the air on the issue, Kinshasa-based Reuters journalist, Jonny Hogg, pushed ahead with the same allegations, this time quoting HRW in the following terms: “… Officials within the Rwandan military have provided up to 300 fighters as well as weapons and ammunition to rebels battling government forces in neighboring Democratic Republic of Congo, Human Rights Watch said on Monday…”

No less damning and not far behind was the Financial Times, quoting Anneke Van Woudenberg in the following terms: “…We have documented that Rwandan military officials at senior levels are clearly involved in support for the M23…”

And that, ladies and gentlemen, is all it took for HRW to turn the World against Rwanda. But how did they manage such a remarkable ‘tour de force’? How can the UN mission, with all its military and logistical capacity, be taken to lesser account than a regular human rights organisation with questionable access to information?

This is a skillfully executed mass media lobbying campaign on the part of HRW through one of its most valuable players, Anneke Van Woudenberg, present on all fronts every step of the way. According to nanojv.wordpress.com, “HRW provides International Press Agencies diverse incitements against Kigali in order to fuel THE New Politically Correct Narrative on Congo”.

You don’t need to be a rocket scientist to guess the desired outcome of this NGO; if the UN report was about getting Rwanda to be sanctioned by the International Community, as wanted by Steve Hege since 2009, this latest ‘salvo’ was clearly designed to achieve what it (HRW) had unsuccessfully tried for years with the Arusha tribunal: indict Rwandan officials!

This HRW’s obsessive quest against Kigali, though new to us, is all too familiar with another state, not unlike Rwanda… the state of Israel!

It hardly took any digging on my part to find out the scandals of yesteryears involving HRW and the Jewish State. Founded as Helsinki Watch in 1978, HRW is based in New York, headed by Kenneth Roth, its unchallenged Executive Director since 1993. According to ‘NGO Monitor’, a ‘watchdog organisation’ watching the ‘watchdogs’, here are a few interesting facts worth noting about Human Rights Watch:

• Its annual budget was $48 million in 2010; in September 2010, HRW announced a 10-year, $100 million donation from billionaire George Soros. With the grant, HRW plans to increase its staff by one-third and “to shape the foreign policies of these emerging powers, much as we have traditionally done with Western powers.”

• Many HRW officials have a history of ideological bias.

• In October 2009, HRW founder Robert Bernstein published an article in the New York Times (“Rights Watchdog, Lost in the Mideast”), strongly criticizing the organisation for ignoring severe human rights violations in closed societies, for its anti-Israel bias, and for “issuing reports…that are helping those who wish to turn Israel into a pariah state.” Bernstein could easily rephrase it using Rwanda and the Great Lakes.

• In 2009, HRW held a fundraising in Saudi Arabia using HRW’s anti-Israel bias and the specter of “pro-Israel pressure groups” to solicit funds from “prominent members of Saudi society.” At the event, Whitson boasted that HRW allegations of human rights violations were instrumental in the Goldstone mission.

• In September 2009, “senior military analyst” Marc Garlasco was revealed to be an obsessive collector of Nazi memorabilia. He was suspended and then dismissed, but his reports were not withdrawn. As shown in a Sunday Times (UK) article, “Nazi scandal engulfs Human Rights Watch” (March 28, 2010), the Garlasco issue was indicative of far deeper problems at the NGO.

• HRW holds a portion of its budget from the para-governmental organisation Oxfam Novib Dutch funded through Dutch Government Funds.

In light of this information, does it surprise anyone that Kenneth Roth is carrying on the age-old traditions of the organisation he heads, by any means necessary?

On September 11, 2012, as much of the World joined in remembering the terrorist attacks against the US, which hit particularly hard the city of New York from which he operates, Kenneth Roth was busy tweeting the following: “Rwanda military still in eastern Congo, could be aiding & abetting the war crimes of the M23 rebels, @HRW finds.”

I would have shrugged off this one as bad timing on his part if he had not already performed a similar stunt on the first day of the 18th commemoration of the 1994 Genocide against the Tutsi in Rwanda; feels like incitement to me!

In light of all this, it becomes clear to many an observer that HRW is a behind-the-scene stakeholder fueling the war in Congo in sync with the likes of Steve Hege to make Rwanda a pariah state…shame and shame again for their blind supporters.

With Nanojv

Human Rights Watch latest report on the DRC raises more question about the real intentions of the NGO and shows a clear bias as an active stakeholder in the conflict.

It is obviously tailored to fit only the M23 as a “negative force”.

The sensitization techniques used by HRW are simple and straightforward: Forget the genocidairs and other militias or the Congolese army as elements responsible for committing atrocities against the population, concentrate on Rwanda’s “proxies” … aiming at indicting Rwanda.

If we look at the map that supports the report several comments need to be highlighted:

– The map below is supposed to arbitrarily represent area controlled by the Congolese rebel M23 on September 7th 2012.

– It is signed by the American activist John Emerson, an expert in tactic mapping (influence public opinion by simple representations).

– Note that the border post Kabuhanga is not in rebel hands according to HRW despite what had been announced by many before, including sources close to HRW.

– The area controlled by the M23 progressing towards Rutshuru was monitored until recently 1st September by the joint force FARDC (Congolese army), RDF (Rwandan army).

– This tiny area spreads over only a few tens of km2. We recall to mind that the total national territory is 2.3 million km2 or the size of Europe.

– The number of the rebels is made up of former military FARDC soldiers; they go up to hundreds of fighters, thousand at most.

– HRW is cautiously not mentioning the presence of genocidal militias in the region and attempts to regain control of the Rutshuru area after the withdrawal of the joint FARDC-RDF force.

– HRW consciously misleads the opinion by ignoring other areas controlled by militias responsible for committing atrocities and plunder natural resources (like FDLR).

– The public’s attention is once again focused exclusively on the self-defense force of M23. This technique allows HRW to simplify its communication campaigns to raise millions of dollars for the organization.

– HRW is also pursuing a smear campaign against neighboring Rwanda based on anecdotal evidence, some of which served to support the unfounded accusations of six UN experts.

– It is not explained in the HRW document why the Congolese army has left the door open to the militias after the withdrawal of the joint force.

– It does not explain why the UN has 20,000 men with highly trained commandos Uruguayan and a fleet of Russian helicopters fighting very powerful renounced take control of the area abandoned by force joint FARDC-RDF.

– The new “tactical” map published by HRW raises many more questions than it answers. What are the real intentions of Human Rights Watch in DRC?

As the founder of HRW, Robert L. Bernstein, and former chairman of Human Rights Watch from 1978 to 1998 rightly stated in 2009:

“Only by returning to its founding mission and the spirit of humility that animated it can Human Rights Watch resurrect itself as a moral force. If it fails to do that, its credibility will be seriously undermined and its important role in the world significantly diminished.”

Dear, Editor,

I hope you are well and thank you for taking the time to read my email.I have read your article on the situation with Banamungu Idi and Ngirukeye Sylvestre and CVC.

I see you have published Rusekampunzi Celestine Pierre’s side of the story so I feel that I should speak for Banamungu and Sylvestre because they cannot speak to you,in the hope that you will publish their side also thank you.

You have published all of the good work CVC has done for the vulnerable people of Rwanda so you have evidence of our good will and what we have done for the people of Rwanda.

I have known Banamungu Idi for 2 years and began helping vulnerable Rwandese with Banamungu in 2011 because I found him to be a very honest man.He would account for every money I gave him with a receipt or a record of where it was spent.

He was very serious about telling the truth and he has a good heart to help people.Other people had tricked me to get money but not Banamungu ever.

Since May 2012 Celestine has been messaging me on Facebook asking for money for things for himself for example a leather jacket for his graduation.

I have told him NO this money is for medical insurance,school fees and CVC projects like goat breeding and mushroom farming that some villages already have such as Kicukiro.He also kept asking Banamungu for money and he also explained that the money was for the villagers.

He then began to threaten me and Banamungu saying he would destroy CVC .We had been warned by a man named Gavin from the U.K who had dealt with Celestine when he was in another organisation for street children (I will not name the organisation).

He told us of his lies and angry violent temper and how he stole money from Gavin’s church organisation.

Banamungu and I decided not to let Celestine on the CVC committee for this reason but we did not want to push him away because we knew God would want us to help him.

So we decided if he wanted to help with volunteer work sometimes it might help him get better and find some peace in his heart.But he did not get better he just tricks people.

Celestine says in the article that there was a donation of $16,000 from members in Australia that paid US$30 each and this was sent to Rwanda and is no where to be seen,this is because it never happened!

I receive all monies into a bank account in Australia and never have I seen this amount of money.CVC has about 10 people donating about $150 a month!This is very small money and I have given bank statements to Banamungu’s lawyer to proove this is the truth.

Celestine also tells of a bus that he says CVC has,this is also a lie.The bus he is talking about came from a photo that Mundere Karim found on the internet during the RINA Humanitarian Awards voting that CVC was nominated for.

He joked that if CVC win we should go to the RINA award night in Washington DC in this bus.

There is no such passenger transportation business sending money to Rwanda.This bus in the photo would cost about $300,000 to buy,I think it would take a long time for CVC to get that much money if all we have is about $150 a month!!

This can be proven just by checking the Facebook page of Counselling Volunteers Club and scrolling down to May the 12th 2012,you will see the truth here.

I wrote a book with my Professor,Dr.Patricia Sherwood at Sophia College of Counselling where I teach in Australia called Clay Therapy,Healing Rwandan Genocide based on the Clay Therapy workshops I taught last year to 45 Rwandese,counsellors from FXB,Psychology students from International University of Rwanda and many villagers including Banamungu,Sylvestre and Celestine.

We wrote this book to help severely traumatised people to heal through Clay Therapy because we wittnessed so many people find peace in their hearts from this kind of counselling.

The sale money of this book is with Sophia College of Counselling and will be used in a project CVC had planned for its members that Banamungu and myself wouid make happen.

I have 12 counsellors volunteering to come in the Genocide memorial time in April 2013 to counsel all CVC members.

We planned to do many workshops providing food,water,transport and equipment for all participants of the workshops.This money is to stay in Sophia Colleges bank account until we reach Rwanda in 2013.

None of this money has gone to me or Banamungu or Sylvestre.It is for the villagers only.

I also read that a request to end CVC completely has been made.How sad this would be if the lies of Celestine would be heard and the good work that myself,Banamungu,Sylvestre and the other CVC committee members and volunteers who had put their heart and soul into everything CVC has done would be forgotten.

The 2013 project would not happen and Celestines threat would steal many villager’s chances to heal and make an income for their future through CVC projects.

CVC’s case is being viewed now, it is not settled yet as the Judge waits for my testimony and all the evidence that was asked for so that he/she can make a decision,I have great faith the judge will find the truth.The case is on the 5th September.

I hope that you will let your readers have both sides of the story so they can feel in their hearts what is true.

My wish is for Banamungu to remain President of CVC and for Sylvestre to remain Secretary so that we can continue helping the vulnerable people of Rwanda.I pray to God.

Thank you

Kim O’Meara Adv.Dip. Holistic Counselling.

Honourary President of CVC

Perth, Australia

DR Congo, Tanzania and Rwanda-in-the-middle have all celebrated their fiftieth birthday and are thus about the same age.

Why does the vastly rich Congo, whose population exceeds that of Tanzania by two and half times that of Rwanda, require any help to deal with Rwanda?

So, could the problem be more with Congo than with Rwanda?

In a way, Rwanda sits like a mirror at the heart of Africa. On one side there is a huge country that stretches as far as the ocean. On the other side, there is a huge country that stretches as far as the ocean.

Congo, stretching from the Atlantic to the centre of Africa, has over 70 million people, Tanzania, stretching from the Indian Ocean to the centre of Africa has 45 million people, and tiny Rwanda has about 10 million.

Both Tanzania and Congo are stupendously rich in minerals and forests.

The “international community” is now accusing Rwanda of destabilising DR Congo. They could be right. But they should pause and ask why Rwanda isn’t destabilising Tanzania instead?

After all, its geographical relation to the two countries is the same, except that Tanzania has 25 million fewer people than DR Congo, so it should be easier for Rwanda to mess up.

Why don’t we hear of Rwanda sponsoring Tanzanian dissidents? Why is it inconceivable for Rwanda to be arming Zanzibari extremists to secede from the Union but it is routinely suspected of arming secessionists in eastern DR Congo?

So, could the problem be more with Congo than with Rwanda?

Dizzying wealth

The international community has always been interested in Congo’s affairs, and in 1960/61, just after the country attained Independence, two “civilised” Western democracies decided that the best service they could render the Congolese people was to kill their popular, newly elected leader – Patrice Lumumba — to install a man who in their view would be more democratic and developmental — Joseph Mobutu.

With such a record and credentials of reading what is best for the Congolese, the international community now believes it has found the cause of Congo’s problems – Rwanda.

Those who want to solve DR Congo’s problems — and that should be almost everybody — would do well to ask the following question: Why does the vastly rich Congo, whose population exceeds that of Tanzania by two and half times that of Rwanda, require any help to deal with Rwanda?

At seventy plus million people and dizzying wealth, DR Congo should be having a well equipped, well paid army of 1.4 million men under arms (at a standard ratio of one government-armed man for every 50 people).

Why can’t DR Congo just overrun small, poor Rwanda and install a government of its choice?

The answer is that DRC has the potential to be the richest, most advanced and most militarily powerful country in Africa.

But it got stunted as a state from the time it became a personal property of King Leopold; and when it finally got a chance to start off towards development, its only ever legitimately elected leader was sentenced to death by two wealthy nations and executed by firing squad.

Recently, leaders of SADC have expressed interest in the affairs of DR Congo. Let us hope they direct their collective brainpower towards establishing a working government in Kinshasa that uses the vast wealth of its people for their development.

Published in NMG

Joachim Buwembo is a Knight International fellow for development journalism. E-mail: [email protected]