France and international justice on trial in quarrel with Rwanda

Relations between Rwanda and France have taken a turn for the worse. For the past twenty-two years, they have not been good anyway. But occasionally there were signs that they might improve. With the recent decision by French authorities to reopen investigations into the plane crash that killed President Juvenal Habyarimana and his Burundian counterpart, whatever chance there was is gone. Rwanda has now taken action of its own. First, the Commission for the Fight against the Genocide (CNLG) named over 20 military officers and diplomats it accuses of involvement in the Genocide against the Tutsi. That was followed by a government statement that it was going to name leading politicians and senior government officials complicit in the genocide. And now the national prosecution authority is starting a judicial investigation against twenty French nationals for their role in the genocide and has requested the cooperation of the French authorities in the matter. If found criminally liable, they face prosecution. It is not clear whether the French will comply with the request. But one thing is clear. Rwanda’s action provides a stern test for the very concept of international justice. It is going to be a test of its fairness and whether it applies equally to all. Anyone familiar with recent Franco-Rwanda relations knows that they hit their lowest point when a French judge, Jean-Louis Bruguiere, indicted some senior Rwandan military officers for their alleged role in downing the plane. He then issued international arrest warrants for the officers. This was all done in the name of universal jurisdiction. Naturally Rwanda protested this action, calling it, rightly, political bullying disguised as a just legal process. Rwanda’s intention to have French officers investigated and possibly prosecuted for their role in the Genocide puts France in a quandary as far as international justice is concerned. If they cooperate, that will indicate that indeed there is equality of nations in the international justice system and undermine the argument that it serves only the powerful. In fact, French cooperation in the investigation of its officers would make a most compelling case for the International Criminal Court among sceptical Africans. However, French cooperation is unlikely to happen. The French political, military and civil service establishments are strong institutions and will always look after their own. Besides, a misplaced sense of honour stands in the way of moral rectitude. That blunts any feeling of responsibility and makes remorse impossible. Power (in terms of might not right) relations are also at play here. How can the powerful accede to the demands of the weak? If on the other hand they refuse to cooperate (which is likely), that will confirm what most African states have been saying – that international justice is only for the strong. Whichever way this goes, both France and international justice are on trial. Rwanda’s action will provide a more compelling argument to those who believe justice at this level is skewed than all the official fulminations and heads of state summits can ever do. How did we get here? Why has it been difficult to improve relations? The simple answer is that France has refused to accept the role of its civilian and military leaders in the genocide against the Tutsi despite clear evidence of their support for the genocidal governments before, during and after the genocide. They cannot wish away the evidence, and so they resort to bullying. At this point, Rwanda has had enough of that and has now called out the bully. That is the only way you can deal with such. You can’t appeal to his sense of goodness or fairness or reasonableness. So you stand up to him with the might of right and truth, and the weight of injustice on your side. Continued French denial of their role in the genocide is going to force Rwanda to put out in public what they have always known but kept locked up thinking relations might improve. Actions have consequences, don’t they? All said, Rwanda has set a precedent. What remains now is to see which way the scales of justice will go. jorwagatare@yahoo.co.uk

Opinions

France and international justice on trial in quarrel with Rwanda