Samenvatting

In the aftermath of the 1994 genocide in Rwanda the government decided to set up a "genocide divisionism" campaign in order to eradicate all ethnicity in the country and hereby prevent a new outburst of ethnic violence. The consequent established "genocide
ideology" laws are highly criticised by non-governmental rganizations, arguing that they violate international human rights law, specifically the freedom of speech. This paper examines the compatibility of the "genocide ideology" laws and the internationally
accepted requirements for a rule-of-law state.
Chapter one is written in order to broaden the reader's knowledge on the "genocide ideology" act, describing the three "genocide ideology" laws and the criticism of nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) on the laws. Specifically the vague terms used in the laws and excessive punishments for the crime are major points of concern. Afterwards the
law enforcement mechanism, the Rwandan criminal courts, is described and some statistical information concerning cases is provided. The chapter ends with a comparison between the Rwandan law criminalizing "revisionism, negotionism and trivialisation" of the
genocide and the German law banning Holocaust denial.
In chapter two a literature review on the principle of "rule of law" is described.
Consequently three main elements that create the foundation for a rule-of-law state are highlighted, to wit: a clear and consistent legal framework; strong enforcement mechanisms; and an independent judiciary. In chapter three these elements are used as guideline for describing the criticism of NGOs on the "genocide ideology" laws. Afterwards the in 2011 conducted review of the "genocide ideology" law is described. The revised version of the law shows some improvements, however, the law is at this writing not yet
enacted, as it is waiting for the approval of the Rwandan government and parliament.
In the final chapter the highly debated case of Victoire Ingabire, a political opponent of president Kagame, is described. Ingabire is currently imprisoned for, among others, genocide denial. The trial is by several NGOs described as flawed and unfair.
This dissertation ends with a short summary of the main findings of the sub questions, followed by a general conclusion and some considerations for further research. The final part consists of a set of recommendations for the Rwandan government, which are based
on three main points: a revision of the laws, the independency of the judiciary and the transparency and treatment of cases.