Cablegate: Journalist Freed by Gacaca Authorities
VZCZCXYZ0004
PP RUEHWEB
DE RUEHLGB #0784 2230940
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
P 110940Z AUG 06
FM AMEMBASSY KIGALI
TO SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 3103
UNCLAS KIGALI 000784
SIPDIS
SIPDIS
DEPT FOR AF/C, DRL
E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: KDEM KPAO PGOV PHUM RW
SUBJECT: JOURNALIST FREED BY GACACA AUTHORITIES
1. (U) Summary. On July 28, Jean Leonard Rugambage, a
journalist for the Kinyarwanda fortnightly newspaper
Umuco,, who was charged with murdering a bank official in
his home district during the genocide, was freed after 11
months in detention. Rugambage had been formally charged
with murder one month after his initial arrest and
subsequently had a contempt charge added. The decision to
free Rugambage was made after a review of the case by the
National Gacaca Service, which determined that Rugambage,s
arrest by local gacaca officials was arbitrary and found that
there was no evidence to support the criminal charge against
him. This ruling followed a July 26 decision by a sector
level gacaca appeals court to overturn the contempt of court
conviction against Rugambage, for which he had been sentenced
to one year in prison. While it is possible that Rugambage
could be charged in a traditional criminal court for the
crime of murder (alleged to have occurred during the 1994
genocide), initial indications are that no further legal
action will be taken against him. End summary.
2. (U) In an August 8 meeting with Emboffs, Rugambage
provided an overview of his case from the time he was
arrested in September 2005 through his ultimate release from
jail. In most respects, Rugambage,s account of his initial
arrest was consistent with an October 2005 report issued by
the High Council of the Press (HCP), which determined that a
local gacaca judge and an individual policeman had conspired
to coerce local gacaca judges to sign Rugambage's arrest
order. Initially Rugambage was charged only with attempting
to evade law enforcement authorities. The HCP investigation
had concluded that the local police had improperly interfered
in gacaca procedures, had declared that Rugambage had been
detained illegally, and had called for his immediate release.
3. (U) Where Rugambage and the HCP differ is in their account
of why Rugambage was originally arrested. Rugambage
continues to insist that his arrest was spearheaded by a
local gacaca judge in the Gitarama area (Rugambage,s native
region) in response to articles he wrote that criticized him
and other local gacaca officials. In Rugambage,s version of
events, this lone gacaca judge colluded with a policeman from
Rugambage,s home village to have him arrested. The HCP, on
the other hand, concluded that there was no evidence that
Rugambage was arrested because of his articles, but the HCP
did not offer any alternative explanation for his arrest.
4. (U) Rugambage said he does not believe that any senior
government official was involved in his arrest or detention.
Rugambage appeared to be genuinely grateful to Domitille
Mukantaganzwa, executive secretary of the National Gacaca
Service, for the role she played in bringing his case to a
close and the willingness of the national administration to
intervene when it became aware of examples of miscarriage of
justice.
5. (U) Comment: Rugambage's case has sometimes been
highlighted as an example of the lack of press freedom in
Rwanda. It is probably more accurate to describe it as an
example of how local officials in the gacaca system can evade
checks and balances to pursue individual agendas. End
comment.
ARIETTI