The Supreme Court has adjourned the verdict of a petition challenging the Rwanda Investigation Bureau (RIB)'s authority to conduct investigative searches in homes and other premises without a search warrant. Originally scheduled for July 21, the verdict will now be delivered on September 15 to allow further analysis of certain aspects of the case. ALSO READ: Lawyer petitions court over RIB's ‘unconstitutional’ searches The petition, filed in April by Edward Murangwa, a Kigali-based lawyer, seeks to prompt the Supreme Court to review whether RIB's search powers are in line with specific articles of the constitution. Under the current law, RIB investigators have the authority to conduct searches without a warrant if there are reasonable grounds to suspect a criminal act or the presence of objects used in committing a crime. A search warrant is a written order that permits law enforcement officers to search a specific person or premises, typically issued by a judge or magistrate in some countries. Murangwa's petition is primarily based on the argument that investigative searches infringe upon human rights, and as such, the judiciary—the government body responsible for overseeing human rights—should approve such actions. He asserts that conducting investigative searches without a judicial warrant violates Article 43 of the Constitution, which states, The Judiciary is the guardian of human rights and freedoms. This duty is exercised in accordance with this Constitution and other laws. Murangwa also points to Article 23 of the Constitution, which safeguards people's homes from unwarranted intrusion except under circumstances determined by the law. The article reads, A person's home is inviolable. No search or entry into a home shall be carried out without the consent of the owner, except in circumstances and in accordance with procedures determined by the law. During an earlier hearing, state attorneys representing the government in the case, Spéciose Kabibi and Petronille Kayitesi, argued that while the government branches are independent, they work together with mutual trust and complement each other. They cited examples of other countries where search warrants are often regarded as mere formalities, with judges sometimes providing investigators with blank documents to fill in the operation's details. ALSO READ: Supreme Court to hear petition on RIB “unconstitutional” searches However, Murangwa contested this practice, asserting that it does not adhere to due process. A search warrant is of utmost importance in the administration of justice. If a judge simply hands it over to investigators to fill in the details, that is not justice. True justice considers both sides, he emphasized.
