VZCZCXYZ0017
PP RUEHWEB

DE RUEHLGB #0291/01 0881012
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
P 291012Z MAR 06
FM AMEMBASSY KIGALI
TO SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 2576

UNCLAS KIGALI 000291 
 
SIPDIS 
 
DEPT FOR AF/C AND DRL 
DEPT PASS TO MCC 
 
SENSITIVE 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PHUM PGOV PREL KDEM KJUS RW
SUBJECT:  GOR Discusses Human Rights Report, Promises 
Further Dialogue 
 
 
This is sensitive but unclassified.  Please protect 
accordingly. 
 
¶1. (SBU) Summary:  During a candid meeting March 22 with 
Ambassador and Embassy poloffs and PD officer on the 2005 
Human Rights Report, senior GOR officials raised several 
issues, including what they characterized as the report's 
accusatory tone and lack of context.  Officials also voiced 
concerns over policy issues and methodology, noting the low 
standard of investigation, factual inaccuracies and 
misperceptions.  The GOR has set up a senior-level working 
group to focus on human rights issues.  As a first step, the 
group has reviewed the 2005 report and prepared a detailed 
written response.  Officials said the improved quality of 
this year's report provides a basis for the first time for a 
constructive dialogue on human rights issues in Rwanda. 
They would like to see the report, which went from "worse to 
bad" this year, go a step higher next year "from bad to 
good."  End summary. 
 
¶2. (U) Ambassador Arietti and emboffs met with a group of 
senior GOR officials March 22, at the request of Special 
Envoy to the President for the Great Lakes Region Amb. 
Richard Sezibera, to discuss the 2005 Human Rights Report. 
The meeting, chaired by Sezibera, included Ministry of 
Internal Security Secretary General Amb. Joseph Mutaboba, 
Deputy Prosecutor General Martin Ngonga, Deputy Police 
Commissioner Mary Gahongayire, National Human Rights 
Commissioner Tom Ndahiro, Director General of Immigration 
and Emigration Anaclet Kalibata, and Foreign Affairs 
Ministry Americas Desk Officer Augustin Rutikara. 
 
GOR Critique of Report 
---------------------- 
 
¶3. (SBU) Sezibera began by observing that Rwanda and the 
U.S. share an interest in advancing the human rights agenda. 
However, he was disturbed by what he called the overall 
"accusatory tenor" of the report.  He noted, for example, 
that the report begins with a statement about the "largely 
Tutsi" Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF), which he said is not 
only inaccurate but sets the tone for the rest of the 
report.  A subsequent statement that there were "no reports 
of local government officials inciting Tutsi citizens to 
make false accusations against or discriminate against 
Hutus" not only gives the impression that this is the norm 
but also contributes to "social antagonism" rather than 
advancing the human rights agenda. 
 
¶4. (SBU) Sezibera articulated three major objections to the 
content of the report.  He objected to language that imputes 
to Rwanda human rights abuses committed by Congolese army 
groups against the Congolese in Congolese territory, while 
omitting mention of FDLR activities in Rwanda.  In addition, 
he said the report lacks context, particularly in the highly 
insensitive way in which it characterizes the gacaca system. 
While acknowledging that the GOR itself has raised questions 
about the system and has been working to address 
shortcomings, he complained that the report makes an unfair 
value judgment.  In particular, he objected to the criticism 
that the gacaca process is more effective at rendering 
justice than fostering reconciliation.  He objected also to 
the implication that the RPF is not subject to gacaca.  He 
said gacaca is intended only to address genocide crimes.  He 
explained that the RPF, as an organization, cannot be judged 
as a group and that individual RPF officers have been tried 
for human rights violations.  He agreed that gacaca is an 
imperfect system, but maintained that it is the only viable 
option they have.  Any critique of gacaca, he said, must be 
viewed in that context. 
 
¶5. (SBU) Sezibera acknowledged that LDF members can and do 
commit crimes, but noted that the problem is not systemic 
and the number of crimes is not statistically significant. 
He said that individuals are prosecuted and punished if 
found guilty.  He asserted that the report's claim that the 
LDF is not a constitutionally-based force is inaccurate.  In 
fact, he said, the LDF is based on the constitution, which 
provides for citizens' participation in leadership, justice, 
defense, and provision of security.  He clarified that LDF 
is under the Minister of Local Government, not under the 
control of the national police. 
 
¶6. (SBU) Regarding the Jehovah's Witnesses, Deputy 
Prosecutor General Ngonga noted that they probably have more 
churches in Rwanda than in any other African country, and 
that their extensive presence does not reflect persecution. 
He commented that it is necessary to differentiate between 
the conduct of individuals and the conduct of the group.  He 
 
pointed out that there are ongoing issues with individual 
Jehovah's Witnesses that do not entail activities prohibited 
by their dogma. 
 
Report Methodology 
------------------ 
 
¶7. (SBU) Deputy Prosecutor General Ngonga criticized the 
methodology of the report.  He noted that as human rights 
are universal, so are the norms of investigation, and that 
the standard of investigation for the Human Rights Report 
should be upgraded.  He observed that the U.S. has high 
investigative standards for legal issues and asked why the 
standards are lower for the HRR.  When one points to 
specific cases of alleged illegal detention, for example, 
one is obligated to dig deeper for all the facts rather than 
simply rely on news media accounts or NGO reports.  He said 
that the Prosecutor's Office is willing to share its 
findings on all cases.  Ngonga expressed concern that 
generalizations in the report were based on insufficiently 
investigated individual cases.  He noted, for example, that 
in the description of the case of an LDF member alleged to 
have committed a crime, there was no mention of actions 
taken by the prosecution or any indication as to whether the 
accused had been apprehended or imprisoned. 
 
¶8. (SBU) Other members of the group noted the lack of 
critical analysis of NGO reports.  National Human Rights 
Commissioner Ndahiro stressed the importance of attributing 
sources; otherwise, he said, it appears as if the USG 
endorses the source.  He said that the NGOs have a known 
style--"mobilizing shame against the government"--of 
describing human rights abuses in order to further their own 
agendas.  Ndahiro also pointed out the need to check and 
cross-check facts, avoid accusations, understand Rwandan 
complexities, and ascertain the credibility of both the 
source and the translator, since the translator also can 
distort the information.  Deputy Police Commissioner 
Gahongayire commented on the repetitive nature of the 
report.  She noted that cases that had already been reported 
and resolved appeared again in this year's report. 
 
GOR Initiatives on Human Rights 
------------------------------- 
 
¶9. (SBU) Sezibera remarked that the "slightly improved" 
quality of this year's report from that of previous years 
provides a basis for initiating a constructive dialogue on 
human rights, which had not been possible in previous years, 
with a view toward improving Rwanda's standing next year. 
The GOR would like to see the quality of the report, which 
went "from worse to bad" this year, go a step higher next 
year "from bad to good." 
 
¶10. (U) Sezibera announced that the GOR has set up a senior 
inter-ministerial working group to focus on human rights 
issues.  As a first step, the group has reviewed the 2005 
human rights report and prepared a detailed written 
response.  (Note:  After the release of the 2004 HRR, the 
GOR responded with a detailed 26-page rebuttal.  End note.) 
The group, chaired by Amb. Sezibera, is comprised of seven 
senior GOR officials:  Sezibera, Mutaboba, Justice Ministry 
Secretary General Johnston Busingye, Ngonga, Ndahiro, 
 
SIPDIS 
Kalibata, and Rutikara. 
 
Next Steps 
---------- 
 
¶11. (U) Ambassador expressed his appreciation to the GOR for 
taking the initiative in putting together the working group 
and initiating the human rights dialogue.  He explained that 
the Human Rights Report is a Congressionally mandated 
requirement and that, although it might be perceived by some 
as overly critical of the GOR, it should serve as a solid 
base to prompt discussion on shared goals and interests.  He 
acknowledged that there are differences of interpretation, 
and reiterated that the USG is open to correction and 
clarification of misunderstandings or misperceptions. 
Noting constraints in format and style in the drafting of 
the report, the Ambassador suggested identifying key areas 
that are fundamentally important and not focusing on issues 
of style or specific wording. 
 
¶12. (U) Ambassador pushed back on many of the points raised 
by Sezibera.  He dealt directly with each of the concerns 
raised by the GOR and suggested two additional areas for 
discussion--press freedom and civil society.  He also noted 
the importance of addressing issues relating to the role of 
political parties in Rwanda. 
 
¶13. (U) Sezibera responded that the GOR wishes to maintain a 
regular dialogue with Embassy to address all the areas of 
concern raised in the report, and expand the dialogue to 
include other relevant parties and observers.  He promised 
that the GOR would be specific in its points and offered to 
organize a meeting with the press and civil society.  He 
also agreed to Ambassador's suggestion to focus on a few 
select topics for the next meeting. 
 
Comment 
------- 
 
¶14. (U) This initial meeting on human rights, initiated by 
the GOR, was successful in setting a positive tone for 
further constructive engagement.  It provided both the GOR 
and Embassy an opportunity to candidly voice their views 
about fundamental human rights issues.  The level and extent 
of GOR representation at the meeting and the GOR's prompt 
formation of a working group to focus on human rights issues 
signal the seriousness with which the GOR takes criticism of 
its human rights record and its interest in a meaningful 
dialogue rather than a mere exchange of criticisms.  The GOR 
has offered to share further information on specific cases, 
take a critical look at problem areas to reach mutual 
understanding, clarify misperceptions, and consider amending 
laws where warranted.  Post will meet with the GOR working 
group on human rights after we receive its written response 
to the 2005 Human Rights Report, and then regularly 
throughout the year. 
 
¶15. (U) Post is confident that in some areas we will be able 
to see real progress in the short term, such as resolving 
issues regarding the Jehovah's Witnesses and having the GOR 
take a more proactive stance in responding to and taking 
action against complaints of excessive use of force by the 
police.  Other issues that are more difficult, such as press 
freedom, political pluralism, and issues affecting civil 
society, may take more time.  The government, however, has 
offered to convene meetings with all the stakeholders to 
discuss those issues as well as to meet with others from the 
USG, such as DRL, and to reach out to more international 
NGOs. 
 
¶16. (U) Ambassador subsequently briefed EU Chiefs of Mission 
about this meeting.  They endorsed the U.S. initiative and 
agreed to look for appropriate ways in which the U.S. and 
the EU can coordinate human rights efforts. 
 
ARIETTI