EDITORIAL: Media silence over HRW’s exposure raises unanswered questions

A few months ago, Human Rights Watch (HRW), with a lot of fanfare, came out with yet another of its now famous “reports” on alleged rights abuses in Rwanda. To make sure it aroused as much media interest as possible, it gave it a most sensational title that would put most Hollywood script writers to shame. True to its intentions, “All thieves must die” – the title of the report – made headlines in all major news outlets. As has been the practice of the media houses, they swallowed HRW’s fairytale hook, line and sinker. In fact, as far as HRW is concerned, when it comes to dragging Rwanda’s name in the mud, it has perfected the art of snuggling in bed with a section of the media. They swallow everything thrown at them, basic journalistic ethics notwithstanding. Now there is an embarrassing silence from both HRW and the media houses in question after the “thieves” it alleged had been “executed” by security forces were found alive and well. Even those who died did so through sickness or accidents and there is evidentiary proof. HRW has failed to deal with its foot-in-the-mouth situation and has instead dug in, sheepishly calling for dialogue with Rwandan authorities over the report. But that does not answer its unethical conduct when compiling its “reports” nor its political overtones that have become its calling card over the years. But that is not the major issue since every time it comes up with one of its fabrications, it continues to expose itself. The alarming thing is the media that helps spread the poison keeps mum in the face of evidence to the contrary. No word can describe that situation better than “collusion”. Ken Roth’s (HRW head for the last two decades and a half) obsession with Rwanda is reaching alarming pathological levels but at least it has the power to raise the dead.

Opinions

EDITORIAL: Media silence over HRW’s exposure raises unanswered questions