A Candle For Remembering
May this memorial candle lights up the historical past of our beloved Country: Rwanda, We love U so much. If Tears could build a stairway. And memories were a lane. I would walk right up to heaven. To bring you home again. No farewell words were spoken. No time to say goodbye. You were gone before I knew it And. Only Paul Kagame knows why. My heart still aches with sadness. And secret tears still flow. What It meant to lose you. No one will ever know.
Why did Kagame this to me?
Can't forget. He murdered my mother. What should be my reaction? FYI: the number of orphans in Rwanda has skyrocketed since the 1990's Kagame's invasion. Much higher numbers of orphans had and have no other option but joining FDLR fighters who are identified as children that have Lost their Parents in Kagame's Wars inside and outside of Rwanda.If someone killed your child/spouse/parent(s) would you seek justice or revenge? Deep insight: What would you do to the person who snuffed the life of someone I love beyond reason? Forgiving would bring me no solace. If you take what really matters to me, I will show you what really matters. NITUTIRWANAHO TUZASHIRA. IGIHE KIRAGEZE.If democracy is to sell one's motherland(Africa), for some zionits support, then I prefer the person who is ready to give all his live for his motherland. Viva President Putin!!!
RPF committed the unspeakable
The perverted RPF committed the UNSPEAKABLE.Two orphans, both against the Nazi world. Point is the fact that their parents' murder Kagame & his RPF held no shock in the Western world. Up to now, the Rwandan Hitler Kagame and his death squads still enjoy impunity inside and outside of Rwanda. What goes through someone's mind as they know RPF murdered their parents? A delayed punishment is actually an encouragement to crime, In Praise of the ongoing Bloodshed in Rwanda. “I always think I am a pro-peace person but if someone harmed someone near and dear to me, I don't think I could be so peaceful. I would like to believe that to seek justice could save millions of people living the African Great Lakes Region - I would devote myself to bringing the 'perp' along to a non-happy ending but would that be enough? You'd have to be in the situation I suppose before you could actually know how you would feel or what you would do”. Jean-Christophe Nizeyimana, Libre Penseur
Hutu Children & their Mums
Look at them ! How they are scared to death. Many Rwandan Hutu and Tutsi, Foreign human rights advocates, jounalists and and lawyers are now on Death Row Waiting to be murdered by Kagame and his RPF death squads. Be the last to know.
Almighty God :Justice for US
Hutu children's daily bread: Intimidation, Slavery, Sex abuses led by RPF criminals and Kagame, DMI: Every single day, there are more assassinations, imprisonment, brainwashing & disappearances. Do they have any chance to end this awful life?
Killing Hutus on daily basis
RPF targeted killings, very often in public areas. Killing Hutus on daily basis by Kagame's murderers and the RPF infamous death squads known as the "UNKNOWN WRONGDOERS"
RPF Trade Mark: Akandoya
Rape, torture and assassination and unslaving of hutu women. Genderside: Rape has always been used by kagame's RPF as a Weapon of War, the killings of Hutu women with the help of Local Defense Forces, DMI and the RPF military
The Torture in Rwanda flourishes
How torture flourishes across Rwanda despite extensive global monitoring
Fighting For Our Freedom?
We need Freedom, Liberation of our fatherland, Human rights respect, Mutual respect between the Hutu majority and the Tutsi minority
Wednesday, February 26, 2014
[Since 1994, the world witnesses the horrifying reality : the Tutsi minority (14%) ethnic domination, the Tutsi minority ethnic rule, tyranny and corruption in Rwanda. The current government has been characterized by the total impunity of RPF criminals, the Tutsi economic monopoly, the Tutsi militaristic domination with an iron fist, and the brutal suppression of the rights of the majority of the Rwandan people (85% are Hutus), mass-arrests and mass-murder by the RPF criminal organization.
So long as justice and accountability for RPF past and current crimes are ignored and delayed, Peace and Stability will remain illusive and impossible in Rwanda=>AS International]
Rwanda : Dans le plus grand secret. Détention illégale et torture aux mains du Service de renseignement militaire
By supporting Paul
Kagame, some Western countries obviously support the ongoing genocide in Rwanda
while they fight against it at home.
Nine months at Kami, It
is shameful for a state of law.”
Civilian detained at Camp
Kami without charge for nine months and alleged to have been tortured. March
2012, Kigali, Rwanda.
“[Eight] months went by
without knowing if my husband existed or not.” Wife of man unlawfully detained
and alleged to have been tortured by the military at Camp Kami.
March 2012,
Kigali, Rwanda.
SUMMARY
Progress over the last
decade by the government of Rwanda in improving conditions of detention in
prisons falling under the authority of the Rwanda Correctional Service (RCS) is
being undermined by the parallel detention system run by the military. Scores
of people are held in detention in military camps and the safeguards which
protect detainees in police stations and other official places of detention are
circumvented. Hidden from view, detainees have been unlawfully detained as well
as reportedly tortured and otherwise ill-treated.
This report details
unlawful detention, torture and other forms of ill-treatment and enforced
disappearances, mostly of civilians, at the hands of Rwanda’s military
intelligence, known as J2. It is based on information gathered during more than
two years of research, including seven visits to Rwanda. The report documents
more than 45 cases of unlawful detention and 18 allegations of torture or other
ill-treatment by Rwandan military intelligence in 2010 and 2011. Some
individuals who were disappeared remain in secret detention in 2012.
Amnesty International
believes that the actual number of people who were detained and who were at
risk of, or subjected to, torture and other ill-treatment during this period is
higher than those documented here.
Amnesty International
began to receive reports of enforced disappearances, torture and other
ill-treatment by Rwandan military intelligence in March 2010.
This spate of human
rights violations happened as military intelligence launched investigations
into threats to national security in the run-up to the August 2010 presidential
elections. Grenade attacks, rare in recent years, multiplied after February
2010. Some security analysts attributed them to the Democratic Forces for the
Liberation of Rwanda (FDLR), an armed opposition group based in eastern
Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC).1 Growing tensions within the Rwandan
Defence Force (RDF) following the departure of the former army chief, General
Kayumba Nyamwasa, in February 2010 also allegedly raised the spectre of
potential security threats from within the army.
As part of the Rwandan
authorities’ investigations into security matters, individuals were arrested,
often arbitrarily, by the military, sometimes acting in collaboration with the
police.
Those arrested were
almost exclusively men aged between 20 and 45. Most of the cases documented
here are of civilians, including demobilized military. Other cases include
members of the Rwandan army or individuals suspected by the Rwandan authorities
of belonging to the FDLR.
After their arrest, the
men were detained incommunicado and interrogated by military intelligence. For
their families, unable to confirm their whereabouts or if they were still
alive, their loved ones had effectively disappeared. The authorities denied
holding those arrested or did not respond to requests for information from
family members or lawyers. During their detention by the military, often
spanning several months, they were denied access to lawyers, family members and
medical assistance. Some were reportedly subjected to torture or other ill-treatment.
Not knowing the
whereabouts of their relatives had a tremendous psychological impact on the
families of the disappeared. As those missing were almost exclusively men, and
round-ups often included people from the same community, male family members
were forced to live with the constant fear that they might be arrested next.
Women – wives, mothers and sisters – bore the brunt of trying to locate their
relatives.
At the time of writing in
July 2012, Amnesty International believes that the number of new cases of
unlawful detention of civilians by the military has fallen over the last year.
However, the absence of investigations or prosecutions for the human rights
violations documented here increases the likelihood that Rwandan military
intelligence will revert to these practices each time that they perceive
national security to be under threat.
Amnesty International
urges the Rwandan government to immediately end the unlawful detention of
civilians, disclose the fate or whereabouts of all those subjected to enforced
disappearance, investigate allegations of torture and other ill-treatment,
suspend those security officers alleged to be responsible for these human
rights violations pending the outcome of investigations, and hold them
accountable through criminal prosecutions.
METHODOLOGY
This report is based on
seven research visits to Rwanda in September 2010, February, July and November
2011, and February, March and June 2012, as well as a trial observation between
September 2011 and June 2012. Amnesty International also interviewed
individuals previously illegally detained in Rwanda and their family members
outside Rwanda at various times between 2011 and 2012. The report does not take
into account developments after the end of June 2012.
Amnesty International
conducted more than 70 face-to-face interviews for this report, including eight
interviews with torture victims previously detained by the military. The
organization also interviewed family members of individuals disappeared,
unlawfully detained or tortured, as well as lawyers, members of civil society,
and individuals who had observed court proceedings. Interviews were conducted
in English or French or from Kinyarwanda with the assistance of interpreters.
Through these interviews,
Amnesty International documented more than 45 cases of unlawful detention for
periods ranging from 10 days to nine months, primarily of civilians in military
camps and other secret detention locations during 2010 and 2011. Two cases of
enforced disappearances of more than two years were also documented. Amnesty
International was able to cross-check the identities of these former detainees
through various sources, including other detainees, lawyers, court documents
and news reports. Amnesty International received single source information on
tens of other former detainees but because of the lack of corroboration has not
included them in this report.
This report documents 18
allegations of torture or other ill-treatment by Rwandan military intelligence
and other security personnel. Restrictions on prison access made it impossible
to ascertain the extent of torture and other ill-treatment of individuals
previously detained by the military and later transferred to civilian prisons.
For these reasons, Amnesty International believes that the number of people
detained by the military at risk of torture, or who may have been subjected to
torture or other ill-treatment, is higher than the number of cases documented.
Amnesty International
gathered documentation related to criminal cases in military and civilian
courts, including statements of arrest and court decisions and orders. The
report also draws on Amnesty International’s observation of the trial from
September 2011 to June 2012 of those accused along with opposition leader
Victoire Ingabire. They had been unlawfully detained at Camp Kami.
Amnesty International was
unable to interview individuals currently detained in Rwanda. Since July 2011,
Amnesty International has twice formally requested authorization to interview
detainees and prisoners in private. Most recently, the organization requested
permission to visit prisons in advance of arriving in the country. They
requested private interviews with detainees in Kigali Central Prison, Ruhengeri
Prison and Rubavu (commonly known as Gisenyi) Prison in March 2012. The
organization’s representatives were informed one working day before leaving
Rwanda by the Ministry of Internal Security that they had the right to request
authorization. However, they were told that under Rwandan law they could only
interview detainees and prisoners in the presence of a prison guard. Amnesty
International subsequently received a letter from the RCS authorizing the
delegates to visit prisons on 4 April 2012, six days after leaving Rwanda.
The initial impetus for
the report was a number of specific requests from family members for Amnesty
International’s help in finding their disappeared relatives. In researching
these cases, details emerged of other men who had been subjected to enforced
disappearance or who had been previously detained by the military. This report
sheds light on the circumstances and conditions of their detention which remain
shrouded in secrecy.
Many other individuals
who had been detained by the military declined to speak to Amnesty
International delegates for fear of retribution. Former detainees and their
family members who shared their stories expressed fear of reprisals. To protect
their identities, Amnesty International has excluded their names, other
identifying details, and some interview dates and locations.
Amnesty International
does not take a position on the guilt or innocence of those arrested. Our
concern is that they were subjected to a pattern of human rights violations:
arrests in violation of the law, detention in secret locations, unlawful
detention, often for several months, and a lack of access to lawyers, family
members or doctors. This string of abuses violates the rights of the detained
persons and renders them more vulnerable to torture and ill-treatment.
A letter summarizing the
findings of this report was sent to the Rwandan Minister of Defence on 29 March
2012, with copies to the Director of Military Intelligence and the Minister of
Justice, and a separate letter to the Minister of Justice. The letters requested
an official response in order to reflect the Rwandan government’s perspective
in this report, as well as a submission to the UN Committee against Torture.
The organization did not receive a reply.
Amnesty International
visited Rwanda in June 2012 to seek an official response to these findings. The
organization met with the RDF Spokesperson, the Rwandan Minister of Justice, a
team from the National Public Prosecution Authority led by the Prosecutor
General, an official from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and a team from the
RCS led by the Commissioner General.
Amnesty International
expresses its profound gratitude to the individuals who shared their stories,
sometimes at personal risk. We also thank the lawyers who generously shared
their legal expertise and their experiences of representing clients previously
detained by the military.
POLITICAL AND SECURITY
CONTEXT
The ruling party in
Rwanda is the Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF), in power since 1994. The military
has long played an important role in the country’s history2 and the RDF (army)
currently retains an influential position within politics and society. While
the army is best known for its involvement in the DRC conflicts or its
contribution to peacekeeping such as in Darfur (Sudan), the RDF began to play a
more visible role at home from 2010 onwards when it became more overt in
detaining and arresting suspects.
Events during the lead-up
to the August 2010 presidential elections also brought the fragility of
Rwanda’s security to the fore. Grenade attacks, rare in recent years,
multiplied. Prominent military officers, as well as soldiers, were arrested or
went into exile. Killings and arrests of opposition politicians and journalists
and the closure of newspapers reinforced a climate of fear.
Kigali was hit by three
simultaneous grenade attacks on 19 February 2010, killing two people and
wounding several.4 At first, the Rwandan government attributed this to the
FDLR,5 but after General Kayumba Nyamwasa, a popular figure within the Rwandan
army, fled a week later, the authorities shifted the blame to him.6 According
to Rwandan government statistics, 18 grenade attacks were carried out between
December 2009 and March 2011, killing 14 people and injuring 219.7 Grenade
attacks continued after that sporadically.
Growing divisions emerged
within the RPF party, as well as in the army. The primary catalyst for this was
the departure of General Kayumba Nyamwasa on 26 February 2010. His flight
prompted the army to arrest and detain officers and soldiers suspected of being
loyal to him. Exiled in South Africa, Kayumba Nyamwasa survived an
assassination attempt on 19 June 2010.
Tensions also grew in
2009 and 2010 between the Rwandan government and supporters of Laurent Nkunda,
the former leader of the Congolese armed group, the National Congress for the
Defence of the People (CNDP). Arrested in January 2009, he officially remains
under house arrest in Rwanda without charge or trial.
At the same time as
security worsened, a crackdown on the political opposition and media in advance
of the elections was under way. Opposition politicians and journalists were
arrested, accused of threatening state security for criticizing government
policies. An opposition leader was beheaded in a gruesome attack in mid-July
2010, for which no-one was brought to justice. Journalists who covered these
events touching on sensitive issues of state security had their papers closed.
They too fled and one of their newspaper editors was murdered.
It was against this
backdrop that Rwanda’s military intelligence rounded up scores of young men
accused of threatening national security. For their families, unable to confirm
their whereabouts, or whether they were alive, they had simply disappeared. The
torture and other ill-treatment that some of these men reportedly experienced
during their unlawful detention is documented in this report.
2. APPLICABLE RWANDAN AND
INTERNATIONAL LAW NATIONAL LAW
Rwanda’s new Penal Code
criminalizes torture as a standalone offence for the first time under Rwandan
law. It came into force after its publication in the Official Gazette on 14
June 2012. Penalties for torture which range from six months to seven years,
unless the torture results in the death of the victim, are too lenient.This
issue was raised by the Committee on Torture before the law was promulgated.
Before June 2012, Rwanda
did not specifically criminalize torture as an autonomous offence in its
national law, but it was possible to prosecute perpetrators of torture for
offences such as murder or assault. Rwanda’s constitution guarantees the right
to integrity and prohibits the use of torture without defining what torture is.
12 Past failure to criminalize all acts of torture as offences under national
criminal law violated Article 4 of the Convention against Torture to which
Rwanda is a state party.
Rwanda’s evidence law
states that “a person cannot retract a judicial admission unless it can be proved
that the admission was a result of physical torture or it was a mistake of
fact.” This provision should be amended in line with international standards,
including by covering mental torture and ensuring that the burden is on the
State to prove beyond reasonable doubt that such statements have been given of
the person’s free will.
Rules in Rwanda
prohibiting detention in secret places and regulating detention of civilians in
military custody are ill-defined. The Code of Criminal Procedure states that
“persons on remand in custody shall not be subject to a release in a place
other than the custody availed for that matter and located within the area the
National Police or Military Police office is located. As for soldiers and their
accomplices, that place shall be located near the office of Military
Prosecution.”20 It does not define “accomplices” and so may leave civilians at
risk of being detained in military facilities. Furthermore, it does not
regulate the type of places where “soldiers and their accomplices” can be
detained.
Rwandan counter-terrorism
legislation goes beyond what is foreseen by the Rwandan Code of Criminal Procedure. Under Article 45 of the
law on counter-terrorism “.
A police officer, a security agent or any other
authorized person may arrest without warrant in case of clear reasons for
suspecting such a person to have committed or attempts [sic] to commit acts of
terrorism and shall hand him/her over to the nearest police station in a period
not exceeding forty eight (48) hours. ”This facilitates the likelihood of
individuals suspected of crimes under this law being placed in unofficial
and/or secret detention for periods of up to 48 hours. It effectively denies
them access to legal counsel in the early stages of detention when they are at
the greatest risk of torture or other ill-treatment. Detention in unofficial
and/or secret places violates Rwanda’s obligations under international law. As
well as numerous shortcomings in Rwandan legislation, the human rights
violations documented in this report also stem from a failure to respect
existing laws.
INTERNATIONAL LAW
The UN Security Council, General Assembly, and Human Rights Council have all repeatedly affirmed that all measures taken to counter terrorism must comply fully with states’ obligations under international law, including particularly international human rights law, international refugee law, and where applicable, Rwanda is yet to ratify the International Convention for the Protection of all Persons from Enforced Disappearance and the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment or Punishment. In response to its Universal Periodic Review before the Human Rights Council in January 2011, Rwanda stated that it was in the process of ratifying both conventions.
Following Rwanda’s initial review by the Committee against Torture, Rwanda’s cabinet approved ratification of the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture on 13 June 2012.27 At the time of writing, no progress had been made towards ratification of the Convention on Enforced Disappearances.
Once Rwanda has ratified
the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture, it will have an
obligation to establish a National Prevention Mechanism, an independent
national body to conduct regular visits to places of detention. They may also
receive occasional visits from the Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture and
other Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment, who can provide concrete
recommendations on how to prevent torture and ill-treatment.
WHAT WOULD RWANDA’S
OBLIGATIONS BE UNDER THE INTERNATIONAL CONVENTION FOR THE PROTECTION OF ALL
PERSONS FROM ENFORCED DISAPPEARANCE?
Enforced disappearance is
defined in Article 2 of the International Convention for the Protection of All
Persons from Enforced Disappearance which the UN General Assembly adopted in
December 2006, as:
“the arrest, detention,
abduction, or any other form of deprivation of liberty by agents of the state
or by persons or groups of persons acting with the authorization, support, or
acquiescence of the state, followed by a refusal to acknowledge the deprivation
of liberty or by concealment of the fate or whereabouts of the disappeared
person, which place such a person outside the protection of the law.”
The Convention came into
force on 23 December 2010 after it was ratified by 20 countries. States that
ratify the Convention commit themselves to conduct investigations to locate the
disappeared person, to prosecute those responsible and to ensure reparations
for survivors and their families. Under Article 17, which includes the
prohibition of secret detention, they must implement numerous safeguards to
prevent enforced disappearance, including through keeping detailed records of
persons deprived of liberty. Any judicial or other competent authority or
institution authorized for that purpose by the law of the state party concerned
or any relevant international legal instrument to which the state concerned is
a party should be able to consult these records.
The records should note:
(a ) The identity of the
person deprived of liberty;
The unspeakable RPF
weapon for TORTURE In Rwandan prisons
( b ) The date, time and
place where the person was deprived of liberty and the identity of the
authority that deprived the person of liberty;
( c ) The authority that
ordered the deprivation of liberty and the grounds for the deprivation of
liberty;
( d ) The authority
responsible for supervising the deprivation of liberty;
( e ) The place of
deprivation of liberty, the date and time of admission to the place of
deprivation of liberty and the authority responsible for the place of
deprivation of
( f ) Elements relating
to the state of health of the person deprived of liberty;
( g ) In the event of
death during the deprivation of liberty, the circumstances and cause of death
and the destination of the remains;
( h ) The date and time
of release or transfer to another place of detention, the destination and the
authority responsible for the transfer.
In addition, according to
Article 18 of the Convention, and subject to the requirements mentioned in
Article 19 and 20 of the Convention, relatives of the person deprived of
liberty and their legal counsel should have access to at least information on:
The authority that ordered the deprivation of liberty;
b) The date, time and place where the person was
deprived of liberty and admitted to the place of deprivation of liberty;
(c) The authority responsible for supervising the
deprivation of liberty;
(d) The whereabouts of the person deprived of liberty,
including, in the event of a transfer to another place of deprivation of
liberty, the destination and the authority responsible for the transfer;
(e) The date, time and place of release;
(f) Elements relating to the state of health of the person
deprived of liberty;
(g) the event of death during the deprivation of
liberty, the circumstances and cause of death and the destination of the
remains.State parties also have a
responsibility to submit to the Committee on Enforced Disappearances a report
on the measures taken to give effect to its obligations under the Convention.
The Committee can also receive and investigate individual complaints, and may
conduct a visit to the country when it receives reliable information indicating
that a state party is seriously violating the provisions of the Convention.
Rwanda is still bound by
the prohibition of enforced disappearances, as a rule of customary
international law, and since any act of enforced disappearance inherently
involves violations of a range of obligations under the ICCPR and the ACHPR.28
Rwanda should adhere to the standards set out in the 1992 UN General Assembly's
Declaration on the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearances,
which reflects the consensus of the international community against this human
rights violation.
3. MANDATE AND LEGAL
POWERS OF ARREST AND DETENTION BY THE MILITARY
Rwanda has several bodies
responsible for ensuring national security. The RDF under the Ministry of
Defence ensures external security. It is headed directly by President Kagame,
who is Commander-in-Chief of the Army, seconded by the Chief-of-Defence Staff.
The Rwanda National Police (RNP), led by an Inspector General of Police,
maintains internal security.
Both the police and the
RDF have their own intelligence branches, as does the President’s Office.
Within the army, this is the Department of Military Intelligence (DMI), known
more commonly in Rwanda as J2.
Since early 2010, the
role of the military and the police in arresting individuals suspected of threatening national security became
increasingly blurred. In February 2010, Rwandan authorities created a Joint
Operational Centre to facilitate information sharing between the RDF, RNP,
National Intelligence and Security Service and the RCS.29 The following month,
March 2010, Amnesty International began to receive reports of enforced
disappearances, torture and other forms of ill-treatment in military detention
facilities. These joint operations may reduce oversight and confuse reporting
lines, rendering accountability for abuses less likely.
4. SECRET AND
INCOMMUNICADO DETENTION
DETENTION JOURNEYS
TRAVERSING J2’S PARALLEL SYSTEM OF DETENTION
The Department of
Military Intelligence (DMI), J2, operates a parallel system of arrest and
detention. This system within a system is largely reserved for individuals
suspected of threatening national
security.
Detainees’ detention
journeys typically involved them being held in multiple locations. This made it
harder to trace their whereabouts and rendered them more vulnerable to torture
and other ill-treatment. Former detainees reported that they were blindfolded
when transported from one location to another, and such transfers largely took
place at night.
One man described his
transfer from the Ministry of Defence to an unknown location, which he later
found out was Camp Kami: “They put me in a vehicle. After about an hour, they
stopped the vehicle, and they took off the fabric from my eyes. They took off
all my clothes and gave me a military uniform. I was handcuffed and put in a
house.”32 Usually suspects were shunted between different locations at the
start and end of their military detention, but held for a prolonged period in
one place in the middle.
DMI agents tried to
conceal the location of some detention centres to detainees. A number of
detainees developed relationships with their captors, eliciting information
from them about where they were detained.
MINADEF
The Ministry of Defence
(MINADEF) is a modern multi-story building in Kimihurura surrounded by swathes
of neatly manicured gardens. Some of the men who were unlawfully detained
passed through MINADEF for interrogations before being transferred to Camp
Kami.
CAMP KAMI
Camp Kami is a newly
renovated military camp situated in Kinyinya Sector on the outskirts of Kigali.
The surrounding area is predominantly residential and overlooks the new housing
developments of Nyarutarama. The area is known for the tall radio antennae of
Deutsche Welle which dominate the local landscape.
Camp Kami had a notorious
reputation for the torture and ill-treatment of detainees in the late 1990’s
and early 2000’s.33 Its name continues to instil fear among Rwandans.
Officially, the camp now serves as an army barracks and a detention centre for
Rwandan soldiers subject to disciplinary action, but Amnesty International has
also documented several cases of civilians unlawfully detained there. The
facility is used by the DMI for questioning individuals accused of threatening
state security.
The part of Camp Kami
where detainees are held is just a small section of the larger military
barracks. It is comprised of different “houses” which former detainees called
different “prisons” within Kami. Some detainees were kept in isolation for
several days, but the vast majority were detained with a few others in small
rooms. Former detainees reported to Amnesty International that approximately 60
detainees were held at Camp Kami in late 2010 and 2011. They based their
estimates on conversations with their guards, as well as detainees who were
responsible for preparing food for other prisoners; a task they said was reserved
for RDF deserters.
MUKAMIRA MILITARY CAMP
Mukamira military camp
lies between Gisenyi and Ruhengeri.35 Some suspects detained at Mukamira camp
were brought over from the DRC, while others appear to have been arrested near
Gisenyi. It houses a mix of civilians, demobilized FDLR fighters and FDLR
apprehended in the DRC.
Amnesty International has
reviewed judicial files of some former detainees of Mukamira military camp and
interviewed their lawyers. The organization was obstructed in gathering
detailed information on the camp though restrictions on visiting individuals formerly
detained there and subsequently transferred to Gisenyi prison.
SAFE HOUSES
Amnesty International
also received reports of a network of safe houses used to detain suspects in
Kigali. Safe houses are not permitted under Rwanda’s code of criminal procedure.36
They appear to be used to detain and interrogate higher profile personalities,
including Rwandans with links to the DRC or dual Rwandan-Congolese nationals.
Suspects were kept in secret detention in private houses, sometimes in
bathrooms and handcuffed for extended periods of time. Two detainees reported
to Amnesty International or their families that they had been interrogated by
high-ranking officials from the DMI in safe houses. Specific conditions were
more difficult to verify than in military camps because detainees were isolated
and typically did not have contact with co-detainees.
INCOMMUNICADO DETENTION
All former detainees told
Amnesty International that they were held incommunicado in military custody for
long periods of time – in many cases for more than two months and, in some
cases, up to eight or nine months – before being presented to a prosecutor or
court or being transferred to a civilian prison. During military custody, they
were unable to contact a lawyer or relatives and their cases were not subject
to judicial review. Such incommunicado detention, which includes no access to
lawyers, doctors, and relatives and no judicial review of the lawfulness of
detention, violates Rwanda’s obligations under international law, including guarantees
against arbitrary detention and torture.
TORTURE AND OTHER
ILL-TREATMENT
For most detainees,
interrogations by military intelligence officers focused on knowledge of threats to national security. Many were
questioned about the 2010 and 2011 grenade attacks and funding of the FDLR.
Others were asked questions about their personal, social and family
relationships, including their relationships with other detainees.
SERIOUS BEATINGS DURING
INTERROGATIONS
Some family members and
lawyers reported seeing marks from beatings on their relatives or clients. One
family member described the first time they saw their relative after a month’s
unlawful detention at Camp Kami, “His face, hands and legs were all swollen. We
couldn’t easily recognize him”. 40 The individual concerned had not been
charged by the prosecution or brought before a court during his time at Camp
Kami.41 The vast majority, however, said that no visible signs were left due to
the months that had elapsed since the beatings took place, shortly after their
arrest and in the immediate months that followed.
ELECTRIC SHOCKS
Three former detainees
from Camp Kami recounted to Amnesty International that they were subjected to
electric shocks during interrogations. Two of these detainees described that
this happened to them on one occasion each. Both of them reported that military
intelligence had used these devices during interrogations at MINADEF shortly
after their arrest and prior to their transfer to Camp Kami. Both
interrogations took place at night. The other man had been electrocuted after
his transfer to Camp Kami.
The Truth can be buried and stomped into the ground where none can see, yet eventually it will, like a seed, break through the surface once again far more potent than ever, and Nothing can stop it. Truth can be suppressed for a "time", yet It cannot be destroyed. ==> Wolverine
Subscribe to:
Post Comments
(Atom)
AS International
SurViVors SPEAK OUT - Rights of Victims Seeking Justice and Compensation for the RPF Genocide. This is an Exciting Collaborative Project launched by The AS International Founder Jean-Christophe Nizeyimana, Economist and Human Rights Activist. Join US and Be the First to know about the Mastermind of the Rwandan Genocide Still At large and enjoing Impunity.
0 comments:
Post a Comment