We do not think so for two reasons.
The first reason is of a general nature.
Indeed, in general, we share the view of those who believe that such a law would be a danger to freedom of expression in a democracy.
In this respect, we refer to our first appendix, which is a text by Professor Anne STAQUET of the University of Mons: "Should the denial of genocide be condemned?" (Annexure 1).
The question of the appeal of such a law is particularly relevant because such a law can easily serve as an instrument of political repression.
The second reason is that the genocide committed in Rwanda is much too recent to allow for the adoption of such a law.
The facts date back to 20 years ago, unlike the other genocides that became the subject of legislation long after light had been shed on the history of the events and there was no need to reassess facts which had been established decades before.
In the case of Rwanda, a huge proportion of the victims have not yet had any justice and are even denied the opportunity to commemorate theirs.
In Rwanda, the truth has not yet been concretized and many victims do not yet dare to tell the real stories of their experiences.
Moreover, among those responsible for what happened in Rwanda is the RPF, which is currently in power in Kigali and which has done everything possible to muzzle the victims of the genocide and ensure that no light is shed on their part in the genocide.
As long as Rwanda is in the hands of those who took part in these events and themselves committing mass crimes, it will be impossible to establish any historical truth which will be shielded from genocide denial.
----------------------Home----------------------
1. Who are we and what are our objectives?
3. Is the law timely in its content?
4. What would be the objectives in case of adoption of the law? We do not think so for two reasons.
The first reason is of a general nature.
Indeed, in general, we share the view of those who believe that such a law would be a danger to freedom of expression in a democracy.
In this respect, we refer to our first appendix, which is a text by Professor Anne STAQUET of the University of Mons: "Should the denial of genocide be condemned?" (Annexure 1).
The question of the appeal of such a law is particularly relevant because such a law can easily serve as an instrument of political repression.
The second reason is that the genocide committed in Rwanda is much too recent to allow for the adoption of such a law.
The facts date back to 20 years ago, unlike the other genocides that became the subject of legislation long after light had been shed on the history of the events and there was no need to reassess facts which had been established decades before.
In the case of Rwanda, a huge proportion of the victims have not yet had any justice and are even denied the opportunity to commemorate theirs.
In Rwanda, the truth has not yet been concretized and many victims do not yet dare to tell the real stories of their experiences.
Moreover, among those responsible for what happened in Rwanda is the RPF, which is currently in power in Kigali and which has done everything possible to muzzle the victims of the genocide and ensure that no light is shed on their part in the genocide.
As long as Rwanda is in the hands of those who took part in these events and themselves committing mass crimes, it will be impossible to establish any historical truth which will be shielded from genocide denial.
----------------------Home----------------------
1. Who are we and what are our objectives?
3. Is the law timely in its content?
4. What would be the objectives in case of adoption of the law?