A petition filed in March last year by a human rights lawyer questioning the constitutionality of Rwanda’s cybercrime law, is finally set for pre-trial by the Supreme Court on February 6. The lawyer, Jean-Paul Ibambe, is seeking for the revocation of article 39 of the country’s law on prevention and punishment of cybercrimes, which criminalises the publication of rumours. Any person who, knowingly and through a computer or a computer system, publishes rumours that may incite fear, insurrection or violence amongst the population or that may make a person lose their credibility, commits an offence,” the article reads. Ibambe argues that the article is unconstitutional as it aligns closely with the criminalisation of defamation which was repealed by the Supreme Court in 2019 after Richard Mugisha, a fellow Rwandan lawyer challenged some specific provisions in the law. ALSO READ: Journalists laud Supreme Court landmark ruling on defamation Ibambe’s petition claims that the criminalisation of statements that may damage a person's credibility in the cyber law is a “hallmark” of criminal defamation. He noted that his challenge is grounded in several fundamental legal instruments, precedents, and comparative jurisprudence. I am referring to the (Richard) Mugisha case vs. Government of Rwanda. In this case, the Supreme Court ruled that Article 233 of the law on offenses and penalties in general, which criminalised the humiliation of national leaders and public officials, was unconstitutional as it hampered freedom of expression,” he told The New Times. The court emphasised that such provisions impede the public's right to critically examine and disseminate information about public figures,” he added. For him, defamation should never be addressed criminally as it restricts constitutional rights to freedom of expression and access to information. “Rwanda has already taken a stand on this matter, and defamation cases should be handled in civil or administrative courts,” he noted. What is pre-trial? A pre-trial conference is a meeting during which a court registrar reviews the case file in the presence of the conflicting parties. The registrar reads each point and allows the litigants to make necessary modifications. Once all the contents of the case have been reviewed, the registrar inquires whether the parties are open to a compromise. If they are, the parties’ agreement to compromise is recorded in writing. However, if a compromise is not reached, the registrar notifies the parties of the date and time for the hearing on the merits of the case, and agrees with them on the duration of the hearing. Ibambe is currently based in the USA where he is pursuing further studies. He expects to fly into Rwanda for the trial.
