In Palestine whenever a surgery goes well, the family congratulates the surgeon, if it doesn’t, they praise Allah. In Israel when a surgery goes well they praise God, if it doesn’t, the blame the surgeon.

In Rwanda too, when a sinister occurs, people praise God, when government prevents it against their will, they blame government. 

Citizens have rights. Some are immediate, absolute and permanent others are subjected to progressive realization, on a case by case basis, and this: Everywhere in the world.

Why? Because states do not have the means to fulfill all rights at all times.

On Expropriation v. Eviction: Eviction for safety purposes isn’t expropriation.

Eviction is when a person illegally occupies a location. Expropriation is when a person occupies land legally and the said land is affected to another activity in the interest of the public.

On Evacuation: Evacuation however is when early warning mechanisms have signaled an imminent catastrophe such as floods, a hurricane, fire, thunder and other danger, which compel the state to act diligently to safeguard the public.

In such case, temporary measures are found to resettle the evacuated people.   

In cases of evacuation and eviction, the state is not liable for compensation. Only in case of expropriation is the state bound to compensate.

This is what happened to people who were evacuated from high risk zones last week.

In international law: Article 2 (1) of the ICESCR stipulates that: ‘Each State Party to the present Covenant undertakes to take steps[…] especially economic and technical, to the maximum of its available resources, with a view to achieving progressively the full realization of the rights recognized in the present Covenant by all appropriate means…’

Exception made to oil and gas super-rich countries with small populations, the right to shelter isn’t guaranteed by the state anywhere else in the world; in fact the main characteristic of rich western cities is the high numbers of homeless people.

I spoke to the mayor, the vice mayor of social affairs and the head of communication of the city of Kigali. All confirmed that every family which was evicted was given a humane alternative:

- Land compensation for those who occupied the land before the law; - Rent for up to three month for landlords; - Rent of one month for tenants; - Temporal accommodation in schools and other public buildings.

On the other hand, I also spoke to my uncle whose house too is to be destroyed, he confirmed of the insufficient but available temporary measures offered to them.

However, in spite of the offered alternatives, some households decided to picket in the land they were being evicted from. They were there in virtue of their constitutional right to protest and not because they were being subjected to.

Also they were there for a photo opportunity – which too is their right. After the media had left, most of them joined the temporary relocation venues.

Now, I find it interesting for young people to express outrage, for Rwandans to demand more from their government. It means the government has placed the standard of policy making and service delivery to the highest level. This is good.

However legitimate the public demands; namely compensation for all the people evacuated, it should not be a legal claim but an advocacy appealing to the empathy of the state. Which is totally justified.

Unfortunately, I think the communication experts, populists, influencers and twitter watchdogs are overselling their wire. What matters in a policy is the equity inherent to it, the humanity in its implementation - and not the spin added to it.

Rwanda is a welfare state led by revolutionaries, and not an old, western liberal democracy led by lobby firms, big pharmaceuticals, weapon manufacturers and conservative Think Tanks: All spin doctors, hired by the state, whenever it (excuse my French) ‘pisses on the people and pays them to call it rain’.

In whatever we do, we must remember who we are. There is no ‘Us’ versus ‘Them’. I, writing this have family in Batsinda and in Gatsata.

I find it disingenuous that most people overlooked the meteorological data which formed the basis for the hasty evacuation and the fact that there was exceptionally less casualties following such heavy rains last night.

Many people blamed poor communication from the city council. But I believe the city council need not compete with the uninformed popularity contest on social media.

There was ample explanation, ministers and parliamentary visits, local leaders’ awareness, etc., since two years ago.

But as I illustrated above, Rwandans believe death by natural disaster is within God’s plan, ‘harindimana’, ‘Umuntu apfa umunsi we wageze’

In reality, death occurs not due to God’s plan, but due to failure by responsible governments to mitigate risk and protect human life, especially by preventing citizens who willingly put themselves in harm’s way.

Otherwise God would be a racist, if death of black people always occurred more frequent than that of other races.

The right to shelter isn’t explicitly guaranteed by our constitution, although an interpretation of the right to life, my implicitly cover adequate shelter.

For those interested, this legal approach of giving primacy to political rights than socio-economic ones dates back to the Cold War. Indeed the Communist block wanted elementary human rights to take precedence; namely the right to food, shelter, education, health: those rights that are necessary for a healthy, decent living.

These rights were grouped in an instrument called the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR).

The capitalist block didn’t care about that, they wanted freedoms to take precedence to livelihood. They promoted things like the right to protest, the right to vote, freedom of assembly, freedom of expression, freedom of media, etc.

These were grouped in an instrument called the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).

Now after the cold war and the defeat of the communist bloc, ICCPR took precedence and countries that privileged socio-economic rights were deemed ‘dictatorships’.

However in Rwanda we have no supremacy of rights, we believe in ‘protection’, ‘promotion’ and ‘fulfillment’ of rights within our means.

To conclude on the topic at hand, as I said above, Rwanda is a welfare state led by revolutionaries, all from humble backgrounds. Rwandans are a family; a creed. There is no ‘rich’ v. ‘poor’.

The media which misreported what happened, portraying the evacuation process as abrupt and draconian did not do it for the people evacuated. They did it for their own cheap popularity.

But as heavy rains last night demonstrated; that was good, foresighted policy implementation.

In the future, I encourage the city council to not be thwarted by ill-informed or ill-intentioned media to pursue what is fair, equitable and in the interest of all vulnerable residents of Rwanda.

The views expressed in this article are of the author.