VZCZCXYZ0004
RR RUEHWEB

DE RUEHLGB #0887/01 2570947
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 140947Z SEP 06
FM AMEMBASSY KIGALI
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 3237
INFO RUEHJB/AMEMBASSY BUJUMBURA 1549
RUEHDR/AMEMBASSY DAR ES SALAAM 0743
RUEHKM/AMEMBASSY KAMPALA 1448
RUEHKI/AMEMBASSY KINSHASA 0116
RUEHNR/AMEMBASSY NAIROBI 0596
RUEHFR/AMEMBASSY PARIS 0132

UNCLAS KIGALI 000887 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SENSITIVE 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PGOV PREL PHUM RW
SUBJECT: EMBASSY - GOR ROUNDTABLE: RULE OF LAW IN RWANDA 
 
 
¶1.  (SBU) Summary.  As part of a continuing dialogue on human 
rights, the Mission met with senior Rwandan officials to 
discuss the Rule of Law in Rwanda.  Discussions focused 
chiefly on the role of the judiciary, procedures for 
redressing police abuses, and the role of the Ministry of 
Justice in the Gacaca courts.  GOR officials delineated the 
existing codes of ethics for judges, administrative 
structures for selection of qualified candidates, and 
disciplinary proceedings for wayward jurists.  For the 
police, various bodies exist for receiving complaints from 
the public, and for disciplining police officers who violate 
the law.  GOR officials emphasized "no special treatment" for 
any category of citizens, including members of the media, 
regarding investigations of possible offenses.  While the 
Ministry of Justice has "administrative" oversight of Gacaca 
courts, the courts are independent, and a Gacaca secretariat 
conducts disciplinary proceedings in cases of abuse by Gacaca 
officials.  End Summary. 
 
¶2.  (U) Ambassador Arietti and Mission officers met September 
12 with Ambassador Richard Sezibera, Special Envoy for the 
Great Lakes, Vice President of the Supreme Court Sam Rugege, 
Prosecutor General Martin Ngoga, and officials from the 
Ministry of Justice and the Gacaca courts.  The fourth in a 
continuing series of meetings on human rights in Rwanda, the 
topic for the day, Rule of Law, centered on the independence 
of the courts, the procedures for redressing police abuses, 
and the role of the Ministry of Justice in Gacaca proceedings. 
 
¶3.  (U) Supreme Court Vice President Rugege explained at 
length the existing code of judicial ethics, the procedures 
for selection of judges, and the administrative procedures 
for disciplining misbehaving judges.  A Judicial Inspectorate 
conducts investigations, and refers serious offenses to the 
Superior Council of the Judiciary.  The Council can and does 
dismiss judges -- several district court judges were 
dismissed in 2005, he said, in corruption cases.  The 
Ombudsman also refers cases to judicial authorities, when 
contacted by aggrieved members of the public. When questioned 
on the prevalence of attempts to influence the judiciary, the 
Rwandan delegation readily admitted that such cases occurred. 
However, they said less qualified and less adequately 
remunerated lower court judges were the usual objects of such 
approaches. 
 
¶4.  (SBU) On abuses by the police, a senior police official 
explained that a disciplinary council addressed allegations 
of police abuse, either from internal investigations, or from 
cases referred by the Human Rights Commission or the 
Ombudsman.  She mentioned that there were 15 current cases 
underway, and that the police had dismissed a number of 
officers in the past for abusive behavior toward the public. 
Questioned on the subject of investigations involving 
journalists, the Rwandan delegation said that investigating 
officers accorded no "special treatment" to anyone, be it 
journalists, engineers or any other profession or category of 
citizen.  Police had independent powers of investigation, and 
had no requirement to discuss or clear investigations with 
the National Press High Council or other entities.  However, 
the prosecutor's office would then determine which 
investigations actually merited the filing of criminal 
charges, including criminal libel cases or breach of national 
security.  When pressed by the Ambassador, the Rwandan 
delegation acknowledged the "sensitivity" of cases involving 
the media, and said that offices outside the police were kept 
informed of such investigations. 
 
¶5.  (U) On Gacaca, a Ministry of Justice official explained 
that the Ministry exercised a limited form of 
"administrative" oversight of the Gacaca court system, 
assisting with such matters as the collection of public 
complaints (which the Gacaca secretariat then assessed and 
processed).  The Gacaca courts had full judicial independence 
in regard to its caseload, appeals and imposition of 
sentences. 
 
¶6.  (SBU) Comment.  The GOR delegation gave a comprehensive 
response to the Mission's questions regarding the existing 
administrative and judicial machinery in place to deter abuse 
of the public and corruption among the police and the courts. 
Readily acknowledging that abuses did occur, the officials 
expressed their commitment to the redress of abuses 
generally.  On the subject of criminal investigations of 
media outlets, where publications were alleged to be either 
criminally libel or infringing on national security, these 
officials invoked the principle of equal treatment of 
criminal suspects (a core principle of the rule of law). 
However, they did acknowledge that investigating journalists 
for what they print or broadcast is not quite the same as 
investigating someone for tax fraud or other run-of-the-mill 
crime. 
 
¶7.  (SBU)  Comment continued.  This is an area where further 
patient approaches by this Mission on the subject of an 
independent media can reap dividends.  We find today that the 
local press is able and willing to publish very critical 
pieces on the GOR, without reaction of any kind from the 
government.  The balance of investigatory powers versus 
freedom of the press could be positively altered, for 
example, by a decision to make libel a civil, not criminal, 
matter.  We will continue to encourage such constructive 
change.  End comment. 
ARIETTI