Editor,

I totally agree with the following statement, quoting Francis Boyle, Professor of Law at the University of Illinois, who served on Amnesty International’s (AI) US board. He said that the organization is motivated "first by publicity; second, money; third, more members and fourth and last, human rights”. This was all recently published in The New Times.

They have now achieved their number one goal "publicity” which will bring in the number two goal "money”.  For sure many ignorant "good people” have joined (goal number three) and recently, for show in my opinion, the UN has now arrested a "small fish” in DRC to put on trial, goal number four.

Just try to imagine if, all of a sudden, all the UN tribunals had to close down, who would be the main loser?   For example, of all the billions of dollars spent on ICTR 75 percent goes back to the lawyers and the employees of the money making machine.

The dream for the UN would be that the ICTR becomes a permanent court for all their imaginary crimes or as they suggest, create a hybrid tribunal for the DRC.   I personally call it a case of self-preservation. What I fail to understand is why Rwanda is always their soft target?

Vero Rukundo, Kimihurura