Denial of Genocide against Tutsi has increased in recent years with prominent intellectuals and journalists finding a growing voice in the mainstream media and academic institutions.

Many of these forms of denial are intended to sow doubt about the veracity of the history of the genocide without openly denying that it happened, so you often hear phrases like we do not deny that there was a genocide however the intention here is to distort, mislead and to deceive and it is crucial that we remain vigilant and capable of recognising and responding to genocide denial in whatever form it appears.

In the last 28 years, the denial of the Genocide against Tutsi has had many forms and changed according to the different events. For example, the denial narrative before the establishment of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda is different from the denial narrative after main perpetrators, including Prime Minister Jean Kambanda who pleaded guilty, have been tried.

The first form of the denial narrative is to deny that the genocide happened. They deny the facts about genocide and its plan.

On June 16, 1994, a security meeting that was convened in Rusiza Sector in the former Mutura Commune currently in Rubavu District. We can read from the minutes of the meeting which were signed by all attendees’ and distributed by authorities: "There is a commission which will investigate the killings of Tutsi, so we need to tell them that they moved to Zaire (Current DR of Congo)".  The meeting urged the population to erase all existing signs of the homes of Tutsi such as fences and building foundations because houses were destroyed before.

The commission they were referring to was the visit of the UN Special Rapporteur of the Commission on Human Rights, Degni-Segui, and his delegation who was in Rwanda and the region from 9-20 June 1994 to conduct his first field mission to investigate violations of human rights particularly crimes against humanity and genocide.

Note that in the former Mutura Commune, the genocide lasted less than five days and the militias were deployed for support in killings in former Gitarama and Kibuye Communes. Those who were killed in Mutura are survivors of Bagogwe massacres especially women and children because men were killed between 1990-1993.

The information given during the security meeting of Rusiza Sector was shared in the rest of the country. That was the directive of the genocidal government; denial of the existence of Tutsi in their neighbourhood. This was the first form of denial of the genocide against Tutsi which the genocidal government spread especially to international organisations in the refugee camps.

The second denial narrative is that killings are acknowledged but are recast as something other than genocide. The killings were justified as self-defence, part of civil war, or ethnic self-determination of the ‘majority’ population.  The popularity of digital platforms such as Twitter contributes to this form of genocide denial where the descendants of genocide perpetrators, the dignitaries of Habyarimana’s regime are very active on this platform. Engaging with this digital space demand huge amounts of energy and genocide deniers are very committed.

By interpreting a genocide as self-defence, or part of civil war and ethnic self-determination by the ‘majority’ population, this denial narrative conveniently amends the facts of genocide as something else.

The third form of denial acknowledges that genocide took place, but involves explicit counter-accusations to blame the Tutsi. This form of denial revives conspiracy theories that preceded the genocide between 1991 and 1993 that the Tutsi intended to wipe out the Hutu majority. In February 1991, Leon Mugesera in collaboration with and some women parliamentarians published a pamphlet claiming that the RPF planned "a genocide, the extermination of the Hutu majority in the article titled "Toute la Verité sur la Guerre d’Octobre 1990 au Rwanda”

This fear-mongering was intended to justify the creation of so-called self-defence militias, really death squads, like the notorious interahamwe, who in 1994 were deployed to kill Tutsis in their homes, at roadblocks, even in schools, hospitals, and places of worship.

Extreme deniers combine the second and third narrative forms of denial. Recently, one notorious genocide convict Capt Innocent Sagahutu who was recently released by International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals (IRMCT) brought a new form of denial where he distanced Interahamwe Militia to MRND and attributed them to the victims of the genocide carried out by those Interahamwe militia.

The denial of the 1994 Genocide against the Tutsi in Rwanda before, during and after the genocide itself was collective and highly organized. The greater the crime, the more elaborate and organized the denial. As President Kagame said; "If deniers have no shame, why should I have fear?”  We should know that fighting genocide denial in all its forms is a full-time job.