History

Introduction

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.

After the 1994 genocide against Tutsi, Rwandan economic structure was devastated

none was hoping that the county should be rebuilt and continues its development

process. After this period, Rwandan government has adopted several programs

and policies to boost Rwandan economy and to promote the general welfare of the

population.

HGIs had a significant impact on recipient households and the community. In

terms of social impact, Home Grown Initiatives have contributed to beneficiary

households through the increased access to health and education services,

shelter, improved nutrition, social cohesion and sustained participation in

decision making at community level. 

Key unit competence

Critique how home-grown solutions contribute to self-reliance (Abunzi, Gacaca,

Girinka, Imihigo, Itorero, Ingando, Ubudehe, Umuganda, umwiherero,).

Learning objectives

At the end of this unit, I should be able to:

• Explain the concepts of home-grown solutions and self-reliance and their contribution to national building;

• Analyse the contributions of home grown solutions towards the good

governance, self-reliance and dignity in Rwanda;

• Examine the challenges encountered during the implementation of

home - grown solutions.

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.

10.1 Concepts of home-grown solutions and self-reliance

Activity 10.1

1. Examine in which context has Rwanda 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 Ndera on October 30, 2015.

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

• 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), Itorero

and 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.

10.1.1 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 known

within their communities for personal 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.

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 decentralised 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.

Establishment of the mediation committees

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. 

Organisational structure

The mediation committees that make up the Abunzi operate at a cell level

in the first instance (initial cases) and at a sector level in the event of appeal

(appeal cases). According to the law establishing the structure of abunzi,

the committee is composed of twelve people known for their integrity, who

reside respectively in the concerned cell and sector and who are recognised for

their ability to reconcile differences. These mediators are elected by the Cell

Council and the Sector Council respectively for a renewable term of five

years.

The mediation committee, at the cell and sector level, is headed by a bureau

composed of a president and a vice-president elected by their peers. Claims

made to the abunzi are received by the Executive Secretary who in turn

forwards them to the mediation committee. If the Executive Secretary is

unable to receive the claim, the request is delivered to the chairman of the

mediation committee. The relevant council (cell or sector level) is then notified.

Functioning of the mediation committees

In order to initiate a case, one of the parties must first submit a complaint

to the Executive Secretary of the cell  verbally or in writing so that it can be

registered by the mediation committee. The applicant must provide a brief

outline of the case to inform the proceedings, after which the mediation

committee can summon parties and decide on the venue, as well as the date

and time for hearing the case.

As outlined in Article 17 of the 2010 Abunzi Organic Law on the Organisation,

Competence and Functioning of Mediation Committees, the parties agree on

three mediators to whom they submit their case. When the parties cannot agree

on mediators, each party chooses one mediator, and the two chosen mediators

choose the third. Where parties agree on one mediator, that mediator chooses

two others from within the mediation committee. Parties have no right to refuse

a mediator or mediators chosen via this procedure. When the case involves a

police officer or a soldier, the nearest commander of the police force or army

is required to assist the mediators. Abunzi must settle the litigation within one

month from the day the litigation is registered by the mediation committee.

If the summoned party fails to appear at the hearing, a summon is issued

informing them that the mediators will make a decision on the case at the

next hearing regardless of their absence. If the summoned party fails again to

attend on the new date, the applicant and the mediation committee choose one

mediator each and the chosen two select the third one to examine the case in

the summoned party’s absence. However, if the summoned party is considered

by the Committee to have offered an acceptable reason for non-attendance,

the matter can be postponed to a later date.

In most cases, the mediation hearing is public, unless decided otherwise by

mediators. Other members of the mediation committee not chosen to settle the

matter may participate in the mediation session but do not have the right to

make a decision. When settling a case, mediators hear from each of the parties

in conflict and from any available witnesses. During those hearings, advocates

are allowed to assist the parties but they cannot represent or plead for any

party.

In each instance, the mediators are obliged to first strive to conciliate both parties

but where this proves impossible, they render a decision in all honesty and in

accordance with the laws and local customary practices. When the mediators are

successful at reconciling the parties, prosecution does not occur.

After considering the case, the mediators withdraw to make a decision. The

mediators’ decision is taken by consensus or by the absolute majority of votes in

the event that a consensus cannot be reached at. 

Recorded minutes of the proposed settlement are signed by mediators and the

concerned parties when the mediation procedure is completed. In all cases, the

decision is written, signed on each page and available within ten days from the

day of the decision.

Mediators who fail to do this may face disciplinary action for not meeting the

Standard of Conduct established by Order of the Minister of Justice.

The minutes of a case taken to Abunzi contain the following:

1. Identification of the parties

2. A summary of the dispute

3. Arguments put forward by the involved parties

4. The mediation decision with which all parties agree

5. The mediation decision with which one of the parties does not agree, if

any

6. The date and the place where the mediation session took place

7. Signatures or finger prints of parties in conflict

8. The mediators’ names as well as their signatures or fingerprints

9. The reporters’ name as well as their signature or fingerprints

The mediation minutes are closed with the seal of the mediation committee

and kept by the Executive Secretary of the cell, who then submits them to

the concerned parties. Any dissenting opinion held by a mediator will also be

included in those minutes. The decision taken by the mediators, and agreed

upon by all parties, will then serve as a compromise for those parties.

The mediators’ decision is carried out voluntarily, but in the event that one party

refuses to comply with the decision, it will be enforced through a request to the

President of the Primary Court.

Appealing decisions of mediation committees

Either party can appeal  the mediators’ decision at the sector or cell level within a

period of one month from the day the written decision was handed down. Once

received by the mediation committee at the sector level, mediators will only

examine aspects of the case deemed objectionable by the appealing party.

There is no filing fees associated with the appeal process.

If a party is not satisfied with the decision taken at the sector level, the party

may refer the matter to the Primary Court within a month of notification of the

sector level decision. However, filing an action before a Primary Court will require

payment of filing fees.  As with all appeal cases, minutes from the mediation

session will be provided to the Primary Court, which is obliged to consider only

those aspects of the earlier decision to which one of the parties objects.

Any member of the Mediation Committee may be suspended  for a maximum

of a month in the event of exhibiting bias or other misconduct. The decision to

suspend one of its members must be taken by two thirds of the Committee. The

affected mediator has an opportunity to challenge the suspension. In the event

that the Electoral College finds the concerned mediator unable to further fulfil

his/her duties, then the mediator will be dismissed.

Legal competence of mediation committees

• Disputes over land and other immovable assets whose value does not exceed

3,000,000 Rwf or US $4,762

•   Disputes over cattle and other movable assets whose value does not exceed

1,000,000 Rwf or US $1,587

• Disputes relating to alleged breaches of contract where the case in question

does not exceed the value of 1,000,000 Rwf, or US $1,587, with the exception

of central government, insurance and commercial contractual obligations

• Employment disputes between individuals where the value is less than 100,000

Rwf or US $159

• Family disputes other than those related to civil status

• Successions when the matter at issue does not exceed 3,000,000 Rwf or US

$4,762

With respect to criminal matters, Article 9 allows for Mediation Committees to

preside over cases involving “the removal or displacement of land terminals and

plots, any form of devastation of crops by animals and destruction of crops when

the value of crops ravaged or destroyed does not exceed three million Rwandan

francs (3,000,000 Rwf ) or US $4,762, theft of crops when the value of crops does

not exceed three million Rwandan francs (3,000,000 Rwf ) and larceny (theft)

when the value of the stolen object does not exceed three million Rwandan

francs (3,000,000 Rwf ).

Civil and low level criminal cases can only be heard by the Mediation

Committees when both parties reside within their jurisdiction (Article 10). In

the event that either the defendant or the complainant resides outside the

committee’s jurisdiction, then the case will be brought before the competent

authorities. The mediation committees do not have jurisdiction over cases

involving the state and its entities or public or private associations and

companies endowed with legal status.

10.1.2 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.

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.

The aims of the Gacaca were to:

• 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 activities 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.

The following principles guided the Gacaca process:

• Classification of genocide suspects into categories based on the gravity of the

charges brought against them. Opportunity was given to genocide suspects

to admit and confess to their crimes and to ask for forgiveness; when their

confessions were accepted, their sentences were reduced.

• Special sentencing for those who committed genocide crimes as minors. For

example, those over 14 but under 18 years old were ordered to follow a rehabilitation program in a correctional centre.

• Similar to conventional courts, the defendants in Gacaca had the right to appeal the judgment of the first hearing and to receive retrials in cases where the

law was not observed during the first hearing.

With the introduction of the Gacaca law of 2004, these four categories were revised

down to three to streamline the process.The offences constituting to the crime of

the Genocide were classified into 3 categories. Apart from the acts of torture and

the dehumanising acts on a dead body, the first category contained the same

accusations as provided for by the Organic Law of 2001, the 2nd and 3rd categories

of the old law were merged to make category 2, the fourth category became the

third.

Functioning of Gacaca

While Gacaca courts were given competence similar to other judicial systems,

they also had the special competence of investigating the manner in which crimes

were committed, a task normally carried out by the prosecution department.

Judges in Gacaca courts

The public elected the judges who presided over the hearings in Gacaca courts,

known as inyangamugayo (people of integrity in their community). The election

of  inyangamugayo  was conducted countrywide from 4-7 October 2001; other

elections were held to replace inyangamugayo who were no longer able to serve on the courts. 34.3% of the inyangamugayo were women, and 65.7% men.

Criteria to be elected as inyangamugayo

• To be of Rwandan nationality

• To have his or her residence in the Cell where he or she needs to present his or

her candidature

• To be at least 21 years of age

• To be a person of good morals and conduct

• To be truthful and characterised by a spirit of truth telling

• Not to have been sentenced to a penalty of at least six months of imprisonment

• Not to have participated in the Genocide or other crimes against humanity

• To be free of sectarianism

• To have no history of dismissal for indiscipline.

The National Service of Gacaca Courts organised general training sessions for

all Gacaca inyangamugayo  countrywide and special training sessions for the

courts that demonstrated need for supplementary training. Inyangamugayo also

received training relating to the amended Organic Law governing the functioning

of Gacaca Courts before starting any Gacaca activities.

As part of a capacity building exercise for inyangamugayo, the National Service

of Gacaca Courts established a team of 551 trainers including 106 Gacaca

Court Coordinators and 445  inyangamugayo judges selected on the basis of

the knowledge and skills they demonstrated. These  inyangamugayo  mainly

comprised of school teachers, civil servants and business people.

Analysis of the cases

After gathering the information about the case presented to the court, it was

analysed by the  inyangamugayo  of the Gacaca Court at the cell level. These

judges then prepared a file for those who were accused of committing crimes.

Based on the gravity of the crimes allegedly committed, the suspect was put in

one of the three categories described above.

After the inyangamugayo had prepared the file and categorised it appropriately,

it was then submitted to the court with the competence to judge it. The files of

the first and second categories were submitted to the Gacaca court of the sector,

while those in the third category remained in the Gacaca court of the cell.

During this investigative phase, the number of suspects increased significantly

which placed a strain on the courts’ ability to deliver timely justice to victims.

As a result, the Organic Law governing the functioning of Gacaca was revised.

This transferred a large number of genocide suspects in the first category to the

second category.

Gacaca hearings were public, except those in camera as decided by the court,

or upon the request of any interested party and decided with a pronounced

judgment for reasons of public order. Deliberations of the inyangamugayo were

conducted in private. Every Gacaca court held a hearing at least once per week

usually beginning at 8:30am and finishing at 4:00pm.

Whoever was to be summoned to appear before the court, whether accused,

witness, victim or any other person, had to be informed at least seven days

before the trial. If the defendant had neither a known address nor residence in

Rwanda, the summons period was one month.

At every hearing, the president of the court requested all those present to

observe a minute of silence in memory of the victims of genocide. Before

testifying, the witness had to take an oath and swear to tell the truth. The sessions

were governed by a set of eight rules which ensured the proper and respectful

functioning of the hearing. These included, those present raising their hand to

speak, a prohibition on insults or threats and an obligation to always tell the

truth among others.

10.1.3 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 commercialising 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 as

gutanga 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.

For centuries the cow has been considered as a symbol of prosperity in Rwanda

and was used in barter trade before colonisation. For these reasons, the whole

chain of social relationships across the country has been built around cattle for

generations. This remains true up-to-date.

The 20^th century experienced a dramatic shift in the social understanding of what

it meant to own cattle in Rwanda. Before colonisation, there was little distinction

between cattle keepers and those who cultivated. Herders and cultivators often

worked together to achieve greater agricultural production. During this time

while owning cattle was associated with being rich, herders and cultivators alike

faced the challenges of drought, poor soil fertility and the country’s topography.

The arrival of colonisation, however, brought a change in these understandings

and cultural practices. The cow was used to divide Rwandans along “ethnic” lines

and cattle became a symbol of elitism and a commodity reserved only for a

portion of the country’s people.

While significant progress had been made since the genocide in improving the

livelihoods of its people, Rwanda continued to face high levels of poverty and

childhood malnutrition. It was with these indicators in mind that Girinka was

established in 2006.

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 survey showed that in some parts of the country (such as Bugesera), up to

40% of the households were food insecure. The Demographic Health Survey of

2005 indicated that 45% of Rwandan children under the age of five had

moderate chronic malnutrition and 19% had severe chronic malnutrition. At that

time, 90% of the Rwandans lived in households that owned some farming land,

and more than 60% of the households cultivated less than 0.7 hectares of land,

according to the EICV2. It was these factors that provided the catalyst for the

Girinka programme.

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

the program.

The program is structured in two phases. First, a community member identified

as someone who would greatly benefit from owning a cow is given a pregnant

dairy cow. That person benefits from its milk and manure production. Beneficiaries

are then obliged to give the first born female calf to another worthy beneficiary in

their community. This is known as the ‘pass on’ principle, or kuziturirana/kwitura.

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 Girinkaprogram 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.

10.1.4 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 socioeconomic 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

or head of institution.

While Imihigo are now widely used across government, it first began at the

district level. When developing its Imihigo, each local government administrative

unit determines its own objectives (with measurable indicators) taking into

account national priorities as highlighted in the national as well as international

strategy and policy documents such as the MDGs, Vision 2020, EDPRS, District

Development Plans (DDPs) and Sector Development Plans (SDPs). The Imihigo, at

both planning and reporting phases, are presented to the public for the purpose

of accountability and transparency. The mayors and province governors also

sign the Imihigo or performance contracts with Rwanda’s President committing

themselves to achieving set objectives. The Imihigo process ensures the full

participation and ownership of citizens because priorities are developed at the

grassroots level.

Between 2006 and 2009 a limited evaluation process took place whereby the best

ten performing districts from across the nation were reviewed (two from each

province and the City of Kigali). Each province and the City of Kigali would rank

the performance of their districts with the top two then communicated to the

national evaluation team. This team then conducted their own review and ranked

them from 1-10. This approach suffered from significant limitations including

the fact that it was not possible to objectively compare the performance of all

districts because while one province may have had better performing districts

than another, this system did not allow that to be discovered. Due to these

shortcomings, a nation-wide district Imihigo evaluation exercise was conducted

in 2010 for all the thirty districts. A national evaluation committee with technical

expertise and experience conducts this process.

Undertaken by a multi-sector team of experts from government, the private

sector and civil society institutions, the first Imihigo evaluation was launched on May

11, 2010 and completed on June 17, 2010. The evaluation exercise was significant

because it was the first time that the Government of Rwanda had thoroughly

assessed the degree to which district priorities and targets were realised against

their Imihigo. The exercise acknowledged key achievements and challenges in

the areas of planning, implementation, reporting and communication.

Principles and objectives of Imihigo

Imihigo are guided by the following principles:

Local: Each district decides what goes into its  Imihigo. However alignment with

national priorities is required.

Ambitious: Pledges are made to achieve only what has not already been gained or

achieved.

Excellence: Imihigo is about outstanding performance.

Imihigo aims at:

• speeding up implementation of the local and national development agenda.

• promoting accountability and transparency.

• promoting result-oriented performance.

• instilling innovation and encourage competitiveness.

• engaging stakeholders (citizens, civil society, donors, private sector, etc) in

policy formulation and evaluation.

• promoting zeal and determination to achieve set goals.

• instilling the culture of regular performance evaluation.

Imihigo preparation process

Imihigo and action plans are used by the Government of Rwanda to define

goals, targets and objectives. While different in their purpose, the two tools

are interlinked. The action plan is a set of activities to be achieved within a set

time period, usually a period of one year. Imihigo are a subset of the action plan

showing priority activities to be used as a performance measure.  The action

plan may contain any number of activities of a routine nature such as payment

of salaries whereas Imihigo define targets that have a significant impact on

economic development, poverty reduction, good governance and social

welfare.

When Imihigo are developed, the Rwandan Government leaders are advised

to ask some key questions before including activities in Imihigo. Activities

that answer positively to the questions outlined below are given priority

consideration.

1. Will the activity impact positively on the welfare of the local population

(water access, transport, energy access, schools, etc.)?

2. Does it create jobs for the local population?

3. Does it create income generating opportunities for  the population/local

government?

4. Does it have an impact on poverty reduction?

5. Is it a priority for the residents in the area?

6. Does the activity have synergy with development of other areas (an

activity may have potential to impact development in neighbouring

areas)?

7. Is the activity sustainable or are the results sustainable?

8. Is there ownership from the local population for the activity?

9. Does it help to achieve the national targets and is it linked to the national

and international priorities, programs or policies (MDGs, EDPRS, Vision

2020)?

10. Can the activity produce quality results/outputs with minimum resources?

11. Can it improve the way services are delivered or reduce costs?

12. Does the activity promote social cohesion (unity and reconciliation)?

13. Does the activity reduce social disturbances (insecurity, drug abuse,

prostitution, environmental degradation, conflicts, corruption, etc.)?

14. Does it address key cross cutting issues (gender, HIV/AIDS, environment,

social inclusion and youth)?

15. Has the source of funds for implementation been determined?

16. Is it realistic and can it be achieved?

Imihigo is the result of a participatory process of identifying and implementing

priorities from the grassroots to the national level. In the process of identifying

priorities, each level demonstrates its contribution to the achievement of the

development goals. The table below describes who prepares Imihigo from the

individual to provincial level.

Step 1: Identification of national priorities by the central government

Each ministry identifies national priorities to be implemented at local levels

for which they have earmarked resources that they will transfer to local

governments.

Consultation on the following policies and programs occurs:

• Vision 2020.

• Economic Development and Poverty Reduction Strategy (EDPRS).

• Government of Rwanda programs and policies.

• National Leadership Retreat and National Dialogue resolutions.

• Cabinet resolutions.

• Three Year Medium Term Expenditure Framework (MTEF).

• Five Year District Development Plan (DDP).

• Millennium Development Goals (MDGs).

• Seven Year Government Program.

Where they do not have earmarked resources, line ministries identify how the

resources, whether financial or non-financial, can be mobilised (both national

and local).The central government consolidates the priorities paying special

attention to areas of quick wins and synergy while avoiding duplication.

Step 2: Communication of national priorities to the local government

The list of central government priorities is communicated and discussed with

local government leaders at a forum of central and local government leaders.

Step 3: Identification of local priorities

District leaders  consult their District Development Plans (DDPs). Consultative

meetings with different stakeholders are held at province/Kigali City, districts,

sector, cell and village levels to discuss and consolidate the emerging priorities.

Step 4: Preparation and approval

Firstly, districts consult their respective DDPs and national priorities as

communicated in the forum/meeting between central and local governments.

Secondly, local and national priorities at district level are consolidated.

Thirdly, the draft (for district and province/City of Kigali) is discussed with

Quality Assurance Technical Team (from the Ministry of Local Government and

Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning). Fourth, priorities are presented to

stakeholders. Finally, priorities are approved.

The Quality Assurance Technical Team was set up to assist the districts and

provinces/Kigali City in preparing tangible Imihigo that respond to national

targets. The Quality Assurance Technical Team is composed of members of the

Imihigo evaluation team, the Office of the Prime Minister (PMO), the Ministry of

Local Government (MINALOC) and Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning

(MINECOFIN) as well as all sector ministries that are part of decentralisation

including:

• Ministry of Health

• Ministry of Education

• Ministry of Agriculture

• Ministry of Infrastructure

• Ministry of Trade and Industry

The team gives regular feedback to district planners during the process of

preparing Imihigo. District leaders across Rwanda are asked to prepare plans

that are realistic, take into account the cost of delivering services as well as the

available resources. To make sure that proper monitoring and evaluation can

be conducted, indicators, targets and outputs must be clearly identified in the

planning process.

Monitoring and evaluation

A full evaluation of Imihigo takes place once a year. Evaluation teams are

established to carry out the process in all districts (each province and the City of

Kigali). The terms of reference for the team are distributed to all team members

beforehand to ensure proper understanding of the exercise.

The evaluation team is made up of people with skills in planning, monitoring

and evaluation (this might include a director general, coordinators and experts).

Objectivity is also assessed to make sure that any person with potential bias is

excluded from the team.

The methodology for the evaluation (including scoring) is developed and

communicated to local government in advance of the evaluation exercise. The

evaluation used is a standard template developed against the Imihigo of each

district.

After analysing the Imihigo reports received from the districts, the evaluation

team conducts field visits to specific activities for verification and assessment

purposes.

After the field visits and verification of selected activities, the team scores/

assesses performance against Imihigo targets and provides a written report.

Assessment and evaluation of Imihigo at local levels below the sector level is

managed by the district including setting up the planning, reporting, evaluation

guidelines and timelines consistent with the higher level framework.

Reporting

Districts report their Imihigo progress to the provincial level on a monthly

basis. Reporting to the national level is completed quarterly (in line with

the timelines of the EDPRS). An assessment of the progress in implementing

Imihigo is done after six months, while a full evaluation is done at the end of

each fiscal year. The assessment and evaluation of Imihigo is conducted by the

National Evaluation Team whose composition is shown in the table above.

10.1.5 Itorero - Civic education

Activity

Using internet and textbooks in your school library, explain in not more than

500 words your understanding of civic education with specific examples to

Rwanda.

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 behaviour 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 behaviour among the rest of his family

and his community.

At the king’s court level, the person selected to join this highest level of

Itorero could either be the son of a man who went through the king’s Itorero or

a young man who distinguished himself while in the chief’s Itorero. The king

could also select the young man who would join his Itorero based on his own

observations of the candidate in action.

Both the chief and king’s itorero trainings lasted for long periods of time to

test the perseverance of the participants. Those who performed well would

be rewarded with cows, allowed to return home and get married, or were

nominated to various national duties.  Intore  who distinguished themselves

were called Intore zo ku mukondo, which translates as the ‘frontline Intore’.

During colonisation, traditional Itorero gradually disappeared because the

core values taught did not align with the structures established in society. In

1924, the colonial administration prohibited classic Itorero. The Itorero during

and after the colonial period were different in the sense that they focused

on singing and dancing, whereas the other core civic education components

of Itorero, such as respect and good relationships with others, were no longer

taught.

Contemporary Itorero

In the after math of the Genocide against the Tutsi, the Government of Rwanda

reintroduced Itorero in view of societal transformation. This HGS translated as

Civic Education Program, was adopted following the 4thUmwiherero (National

Leadership Retreat) in February 2007.

Contemporary Itorero includes physical activities along with classes on

Rwandan history that reintroduce some of the cultural values lost during

colonisation. Training is adapted for the group participating in Itorero. For

example, health workers have been trained on activities relevant to their

profession, while local leaders have been trained on service delivery and good

governance.

National Itorero Commission

The Government of Rwanda established the National Itorero Commission with

the objective of mobilizing Rwandans to uphold important cultural values

and the culture of  intore. The commission was entrusted with developing

a program that  allowed Rwandans from diverse backgrounds to undertake

personal development and contribute to the wellbeing of the communities

where they live or that they serve. The Itorero program provides opportunities

for participants to enhance positive values, build a sense of responsibility

through patriotism and gain professional knowledge.

The values at the core of contemporary Itorero are unity, patriotism,

selflessness, integrity, responsibility, volunteerism and humility.

Participants

Itorero is designed for all Rwandans. Different curricula have been developed

to suit the program’s varied participants.

Children of seven years and above take part in their imidugudu, villages, to help

them grow up to become responsible citizens. Compulsory National Service

(Urugerero) is designed for those between the ages of 18 and 35 who have

completed secondary education.

 Others keen to participate are given the opportunity to do so according to

their professional backgrounds.

Rwandan citizens living abroad also join  Urugerero  and a number of young

Rwandans have organised Itorero in cities including London and Brussels.

 Non-nationals desiring to participate and provide service to the country

can also do so. University graduates and retired people who participated

in Urugerero  before and wish to do so again are also given the opportunity

to join Itorero.    Participants come from each administrative level across the

country.

Below is a table which explains who joins Itorero and from which level:

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.

Main objectives of contemporary ingando

• Providing a platform for the exchange of ideas and experience among

Rwandans.

• Encouraging Rwandans to better manage their communities.

• Encouraging self-reliance within the community.

• Promoting a culture of volunteerism among Rwandans.

• Leading every section of the population towards peace and reconciliation.

• Promoting social cohesion through civic education.

• Assisting in building shelters for disadvantaged genocide survivors and other

vulnerable citizens.

A range of topics such as the man and the universe; the History of Rwanda,

human rights and conflict management; the Rwandan nation; good

governance and the economy and social welfare are discussed during ingando.

Ingando trainings restarted in 1997 and were organised by the Ministry

of Youth, Sports and Culture. The first contemporary Ingando was held in

Karangazi, Nyagatare District, and Eastern Province and brought together

young people, students and others from the region of Byumba. The event

facilitated the social reintegration of  recently returned refugees who had come

back from the Democratic Republic of the Congo. After the National Unity and

Reconciliation Commission (NURC) was established and organised Ingando

trainings from 1999. These trainings received logistics and financial support

from the government and non-governmental agencies including:

• Ministry of Education (MINEDUC) for the lists of high school graduates going

to Universities;

• Ministry of Health (MINISANTE) for health-related presentations;

• Ministry of Internal Security (MININTER) for the security of the camps and its

participants;

• Ministry of Defence (MINADEF) for the morning sports activities;

• World Food Program;

• UNICEF for mothers participating in the trainings.

These trainings had a socio-economic aspect as they included community

service activities and allowed for the demystification of the government. The

trainees wore military uniform to make them at ease around the military,

reduce any fear associated with the uniform and  so they could experience

life outside of their comfort zones and learn how to survive  physically and

mentally  during difficult times. The trainings aimed at changing the negative

perceptions about different aspects of the government and reduce the

distance some people perceived between themselves, the government and its

policies.   Ingando aimed to teach participants how to face certain challenges

and overcome them.

Ingando graduates learned new skills to help them find new ways to become

more financially stable and organise themselves into cooperatives. In the case

of students, those who went to Ingando showed their aptitude at resolving

conflicts and fighting genocide ideologies in their schools and universities.

The trainings for genocide perpetrators also helped during the Gacaca

trials as participants talked about the roles they played during genocide

and confessed their crimes. Telling the truth helped to create an environment

that allowed for the perpetrators to return to their villages and do community

service activities to help rebuild the lives of the victims.

The activities of Ingando included various groups of students until 2007

when another Home Grown Solution,  Itorero  (Civic Education Program) was

launched. Students in Rwanda and abroad began participating in Itorero, which

focused on the reintroduction of lost cultural values in order to strengthen

different communities. 

The groups that continue to take part in Ingando are those striving to be

reintegrated into mainstream society, such as former combatants who recently

returned home, war veterans, and those who worked in the informal sector.

10.1.7 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

Ubudehe is 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.

Colonisation and the introduction of a cash-based economy weakened the

practice of Ubudehe as some members of the community were able to recruit

some people to perform agricultural works for payment. While this trend

occurred across the country, in some places Ubudehe was still practiced until

the 1980s.

Contemporary Ubudehe

Contemporary Ubudehe is a poverty reduction initiative by the Government of

Rwanda which provides communities with the skills and support necessary to engage

in problem solving and decision making for their development. This programme

was conceived through a set of meetings of political, social, legal and religious

leaders between 1998 and 1999 known as the Urugwiro Debates. These gatherings

discussed the most pressing issues concerning national reconstruction after

the 1994 Genocide against the Tutsi.  The Urugwiro Debates prioritised policies

and programs that promoted collective action and that upheld the principles of

decentralisation.

After Urugwiro Debates, Ubudehe was reintroduced into Rwandan life in 2001

as way to better involve communities in their development by setting up

participatory problem solving mechanisms. The program helps citizens to use

local institutions to achieve goals set by the community. 

The program was seen as a way to strengthen democratic processes and good

governance through greater community involvement in decision making

process. In this regard, Ubudehe creates opportunities for people at all levels of

the society, especially the village level, to interact with one another, share ideas,

create institutions and make decisions for their collective development.

Ubudehe has its roots in the Participatory Poverty Assessment (PPA) whereby

citizens would self identify as poor or otherwise according to a set of criteria.

The objective of the PPA was to help community groups and some poor

households to create their own problem solving strategies.

Evolution of Ubudehe

The programme was reinstituted and launched in a pilot phase in Butare

prefecture (known today as Huye) by the Ministry of Finance and Economic

Planning and the Ministry of Local Government in 2001. The pilot covered all

769 cellules in the prefecture and was funded through a €1 million grant from

the European Union. The pilot was carried out as a way for the government to

test the methodology of Ubudehe as well as to demonstrate its potential for

nationwide adoption. After a positive assessment at the end of the two year

pilot, Ubudehe was rolled out nationally.

The national roll out of Ubudehe took place between 2004 and 2006 as the

programme was officially adopted as a national policy overseen by the Ministry

of Local Government. Funding of €10 million (8,000,000,000 RWF) was provided

by the European Union. In 2005, an additional €200,000 (160,000,000) was

injected into the program.

A consolidation of Ubudehe took place between 2007 and 2012. This was

at the same time as an administrative restructure which saw the creation of

14,837 villages (umudugudu) as the lowest level of government organisation.

In 2011-12, Ubudehe was conducted in ten districts and in 2012-13 Ubudehe

was conducted in 15 districts. 

The Government of Rwanda planned to carry out Ubudehe in the 20 districts

by 2014.

How Ubudehe works

• Identifying and analysing the problems facing the community and determine

a priority problem to be addressed.

• Planning the activities and resources needed for addressing the prioritised

problem through a collective action plan (Ubudehe).

• Putting in place a system to manage the identified collective action.

• Assisting people to classify the level and type of poverty that exists in their

community and reach a common understanding of this classification.

• Drawing up the social map of the cell showing the names of household heads,

their social category (different categories are again decided by the people

themselves) and development infrastructure.

• Helping communities define their development priorities.

• Bringing communities together to discuss and decide upon the most

effective and efficient ways to achieve poverty reduction and their

development priorities.

• Helping communities establish ways of funding their development plans, at a

group and individual level.

To achieve these aims, participating villages across Rwanda come together over

a period of four to seven days (at times convenient to the community such as

after farming activities) to complete the Ubudehe process. This process takes

place at the beginning of the financial year. 

Meetings are chaired by the President of the local Ubudehe Committee and the

village leader. They usually last for three hours each day. Ubudehe takes place at

both the umudugudu (village) and household level through similar processes.

The first three steps described below are carried out every two years while the

remaining are carried out each year.

• Determine the poverty profile as perceived by the people themselves.

• Determine the causes and consequences of poverty.

• Submit the action plan to an applicability test for all stakeholders to see if the

strategies are the best to solve the identified problem.

• Check if collective action principles are respected.

The management committee, elected by the community, local technicians,

local authorities and other stakeholders approve the execution of the collective

action and engage to safeguard and respect the principles of collective action.

After this process, funds are made available to support the identified Ubudehe

collective action.

At the household level, one household is chosen to undergo the Ubudehe

process to assist it in overcoming poverty. The purpose of singling out one

household is to provide the community with a model that can be followed.

The household’s coping strategies are analysed before the following process is

undertaken with the assistance of trained Ubudehe facilitators. A compatibility

test is then carried out by people of integrity in the community (inyangamugayo)

to make sure that the retained strategy is appropriate and will be of good use

to the household. The household members finally accept and sign for the funds

that are accorded to them. They agree that the funds supporting the execution

of their strategy will have a rotating character.

A key part of Ubudehe is the residents of a community defining the levels of

poverty that exist in their village. This process takes place every two years and

the information is used to decide development priorities as well as who should

benefit from other social security programs and Home Grown Solutions such

as Umuganda and Girinka. 

10.1.8 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 neighbours 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 organising Umuganda and

citizens had little say in this process. Because penalties were imposed for

non-participation, 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 and

reporting 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 since 2007 has been estimated at more than US $60

million (48,000,000,000 RWF.

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. 

10.1.9 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.

In modern times, the Government of Rwanda is drawing on this tradition

to reflect on, and address the challenges the country faces on an annual

basis. Umwiherero is organised by the Office of the President in conjunction

with the Office of the Prime Minister. The President chairs Umwiherero during

which presentations and discussions centre on a broad range of development

challenges, including economics, politics, justice, infrastructure, health,

education and others. Contemporary Umwiherero was intended exclusively

for senior public officials but has evolved to include leaders from the private

sector as well as civil society.

Since its inception, organisers of Umwiherero have adopted numerous initiatives

to improve the implementation of resolutions agreed upon at each retreat.

By 2011, these efforts resulted into noticeable improvements in planning,

coordination, and accountability leading to clearer and more concise priorities.

In 2011, six priorities were identified, down from 174 in 2009, allowing for

more effective delivery and implementation of Umwiherero resolutions.

Application activity 10.1

1. Use your own words to explain the following concepts of home-grown

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.

4. Basing on the concepts of home-grown initiative, identify and explain

other examples of home-grown initiatives found in Rwanda not stated

in the section 10.1.

5. Use the internet and other available documents to discuss how

Agaciro is a home-grown initiative.

10.2 Contribution of home-grown solutions towards good governance, self-reliance and dignity

Activity 10.2

“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.

The cultural based policies have contributed a lot in helping getting some

socio-economic solutions that were not possible to get otherwise.

10.2.1 Contribution of abunzi

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 ability to mitigate conflicts between litigants (80.1%).

• Other advantages mentioned are the participation of citizens in the mediation

process (67.3%) and freedom to choose a judge by the complainant and defendant (56.7%).

Best Practices

The best practices from mediation committees are as follows:

• Pre-hearing counselling:  Before cases are heard, mediators call on  both

complainant and defendant to emphasize the importance of social cohesion

and conflict resolution through community mediation. In some instances,

both parties may opt to withdraw the case at this point, and come instead to a

mutual agreement. In other cases, litigants are more inclined to accept, rather

than appeal, the mediation decision as a result of the counseling.

• Reduced social distance between parties and mediators:  Since mediators are

members of the same community from which disputants come, the latter feel

less intimidated and more comfortable expressing themselves during those

sessions, whether in public or in camera.

• Integrity over legal  literacy: The majority of the participants insisted that the

question of integrity, which determine the selection of mediators, confer

more “trust and confidence” in the committees and fostered an environment

in which justice prevailed.

• Parties’ freedom to choose mediators: This was another factor highlighted by

participants who felt that the freedom to choose mediators helped ensure

equal treatment during mediation and reduced the likelihood of corruption.

• Win-Win approach: During mediation, Abunzi avoid referring to either party as

“winner” or “loser” as these words could create resentment and further contribute to the atmosphere of conflict. The goal of these mediations is to find

lasting solutions through reconciliation, hence the avoidance of such words.

10.2.2 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.

Number of trials judged by Gacaca per category

10.2.3 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

(79%) or about 1,717,000 households had acceptable food consumption and

could be considered food secure. Others either had poor food consumption

(82,000 households, representing 4% of all the households) or borderline food

consumption patterns (378,000 households, 17%), adding up to a total of 21%

of food insecure households in Rwanda. These figures show a 7% decrease in

food insecure households since 2006 at which time the figure was 28% according

to the CFSVA report of 2006.

Livestock ownership

The   Third Integrated Household Living Conditions Survey (EICV III)  of 2012

indicated that 4% of all Rwandan households received a cow under the OneCow per Poor family policy. The highest rate was seen in the Eastern Province

(7%). Animal production and the integration of livestock into smallholder

farming is a key contributor to food security. Animal products are a good source

of proteins and lipids and, in times of crisis, livestock functions as a shock

absorber, contributing to the resilience of poor households. 

According to the  CFSVA and Nutrition Survey 2012, 70% of all households in

Rwanda own some type of livestock. Results of the EICV III of 2012 showed that

in comparison to 2005/2006, higher proportions of households are now able to

afford cattle at 47% nationally (up from 34%). The survey also showed that the

percentage of livestock-owning households owning cattle increased to 47.3% in

2012, up from 34.4% in 2005/2006.

Health outcomes

While Girinka cannot be credited with single-handedly for improving the

health outcomes across Rwanda, the program has certainly played a part in

reducing the level of malnutrition across the population, in particular among

children under five years. According to the  Demographic Health Survey  of

2010, the percentage of stunted children fell from 51% in 2005, to 44% in 2010,

and the percentage of underweight children fell from 18% to 11%.

Reconciliation and unity

Girinka has played a significant role in post genocide reconstruction in Rwanda.

During the colonial period, the cow was used to divide Rwandans along

ethnic lines and cattle became a symbol of elitism and a commodity reserved

only for a portion of the country’s people.

Girinka has changed what it means to own cattle in Rwanda. While the

symbolism of prosperity is still attached to the cow, by giving cattle to the

poorest in society, the program has helped to end the divisive perception

surrounding owning cattle. The ‘pass on’ component of Girinka, whereby a

recipient gifts the first born calf to a neighbour, has helped to rebuild social

relationships which had been destroyed during the 1994 Genocide against

the Tutsi. This is because the giving of a cow to someone or “Gutanga Inka”

translated as “sealing a bond of friendship” remains a cultural practice owned,

understood and valued by Rwandans.

10.2.4 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).

Since the inception of Imihigo in 2006, the following results and best practices were

observed:

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 realise 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.

9YBE (Nine Years Basic Education): All districts evaluated made substantial

progress in classroom construction, made possible by the willingness of the

community to play a role in the districts’ development programmes, particularly

Imihigo. This was as a result of awareness raising campaigns and mobilisation

efforts to encourage citizens to own their development activities.

VUP (Vision 2020 Umurenge Programme): Programmes implemented under VUP

substantially improved the welfare of citizens and facilitated the implementation

of government policies such as SACCO, terracing and road construction. 

Community assemblies (Inteko z’Abaturage):  The function of Community

Assemblies was reasonably understood, taking place once a month to

resolve various community problems. This was evidenced by the fact that very

few unresolved problems reached the district level.

Citizen participation and ownership of government programmes:  Most of the

citizens contacted during the field visits were aware of, and actively participated

in government programs especially the health insurance scheme, SACCOs,

12YBEs, Girinka and adult literacy. Citizen participation in the Imihigo process

was especially visible in rural areas.

Health statistics such as those of maternal and child mortality, accessibility of

maternal and child care, and accessibility to health insurance (Mutuelle de Santé)

revealed improved levels of health care for Rwandans.

Land use consolidation: Through programs such as Umuganda, TIG (Travail

d’Intérêt Général, meaning community service done by prisoners) and the one

village one product program, selected crops such as wheat, Irish potatoes,

coffee, tea, and beans were cultivated extensively.

Improvement of agricultural  production:  Significant efforts were made by the

districts in mobilizing and advising farmers on how to improve farming, notably

among which was land use consolidation (maize, rice, coffee, tea, cassava,

potatoes, banana and beans) which helps to guarantee national food security.

Infrastructure development:  A significant number of infrastructure projects

were completed including roads and bridges, hospitals  and  health centres,

classrooms and  toilet facilities, houses for vulnerable people, modern markets,

selling points, drying grounds, street lighting and housing development

in urban areas, trading centres and administrative offices. There was great

improvement in distribution of electricity and water in both urban and rural

areas. In addition, there was evidence in most districts of small scale factories

being started, especially those involved in agro-based products being initiating.

Greening and beautification:  Reasonable effort was made to plant grass and

flowers at most public buildings such as district, sectors and cell offices, schools,

health and trading centres. In other places, especially at district level, pavements

were laid. Land registration improved drastically where the lowest performing

districts have registered 60% of lands.

Rural settlement(imidugudu):  There was a general improvement in mobilizing

citizens to build in areas set aside for communal villages. This was accelerated

by setting up basic infrastructure like roads, water supply and power. The

eradication of grass thatched houses and the construction of houses for

vulnerable people was also a contributing factor to this success. 

10.2.5 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.

Instilling the culture of unity, truth and hard work among Rwandans: in 2009, Itorero

ry’Igihugu was launched in all districts of the country. Each district’s regiment

presented their performance contracts at that colourful 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 identification

name. 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.

Achievements Made Through Urugerero Program:Plans to implement Urugerero

(National Service) started towards the end of 2012 and the actual implementation

started in 2013. Despite this short time, however, Urugerero program has started

to yield impressive results. Students who completed Secondary School since

2012 went through Itorero mentorship.

Upon the completion of the prescribed course, participants were given the

certificates, but later on they had to undergo practical exercise of Urugerero

organized through various activities designed to promote social cohesion and

community wellness in particular, and boost national development in general.

The achievements of Urugerero can be categorized as follows:

• Sensitizing Rwandans on the eradication of genocide and its ideology.

• Encouraging all Rwandans to participate in activities organized to

commemorate the 1994 Genocide against the Tutsi .

• Sensitizing the community on the importance of mutual health insurance.

• Sensitization on adult literacy.

• Sensitizing the community in general and the youth in particular, to fight

against drug abuse.

• Sensitizing the community on the importance of legalizing their marriages

especially for families that are just cohabitating.

• Organizing meetings at village levels aimed at educating the community on

Rwandan cultural values, unity, patriotism, and development.

• Sensitizing the community to participate in ceremonies organized to honour

the national heroes and the International Women’s Day.

• Educating the population on personal hygiene and cleanliness of their

environment.

• Sensitizing the population on environmental protection.

• Sensitizing the communities on the culture of saving via SACCOs and other

nearby banking institutions.

In line with the above achievements, Urugerero participants did different

activities related for instance to data collection; service provision and delivery;

communal work; promotion of volunteerism in national development

programmes and partnership with other stakeholders.

Partakers in Urugerero did data collectionrelated to illiterate people; people

not yet registered for mutual health insurance; potential tax payers; school

drop outs and children of school going age who are not yet in school; illegal

marriages. Making inventories of districts’ properties was also done by Urugerero

participants.

Other Urugerero activities are related to manual community work such as

vegetable gardening for family consumption; shelters construction for

vulnerable families; participation in the construction of cell offices and their

compounds’ landscaping.

In the area of environmental protection, Intore constructed terraces and planted

trees as a measure of preventing soil erosion,

Regarding activities related to service provision and delivery, some groups of

Intore in Urugerero opted to demonstrate how speedy and exceptional service

could be rendered while working with various public offices. This kind of

support work was done in Health Centers, Cell offices, District offices, especially

in the services relating to issuing of documents, data entry in computers and

customer care. 

Intore contributed to activities related to the Volunteer Services in National

Development Programmes. In the Rwandan culture, “volunteerism” means

rendering a sacrificial and selfless service out of love either to a national cause or

to a needy neighbour. According to the policy of Itorero ry’ Igihugu, volunteerism

refers to any unpaid communal work, voluntarily undertaken in the service of

the nation.

Volunteerism is reflected in various community works such as Umuganda, Ubudehe

and contributions to a common cause. Other voluntary activities include those of

community mediators, various councils, community health workers, Community

Policing Committees/CPCs, Red Cross volunteers, etc.

Regarding partnership with other Organs/Stakeholders Itorero ry’ Igihugu as a homegrown educational institution was revived to complement existing Government

organs and initiatives, civil society organizations, and religious institutions in their

work of moulding Rwandans with appropriate moral values.

It is in this regard that Itorero ry’Igihugu has sought partnership with these

institutions, especially for the purpose of harnessing synergy in availing

resources (financial, human and materials) with the aim of speeding up the

desired transformation. Each stakeholder has contributed in the programs

of Itorero ry’ Igihugu and this has made Itorero, an exemplary partnership

undertaking. 

10.2.6 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.

10.2.7 The contribution of Ubudehe

Ubudehe has been recognised 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 characterised by centralised 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.

10.2.8 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.

Environmental protection projects undertaken include tree planting and

terracing to fight erosion, wetland rehabilitation, renewable energy

construction and crop planting.

From 2007 to 2010/11, the activities valuated at 26,397,939,119 Rwf consisted

mainly of  the construction of houses for vulnerable people, roads, classrooms

for the Nine Year Basic Education Programme (9YBE), health centres, public

offices, tree planting, terracing and other infrastructures to protect against

erosion.

To measure the impact of Umuganda and encourage greater participation, the

Government of Rwanda introduced the National Umuganda Competition in

2009. The aim of the competition is to create awareness of the best projects

carried out, award communities that have completed good initiatives and to

encourage communities to plan properly and maintain what they have achieved.

The competition includes all levels of Rwandan society from the village up to

the national level. The best activity in each district is awarded with a certificate

and funding for future projects, and th

e best three projects in each province are

awarded prizes. The best three projects from across Rwanda are awarded a

cash prize of between US $1,500 (1,200,000 RWF) and $2,300 (1,840,000 RWF).

Umuganda is also credited with assisting in reconciliation and peace building in Rwanda. This is because neighbours are brought together to build their

community and have the opportunity to discuss problems and solve them

collectively. 

10.2.9 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, 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 their mandate 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. 

The retreat sets a scene for every leader to be held accountable. Ultimately,

this provides an opportunity for leaders to forge a better future for Rwanda.

The organization, implementation and outcomes of Umwiherero have vastly

improved and significant achievements recorded. The focus has been to

make number of key priorities that makes it easier for meaningful discussions

and effective implementation. The retreats are also credited with significantly

improving coordination and cooperation between government ministries and

agencies. This time round, priorities might not be just small in number, but much

more challenging and tougher. 

Application activity 10.2

1. Analyse 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. Analyse the contribution of home-grown initiatives to unity and

reconciliation of Rwandans.

4. Evaluate the role of umuganda as a home-grown solution.

10.3 Challenges encountered during the implementation of home - grown solutions

Activity 10.3

Discuss in not more than 500 words challenges encountered in Girinka

programme and how they can be handled.

10.3.1 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 files.

• 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 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.

10.3.2 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 fleeing their communities and

claiming that they were threatened because of Gacaca.

• In some cases there was corruption and favouritism in decision making.

10.3.3 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. 

A lack of feed factories in the country has hindered efforts to properly

feed some of the cattle affecting their health and productivity. The Ministry of

Agriculture worked with investors who have shown interest in building feed

factories in Nyagatare, Kayonza and Kicukiro.  In some instances, the cost of

management inputs has been high and in some districts there has been a

delay in utilisation of earmarked fund. Decentralisation of the programme has

helped address this.

Provision of additional services (especially veterinary services and artificial insemination) has been limited in some cases due a shortage of skilled staff with

relevant training. This has affected the cows’ milk production and the ‘pass on’

system.

With regards to bank loans, some farmers received cows that were overpriced.

As a resolution, farmers who were overcharged are required to pay the bank the

actual cost of the cow only through a new contract with the difference paid by

those who were responsible for over costing.

Poor management by inexperienced farmers has increased the mortality for

some cows. A shortage of land requires an intensification program in cattle

management practices which can sometimes have adverse impacts on the cows

such as increase in disease prevalence. To address this, beneficiaries now receive

training about modern farming practices prior to receiving their cow.

10.3.4 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 effort

to implement.

• The practice of consistent tracking of implementation progress, reporting and

filing is generally still weak.

• Some targets were not achieved because of district partners who did not fulfil

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.

10.3.5 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;

• Training modules and internal regulations and procedures governing Itorero

programmes not yet refined;

• Low level of understanding the important role of Itorero ry’ 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 relating to the

promotion of Ubutore culture in their plan of action.

10.3.6 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. 

10.3.7 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.

Project Implementation

The major challenges of project implementation are with the community

choosing a project and then completing the project.

Communities sometimes have difficulty defining the problems affecting their

development and struggle to know how best to prioritise the projects and

select the most crucial project to execute. Challenges also sometimes arise

when communities are required to choose one household to act as a model for

the village. This can be a point of contention because that household receives

significant resources to carrying out its Ubudehe development plan.

To overcome these challenges, the programme has increased training provided

to communities on how to select and prioritise projects. In deciding which

household will be the model for the village, the community is required to vote

which helps members support the decision.

At the household level it has been observed that some beneficiaries have

struggled to manage the funds or resources they received. In some cases,

households spent the money on things other than their project or sold the

livestock they received. To overcome this challenge, the Ubudehe Committee at

the village level has been tasked to provide regular follow up and support.

10.3.8 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.

A mobilisation strategy is currently being devised which includes ideas about

how to streamline the laws and policies governing Umuganda so that they

are more easily understood. This is also to ensure that they are in line with the

National Community and Local Development Strategy. The City of Kigali is also

embarking on a process to find the best ways to encourage those living in urban

areas to take part in Umuganda.

The Ministry of Local Government has begun a partnership with South Korea to

learn from the community work practice there known as Saemual Undong. This

is part of attempts to learn from the best practices all over the world as well as

share Rwanda’s experience with other countries. 

10.3.9 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 a 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 10.3

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.

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 unity and

reconciliation.

GLOSSARY

Challengethe situation of being faced with) something needing great mental

or physical effort in order to be done successfully and which therefore tests a

person’s ability

Contribution: something that you do or give to help produce or achieve

something together with other people, or to help make something successful

Dignity: calm, serious and controlled behaviour that makes people respect you

Goal: an aim or purpose

Governance: way of using controlling influence on something, on a country or

organization

Leadership: the set of characteristics that make a good leader