UNIT 8 DIGNITY AND SELF-RELIANCE
Key Unit Competence:
To be able to critique how the home-grown solutions contribute to self-reliance
(Abunzi, Gacaca, Girinka, Ingando, Imihigo, Itorero, Ubudehe, Umuganda,
umwiherero)
Introductory activity
Discuss how Rwandan people were handling their problems in
traditional society in different domains such as medicine, education,
agriculture, justice, leisure, arts, handcraft and environment and then
propose which methods from Rwandan traditional society should be
applied to our modern society to handle problems. Write your answer
on not more than one page.
8.1. Concepts of home-grown solutions and self-reliance
Learning activity 8.1
1. Examine in which context Rwanda has initiated her proper
innovations such as Gacaca, Abunzi, Itorero, Umwiherero and
Girinka to achieve economic and social development and write
your response in not more than 15 lines.
2. Read and use your knowledge on Umuganda to comment on the
following statement:
“Our country was once known for its tragic history. Today, Rwanda is
proud to be known for its transformations…When your achievements
are a result of hard work, you must be determined to never slide back
to where you once were… What we have achieved to date shows us
what we are capable of and Umuganda is an integral part of achieving
even more…Umuganda is one of the reasons we are moving forward,
working together and believing in our common goal of transforming
our lives and the lives of our families”, President P. Kagame at Nderaon October 30, 2015
8.1.1. Home-grown solutions initiatives
Home-Grown Initiatives (HGIs) are Rwanda’s brain child solutions to economic
and social development. They are practices developed by the Rwandan
citizens based on local opportunities, cultural values and history to fast track
their development. Being locally created, HGIs are appropriate to the local
development context and have been the bedrock to the Rwandan development
successes for the last decade.
HGIs are development/governance innovations that provide unconventional
responses to societal challenges. They are based on:
• National heritage/legacy
• Historical consciousness
• Strive for self-reliance
HGIs include Umuganda (community work), Gacaca (truth and reconciliation
traditional courts), Abunzi (mediators), Imihigo (performance contracts), Ubudehe
(community-based and participatory effort towards problem solving), Itoreroand
Ingando (solidarity camps), Umushyikirano (national dialogue), Umwiherero
(National Leadership Retreat) and Girinka (One cow per Family program).
They are all rooted in the Rwandan culture and history and therefore easy to
understand by the communities.
Self-reliance: This is a state of being independent in all aspects. Theindependence could be social, political or economic.
8.1.2 Abunzi Community mediators
The word “abunzi” can be translated as “those who reconcile” or “those who
bring together” (from verb kunga). In the traditional Rwanda, abunzi were men
and women for their integrity and were asked to intervene in the event of conflict.
Each conflicting party would choose a person considered trustworthy, known as
a problem-solver, who was unlikely to alienate either party. The purpose of this
system was to settle disputes and also to reconcile the conflicting parties and
restore harmony within the affected community.
Abunzi can be seen as a hybrid form of justice combining traditional with modern
methods of conflict resolution. The reintroduction of the Abunzi system in 2004
was motivated in part by the desire to reduce the accumulation of court cases,
as well as to decentralise justice and make it more affordable and accessible
for citizens seeking to resolve conflicts without the cost of going to court. Today,
Abunzi is fully integrated into Rwanda’s justice system.
a) Conflict resolution through community participation
Historically, the community, and particularly the family, played a central role in
resolving conflicts. Another mechanism for this purpose was inama y’umuryango
(meaning ‘family meetings or gatherings) in which relatives would meet to find
solutions to family problems. Similar traditions existed elsewhere, such as the
“dare” in Zimbabwe. These traditional mechanisms continue to play important
roles in conflict resolution regarding land disputes, civil disputes and, in some
instances, criminal cases.
The adoption of alternative dispute resolution mechanisms in Rwanda emerged
from the recognition of a growing crisis in a judiciary where it had become almost
impossible to resolve disputes efficiently and in a cost-effective manner. The
Government of Rwanda concluded that modern judicial mechanisms of dispute
resolution were failing to deliver and so the decision was taken to examine
traditional mediation and reconciliation approaches as alternatives. By doing so,
it would not only help alleviate the pressure on conventional courts but also align
with the policy objective of a more decentralized justice system. In addition, the
conflict resolution mechanisms rooted in Rwandan culture were perceived as less
threatening, more accessible and therefore more intimate. Those who referred
their cases to Abunzi were more comfortable seeking mediation from within their
community, which afforded them a better understanding of the issues at hand.
b) Establishment of the mediation committees (Abunzi committee)
In 2004, the Government of Rwanda established the traditional process of abunzi
as an alternative dispute resolution mechanism. Established at the cell and sector
levels, abunzi primarily address family disputes, such as those relating to land
or inheritance. By institutionalizing Abunzi, low level legal issues could be solved
at a local level without the need to be heard in conventional courts. Citizens
experiencing legal issues are asked to first report to abunzi, cases not exceeding
3,000,000 Frs (for land and other immovable assets) and 1,000,000 Rwf (for
cattle and other movable assets). Cases of these types can only be heard in a
conventional court if one party decides to appeal the decision made at the sector
level by the mediation committee.
As the Abunzi system gained recognition as a successful method to resolve
conflict and deliver justice, the importance of providing more structure and
formality to their work increased. Consequently, the abunzi started receiving
trainings on mediating domestic conflicts and support from both governmental
and non-governmental organisations to improve the quality of their mediation
services.
8.1.3 Gacaca Community courts
The word gacaca refers to the small clearing where a community would traditionally
meet to discuss issues of concern. People of integrity (elders and leaders) in the
village known as inyangamugayo would facilitate a discussion that any member of
the community could take part in. Once everyone had spoken, the inyangamugayo
would reach a decision about how the problem would be solved. In this way,
Gacaca acted very much as a traditional court. If the decision was accepted by all
members of the community, the meeting would end with sharing a drink as a sign
of reconciliation. If the parties were not happy with the decision made at Gacaca,
they had the right to take their case to a higher authority such as a chief or even
to the king.
One aspect particular to traditional Gacaca is that any decision handed down at
the court impacted not only the individual but also their family or clan as well. If
the matter was of a more serious nature and reconciliation could not be reached,
the inyangamugayo could decide to expel the offenders or the members of their
group from the community.
The most common cases to come before Gacaca courts were those between
members of the same family or community. It was rare for members of other
villages to be part of the courts and this affirmed the notion of Gacaca as a
community institution.
Colonisation had a significant impact on the functioning of Gacaca and in 1924
the courts were reserved only for civil and commercial cases that involved
Rwandans. Those involving colonisers and criminal cases were processed under
colonial jurisdiction. While the new justice systems and mechanisms imported
from Europe did not prohibit Gacaca from operating, the traditional courts saw
far fewer cases. During the post-colonial period, the regimes in power often appointed administrative officials to the courts which weakened their integrity
and eroded trust in Gacaca.
The Genocide against the Tutsi in 1994 virtually destroyed all government and
social institutions and Gacaca was no different. While Gacaca continued after the
Genocide, its form and role in society had been significantly degraded.
a) Contemporary Gacaca as a home-grown solution
Contemporary Gacaca was officially launched on June 18, 2002 by President
Paul Kagame. This took place after years of debate about the best way to give
justice to the survivors of the Genocide and to process the millions of cases that
had risen following the Genocide.
Contemporary Gacaca draws inspiration from the traditional model by replicating
a local community-based justice system with the aim of restoring the social
fabric of the society. In total, 1,958,634 genocide related cases were tried
through Gacaca. The courts are credited with laying the foundation for peace,
reconciliation and unity in Rwanda. The Gacaca courts officially finished their work
ten years later on June 18, 2012.
Gacaca first began as a pilot phase in 12 sectors across the country one per
each province as well as in the City of Kigali. After the pilot, the courts were
implemented across the country and the original Organic Law No. 40/2000
(January 26, 2001) was replaced by the Organic Law No. 16/2004 (June 19,
2004) which then governed the Gacaca process.
b) The aims of the contemporary Gacaca
– Expose the truth about the Genocide against the Tutsi
– Speed up genocide trials
– Eradicate impunity
– Strengthen unity and reconciliation among Rwandans
– Draw on the capacity of Rwandans to solve their own problems.
These aims were carried out at three levels of jurisdiction: the Gacaca Court of
the cell, the Gacaca Court of the Sector, and the Gacaca Court of appeals. There
were 9013 cell courts, 1545 Sector courts and 1545 Courts of Appeal nationwide.
According to the statistics given by National service of Gacaca Courts, the Gacaca
Courts were able to try 1,958,634 cases of genocide within a short time (trials
have begun on to 10/3/2005 in pilots sectors). This is on irrefutable evidence of
the collective will and ability of Rwandans to overcome huge challenges of their
country and work for its faster development basing on “Home grown solutions”.
8.1.4 Girinka Munyarwanda- One Cow per Poor Family
Programme
The word girinka (gira inka) can be translated as “may you have a cow” and
describes a centuries’ old cultural practice in Rwanda whereby a cow was
given by one person to another, either as a sign of respect and gratitude or as a
marriage dowry.
Girinka was initiated in response to the alarmingly high rate of childhood
malnutrition and as a way to accelerate poverty reduction and integrate livestock
and crop farming.
The programme is based on the premise that providing a dairy cow to poor
households helps to improve their livelihood as a result of a more nutritious and
balanced diet from milk, increased agricultural output through better soil fertility
as well as greater incomes by commercializing dairy products.
Since its introduction in 2006, more than 203,000 beneficiaries have received
cows. Girinka has contributed to an increase in agricultural production in Rwanda
- especially milk products which have helped to reduce malnutrition and increase
incomes. The program aimed at providing 350,000 cows to poor families by 2017.
Traditional Girinka
Two methods, described below, come under the cultural practice known asgutanga inka, from which Girinka is derived.
Kugabira: Translated as “giving a cow”; such an act is often done as a sign of
appreciation, expressing gratitude for a good deed or to establish a friendship.
Ubuhake: This cultural practice was a way for a parent or family to help a son
to obtain a dowry. If the family was not wealthy or did not own cattle, they could
approach a community or family member who owned cows and requested him/
her to accept the service of their son in exchange for the provision of the cows
amounting to the dowry when the son marries. The aim of ubuhake was not only
to get a cow but also protection of a cow owner. This practice established a
relationship between the donor and beneficiary. An informal but highly valued
social contract was established which was fulfilled through the exchange of
services such as cultivating the farm of the donor, looking after the cattle or
simply vowing loyalty.
Contemporary Girinka
Girinka was introduced in 2006 against a backdrop of alarmingly high levels of
poverty and childhood malnutrition. The results of the Integrated Household
Living Conditions Survey 2 (EICV 2) conducted in 2005 showed rural poverty at
62.5%. The Comprehensive Food Security and Vulnerability Analysis (CFSVA)
and Nutrition Survey showed that 28% of Rwanda’s rural population were foodinsecure
and that 24% of the rural population were highly vulnerable to food
insecurity.
The objectives of the programme are as follows:
• Reducing poverty through dairy cattle farming.
• • Improving livelihoods through increased milk consumption and income
generation.
• Improving agricultural productivity through the use of manure as fertilizer.
• Improving soil quality and reducing erosion through the planting of grasses
and trees.
Promoting unity and reconciliation among Rwandans based on the cultural
principle that if a cow is given from one person to another, it establishes trust,
respect and friendship between the donor and the beneficiary. While this was
not an original goal of Girinka, it has evolved to become a significant aspect of theprogram.
Girinka has been described as a culturally inspired social safety net program
because of the way it introduces a productive asset (a dairy cow) which can
provide long-term benefits to the recipient. Approved on 12 April 2006 by Cabinet
decision, Girinka originally aimed to reach 257,000 beneficiaries; however,
this target was revised upwards in 2010 to 350,000 beneficiaries by 2017. The
Government of Rwanda was initially the sole funder of the Girinka program but
development partners have since become involved in the program. This has led
to an increase in the number of cows being distributed.
Girinka is one of a number of programs under Rwanda’s Vision 2020, a set of
development objectives and goals designed to move Rwanda to a middle income
nation by the year 2020. By September 2014 close to 200,000 beneficiaries had
received a cow.
8.1.5. Ingando- solidarity camps
The word Ingando comes from the verb kugandika, which means going to stay in
a place far from one’s home, often with a group, for a specific reason.
Traditionally, the term ingando was used in the war context. It represented a
temporary resting place for warriors during their expeditions, or a place for the
king and the people travelling with him to stay. In these times of war, ingando
was the military camp or assembly area where troops received briefings on their
organisation and mission in preparation for the battle. These men were reminded
to put their differences behind them and focus on the goal of protecting their
nation.
The term Ingando has evolved in contemporary Rwanda to describe a place where
a group of people gather to work towards a common goal. Ingando trainings served
as think tanks where the sharing of ideas was encouraged. Ingando also included
an aspect of Umuganda. The trainings created a framework for the re-evaluation
of divisive ideologies present in Rwanda during the colonial and post-colonial
periods. Thus, ingando was designed to provide a space mainly for the young
people to prepare for a better future in which negative ideologies of the past
would no longer influence them.
The other aim of Ingando is to reduce fear and suspicion and encourage reconciliation
between genocide survivors and those whose family members perpetrated the
Genocide. Ingando trainings also serve to reduce the distance between some
segments of the Rwandan population and the government. Through Ingando,
participants learn about history, current development and reconciliation policies
and are encouraged to play an active role in the rebuilding of their nation.
8.1.6. Imihigo- performance contracts
The word Imihigo is the plural Kinyarwanda word of umuhigo, which means to vow
to deliver. Imihigo also include the concept of guhiganwa , which means to compete
among one another. Imihigo practices existed in pre-colonial Rwanda and have
been adapted to fit the current challenges of the Rwandan society.
Traditional Imihigo
Imihigo is a pre-colonial cultural practice in Rwanda where an individual sets
targets or goals to be achieved within a specific period of time. The person must
complete these objectives by following guiding principles and be determined to
overcome any possible challenge that arises. Leaders and chiefs would publicly
commit themselves to achieving certain goals. In the event that they failed, they
would face shame and embarrassment from the community. Definitions however
vary on what constitutes a traditional Imihigo. Some have recalled it as having a
basis in war, where warriors would throw a spear into the ground while publicly
proclaiming the feats they would accomplish in battle.
Contemporary Imihigo
Imihigo were re-initiated by Rwanda’s President, Paul Kagame, in March 2006.
This was as a result of the concern about the speed and quality of execution of
government programs and priorities. The government’s decentralisation policy
required a greater accountability at the local level. Its main objective was to
make public agencies and institutions more effective and accountable in their
implementation of national programs and to accelerate the socio-economic
development agenda as contained in the Vision 2020 and Economic Development
and Poverty Reduction Strategy (EDPRS) policies as well as the Millennium
Development Goals (MDGs).
Today, Imihigo are used across the government as performance contracts and
to ensure accountability. All levels of government, from the local district level
to ministries and embassies, are required to develop and have their Imihigo
evaluated. Members of the public service also sign Imihigo with their managers orhead of institution.
8.1.7. Itorero: Civic education
Traditionally Itorero was a traditional institution where Rwandans would learn
rhetoric, patriotism, social relations, sports, dancing, songs and defence. This
system was created so that young people could grow with an understanding
of their culture. Participants were encouraged to discuss and explore Rwandan
cultural values. Itorero was reintroduced in 2009 as a way to rebuild the nation’s
social fabric and mobilise Rwandans to uphold important cultural values.
Traditional Itorero
As a traditional school, itorero trainers planned daily activities according to
different priorities and every newcomer in itorero had to undergo initiation, known
in Kinyarwanda as gukuramo ubunyamusozi. The common belief was that Intore
were different from the rest of the community members, especially in matters of
expression and behaviour because they were expected to be experts in social
relations, quick thinkers and knowledgeable.
Each Itorero included 40 to 100 participants of various age groups and had its
own unique name. The best graduates would receive cows or land as rewards.
The tradition of Itorero provided formative training for future leaders. These
community leaders and fighters were selected from Intore (individuals who took
part in Itorero) and were trained in military tactics, hand to hand combat, jumping,
racing, javelin, shooting and endurance. They were also taught concepts of
patriotism, the Rwandan spirit, wisdom, heroism, unity, taboos, eloquence,
hunting and loyalty to the army.
Itorero was found at three levels of traditional governance, the family, the chief,
and the king’s court. At the family level, both girls and boys would be educated
on how to fulfil their responsibilities as defined by the expectations of their
communities. For example, the man was expected to protect his family and the
country, while the woman was expected to provide a good home and environment
for her family. Adults were also asked to treat every child as their own in order to
promote good behavior among children.
At the chief level, a teenage boy was selected by either his father or head of the
extended family to be introduced to the chief so that he could join his Itorero.
Selection was based on good behavior among the rest of his family and his
community.
8.1.8. Ubudehe - Social categorisation for collective action and
mutual support
Ubudehe refers to the long-standing Rwandan practice and culture of collective
action and mutual support to solve problems within a community. It is one of
Rwanda’s best known Home-Grown Solution because of its participatory
development approach to poverty reduction. In 2008, the program won the United
Nations Public Service Award for excellence in service delivery. Today Ubudeheis one of the country’s core development programs.
The origin of the word Ubudehe comes from the practice of preparing fields
before the rainy season
and finishing the task in time for planting. A community would cultivate clear the
fields together to make sure everyone was ready for the planting season. Once
a community had completed Ubudehe for everyone involved, they would assist
those who had not been able to take part, such as the very poor. After planting
the partakers gathered and shared beer. Therefore, the focus of traditional
Ubudehe was mostly on cultivation. It is not known exactly when Ubudehe was
first practiced, but it is thought to date back more than a century.
At the end of a successful harvest, the community would come together to
celebrate at an event known as Umuganura. Everyone would bring something
from his/her own harvest for the celebrations. This event would often take place
once the community’s sorghum beer production was completed.
Ubudehe was an inclusive cultural practice involving men, women and members
of different social groups. As almost all members of the community took part, the
practice often led to increased solidarity, social cohesion, mutual respect and
trust.
8.1.9. Umuganda: Community work
In simple terms, the word Umuganda means community work. In traditional
Rwandan culture, members of the community would call upon their family, friends
and neighbors to help them complete a difficult task.
Umuganda can be considered as a communal act of assistance and a sign of
solidarity. In everyday use, the word ‘Umuganda’ refers to a pole used in the
construction of a house. The pole typically supports the roof, thereby strengthening
the house.
In the period immediately after independence in 1962, Umuganda was only
organised under special circumstances and was considered as an individual
contribution to nation building. During this time, Umuganda was often referred to
as umubyizi, meaning ‘a day set aside by friends and family to help each other’.
On February 2, 1974, Umuganda became an official government programme
and was organised on a more regular basis – usually once a week. The Ministry
of District Development was in charge of overseeing the program. Local leaders
at the district and village level were responsible for organisingUmuganda and
citizens had little say in this process. Because penalties were imposed for nonparticipation,
Umuganda was initially considered as forced labour.
While Umuganda was not well received initially, the programme recorded
significant achievements in erosion control and infrastructure improvement
especially building primary schools, administrative offices of the sectors and
villages and health centres.
After the Genocide, Umuganda was reintroduced to Rwandan life in 1998 as part
of efforts to rebuild the country. The programme was implemented nationwide
though there was little institutional structure surrounding the programme. It was
not until November 17, 2007 with the passing of Organic Law Number 53/2007
Governing Community Works and later on August 24, 2009 with Prime Ministerial
Order Number 58/03 (determining the attributions, organisation, and functioning
of community work supervising committees and their relations with other organs)
that Umuganda was institutionalised in Rwanda.
Today, Umuganda takes place on the last Saturday of each month from 8:00
a.m. and lasts for at least three hours. For Umuganda activities to contribute to
the overall national development, supervising committees have been established
from the village level to the national level. These committees are responsible
for organising what work is undertaken as well as supervising, evaluating andreporting what is done
Rwandans between 18 and 65 are obliged to participate in Umuganda. Those
over 65 are welcome to participate if they are willing and able. Expatriates living
in Rwanda are also encouraged to take part. Those who participate in Umuganda
cannot be compensated for their work – either in cash or in kind.
Today close to 80% of the Rwandans take part in monthly community work.
Successful projects have been developed for example the building of schools,
medical centres and hydro-electric plants as well as rehabilitating wetlands
and creating highly productive agricultural plots. The value of Umuganda to the
country’s development is very remarkable in many parts of the country.
While the main purpose of Umuganda is to undertake community work, it also
serves as a forum for leaders at each level of government (from the village up to
the national level) to inform citizens about important news and announcements.
Community members are also able to discuss any problems they or the community
are facing and to propose solutions together. This time is also used for evaluating
what they have achieved and for planning activities for the next Umuganda a
month later.
8.1.10. Umwiherero: National leadership retreat
Umwiherero, translated as retreat, refers to a tradition in Rwandan culture where
leaders convene in a secluded place in order to reflect on issues affecting their
communities. Upon return from these retreats, the objective is to have identified
solutions. On a smaller scale, this term also refers to the action of moving to a
quieter place to discuss issues with a small group of people.
For a few days every year, leaders from all arms of Government come under
one roof to collectively look at the general trajectory the country is taking and
seek remedies to outstanding problems. Initially, Umwiherero had been designed
exclusively for senior public officials but it has evolved to include leaders from
the private sector as well as civil society. Provided for under the constitution,
Umwiherero is chaired by the Head of State and during this time, presentations
and discussions centre on a broad range of development challenges including
but not limited to the economy, governance, justice, infrastructure, health and
education.
Since its inception, organizers of Umwiherero have adopted numerous innovative
initiatives to expedite the implementation of resolutions agreed upon at each
retreat. Since then, the results are quantifiable. These efforts have resulted in
noticeable improvements in planning, coordination, and accountability leading to
clearer and more concise priorities.
As discussions go deep in exposing matters affecting the well-being of the people
of Rwanda, poor performers are reprimanded and those who delivered on theirmandate are recognized.
Umwiherero provides a platform for candid talk among senior officials. For
example, an official raises a hand to mention his/her superior who is obstructing a
shared development agenda. The said superior is then given a chance to explain
to the meeting how he/she intends to resolve this deadlock.
Application Activity 8.1
1. Use your own words to explain the following concepts of homegrown
solutions: umuganda, imihigo and ubudehe.
2. Compare the traditional umuganda and contemporary umuganda.
3. Discuss the reason why Rwanda adopted home-grown solutions
to social and economic development.
8.2 Contribution of the home grown solutions towards a good
governance, self-reliance and dignity
Learning activity 8.2
“Akimuhana kaza imvura ihise” in English: help from neighbours
never comes in the rain it comes after. Discuss this Kinyarwanda
proverb in reference to the concepts of home-grown solutions
As part of the efforts to reconstruct Rwanda and nurture a shared national
identity, the Government of Rwanda drew on aspects of Rwandan culture
and traditional practices to enrich and adapt its development programmes to
the country’s needs and context. The result is a set of Governance and Home
-Grown Initiatives (GHI) - culturally owned practices translated into sustainable
development programmes.
As the abunzi system gained more recognition as a successful method to resolve
conflicts and deliver justice, the importance of providing more structure and
formality to their work increased.
During the fiscal year ending June 2017 for example, mediation committees
received 51,016 cases. They were composed of 45,503 civil cases representing
89.1% and 5,513 penal cases received before the amendment of the law
determining organization, jurisdiction, and competence and functioning of
mediation committees. A total of 49,138 cases equivalent to 96.3% were handled
at both sector and cell levels. 38,777 (76.0%) cases received by mediation
committees were handled at cell level, 10,361 (20.3%) cases were mediated
at sector level whereas only 3.6% were undergoing at the end of the year. The
number of cases received by mediation committees increased at the rate of
30.9% over the past three years.
The Rwanda Governance Board (RGB) conducted an investigation into public
perceptions of some of the benefits of Abunzi in comparison to ordinary courts.
Those surveyed highlighted the following positive attributes:
• The reduction of time spent to settle cases (86.7%).
• Reduction of economic costs of cases (84.2%);
The cultural based policies have contributed a lot in helping getting some socioeconomic
solutions that were not possible to get otherwise.
8.2.1. Contribution of Gacaca courts
Gacaca courts officially finished their work on June 18, 2012 and by that time
a total of 1,958,634 genocide related cases were tried throughout the country.
As earlier mentioned Gacaca is credited with laying the foundation for peace,
reconciliation and unity in Rwanda.
8.2.2 Impact of Girinka
Girinka has led to a number of significant changes in the lives of the poorest
Rwandans. The impact of the program can be divided into five categories including
agricultural production, food security, livestock ownership, health outcomes, unity
and reconciliation.
Agricultural production
Girinka has contributed to an increase in agricultural production in Rwanda,
especially milk products. Milk production has risen due to an increase in the
number of cows in the country and because beneficiaries have received cross
breeds with better productive capacity than local cattle species. Between 2000
and 2011, milk production increased seven fold allowing the Government of
Rwanda to start the One Cup of Milk per Child program in schools. Between 2009
and 2011, national milk production increased by 11.3%, rising to 372.6 million
litres from 334.7 million litres. Over the same period, meat production increased
by 9.9%, according to the Government of Rwanda Annual Report 2010-2011.
The construction of milk collection centres has also increased and by February
2013, there were more than 61 centres operational nationwide with 25 more due
to be completed by the end of 2013.
Most of the beneficiaries produce enough milk to sell some at market, providing
additional income generation. The manure produced by the cows increases
crop productivity, allowing beneficiaries to plant crops offering sustenance and
employment as well as a stable income. Girinka has also allowed beneficiaries to
diversify and increase crop production, leading to greater food security.
Food Security
According to the Comprehensive Food Security and Vulnerability Analysis and
Nutrition Survey (CFSVA) conducted in March/April 2012, almost four in five
have workspace reserved for them and must share space with the staff from
cells and/or sectors offices; this sharing can sometimes result in the loss or mixup
of case les.
• Incentives: A number of mediators complained that the incentive promised
to them and their families in the form of “mutuelle de santé” (health insurance)
was not always forthcoming.
• Transportation for field visits: According to a study conducted by RCN
Justice & Démocratie in 2009, mediators complained about not always
being able to afford transportation to perform site visits when reviewing
cases. While each chairperson at the appeal level received a bicycle, it has
been recognised that field visits for all mediators have been very difficult in
some cases. This can result in delays in the mediation process.
• Communication facilities: To perform their duties, mediators have to
commu-nicate among themselves or with other institutions, but they are
not given a communication allowance. This proves problematic at times
and can lead to financial stress for some when they are obliged to use their
own money to contact for instance litigants and institutions.
8.2.3. Contribution of Imihigo
Since its introduction, Imihigo has been credited with improving accountability
and quickening the pace of citizen centred development in Rwanda. The practice
of Imihigo has now been extended to the ministries, embassies and public service
staff.
Once the compilation of the report on Imihigo implementation has been completed,
the local government entity presents it to stakeholders including citizens, civil
society, donors and others. After reviewing the results, stakeholders are often
asked to jointly develop a way forward and this can be done by utilising the Joint
Action Development Forums (JADF).
SACCOs (Savings and Credit Cooperatives) and payment of teachers’ salaries
and arrears: Good progress was made in mobilising citizens to join SACCOs
and reasonable funds were mobilised. Although most of the SACCOs obtained
provisional licenses from the National Bank of Rwanda to operate as savings
and credit cooperatives, they needed to mobilise more member subscriptions
in order to realize the minimum amount required to obtain full licenses. Most of
all SACCO at the sector level needed adequate offices. In addition great efforts
were made to ensure that teachers were paid their monthly salaries on time.
8.2.5. Impact of ingando
Ingando has contributed significantly to the national unity and reconciliation in
Rwanda. This is especially true for the early years of the programme(between
1996-1999) when most participants were returning combatants or Rwandans
afraid or unsure of their new government. Special attention was paid to social
justice and helping participants understand government strategies to improve
social welfare. This approach was key in ensuring that the progress made in
reconciliation was sustainable.
At a consultative forum in 2001, a number of observations were made that are
indicative of the progress towards national unity, reconciliation and development.
These included rejection of genocide ideology, a desire to be involved in
safeguarding national security and having equal access to education as well as
being part of the national army and the police force.
This consultative forum also gathered strong and positive recommendations
from Rwandans throughout the country on the necessity to teach love and
truth denounce wrongdoing and encourage forgiveness among people, foster
tolerance, promote the culture of peace and personal security, as well as
promoting development and social welfare for all Rwandans.
Between 1999 and 2010, more than 90,000 people took part in the Ingando
trainings organised by the National Unity and Reconciliation Commission.
8.2.6 Contribution of Itorero
The contribution of Itorero as a home-grown solution towards good governance,
self-reliance and dignity is observed through Itorero activities described above.
Capacity building for Itorero ry’Igihugu: structures of Intore were elected from
villages up to sector levels in 2009. Later on in 2012, Itorero ry’Igihugu was
officially launched in primary and secondary schools. From November 2007 up
to the end of 2012, Itorero ry’ Igihugu had a total of 284,209 trained Intore. The
number of Intore who have been trained at the Village level amounts to a total
of 814 587. Those mentored at the national level are the ones who go down
to mentor in villages, schools, and at various work places. In total, 1 098 599
Rwandans have been mentored nationwide.
Itorero ry’Igihugu was launched in all districts of the country. Each district’s
regiment presented their performance contracts at that colour ful ceremony
marked by cultural festivals. Each district’s Intore regiment publically announced
its identification name. At the national level, all the 30 district Intore regiments
comprised one national Itorero, but each district regiment has its identificationname. Each district regiment can have an affiliate sub-division which can, in turn,
also have a different identification name. There is also Itorero for Rwandans in
Diaspora that has the authority to develop its affiliated sub-division.
In order to enable each Intore to benefit and experience change of mindset,
each group chooses its identification name and sets objectives it must achieve.
Those projected objectives must be achieved during or after training, and this is
confirmed by the performance contracts that necessarily have to be accomplished.
With this obligation in mind, each individual also sets personal objective that in
turn contributes to the success of the corporate objectives.
8.2.6 The contribution of Ubudehe
Ubudehe has been recognized internationally as a highly successful development
program. In 2008, Ubudehe was awarded the United Nations “Better Management:
Better Public Service” Award.
One of the most significant impacts of Ubudehe is the way in which it has
transformed citizens’ engagement with their own development. Much of the
twentieth century in Rwanda was characterized by centralized planning and
delivery of services with little or no involvement from local communities. Ubudehe
has changed this and, coupled with decentralisation efforts, has changed the
way Rwandans participate in decision making processes that affect their lives.
Ubudehe has achieved almost nationwide coverage and communities across
Rwanda are now actively involved in developing their own social maps, visual
representations and collection of data to the extent of poverty in their village.
This information is used to determine national development objectives against
which the national government and its ministries are held accountable.
The way in which Ubudehe has brought communities together for collective
action based on their own priorities is also considered a major achievement of
the programme. The provision of a bank account to each community has enabled
thousands of community led actions such as purchasing livestock, undertaking
agriculture activities, building clean water facilities, classrooms, terraces, health
centres as well as silos for storing produce. In 2006-2007, 9,000 communities
undertook different projects through Ubudehe and in 2007-2008 that number rose
to 15,000. 2010 saw over 55,000 collective actions by communities with the
assistance of 30,000 Ubudehe facilitators.
At least 1.4 million people, around 20% of the population, have been direct
beneficiaries of Ubudehe. Between 2005 and 2008, around 50,000 people were
trained on Ubudehe concepts and procedures.
This has resulted in a greater level of skills available to the community at the local
level helping Ubudehe to be more effective.
5.2.7 Contribution of Umuganda
Umuganda is credited with contributing to Rwanda’s development, particularly in
the areas of infrastructure development and environmental protection. Common
infrastructure projects include roads (especially those connecting sectors),
bridges, heath centres, classroom construction (to support the 9 and 12) Years
of Basic Education programs), housing construction for poor and vulnerable
Rwandans (often to replace grass-thatched housing) and the construction of
local government offices and savings and credit cooperative buildings.
8.2.9 Impact of Umwiherero
For a few days every year, leaders from all arms of Government come under
one roof to collectively look at the general trajectory the country is taking and
seek remedies to outstanding problems. Initially, Umwiherero had been designed
exclusively for senior public officials but it has evolved to include leaders from
the private sector as well as civil society. Provided for under the constitution,
Umwiherero is chaired by the Head of State and during this time, presentationsand
discussions centre on a broad range of development challenges including but not
limited to the economy, governance, justice, infrastructure, health and education.
Since its inception, organizers of Umwiherero have adopted numerous innovative
initiatives to expedite the implementation of resolutions agreed upon at each
retreat. Since then, the results are quantifiable. These efforts have resulted in
noticeable improvements in planning, coordination, and accountability leading to
clearer and more concise priorities.
As discussions go deep in exposing matters affecting the well-being of the people
of Rwanda, poor performers are reprimanded and those who delivered on their
mandate are recognized.
Application activity 8.2
1. Analyze the impact of Abunzi as a home-grown initiative.
2. Discuss the contribution of home-grown initiatives to social and
economic development of Rwanda.
3. Analyze the contribution of home-grown initiatives to Unity and
Reconciliation of Rwandans.
8.3. Challenges encountered during the implementation of the home grown solutions.
Learning activity 8.3
Discuss in not more than 500 words challenges encountered in
Girinka programme and how they can be handled.
1. Analyse challenges encountered in the implementation of Gacaca
courts.
2. Using internet, reports, media and your own observation discuss
the challenges met by abunzi.
3. Discuss the key challenges in the Imihigo planning process and
implementation
4. Evaluate the role of umuganda as a home-grown solution.
8.3.1. Challenges of Abunzi
Some of the challenges encountered during the implementation of Abunzi
are:
• Inadequate legal knowledge: While most mediators acknowledged that
they received training session on laws, they expressed a desire to receive
additional training on a more regular basis to enhance their knowledge of
relevant laws.
• Insufficient mediation skills: Mediators also expressed a desire to
receive additional training in professional mediation techniques in order to
improve the quality and effectiveness of their work.
• Lack of permanent offices: In some areas, mediation committees do not
always have workspace reserved for them and must share space with the
staff from cells and/or sectors offices; this sharing can sometimes result in
the loss or mix-up of case
• Incentives: A number of mediators complained that the incentive promised
to them and their families in the form of “mutuelle de santé” (health
insurance) was not always forthcoming.
• Transportation for field visits: According to a study conducted by RCN
Justice &Démocratie in 2009, mediators complained about not always
being able to transportation to perform site visits when reviewing cases.
While each chairperson at the appeal level received a bicycle, it has been
recognised that field visits for all mediators have been very difficult in some
cases. This can result in delays in the mediation process.
• Communication facilities: To perform their duties, mediators have to
communicate among themselves or with other institutions, but they are not
given a communication allowance. This proves problematic at times and can lead to financial stress for some when they are obliged to use their own
money to contact for instance litigants and institutions.
8.3.2. Challenges of Gacaca courts
Below are challenges faced during implementation of Gacaca.
• At the beginning of the data collection phase at the national level, 46,000
Inyangamugayo representing 27.1% of the total number of judges, were
accused of genocide. This led to their dismissal from Gacaca courts.
• Leaders, especially in the local government, were accused of participating in
genocide constituting a serious obstacle to the smooth running of Gacaca.
• In some cases there was violence against genocide survivors, witnesses
and Inyangamugayo.
• Serious trauma among survivors and witnesses manifested during Gacaca
proceedings.
• In some cases there was a problem of suspects eeing their communities
and claiming that they were threatened because of Gacaca.
• In some cases there was corruption and favouritism in decision making.
8.3.3. Challenges of Girinka
The following are the major challenges faced by the Girinka programme:
In some cases, the distribution of cows has not been transparent and people
with the financial capacity to buy cows themselves were among the beneficiaries.
This issue was raised at the National Dialogue Council. (Umushyikirano) in 2009
and eventually resolved through the cow recovery programme. This program
resulted in 20,123 cows given to unqualified beneficiaries (out of a total of 20,532
wrongly given) redistributed to poor families.
8.3.4. Challenges of Ingando
Ingando has contributed significantly to national unity and reconciliation in
Rwanda. But when the programme was established, it faced significant challenges
including a lack of trust between participants and facilitators as well as low quality
facilities. These issues were slowly overcome as more resources were dedicated
to the programme.
8.3.5. Challenges of Ubudehe
The major challenges of Ubudehe can be divided into categorisation and project
implementation:
Categorisation
In some cases, village members have preferred to be classified into lower poverty
levels as a way to receive support from social security programs such as health
insurance and Girinka.
To overcome this, household poverty level categorisation takes place publically
with all heads of households and must be validated by the village itself.
In the event that community members dispute the decision made by their village,
they are entitled to lodge a complaint and appeal in the first instance to the
sector level. The Ubudehe Committee at the sector level conducts a visit to the
household and either upholds or issues a new decision. If community members
remain unhappy with the decision they can appeal in the second instance to the
district level. The final level of appeal is to the Office of the Ombudsman at the
central government level.
8.3.6. Challenges of Imihigo
While Imihigo has provided the Government of Rwanda and citizens with a way
to hold leaders to account, some challenges listed below have been identified
from the 2010-2011 evaluation report:
• There is a planning gap especially on setting and maintaining logic and
consistency: objectives, baseline, output/targets and indicators
• Setting unrealistic and over-ambitious targets by districts was common.
Some targets were not easily achievable in 12 months. For example,
construction of a 30 km road when no feasibility study had been conducted
or reducing crime by 100%.
• In some districts low targets were established that would require little e ort
to implement.
• The practice of consistent tracking of implementation progress, reporting
and ling is generally still weak.
• Some targets were not achieved because of district partners who did
not fulfill their commitments in disbursing funds - especially the central
government institutions and development partners.
• There is a weakness of not setting targets based on uniqueness of rural
and urban settings. Setting targets that are beyond districts’ full control was observed: For example,
construction of stadiums and development of master plans whose implementation
is fully managed by the central government.
There was general lack of communication and reporting of challenges faced that
hindered implementation of the committed targets.
8.3.7. Challenges of Itorero
During its implementation, Itorero faced a series of challenges including:
• Inadequate staff and insufficient logistics for the monitoring and evaluation
of Itorero activities;
• Low level of understanding the important role of Itorerory’ Igihugu on the
part of partners;
• Districts lack sufficient training facilities;
• Some Itorero mentors lack sufficient capacity to train other people;
• The National Itorero Commission does not get adequate information on
partners’
• commitment to Volunteer Services;
• A number of various institutions in the country have not yet started
considering voluntary and national service activities in their planning.
• Low understanding of the role of Itorero especially at the village level;
• Existence of some partners who have not yet included activities.
8.3.8. Challenges of Umuganda
The challenges faced by Umuganda fall into two broad categories: planning and
participation. In some areas of the country, poor planning has led to unrealistic
targets and projects that would be difficult to achieve without additional financing.
In urban areas, participation in Umuganda has been lower than in rural areas.
To address these challenges, the team responsible for Umuganda at the Ministry
of Local Government has run trainings for the committees that oversee Umuganda
at the local level.
These trainings include lessons on monitoring and evaluation, how to report
achievements, the laws, orders and guidelines governing Umuganda as well as
responsibilities of the committee.
To overcome the issues of low participation rates in some areas of the country,
especially in urban areas, an awareness raising campaign is conducted through
documentaries, TV and radio shows to inform Rwandans about the role Umuganda
plays in society and its importance.
8.3.9. Challenges of Umwiherero
The first four years of Umwiherero saw questionable results. The organisation
of the retreat was often rushed, objectives were poorly defined and few tangible
results could be measured.
This led President Paul Kagame to establish the Strategy and Policy Unit in
the Office of the President and the Coordination Unit in the Office of the Prime
Minister. At the same time, the Ministry of Cabinet Affairs was set up to improve
the functioning of the Cabinet. These two newly formed units were tasked with
working together to implement Umwiherero.
While the first retreat organised by the two new teams suffered from similar
problems to previous retreats, improvement was noticeable.
Following Umwiherero in 2009, Minister of Cabinet Affairs served as head of
the newly formed steering committee tasked with overseeing the retreat. The
steering committee was comprised of 14 team members. Alongside the steering
committee, working groups were set up to define the priorities to be included on
the retreat agenda. This process was overseen by the Strategy and Policy Unit
who developed a concept paper with eleven priority areas to be approved by the
Prime Minister and the President.
Since that time the organisation, implementation and outcomes of Umwiherero
have vastly improved and significant achievements have been recorded.
The focus on a small number of key priorities has made it easier for meaningful
discussions to be had and for effective implementation to take place. For example,
the number of national priorities agreed upon by participants fell from 174 in 2009
to 11 in 2010 and to six in 2011. The retreats are also credited with significantly
improving coordination and cooperation between government ministries and
agencies.
Application activity 8.3
1. Analyze challenges encountered in the implementation of Gacaca
courts.
2. Using internet, reports, media and your own observation discuss
the challenges met by abunzi.
3. Discuss the key challenges in the Imihigo planning process andimplementation.
8.4. End Unit Assessment
End Unit Assessment
1. Assess the achievements and challenges of Umuganda in
social and economic sector and propose what can be done to
improve it.
2. Explain the contribution and challenges of Umwiherero on
economic development and good governance and what can be
done to improve it.
3. Discuss the contribution of Ubudehe to dignity and self-reliance.
4. Analyse the contribution of Girinka to poverty reduction.
5. Discuss the social impact of Abunzi and its contribution to unityand reconciliation.