Justice4Survivors

Making survivors’ voices count

Tag: Genocide

  • Post-Gacaca Compensation for Rwanda’s Genocide Survivors: Gaps in Justice and Missed Opportunities for Reconciliation

    In this paper, Albert Gasake, Legal Advocacy Coordinator at SURF and Justice Commissioner at GAERG, examines the ongoing struggle of genocide survivors to secure fair compensation for property lost or destroyed during the genocide.

    The paper looks at the failures of the Gacaca courts, which closed in 2012, and the shortcomings of the laws that replaced them—laws meant to address unresolved compensation claims but which have delivered little real progress.

    🎥 Watch: Maria’s story — a genocide widow shares her fight to receive compensation for her destroyed property.

    A key focus is the Travaux d’Intérêts Généraux (TIG) program, introduced under Gacaca as an alternative penalty. Gasake questions whether TIG has diverted resources away from survivors into public works, leaving many without meaningful redress. He also critiques the Prime Minister’s Special Committee on Gacaca, arguing that its vast remit, short timeline, and lack of enforcement powers make it unlikely to resolve outstanding claims—and that failure to do so risks closing the door on future settlements.

    The paper also draws on findings from the National Unity and Reconciliation Commission, whose surveys and community dialogues reveal survivors’ deep concerns over the inadequacy of current compensation processes.

    While Gasake acknowledges that reparation alone cannot solve all the challenges survivors face, he stresses that it can provide a measure of restorative justice—offering survivors the means to rebuild their lives, restore dignity, and strengthen reconciliation.

    His conclusion is clear: since the genocide, efforts to address compensation have been largely inadequate, and this failure is undermining reconciliation. He calls for urgent action to create an effective, survivor-centered reparation system—a need that is especially pressing as Rwanda approaches the 20th anniversary of the genocide in 2014 and the momentum for compensation wanes.

    “If reconciliation is truly possible, it will only be built on a foundation of complete justice.” — Albert Gasake

    📄 Read the full article here

    Related articles
    Gasake_Post-Gacaca_Compensation_v2Download

    Related articles:

  • Clinton on “CNBC Meets”: Crocodile Tears

    Former US President, Bill Clinton, 3/20/2013.

    On CNBC Meets, which aired on March 20th, 2013, the former United States President, Bill Clinton, publicly expressed regret for the second time on the US failure to stop the 1994 Tutsi genocide under his Administration, also referred to as “the preventable genocide.”

    President Clinton told CNBC that if the United States had intervened in Rwanda during the genocide, at least one-third or roughly 300,000 lives could have been saved. Clinton explained that the failure of his Administration to act during the genocide, which claimed the lives of around a million Rwandans, was one of the reasons behind the establishment of the Clinton Foundation. This statement follows Clinton’s historic apology speech pronounced in Kigali in March 25th, 1998.

    “It may seem strange to you here, especially to many of you who lost members of your family, but all over the world there were people like me sitting in offices, day after day after day, who did not fully appreciate the depth and the speed with which you were being engulfed by this unimaginable terror,” said the US president 15 years ago on the tarmac of the Kigali International Airport.

    In the same regard, international political leaders such as former United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan, and Belgian Prime Minister Guy Verhofstadt, have issued apologies of the same nature.

    Clinton’s apology leaves us with several unanswered questions, especially in the eyes of over 309,000 survivors of the 1994 genocide.

    What exactly prevented Clinton and other international political leaders from intervening? Additionally, what type of work is the Clinton Foundation doing to mitigate the longstanding consequences of genocide in the lives of survivors?

    While symbolically appreciated, the people of Rwanda need action. These apologies do little to heal the wounds of survivors, many of whom are still in a desperate situation, without food and shelter, access to medicine, or means of a livelihood, and enduring acute trauma. President Clinton, like many in the international community, acknowledge their responsibility for the genocide but need to do more to turn their words into actions – and to honor the memory of the one million people killed on their watch, and help restore the welfare of those who survived.

    Since 1995 survivors have been progressively claiming their right to reparation. Reparation would mean an acknowledgment of their suffering, and materially restoring their lives. The theme for the 19th commemoration of the genocide, just a few weeks ahead, is “kwigira” or self-reliance. This is one of the main objectives of reparation and should ultimately be the goal of the apologies offered. If that reality is ignored, apologies risk rather being perceived as empty slogans. With the right support and the effective participation of survivors, the concept of kwigira will move beyond an abstract idea to a concrete reality.

    This particular time presents President Clinton and other international political leaders with the opportunity to honor the values of the international community exists and make a difference in the lives of genocide survivors. One powerful avenue to do so is through supporting the survivor’s ongoing international campaign for reparation leading up to the 20th commemoration of the 1994 genocide in 2014. This period will also mark the closure of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR), the only international vehicle for justice set up in the immediate aftermath of the Tutsi genocide to prosecute those most responsible genocide suspects and render justice to victims.

    Despite being in existence for close to two decades, the ICTR has never recognized the rights of victims to reparation and effective participation. This is despite several requests made by consecutive judges of the ICTR to set up a victim’s compensation fund.

    By delivering reparation to victims or their families, governments and international political leaders like President Clinton can demonstrate that their apology is sincere.

    By Albert Gasake, First appeared on SURF’s website: “Regret,” last modified March 20th, 2013, http://survivors-fund.org.uk/news/regret/.