Appeal trial of SIMBIKANGWA. Friday 28th of October 2016. D4.

Only the morning was to be devoted to hearing Mr. André GUICHAOUA, but the accused having made an appeal to a docteur just before the hearing, it started very late. Mr. President asked him to in the future, not wait until the last moment to make his request. We cannot afford to regularly start late. Mr. GUICHAOUAs’ hearing will eventually last all day.

Hearing of Mr. André GUICHAOUA, background witness.

In a long developed comment, the witness will present the geographical context and the historical context of the country in which the Tutsi genocide took place. He begins by pointing out that Rwanda, and Burundi with which he will make many parallels, are exceptions in the Great Lakes region : small populous countries surrounded by giant underpopulated countries, including Zaire and Tanzania and Uganda, to a lesser extent.

He will continue seeking of colonisation and settlement of the country, referring to the composition of the family with the arrival, at undetermined dates, Twa, Hutu (Bantu) and the Tutsi, “Nilotic people who would have arrived from Israel or the Middle East”, although no proof of this can be given.

Everything happened in Rwanda, in the process of decolonisation. After supporting and formed the Tutsi elite, the Belgian settler, in the late 50s, will have to face the request for decolonisation from this elite. Belgium will then rely on the Church to “mobilise the Hutu majority”. Then will be published the “Hutu manifesto” in opposition to the Tutsi elite. The first Tutsi massacres happened in 1959, then the Republic of Gitarama, close to the Kabgayi Archbishop and of it’s leader, Mr PERRAUDIN, Swiss. We will then talk about ‘the majority people democracy”, the Center/South Hutu taking power in favour of racialised elections. This policy change causes the exile of many Tutsi to neighbouring countries : Burundi, Uganda, Congo, Tanzania. Repeated incursions of some of these exiled provoked repeated reprisals against the Tutsi population back home. And this went on until 1967. For the witness, the genocide does not begin at that time, but there still remains a “vivid memory of the massacres” for people.

After a brief analysis of the situation in Burundi at the same time, Mr. GUICHAOUA comes to 1973 and the coup of President HABYARIMANA, era marked by the establishment of quotas in the civil service, schools, the army… quotas aimed primarily at the Hutu/Tutsi component and soon the North/South Hutu. Politically, the emphasis is on development. The Parmehutu gives way to the MRND.

For the witness, there is a characteristic in Rwanda. Unlike the costal African countries, elites remain close to their place of origin, close to the peasantry they need to subsist. This will make these elites, thanks to that closeness, keep an important influence over the masses, which even if they do not always leave count, remain subject to them. However this elite does not hesitate to show it’s wealth ostentatiously and moved into corruption. We will distribute these new rich pasture : SIMBIKANGWA will be amont the beneficiaries of this largesse.

From 1985, the refugees wishing to return to their country will pose a problem.The witness forgot to say that the President HABYARIMANA always refused this return because the country is too small and can not accommodate everyone. However, in 1990, 90 000 refugees returned to Rwanda. The 1989 famine will force more than 20, 000 Rwandans to flee to Tanzania.

In Uganda, some Tutsi refugees have a military structure so that on the 1st of October 1990, the FPR attack coming from that country “will trigger an internal earthquake”, “the poorly trained Rwandan army being unable to fight, the Zairian army called in reinforcement will simply loot and flee”. The witness claims that the FPR feared not being able to attain power if elections are held, the FPR attack was aimed and “thwarting democratisation”.

The new 1991 Constitution establishes a multiparty system and many MRND opposition parties are created, but each plays it’s own card. The opposition parties, MDR, PL, PSD… combine, in part will the FPR who has an army. The 16th of April 1992 sees the introduction of a multiparty government. Despite the signing of the Arusha Agreements on the 4th of August 1993, things keep getting worse, the ones in power does not really want to apply these agreements because too much emphasis is given to the FPR to which is rallied the opposition parties. This period will aulso see these new parties split in two : a Power trend, uncompromising and extremist and a trend we will call moderate. In 1993, with the death of the Burundi President Melchior NDADAYE in October, is « the year of all dangers ». Ethnism returns to the heart of politics, mostly among the elite, but not yet in the peasant population.

This series of issues will provide an opportunity to discuss matters somewhat ignored : ID cards with ethnic reference and their rôle. Back to 1973 and the features of the HABYARIMANA regime (army, police, information restructuring, a lot of power in the hands of the president, setting up of family members at key positions, especially those close to the presidents wife (Elie SAGATWA, Protais ZIGIRANYIRAZO : the Akazu)). « A mafia system takes control of the economy fore », especially between 1988 and 1992, and always for the benefit of relatives of the president or his wife. That’s when SIMBIKANGWA enters the game. « The man behind the curtain, behind the dirty work, he did what RWAGAFILITA (Chief of Staff of the Gendarmerie) and SERUBUGA (Deputy Chief of Staff of the Army) can not or did not want to do. However, all the attrocities committed at the time are not all to be put on the account of power. »

With the multiparty system appears new media : transgressions are not feared anymore (see RTLM). It is also an opportunity for the political parties to create their own youth movements that will become armed wings during the genocide.

To a question of Domitille PHILIPPART, lawyer for the CPCR, Mr GUICHAOUA is made to clarify that SIMBIKANGWA was actually part of the Akazu, even if he is not at the heart of the device. Although he had left the army, he had kept a great influence. « He had kept an authority because he was responsible for the dirty work ».

The General Attorney would like to have a clear definition of the Akazu. Which gives an opportunity for the witness to clarify : « The Akazu is governed by family ties. Also refered to as « OTP », natives of the presidential land. All indeed are from Karago and Giciye ; they benefit from annuities. This is a family orientated and political patronage. As for the Zero Network (Réseau Zéro), the Amasasu and other death squads, they took care of terrorism instead. »

Maliciously the defense referring to statements from the witness, try to make him say that the KAGAME intelligence was much more efficient than the HABYARIMANA intelligence service. Mr GUICHAOUA sees the trap and asked him to « make no anachronism », the context and technical means being different.

Mr GUICHAOUA, still questioned by the defense, admits that the ICTR did not prove that there was an « agreement to commit genocide » : which does not mean that there were no killings before the 6th of April 1994. Refer to the Bagogwa, Kibilira or Bugesera massacres. Those are « genocidal practices ». The defense would like to pin these massacres on the FPR : they would be the consequence of destabilization attemps made by the FPR. The witness does not follow the defense. For him, the genocide, as assumed politics, begins on April 12, 1994, when the government created on the 9th sets up the genocidal policy. Debatable, of course.

Mrs BOURGEOT, for the defense, returns to the eternal question of the defense witnesses coming from Rwanda and who would be threatened ! Evokes the false witnesses at the ICTR, discusses the role of IBUKA, survivor association who would manipulate witnesses. Mr GUICHAOUA, who is not a friend of the FPR, however said that there was no « institution in Rwanda to invent false witnesses ». And Mr FORELAN added that there is not just the KAGAME regime that frightens the witnesses.

GUICHAOUA is in Kigali from 6 to 11th of April : his personal experience.

The day ended with what the witness has retained from his stay in Kigali during the first days of the genocide… He had taken refuge at the Mille Collines Hotel where he had to redeem the lives of survivors who had sought refuge in this place.

Since the minute the plane fell, massacres began in Kigali. The Presidential Guards (GP) carried out their wretched task in several neighborhoods (Editors note : the witness does not mention what happend around the airport, around the HABYARIMANA residence. In the hours following the attack, the Gps will exterminate the entire civilian population. Very little witnesses are there to report this.) On the 7th, Prime Minister Agathe UWILINGIYIMANA is murdered as well as many Hutu opponents. The death of ten Belgian UN peacekeepers entails the withdrawal of Belgian troops. Gradually, all prefectures are ablaze, but on the incentive of policy makers. The international community will shine by it’s inefficiency.

The question asked is to know whether, if we were at Kiyovu, we could not have seen anything, heard anything ! The witness’ answer : « It’s unlikely ». Or, SIMBIKANGWA was 200 meters under the Mille Collines Hotel. (Editors note : he has already claimed, during the first trial, that he had really understood that a genocide took place in Rwanda only after reading Abdul RUZIBIZA’s book, prefaced by GUICHAOUA, book that appears to have become his new bible. The accused was then in Mayotte.) « With the personalities that are there, it is impossible that there were no connexions. »

Genocide : result of popular anger of a people whos’ president was killed ? No, that is not the case. « We had to encourage people to kill. »

Mr PHILIPPART returns to an extract of the witness’s book « From War to Genocide ». Pages 470/471, the author mentionned the number of 34 159 victims at Gisenyi. However, SIMBIKANGWA has recently said that in his town, there were only 3 deaths out of 40 000 inhabitants ! Not very credible !

The General Attorney HERVELLIN-SERRE asks the witness about the presence of barriers in Kiyovu. The witness confirmes : « Kiyovu was one of the most fearsome neighbourhoods ». « Besides the barricades, the GP circulated and killed in all houses. The corpses were fairly quickly picked up and thrown into dumpsters of Public Works, Kigali had become an open-air cemetery ».

If the witness has not seen or heard SIMBIKANGWA in the first few days of the genocide, he knew him well. During 1992/1993 there was a « real fear of this figure. You could not not know him. And his reputation ! »

Mrs BOURGEOT, for the defense, returns to state, as she knows how to, what I have called dalse questions : the answer is induced in the question. « For the FPR, the priority was not to save the Tutsis ? But to take power ? The Prosecution wants to make you say thaat there was a concerted plan but the ICTP has never proved this ? »

Ditto for Mr EPSTEIN who comes from time to time to help his colleague when he believes she has not asked the question in the right way. « So, access to the truth is very complicated in Rwanda ? There are collective consultation sessions with witnesses before leaving Rwanda ? » Mr GUICHAOUA has opted to give very evasive answers to not get trapped by the defense.

The floor was given to Mr SIMBIKANGWA who was asked to keep it short, which is often difficult for him. His lawyer had to signal to him to shut up : he is broadly satisfied by Mr GUICHAOUAs testimony.

Hearings are adjourned at 7:35pm and will not resume until Wednesday the 2nd of November.

Alain GAUTHIER, Chairman of the CPCR

(translated by Leah TSHABALALA)