The June 30 ministerial instructions relating to the settling of people are meant to ensure that people who are settled by the government get accommodation, in addition to ensuring accountability in the process, a Ministry of Local Government official has said. Jean Claude Ingabire, the Acting Director General of Local Government Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation, explained the main provisions in the ministerial instructions relating to the settling of persons, during a related conversation posted on the ministry’s YouTube channel on July 16. ALSO READ: Govt revises home ownership rules for resettled citizens The new directives – repealing the 2017 instructions – were issued by the Minister of Local Government, Patrice Mugenzi. The revised guidelines were introduced following persistent challenges such as difficulties in issuing land titles, dilapidated housing, the welfare of resettled individuals, and the mismanagement of housing allocation and ownership transfer. ALSO READ: Kigali: 6,000 families to be relocated from high-risk zones People to be settled are selected based on their household’s living conditions and socioeconomic status. Major changes from the 2017 directives In the 2017 instructions, the criteria for transferring house ownership to a settled person included that at least five years must have elapsed from the time they signed a settlement contract. But in case they showed good practices to get lifted out of poverty, they could get the house before the five years pass. The old instructions also prohibited the use of such homes as collateral, gifts, inheritance, or for commercial purposes (as collateral) without government approval. ALSO READ: Govt needs Rwf13bn to relocate 19,000 families from high-risk zones While settlement focused on home ownership under the previous instructions, Ingabire said that settlement is done through three methods under the new instructions. They include ownership transfer which is granted to people who contributed to the home’s construction. An example is a house that can be given to a person as compensation for expropriation. The two other methods are lending for people who are vulnerable and contributed nothing to construction, as well as renting which is applied when a beneficiary has some financial means. In this case, a reasonable rent is determined by the district or the City of Kigali. Ingabire said that people in the renting category are expected to pay a modest amount determined based on their income, which helps maintain the homes and shared infrastructure in grouped settlements. Lending and renting arrangements require formal contracts between the beneficiary and the local authority. “Lending helps address recurring issues faced by local government authorities, such as when a beneficiary is given full ownership of a house, only to later sell it, eventually making the person a burden to the government again,” he said. “It also helps resolve other property-related disputes, such as inheritance claims by children. With the lending model, once a beneficiary no longer needs the house as they can afford their own, they can vacate it and it is then lent to another vulnerable person. This ensures the house remains under government management and continues to serve its intended purpose.” The government continues to be responsible for the upkeep of the lent houses, Ingabire said, acknowledging that vulnerable occupants do not have the means to maintain them. Special ownership with restrictions For the survivors of the 1994 Genocide against the Tutsi and disabled former combatants, ownership comes with restrictions on selling or mortgaging the home. Approval from the district or City of Kigali is required for any such transactions to avoid burdening the state or its partners, Ingabire observed. Consequences for non-compliance If someone fails to meet contract terms, including abandoning a home for more than three months without notifying authorities, they may lose their housing rights. Ingabire warned that people who attempt to buy or use homes under lending or renting schemes as collateral risk losing their investment, as such transactions are considered invalid because they are not permitted.
