The ideology that fueled the 1994 Genocide against the Tutsi continues to spread across the Great Lakes region and in some parts of the Rwandan community abroad, propagated through social media, digital platforms and even by the children and allies of perpetrators, experts have warned. They stressed this as Rwanda and the world mark the 32nd commemoration of the Genocide against the Tutsi on Tuesday, April 7. The fight against genocide ideology, the experts said, requires not only remembrance but also vigilance in how the language around it is used. ALSO READ: Rwandans must keep fighting genocide ideology, says PM Nsengiyumva “We must correct the language: those who spread genocide ideology should not be grouped with people who merely distort history; they must be recognised as those who actively fuel hatred,” Tom Ndahiro, a researcher on Genocide, told the Rwanda Broadcasting Agency on Sunday evening. Ndahiro said the reason such ideology continues to circulate is that many individuals who witnessed or followed the events of 1994—or even earlier atrocities—chose to ignore them. Some perpetrators and their allies remain alive and continue to exert influence, allowing these harmful ideas to persist. He explained that many individuals who propagated genocide ideology migrated from Rwanda to other countries. “The organisers of the genocide had international networks, including Europeans who became allies of the Interahamwe, both during and after the genocide. These networks engaged in recruitment, and in some cases, foreign governments or entities contributed to the spread of extremist ideas even before the genocide occurred,” he added. Ndahiro criticised double standards in global responses, noting that while European governments acted to prevent the resurgence of anti-Semitic ideology after the Holocaust, perpetrators of the Genocide against the Tutsi were able to go abroad and openly promote their ideas. “The failure to fully recognise the severity of genocide ideology allows it to infiltrate governments and influence policy elsewhere. For example, practices in DR Congo reflect ideas that originated in Rwanda—geographically displaced ideology,” Ndahiro said. ALSO READ: Nduhungirehe warns against silence amid genocide ideology, Tutsi persecution in DR Congo The international community has also struggled to take consistent action. The preamble of the Genocide Convention recalls UN General Assembly Resolution 96 (I) of December 11, 1946, which declares genocide a crime under international law and calls for international cooperation to prevent such atrocities. Ndahiro said the reality falls short of this ideal. “Some do not even recognise genocide ideology for what it is and yet ignoring it is dangerous. Genocide ideology leads to the killing of people for who they are. Where you see it, it must be condemned, not spoken of lightly,” he said. Richard Gisagara, a Rwandan lawyer based in France, said that for a long time the term “genocide” was not widely accepted in the country, and efforts were made to limit its use. Since then, some progress has been made, including the introduction of a law granting authority to regional prefects. Gisagara, who handles cases against Genocide suspects, described this as “an important step forward.” ALSO READ: A look at Genocide ideology cases in the last 5 years However, he added that sustained effort is needed, as many people abroad still do not regard the Genocide against the Tutsi with the same seriousness as the Holocaust. “Our task is to ensure they understand that this genocide is an international crime, a crime against humanity. They must recognise its seriousness, not act to please us,” he said. Gisagara warned that despite some improvements, networks promoting genocide ideology and hatred remain active and powerful. Eugene Mutabazi, president of Ibuka-Belgium, noted that the problem is compounded by the presence of perpetrators’ children and grandchildren, who continue to spread harmful narratives inherited from their parents. “Even though Belgium has laws punishing those who deny the Genocide, enforcement is weak. Some court rulings favor perpetrators or those who deny the genocide, allowing them to spread harmful narratives on television without accountability,” Mutabazi said. “Local authorities in some areas even block commemoration activities because of these ongoing ideologies and political relationships with Rwanda. These people are still allowed to appear on media platforms to promote hatred.” Mutabazi added that genocide ideology now spreads through radio, social media and other platforms, using new forms of language that distorts history, such as suggesting “the Hutu were also killed,” while claiming not to deny the genocide. To counter this, Mutabazi said Ibuka, other survivor organisations and human rights groups engage in schools, bringing survivors to testify and educating children about what happened in Rwanda and to prevent the resurgence of genocide ideology.
