UK: Andrew Mitchell faces grilling over Rwandan aid decision

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2012/nov/01/andrew-mitchell-grilling-rwanda-aid Andrew Mitchell faces grilling over Rwandan aid decision Former chief whip to be questioned over decision to restore £16m in aid on last day as international development secretary Share44 inShare1 Email Hélène Mulholland, political reporter guardian.co.uk,  Thursday 1 November 2012 07.39 EDT Andrew Mitchell worked in the Department for International Development before his brief stint as chief whip. Photograph: Bethany Clarke/Getty Images Andrew Mitchell, the former chief whip who resigned after becoming embroiled in "plebgate", is to be grilled by MPs over a decision made on his last day as international development secretary to restore British aidto Rwanda. The decision was made despite fears about the human rights record of the country's president, Paul Kagame. Mitchell is scheduled to give evidence on 8 November to the international development committee, which is investigating the decision by the Department for International Development to grant £16m in aid to the Rwandan government. DFID made the decision despite allegations about Rwanda's role in the conflict in eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo, and the decision of other donors who withdrew budget support not to reinstate it. The UK, Rwanda's biggest bilateral donor, is now under pressure to halt the aid, after one of Kagame's allies was named in a leaked report as the de facto leader of a violent uprising in the DRC. UN experts identified General James Kabarebe, the Rwandan defence minister, as effectively directing a Congolese rebel militia accused of killings, rapes and other atrocities. In an interview in August, Kabarebe, who for years has faced accusations of plundering Congo's mineral resources, denied that the Rwandan army supported the M23 militia. "Everyone knows that Rwanda does not have a single soldier among the M23 and does not give it any support," he told the Belgian newspaper Le Soir. Mitchell's decision in September to restore the aid was made just hours before he left the department to take up his new post as chief whip following David Cameron's September reshuffle, for what proved to be a brief stint. He returned to the backbenches last month after quitting in the face of sustained criticism over his expletive-laden outburst to a police officer at Downing Street. The MP for Sutton Coldfield, who forged a strong political relationship with Kagame while the Tories were in opposition, now faces questions over his agreement to restore the aid to the Rwandan government in September 2012. He had originally put a block on it after visiting the Kivu region of the neighbouring Democratic Republic of the Congo. He had cited progress at the International Conference on the Great Lakes Region under the chairmanship of Yoweri Kaguta Museveni, the Ugandan president. It emerged last month that the unfreezing of the aid was formally approved by the Department for International Development, the FCO and Downing Street. Mitchell, who was appointed international development secretary after the 2010 general election, was succeeded by Justine Greening, will give evidence to the committee the following week.

Rwanda: Fear and insecurity are Kagame’s principal weapons

http://www.inyenyerinews.org/human-rights/fear-is-kagmes-principal-weapon-and-insecurity/ Fear and insecurity are Kagame's principal weapons November 2, 2012 By Rwema IT Webmaster 1 Comment By: Jennifer Fierberg, MSW Victorie Ingabire returned to Rwanda in 2010 in order to register her party and run for the Presidential seat against Paul Kagame. She stepped off of the plane went to a genocide memorial site where she spoke to supporters and dared to mention that Hutu were also killed during the genocide and should be remembered as well. This statement landed her in a judicial sea of vague charges and house arrest. At the time she was part of a coalition of opposition groups who all came to her defense and stood by her side demanding she be released. On October 30th 2012 the judicial gymnastics have finally ended in the conviction of Mrs. Ingabire and a harsh sentence of eight years in one of the world's worst prisons, 1930 in Rwanda. Sadly, neither of the other two parties that were part of the coalition upon her return has made any statement thus far as to her sentencing. President Kagame needed to get rid of Mrs. Ingabire upon her return to Rwanda because she posed a strong and credible threat to his continued rule since 1994 and he knew she might just win the election back in August 2010 so she was arrested. He won the election at 93% and later expressed strong disappointment that he did not win by a larger margin. Now, with her sentence, she is a convicted criminal in Rwanda and cannot run for President so he has successfully been able to rid his country of a real threat to his continual oppressive rule. In a press release published by her party the FDU-INKINGI made the following statement: The Rwandan justice system is broken. All of you who might still doubt the unfairness and the lack of independence of the Rwandan justice system with regard to the regime of Paul Kagame, open your eyes. Throughout the trial, we tirelessly showed you how the High Court, by violating basic judicial procedures and evidence of innocence presented by the defense, persisted in its wanderings and declared itself competent to judge the facts all of which were unsubstantiated and were contested by the defense, the facts that apparently occurred before the law repressing them was enacted or the facts that have been committed outside the jurisdiction of the High Court. Even the illegal acquisition of the evidential documents from the Netherlands, which were supposed to show the collaboration of Madame Victoire Ingabire with the armed rebellion of Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda (FDLR), turned out to be a windbag. The Prosecution failed to provide, beyond any reasonable doubt, the evidence of guilt for Madame Victoire Ingabire. By refusing to consider the testimonies and breaches to the judicial procedure that were presented by the defense team, and moreover, by violating the basic legal principles of non-retroactivity of criminal laws and jurisdictions, the High Court failed to interpret the law and therefore denied to Madame Victoire Ingabire the right to a fair trial. For FDU-Inkingi Coordinating Committee Dr. Nkiko Nsengimana Coordinator Many political and human rights organization have published reactions to this miscarriage of justice. The Rwanda National Congress published the following statement in reaction to her sentencing: The Rwandan Justice System, once again, demonstrated today that it continues to serve the interests of the government and the RPF, instead of serving those of the people of Rwanda. The sentencing of Madame Victoire Ingabire is another wakeup call that reminds us of the urgent need for regime change and the introduction of a government that will implement the rule of law and fairness in the Rwandan justice system. Despite the failure of the Prosecution in this case to prove beyond reasonable doubt, that Ingabire is guilty of charges she is accused of, she was sentenced to eight years in prison. This is violation of due process, which requires the government to follow certain procedures before it deprives a person of life, liberty, or property. Also, the Rwandan courts failed to determine whether the government had sufficient justification for its actions of taking Madame Ingabire's liberty. Signed by: Jean Paul Turayishimye RNC, Spokesperson Date: October 30, 2012 Email: jpturayishimye@yahoo.com Human Rights Watch published the following statement, in part, on the day of Victorie Ingabire's sentencing: ""The prosecution of Ingabire for "genocide ideology" and divisionism illustrates the Rwandan government's unwillingness to tolerate criticism and to accept the role of opposition parties in a democratic society," said Daniel Bekele, Africa director at Human Rights Watch. "The courts should not be used for such political purposes." Human Rights Watch cannot comment on the veracity of the charges relating to Ingabire's alleged collaboration with armed groups, but is concerned that some of the evidence used to convict her appears to be unreliable." Many political analysts and outside journalists have voiced a consensus that this verdict was 100% politically motivated and was used to silence a legitimate opponent to the current ruling party. Rwanda refuses to open up political space and silences and dissident voices whether they are political, media or individuals. With the pressure Rwanda is currently under with the international community they may have used a "reduced" sentence of eight years to appear lenient but it did not work. This is a harsh sentence based on the politics of hate that government of Rwanda is known for. While President Kagame may feel he is giving her a break by not giving her life in prison he is really sealing his own fate in the eyes of international donors who have called for him to open up political space. Kagame's insecurity is showing more and more each day and his fear of change and vocal dissent will be a losing battle.

Rwanda denies their support to M23.  They say that M23 is an internal matter to RDC. But, why Rwanda and Uganda are pushing for RDC's  internal matter to be  dealt with by  the International Conference on the Great Lakes Region (ICGLR). They should leave M23 problems with DRC.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Andrew Mitchell faces grilling over Rwandan aid decision

Former chief whip to be questioned over decision to restore £16m in aid on last day as international development secretary

• Hélène Mulholland, political reporter
• guardian.co.uk, Thursday 1 November 2012 11.39 GMT

Andrew Mitchell worked in the Department for International Development before his brief stint as chief whip. Photograph: Bethany Clarke/Getty Images

Andrew Mitchell, the former chief whip who resigned after becoming embroiled in "plebgate", is to be grilled by MPs over a decision made on his last day as international development secretary to restore British aid to Rwanda. The decision was made despite fears about the human rights record of the country's president, Paul Kagame.

Mitchell is scheduled to give evidence on 8 November to the international development committee, which is investigating the decision by the Department for International Development to grant £16m in aid to the Rwandan government. DFID made the decision despite allegations about Rwanda's role in the conflict in eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo, and the decision of other donors who withdrew budget support not to reinstate it.

The UK, Rwanda's biggest bilateral donor, is now under pressure to halt the aid, after one of Kagame's allies was named in a leaked report as the de facto leader of a violent uprising in the DRC. UN experts identified General James Kabarebe, the Rwandan defence minister, as effectively directing a Congolese rebel militia accused of killings, rapes and other atrocities.

In an interview in August, Kabarebe, who for years has faced accusations of plundering Congo's mineral resources, denied that the Rwandan army supported the M23 militia. "Everyone knows that Rwanda does not have a single soldier among the M23 and does not give it any support," he told the Belgian newspaper Le Soir.

Mitchell's decision in September to restore the aid was made just hours before he left the department to take up his new post as chief whip following David Cameron's September reshuffle, for what proved to be a brief stint.

He returned to the backbenches last month after quitting in the face of sustained criticism over his expletive-laden outburst to a police officer at Downing Street.

The MP for Sutton Coldfield, who forged a strong political relationship with Kagame while the Tories were in opposition, now faces questions over his agreement to restore the aid to the Rwandan government in September 2012. He had originally put a block on it after visiting the Kivu region of the neighbouring Democratic Republic of the Congo. He had cited progress at the International Conference on the Great Lakes Region under the chairmanship of Yoweri Kaguta Museveni, the Ugandan president.

It emerged last month that the unfreezing of the aid was formally approved by the Department for International Development, the FCO and Downing Street.

Mitchell, who was appointed international development secretary after the 2010 general election, was succeeded by Justine Greening, will give evidence to the committee the following week.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2012/nov/01/andrew-mitchell-grilling-rwanda-aid

S&P réévalue la note du Rwanda de « positive » à « stable »

http://www.jambonews.net/actualité/20121101-standard-and-poors-reevalue-la-note-du-rwanda-de-positive-a-stable/   Standard and Poor's réévalue la note du Rwanda de « positive » à « stable » 1. nov | Par Clément Cyiza | Catégorie: A la une Ce lundi 29 octobre, l'une des plus puissantes agences de notations au monde, Standard and Poor's (S&P), a réévalué à la baisse la note de solvabilité du Rwanda de «positive» à  «stable». Cela intervient quelques semaines après que les grandes puissances aient décidé de réduire l'aide octroyée au Rwanda, à la suite d'un rapport des experts de l'ONU accusant le gouvernement rwandais de soutenir la rébellion M23 dans l'Est de la RDC.    En effet, dans un communiqué sur le site de l'agence de notation, S&P explique que cette réévaluation vers le bas résulte des dernières tensions entre le Rwanda et  le Congo qui ont poussé certains donateurs, dont les États-Unis, l'Angleterre, les Pays-Bas et l'Allemagne, à suspendre ou retarder leurs aides au Rwanda. Cette même agence estime que la suspension de l'aide s'élève à 15% de l'aide totale que le Rwanda reçoit chaque année, ce qui représente  un manque de plus de 6% du budget rwandais.   Conséquences de cette réévaluation   Les conséquences de cette décision sont à regarder dans la mission même de l'agence de notation. Vivant dans un monde où règne une asymétrie d'information entre les détenteurs de capitaux et les emprunteurs, ces agences, qui sont des entreprises privées, ont comme  rôle principal d'éliminer l'asymétrie d'information régnant sur les marchés financiers. Chaque émetteur (État, entreprise, organisme public) se voit attribuer une note par les agences de notations, allant de  « AAA »(qualité de crédit la plus élevée)  à  « D »(défaut); note reflétant la capacité de l'émetteur à  honorer ses engagements financiers, à  savoir rembourser son prêt. Ceteris paribus,  plus un pays est bien coté par les agences de notation,  plus il pourra prélever des liquidités sur les marchés financiers aux meilleures conditions, c'est-à-dire, à des taux  d'intérêt  bas.   A noter que le Rwanda bénéficiait jusque-là d'une note équivalente à celle du Kenya ou encore de l'Ouganda mais bien meilleure que celle de  la Grèce.   A court terme, dans le cas du Rwanda, cette réévaluation négative de S&P risque de se traduire par une hausse des taux d'intérêts sur les emprunts du gouvernement rwandais, ce qui , en combinant avec la suspension d'une partie de l'aide qu'il recevait, mettrait à mal les revenus gouvernementaux.   Néanmoins, si ces suspensions s'avèrent être temporaires, les conséquences de cette réévaluation seraient maitrisables, notamment en comblant ce déficit par le fond « Agaciro » et par l'argent  que le pays prévoit de récolter à partir de la fin de cette année via le « Diaspora Bond ».   Sur le long terme, comme l'agence l'a précisé, si les donateurs continuent à suspendre leurs aides de manière permanente, « ça aurait des conséquences sérieuses sur les finances du Rwanda » car le gouvernement  rwandais dépend des aides étrangères à  hauteur de plus de 40% de son budget.  De plus, la suspension permanente de ces aides se traduirait très probablement par une dégradation de la note du Rwanda, de « B » à « C », c'est-à-dire de la catégorie des pays très spéculatifs aux pays à risque très élevé.   Si ces suspensions perdurent, cette réévaluation pourrait avoir un effet de boule neige, dont les conséquences économiques et sociales seraient non négligeables. Le scénario suivant est à envisager : la  dégradation de la note du pays  se traduirait par une hausse des taux d'intérêts et donc un financement sur les marchés plus couteux, et de ce fait une partie des revenus de l'état serait allouée à ce financement, ce qui entrainerait  la baisse des revenus disponibles pour les dépenses publiques. Cela pourrait même aller plus loin puisque des licenciements dans le secteur public pourraient être envisagés dans un cas plus extrême. En ce qui concerne  les tentatives pour combler ce déficit, celles-ci ne seraient  guère optimistes : principalement – moins de donateurs dans le fond « Agaciro » car une hausse de chômage et baisse de revenus, -  peu de succès pour le prélèvement des liquidités via le « Diaspora Bond » car les investisseurs demanderont une compensation plus importante (prime de risque) pour compenser le risque élevé de défaut. A terme, ayant comme seul moyen le financement  une politique monétaire expansionniste, la pression inflationniste accentuerait le ralentissement de l'économie rwandaise.   L'ampleur de cette réévaluation sur l'économie rwandaise repose entièrement d'une part,  sur le peuple rwandais dans sa confiance ou non dans le fond « Agaciro » et le « Diaspora Bond » et d'autre part, dans la volonté de Kigali de résoudre les tentions entre lui et Kinshasa.   Clément Cyiza   Jambonews.net

[VIDEO]-CONDAMNATION DE VICTOIRE INGABIRE : L'OPPOSITION DENONCE UNE PARODIE DEJUSTICE

CONFERENCE DE PRESSE DE L'OPPOSTION RWANDAISE A LA MAISON DE LA PRESSE DE L'UNION EUROPEENNE POUR DENONCER LA CONDAMNATION DE Mme VICTOIRE INGABIRE A 8 ANS DE PRISON. http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=JG1U1tk4el0