
Burundi: Ordonnance Ministerielle 530/1960 du 24/10/2016 Portant Suspension Provisoire de Certaines Associations Sans but Lucratie (24.10.2016)



OTTAWA, Canada, October 24, 2016 – The Honourable Stéphane Dion, Minister of Foreign Affairs, today issued the following statement:
“Canada is deeply troubled by South Africa’s announcement that it has submitted a notice of withdrawal from the International Criminal Court to the United Nations Secretary-General.
South Africa played an important role in the development of the court, and we recognize its past efforts to end impunity for the most serious international crimes. We also remember the words of Nelson Mandela in 1998, when South Africa joined the court:
Our own continent has suffered enough horrors emanating from the inhumanity of human beings towards human beings. Who knows, many of these might not have occurred, or at least been minimized, had there been an effectively functioning International Criminal Court.
All victims, including African victims, have a right to justice. The ongoing contributions of African states in support of the court are invaluable to make this justice a reality.
That steadfast support is more important than ever today; we urge South Africa to reconsider. The International Criminal Court cannot be abandoned because it may not be perfect. Our answer must rather be to improve and strengthen it.
We must not forget the thousands of children, women and men who have been victims of unimaginable atrocities and for whom the International Criminal Court, as a court of last resort, offers the only hope of justice.”

The EU and its Member States remain staunch supporters of the ICC and are committed to full co-operation on the prevention of serious crimes falling under the jurisdiction of the Court.
BRUSSELS, Belgium, October 24, 2016 – The European Union deeply regrets the Republic of South Africa’s decision to initiate its withdrawal from the Rome Statute. We equally note with deep concern that Burundi has formalised steps to withdraw from the Rome Statute. Until now, no State has ever withdrawn from the Rome Statute.
South Africa played a significant role in the establishment of the ICC and was one of the first signatories of the Rome Statue. We will continue to engage with both countries on how they can remain partners to the Rome Statute.
The International Criminal Court (ICC) is a key institution to assist citizens achieve justice when confronted with the most serious crimes, where this is not possible at the national level. A majority of African situations were submitted by the national authorities concerned. The Court is also involved in situations all over the world.
We all have a shared interest in strengthening the rule of law and working together with the ICC, including along the lines suggested by the President of the Rome Statute’s Assembly of States Parties.
The EU and its Member States remain staunch supporters of the ICC and are committed to full co-operation on the prevention of serious crimes falling under the jurisdiction of the Court. Where concerns are raised within the framework of the Rome Statute, we remain open for constructive discussion.
“A founding signatory of the Rome Statute, on ICC: Yes we should be out of the ICC. ICC is not serious. It is partisan. There are so many people who should have been tried if they were serious. The way to go is to have our own African Criminal Court. Trying to work with ICC was a mistake” – President Yoweri Kaguta Museveni [at the Second #UGDebate on the 13th February 2016]
As Washington is shocked by the recent events, that the International Criminal Court which is stationed in The Hague and the Netherlands; where they ironically are closing down prisons because of lacks of criminals. The International Community and the African Nations are triggering the Article 127 of the Rome Statute of 1997 to Withdraw from the honourable justice chambers of this so-called earth. There is certain reflections and vivid reasons for why this is happing. And I will try to sort it out, the Westerns and Europeans, even some Americans might be offend, but still carry it and take it for what it is.
“In June 2009, Comoros, Djibouti, and Senegal called on African States Parties to withdraw en mass from the Statute in protest against allegations that the ICC was targeting Africans. This declaration was specifically in reference to Sudanese Pres. Omar al-Bashir’s indictment” (Mbaku, Weber State University).
The ICC is not a pre-historic relic of the European Colonial past, still the actions of is of a seemingly imperialistic affair where the smaller newer nations and less resourceful have been targeted at much higher extent than the ones of more sophisticated countries who are not former colonialized. That is a fact and not NRM fiction. Just a certainty that the further hurt the African sovereign nations that they even has Executives under the microscope for their actions while Tony Blair and George W. Bush walks around like Kings on this earth. It’s not like the powers to be, touches the big-men from there, but around the corner they get taken away quicker than ice-cream on a hot-summer-day.
Not that the men and woman who has been questioned and been under investigations has been involved in crimes and activity against the humanity. They have and many using child-soldiers, used ethnicity to win power and even some killings to the level of genocide.

“Article 127
Withdrawal
United Nations, withdraw from this Statute. The withdrawal shall take effect one year after the date of receipt of the notification, unless the notification specifies a later date.
Burundi withdraws:
“President Pierre Nkurunziza, who critics accuse of human rights abuses, signed a decree late on Tuesday that paves the way for his east African nation’s departure from the court. His decision comes at time when the ICC is conducting a preliminary investigation into politically motivated violence in Burundi in which several hundred people died” (Alionby, 2016).
South Africa withdraws:
“Under the Rome Statute, the 2002 treaty that established the court, countries are obligated to arrest anyone sought by the tribunal. “Legal uncertainty” around the statute blocks South Africa from resolving conflicts through dialogue, including inviting adversaries for visits, Justice Minister Michael Masutha said, and handing over a foreign leader to the court would have amounted to an infringement of South Africa’s sovereignty” (…) “The Rome Statute “is in conflict and inconsistent with” South Africa’s law giving sitting leaders diplomatic immunity, Mr. Masutha said at a news conference on Friday. The question is before the country’s high court” (…) “Foreign Minister Maite Nkoana-Mashabane this week formally notified the United Nations secretary general, Ban Ki-moon, of South Africa’s intention to withdraw from the international court. Leaving the body would take about a year, during which South Africa would still have to cooperate with the court’s proceedings” (Chan & Marlise, 2016).
This is happening while the ICC has asked for Nations who has signed up for the Rome Statute and the ICC. This has been South Africa, Rwanda, Burundi and Kenya. The Non-compliance documents of Djibouti and Uganda has even come in 11th July 2016. The Arrest Warrant on President Omar Al-Bashir we’re set on 4th March 2009. There has gone 7 years has passed and his still roaming around with countries willingly delivering “non-compliance” documentations to the ICC for their non-cooperation towards them.

There are more running cases on the continent… some of them are:
“The ICC Prosecutor has opened cases against 26 individuals in connection with five African countries. Twenty-five of these remain open; the 26th, against Darfur rebel leader Bahar Idriss Abu Garda, was dismissed by judges, though the prosecutor may attempt to submit new evidence in an attempt to re-open it. The cases stem from investigations into violence in Libya, Kenya’s post-election unrest in 2007-2008, rebellion and counter-insurgency in the Darfur region of Sudan, the Lord’s Resistance Army insurgency in central Africa, civil conflict in eastern Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), and a 2002-2003 conflict in the Central African Republic. The Prosecutor is also examining 2010-2011 violence in Côte d’Ivoire, a 2009 military crackdown on opposition supporters in Guinea, and inter-communal violence in central Nigeria, but has not opened formal investigations or opened cases with regard to these situations. Uganda, DRC, CAR, Kenya, Nigeria, and Guinea are states parties to the ICC. Sudan, Libya, and Côte d’Ivoire are not. ICC jurisdiction in Sudan and Libya stems from U.N. Security Council actions, while jurisdiction in Côte d’Ivoire was granted by virtue of a declaration submitted by the Ivorian Government on October 1, 2003, which accepted the jurisdiction of the Court as of September 19, 2002.25 Five suspects—four Congolese nationals and one Rwandan—are currently in ICC custody. The ICC Prosecutor has sought summonses, rather than arrest warrants, in connection with attempted prosecutions of Darfur rebel commanders and of Kenyan suspects. The Prosecutor has not secured any convictions to date” (Congressional Reaserch Service, 2011).
The Kenyan case we’re like the Prosecutor said wasn’t done, but for now there wasn’t able to follow through on evidence and make a case worth living. That is me translating the jurors lingo. The IGAD communique on the 6th April 2016: “The Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) joins Kenyans of all walks of life to rejoice the collapse of cases against the Deputy President, H.E. William Samoei Ruto and his co-accused, radio journalist, Joshua Arap Sang at the International Criminal Court in The Hague yesterday” (…) “It would be recalled that IGAD had condemned the way the ICC had handled the Kenyan cases from the beginning. During a press conference held in Nairobi on 22nd March 2011, Amb Mahboub stated clearly IGAD’s position on the deferral request of the ICC cases by Kenya pointing out that the trials would “weaken the country and weaken the region” (IGAD, 06.04.2016).
The Kenyan government President Kenyatta the day before on the 5th April 2016:
“Earlier today, Trial Chamber V (a) of the International Criminal Court acquitted my Deputy President, Honourable William Ruto, and Mr. Joshua Arap Sang. I welcome the aforementioned decision, which reaffirms my strong conviction from the beginning about the innocence of my Deputy President. From the start of this case, I have believed that this case was ill-conceived and never grounded on the proper examination of our experience of 2007/2008 as a nation” (…) “Each and every Kenyan was touched by the tragedy that befell our nation in 2007-2008. Each and every victim of this unfortunate happening matters. Not one of them has been forgotten. Their suffering demanded of us as leadership to seek reconciliation. My Deputy and I campaigned and were elected on a platform to unite and reconcile our motherland. When you entrusted the leadership of the country to our administration, you made us responsible for the healing and reconciliation of our people” (Kenyatta, Uhuru – ‘H.E. Uhuru Kenyatta Statement on ICC verdict on the Ruto and Sang Case’ 05.04.2016).
So with this in mind, the Kenyan Government have been thoroughly investigated by the ICC recently over time since the ICC charged people close connected to the current leadership and government. They even at some point had a case against the Kenyan President Kenyatta, but they let it slide because they got no witness angle on him. The Jubilee has fought back and has done their duty towards Courts. Still the wound of charges, the appearance and the trial has hurt.
The newest ICC cases into Africa is the post-election violence where even the Parliament we’re put on fire. “In the letter of referral to the ICC signed by Gabon’s Justice Minister Denise Mekamne Edzidzie, the government accuses Ping and his supporters of incitement to genocide and crimes against humanity” (…) “It highlights a speech which Ping gave during his electoral campaign, in which he allegedly called on his supporters to “get rid of the cockroaches.” (…) “These words were an incitement to commit the crime of genocide,” the letter says” (France24, 2016). The Gabonese Authorities tries to pin it on the Opposition as the election rigging made the public mad and not just the supporters of Jean Ping. If the ICC uses this opportunity not to pin it on themselves as the Second Generation for life President Bongo!
African Union Letter to the ICC on the 29th January 2014:




So the long-stemming grievances are now coming into effect. The feeling of being targets while others walk scotch-free. The inaccurate acts of being the main ones, even as the violence, genocides and crimes against humanity happen; the leaders don’t want a hanging gallows over their heads. Still, the acts of many current Presidents and their Regimes are using armies like Ethiopia against civilians. If they weren’t a strong ally of the United States, they would have a cherry to pick at the courts. President Museveni fears for place, the same should President Mugabe that never been for the Gukurahundi massacres we’re Zimbabwean Republican Police killed 20,000 people. These are men who fear the ICC and would do what they can to not be touched by their current sins and the ones of old.
Sudan, the country of President Omar Al-Bashir has said this in the recent our about the matter:
“This wise decision is established by the Republic of Burundi on objective grounds that the so-called International Criminal Court has become a tool of pressure and instability in the under-development countries. Further, the opening of investigations against some leaders is a result of pressures exercised by the western force,” the statement cited by the Sudan Tribune said” (Akwei, 2016).
So the country who has the Executive under charges, the other one of late has been forces away from power, but still men who was in charge of their respectable nations President Laurent Gbagbo who have now recently been in trial at ICC:
“On Thursday, Mr. Gbagbo, the former president of Ivory Coast, will go on trial at the International Criminal Court in The Hague, facing four counts of crimes against humanity stemming from the violence surrounding the 2010 presidential election. He was narrowly defeated in a runoff, but he insisted that he had won and refused to cede power, leading to months of turmoil and the deaths of more than 3,000 people before his arrest in April 2011” (…) “The trial of Mr. Gbagbo is an important challenge for the International Criminal Court. He is the first former president to reach trial at the tribunal, which has been in operation for a decade with a mandate to deal with war crimes and genocide. Also on trial with him will be Charles Blé Goudé, one of Mr. Gbagbo’s militia leaders in the 2011 upheaval, which followed more than a decade of ethnic political violence in Ivory Coast” (Rothschild, 2016).
So with this in mind, he isn’t a guerrilla fighting with child-soldiers like the ones charged by the ICC when coming to Lord Resistance Army and others who has been charged for violations against humanity in the ICC. These being Bosco the Terminator from the Democratic Republic of Congo, also that the former Vice President of Pierre Bemba of the MLC has been charged for his crimes, while his President Joseph Kabila walks free for his sins. This proves the neglect and the handpicked cases of the ICC. Reasons why the African Union and others are claiming so, partly righteous, partly wrong! The key to this, if the ICC want to be serious as an International legal institution… it needs cases and probes into states in Europe, America and Asia; not only War-Lords in Africa. That is just Neo-Colonialism and proves the questionable attributes to the character of the laws and big-man politics of the world. Peace.
Reference:
Akwei, Ismail – ‘Sudan urges mass African withdrawal from the ICC’ (21.10.2016) link: http://www.africanews.com/2016/10/21/sudan-urges-mass-african-withdrawal-from-the-icc/
Alionby, John – ‘Burundi becomes first nation to quit International Criminal Court’ (19.10.2016) link: https://www.ft.com/content/ce408588-95bf-11e6-a1dc-bdf38d484582
Chan, Sewell & Simons, Marlise – ‘South Africa to Withdraw From International Criminal Court’ (21.10.2016) link: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/22/world/africa/south-africa-international-criminal-court.html?_r=0
Congressional Research Service – ‘International Criminal Court Cases in Africa: Status and Policy Issues’ (22.07.2011) link: https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/RL34665.pdf
France24 – ‘ICC opens preliminary probe into Gabon unrest’ (29.09.2016) link: http://www.france24.com/en/20160929-icc-opens-preliminary-probe-situation-gabon
Mbaku, John Mukum – ‘Africa’s Case Against the ICC’, Weber State University
Rothschild, Saskia de – ‘Trial of Ivory Coast’s Laurent Gbagbo Will Test International Criminal Court’ (27.01.2016) link: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/28/world/africa/ivory-coast-laurent-gbagbo-hague-trial.html
International Criminal Court – Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (17.07.1998 in force on 01.07.2002) Copyrighted 2011








ADDIS ABABA, Ethiopia, October 12, 2016 -The Peace and Security Council of the African Union (AU), at its 631st meeting, held on 6 October 2016, adopted the following decision on the situation in Burundi:
Council,
1. Takes note of the briefing made by the Special Representative of the Chairperson of the Commission for the Great Lakes region, Professor Ibrahima Fall, as well as the statements by the representatives of the Republic of Angola, as member of the African Member in the United Nations Security Council, the United Nations (UN), the European Union and the permanent members of the Security Council namely France, United Kingdom and the United States of America;
2. Recalls its previous communiqués and press statements on the situation in Burundi, in particular, Communiqué PSC/PR/COMM.(DLXXXI) adopted at its 581stmeeting held on 9 March 2016;
3. Acknowledges that the security situation in the country has improved, especially in the capital city Bujumbura and its surrounding areas. In this respect, Council urges the Government of Burundi to continue enhance security and safety, ensuring fundamental freedoms and civil liberties for all Burundians, including through reopening the space for the media;
4. Strongly condemns all incidents of violations of human rights, arbitrary arrests and targeted killings by whomsoever in the country and urges the Government to take further stern and urgent measures to put these actions to a definite end;
5. Reiterates the imperative of urgent resumption of the Inter-Burundian Dialogue under the aegis of the East African Community (EAC) as the only practical way forward to resolve the crisis in the country. In this regard, Council reaffirms the need fora consensual approach among all the Burundian stakeholders to address and resolve contentious issues relating to the situation in the country, and in so doing, to uphold the Constitution and the Arusha Peace and Reconciliation Agreement of August 2000;
6. Underscores the need for the deployment of additional the AU human rights observers and military experts in line with the relevant decisions of Council, to monitor and report on the human rights and security situation in Burundi. In this respect, Council calls for full cooperation of the Burundian authorities and other concerned stakeholders in the country;
7. Urges the Government of Burundi to speed up the signing of the Memorandum of Understanding with the AU Commission for the smooth deployment of the AU human rights observers and military experts in Burundi, as well as to start discussion with the UN on the modalities to deploy 228 UN police officers as adopted by the UN Security Council resolution 2303 (2016) of 29 July 2016;
8. Further urges the Government of Burundi, in consultation with the United Nations High Commission for Refugees and the countries hosting Burundian refugees, to promote and ensure safe conditions for the return of refugees into the country and their resumption of normal life;
9. Requests the AU Commission to continue to closely monitoring the situation in Burundi and to brief Council on a regular basis, in order for it to take appropriate decisions;
10. Requests the Commission to take the necessary measures to invite the EAC Facilitator of the Inter-Burundian Dialogue, former President Benjamin Mkapa to brief Council on the status of the Dialogue;
11. Further requests the Chairperson of the Commission to transmit this communique to the United Nations Secretary-General, for it to be circulated as an official working document to members of the UN Security Council in time for their meeting on Burundi scheduled for 13 October 2016;
12. Decides to remain actively seized of the matter.

“The attitude of these military personnel can be understood insofar as they have always been pampered by the regime of President Habyarimana. For this reason, they remain impervious to the current political changes and are looking to use any means whatsoever to hold onto their master, who, despite his florid entreaty to the Rwandan people to uphold the Peace Treaty, is in fact the instigator of a diabolical scheme to sow disorder and desolation amongst the population. The events that occurred recently in Kirambo, Mutura and Ngenda are sufficient testimony to this” (Re: Machiavellian plan by President Habyarimana, 03.12.1993, To: The Commandant, United Nations Mission for Assistance to Rwanda, MINUAR, Kigali).
Here is also a prequel to the killing of President Habyarimana… which should not be overlooked as the arms trade and ammunition delivery from China would be substantial, together with another one, I will not show is the way the Rwandan Government order to get Technical Service from Brazil. After this I will look into the aspects of the killing and witnesses to the murder of an Executive of Rwanda 1994.
There is also a Secret Loan and Arms deal with the Chinese Government:
“The Ministry for Foreign Affairs of the Rwandan Republic sends its compliments to the Embassy of the Popular Republic of China in Kigali and, following the verbal memo n°0083/16.00/CAB of 01 February 1992, has the honour of sending it in annex the list of weapons and munitions requirements within the framework of the long-term concessionary loan already accepted by the Chinese party. The Ministry asks the Embassy to send it the draft agreement for this loan for examination and observation. The Ministry for Foreign Affairs of the Rwandan Republic thanks the Embassy of the Popular Republic of China in Kigali, in advance, for its friendly intervention and would like to take the opportunity to reiterate the assurances of its highest consideration” (Rwandan Government – ‘N° A56/15.00/CAB’ 24.02.1992, Embassy of the Popular Republic of China in Kigali).
The now deceased, Rwandan President Juvénal Habyarimana that went down in 1994 and was one of the actions that sparked the 1994 Genocide in Rwanda. As I have looked through some documents that says certain things and certain eye-witness reports and such, that gives an in-depth look and fresh stance on the matter, as there still unclear about it. Like there are still uncertainty about the plane, that was carrying Dag Hammarskjöld, the then United Nation Secretary General who lost his life in a plane crash around Ndola, Zambia in 1961.

Thierry Charlier said this: “I would also point out to you that I learned from a Belgian living opposite the residence of the Prime Minister, “Agathe” in Kigali that the Rwandan press agency filmed the serious beating of 3 Belgian soldiers on the property of the Prime Minister…I did not have time to speak further with this individual. I report that European civilian witnesses told me. That in Kigali roadblocks and soldiers were already in place at certain intersections within the city before the attack on the presidential aircraft. These intersections were not usually occupied at normal times. I can add that a soldier of the 2 Bn Cdo told me that he had seen that the markings on the runway had been extinguished just before the landing of the presidential aircraft. During the afternoon, Mr. Charlier notified us of the name of the French Vice-Consul in Butare: BOUSSAC” (Gendarmerie, 16.05.1994).
For report No. 684: “Serubuga, Bagasora, Buregeya, Rwagafilita and others played a role in the attack. I don’t know anything about the assassination of our paratroopers. Nothing allowed us to think that such a thing could happen. I did not hear the communications of the Paras who were killed. With regard to radio RTLM, I only listen to it rarely, but I heard the translations made by the staff because the essential part of the broadcasts were in Kinyarwanda. Comments have been broadcast in the style: “the Belgians have money, it’s from them that we should take it”, “The Belgians killed your president, you should kill a Belgian at this or that place” or things of this kind. I did not hear them personally. As far as I’m aware, the FAR shouldn’t have had missiles” (Report 684, 1994).
From the witness Herman Trog said this: “on 06/04/94, during the afternoon, it was announced on the radio that the President would return from DAR ES SALAAM” (…)”One of their acquaintances, Mrs. BOVEN (of Zairean origin) was at the swimming pool of the Hotel “VILLAGE URUGWIRO” in KACYIRU on 06/04/94 around 17:00, when she was warned by a captain of the Rwandan army that it was advisable for her to go home since serious things were going to happen” (…)”Behind the CND on the road towards DEUTSCHE WELLE, there was a large area somewhere owned by the President, where the INTERAHAMWE carried out its training” (…)”During the period when the disturbances had begun, an anonymous pamphlet had circulated which stated that the Belgians were going to “turn Rwanda into a Somalia” (…)”During the broadcasts of RTLM, on the day following the attack, a type of debate took place between HABYMANA and a woman. This broadcast was rebroadcast several times on that day. It stated that the FPR had shot down the presidential plane with the collaboration of the Belgians. The Rwandans should take revenge and defend themselves. This information was broadcast in the local dialect” (…)”In another broadcast, it was mentioned that people should not ask themselves who the whites were that they had seen. It was observed that it was Belgians who were in the process of pillaging around GISOZI and GACULIRO” (…)”On RADIO KIGALI, between 07/04 and 11/04, Mathieu GIRUTZI (MRND) had cried that it was the 10 paras’ own fault if they had been killed because they themselves had initiated the attack” (Pro Justitia, 1995).
Then this was being reported by Maurice Timsonet said this: “During a security meeting with the authorities of the Rwandan gendarmerie, chaired by the Gen-Chief of staff of the gendarmerie NDINDILYIMANA (the 5th (?) at 14:00)” (…)”had the impression that this latter party, whom I had previously met (CTM between 1980 and 1983 and visit in November 1992), avoided advertising the fact that he knew me in the presence of his officers. At this meeting, it was decided that the weapons search activities carried out by the Rwandan gendarmerie in collaboration with UNCIVPOL, should take place starting from the night of 7/8 April. I also had the impression that this type of operation. On the evening of 6 April, I found myself at PEGASUS. I remember that initially there was confusion and that the sector thought that a munitions depot had exploded on the KANOMBE side. The communications deriving from the airport group soon clearly indicated that it was a small aircraft which had been shot down with missiles. At this point I also said that if it was not a coup d’état, it bore a strange resemblance to one. The confirmation of the assassination was given by VITAMINE, who had contact with the spouse of the pilot of the presidential aircraft. on disturbed a fair number of officers of the gendarmerie present at this meeting” (…)”During the night of 6 to 7 April, an order was received from K9 cancelling all escorts, including the permanent ones, hence that of AGATHE. The message announcing this decision derived from S 14 (Captain SCHEPKENS) who received it from the commander of the sector, Colonel MARCHAL. At this point, this decision was notified to the teams in question, including Y6. This measure seemed logical to me in view of the events. I am not aware that it was the fruit of coordination between KIBAT and the sector. It was simply announced by radio. Some time afterwards (18 minutes according to the campaign journal), the permanent escorts were re-established. The escort for AGATHE is a permanent escort. In the same fashion as the cancellation message, this latter order was broadcast and I could not say what the motivation for it was. By permanent escort, one should understand that the staff carrying out this type of mission makes itself available to a designated individual and ensures the safety of his/her movements until this individual dismisses them” (…)”During the AGATHE mission, the problems faced by Lt. LOTIN, difficulties in finding an open route, problems at the domicile of the minister herself, were serious but did not seem to us to be exceptional relative to other situations experienced in other places” (Report 985/94, 13.06.1994).

The witness report from Jean Turatsinre has said this: “On 6 April 1994, around 21.00, I received the order from Lieutenant-Colonel Bavugamenschi to reinforce the security of Agathe Uwilingiyimana and Faustin Twagiramungu” (…)”On arriving at the presidency, we were stopped by the presidential guards who were in an armoured vehicle and who prohibited us from continuing and passing to reach the residence of Agathe Uwilingiyimana” (…)”The presidential guards entered Agathe’s property two or three times without finding her there, until they discovered the hole in the fence. The presidential guards first searched Agathe’s house but without finding her there” (…)”The gendarmes had hidden her with the Senegalese (PNUD)” (…)”I think that by acting in this way, Agathe wished to protect their children, who were refugees and were also with the United Nations volunteers (PNUD). Agathe and her husband were killed on the spot” (…)”The Prime Minister Agathe was one of the threatened ministers and since 7 April 1994 at midnight/midday?, the Rwandan gendarmerie and hence I myself also knew that three ministers had been assassinated (the information minister, the agriculture minister and Landuald, Chairman of the Liberal party). The commander of the Presidential Guard assigned on another occasion to the gendarmerie was a witness to these three assassinations” (…)”Before dying, Agathe attempted to reach General Dallaire to obtain assistance” (…)”The presidential guard, the Para- commandos stationed at the camp in Kanombé, The Recce Battalion (composed of men from the president’s region) and the FAR battalion stationed at Mont Kigali in HUYE took part in the massacres. The last named FAR battalion carried out the first massacres in the centre of the city” (Pro Justitia, 10.05.1995).
The Witness of Andre Renouprez said this: “This aircraft circled around the airport after the attack waiting for authorisation to land. As it did not have authorisation and was beginning to have fuel problems, it was diverted to NAIROBI. On the radio CAPT. VANDRIESSCHE reported that he found it strange that the firemen from the airport who had come for the burning aircraft seemed to be leaving rapidly in the opposite direction. He also reported that he had tried to approach the aircraft but that this was not possible because of the heat” (…)”I explained to them having found out in the meantime that it was the aircraft of the PRESIDENT of RWANDA that had just exploded” (…)”I report on questioning that at the time of the aircraft crash, in the minutes that followed, I did not hear shooting around our position. Only the following day did we hear shooting quite loudly from the side of the CKD. These shots were from automatic firearms and artillery shooting” (Record 780/94, 31.05.1995).
What the witness Marc Ferdinand Beyens said: “Two or three weeks before the attack on the President, the wing received from on high the order to be on its guard and to dig in. Rifleman’s trenches had to be dug. They were waiting for something. They were very nervous. We felt there was something in the air and something was going to happen. During the night of 6 to 7 April 1994, at about 00.30 hours, I was informed where I was by the Second Captain of the C.T.M. of the attack on the President. The following day, during the briefing, more details were given to us about the attack and the death of the President was confirmed. Despite the fact that the Rwandan army was expecting something, the attack on the President was, for them, a complete surprise” (…)”During the night of 7 to 8 April 1994, while I was on duty, I was informed between 04.00 hours and 06.00 hours by the Chief Warrant Officer Charlier from Kigali that 10 Belgian servicemen had been killed. He gave me no more information about this. Later I learnt that the men, at the time of their capture, had to hand over their weapons. With regard to the arms of the Rwandan army, and more specifically the firearms, I know that they were equipped with Fal, AK 47 and R4. These weapons had bayonets, however these were not placed on the weapons. The servicemen wore them in the belt or kept them in their backpacks.” (Pro Justitia, 10.05.1994)
Here is what the witness Jean Birara said this: “Mr Birara pointed out that he saw together with 6 persons, on 20.02.94 the list of people who were to be massacred. General Nsabimana who he presented to us as a “moderate” managed to have the start of the massacres postponed three times but it was a Presidential decree. President Habyarimana had to give the signal” (…)”At the end of the month of March (30 or 31), President MOBUTU telephoned the HABYALIMANA residence and found him absent; he spoke with Agathe.H. and told her that attack was being planned and would be perpetrated on the return of President HABYALIMANA from Dar-Es-Salaam” (…)”In any event, with the postponement of the massacres, the President seemed decided this time to apply the ARUSHA agreements; convinced finally by the minister DELACROIX. On 4/04/1994, Easter Monday, Colonel RUSATIRA, Secretary to the Ministry of Defence for 15 years, then the Director of School of Officers, replacing BUREGEYA, came to me at midday. He told me that the President had just requested his Chief of Staff, RUHIGIRA Enoch, to prepare everything for the service of swearing in deputies and government, on his return from ARUSHA. When the in-laws and the officers were informed they summoned BAGOSORA back who was on holiday in Gisenyi, he got back to Kigali on 5/04/1994 in the evening. He took the decision to attack the President’s aircraft and to recall SERUBUGA, BUREGEYA and RWAGAFILITA (the three discontented officers)” (…)”The firing came from the Kanombe camp (near to the President’s residence and the airport); after the aeroplane had crashed, from the same camp, the President’s residence was fired on to be certain that the guard soldiers who were there (generally: 200 soldiers with 3 armoured cars) would not counter attack. (The Presidential Guard includes 1,200 soldiers; during the war, 200 guarded the Residence)” (…)”1) After the death of the President, Agathe.H. personally gave (assisted by the two sisters of the President who are nuns) the order to execute:
– NDASINGWA Landward, a Tutsi Minister of Employment
– RUCOGOSA, Minister of Information.
– KAVARUGANDA, President of the Supreme Court.
– UWILINGIYIMANA Agathe, Prime Minister. The soldiers who arrived at the house of UWILINGIYIMANA Agathe telephoned Mrs. HABYALIMANA to ask for instructions; they were told to force the domestic staff of the Prime Minister to rape her, then to kill her. “And the Belgian UN Peacekeepers?”, the Rwandan soldiers asked. Reply: “if they saw everything, they must be discretely removed1… Furthermore, it was Belgium that assassinated my husband.” (Report 734, 26.05.1994).
This is what the witness Rene Marcel Ghislain Chataine said this: “Personally, I would not be surprised if General Nsabimana, the former Colonel Serubuga (retired), Colonel Baransalitse and Colonel Bagasora were implicated as backers in this attack. Furthermore, I have heard it said that after the events Col. E.R. Serubuga took his office back…” (…)”As far as I am aware the FAR did not have Ground-Air missiles. With regard to individual arms, I cannot give you much information given my position. I know that there were kalaschnikovs, FAL, R 4, G7, MAG and FALCOS” (Report 677, 09.05.1994).

Here is what the witness Benoit Roger Ghislain Michael Daubie said this:
“The number of munitions removed was very large. I take for example the distribution of 1000 120 m/m mortar shots over Gitarama. There remained about 20 % of the munitions in the warehouse. This happened about 1 month before the attack and a week was needed for the transport A FAR lieutenant told me that it was in anticipation of an FPR attack. . .” (Report 685, 10.05.1994)
Then this is what the witness Christian Joseph Jean E. Defraigne said this:
“I was in the Belgian Military village of Nyarutarama. I was blocked at this place. I have nothing in particular to say about the attack and the murder of our 10 paras. What surprised me was the speed of action of the FAR. In less than 20 minutes after the attack the entire town was under control and blocked off. It seemed to me that all these soldiers were aware before the attack of what was going to happen and about what had to be done. We were in the FPR lines and I can say that I was impressed by their good manners” (Report 682, 10.05.1994)
The Witness Athanase Dushimiliana, the inspector of the criminal investigation department at the Regional Court of Kigali said this: “I would like to add here, that the day before on Thursday 7 April in the morning, long periods of shooting resounded in the “French village”. I found out subsequently, from Mr. NKUBITO, current Minister of Justice, who lived in the same district as me, that it was the family of Justin NYONGIRA from the Ministry of Public Works that had been massacred while fleeing. As we had seen the various movements of the killers in uniform wearing a black beret and armed with Kalashnikovs from our garden, we had the feeling, shared by our boy, that these movements were directed from the house of the military neighbour in plot 2. The information was confirmed later by Mr. NKUBITO himself” (CRIM/DA-KK/KGL/95 Case n° 57/95, 05.05.1994).
This here is some witness’s form the day that France is planning to yet again open. The mysterious killing of the President Juvénal Habyarimana that we’re never solved even as there we’re many witness reports. Here are even some other ones as well.
SGR Bastien’s Report:
“There are ± two [illeg] (end of March, shortly after the visit of Mrs CLAES to RWANDA) [illeg] a. the Belgians were planning an attack against President HABYARIMANA b. 5 Belgian paras were preparing to go to Rwanda soon, they had told somebody [illeg] in LIEGE that they had received, instructions to do everything to get President HABYARIMANA” (…) “On 07 April in the morning, a Rwandan inhabitant in the Belgian and who was loyal to President HABYARIMANA [illeg] a. “that the rumours started 15 days earlier [illeg] b’ “that formal proofs of the involvement and even of the instigation of the Belgian government [illeg], that is to say: (1) the statements of the 5 soldiers in LIEGE (see para 1b above (2) the missile that hit the presidential aircraft was fired from KANOMBE camp guarded by Belgian soldiers and that soon after the attack, the blue helmets from Bangladesh [illeg] 5 Belgian paras and they took them to the prison where they were [illeg]” (G. Bastien, 10.04.1994).
Reactions from another Military Intelligence days after Bastien’s affidavit:
“It transpires from them that the place where the missiles were probably fired from is located on the topographical map of Rwanda 1:500000, Kigali region series Z721 pages 16 -17 – 23 – 24 between coordinates 190800 and 190820 from South South East to North North West at a minimum distance of 1 kilometre to a maximum of 5 kilometres. This location was provided by one of the eyewitnesses above who was at coordinates 192812. As regards remark 2.b. (2) of the confidential report from Major-General Bastien – SGR – of 10 April 1994, I can formally assure you that that did not happen in any way” (M. Peeraer, Military Investigator, 13.04.1994 – Letter to MINUAR, Military Investigator on the ground).
Memo – Attack on the Presidents of Rwanda and Burundi:
“In Kigali, the presidential guard began the hunt for the attackers. Information, as yet unconfirmed, cites arrests of ministers and well-known personalities, Hutu and Tutsi, political adversaries of President Habyarimana. A confrontation in the capital between the Rwandan army and the FPR seems inevitable. The interior of the country seems calm at the moment. The transition institutions have not yet been set up, so the death of the president leaves the country without any recognised authority (the government and parliament have not been established). A military coup is feared” (Bruno Delaye, 07.04.1994).
Testimony of Inspector of Judicial Police:
“Around two in the morning, I got a call from Colonel Bagosora who told me that I had been appointed temporary Chief of Staff of the Army. We had been informed in the meantime, by telegram, that the President and Chief of Staff were dead.” (…) “During the meeting on the evening of the 7th, I felt some antagonism between Bagosora and the rest of the team, in that Bagosora wanted to take over as president of the crisis committee although it was a military committee. We did not agree to him presiding, as he was retired military and was a politician in his capacity as Director of Cabinet. We wanted the most senior military person to preside, that is, Augustin Ndindiliyimana. He was there during that meeting” (…) “We learned afterwards that Bagosora had a radio network with him, parallel to the normal military network. Via this network he had direct contact with the GP, the para-commando battalion and the reconnaissance battalion. Through this network he was certainly able to issue orders to these units without the military authorities knowing” (Kibibi Kamanzi, Report No. 0142, File No. **/CRIM/KK/KGL/95 File 57/95, J. I. Vandermeersch, 06.07.1995).
Belgium official defense:
“More than a fortnight before the attack on the presidential aircraft, Habyarimana was already being accompanied by a Rwandan or even foreign personage. This would explain the presence of the President of Burundi in President Habyarimana’s plane. A few minutes before the attack, when the presidential aeroplane had received the order, issued by the control tower, to circulate around the Kigali airfield, the Presidential Guard had taken out its heavy arms and started taking up positions in the city. Less than ten minutes after the crash, “Thousand Hills Radio” was giving out the names of the persons killed in the crash, on air” (Belgium – Ministry of Justice, Department of State Security, R. Froyen, Subject: RWANDA: the “Amasasu” Association).
A defense for General Basogora:
“I would like to add that the anti-Belgian campaign at the end of the Habyarimana regime was organised underhandedly by President Mobutu and the French authorities. In fact, when President Habyarimana was in the favour of the Belgians and King Baudouin in particular, Mobotu hoped to use him as an official intermediary between him and the Belgians. However, from the time of his fall from grace, the Rwandans became anti-Belgian in the same way as Mobutu in order to please him. On the other hand, most of the leaders of the opposition had privileged relations with the Belgians, especially the PSD (Democratic Social Party), whether it was Félicien Gatabazi or Dr Gafaranga, former ULB members, without forgetting the great Rwandan scattering in Belgium and the FRP, whose co-ordination office was in Brussels. As the opposition was sure that it would win the elections after the Arusha agreements, it was very likely that the influence of Belgium would supplant that of France in Rwanda, as is currently the case despite certain Belgian areas reticent to the regime. The highest Rwandan authorities are more in Brussels than in Paris. Finally, I will add that the FAR cannot fight the FPR in military terms, and because the elections were uncertain for the MRND and the CDR, it is probable that certain French areas suggested the scorched earth policy that led to the genocide, in order to safeguard their influence within the region” (Joseph Twahirwa, 01.12.1994, Pro Justia, Brussels King’s Prosecutor Apostil: 30.99.3959/94).
Even with all of this there is hard to have all the answers to the brutal killing of the President. How and where they shot-down the airplane, where it the Belgian, was it the Presidential Guards? Was it a mutiny under General Basogora?
We can even question it more as there are plans by the French government to settle the score and clean their hands with new rounds in courts in France. They want to take the case and settle it. They will never take if they we’re involved, as much as the Belgians did what they could do. This here is just some witnesses and their affidavits of the actions they saw in the day and the days after.
And if they used Russian/Soviet weapons imported from China to shoot it down wouldn’t be surprising as the sale of that around the world is something we could imagine. The ones using it could be the Presidential Guards or other wishing to bring down the Rwandan Government, this together with the sentiments against the Arusha Agreement. There are enough pieces and soldiers who could be behind it or act with their skill-set to achieve their goal of getting rid of a President.
I don’t believe the French Government wants the true answer, as they are implicated and was part of donor-community who liked to control and “assist” the Central Government in Kigali and wouldn’t like how they turned to Brussels. Peace.


Reference:
GENDARMERIE, Judicial Detachment, Military Auditorat1, Palais de Justice, 1000 BRUSSELS (02/508.60.11) Report. No. 687
Dossier No. 02.02545N94/CAB.8 Military Auditorat in BRUSSELS (15.12.1995) – Pro Justitia No. 1008/94
Military Auditorat At the Council of War – Pro Justitia (10.05.1995)
Annex No. One To the Report No. 985/94 – Of the Judicial Detachment – BRUSSELS (13.06.1994)
Judicial Detachment of Brussels (10.05.1994) Report No. 684
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 71716 Annex n°….01 ………………. of the
Record n°…780/94…… of…31.05.94 of the Gendarmerie Unit JUDICIAL SECONDMENT OF BRUSSELS
GENDARMERIE Judicial Secondment Judge Advocate’s Department Palais de Justice 1000 Brussels ——- N° 676 – Pro Justitia (10.05.1994)
GENDARMERIE Judicial Secondment Judge Advocate’s Department Palais de Justice 1000 BRUSSELS 02/508.60.11 – Report n° 734 (26.05.1994)
GENDARMERIE Judicial Secondment Judge Advocate’s Department Palais de Justice 1000 BRUSSELS 02/508.60.11, Report n° 677 (09.05.1994)
GENDARMERIE Judicial Secondment Judge Advocate’s Department Palais de Justice 1000 BRUSSELS 02/508.60.11, Report n° 685 (10.05.1994)
GENDARMERIE Judicial Secondment Judge Advocate ’s Department Palais de Justice 1000 BRUSSELS 02/508.60.11 Report n° 682 (10.05.1994)
PRO JUSTITIA 1st sheet Report 0011 / Case n° /CRIM/DA-KK/KGL/95 Case n° 57/95 J.I. VANDERMEERSCH (05.05.1994)


