ABSTRACT

The Hutu extremist government planned, organized, and ordered the genocide in Rwanda. However, the killings and other crimes that accompanied the slaughter were, in the majority of cases, perpetrated by average citizens.1 The entrenched and institutionalized culture of impunity in Rwanda’s recent past led to the Government of National Unity to establish a policy of maximal accountability. The massive arrests and subsequent detention of suspected genocidaires – has been described as both arbitrary and unlawful2 – and has propelled international human rights groups to call for immediate remedial action. From 1-5 November 1995, the Office of the President Pasteur Bizimungu

convened an international conference to open a dialogue to address the impact of the genocide. In arranging the conference, ‘the Government of Rwanda wanted to associate the international community to its genuine search for a viable and coherent solution to the problems faced by Rwanda in the aftermath of [the 1994] genocide’ (Government of Rwanda 1995: 5).The perceived culture of impunity existing in Rwanda’s history greatly influenced the debate. The conference concluded by putting forth a number of recommendations regarding the best way to address the crimes allegedly committed during the genocide. In consideration of other models, specifically that of a Truth Commission

similar to that employed in South Africa, the recommendation of the conference was that it ‘rejects any consideration of a blanket amnesty which would imply

continued tolerance of impunity’ (Government of Rwanda 1995: 16). Furthermore, Vandeginste observes that ‘fighting impunity is seen as the key instrument of rendering justice and justice is considered an essential pre-condition for reconciliation in Rwanda’ (Vandeginste 1999: 7). As stated by Mamdani, when comparing the South African model with that of Rwanda’s, South Africa ‘exemplifies the dilemma involved in the pursuit of reconciliation without justice, whereas Rwanda exemplifies the opposite: the pursuit of justice without reconciliation’ (Mamdani 2001a: 383). In recognition of the need to address historical impunity for such crimes:

[the] new government, inclusive of Hutus but dominated by Tutsis, made justice a cornerstone of its policy. It argued that unless there was an elimination of the culture of impunity in Rwanda through full retributive justice, the vicious cycle of violence would never cease.