VZCZCXYZ0000
RR RUEHWEB

DE RUEHLGB #0726/01 2101035
ZNY CCCCC ZZH
R 291035Z JUL 06
FM AMEMBASSY KIGALI
TO SECSTATE WASHDC 3045

C O N F I D E N T I A L KIGALI 000726 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SIPDIS 
 
DEPT FOR AF/C, DRL 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 07/28/2016 
TAGS: KDEM PGOV PHUM RW
SUBJECT: GOR ON RELATIONS WITH CIVIL SOCIETY 
 
Classified By: PAO Brian George for reason 1.4 (D) 
 
¶1. (U) Summary.  On July 5 Emboffs met with GOR officials to 
discuss the relationship between civil society and the GOR. 
The meeting provided an opportunity for the GOR to clarify 
its relationship with NGOs, religious organizations, and 
political parties operating in the country, and to address a 
number of issues raised in the Human Rights Report,s country 
report on Rwanda.  End summary. 
 
¶2. (U) The meeting, chaired by Ambassador Richard Sezibera, 
also included the following GOR officials: 
--Ambassador Joseph Mutaboba, Secretary General, Ministry of 
Interior 
--Dr. Alisa Kirabo Kakira, Mayor, Kigali 
--Eugene Barikana, Secretary General, Ministry of Local 
Government, Community Development, and Social Affairs 
--Mary Gahonzire, Deputy Commissioner, Rwanda National Police 
--George Rupenzi, Spokesman, GOR Civil Society Platform 
 
Embassy representatives were CDA, PAO, POLOFF, USAID 
Democracy and Governance team leader, and POL intern. 
 
¶3. (U) Background: In an effort to fully engage the GOR on 
human rights issues, Embassy Kigali has initiated a series of 
meetings with key GOR officials.  This was the second in that 
series; the first meeting focused on press freedom.  The July 
5 meeting used the Human Rights Report as a framework for 
discussion. 
 
---------------- 
NGO Oversight 
---------------- 
¶4. (U) The GOR recently forwarded to parliament a draft 
amended bill on the regulation of domestic NGOs and cabinet 
currently is reviewing a draft bill governing international 
NGOs operating in the country.  Both bills, Ambassador 
Sezibera said, were drafted to address dissatisfaction with 
existing laws and are the result of very long and extensive 
consultative processes.  He expressed his hope that these 
laws, when passed, will adequately address the earlier 
concerns.  Sezibera stated, however, that at no point had the 
registration of NGOs been suspended. 
 
¶5. (U) The GOR began the discussion on NGOs by outlining the 
many reasons it believes that government oversight is 
necessary.  Referring to the immediate post-genocide period, 
Ambassador Sezibera and others noted the great influx of NGOs 
onto the country.  The rapid influx and lack of coordination 
led to duplication of efforts, wasted resources, and a 
proliferation of fake organizations that sought to capitalize 
on the ready availability of assistance money.  It is 
important, they said, to protect donors from being duped into 
giving money to disreputable organizations. 
 
¶6. (U) GOR representatives argued that the number of NGOs 
operating in the country (in some instances, as many as 200 
in a single district) makes it a practical necessity to know 
who is active and what programs they are working on in order 
to effectively coordinate efforts.  They cited the provision 
requiring NGOs to register in each district within which they 
are active as a logical outgrowth of the GOR,s 
decentralization program.  Local registration and oversight 
is, Sezibera said, a way of empowering the local population. 
The GOR, he added, is interested in knowing, not controlling, 
what NGOs do, and he observed that NGOs should have no 
problem with being held to standards of transparency and 
accountability that governments themselves must meet. 
 
¶7. (U) NGOs will, under the new law, be subject to bi-annual 
evaluations in each district under the auspices of Joint 
Action Forums.  The GOR team was unmoved by expressions of 
concern that this could, in effect, subject an NGO working 
countrywide to 30 different evaluations, each of which might 
employ different criteria to determine whether the 
organization is performing satisfactorily, and that those 
criteria are too vague.  Sezibera said that the evaluation 
criteria are sufficiently clear and that protection under the 
law is spelled out in other parts of Rwandan law, but he 
cited no specifics.  The GOR made it clear that they believe 
the role of civil society is to support the government, and 
that their work should be in accordance with national and 
local action plans.  At the same time, however, they argued 
that the action plans are sufficiently broad to permit a wide 
range of activities.  As a practical matter, it was noted, 
only one NGO has ever been denied registration. 
 
¶8. (SBU) The only NGO to have been denied registration is the 
Community of Indigenous Rwandans (CAURWA), which purports to 
advocate for the advancement of the Batwa people.  Sezibera, 
Ambassador Mutaboba, and Gahonzire were all adamant that the 
GOR could not permit the registration of CAURWA since it is 
organized on ethnic lines.  Mutaboba said it is a mistake to 
view the Batwa in the same light as the pygmies of Congo or 
other countries.  The Batwa are not, he said, an aboriginal 
group. Historically, he added, they were part and parcel of 
the administrative system of the Kingdom of Rwanda.  It was 
only during the colonial era that they were marginalized. 
They were not alone in being marginalized, however, and the 
GOR believes their grievances (poverty, lack of education, 
etc.) can be addressed without resorting to an ethnic prism. 
Gahonzire characterized CAURWA as an organization founded by 
two unscrupulous individuals who do not have the backing of 
the broader Batwa community.  They are simply opportunists 
looking for a chance to make some money off international 
donors. 
 
¶9. (SBU) Mutaboba went on to explain that he himself visits 
regularly a Batwa community near his own Immigration 
Department and cited--apparently as a sign of the GOR,s 
tolerance--the fact that there is a cultural group that 
promotes a particular Batwa form of dance.  Asked to clarify 
how it is possible for this group to promote a specifically 
Batwa dance, Mutaboba backtracked somewhat and said the group 
promotes a specific dance, not Batwa dance per se.  Asked 
whether a group advocating on behalf of the Batwa could be 
formed as long as its membership was open to all ethnic 
groups, he said that this was not possible.  (Comment: It 
appears the GOR is in the difficult position of reconciling 
tolerance for forms of cultural expression closely identified 
with the Batwa while at the same time strictly enforcing in 
the political realm the Constitutional ban on groups formed 
along ethnic lines. End comment.) 
 
¶10. (U) Contrary to the Human Rights Report,s assertion, 
Ambassador Sezibera said there is no prohibition on advocacy 
activities; civil society organizations--including labor 
unions--are allowed to advocate.  The misunderstanding, he 
said, resulted from a poor English translation of the 
original Kinyarwanda text of Article One of Law 20/2000 
passed 26 June 2000.  With respect to lobbying, Sezibera said 
that lobbying is permitted but noted that lobbying 
organizations, because they are businesses, are regulated by 
commercial law rather than by the NGO law. 
 
------------------------- 
Religious Organizations 
------------------------- 
¶11. (U) Registration of new religious organizations was 
suspended in 2003, Sezibera said, but only because religious 
organizations were unhappy with the terms of the law under 
which they were being registered.  Religious organizations 
have been able, however, to register under the NGO law 
pending approval of a new law on religious organizations. 
Sezibera also noted that in reality, there have been very few 
new church applications since 2003 because of the large 
influx of churches prior to that date. 
 
¶12. (U) The GOR team confirmed that the authorities must be 
notified if a large meeting (religious or otherwise) is to 
take place at night, but noted that this is a safety and 
security issue (large daytime gatherings also require advance 
notification, but the requirements are less strict because 
nighttime events pose a greater challenge to security and 
emergency workers).  The Ministry of Local Government 
(MINALOC) representative added that the Government has a very 
positive relationship with religious groups and noted that 
the Ministry meets with religious leaders every three months 
and additionally as needed. 
 
¶13. (U) With respect to Jehovah,s Witnesses, the group 
denied that there were any widespread problems. Problems may 
exist with individuals, but because of their transgressions, 
not because of they are Jehovah,s Witnesses.  Mayor of 
Kigali Dr. Alisa Kirabo Kakira denied that there is a ban on 
the construction of new Kingdom Halls, and the group said 
that it has been accepted that Jehovah,s Witnesses, like 
many other groups, are permitted to perform other civic 
duties in lieu of serving on night patrols if it violates the 
strictures of their religion. 
 
¶14. (C) In spite of these statements, it was clear that on an 
individual level there are some government officials who are 
uncomfortable with the practices of Jehovah,s Witnesses. 
Kakira, for example, expressed concern about Jehovah,s 
Witnesses practice of going door to door proselytizing and 
stated that their unwillingness to participate in civic 
education had a negative effect on the patriotism the GOR is 
trying to instill in Rwandans (as a replacement for ethnic 
identities). 
 
------------------- 
Political Parties 
------------------- 
¶15. (U) The GOR officials, as in earlier exchanges with 
Emboffs, explained that the Democratic Movement of Rwanda 
(MDR) was not banned.  Rather, the party fell apart of its 
own accord and failed to re-register.  Asked why then there 
was a need for the government to have legally dissolved the 
party, Sezibera explained that the GOR did not &dissolve8 
the party but rather &liquidated8 it after it failed to 
re-register.  The confusion over the GOR,s action arose, he 
said, from an English translation of Law 20/2000 which 
incorrectly used the word &dissolved.8 
¶16. (C) MINALOC Secretary General Eugene Barikana said that 
there are no barriers against the organization of political 
parties; any group interested in registering as a party need 
only submit a membership list and demonstrate its capacity to 
function as a party.  Barikana went on to add, however, that 
the Government must also be satisfied that a party's platform 
is one that will contribute to the development of society. 
When asked by Emboffs if that is not a judgment best left for 
the electorate to make, Sezibera interjected and suggested 
that we first review the relevant legislation and statues 
which, he said, clearly spell out the criteria for 
registration of a party and then see if we have any specific 
questions. 
 
----------------------------- 
Pillars of Rwandan Society 
----------------------------- 
¶17. (SBU) Sezibera identified the Forum of Political Parties 
(FPP), the gacaca courts, the National Unity and 
Reconciliation Commission, and the Human Rights Commission as 
&pillars8 of Rwandan society.  Sezibera was particularly 
animated by what he termed the uninformed criticism of the 
Forum of Political Parties in the HRR.  The GOR, he said, 
took great offense to that portion of the report and 
suggested that their objection was so strong that they 
preferred not to put in writing what they really felt in 
their official response to the HRR.  Whoever wrote that 
portion of the report must, Sezibera argued, have an 
ideological aversion to the FPP.  In fact the FPP was, he 
said, created to give an opportunity for all parties--even 
those who do not receive enough votes to be represented in 
parliament--to have a seat at the table.  The general idea, 
he added, is that if a group of people feel so strongly about 
certain issues that they decide to form a party, then they 
should have an opportunity to express their opinions. (Note: 
Sezibera used the example of land reforms and said, due 
especially to Rwanda's history, "all people" must have a 
voice. End Note)  The FPP is designed to encourage Rwandans 
to work together and it promotes a culture of dialogue that 
Rwandans highly value.  It is also part of a broader effort 
to get people comfortable enough to participate in political 
change in a country where, traditionally, getting a voice has 
been difficult if one party is in the majority. 
THURSTON