This week, we commenced activities that will lead to the commemoration of the 1994 Genocide against the Tutsi. This is a big deal since we are marking 20 years after this massacre that claimed over a million lives. 

Coincidentally, during his visit to Rwanda this week, the Dutch Minister for Migration, Security and Justice, said that the challenge his country encounters in trying to extradite fugitives to Rwanda is because some of them have acquired citizenship in his country. 

This is good news for which I want to thank the minister, not only for what the Dutch have done in as far as revitalising the justice sector in the country—which I will delve in shortly, but also the political will to extradite fugitives – despite the  constraints caused  by technicalities.  

For other countries, these fugitives have remained without any form of inconvenience, which is by far worse, especially when most of such countries are actually in Africa. 

The Netherlands’ commitment to bring to book the perpetrators of  the 1994 Genocide against the Tutsi is almost unmatched, including the prosecution and conviction of some of them- like Joseph Mpambara, who had his 20-year sentence overturned on appeal, earning himself life imprisonment. 

Last year, Yvonne Basebya, a wife to a former minister was sentenced to over eight years, also for her role in the Genocide. Two prosecutions plus a number of arrests that have been made is something not many countries have done in helping to bring to book these suspects.

And lastly of course, the Kingdom of Netherlands’ partnership with the Government of Rwanda in the reforms within the judiciary has seen many jurisdictions billing Rwanda a bonafide guarantor of international justice, not only for Rwandans but also international war criminals.

It is however the reason that the minister gave on the impediments they meet in trying to extradite the fugitives that left me a bit uncomfortable; that some of these fugitives are naturalised Dutch citizens.

We have had scores of investigative police from the Kingdom of The Netherlands who came here on missions to dig into the role these same people played in the Genocide. 

Why can’t they base on findings of these investigations to nullify the citizenships of these people, because I read somewhere that fraud in the processing of the citizenship, according to the Dutch laws, can cost you the citizenship. 

This is not completely unprecedented, because we have seen people deported from the United States – so far four of them – on the account that they committed fraud at the time they were processing their naturalisation in that country.

So as we mark this very important milestone, let everyone play their role in ensuring that everyone who played a role in these heinous crimes have their day in court, because, 20 years after the Genocide only justifies the old adage; justice delayed is justice denied. 

The perpetrators are not getting any younger, neither are those who lost their loved ones, especially when you think of that widow, who lost the husband, and all her children. 

Secondly, my agitation for the extradition to Rwanda as the best alternative is premised on the distinction between delivering justice and ensuring that justice is seen to be done, as was meticulously put by Chief Justice Prof Sam Rugege. 

The people who so need to see justice done are here, so having the perpetrators tried in far-flung countries only, in the good Prof’s learned words, only leaves justice half served.

The writer is an editor with The New Times