In 1988...

Radio is a particularly important means of communication… There are an estimated 250,000 radio receivers in Rwanda. No press code or any other legislation regulating the press currently exist. In November 1987 the government stated that a new law governing the press was in preparation. The printed press is limited: Rwanda has no daily newspaper. There are two main newspapers: a weekly, Imvaho, which is State-owned, has an estimated circulation of 23,000 and a second paper, Kinyamateka, a fortnightly which has been published since 1933, has a circulation of 11,000. Both are published in Kinyarwanda. The government also publishes a French-language weekly, La Relete… Self-censorship is pervasive. Nine out of 10 professionals are employed by the State. Read more...

In 2008...

The importance of the media in promoting development, informing the public about political debates and ensuring accountability is often stressed, but the case of Rwanda shows how the media can also be manipulated as a government tool to the detriment of society and politics. In 1994 Rwanda suffered Africa’s worst genocide in modern times. Approximately 800,000 Rwandans were murdered in 100 days, most of whom were ethnic Tutsis and the remainder were seen as moderate Hutus or Tutsi sympathisers. The genocide was triggered by the shooting down of President Juvenal Habyarimana’s plane, which Hutu extremists blamed on the Tutsiled Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF). It is unlikely, however, that the RPF was responsible for President Habyarimana’s death.

Rwanda first replaced one-party politics with a multi-party system in 1992. However, constitutional reform since the genocide has seen a development in this system to a pattern of ‘shared politics’ led by a ‘government of national unity’, with RPF remaining the ruling political party since 1994. Anew Constitution was adopted in 2003. It introduced legislative elections, but all opposition parties were banned until almost immediately before the elections, preventing opposition election campaigns from having any real effect.

President Paul Kagame has been in power since 2000, having been Vice-President from 1994 to 2000 under former President Pastor Bizimungu.

Articles 33 and 34 of the 2003 Constitution guarantee freedom of thought, opinion, conscience, religion and worship. Also guaranteed are freedom of the press and freedom of information so long as they do not ‘prejudice public order and good morals’. The conditions for exercising these freedoms are determined by separate laws.

Legal and Regulatory Framework

A number of draconian laws restricting freedom of expression remain in force, such as laws on criminal defamation. The legislation is regularly used against government critics and the media. Moreover, definitions of many criminal offences are vague, unclear and broad, which allows legislation to be manipulated to restrict access to information and repress free speech.

In 2001 the government adopted a law criminalising every act considered to encourage ‘divisionism’ or sectarianism. In the absence of a detailed definition of ‘divisionism’, the law leaves space for various interpretations and for potential abuses by the government.

There is currently no freedom of information law in Rwanda. The Penal Code, in the section dedicated to the protection of State security, characterises the publication of classified security information as a betrayal of the country. In its definition of security information, the Penal Code includes all kinds of information or knowledge which should not be revealed to foreign governments or institutions in the interests of national security. Research into the activities of the government is therefore risky. Combined with a generally hostile attitude towards media reporting on the part of the authorities, this creates a difficult environment for journalists and leaves little space for the development of different political viewpoints and public assessment and criticism.

‘In its definition of security information, the Penal Code includes all kinds of information or knowledge which should not be revealed to foreign governments or institutions in the interests of national security.’

The Penal Code in force in Rwanda dates back to 1977, with subsequent amendments. It criminalises defamation and defamatory denunciation (Chapter 8) with penalties of up to three years’ imprisonment. The 2002 Press Law provides for sanctions on the media on a wide range of grounds. It makes the ‘publication of false news, defamation and abuses’ a criminal offence and penalises ‘contempt of the President … verbal assaults committed through the press to a Head of State and foreign diplomatic officials, defamations and abuses committed through the press towards the public authorities and forces availed to the Government to maintain law and order’. These offences carry the maximum punishments provided for by the Penal Code. Furthermore, under the Press Law, ‘vendors, distributors or managers of poster display firms’ may be held responsible for offences committed by the printed press even though they have had no involvement in the content of a publication. They can be imprisoned if the journalist or other individual responsible for a publication cannot be found, under a hierarchy of penal liability. Such a provision may influence printers or vendors not to distribute opposition newspapers.

The High Council of the Press is the State media regulator, established according to Article 34 of the Constitution. Although Rwanda does not have an independent media regulator, the Council has encouraged a system of self-regulation. In 2003 the Rwandan Media Monitoring Project (RMMP) was established to monitor the elections and to assist the High Council of the Press in regulating and promoting the media sector. The RMMP drafted Guidelines and Code of Ethics for Rwanda’s Media in 2004 as ‘an instrument to measure and guide progress in the professional standards of Rwandan media’. Self-censorship by journalists is widespread, owing to a fear of harassment by government authorities or pro-government groups and individuals.

The telecommunications network is regulated by the 2001 Telecommunications Act and supervised by the Regulation Council whose functions include the distribution of licences for telecommunications services in the country. The 2001 Telecommunications Act (Chapter 14) gives the government full discretionary powers in regard to the telecommunications sector in order to guarantee the territorial integrity of the country. It allows for the suspension of private communications, the indefinite suspension of broadcasting services and the confiscation of broadcasting equipment in order to prevent communications which ‘could appear dangerous for the safety of the State, contrary to the law, to public order or to good manners’. Such a vague formulation is open to interpretation and therefore this legislation can be used as an instrument of intimidation.

Political Expression

The Constitution states that political organizations should ‘constantly reflect the unity of the people of Rwanda and gender equality and complementarity’. In 2003, the European Union Observer Mission to Rwanda assessed that during the presidential elections, candidates had equal access to public television and radio stations, as stipulated by law. However, as far as broadcasting of general information was concerned, the Head of State benefited from disproportionate media coverage. During the legislative elections, the ruling RPF also captured the majority of transmission time allocated to broadcasting about political forces and independent candidates. The European Union mission underlined the difficulty of accessing information in Rwanda and recommended that the authorities offer comprehensive access to information as a citizens’ service.

News Media

Radio Tele Libre Mille Collines (RTLM), a privately owned radio station, assisted in the genocide by broadcasting a barrage of anti-Tutsi propaganda. RTLM, dubbed a ‘hate radio station’, became infamous for its description of Tutsis as ‘cockroaches’ and for broadcasting the names and whereabouts of Tutsi individuals and families to help Hutu militias find and kill them. ARTICLE 19’s landmark publication Broadcasting Genocide: Censorship, propaganda & state-sponsored violence in Rwanda 1990-1994 details the rise of ‘hate media’ and the role of RTLM before and during the genocide.

In the aftermath of the genocide, the Rwandan press was drastically reduced in size and scope. Until the 2002 Press Law, the government largely prevented the creation of private radio stations, invoking the record of RTLM. Today, the ‘hate media’ have disappeared, and the media that remain are generally close to the ruling party and characterised by self-censorship and, to a certain extent, by an absence of pluralism. The media are also hindered by a lack of infrastructure and financial resources. For example, newspapers often have to print in neighbouring Uganda because of excessively high costs in Rwanda.

While the contribution of the local media in the genocide has been closely examined, the international media also played a role by failing to report on and analyse the causes of genocide. Very little coverage was given to the conflict occurring in the country by the international media until the genocide was well under way. The Joint Evaluation of Emergency Assistance to Rwanda in 1996 concluded that ‘inadequate and inaccurate reporting by international media on the genocide itself contributed to international indifference and inaction’.

Much emphasis has been placed on building press freedom and increasing the number of independent radio, television and print press outlets. However, progress has been slow and comparatively little has been achieved. The State retains a monopoly over television broadcasting and there are few independent newspapers in circulation.

According to the Committee to Protect Journalists, there were only 10 private radio stations operating in Rwanda by the end of 2006. Broadcasts from commercial and community-owned radio stations tend not to report heavily on current affairs or engage in investigative reporting. In order to avoid difficult political issues many radio stations orient their programmes around less risky topics.

Foreign radio stations remain an important source of independent news, but they are subject to government censorship. A French radio station was taken off the air entirely on 26th November 2006 following criticism of the Rwandan government by a French judge. BBC journalists have also reported being harassed and threatened by the Rwandan authorities.

New Technologies

The number of mobile phone users in Rwanda was 290,000 in 2005 out of a population of 9.9 million, according to the CIA World Factbook. There is alack of telecommunications infrastructure in rural areas and the use of new technologies is uneven and concentrated in urban areas. In order to counteract this, a one-year pilot programme was launched in 2005 which allocated micro-loans to mobile phone operators to provide rural communities with services. This system, Tel’imbere, is intended to spread across Rwanda in the future. The number of Internet users in Rwanda in 2005 was estimated to be around 38,000.

Repression of Media Workers

Harassment and intimidation of journalists, as a means of exerting official control over the media, is an established pattern. Freedom of the press is not guaranteed and several media organisations have called on the government to improve the alarming working conditions of journalists.

Two journalists, Dominique Makeli and Tatiana Mukakibibi, were arrested and imprisoned for more than 10 years without ever being sentenced, because of the alleged impact of their reporting during the genocide. The journalists appeared before a gacaca – a popular tribunal put in place to judge individuals implicated in the 1994 genocide – but were never tried.

A journalist for Umuco, a private newspaper, who had reported an alleged case of corruption and false accusations in a gacaca court, was arrested and convicted of genocide offences shortly after his article was published in 2005. However, he was released from jail only two days after the sentence was handed down.

Jean Bosco Gasasira, editor of Umuvigizi newspaper, was assaulted by three unidentified men armed with iron bars in February 2007 in Kigali. Several days before the attack, he had published several articles critical of the RPF.

Media Censorship

Newspapers critical of the government are often accused of inciting ethnic hatred. While freedom of speech is enshrined in the Constitution, the government does not tolerate criticism and uses ‘incitement of ethnic hatred’ and ‘avoidance or recurrence of genocide’ to repress its critics in the media. For example, in January 2007 the director of a bi-monthly journal Umurabyo was charged with ‘divisionism, sectarianism and libel’.Newspapers critical of the government are often accused of inciting ethnic hatred. While freedom of speech is enshrined in the Constitution, the government does not tolerate criticism and uses ‘incitement of ethnic hatred’ and ‘avoidance or recurrence of genocide’ to repress its critics in the media. For example, in January 2007 the director of a bi-monthly journal Umurabyo was charged with ‘divisionism, sectarianism and libel’. Agnès Nkusi-Uwimana, who had allowed publication of a reader’s letter that compared ethnic killings during President Kagame’s administration with those of the 1994 Hutu regime, was given a US$760 fine and a prison sentence of five years, reduced to one year.

Other Targets of Censorship

In 2004 a Parliamentary Commission recommended the dissolution of five non-governmental organisations accused of supporting ‘genocidal ideas’. As a result, the League for the Promotion and Defence of Human Rights (Ligue Rwandaise pour la promotion et la défense des droits de l’homme, LIPRODHOR), the only human rights organisation in the country which monitored human rights abuses at provincial and district level, was forced to close down in 2005. In order to operate in Rwanda, human rights organisations have to practise self-censorship.