Rwanda’s Undemocratic Election

This July, Rwanda will conduct its presidential election—an event that should represent a celebration of democratic principles. Instead, it already promises to entrench the persistent suppression of opposition voices by the current government in Rwanda. As a victim of this suppression, I find myself once again barred from participating in an electoral process that I, as a Rwandan, have a right to take part in.

In January 2010, after 16 years in exile, I returned to Rwanda, hopeful and determined to contribute to the country’s political landscape through peaceful and democratic change. My intention was to register my political party and run for president in the elections scheduled for later that year.

But instead of being welcomed into the political arena, I was arrested, tried, convicted, and subsequently sentenced to 15 years in prison on charges widely criticized as politically motivated, including by Human Rights Watch, the European Parliament, and the U.S. Department of State. My trial, marred by irregularities and a lack of minimum fair trial standards, ended with a harsh sentence for crimes including “genocide ideology” — a controversial offense that has been used to silence dissent.

The African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights later ruled in 2017 that my rights to freedom of opinion and expression as well as to a defense had been violated by the Rwandan state. Despite this, I was kept in prison for another year before being released by presidential pardon, a gesture I thought would be followed by opening political space in Rwanda. By then I had been imprisoned for eight years, five of which I spent in solitary confinement.

The African Court’s decision, which the Rwandan state has refused to recognize to this day, highlighted the broader issues of legal restrictions on speech and the challenges faced by political opposition in Rwanda.

Many international observers see Rwanda under President Paul Kagame as an exemplary country that has made significant progress. Since his party, the Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF), took power by military victory, the Rwandan government has adeptly orchestrated communication campaigns and disseminated compelling narratives globally. These efforts, naturally, portray Rwanda favorably, showcasing its purported capability to address both domestic and international challenges from poverty to counterterrorism.

At the same time, the government’s commitment to deploying Rwandan soldiers in multinational peacekeeping missions has not only strengthened the country’s foreign relations but also projected the narrative of Rwanda as a developmental success. This carefully crafted public image is not reflective of reality.

Living in Rwanda, the limitations on citizen participation in decision-making under the leadership of the RPF is plain to see. The concept of the rule of law, intended to promote good governance, is largely absent. The legislature lacks the power to effectively challenge the executive, dominated as it is by RPF members and their coalition allies. Only compliant opposition parties are permitted to operate, contributing to the Parliament’s uncritical allegiance to the RPF.

Consequently, parliamentarians prioritize RPF ideology over constituents’ interests, significantly impacting policymaking. The judiciary’s lack of independence, with top officials appointed by the president and confirmed by the RPF-dominated Senate, results in precious few rulings against the government, and fewer still, if any, in politically sensitive cases.

The absence of effective checks and balances of government policies fosters a top-down approach, excluding citizen input and neglecting the immediate needs of Rwandans. Despite Rwanda’s impressive economic growth, as acknowledged by the World Bank, it is not inclusive and faces shortcomings in sectors crucial for genuine social and economic transformation.

Human capital development lags due to low education standards and high levels of malnutrition among children under the age of 5. The private sector remains underdeveloped and dominated by state and RPF enterprises. And the suppression of dissenting voices creates fear among different sectors of society, inhibiting genuine unity in Rwanda.

Additionally, Rwanda’s alleged support to the M23 rebel group in Eastern Congo and RED-Tabara in Burundi affect its relationship with neighboring countries in the Great Lakes region, creating continuous political tensions. This, in turn, impedes Rwandans from fully benefiting from the sort of regional integration that drives development.

Kagame’s pledge in 2000 to transform Rwanda into a middle-income state driven by a knowledge economy by 2020 has yet to materialize. Despite concerted efforts and notable progress in some sectors, Rwanda still ranks among the least developed countries in the world.

If I am permitted to run in the election, I would promote governance reform in Rwanda—a campaign promise that is perceived by the current authorities as a direct challenge to the status quo. Central to my commitment to genuine democratization is the initiation of inclusive dialogue among political and civil society stakeholders.

The priority is to strengthen institutions capable of upholding human rights and the rule of law, as well as promoting social justice. It also emphasizes the importance of remembering all victims of Rwanda’s troubled history, decentralizing power, enhancing civic education, and promoting equitable economic development across the country.

Through dialogue, my platform also seeks to address the issue of Rwandan refugees, which contributes to conflicts and political tensions in the Great Lakes region. The current Rwandan government perceives these changes as threats to their control, further complicating the path toward meaningful reform.

A recent decision by the High Court of Rwanda denying my application for rehabilitation—and thus the right to run in the upcoming presidential elections—exemplifies the ongoing judicial persecution directed at government’s critics. The Rwandan state has not only restricted my right to run for office, but also my ability to travel abroad, even for personal family matters such as attending my son’s wedding, witnessing the birth of my first grandchild, or visiting my gravely ill husband.

Legally, the actions of the Rwandan state violate the East African Community Treaty, which mandates adherence to fundamental principles of democracy, the rule of law, and respect for human rights.

On April 30, I filed a case before the East African Court of Justice seeking to hold Rwanda accountable by restoring my rights and safeguarding the democratic aspirations of all Rwandans. This case is not just about an infringement on my personal liberties. It is about the systematic denial of the rights of all Rwandans to choose their leaders freely.

Rwandans have suffered long enough under successive regimes led by strongmen who have gained and retained power through violence. This pattern is not unique to Rwanda. It reflects broader global trend of governments manipulating legal frameworks to suppress opposition even without overt repression.

But the situation in Rwanda is a critical case study for how international legal mechanisms can support the enforcement of human rights standards and democratize domestic governance. The outcomes of legal proceedings before bodies like the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights or the East African Court of Justice can set precedents for promoting adherence to international human rights commitments while respecting national sovereignty.

Rwanda’s 2024 elections will serve as a litmus test for the government’s commitment to democratic principles. The best measure of success on that front would be to allow genuine opposition voices to participate.