History

Introduction

After the 1994 Genocide against the Tutsi, the Government of Rwanda managed

to make a number of achievements in the promotion of democracy, unity,

reconciliation and j ustice.

In the area of democracy, the democratisation process culminated into the

establishment of elected institutions both at national and local levels. In 2003, a new

constitution was adopted, presidential and parliamentary were organised. This

Constitution guarantees media freedom and provides for media self-regulation. It

also has as focal point the principle of multi-party system and separation of powers.

In addition, according to the Rwandan Constitution and the principle of power

sharing, a political organisation holding the majority of seats in the Chamber of

Deputies cannot have more than fifty (50%) per cent of Cabinet members.

Moreover, the rule of law, one of the facets of constitutionalism in Rwanda is

respected since state institutions act in accordance with the law. The situation of

Human rights and security is well maintained. The government of Rwanda has

promoted unity and reconciliation by using different mechanisms including the

creation of the Gacaca courts and engaging the Rwandan people in dialogue on

various issues of Genocide.

A number of achievements have also been made in judiciary whereby the justice

structure has been revised and strengthened. New courts like Gacaca jurisdictions

and commercial courts were created. Besides, Maisons d‘Accès à la Justice (MAJ),

were established to serve as the first point of orientation with legal aid service for

Rwandans. MAJ mainly provide legal information/education as well as legal advice/

mediation essentially to the Rwandans who are unable to afford a lawyer.

The process of democracy and judicial systems in the neighbouring countries

of Tanzania and Kenya has also been emphasised in this unit. In Kenya, the

development of democracy and public participation was reliant on multi-party

institutions and a federal system of government. Therefore, several political parties

were created, the main ones being the Kenya African National Union (KANU) and

the Kenya African Democratic Union (KADU). 

In 1969, the ruling party, KANU, banned the opposition and in 1982 officially

became a single political party when the Parliament changed the constitution

to make Kenya a one-party state. The country remained as such until 1991 when

pressure, through people’s struggles for democratic change, compelled the

government to repeal this constitutional provision and provide for a return of

multi-party democracy.

At the recovery time of its independence, Tanganyika had a multi-party political

system .However, in 1965; there was introduction of the single party constitution. All

general elections since 1965 to 1990 were held in a single party system. The multiparty political system was officially reintroduced in 1992 by Tanzanian President

on 1st July, 1992. This marked the era of true democracy in Tanzania, where many

political parties registered. There were 13 political parties that participated in the

general election in 1995. Since that time, the political party Chama Cha Mapinduzi

(CCM) has managed to win all the presidential elections.

The two countries of Tanzania and Kenya have a judicial system inherited from

the colonial period where the British judicial system was a source of inspiration in

their elaboration. It contributes to ensure in both countries the rule of law and to a

certain extent the respect of the human rights and these of citizens.

Key unit competence: Examine the role of democracy, unity and reconciliation in

the transformation of the Rwandan society.

Learning objectives

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

• Explain the concepts of democracy and justice;

• Discuss different forms of democracy and justice;

• Assess how democracy, unity and reconciliation and justice are maintained

in Rwanda;

• Compare the forms of democracy and justice in Rwanda and in neighbouring

countries.

Introductory activity

Do you think that unity and reconciliation policy has contributed to the

transformation of Rwandan society? Write down a 500 words text justifying your

position.

9.1Concepts of democracy, reconciliation and justice and their
features

Activity 9.1

Define the concepts of democracy and justice and describe their features.

Thereafter, basing on the definitions of these two terms and their characteristics,

analyse the extent at which democracy and justice are practiced in Rwanda.

9.1.1Concept of democracy

Etymologically the term “democracy” means power of people. It derives from two

Greek words demos or people and kratos which means power. Democracy is

defined, basically as the government in which the supreme power is vested in the

people. In some forms, democracy can be exercised directly by the people;

in large societies, it is by the people through their elected representatives. In the

memorable phrase of American President Abraham Lincoln, democracy is the

government of “the people, by the people, and for the people”. Thus, democracy is

simply a system of government where the citizens directly exercise their power,

and have the right to elect the government representatives who collectively create

a government body for the entire nation (like, a parliament).

In a democratic government, people have certain basic rights that the government

cannot take away from them, and these rights are internationally recognized and

guaranteed.

Freedom and democracy are often used interchangeably, but the two are not

synonymous. Democracy is indeed a set of ideas and principles about freedom, but

it also consists of practices and procedures that have been moulded through a long,

often tortuous history. Democracy is the institutionalization of freedom.

In the end, people living in a democratic society must serve as the ultimate

guardians of their own freedom and must forge their own path towards the ideals

set forth in the preamble to the United Nations’ Universal Declaration of Human

Rights: Recognition of the inherent dignity; the equal and inalienable rights of all

members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice, and peace in

the World.

9.1.2 Basic features of democracy

The main features of democracy are indisputable initial requirements that are

imposed on all participants of political activities in the country. The basic features of

democracy include the following:

Political freedom

This means, a freedom of choice, social order and form of government. It refers to

the right of people to determine and change constitutional order and ensure the

protection of human rights.

Equality of citizens

This means equality of all people before the law, equal responsibility of any

committed offense and the right to equal protection before court. Equality is

guaranteed for all citizens: there can be no privileges or restrictions on the grounds

of race, colour, political beliefs, religious or other convictions, ethnic or social origin,

property status, residence, linguistic or other grounds. The most important aspect

is the equality of rights and freedom of men and women who have the same

opportunities for their implementation.

Selectivity of state bodies

This implies formation of authorities and local government through the people’s

will. It ensures their replaceability, control and equal opportunity to exercise

electoral rights for everybody. In a democratic state, the same people should not

permanently occupy positions in government bodies for a long time: this causes

distrust of citizens and leads to a loss of legitimacy of these bodies.

Separation of powers

This means that interdependence and mutual restrictions are imposed on different

branches of power: legislative, executive and judicial powers. It serves as a means

of checks and balance in order to avoid the accumulation of powers in the hands

of some individuals who would transform their power into a means of suppressing

freedom and equality.

Decision-making by the will of the majority with the mandatory observance of

the rights of the minority

This feature means the combination of the will of the majority with guarantees of

the rights of the individual who acts as a part of the minority (ethnic, religious or

political). It also means the absence of discrimination, suppression of rights of an

individual who is not a part of the majority in decision-making activities.

Pluralism

It refers to the diversity of social phenomena, broadening of the range of political

choice, leading not only pluralism of opinions but also political pluralism, the

plurality of parties, public associations, etc. With various professions and charters

acting within the framework of the constitution, democracy is possible when it is

based on the principle of pluralism, but not all pluralism is necessarily democratic.

Only when in conjunction with other principles, pluralism assumes universal

significance for modern democracy.

9.1.3 Concept of reconciliation

Reconciliation can be defined as a psychological process for the formation

of lasting peace. In this process, the past rivals come to mutual recognition and

acceptance. They have invested interests and goals in developing peaceful relations,

feel mutual trust, positive attitudes as well as sensitivity and consideration of the

other party‘s needs and interests. The transformation of beliefs, attitudes and

emotions regarding one‘s own group, the others and the relationship between

them is a long term process. Reconciliation is not needed in all societies but only

in those that have been subjected to protracted and intractable conflict.

9.1.4 Concept of justice

Aristotle (384–322 BCE) stated that justice consists of righteousness, or complete

virtue in relation to one’s neighbour. He also espoused the idea of justice as a state

of character, a cultivated set of dispositions, attitudes and good habits. Aristotle

expands on justice by stating that it consists of treating equals equally and

“unequals” unequally, in proportion to their inequality. Justice is an action in

accordance with the requirements of some laws. Whether these rules are

grounded in human consensus or societal norms, they are supposed to ensure

that all members of the society receive fair treatment. Justice ensures that people

receive their fair share of the goods available; obtain fair treatment from society’s

institutions. Justice also implies that people’s actions conform to rules of fair

play.

9.1.5 Features of justice

There are four main features of justice including meritocracy, fairness, equality and

moral righteousness.

Meritocracy This is the idea of “getting what one deserves”. On the positive side, a

person may be given an award or social recognition for a good deed or unselfish

behaviour, for example, a medal for bravery, risking one’s life to save a drowning

person. Awards and honours may also be a way to recognize extraordinary talent,

for instance, a gold medal at the Olympics.

There are examples of getting what one deserves by using negative means. These

include corruption, getting employment without the necessary skills or to be

demoted without valid reasons.

Fairness

This is the idea of treating equals equally. For example, two people doing the

same job competently with the same amount of experience and training should

get the same pay. There should not be distinctions in rates of payment based

on gender, age, racial or ethnic background or any other factor not related to

performance on the job. “Fairness,” however, also means, in certain circumstances,

treating people unequally in order to recognize and correct past injustices.

For instance, if women or members of racial minorities have been historically

excluded from certain relatively well-paid and desirable occupations, there may be

a justifiable case for employment equity measures— giving suitable candidates

from the disadvantaged group preference in hiring. Hence, there can sometimes be

a distinction between what is considered fair at the individual and collective levels.

This concept of justice also denotes “procedural fairness” — ensuring that everyone

receives a fair hearing and due process in courts (for example, their case follows all

the requirements of knowing the case against them and should have enough time

to prepare and an impartial judge). For example, people with a low income should

not be denied competent representation in court by a lawyer if they are charged

with a serious criminal offence, even though they cannot afford legal fees. Legal

aid schemes, in principle, are supposed to ensure such legal representation for all.

Procedural fairness also demands a transparent process for decision-making that

can be clearly understood by all, ready access to practical help to make one’s case

and the right to appeal a decision to a higher body in one feels that one has been

unjustly treated.

Equality

This common understanding of justice is embodied in equal citizenship rights for

all persons (for example, the right of all to vote in elections and run for political

office and equal entitlement to universal public programs such as health insurance

and education). Equality also demands that there should be an equitable sharing of

civic burdens, such as paying taxes (although “progressive” taxation schemes may

require the wealthy to pay proportionately more, they are about fairness).

Equality also has economic and social dimensions. At this level, justice is ensured

when the government puts in place a system that helps everyone to enjoy

adequate economic security through some combination of labour market

earnings and income security programs and all people in society to have ready

access to adequate and affordable housing, sufficient, safe and nutritious food and

other public goods such as transportation and green space.

These aspects of economic and social rights do not necessarily demand treating

everyone exactly the same or giving people equivalent shares of a social good.

It can be acceptable to have differences in income levels, house prices and the

consumption of goods and services. Such differences may in fact provide incentives

that benefit individuals and society.

However, justice demands equality of access for everyone to adequate income,

decent and affordable housing, food security and other necessities of a modest but

dignified life.

The social aspect of justice (social justice) brings up questions of distributive

justice — how resources (for example, money, natural talents, health care or political

power) and opportunities (for example, places in the best educational institutions

or access to the best jobs and the most lucrative business opportunities) are divided

up among everyone in society. Unjust distributions may require corrective measures,

in other words, “redistributive justice.” For example, wealthy people may be required

to pay more taxes than those with modest or low incomes, so that government can

fund a reasonable level of public services for all. Educational institutions may have

to take steps to recruit students and faculty members from groups that they have

historically excluded, such as women, racial minorities and people with disabilities,

so that these minority groups have access to the same educational opportunities

as the majority.

The process of redistribution or, more specifically, arriving at a fair redistribution,

involves participation. Participation in this context requires a societal decision

mechanism or process that allows the meaningful participation of all people in

society with recognition, mutual respect and an ethic of making decisions by taking

into account the position of the least favoured or neediest in society.

Moral righteousness

This final aspect of justice encompasses the ideal of individual virtue and ethical

conduct. Individuals are thought to be “just” when they engage in altruistic

behaviour to help others or make society a better place and set an example of

altruistic conduct in both their personal responsibilities (as a spouse, parent or

friend) as well as civic and public roles (as an employee, elected politician or club

president).

Application activities 9.1

1. The term justice has been defined by a number of scholars. Attempt

your definition by using your own words and discuss its characteristics

by utilising tangible examples that can be found in the daily human

experience.

2. Etymologically, the term democracy means power of people, basing

on your own experience and the Rwandan context, attempt another

definition but do not exceed five lines.

3. Describe any two features of democracy and illustrate them with

examples that prevail in Rwanda.

4. Equality is one of the features of justice. Discuss at least its two

dimensions.

9.2 Different forms of democracy and justice

Activity 9.2

What forms of democracy and justice do you know? Write them in your exercise

book and find out an example and its application for each.

9.2.1Forms of democracy

The main forms of democracy include direct democracy, representative

democracy, presidential democracy, parliamentary democracy, authoritarian

democracy, participatory democracy, Islamic democracy and social democracy.

Every country interprets the meaning of democracy in its own particular way. With

a wide range of different geopolitical atmospheres, there is a large spectrum of

democratic governments in existence around the globe. And to shed light on the

above forms of democracy, the following explanations are provided.

Direct democracy

A direct democracy is when citizens get to vote for a policy directly, without any

intermediate representative or house of parliament. If the government has to pass

a certain law or policy, it goes to the people. The latter vote on the issue and decide

the fate of their own country. 

The people can even bring up issues themselves, as long as they have a substantial

consensus on the matter. Even taxes cannot be raised without the public support.

When the population is small, educated and mostly homogeneous, a direct

democracy does not seem like a bad idea. Switzerland, for example, has had a

long history of a successful direct democracy. In this country, many practices have

elements of direct democracy. For instance, many important political decisions on

issues including public health, energy, and employment, are subject to a vote

by the country’s citizens. And some might argue that, the internet is creating new

forms of direct democracy, as it empowers political groups to raise the matter for

their cause by appealing directly to like-minded citizens.

However, most countries are too large and too complicated for direct democracy

to work within their political borders. In those cases,  people prefer to elect

representatives on their behalf, rather than vote on every single issue.

Representative democracy

Representative democracy or indirect democracy is when people choose to vote

for who will represent them in the parliament. This is the most common form of

democracy found across the World. This form of democracy is based on protecting

the rights of not only the majority of the people in the state but also the minorities.

By electing a more qualified representative, a minority population would be able

to vocalize its grievances in a more efficient manner.

Most of the representative democracies of the World consider themselves to be

liberal democracies. This is because they value the needs of their individual citizens

more than those of the entire state. This is why in countries like India and the USA; it

is difficult to proclaim a state of emergency.

However, some states feel constantly threatened by outsiders or civil unrest. These

states, such as Israel and South Korea, prefer a defensive democracy over a liberal

one. This is done so that the government can organize an army at a moment’s notice.

A liberal democracy can take on different forms, since different countries have

different needs and different ideologies. The following types are just a few subsets

of representative democracy.

Presidential democracy

Under a presidential democracy, the president of the state has a significant amount

of power over the government. He/she is either directly or indirectly elected by

citizens of the state. The president and the executive branch of the government are

not liable to the legislature, but cannot, under normal circumstances, dismiss the

legislature entirely. Similarly, the legislature cannot remove the president from

his/her office either, unless the case is extreme. 

In a presidential democracy, the head of state is also the head of the government.

Countries like the USA, Argentina, and Sudan employ this kind of democracy.

Parliamentary democracy

A democracy that gives more power to the legislature is called a parliamentary

democracy. The executive branch derives its democratic legitimacy only from

the legislature, i.e. the parliament. The head of state is different from the head of

government, and both have varying degrees of power. However, in most cases,

the president is either a weak monarch (e.g. the United Kingdom) or a ceremonial

head (e.g. India).

Authoritarian democracy

This is when only the elites are a part of the parliamentary process. Some

individuals of the state are allowed to vote for their chosen candidate, but “regular

people” cannot enter the elections. Therefore, in the end, it is only the ruling elite

that decide on the various interests of the state’s population. Modern day Russia

under Vladimir Putin is a classic example of this type of governance. Even Hong

Kong generally falls under the same category.

Participatory democracy

This is the exact opposite of authoritarian form of democracy. There are different

types of participatory democracy, but all of them yearn to create opportunities for

all members of the population to make meaningful contributions to the decisionmaking process. It empowers the disempowered by breaking up the state into

small networks and prefers to  empower community-based grassroots politics. It

values deliberation and discussion, rather than merely  voting.

Today, no country actively practices this form of democracy. Although the theories

behind it are sound, the real life application of this approach is fraught with

complications. However, many social movements like the International Occupy

Movement, the Bolivarian Movement in Venezuela and the Narmada Bachao

Andolan in India organize  themselves around a participatory model of democracy.

Islamic democracy

This form of democracy seeks to apply Islamic law to public policies, while

simultaneously maintaining a democratic framework. Islamic democracy has three

main characteristics. Firstly, the leaders are elected by the people. Secondly,

everyone is subject to the Sharia law including the leaders. Thirdly, the leaders must

commit themselves to practicing shura, a special form of consultation practiced

by Prophet Muhammad. The only countries that fulfil these three characteristics are

Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Malaysia. 

Social democracy

Social democracy arose as a reaction to neoliberal policies in international

economics. Under neo-liberalism, profit-making entities like multinational

corporations can easily infiltrate other political states, thus the power of the

political state seems weak. 

Social democracy aims at empowering the state in favour of the neoliberal

market. The state can increase its expenditure by providing free alternatives

to overpriced private ventures. It may focus on providing free education or free

healthcare, so that people do not have to depend on profit-making corporations.

This list obviously does not claim to be an exhaustive discussion around the

different types of democracy that exist today. There are as many theories concerned

with democracy as there are different governments in the World.

9.2.2 Forms of justice

Issues of justice arise in several different spheres and play a significant role in

causing, perpetuating, and addressing conflict. Just institutions tend to instil a

sense of stability, well-being, and satisfaction among the society members, while

perceived injustices can lead to dissatisfaction, rebellion, or revolution. Each of the

different spheres expresses the  principles of justice and fairness in its own way,

resulting into different forms and concepts of justice: distributive, procedural,

retributive, and restorative. People can seek these forms of justice when they have

been wronged.

Distributive justice

Distributive justice, or economic justice, is concerned with giving all members of

the society a “fair share” of the benefits and resources available. However, while

everyone might agree that wealth should be distributed fairly, there is much

disagreement about what counts as a “fair share.” Some possible criteria of

distribution are equity, equality, and need. Equity means that one’s rewards should

be equal to one’s contributions to the society, while “equality” means that everyone

gets the same amount, regardless of his or her input. Distribution on the basis of

need means that people who need more will get more, while people who need

less will get less. Fair allocation of resources, or distributive justice, is crucial to the

stability of the society and the well-being of its members. When issues of distributive

justice are inadequately addressed and the item to be distributed is highly valued,

intractable conflicts frequently result. This is the essence of the conflicts arose across

Europe and in the United States politics in 2012-2013 over taxes, deficits, “austerity

programmes”, jobs, rights of l abour, etc.

Procedural justice

The principle of fairness is also found in the idea of fair play (as opposed to the fair

share  of distributive justice). If people believe that a fair process was used in

deciding what is to be distributed, then they may well accept an imbalance in what

they receive in comparison to others. If they see both procedural and distributive

injustices, they will likely seek restorative and/or retributive justice.

Procedural justice   is concerned with making and implementing decisions

according to fair processes that ensure “fair treatment.” Rules must be impartially

followed and consistently applied in order to generate an unbiased decision. Those

carrying out the procedures should be neutral, and those directly affected by

the decisions should have some voice or representation in the decision-making

process. If people believe procedures to be fair, they will be more likely to accept the

outcomes, even ones tha t they do not like. Implementing fair procedures is central to

many dispute resolution procedures, including  negotiation, mediation, arbitration,

and adjudication.

Restorative justice

Restorative justice (also sometimes called “reparative justice” or “corrective justice”)

is an approach to justice that focuses on the needs of victims and offenders,

instead of satisfying abstract legal principles or punishing the offender. Victims take

an active role in the process, while offenders are encouraged to take responsibility

for their actions, “to repair the harm they have done  by apologizing, returning

stolen money, or doing community service”. In other words, the simplest form of

restitution is a straight forward apology. Restoration means putting things back as

they were, so it may include some acts of apology to demonstrate one is truly sorry.

This may include actions and even extra payment to the offended party.

Restorative justice is based on a theory of justice that considers crime and

wrongdoing to be an offense against an individual or community rather than the

state. Restorative justice that fosters dialogue between victim and offender shows

the highest rates of victim satisfaction and offender accountability.

Retributive justice 

Retributive justice is based on the idea that people deserve to be treated in the

same way they treat others. It is a retroactive approach that justifies punishment as

a response to past injustice or wrongdoing. The central idea is that the offender has

gained unfair advantages through his or her behaviour, and that punishment will set

this imbalance straight. In other words, those who do not play by the rules should

be brought to justice and deserve to suffer penalties for their transgressions. 

The notion of deterrence also plays in here: the hope is that the punishment for

committing a crime is large enough that people will not engage in illegal activities

because the risk of punishment is too high.  In addition to local, state, and national

justice systems,  retributive justice also plays a central role in international legal

proceedings, responding to violations of  international law, human rights, and  war

crimes.

However, because there is a tendency to slip from retributive justice to an emphasis

on revenge, some suggest that  restorative justice  processes are more effective.

While a retributive justice approach conceives of transgressions as crimes against

the state or nation, restorative justice focuses on violations as crimes against

individuals.

Retributive justice is concerned with healing victims’ wounds, restoring offenders to

law-abiding lives, and repairing harm done to interpersonal relationships and the

community. Victims take an active role in directing the exchange that takes place,

as well as defining the responsibilities and obligations of offenders. Offenders

are encouraged to understand the harm they have caused to their victims and

take responsibility for it. Restorative justice aims at strengthening the community

and prevent similar harms from happening in future. At the national level, such

processes are often carried out through victim-offender mediation programs, while

at the international level restorative justice is often a matter of instituting truth and

reconciliation commissions.

Application activities 9.2

1. After being acquainted with the different forms of democracy, find

out the forms of democracy that are employed in the following

countries: Rwanda, Uganda, Kenya, Tanzania, Sudan, Yemen, Iran, Iraq,

France, United Kingdom and the United States of America. Justify

your answer.

2. There are four main forms of justice. Elucidate each form by providing

concrete instances that are based on your day-to-day actions.

3. Compare the presidential democracy and parliamentary democracy.

4. Do you think that the role of the Governments is required to ensure

the social justice to their citizens or individuals have to struggle by

themselves to earn their livings?

5. 5. Describe the features of the direct democracy.

9.3 Preservation of democracy, unity, reconciliation and

justice in Rwanda

Activity 9.3

Since the end of the Genocide against the Tutsi, the Government of Rwanda has

improved and promoted democracy, unity, reconciliation and justice in their all

9.3.1 Preservation of democracy in Rwanda

After the 1994 genocide against the Tutsi, the country of Rwanda strived to

set up a democratic regime. The main principles underlying democracy including

elections, political pluralism, rule of law, decentralisation, liberalisation of the press

and media were emphasized. Moreover, due to the regional and ethnic divisions

that had characterized the first and the second Republics and culminated into the

Genocide against the Tutsi, an emphasis was also placed on the promotion of unity

and reconciliation among Rwandans.

In the process of democratization, the Transitional Government organized

a number of meetings in Urugwiro Village and this offered an initial leap to this

process. Different themes that were dealt with during these meetings included the

issue of organization of elections which had in fact been the final step to put in

place democratic institutions in Rwanda. 

 In 1998, elections were organized to choose grass roots administrative committees

(cells and sectors). Later in 2001, elections were organized to elect the Executive

Committees as well as district and municipal council representatives. The year

2003 which closed the period of the Transitional Government culminated into

a referendum as well as presidential and parliamentary elections. Many other

elections were organised both on the local and central government for instance the

2013 legislative elections and the presidential elections in August 2010 and 2017.

Elections

An election can be defined as a mechanism of filling an office or post through

choices made by the designated body of the people known as the electorate.

Participation of the citizens in elections and thereafter collective involvement of

the elected officials in the decision-making process are important ingredients for

the gradual establishment of democracy. In addition, the concept of representative

democracy is based on the principle that it is the people who are the nominal

holders of political sovereignty and that, in the exercise of that sovereignty, they

elect their representatives so that they can exercise their political rights.

In other words, elections are meant to do more than bolster support for the

regime. They may also be the means by which leaders and (sometimes) actual

policies are chosen by the people. An election must involve a choice between

candidates or a choice whether a particular policy is to be followed or not.

If elections are to be used to choose political leaders, there must be some rules

translating people’s votes into a particular selection of leaders.

In Rwanda, elections are one of the underlying principles of democracy.The

Constitution of the Republic of Rwanda guarantees the right to vote and to be

elected. This implies that the legitimacy of the leaders shall derive from the

consent of the people through elections. Actually, the Constitution of Rwanda

in its article 80 provides for affirmative action by stating that the President of the

Republic has the power to appoint eight senators from the historically marginalised

groups, giving particular consideration to the principles of national unity and any

other national interests and four Senators designated by the National Consultative

Forum of political organisations.

Genuine democracy requires free and fair elections. And even if elections and

democracy complement each other, elections are central to promotion of

democracy. Besides, a free and fair election can be said to be a direct dividend of

democracy and vice-versa, because there can only be free and fair election where

there is democracy, and there can never be democracy when there is no free and

fair election.

In the post genocide period, the Governmen t of Rwanda organised the first

elections at the local level. The elections for cell and sector councils took place

earlier in 1999, as well as district level elections that took place in 2001. These

grass roots elections were seen as testing the waters for democratic transition

before direct elections planned at the national level in 2003. The 1999 and 2001

elections were run on a non-party basis with candidates standing as individuals and

campaigning by political parties was not allowed. In 2001, candidates were vetted

by the National Electoral Commission (NEC), whose members were nominated by

the government officials. Elections were held successfully and 81% of those elected

were the incumbents previously appointed by the government.

The end of the post-genocide transition period was marked by the adoption of a

new constitution in 2003. In a referendum held on May 26, 2003, it was approved

by 93 % of the voters, with almost 90 % of those registered turning out to vote.

The first elections under the new Constitution were held just months later, with the

presidential election on August 25, 2003, followed by multi-party parliamentary

elections between September 29 and October 2, 2003. The year2003 is, in fact, a

turning point in the history of Rwanda because it marked the beginning of regular

elections in post genocide period both at local and national level, with a new

constitution and clear guidelines set by the National Electoral Commission.

In August 2008, the second Parliamentary elections since the adoption of the new

constitution of 2003 were conducted and in August 2010, the second presidential

elections since the adoption of a new constitution took place. In February 2011,

local leaders’ elections from the village, cell, sector, and district to Kigali city level

and in late 2011, Rwanda held the second senatorial elections.  Many other local

level elections took place in Rwanda to elect members of councils from the villages

to the districts. And the last elections took place in 2017 to elect the President of

the Republic of Rwanda.

Figure 9.1 :The counting of votes at the end of the 2017 presidential election at polling station

Source:https://www.voanews.com/a/rwanda-votes-presidential-election/3972455.html.

Separation of powers

The notion of separation of powers can be understood as the separation of

government decision-making into the legislative, executive, and the judicial

functions. This aims at reinforcing constitutional protection of individual liberties

by preventing the concentration of such powers in the hands of a single group of

government officials. However, as stated earlier in Unit 6 (the Age of Enlightenment),

the separation of powers is supported by checks and balance. It must be noted

that arrangements of checks and balances among the three organs allow an

independent judiciary to hear and determine matters involving the interpretation

of constitution, a legislature to scrutinise both primary and secondary legislation

and also having overseeing the activities of the executive.

However, it must be noted that the over sight of the activities of the executive

by the legislature implies that the President of the Republic is responsible to the

legislature in the political sense because political responsibility implies a day

to day relationship between the executive and the legislature. Furthermore, the

impeachment process enforces juridical compliance with the constitutional letter of

the law and is quite different from the exercise of political control over the President’s

ordinary conduct of his or her office.

In Rwanda, the separation of powers is the principle that is explicitly guaranteed

in the Constitution. Interestingly, the Constitution of Rwanda goes further by

emphasizing that the judiciary is both independent and separate from the

executive and the legislature.Furthermore, the separation of powers is enhanced

by the principle of checks and balance, and thus it is important to note that the

Constitution of Rwanda provides for checks and balance between the executive,

the legislature and the judiciary. The power sharing arrangement does not stop

the Parliament from having an over sight role over the activities of the executive

and the Parliament of Rwanda is bicameral and is made up of the Chamber of

Deputies and the Senate. The Government is obliged to provide the Parliament with

all the necessary explanations on questions put to the Government concerning its

management and activities.

In application of the principle of checks and balance, the President of the Republic

after consultation with the Prime Minister, the President of the Senate, the Speaker

of the Chamber of Deputies and the President of the Supreme Court may dissolve

the Chamber of Deputies. Elections of Deputies shall take place within 90 days after

the dissolution. By consulting the Speaker of the Chamber of the Deputies, the

power sharing arrangement is activated in so far the Speaker of t he Chamber of

the Deputies is not from the same political party with the President of the Republic.

However, as previously noted, the Constitution of Rwanda does not specifically

exclude the possibility of the President of the Senate belonging in the same

political party with the President of the Republic. 

Nevertheless, as far as the Speaker of the Chamber of Deputies is consulted, power

sharing becomes effective.

The Constitution of Rwanda complies with the concept of the separation of powers.

Political pluralism

In Rwanda, a multi-party system is recognised in its Constitution (article 54). Political

organisations fulfilling the conditions required by the law may be formed and

operate freely. However, due to the historical context of the country of Rwanda that

had been characterised by “ethnic” and regional discrimination which culminated

into the 1994 Genocide against the Tutsi, the Rwandans have put in place other

principles underpinning the political system which involves power -sharing,

consensus and the existence of the Forum of the Political Parties.

Power sharing

Power sharing can be understood as a system of governance in which all major

actors of the society are provided a permanent share of power. This system is often

used by majority of the government system in which ruling groups rotate among

various social groups over time.The basic aims of power sharing are traditionally

to ensure the decentralization of power, the protection of rights for the minority

groups, the establishment of grand coalition governments in which nearly all

political parties are represented and the provision of mechanism to ensure decision

making by consensus.

Furthermore, it is argued that when the minority is a permanent one defined by

race, ethnicity, language and the system of political party competition coincides

with these communities, rather than cuts across them, such a minority may be

permanently excluded from governmental office and from all prospects of political

influence. Thus, a system of power sharing that guarantees the minority positions

in the government and other political offices proportionate to their numbers is

suggested. Finally, Power sharing arrangements help to promote government

legitimacy and a sense of political fairness among the populace.

Power sharing is respected in State institutions in accordance with the

fundamental principles set out under Article 62 of the Constitution of Rwanda and

the provisions of other laws. The President of the Republic and the Speaker of the

Chamber of Deputies cannot come from the same political organisation. Cabinet

members are selected from political organisations on the basis of seats held by

those political organisations in the Chamber of Deputies. However, a political

organisation holding the majority of seats in the Chamber of Deputies cannot have

more than fifty (50%) per cent of Cabinet members. It is not prohibited for other

competent persons to be appointed to Cabinet. 

In Parliament, the principle of representation of various categories is respected

as provided for by the Constitution of Rwanda and other laws. In addition, with

regard to the cabinet composition, it must be noted that the possibility of having a

member of the Cabinet who does not belong to any political party is not excluded.

The power sharing concept in the Constitution of Rwanda focuses on the

consensus of political parties rather than the ethnic aspect. In so doing, the

concept of power sharing under the Constitution of Rwanda places an emphasis

on a coalition government. The advantage of a coalition government is that the

policies adopted based on consensus are likely to be accepted by a large number

of political parties provided they were involved in the negotiations and debate.

Article 62: Power sharing

Power sharing is respected in State institutions in accordance with the fundamental

principles set out under Article 10 of this Constitution and the provisions of other

laws. The President of the Republic and the Speaker of the Chamber of Deputies

cannot come from the same political organisation.

Cabinet members are selected from political organisations on the basis of seats

held by those political organisations in the Chamber of Deputies. However, a

political organisation holding the majority of seats in the Chamber of Deputies

cannot have more than fifty (50%) per cent of Cabinet members. It is not

prohibited for other competent persons to be appointed to Cabinet In Parliament,

the principle of representation of various categories is respected as provided for

by this Constitution and other laws.

The National Consultative Forum of Political Organisations

In the respect of the Constitution of Rwanda in its spirit of political consensus, the

same constitution provides for an organisation named The National Consultative

Forum of Political Organisations (NFPO). This institution was established by the

Constitution of the Republic of Rwanda of 2003 Revised in 2015, in its article 59.

Membership to the forum

According to the Organic Law No 10/2013/OL of 11/07/2013 governing Political

Organisations and politicians, a political organisation enrols in the Forum

voluntarily and that it must apply for and be granted membership by the Forum.

It is composed of political organisations recognised and signatories to the internal

rules and regulations of the Forum; and political organisations whose membership

application has been approved by the General Assembly and accept to comply with

provisions of the internal rules and regulations of the Forum. Today, the Forum

consists of 11 members political organizations:

1. RPF Inkotanyi

2. PL

3. UDPR

4. PDI

5. PSD

6. Party for Progress and Concord (PPC)

7. Centrist Democratic Party (PD)

8. Rwandese Socialist Labour Party (PSR)

9. Party for Solidarity and Progress (PSP)

10. Social Party Imberakuri (PS Imberakuri)

11. Democratic Green Party of Rwanda (DGPR)

Mission of the forum

“The Forum is mainly responsible of being a platform for national political

dialogue, consensus building and national cohesion”.

The Forum is also mandated to:

• maintain political and social dialogue, as well as public trust and transparency

between political parties and the people, in order to consolidate national

development and democracy.

• strengthen the capacity building of legally recognized political parties to

perform their core functions.

• advice support to political party internal conflict resolutions (upon a written

request).

Organs of the forum

Figure 9.1: Organisational structure of the National Consultative Forum of Political Organisations

The General Assembly  is the supreme organ of the Forum and is constituted

of recognized political organizations. Each political organization provides four

representatives in the Assembly, two of whom should be women.

The Bureau of the Forum  is constituted of a spokesperson and a deputy

spokesperson. It has the responsibility of following up the implementation of the

decisions of the General Assembly and representing the Forum before the law. The

spokesperson and the deputy spokesperson are elected by the General Assembly.

They are elected for a six months non-renewable term.

The Executive Secretariat  is headed by the permanent executive secretary that

is elected for a term of three (3) years renewable only once. It supervises and

coordinates the daily activities of the Forum.

Programmes and activities

The NFPO carries out activities like promoting the consultation and political

dialogue through regular sessions of the Forum General Assembly that are

held once within three months and discusses the national concerns and makes

recommendations to the concerned national institutions on high national political

interests and career development. Besides, the forum performs activities aiming

at consolidating the national cohesion and political pluralism by providing advice

on resolution of internal political party’s conflicts, upon a written request. It also

strengthens the capacity of political parties and their members

Party Leadership Programme was  developed in 2004 targeting the Senior Political

Leaders with funds from the European Union (E.U). This programme covered topics

which all linked to political party’s capacity building needs. These topics include:

Political communication, recruitment and membership, leadership and political

conflict management, governance measurement and indexes, English language

and communication skills.

Figure 9.2 : Logo of the Youth Political Leadership Academy

Source: http://www.forumfp.org.rw/

The Youth Political Leadership Academy (YPLA) was launched in February 2010 to

train Youth from different political parties in leadership and politics and equip them

with the necessary skills and knowledge to meaningfully participate in national

governance and development.

Since 2010, about 120 political cadres have been trained through the United

Nations Development Programme (UNDP) support. From 2011 up to June 2014, the

programme got the national coverage at all provincial headquarters through the

UNDP partnership; about 660 youths were trained and awarded certificates.

Taking of evening class (Kigali branch) and weekend (provincial branch) programme

for six weeks. They are trained by local and international highly skilled and

experienced politicians and academicians.

The Intermediate Local Party Leadership Training Programme aims at improving

knowledge and capacity in the politics and governance for the representatives of

political organisations at local organs of their leadership, with intermediate level of

education and mainly in charge of communication, sensitization and mobilization.

It also reinforces the party field activities and leadership at grass roots.

From February up to June 2014, 1311 grass roots political party leaders from 11

political parties have been trained and were provided with hand outs to use for their

further references. Each political party has chosen four districts and all have been

covered.

The Gender Leadership Training Programme was put in place in order to be

compliant with the compulsory 30% women’s representation at its leadership

organs as provided for by the law. The Forum developed a training project aiming

at urging women occupying positions in the political organisations’ leadership

organs to approach other women members of political organisations to share ideas

on women’s importance and role in the leadership of political organisations in

particular and in national politics in general. This activity aims at sensitising women

to join the leadership of their respective political organisations in order to follow

the example of their colleagues who campaigned for leadership positions before

them. This will also be used to mainstream gender issues in a party leadership and

programs. Then, it will be a tool for establishment of a party for women networking

through gender wing operations. Eleven political parties carried out a seminar

and awareness campaign for their women members on their role in their party

leadership development. As a result, the following political parties have set up their

women wings at provincial levels: RPF Inkotanyi, PDC, PSP, PSD, PS Imberakuri and

UDPR.

There are trainings carried out by political parties themselves. In this regard, a

project proposal designed by a political party is sent to the Forum for analysis

and financing. This analysis is based on the topics to be covered and the funds

availability. Within the topics to be covered, it includes some approved by the

General Assembly and other relevant topics proposed by political the party based

on its ideological framework.

 Rule of law

The rule of law requires state institutions should act in accordance with the law. The

branches of the state must obey the law and in addition the state cannot exercise

power over anyone unless the law permits to do so. It has to be noted that the rule of

law signifies that no political authority is superior to the law itself. When and where

the rule of law obtains, the rights of citizens are not dependent upon the will of

rulers; rather, they are established by law and protected by independent courts.

The judicial apparatus is well established and the judicial authority is vested in the

judiciary composed of ordinary courts and specialised courts.

 Ordinary courts are comprised of the Supreme Court, the High Court, Intermediate

Courts and Primary Courts while Specialised Courts are comprised of Commercial

Courts and Military Courts.

The High Council of the Judiciary is the supreme governing organ of the

Judiciary. It sets general guidelines governing the organisation of the Judiciary. In

Rwanda, the Judiciary is independent and exercises financial and administrative

autonomy.

In Rwanda, there have been signs of significant progress and improvements in

the area of rule of law since 1994. As earlier discussed, much has been done to

rehabilitate the judicial system in order to ensure that the law is not enforced in an

arbitrary fashion, individual rights are respected, and that the population lives in

security.

A part from the judicial system, the rule of law is supported by the existence of a

good situation in terms of security. The national police that replaced the old system of

gendarmerie and communal police have increased the level of professionalization

in law enforcement, while the role of the military has been limited increasingly to

protecting the country from security threats from outside the country. Moreover,

these two institutions, the police and the army, are charged with maintaining

security, law and order, discipline and are trusted by the population. As stated

earlier, they ensure security of the country but they are also involved in security and

peacekeeping in different countries where they are part of UN or AU security forces

such as Sudan, South Sudan, Central African Republic, Haiti and Mali.

The situation of human rights is also well maintained. Since 1994, the Government

of Rwanda embarked on a programme of rebuilding itself by enhancing the

principles of the rule of law, respect of human rights and bringing about national

unity and reconciliation. In its preamble, the constitution of the Republic of Rwanda

reaffirmed the adherence to the principles of human rights enshrined in the United

Nations Charter as well as in the core international human rights instruments.

Rwanda has effectively ratified all the eight key human rights instruments and

most of their additional protocols. Many other international and regional human

rights conventions were ratified by Rwanda or are in the process of ratification.

Once ratified, all the treaties and conventions are integrated into the domestic

legal system. As per the Constitution, ratified treaties have precedence over

the domestic laws. Rwanda has withdrawn all its reservations on International

human rights treaties. Rwanda is committed to submit periodic reports on the

implementation of key human rights treaties.

Given the terrific human rights abuses carried out during the 1994 Genocide against

the Tutsi, the Government has committed itself to promote and protect human

rights. A National Human Rights Commission was created and its capacity firmly

strengthened. It has accelerated investigative work and presented different annual

reports since 2000, detailing a number of human rights abuses. It also works closely

with human rights NGOs. 

The Country has also formulated several policies and programmes geared

towards the promotion and protection of human rights enshrined in various sector

policy papers. Apart from the general policy of human rights, which remains one of

the key priorities, almost all other key policies in different sectors related to human

rights (education, health, social protection, rights of women, rights of children, rights

of people with disabilities) were adopted. all the three branches of Government

play a key role in the promotion and the protection of human rights:

The Parliament has human rights committees (in both the Chamber of Deputies and

the Senate) which conduct investigations and research in relation to the respect

of human rights. This has enabled parliamentarians to investigate the respect of

human rights in local communities through working visits. Different Government

authorities are often questioned by the Parliament on issues related to human

rights. The Rwandan Parliament established mechanisms to further participate to

the promotion of human rights, including the Forum of Women Parliamentarians

and the Amani Forum which is actively involved in strengthening peace and

security in the Great lakes region.

Figure : 9.3 : Logo of the National Commission of Human Rigths

Source:http://cfnhri.org/members/africa/rwanda.

The National Commission for Human Rightsis an independent and permanent

institution. It is in conformity with Paris Principles and has “A” status. It is composed

of seven commissioners whom at least 30% are women. Commissioners are

appointed from different categories of the Rwandan society, including the civil

society. Commissioners enjoy immunity in the process of execution of their duties.

The Commission has a specific mission of educating and raising public awareness on

human rights and providing guidance upon request or on its own initiative on bills

related to human rights (International Bill of Human Rights: consists of the Universal

Declaration of Human Rights  (adopted in 1948), the  International  Covenant

on  Civil  and Political Rights  with its two Optional Protocols and the  International

Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights) and engages State bodies to ratify

international conventions related to human rights and take steps to domesticate

these conventions in the national legislation. 

The Commission also investigates violations on human right s committed within

the territory of the Republic of Rwanda by State organs, public officials abusing

their powers, organizations and individuals. The Commission is empowered to

launch cases before civil, commercial, labour and administrative courts in case of

violation of human rights. Each year the Commission submits a report of its activities

to the parliament and gives copies to the President of the Republic, the Cabinet and

the Supreme Court. This report is an important tool for the Parliament to monitor

the protection and promotion of human rights in Rwanda.

As stated in unit related to achievements of the Government of National Unity,

there are also other institutions established by t he Constitution of the Republic

of Rwanda to promote and protect human rights and ensure social justice in the

country such as the Office of the Ombudsman, the Public Prosecution Authority,

the National Police, the Observatory of Child Rights, the Gender Monitoring Office,

the National Women Council, the National Council for Persons with disabilities,

etc.

In respecting the rule of law, the Rwandan Government is also very effective

and responsible for delivering good services to the people of Rwanda. Through

the process of decentralization, authority, responsibility and service provision

were transferred from the central Government to the local government and its

administrative divisions. Rwanda is internationally recognised as a very secure

country, characterised by its firm commitment on economic growth, but also on

good governance and the zero tolerance to corruption. The President of the Republic,

and the Government of Rwanda in general, have received many international

awards for different outstanding achievements for the development of the country

and its population, including the African Gender Award (Senegal in 2007) and the

global UNICEF Children’s Award in 2009.

Rwanda has also already ratified many treaties, protocols and conventions on

promotion and protection of Human rights, for instance, the Convention on the

Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, the Second Optional

Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights on the abolition

of death penalty; the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or

Degrading Treatment or Punishment; the UN Convention against Transnational

Organized Crimes and its additional protocols, the UN conventions related to the

fight against terrorism, etc. Therefore, Rwanda enjoys a very good situation in

terms of promotion and protection of human rights as it has been attested by

different annual reports of the National Commission of Human Rights (NCHR).

International Standards: The Paris principles

In 1992, the U.N. Commission on Human Rights endorsed a set of internationally

recognized principles concerning the status, powers and functioning of national

human rights institutions.

The U.N. Principles relating to the Status of National Institutions, known as the Paris

Principles,  which were subsequently endorsed by the U.N. General Assembly in

1993, set out the basic guidelines recommended by the U.N. in the establishment

of a national human rights institution. The U.N. defines a national human rights

institution as a government body established under the constitution or by law,

whose functions are specifically designed to promote and protect human rights.

The U.N. broadly groups national human rights institutions into three categories:

human rights commissions, ombudsmen, and specialized national institutions

designed to protect the rights of a particular vulnerable group (such as ethnic

minorities, indigenous populations, refugees, women or children).

The Paris Principles stress, as fundamental features designed to contribute to

independence, the need for:

1. a founding constitutional or legislative statute;

2. “as broad a mandate as possible;”

3. an independent appointments procedures, with terms of office

specified by law;

4. a pluralistic and representative composition;

5. regular and effective functioning;

6. independence from the executive branch; and in recommending methods

of operation, the Paris Principles call on governments to create

national institutions that can take up any human rights matter at their

own initiative, at the suggestion of government, and at the request of

“any petitioner.” Responsibilities should include.

7. adequate funding.

8. reporting and making recommendations to the government on human

rights matters (including the adoption or amendment of national

legislation and the reporting of situations of human rights violations);

9. promoting conformity of national law and practice with international

human rights standards, including the ratification of international

human rights treaties;

10. cooperating with national, regional and U.N. human rights bodies,

including through contributions to country reports submitted to U.N.

treaty bodies and committees; and

11. human rights education programs.

Most importantly, human rights commissions should be empowered to make public

statements on their work directly or through the press.

The Paris Principles direct human rights commissions to cooperate and consult

with other bodies responsible for the protection and promotion of human rights.

The Paris Principles specifically note the importance of effective cooperation with

or through the presence of non-governmental human rights groups, trade unions,

concerned social and professional organizations, eminent scientists, philosophers,

religious leaders, professors and qualified experts, parliament, and other

government departments (in an advisory capacity only).

The powers vested in a human rights commission should include the ability to

seek settlement through “amicable settlement,” “binding decisions,” or “where

necessary, on the basis of confidentiality.” Petitioners should be informed of their

rights and remedies and access to them promoted by human rights commissions.

Complaints should be resolved by human rights commissions or forwarded to the

appropriate authority. Human rights commissions should make recommendations

to the government on human rights matters, including amendments or reforms of

laws and practices.

Decentralisation

Decentralization being the opposite of centralization refers to the process of

transferring powers, authority, functions, responsibilities and the requisite resources

from central government to local governments or administrative divisions.

Decentralization has to be implemented through three modes: deconcentration,

delegation and devolution.

Under deconcentration, services and functions reserved to be performed by central

government are executed by central government public servants located in local

governments but hierarchically responsible directly to central government.

Under delegation, services and functions reserved to be performed by central

government are delegated to local governments and the requisite resources

transferred to them for effective provision of these delegated services.

Under devolution, the powers, authority, functions, responsibilities services and

resources currently centralized at central government level are transferred to local

governments which are created by law as legal entities with powers to sue and be

sued.

The combination of the three phases of decentralization that has been carried

out to date was geared towards economic, political and managerial/administrative

empowerment and reconciliation of the people of Rwanda to determine their

livelihood.

The inappropriate, highly centralized dictatorial governance of the colonial as well

as post independence administration of the country excluded Rwandans from

participating in the determination of their political, economic and social well-being.

When the Government of National Unity came into power in 1994, it made great

efforts to launch democratic decentralization as yet another government policy

targeting poverty reduction by improving the quality of governance in the country

and by promoting the mobilization and participation of the people inthe planning

and management of the development process.

Decentralization aimed at providing a structural arrangement for government

and the people of Rwanda to fight poverty at a close range and to enhance their

reconciliation via the empowerment of local populations. Rwanda’s decentralization

policy was an important innovation. Its objective was to empower and invite the

population to participate actively in debates on issues that concerned it directly. It

also aimed at encouraging the electorate in the countryside to provide information

and explain issues in order to take decisions knowingly. The decentralization of

activities went hand in hand with the decentralization of financial, material and

human resources. The policy enabled the population, not only to elect its leaders

but also to control them. Where need be, the policy enabled the population to

replace them through regular elections.

It was this new policy altogether that changed previous mind set which was based

on central administration whereby people were used to receiving orders. The major

setback in realizing the decentralization policy was that some leaders at the grass

roots did not earn any salary despite acting as pillars of the system.

As time went on, the people started to get used to this policy. It was adopted

after consultations and discussions with the population. The Ministry of Local

Government which was set up in 1999 published a document in 2000 entitled

National policy on decentralization. This was followed in 2002 by another Policy on

community development. 

The major ideas of the sectorial policies of National policy on decentralization

and Policy on community development

• Enabling the people to participate in decision making at all levels.

• Enabling the people to freely choose leaders known to them.

• Giving a strong foundation to transparent management and, consequently,

fight against bad practices in managing public funds.

• Promoting equality of all before the law. In achieving this policy, the

government set up three levels of administration: central administration,

de-concentrated administrative entities (province), decentralized administrative entities (district and towns). The government proceeded to setting up

new administrative demarcations that took into account the viability of the

set-up entities.

• Encouraging ministries to gradually reduce their load and responsibilities in

favour of decentralized and de-concentrated units in terms of staff, material

and financial means corresponding to tax categories and imports.

As earlier stated, the first phase of decentralization (2001-2005) aimed at

establishing democratic and community development structures at the District

level and was accompanied by a number of legal, institutional and policy reforms,

as well as democratic elections for local leaders. The second phase also focused on

trying to build capacities (human and financial) at local levels, and to boost local

development but this has been rather piecemeal and a slow process. Enhanced

upward accountability, particularly after introduction of the process of performance

contracts Imihigo, has led to significant achievements in terms of governance,

social and economic development, and has reinforced synergies, coordination and

harmonization of interventions in local governments. But the next phase needs to

improve on the key downward accountability linkages between local government

leadership and the citizens.

In general, the decentralization policy had had several advantages. This policy

encouraged teamwork in decision making between Councils and Executive

Committees at local administration level. It brought services closer to the people

in order to solve their problems. The policy also helped in enforcing unity in so

far as different Rwandan communities were concerned. In addition, the people

participated in choosing and checking their leaders. Above all, the people took

decisions jointly on concrete programmes and activities. 

For instance, the Rwandan population participated in placing the households in

new categories based on their social-economic status, and their property – in terms

of land and other belongings – and what the families’ breadwinners do to earn a

living at the level of each village.

Press and media

The media means any process, whether in print, audio-visual, auditory, signs or

internet, to disseminate, broadcast and make known to the general public facts,

opinions and any other expression of thought particularly in order to inform,

educate and train, promote leisure and entertainment. And the Public media refers

to public broadcasters and newspapers.

In Rwanda, the present media policy elaborated in 2014 by the Ministry of Local

Government aims at availing an informed citizenry which is sacrosanct to

democratic governance, sustainable peace and development. In addition, the

policy is inspired by the fundamental principles of freedom of speech and opinion,

free access to information, media freedom and their relationship to the pursuance,

attainment and sustainability of a free, secure, united, reconciled and democratic

Rwanda.

The media policy is inspired by the National Constitution as well as international

legal instruments such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the

International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights endorsed by the same

constitution. The policy is also a consequence of Rwanda leadership’s unwavering

belief in the power of the media to contribute to good governance, social and

economic transformation of the country as well as a commitment to media freedom

and responsible reporting. Thus, the policy benefits from the leadership’s clear

understanding of where the country is coming from as well as where it is going and

the realisation that the media, as a cross-cutting sector which links the leadership

to the citizens and all facets of society, it has to be empowered to play its rightful

place on the country’s journey to a strong, united, and democratic state.

Fundamental principles of the Rwanda National Media Policy

The media policy is inspired by and builds from certain fundamental principles that

are central to free, independent, developed and democratic societies regardless

of culture or geography. These fundamental principles, enshrined in Rwanda’s

constitution of 2003 and discernable in the international legal regime, including the

Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948 as well as the International Covenant

on Civil and Political Liberties endorsed by the same national constitution are four

as outlined and elaborated below:

Freedom to hold and express opinion: That freedom to hold opinion, express

opinion and speak freely is not only critical to individual self-actualization,

happiness and fulfilment but is also important for nurturing, strengthening and

reproducing citizenship and democratic governance since it is only through freely

expressing one’s self and expressing opinions and beliefs that communities and

cultures emerge facilitating the consensual development of common values that

are central to sustainably free and democratic societies that Rwanda aspires to and

is committed.

Freedom of the press and of the media: This principle is central not only because

it enables the media to hold office holders accountable and act as watchdogs,

elements that facilitate democratic and good governance that Rwanda is

committed to, but also empowers citizens both through providing information and

education as well as facilitating freedom of expression and speech that are key to

democratic governance.

Access to information and informed citizenry: That an informed citizenry

is sacrosanct not only to good governance and sustainable peace but also

sustainable development; yet, without a guarantee to access information, an

informed citizenry cannot emerge.

That access to a variety of views and perspectives also facilitates informed and

active citizenship which is critical to democratic and accountable governance.

As achievements made by the Rwandan media, it is worth noting that more than

twenty years after the 1994 genocide against the Tutsi, tremendous progress has

been made in the industry of media. For example, at the end of the genocide

in 1994, the country had only a radio and television stations both owned and

operated by the government. In 2014, the country had 35 radio stations that

operate on FM like Radio Rwanda, Contact FM, Radio 10, Salus Radio, Radio Maria,

five private television stations such as Tele10, Lemigo TV and a number of pay

television channels. These radio and television stations are owned by different

individuals and organisations, Rwandans as well as non-Rwandans; a point that

serves to ensure plurality of ownership to avoid over concentration of the media in

a few hands which would adversely affect media freedom. These radio stations

also represent varied interests as some are commercial, others religious while others

are community based. This also means that the radio stations fulfil the principle of

representing variety of views and opinions which is also crucial for media freedom.

Figure: 9.4: The Office of the Rwanda Broadcast Agency

Source: https://twitter.com/rbarwanda

In addition, the former state broadcaster was reformed and renamed Rwanda

Broadcasting Agency (RBA) with a mandate to become more focused on citizen

based programming and citizen generated stories rather than the government.

The broadcaster has added on five community radio stations and two FM stations

(Magic FM and Inteko) besides the parent radio station that broadcasts throughout

the country and Rwanda television.

With regard to the print media, the country had in 2014 at least 43 registered

newspapers and magazines, 80 web-based newspapers and a host of blogs; factors

that illustrate how the media has expanded since the liberalization of the media in

2002 and deliberate heavy government investment in the internet infrastructure.

Crucially, these media outlets are privately owned with some owned by Rwandans

while others are owned by foreign investors. This structure of ownership also serves

to illustrate the government’s commitment to deconcentration of ownership to

ensure plurality and ensuring variety of opinions in the media so as to serve the

people better.

At the legal level, the Nation’s Constitution of 2003 guarantees media freedom as

it does freedom of thought and opinion. In addition, the media law of 2013 not

only protects media pluralism and freedom to start and own a media outlet but

also provides for media self-regulation. The provision of self-regulation came into

effect after the amendment of the media law of 2009. Besides media law, there is

an access to Information law that also guarantee the right not only of journalists

but also citizens to access information whether in position of government or some

private entities. The law was also enacted and came into force in 2013. 

With regard to the economic environment, there is a strong political will to ensure

that media becomes a sustainable and profitable business sector. That is why the

policy of the government is for media outlets to compete for its advertisement

without the exclusion of any media out and regardless of ownership. This is also

done to both ensure transparency as well as competitiveness in the sector.

In addition, media capacity and institutions at the end of the Genocide in 1994 were

very low. However, human and institutional capacity has since been strengthened

although there are still gaps that need to be filled. For instance, while there were no

institutions that trained journalists in 1994, today, there are five such institutions,

including the School of Journalism and Communication (SJC) at the University of

Rwanda (UR) and the Great Lakes Media Centre (GLMC) both directly funded by the

Government of Rwanda. In addition, the Media High Council (MHC) was reformed

and is now charged with media Capacity Development. And since the Government

decided to withdraw from media regulation, journalists regulate themselves

through their own created organ known as the Rwanda Media Commission (RMC).

However, since this organ does not have the capacity to regulate the technical part

of the media, particularly radio and television, RMC works with Rwanda Regulatory

Agency (RURA) when the technical part of media regulation is needed. It is RURA

therefore that also issues broadcasting licenses and frequencies.

9.3.2 Preservation of national unity and reconciliation

Figure 9.4: Logo of the National Unity and Reconciliation Commission

Source:http://mucuruzi.com/job-at-national-commission-for-unity-and-reconciliation-advisor

In Rwanda, unity and reconciliation can be defined as a consensus practice of citizens

who have common nationality, who share the same culture and have equal rights;

citizens characterized by trust, tolerance, mutual respect, equality, complementary

roles interdependence, truth, and healing of one another’s wounds inflicted by their

history, with the objectives of laying a foundation for sustainable development.

Figure 9.5 : Members of a school Unity and Reconciliation club

Source: https://www.google.rw/imgres?imgurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nurc.gov.rw

As earlier stated in Unit one, the Government of Rwanda has initiated different

home grown and reconciliatory mechanisms including the creation of NURC and

establishment of a revamped version of the traditional Gacaca courts in June

2002 to promote unity and reconciliation among Rwandans. Beside these two

programmes, other mechanisms have also been put in place such as the programme

of Ndi Umunyarwanda, creation of villages for both perpetrators and survivors of

the 1994 Genocide against the tutsi and rewarding the rescuers of the Tutsi during

the Genocide.

Gacaca courts were used as a restorative justice measure to deal with perpetrators

on a communal level. In the implementation of the sentences pronounced by the

Gacaca jurisdictions on Genocide convicts of the second category who pleaded

guilty and confessed their role in Genocide, another innovation was also carried out.

Since Rwandans who took part in the Genocide that devastated the country and

destroyed the national development infrastructure, the Government designed a

strategy to give them a role in the country’s reconstruction. In this regard, it was

decided that such prisoners should have their terms commuted to community

service of national interest. It is from this idea that a French acronym loosely

translated as community service as an alternative to custodial sentence (Travail

d’Intérêt Général: TIG) was conceived.

Their community work includes building schools, construction of radical terraces

to fight soil erosion, production of stones for road construction and building houses

for the homeless. Thus, the prisoners are engaged in productive work instead of

being a burden to the nation for their support in jail. The net worth of their work as

of 09/11/2011 was estimated at Rwf 42 billion.

Besides, TIG reinforced the national unity and reconciliation process in the sense that

the prisoners given this kind of punishment were also involved in the rehabilitation

of the houses of the genocide survivors or cultivation of their farms. It also enabled

the convicts to acquire new professional skills to facilitate reintegration in society, in

addition to the training in human rights. As a result, TIG also contributed to national

economic development.

In addition to Gacaca and especially TIG, other many efforts have also been made

so as to unite and reconcile Rwandans. It is worth mentioning here the work done

by the different non- government organisations in healing the wounds of both

survivors and perpetrators of genocide. For instance, there are 40 housing units

inside Kabarondo Reconciliation Village, built by Prison Fellowship Rwanda (PFR), an

international charity group, for families of survivors of the 1994 genocide against

the Tutsi where genocide survivors and perpetrators live in the same village and

work together in their common small projects.

Inter peace, an international peace building organization also operates in Rwanda

as a societal healing and it uses the different healing approaches including the

following:

• Group Approach that includes story-telling, testimonies, sharing of social emotions, peace education, active listening, drama, etc.

• Holistic Approach encompasses for instance socio-economic activities, legal

aid, psychological interventions, interpretation, training on various skills development, dialogue and audio visual.

• Community approach comprises for instance radio, shows, dialogue, training

workshops, film screenings and discussions, sports competitions, sports competitions, truth-telling and home visits.

• Individual Approach is made up of active listening, interpretation, story-telling,

trust-building, confidence-building, etc.

Catholic Relief Services, the official overseas humanitarian agency of the U.S.

Conference of Catholic Bishops, has also played a critical role in helping with

peace-building efforts in the country. Following the Genocide, the organization has

worked closely with the local Church and government to implement reconciliation

programs and structures. 

As achievement, this organisation has contributed to the trainings of 40,000 leaders

in conflict resolution.

The programme of “Ndi Umunyarwanda “and clubs of unity and reconciliation

in schools also play a significant role in uniting and reconciling Rwandans. Ndi

Umunyarwanda is a program and a tool that will sustain cohesion among current

and next generations.

It was initiated in 2013 with a goal to build the national identity and to

strengthen solidarity of Rwandan people, uphold their moral and spiritual values

by first making them understand their rights as Rwandans.Ndi Umunyarwanda

contributes to healing the wounds of Rwandan History and restoring social

cohesion among Rwandans.  More specifically, Ndi Umunyarwanda spirit has

considerably contributed to alleviate suspicion, frustration and mistrust among the

citizens and has become a bridge to human development.

The unity and reconciliation clubs in schools play an important role in education.

They give the youths an opportunity to understand the country’s history and decide

on the path to take from an informed point of view. For them, focus is put on conflict

resolution, where students learn to solve disputes among themselves amicably,

through the club of justice and peace. They also help students to fight against

Genocide ideology and to grow in critical thinking.

Rewarding the rescuers of the Tutsi during the genocide is another mechanism

that is used to enhance unity and reconciliation in Rwanda. In fact, since 1994, the

importance of the country’s programmes to build a cohesive national identity and

educate citizens as a means of Genocide prevention is undeniable. Recently, Hutu

people who, in 1994, despite the risk to their own lives, resisted the Genocide

against their fellow Tutsi and, rescued potential victims fit the category of being

selected and rewarded as Abarinzi b’Igihango na Gihanga cyahanze n’u Rwanda’

(literally guardians of alliance with Gihanga, the founder of Rwanda). These individuals

all resisted perpetrating the Genocide that targeted their fellow Rwandan Tutsi in

1994.

The Government of Rwanda has now initiated the program of identifying how

people who resisted the Genocide can be included in relevant programs like the ongoing campaign of Ndi Umunyarwanda and this plays a significant role in enhancing

unity and reconciliation among Rwandans and promoting the envisioned national

identity.

9.3.3. Maintenance of justice in Rwanda

With the 1994 Genocide against the Tutsi that destroyed all the sectors of the life of

the country, the judiciary needed to be rebuilt to meet the challenges created by that

Genocide. To address this situation, the Government of National Unity committed to

create a strong, responsive, professional and independent judiciary that Rwandans

could trust and respect by reforming the judicial system and establishing of Maisons

d‘Accès à la Justice (MAJ) that assist and plead, before all courts, for indigents.

To meet this objective, the justice system was revised in 2003. With this judicial

reform, the Ministry of justice had to oversee the functioning of the judicial police, the

criminal investigation, the prosecution and the prison services and all these entities

were separated with full financial and administrative independence including the

Ministry of Justice, the Supreme Court and the National Prosecution Authority.

The High Council of the Public Prosecution is composed of persons from different

organs with experience and expertise. The Council is responsible for taking decisions,

recruitment and appointment of staff.

The National Prosecution Authority has branches across the country and is

headed by the Prosecutor General. It also has several special units such as the

Economic and Financial Crimes Unit, Genocide Fugitive Tracking Unit, Sexual and

Domestic Violence Unit, all ideology and related Crimes Unit, Witness and Victims

Protection Unit, all of which have helped in delivering justice.

At the same time, the Inspectorate General of the Prosecution was created

to oversee the functioning of prosecutors. It has a mechanism of evaluating

prosecutors, and sanctioning or rewarding them according to their performance.

Prosecutors in managerial and administrative positions have a limited term of

office to ensure transparency, efficiency and accountability. All these initiatives

have enabled the Prosecutor’s Office to handle more cases in courts of law than ever

before.

According to justice reforms of 2003, the structure of the Supreme Court was

reduced from six separate chambers, each with its own president, to a single unit

under the leadership of the Chief Justice. A new High Court of the Republic was

also created and replaced the former four chambers of the Supreme Court. The High

Court of the Republic has two lower levels, namely the Intermediate Court and the

Primary Court (District). The new structure has had a positive effect on the efficiency

of the High Court because it facilitates harmonisation of jurisprudence. 

In addition, the Inspectorate General of Courts was established to regularly

supervise the functioning of courts so as to evaluate court judges and personnel

who are in turn rewarded in case they perform well while poor performances are

sanctioned accordingly. Heads of courts, on the other hand, have a fixed term of

office.

In 2007, Commercial Courts were established by an organic law No. 59/2007

of 16/12/2007 to settle commercial disputes. Commercial courts comprise the

Commercial High Court and the Commercial Courts. Commercial Courts in the

country are three namely Nyarugenge Commercial Court; Huye Commercial Court

and Musanze Commercial Court.

The reforms have also introduced “single judge seating” at all levels with the

exception of the Supreme Court. This reform has contributed at a certain extent to

the reduction of delays and backlogs, which had previously characterised Rwanda’s

judiciary, in the disposal of cases.

New kinds of courts like Gacaca jurisdictions and Abunzi (mediators) were initiated

as home-grown solutions in the justice system. The historical background of their

creation, structures, achievements and challenges will be developed in Unit 10.

Through the Ministry of Justice, the Government initiated the Access to

Justice Bureaus, referred to in French language as Maisons d‘Accès à la Justice

(MAJ), in 2007. Now established in all 30 districts of Rwanda, MAJ serves as the

first point of orientation with legal aid service for Rwandans. MAJ mainly provides

legal information/education as well as legal advice. MAJ also aligns with the policy

objective of a more decentralized and reconciliatory justice system that involves

citizens. The Rwanda Bar Association (RBA) law grants MAJ staff powers to

provide legal and judicial aid to indigents and needy people.

MAJ staff may assist, counsel, represent and plead, before all courts, for indigents.

They are also able to analyze cases, offer legal advice and mediation to parties,

sensitize the population on their legal rights, assist prisoners and provide legal

training to Abunzi.

In Rwanda, there is also another means utilised in conflict resolution. This is based on

law on arbitration and conciliation in commercial matters published on No 005/2008

of 14/02/2008. This law defines “arbitration”: a procedure applied by parties to the

dispute requesting an arbitrator or a jury of arbitrators to settle a legal, contractual

dispute or another related issue while “conciliation” describes a process, whether

referred to by the expression conciliation, mediation or an expression of similar

import, whereby parties to the dispute request a conciliator to assist them in their

attempt. 

Application activities 9.3

1. Assess the different achievements made by the Government of

Rwanda and especially the National Unity and Reconciliation

Commission (NURC) to unite and reconcile the Rwandan population

from its establishment in 1999.

2. Describe the structure of the judicial system in Rwanda and analyse

how justice is practiced in the country.

3. Towards 2000, the Government of Rwanda placed an emphasis on the

policy of decentralisation. Evaluate the achievements that have been

made so far at the local administration level. Simultaneously discuss

some of the challenges that still impede its realisation.

4. In Rwanda, 1994 tremendous progress has been made in the industry

of media. Discuss this assertion.

5. Read the article 59 of the Constitution of the Republic of Rwanda.

Come up with clear example showing that the Forum can help

to understand the principle of collaboration between political

organisations for the purposes of political dialogue, and building

consensus and national cohesion.

National Consultative Forum of Political Organisations brings together

political organisations for the purposes of political dialogue, and building

consensus and national cohesion. The functioning of the National

Consultative Forum of Political Organisations is provided for by the organic

law determining modalities for the creation of political organisations,

their functioning and the code of conduct of their leaders.

6. The second chapter of the Constitution, from article 10 to article 52,

provides for the fundamental human rights and the duties of the

citizen. Readthese articles and identify some (like 5) fundamental

human rights as contained in the Universal Declaration of Humana

Rights.

7. The Gacaca jurisdictions match with which form of justice. Justify your

answer basing on the programme of unity and reconciliation that the

Government of Rwanda considers as the sine qua non condition for the

rebuilding of the social fabric destroyed by the 1994 Genocide against

the Tutsi.

9.4. Democracy and justice in neighbouring countries: case

studies of Tanzania and Kenya

Activity 9.3.1

After having analysed how democracy and justice are maintained in Rwanda,

establish a comparison between the Rwandan democratic and judicial systems

and those that are practiced in Tanzania and Kenya.

9.4.1 Democracy in Tanzania

The United Republic of Tanzania was established in April 1964, following the

amalgamation of the former independent states of Tanganyika and Zanzibar.

Tanganyika attained independence in December 1961 under the leadership of

Julius Nyerere. The transition to independence was achieved without violence and

in 1964, the Union between Tanganyika and Zanzibar merged to form Tanzania.

Tanganyika (Tanzania mainland) had a multiparty political system. The Tanganyika

African National Union (TANU), established in 1954 was the overwhelmingly a

dominant political party in pre independence Tanganyika. Other political parties

were United Tanganyika Party (UTP), the African National Congress (ANC) and All

Muslim National Unity of Tanganyika (AMNUT). In Zanzibar (Tanzania Islands) there

were three important political parties prior independence.

These included Zanzibar Nationalist Party (ZNP), ASP-Afro Shiraz Party and Zanzibar

and Pemba Peoples Party (ZPPP).

The multi- party general election in Tanganyika prior to independence took place

in 1958, 1960 and 1962 when Tanganyika became a republic and Mwalimu Julius

Nyerere as the first President. Although all the political parties struggled to bring

independence in Tanganyika, soon after the attainment of independence, the

ruling party (TANU) under the Chairmanship of Mwalimu Nyerere, denounced

opposition parties and introduced the single party system in 1962.

Tanganyika united with Zanzibar in 1964 which led to the birth of The United

Republic of Tanzania in which TANU became the only political party in Tanzania

Mainland and ASP-Afro Shiraz Party in Zanzibar after the dissolution of other

political parties. This was followed by the introduction of the single party

constitution in 1965.

All general elections since 1965 to 1990 were held in a single party system, though

they were competitive in nature. The single party political system did not give the

citizens freedom to join in or form the political parties, even though they were not

pleased by the ruling party. The presidential position had one candidate and a

shadow or blank, in which the electorate was required to vote for YES for a candidate

or NO for a shadow. This system violated the citizens’ rights of electing the

leader they wanted. On February 5, 1977, TANU and ASP merged to form Chama

Cha Mapinduzi (CCM) [meaning Party of the Revolution] a revolutionary state party.

It became the sole legal political party in Tanzania.

All candidates had to be approved by CCM and were permitted to campaign

only under the CCM platform. Elections within a single party framework were

competitive. For example in October 1985, there were 328 candidates competing

for 169 elective seats in the National Assembly.

The multi- party political system was officially reintroduced in 1992 after the

collapse of the USSR in the 1990s and pressure from the donor countries (USA and

Europe), the World Bank, and the International Monetary Fund conditionalities

forced the less developed countries including Tanzania to adopt the multiparty

system in order to get financial assistance in terms of loans, grants and aids.

Surprisingly, the majority of Tanzanians refused the introduction of multi- party

due to the fear that the political parties will lead to civil wars and disruption of the

long existing unity and peace. The late Mwalimu Nyerere played a major role in

educating the Tanzanians on the importance of multi-party system. Unexpectedly,

he was the one who banned the political parties soon after independence. He

realized his mistakes and because of his influence and reputation as the father of

the nation, multi-party system was officially instituted on July 1, 1992.

This marked the era of multi-party system and democracy in Tanzania, where many

political parties registered, including the ruling party (CCM) which was the first party

to get the certificate of registration, followed by the Civic United Front (CUF) in

Kiswahili, Chama Cha Wananchi and CHADEMA in Kiswahili Chama cha Demokrasia

na Maendeleo (meaning in English Party for Democracy and Progress).There were

also other many political parties and in 1995 there were 13 political parties that

participated in the general election.

Since 1995 multiparty elections have always been organised and the CCM has

always managed to win all the presidential ones. The election results witnessed

the return of the CCM to power with Benjamin Mkapa who received 62% of the vote

while the opposition candidates amassed 38%. In the parliamentary elections,

the CCM also won more seats than other political parties.

The 2000 elections were not different from the 1995 elections with the CCM able to

ensure that they were not operating on a level playing field. The abolition of state

subsidies to political parties meant that the opposition was unable to fund their

campaigns adequately. The problem of the differentiation between the CCM and

the state remained.

Although Tanzania has escaped the more overt political turmoil that its

neighbouring countries have endured, in the aftermath of the 2000 multiparty

elections, the country appears to be open to inter-ethnic rivalry largely due to the

Zanzibar question which threatens the union itself.

Zanzibar is the site of the greatest opposition to the ruling CCM party which has

been in power since independence. The challenge faced by the former President

Jakaya Kikwete was to deal with the dysfunctional economy and to meet the ever

growing demands of its population which has seen a rapid decline of social services.

The ideal of self-reliance which was espoused by Nyerere is no longer a choice, but

increasingly a necessity.

After the two presidential mandates of Mkapa in 2005, the CCM’s Candidate Jakaya

Kikwete won the presidential election with an unassailable lead of 68% . By 2015,

CCM’s margin of victory had been shortened to 18%. For the first time in Tanzania’s

history, the opposition is a force to be reckoned with.  In 2015, Dr John Pombe

Magufuli from the CCM political Party also won presidential elections and became

on November 5, 2015 the fifth president of Tanzania. After all, the  CCM had been in

power for decades, and meaning   seemed to herald continuity with the past.

9.4.2 Democracy in Kenya

The participation by citizens in political decision-making is an important aspect

of a functioning democracy. It is very important that the citizens’ interests are

represented in the different institutions and processes.

Since the time of the independence of Kenya in 1963, the development of

democracy and public participation have had mixed results. Kenya adopted

a Westminster style of democracy with multi-party institutions and a federal

system of government. There was a devolution structure of government, known

as majimbo (Kiswahili term for regionalism), under which the country had seven

autonomous regions, some of whose boundaries were coterminous with ethnic

settlement patterns. Some of the numerically large groups have a region to

themselves and therefore some regions are identifiable with ethnic groups. Each

regional government was responsible for setting and implementing a broad range

of policies.

There were several political parties, the main ones being the Kenya African

National Union (KANU) and the Kenya African Democratic Union (KADU). KANU’s

membership included some of the large ethnic groups, the Kikuyu and the Luo,

while KADU coalesced the numerically smaller ethnic communities, many of which

feared domination by large groups after independence.

The first government dismantled this set-up after independence. The ruling party,

KANU, made it difficult for the regional governments to operate. The main

opposition, KADU, joined KANU to form one party and govern with them. The

government also introduced a series of constitutional amendments that centralised

power in the presidency.

These changes significantly constrained democratic participation. The government

became increasingly intolerant of dissent. In 1966, some critics within government

resigned their positions to form a new political party the Kenya People’s Union (KPU).

Keen to consolidate power without rivalry, the government banned the opposition

in 1969. This gave the then ruling party, KANU, unchecked dominance. More

amendments to the constitution to centralise power in the executive followed.

In 1982, Parliament changed the constitution to make Kenya a one-party state. The

country remained as such until 1991 when pressure, through people’s struggles for

democratic change and international pressure from multilateral and bilateral donors

compelled the government to repeal this constitutional provision and provide for a

return of multi-party democracy.

This return to multi-party democracy was an important milestone in this respect: it

marked the beginning of enhancing space for freedoms and rights. It ushered in a

new beginning in which citizens could participate in public affairs, question leaders

and hold them to account for their actions. In the 1990s, multi-party democracy was

not yet exercised to fulfil such expectation but it still reproduced certain negative

tendencies and needed to be enhanced.

At the end of 2002, the coming to power of a new government seemed to make

another new promise for the transition to democracy. There was a new beginning

where some of these hopes were momentarily realised but the country

experienced unprecedented electoral violence after a dispute over presidential

election results in December 2007.This violence again eroded some of the gains in

the area of democracy and political participation.

In 2010, yet democracy values and principles of governance provided in the new

constitution such as accountability, public participation and the rule of law were

not fully practised. In fact, interplay of ethnicity, electoral system and struggles

over executive power has constrained public participation and the democratic

transition. 

The new constitution has addressed some of these challenges by establishing

strong checks on the powers of the executive as well as two levels of government:

national and county. However, the electoral system remains largely unchanged and

this led to contestations of the results of presidential elections at different periods.

First of all, violence engulfed Kenya following a dispute over presidential election

results in December 2007. The violence spread fast and split the country along

two main ethno-regional blocs: the Kikuyu and Kalenjin. It also pushed the country

towards the brink of civil war. The violence ended in February 2008 after

mediation by the African Union Panel of Eminent African Personalities. The panel

persuaded the two parties in the dispute, the Party of National Unity (PNU) of

the incumbent President Mwai Kibaki and the main opposition, the Orange

Democratic Movement (ODM) of Raila Odinga, to sign a National Accord committing

to end violence and to share power in a coalition government.

The violence indeed occurred as a result of the failure to respond to long-standing

governance issues. It continued to threaten the consolidation of democracy and

it constrained political participation. Among these issues were the manipulation

of ethnic identity by politicians, the lack of comprehensive constitutional reforms,

centralisation of power in the executive, and the problems around the majoritarian

electoral system.

Figure 9.6 : Picture illustrating the post-electoral violence in Kenya in 2007

Source :https://www.cbsnews.com/pictures/kenya-election-violence/2/.

Kenya normalised fast and held a peaceful referendum for a new constitution

in August 2010 and, following this achievement, the new constitution was

promulgated and later Kenya held a peaceful election in March 2013. Attempts to

make a new constitution had failed to deliver one for about two decades, but the

National Accord signed in February 2008 to end t he violence, developed a

framework and timelines for constitutional review and institutional reforms. The

negotiations on the National Accord revealed that constitutional review, among

other reforms, was urgently required to prevent a recurrence of violence. What

is interesting in the evolving political economy dynamics, is that the two main

ethnic communities that fought one another in the post-2007 election violence,

the Kikuyu and Kalenjin, grouped together into a political alliance, the Jubilee

alliance, which finally won the March presidential elections held in 2013 and those

of 2017. The alliance had both the presidential (Kikuyu) and deputy presidential

(Kalenjin) candidates Uhuru Kenyatta and William Ruto who were indicted by

the International Criminal Court (ICC) for the post-2007 election violence. They

were elected as president and deputy president in spite of indictment for crimes

committed during the post-election violence.

Figure 9.7 : The photo of Uhuru Kenyatta, President of Kenya and his Vice-President William Ruto.Source:https://nairobinews.nation.co.ke/wpcontent/uploads/2016/06/editor7053775513564086556.jpg

The 2010 constitution has addressed some of the obstacles that prevent

consolidation of democratic gains. It has established two levels of government:

national and county government. The County governments are given resources

to undertake development in their areas. The powers of the president have also

been reduced; the president cannot make appointments without the approval of

Parliament. The constitution has secured the independence of the judiciary and

Parliament and, therefore, the executive cannot compel them to tend to its interests.

9.4.3 Maintenance of justice in Tanzania and Kenya

Social justice is the view that everyone deserves equal economic, political

and  social rights and opportunities. The social justice is differently maintained in

Tanzania and Kenya. However, the judicial system has some similarities since the

two countries inherited a judicial system that is based on the British law, the former

colonial master of both countries.

The Tanzanian case

Since independence Tanzania has gone through distinct policy episodes of social

integration. In the first two decades of the post independence period Tanzania made

deliberate efforts and took various initiatives to attain social integration.

In this period Tanzania strived to build national unity and placed emphasis on

human development and social policy consistent with the basic needs approach.

This period was characterized by emphasis on investment in human development

consistent with the basic needs approach. During this period an emphasis was

placed on promoting the principles of human dignity, equality and freedom of the

individuals, equality of opportunity in life and equal citizen political rights across all

races and commitment to reduce income and wealth differentials in society and

fight against corruption.

In the same period, the Government of Tanzania deliberately downplayed religious

differences and promoted religious tolerance. It was declared that the state was

a secular state which worked with various religious denominations.Moreover, the

Government adopted the policy of health for allavailing free medical services to

all. Massive investments were made in health facilities and primary health care was

given priority.The Government of Tanzania also made significant contribution in

the provision of basic services. This has been done through direct funding of services

such as health, education and water which are basic necessities to the population,

and through provision of subsidies on basic goods such as food. All these are

efforts to provide social protection to the population.

Various policy statements on social security issues have been made and Acts

passed in regard to the protection of some sections of the population against

contingencies such as injuries and old age. In total these formal social security covered only a very small proportion of the population (less than 10%). Apart

from the formal social protection schemes, there are also traditional and nontraditional informal social protection schemes. Tanzania, like many other countries

in the developing world, has had strong informal/traditional safety nets built on

family and/or community support and informal income transfers. The traditional

social security systems are often based on customary rights, or on spiritual and

religious grounds. They are often organized around family groups, kinship groups

or neighbourhood and community groups. While it is recognized that over time

traditional social system has tended to decay and change forms in response to the

forces of urbanization and industrialization there are indications that family and

community social support systems have remained the main safety nets, particularly

among the rural poor and other vulnerable groups. In times of crises, individuals

have depended on family and clan members and/or members of the community for

assistance in the form of cash or in-kind, remittances to rural areas and facilitating

settling in of new migrants into the urban areas.

The villagization programme that was adopted was a more inclusive and

country wide programme involving the replacement of the traditional system of

rural settlements in which households were located often in isolated homesteads by

the creation of larger and more viable villages which were perceived to be more

viable economic units. The government’s efforts to deal with the challenges of

smallholders, uneconomically small plots and challenges of providing social services

to a scattered population took various forms but the most memorable policy stance

was villagization, which involved the resettlement of rural population with view to

facilitate the provision of social and economic infrastructure. Priority was given to

education including adult education, health services and rural water supply. Villages

were created in 1974 in which 60% of the population was relocated. The logic

behind villagization was based on what was seen as ideal African traditional family

whereby which was almost self-contained economic and social unit which provided

and shared basic necessities of life on the basis of mutual respect and obligation.

The principles of love, sharing and work which had prevailed in traditional African

family units were expected to be carried into Ujamaa Villages.

In fact, Tanzania made considerable achievements in human development and

during that period, there was an economic progress but this model ran out of

steam towards the end of the 1970s as exhibited by the way this development

was interrupted by the economic crisis starting from the late 1970s and the early

1980s. In response Tanzania adopted structural adjustment programmes which

were meant to focus on efficiency gains and growth acceleration. 

The second policy episode from1981 to 1995 was essentially a period in which

Tanzania adopted adjustment and reforms which were aimed at restoring

stabilization and growth but in the process it contributed to causing cracks into the

social integration status that had been achieved in the previous two decades. In the

third period (1996-2005) Tanzania embarked on more comprehensive economic

and social policies in which social integration received attention again but this time

in a new context of the market economy, competition and globalization.

The Kenyan case

Since the time of independence on December 12, 1963, Kenya has experienced

periods of human rights violations including land clashes, massacres, arbitrary

arrest, extrajudicial executions, and detention without trial, torture, electoral

violence, grand corruption, and economic crimes. Most of these are directly or

indirectly attributable to a constitutional order that concentrated power in the

presidency and weakened other arms of government and civil society.

For a period of at least two decades, Kenyans struggled to reform their

constitution. This struggle ended in 2010 when the people of Kenya voted for

a new constitution. The new Constitution establishes the framework for the

restoration of constitutional democracy in Kenya. It strengthens the likelihood

of accountability for past human rights abuses, of guarantees that they will not

reoccur, and of reparations for victims namely these of violence that followed

2007 presidential elections. The adoption of the new Constitution is an important

milestone and a starting point in the long road to addressing the root causes of

conflict in Kenya.

The 2010 new Constitution focuses on making more inclusive citizenship

through the new devolved system of government; reduced presidential powers

and better separation of powers between the three arms of the government; a

restructured and vetted judiciary; an expanded, enforceable bill of rights that

includes social, economic, and cultural rights; security sector and land reforms;

environmental protection, etc.

The Kenyans are hopeful that this new constitution will play a key role in

correcting the different errors of the past period in implementation of the social

justice principles that the old constitution was not providing. Actually, before the

vote of the new constitution, there were a number of failures in the provision of

social justice. For instance, the old constitution had no clarity as to who the republic

belongs. There was no specification on how people’s aspiration and needs were to

be catered for. But the new constitution gives the Kenyans all the sovereign power,

recognize the aspirations of all Kenyans for a government based on essential values

of human rights, equality, freedom, democracy, social justice and the rule of law.

These aspirations are very critical in the realization of a just, secure and peaceful

society.

In other words, the new Constitution establishes rules, values, and principles that

if implemented will facilitate the realization of equality and inclusive citizenship.

It promises to end the political manipulation of perceptions of marginalization

and exclusion that has contributed to interethnic strife in Kenya. In this respect,

the new Constitution seeks to address the root causes of interethnic conflicts, by:

• Establishing national values and principles of governance that seek to diffuse ethnic tensions often fuelled by perceptions of marginalization and exclusion;

• Reforming the electoral system, which has been used as an instrument

of inclusion and exclusion, in sharing of national resources, with a view to

ensuring that the voices of all segments of society are represented equitably

in government and making elections less fractious;

• Creating devolution mechanisms that seek to enhance fairness in the

sharing national resources; and establishing mechanisms to ensure fairness

in land administration and to address historical land; injustices that have often

reinforced perceptions of marginalization and exclusion and triggered ethnic

conflicts, especially during elections.

Further, the new Constitution seeks to facilitate government accountability, by

seeking to circumscribe the exercise of power in the three branches of government

in general, and the security agencies in particular.

 In doing so, the new Constitution promises to prevent future violation of human

rights and the commission of economic crimes.

Concerning the judicial system, Mainland Tanzanian law is a combination of British,

East African customary law, and Islamic law. The courts at the lower levels are

presided over by magistrates appointed by the chief justice. They have limited

jurisdiction, and there is a right of appeal to district courts, headed by either resident

or district magistrates. Appeal can be made to the High Court, which consists of a

chief justice and 17 judges appointed by the president. It has both civil and criminal

jurisdiction over all persons and all matters however, appeals from the High Court

can be made to the five-members Court of Appeal and judges are appointed to

the Court of Appeal and the High Court by the president on the advice of the chief

justice and to courts at lower levels by the chief justice.

In 1985, the Zanzibar courts were made independent to those of the mainland.

Islamic courts handle some civil matters and cases concerning the Zanzibar

constitution are heard only in Zanzibar courts. All other cases may be appealed to

the Court of Appeal of the Republic.

The judiciary is made up of various courts of judicature and is independent of

other arms of the government. Tanzania adheres to and respects the constitutional

principles of separation of powers. The Constitution makes provision for the

establishment of an independent judiciary, and the respect for the principles of

the rule of law, human rights and good governance.

The Judiciary in Tanzania can be illustrated as follows: The Judiciary in Tanzania

has four tiers: The Court of Appeal of the United Republic of Tanzania, the High

Courts for Mainland Tanzania and Tanzania Zanzibar, Magistrates Courts, which

are at two levels, i.e. the Resident Magistrate Courts and the District Court, both of

which have concurrent jurisdiction. Primary Courts are the lowest in the judicial

hierarchy.

The structure of the Zanzibar legal system is as follows:

figure 9.8: The structure of the Zanzibar legal system

Source:   http://www.nyulawglobal.org/globalex/Tanzania.html.

The entire court system is divided into a hierarchical system wherein the superior

courts consist of Supreme Court, Courts of Appeal, High court and Industrial court

etc. whereas the subordinate courts are made up of Magistrate court, Kadhi court

and others.

Kenya is a country in which the Judiciary of Kenya is the system of courts which

interprets as well as applies the law.  There are courts both at the federal level and

the state level and each is responsible for its own set of functions and responsibilities.

The Supreme Court is the Apex court which is comprised of the Chief Justice,

The President, the deputy chief justice and five other judges.  The word of the

Supreme Court is final and cannot be negated by any other court. All the other

courts fall beneath this court.

The Court of Appealis the court which handles the appeal cases from the High

court as well as those as prescribed by the President.  This court comprises of not

less than 12 judges and is headed by the President who is appointed by the Chief

Justice.

The High Court has the supervisory jurisdiction over all the lower or subordinate

courts and other persons whereas the Industrial Court of Kenya was established

for the purpose of handling issues or cases related to employment and industrial

relations etc. Environment and Land Court is responsible for hearing and settling

disputes which are related to the environment.

The Subordinate Courts comprise the Magistrate Court, Kadhi Court and Courts

Martial. The Magistrate Court is where the majority of judiciary cases are heard

and these courts are located in each of the district of Kenya. Kadhi Court is the

court which is responsible for hearing civil and criminal matters which are related

to Islamic law.  Courts Martial is the military court of Kenya which mostly hears

or settles those cases which are related to the Kenya Defense Forces. Appeals that

move on from this court are heard by the High court.

Figure 9.9: Kenya Court hierarchy

Source:https://www.hierarchystructure.com//wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Kenya-Court-Hierarchy.jpg.

Application activities 9.4

1. Analyse the evolution of democracy process in Kenya.

2. Assess the progress of democracy in Tanzania.

3. Analyse the social justice in Kenya. Illustrate your response by articles

from the Constitution of Kenya.

4. What lessons do you draw from democratic process and social justice in

Tanzania? Explain clearly your answer.

End unit assessment

1. One of the basic features of democracy is the separation of powers.

Explain how this characteristic is stipulated in the Rwandan constitution.

2. Account for meritocracy as one of the features of social justice.

3. Evaluate the meetings held in Urugwiro Village in the democratisation

process in Rwanda in the aftermath of the 1994 Genocide against the

Tutsi.

4. Write an essay form in not more than 800 words on how democracy is

maintained in Rwanda.

5. Assess the key achievements of the National Consultative Forum of

Political Organisations.

6. Analyse the circumstances of the conception of the Travail d’Intérêt

Général (TIG). Evaluate the achievements made thanks to this work

that involves Genocide convicts of the second category who pleaded

guilty and confessed their role in Genocide.

7. Research on internet and examine the process of reconciliation in

Kenya after the violence that engulfed this country following a dispute

over presidential election results in December 2007.

9.5 Glossary

Altruistic:Showing unselfish concern for the welfare of others

Apology:A formal written defence of something you believe in strongly

Austerity:The trait of great self-denial (especially refraining from worldly pleasures)

Bicameral:Composed of two legislative bodies

Blog:A shared online journal where people can post daily entries about their

personal experiences and hobbies

Bolster:Support and strengthen

Covenant:A formal agreement between two or more parties to perform or not

perform some action

Distrust:The trait of not trusting others or Doubt about someone’s honesty

Grievance:A complaint about a (real or imaginary) wrong that causes resentment

and is grounds for action

Legitimacy:Lawfulness by virtue of being authorized or in accordance with law

or the property of being genuine or valid, not being a fake or forgery

Lucrative:Producing a sizeable profit

Marginalise:Relegate to a lower or outer edge, as of specific groups of people

Neoliberal:Having or showing belief in the need for economic growth in addition to

traditional liberalistic values

Neoliberalism:A political orientation originating in the 1960s; blends liberal

political views with an emphasis on economic growth

Privilege:A special advantage, immunity or benefit not enjoyed by all or a right

reserved exclusively by a particular person or group (especially a hereditary or

official right)

Reckon with: Take account of

Righteousness:Adhering to moral principles

Setback: An unfortunate happening that hinders or impedes; something that is

thwarting or frustrating

Spectrum:A broad range of related objects, values, qualities, ideas or activities

Venture:An investment that is very risky but could yield great profits or a

commercial undertaking that risks a loss but promises a profit

Vet: Examine carefully