Monthly Archives: October 2016

GUTABARIZA TWIZEYIMANA ARONI wanyerejwe n’inzego zishinzwe umutekano !

 

img-20161025-wa0002

Turatabariza umuturage witwa TWIZEYIMANA Aroni wafashwe n’inzego zishinzwe umutekano akaba afungiwe ahantu hatazwi mu buryo bunyuranyije n’amatageko.

TWIZEYIMANA Aroni  yavutse mu mwaka w’1973 .Yakoraga umurimo w’Ubumotari(gutwara abagenzi kuri moto) . Yari atuye ahitwa ZINDIRO, hafi yo kwa nyakwigendera Nayinzira Nepomuseni; ni mu Mudugudu wa MATWARI, Akagari ka MASORO, Umurenge wa NDERA, Akarere ka GASABO. Se umubyara yitwa GASHUGI, nyina akitwa NYIRANDONDOGOZI.

TWIZEYIMANA Aroni yashakanye na MUKABUGABO Claudine w’imyaka 34, bakaba bafitanye abana batatu.

TWIZEYIMANA Aroni yahagurutse iwe mu rukerera rwo ku italiki ya 11/8/2016 avuga ko agiye gutabara incuti ye yagize ibyago i CYANGUGU . Gusa  urwo rugendo ntiyashoboye kurukomeza kuko yafatiwe n’inzego zishinzwe umutekano i NYABUGOGO. Icyakora hari umugabo Aroni TWIZEYIMANA yatumye kumenyesha umufashawe Claudine MUKABUGABO ko yatawe muri yombi n’ inzego zishinzwe umutekano . Nanone kandi uwo muntu yashyikirije Claudine MUKABUGABO amafaranga  y’u Rwanda ibihumbi 14, amubwira ko ari Aroni wamusabye kuyasubiza mu rugo. Ni ukuvuga ko uwo muntu azi neza ibyabaye kuri Aroni TWIZEYIMANA, akaba kandi atayobewe  uko Aroni yafashwe, abamufashe n’aho bamujyanye . Ubutabera buramutse bushaka gukurikirana iki kibazo bwahera ku buhamya bw’uwo mugabo!

Biratangaje kubona  mu gihugu nk’u Rwanda kivuga ko gikataje mu miyoborere myiza , umuturage  w’inzirakarengane nk’uyu Aroni TWIZEYIMANA afatwa n’inzego zishinzwe umutekano, agafungirwa ahantu hatazwi, akimwa uburenganzira bwo gusurwa n’abo mu muryango we ndetse n’ubwo kugezwa imbere y’umucamanza kugira ngo niba hari ibyaha akekwaho abibazwe mu nzira ziciye mu mucyo kandi ziteganywa n’amategeko. Iyi mikorere idasobanutse , iha igihugu cyacu isura mbi , ikwiye kugawa na bose kandi igacika burundu.

Mu gihe twariho twandika iyi nkuru , twasanze ari ngombwa kujya kubaza Claudine MUKABUGABO uko abayeho muri iki gihe. Yadutangarije ko yazengurutse Gereza zitari nke na Kasho nyinshi  ashakisha umugabo we, ariko akaba yaramubuze . Ikigaragara ni uko n’abayobozi bose guhera mu nzego z’ibanze  ndetse n’iza polisi batashatse kumufasha  gushakisha cyangwa se nibura ngo bamuhe amakuru afatika kugira ngo amenye niba umugabo we akiriho cyangwa se yarishwe . Abana ba Aroni Twizeyimana  nabo  bazonzwe n’agahinda kubera kutamenya neza ibyago byaba byaragwiriye umubyeyi wabo. Baraho batagira kirengera,  barasa n’aho batagishoboye kwiga  ishuri kuko batagifite umubyeyi wabarihiraga .

Hejuru y’ibyo , twamenyeshejwe ko Banki ishaka gusohora Claudine n’abana mu nzu ngo bajye kwangara bityo iyo nzu itezwe cyamunara, kubera ideni Aroni yari yarafashe. Uyu muryango ni uwo gutabarwa.

TWIZEYIMANA Aroni yari azwi nk’umuturage w’umunyamahoro, ntawe yahohoteraga, nta n’umuturage wundi bari bafitanye amakimbirane . Ahubwo ndetse yari umuntu w’umugiraneza wajyaga wibuka gufasha bamwe mu batishoboye urushije ubushobozi.  Abaturanyi be bamukundaga.

UMWANZURO

Turasaba abategetsi bose iki kibazo kireba ko bakora ibishoboka bagasobanurira abaturage iby’aka karengane gakomeje kugirirwa rubanda , bakarekura Aroni TWIZEYIMANA bidatinze agasubira iwe, kandi akarenganurwa .

Gusa nibyumvikane ko iri rigiswa rya hato na hato rikorerwa abenegihugu b’inzirakarengane mu mpande zinyuranye z’igihugu   rimaze gutera umujinya abaturage batari bake.  Rikwiye guhagarara mu maguru mashya.

Turakomeza tubakurikiranire iby’iki kibazo, kugeza ubwo tuzamenya ko cyabonewe umuti .

UMUTONI Aurore,

Kigali, Rwanda .

Kagame government blocked criminal probe, former chief prosecutor says

louise-arbour                                                                                                    Louise Arbour, the tribunal’s former chief prosecutor at ICTR

A United Nations criminal tribunal was so hobbled by the hostility of the Rwandan government that it was unable to investigate “very credible allegations” of crimes by the forces of President Paul Kagame, says Louise Arbour, the tribunal’s former chief prosecutor.

Ms. Arbour, a retired Supreme Court of Canada justice, revealed details in an interview with The Globe and Mail of how the Kagame government and its supporters made it difficult for the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda to investigate many serious crimes, including the assassination of two presidents – the event that ignited the genocide in which 800,000 Tutsis and moderate Hutus were killed.

The attack on the presidential plane in 1994 was just one of many unsolved crimes in Rwanda before and after the genocide, she said, adding: “I think that remains a very serious failing of international criminal justice.”

Ms. Arbour’s revelations about her three-year stint as the tribunal’s chief prosecutor came after The Globe obtained two documents – a deposition by one of Mr. Kagame’s former top aides and an earlier report by investigators at the UN Rwanda tribunal – pointing to the involvement of Mr. Kagame’s forces in the death of Rwandan president Juvénal Habyarimana.

The missile strike on the night of April 6, 1994, that killed Mr. Habyarimana and Burundian president Cyprien Ntaryamira remains a mystery, but investigating magistrates in France have now reopened their probe to consider the new deposition by the former Kagame aide, who says he heard Mr. Kagame and two other aides admitting that they orchestrated the attack.

The French investigation was precipitated by a case filed by the families of the French crew of the plane carrying the two presidents, but later went into limbo because of a lack of witnesses.

Mr. Habyarimana’s daughter Marie-Rose, now a Canadian citizen, has criticized the UN tribunal for failing to pursue charges in connection with the assassination. “People have closed their eyes,” she told The Globe in an interview this month.

But Ms. Arbour said in her interview that Mr. Kagame’s government “could turn on and off the co-operative tap at will, depending whether they were pleased or not with the work that was being done.”

The tribunal, which closed last December after more than two decades of work, indicted 95 suspects and convicted 61 of them, but all were linked to the former Hutu regime of Mr. Habyarimana, which was driven out of power by Mr. Kagame’s forces after the genocide. Critics have said the tribunal became a form of “victor’s justice.”

The tribunal had the power to investigate crimes during the entire year of 1994, including the period before and after the genocide, but it did not indict anyone linked to Mr. Kagame and his Tutsi-led forces, despite many allegations against them.

“These kinds of very credible allegations have been made time and again,” Ms. Arbour said. “And in the 22 years of its history, the tribunal has never been able to take that on.”

The concerns about the imbalance in the tribunal’s prosecutions are valid, she said.

Ms. Arbour disclosed that she had told her successor, Carla Del Ponte, that the tribunal “had to make some efforts” to investigate “serious allegations of crimes” by “elements or sympathizers” of Mr. Kagame’s forces.

Those investigations “could only be done from outside the country” because of the dangers and difficulties of working inside Rwanda, she told Ms. Del Ponte in 1999, when she left the tribunal to become a Supreme Court justice.

“The office of the prosecutor was sitting right in the middle of the country, where allegedly some of the leadership elements had to be investigated,” Ms. Arbour told The Globe. “That’s not, frankly, very doable.”

Asked whether the tribunal could have investigated the assassination of the two presidents in 1994, she said: “We worked in a very fragile environment. I had a lot of concerns about the safety, the security of our witnesses. I don’t think we had anywhere near the kind of human resources, capacity, know-how, to do that work while we were sitting in that country.”

She drew a comparison to the criminal tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, where she was also the chief prosecutor and where she indicted former Yugoslav president Slobodan Milosevic for war crimes.

“I don’t think we would have managed to do leadership investigations in Yugoslavia had we been, in a sense, hostage to the government of Croatia, Bosnia or Serbia,” she said.

“Without being able to operate safely from the outside [of Rwanda] with a lot of credible, independent, outside investigative support – it’s not an excuse, but it’s in part an explanation as to why maybe this has never been done. It certainly would not have been doable in the first few years of the tribunal.”

The tribunal was “constantly in a conflictual position vis-à-vis President Kagame,” she said. For example, his government insisted that some genocide suspects should be put on trial domestically in Rwanda, rather than sent to the tribunal’s court in neighbouring Tanzania, she said.

“So even in the genocide prosecutions, we were very often – regularly – in conflict with the government, whom we would have thought would have been supportive of our work. So you can imagine what kind of situation we would have been in, sitting in the country needing visas to come in and out. … None of that was feasible without the full co-operation of the government.”

In a forthcoming book by freelance writer Judi Rever, a former senior official at the Rwanda tribunal says it was difficult to ensure the safety of witnesses who had information incriminating Mr. Kagame.

“The problem was that witnesses kept disappearing,” says Douglas Marks Moore, now a judge in Britain who was senior counsel to a team of investigators at the tribunal.

Many witnesses against Mr. Kagame fled to neighbouring countries such as Kenya and Uganda, but were then “extracted, tortured and killed,” he says.

This led to a serious depletion of the witness pool, he says in Ms. Rever’s book, In Praise of Blood, to be published by Random House Canada.

Mr. Marks Moore says it was “unwise” for the tribunal to have prosecuted only “one side” of the crimes in Rwanda.

Another senior investigator at the tribunal, former U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation agent Jim Lyons, told Ms. Rever that in 1997 the investigators heard detailed evidence from three witnesses who said Mr. Kagame was involved in planning the missile attack that killed the two presidents.

In the forthcoming book, Mr. Lyons says one of the tribunal investigators, Michael Hourigan, took the information to Ms. Arbour in 1997. “Arbour told him to shut down the investigation, that the ICTR had no mandate to investigate the plane crash – it had no jurisdiction,” he says.

Ms. Arbour said she met Mr. Hourigan only once. The information that he brought her about the plane crash “didn’t fall, in my view, within our prosecutorial agenda,” she told The Globe. “I don’t think we had the capacity or the resources, even if I had otherwise felt that we should collect information.”

MICHELLE ZILIO AND GEOFFREY YORK

Source:The Globe and Mail

France: enquête relancée sur l’attentat contre le président rwandais Habyarimana

000_arp1424327_0L’enquête française sur l’attentat en 1994 contre l’avion du président rwandais Habyarimana est relancée. Selon l’AFP, qui a eu accès au dossier, les juges français ont lancé une nouvelle commission rogatoire internationale pour entendre le général Kaymba Nyamwasa, ex-chef d’état-major rwandais. Cet ancien proche du président Kagame, entré en dissidence et exilé en Afrique du Sud, accuse depuis plusieurs années Paul Kagame d’être responsable de l’attaque qui a coûté la vie à Juvénal Habyarimana et constitué un épisode déclencheur du génocide. L’enquête française sur l’attentat contre l’avion du président Habyarimana, une première fois close à l’été 2014, puis rouverte 3 mois plus tard, avait été une nouvelle fois clôturée sans avancées majeures en janvier dernier.

Selon les informations de l’AFP, c’est une démarche du général Nyamwasa lui-même qui vient relancer la procédure. En septembre 2013, l’ancien chef d’état-major rwandais, entré en dissidence, avait déclaré à RFI avoir des preuves de la responsabilité de Paul Kagame dans l’attentat et s’était dit prêt à témoigner. Une audition qui n’avait jamais eu lieu.

Pourtant, le général Nyamwasa faisait lui-même partie de 9 proches de Paul Kagame poursuivis dans cette même affaire depuis 2006, suite au rapport du juge Bruguière. Mais le mandat d’arrêt lancé contre lui, puis la commission rogatoire envoyée à l’Afrique du Sud pour son audition, n’avaient jamais abouti.

La nouvelle commission rogatoire qui vient d’être lancée par les juges Nathalie Poux et Jean-Marc Herbaut fait suite, selon l’AFP, a une nouvelle demande de Kayumba Nyamwasa pour être interrogé. Une demande qu’il a assortie cette fois d’une déposition devant notaire faite le 23 juin dernier à Pretoria, dans laquelle il met à nouveau directement en cause le président Kagame, indique l’AFP.

Nyamwasa affirme, dans cette déclaration, qu’au soir du 6 avril 94, il aurait appris de la bouche de Paul Kagame lui-même que « l’avion du président Habyarimana avait été abattu pas nos propres troupes ». Il nomme également deux autres responsables et deux exécutants présumés.

Je dirais que la situation est liée à la volonté entre la France et l’Afrique du Sud…
Réaction de maître Meilhac, avocat de la veuve du président Habyarimana
08-10-2016 – Par Laura Martel
 Source:RFI

Rwanda, the Clinton Dynasty, and the Case of Dr. Léopold Munyakazi

kagame-hillary

Three U.S. presidents – Clinton, Bush and Obama – have honored their alliance with Paul Kagame, one of the world’s premier war criminals, by dutifully deporting his critics to imprisonment, or worse, in Rwanda. Dr. Léopold Munyakaz awaits this same fate for describing the Rwandan conflict as a class struggle, not a genocide, thus undermining the “ideological foundation of U.S. ‘humanitarian’ war ideology.”

by Ann Garrison

“The war and massacres were fundamentally a conflict between the historically privileged Tutsi and the historically oppressed Hutu.

I answered some heartbreaking calls from Dr. Léopold Munyakazi phoning from Alabama jail this week. Dr. Munyakazi is a gentle Rwandan born scholar, with a PhD in linguistics and further advanced degrees French and African linguistics. He has lost his immigration case in the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals and will all but certainly be deported to Rwanda to face prison or worse.  The Rwandan government accuses him of genocide crime committed in 1994, but they made no such accusations until after he gave several talks on northeastern college and university campuses in which he said that the Rwandan war and massacres of the 1990s were a class conflict, not an ethnic conflict, and therefore not genocide.  These talks constituted a threat to President Paul Kagame’s totalitarian Rwandan regime, to the Clinton dynasty, and to “humanitarian” war ideology.

On the phone Dr. Munyakazi protested his innocence. He spoke of witnesses who had testified that he was not where his accusers said he was and therefore could not have done what he was accused of doing there. I told him that he didn’t have to convince me because I have been following and reporting on cases like his for years.  A Rwandan exile speaks out against Rwandan totalitarianism, disagrees with Rwanda’s constitutionally codified description of the 1994 massacres as “genocide against the Tutsi,” or testifies in defense of another Rwandan, and soon a gaggle of anonymous witnesses say that he or she too was guilty of genocide in 1994 and the Rwandan government demands his or her return to Rwanda.

“If a million Rwandans died, and 200,000 of them were Tutsi, that means 800,000 of them were Hutu.

The Rwandan government has even accused  Lin Muyizere, the husband of celebrated Rwandan political prisoner Victoire Ingabire of genocide crime, and tried to have him extradited from the Netherlands. Ingabire herself is now in the sixth year of a 15-year sentence in Rwanda for daring to run for president against Paul Kagame in 2010 and for “genocide denial.”  She did not say, like Dr. Munyakazi, that the Rwandan conflict was about class rather than ethnicity, but she did say, in an equally challenging statement, that there were extremists on both sides, Hutu and Tutsi, that there were victims on both sides, and that all the victims must be remembered.  I had the honor of speaking to Victoire many times in 2010, and putting her voice on the air on Pacifica Radio’s KPFA-Berkeley and WBAI-NYC.      Yet another challenge to the Wikipedia/Hotel Rwanda story has come from Professors Allan Stam and Christian Davenport, after 10 years of research in Rwanda. In the 2015 BBC documentary Rwanda’s Untold Story, Allan Stam had this exchange with the BBC’s Jane Corbin:

Allan Stam: If a million people died in Rwanda in 1994 — and that’s certainly possible — there is no way that the majority of them could be Tutsi.

Jane Corbin: How do you know that?

Allan Stam: Because there weren’t enough Tutsi in the country.

Jane Corbin: The academics calculated there had been 500,000 Tutsis before the conflict in Rwanda; 300,000 survived. This led them to their final controversial conclusion.

Allan Stam: If a million Rwandans died, and 200,000 of them were Tutsi, that means 800,000 of them were Hutu.

Jane Corbin: That’s completely the opposite of what the world believes happened in the Rwandan genocide.

Allan Stam: What the world believes, and what actually happened, are quite different.

The Rwandan – and Burundian – Hutu and Tutsi divide

Dr. Munyakazi stated what seemed obvious to many who have studied the history of Rwanda and Burundi.  He said that Hutu and Tutsi speak the same language, share the same culture, eat the same food, and even marry each other, with membership in one group or the other determined patrilineally. Ninety-three percent of Rwandans are Christian. They are distinguished instead, by historical class privilege.  Prior to colonization, the Tutsi were a cattle owning, feudal ruling class, the Hutu a subservient peasant class.  Belgian colonists reified this divide by issuing ID cards that labeled Rwandans and Burundians as Hutu, Tutsi, or Twa.

Rwanda’s third population, the Twa, are traditionally forest people, hunter gatherers, but the Twa are only one percent of Rwanda’s population. They  also suffered in the Rwandan war and massacres of the 1990s, but the war and massacres were fundamentally a conflict between the historically privileged Tutsi and the historically oppressed Hutu.

“Prior to colonization, the Tutsi were a cattle owning, feudal ruling class, the Hutu a subservient peasant class.”

There is nothing like the UN Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Genocide to prevent and punish class war.  Article II of the Convention says that “genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group.”  It says nothing about preventing or punishing the murder of masses of people in order to claim, reclaim or defend wealth and privilege. Nor does it say anything about the murder of masses of people in order to steal what they have, such as oil, land, water or mineral riches.

Dr. Munyakazi told me he believed the U.S. State Department had intervened in his case behind the scenes to make sure that he was sent back to Rwanda, and I told him that wouldn’t surprise me. President Bill Clinton’s Secretary ofState, Madeline Albright, openly intervened as a litigant to make sure that Pastor Elizaphan Ntakirutimana was extradited to stand trial at the International Criminal Tribunal on Rwanda in 1999. Former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark defended Pastor Ntakirutimana in the U.S. and at the ICTR and called his conviction “a tragic miscarriage of justice.”

Dr. Munyakazi threatens President Paul Kagame, Samantha Power and the humanitarian warriors

Since a class conflict is not a genocide, Dr. Munyakazi is dangerous to Rwandan President Paul Kagame, who justifies his ruthless totalitarian regime by claiming to be the savior who stopped a genocide.  He is also dangerous to the Holocaust and genocide industries, whose false equation of the Holocaust and the Rwandan massacres is at the ideological foundation of “humanitarian” war ideology, as codified in Obama’s Executive Order — Comprehensive Approach to Atrocity Prevention and Response and in Mass Atrocities Prevention Operations, a Military Handbook, a collaboration between the Pentagon and Harvard’s Carr Center for Human Rights.  He is dangerous to UN Ambassador Samantha Power, who has built her entire career on a historically inaccurate, decontextualized, and grossly oversimplified account of the 1994 Rwandan massacres, during which U.S. officials “stood by.”  What would come of all their moral urgencies about “stopping the next Rwanda” in Libya, Syria, etc., if “Rwanda” were not the story we were all told?

And the Clinton dynasty

As if that weren’t enough, Dr. Munyakazi is  dangerous to the Clinton dynasty, which is so wedded to the lies about the Rwanda war and massacres that Bill Clinton presented one of his Global Citizen Awards to President Paul Kagame in 2009. For the past 22 years, Clinton has shed crocodile tears and called his “failure to intervene” in Rwanda the greatest mistake of his presidency.  This year, in support of his wife’s campaign, Bill Clinton claimed that she urged him to intervene in Rwanda. She affirmed that claim as evidence of her commitment to humanitarian “intervention.”

Trouble is President Bill Clinton did not “fail to intervene” in Rwanda.  He refused to intervene and stopped the UN Security Council from organizing an intervention, because the U.S. and UK had already intervened in support of General Paul Kagame and the Rwandan Patriotic Army that invaded Rwanda from Uganda in October 1990.  Clinton was not going to let an intervention stop Kagame from finally overthrowing the existing, Hutu-led Rwandan government and seizing power.  The evidence of this is laid out in Robin Philpot’s Rwanda and the New Scramble for Africa, Ed Herman and David Peterson’s Enduring Lies: Rwanda in the Propaganda System 20 Years Later, Peter Erlinder’sAccidental Genocide, Carla Del Ponte’s Madame Prosecutor: Confrontations with Humanity’s Worst Criminals and the Culture of Impunity and Jean-Marie Ndajigimana’s How Paul Kagame Deliberately Sacrificed the Tutsi.

“Clinton has tirelessly extolled the achievements of Rwandan President Paul Kagame, ‘the most important war criminal in office today.’”

Everything went according to the US/UK plan except that the loss of life in Rwanda was far greater than President Clinton or anyone at the Pentagon had anticipated. A massive cover-up was mounted at the International Criminal Tribunal of Rwanda, which indicted and prosecuted only Rwandan Hutus, and in the heroization of Rwandan President Paul Kagame.  Like Tony Blair, Clinton has tirelessly extolled the achievements of Rwandan President Paul Kagame, as the BBC reported in Rwanda’s Untold Story.  Belgian scholar Filip Reyntjens, in the same BBC doc, says that “their closeness is a closeness with what I call the most important war criminal in office today.”

On July 28, 1994, after General Paul Kagame had won the war and seized power in Rwanda, the New York Times reported that “the United States is preparing to send troops to help establish a large base in Rwanda to bolster the relief effort in the devastated African nation.”  Just over two years later, U.S. proxies Rwanda and Uganda invaded Zaire – what is now the Democratic Republic of the Congo – in 1996 and then again in 1998, overthrowing first Mobutu, then Laurent Kabila, establishing the U.S. as the dominant power in the region, and leaving millions more dead in the wars and ongoing conflict over eastern Congo’s vast mineral wealth.  “The United States has been the superpower that has dominated what has happened in this area in the Congo and in Rwanda,” says Professor Edward S. Herman. “The American people know almost nothing about the area, and since the United States has had a strong position of support for Kagame and for the invasion of the Congo, that dominated all the institutions that were associated with it.”  Bill Clinton’s so-called “failure to intervene” was in fact a proxy intervention causing massive loss of life.

“The International Criminal Tribunal of Rwanda indicted and prosecuted only Rwandan Hutus.”

And what was the justification of Rwanda’s repeated invasion of Zaire and its  plunder and occupation of the eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo?  Kagame said he was going to hunt down the Hutus guilty of genocide, which the international community had been quick to equate with the Holocaust.

I asked myself what else to say to Dr. Munyakazi, on the other end of a cell phone connection between Oakland and Alabama, except that I know he is innocent?  I could barely hear him because the connection kept breaking up, but I was able to understand that he wants to appeal to the Supreme Court. I said I would speak to his lawyer and some other lawyers, doubtful as I am that the Court would hear his case. I said I would try to produce some radio coverage, but that it would be difficult to garner any attention for his story right now without tying it to Bill and Hillary Clinton’s decades of involvement in the events leading up to his pending “removal” to Rwanda, and that that would do nothing to help his case.  He said that he was committed to telling the truth about what really happened in his country, regardless of the consequences.