CIVIL Society Organisations in Rwanda have come out to disown a report on the human rights situation in Rwanda circulating within and outside the country, saying that the authors had not consulted them as the report claims.

The report entitled the "Alternative Report of the Civil Society on the Universal Periodic Review of Rwanda 2011” was produced by regional human rights advocacy group, LDGL, and submitted to the UN and other organizations.

However, the report which it claims contains the views of 35 organisations has now come under fire after the organisations denied being part of the coalition that supposedly penned the controversial document and have threatened to take legal action against its authors.

In a statement issued yesterday and signed by the organisations which LDGL claims were divided into six sets of groups, they said the content of the nine-page ‘tract’ are untrue and do not reflect the views of the organisations.

"We, representatives of the organizations signatories of this declaration; Note that a tract claiming to be a synthesis of the report of the civil society on the Universal Periodic Examination of Rwanda 2011 is currently in circulation both in and outside Rwanda;”

"Note that the contents of this tract are untrue; Note that our organizations have been mentioned as authors of this tract which is not true.  They did not contribute in its drafting and its circulation;” the statement reads in part.
As a result, the organisations declared that the alleged authors of the tract never existed and do not exist, hence "the tract in question is   of no value and of no legitimacy and engages only its author.”

The report claims that the organisations observed that there is no freedom of expression, opinion, press and association for fear of facing legal proceedings, despite those freedoms being guaranteed by article 24 of the constitution. 

"The population is afraid to express themselves freely on questions related to general interest with journalists particularly falling victims to this climate, as reflected in the following and recent cases,” the report says, citing the ban on Umuseso and Umuvugizi tabloids as an example.

The report further adds that the murder of Jean Leonard Rugambage, a journalist, as an example and goes on to claim that the Media High Council is used as a tool to make arbitrary decisions.

However the organisations argue that they were not consulted on the issue and have vowed to do the necessary to contradict the tract.

"The signatories of this declaration request competent authorities to identify and prosecute the persons in charge of the drafting and the diffusion of the lies contained in this tract,” the statement issued yesterday adds.

It is not clear who authored the report as LDGL is said to be distancing itself from the controversial document.

Ends