Global Ethics Corner: Genocide Denial in Rwanda: Dealing with the Past or Subverting Democracy?

Sep 16, 2011

Do laws that make it a crime to deny the existence of genocide help to lessen the chances of renewed conflict? Or, do they stifle freedom of speech--and risk eliminating political dissent? These are the questions currently debated in Rwanda.

Do laws that make it a crime to deny the existence of genocide help to lessen the chances of renewed conflict? Or, do they stifle freedom of speech—and risk eliminating political dissent?

These are the questions currently being debated in Rwanda.

The recent trial of Victoire Ingabire—a staunch government critic—has drawn attention to a controversial law that criminalizes what it calls "genocide ideology."

Passed in 2008, the law places hefty fines and prison sentences on a wide range of alleged transgressions. These span the gamut from incitement of hatred and the denial of genocide to statements that poke fun at genocidal actions.

Advocates of the law argue that it represents a genuine effort to deal with the past. They accuse individuals like Ingabire of denying the extent of the tragedy inflicted upon Rwanda's Tutsi minority. By drawing attention to Hutu victims, they say Ingabire and others fuel ethnic divisions.

Critics make a different case. They say the law's vague terminology can lead to censorship, and offers the government too much leeway in selecting potential transgressors. Rather than redress the past, they say it serves as a legal instrument for an authoritarian government bent on eliminating opposition.

The Ingabire trial is a case in point. Far from denying genocide, critics say Ingabire drew attention to the complexity of the genocide, which resulted in both Tutsi and Hutu victims. By arresting Ingabire, the government was not dealing with the past—it was eliminating its most credible opponent.

As Ingabire's trial gets underway, what is your take on Rwanda's "ideology law"? Does it help to stem genocide or is it a veiled attempt to eliminate opposition?

How do you distinguish between laws that deal with the past and laws that subvert a democratic future?

By Marlene Spoerri

For more information see

Josh Kron, "Rwanda Lays Out Charges Against Ex-Presidential Hopeful" The New York Times, September 9, 2011.

"Law and Reality: Progress in Judicial Reform in Rwanda", Human Rights Watch, July 24, 2008.

"Rwanda (2011)," Freedom House.

Photo Credits in order of Appearance: MSGT Rose Reynolds Kigali Wire Graham Holliday Alberto… Julien Harneis Commonwealth Secretariat Amnesty International Penn State Graham Holliday hoteldephil Graham Holliday d_proffer

You may also like

President Biden at the White House, March 2021. <br>CREDIT: <a href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/whitehouse/51033292536/">Official White House Photo by Adam Schultz</a> (<a href="https://www.usa.gov/government-works">U.S. Government Works</a>)

MAR 25, 2021 Article

Grappling with Competing Ethical Demands: The New Biden Administration

Any leader faces competing ethical demands. In particular, policymakers must decide which ethical claims to preference and which to defer. In this blog post from ...

New York Army National Guard at a COVID-19 mobile testing center, New Rochelle, NY, March 14, 2020. <br>CREDIT: <a href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:New_York_National_Guard_(49667734346).jpg">New York National Guard (CC)</a>.

MAY 5, 2020 Podcast

COVID-19 & the Future of Health Data, with Mona Sloane

The implementation of contact tracing and the collection of health data may be necessary for life to return to "normal" in the face of the ...

Adam Gopnik. CREDIT: Billy Pickett

MAY 22, 2019 Podcast

A Thousand Small Sanities: The Moral Adventure of Liberalism, with Adam Gopnik

In his eloquent defense of liberalism, Adam Gopnik goes back to its origins and argues that rather than emphasizing the role of the individual, the ...