Byimana school fires: Who should foot the bill?

BYIMANA School of Sciences could at the end of the year, emerge as having made the most headlines for all the wrong reasons. The school suffered three fire outbreaks within a space of less than 40 days. The school, managed by the Brothers of Charity, was better known as one of the best performing secondary schools in the country in terms of academics and discipline. But today it seems that that image has been partly affected by the fire incidents. When the fires continued to break out and investigators struggled vainly to find who and what was behind them, many parents turned up at the school with one wish: to take their students elsewhere because they believed their children were no longer safe. However, their wishes were never met as authorities, including government ministers and security officers, moved in to reassure the worried parents. But it is only when the Police announced it had finally arrested those behind the fires that some parents felt relieved though a few others remained sceptical wondering whether the teenage suspects (six in total, all senior one and two students at the Ruhango-based school) operated alone or someone else was behind them. The Police said it found no evidence implicating anyone else or suggesting that the young boys operated on orders from some other people. After the substantive trial, Muhanga Intermediate Court, on June 27, found the teenagers guilty of torching their school. Justice Bernadette Mukansanga handed between one-and-a-half and two-and-a-half years of jail term to four of the six teenagers, aged between 14 and 16. The two others were, according to the law, sent to a rehabilitation centre because they were under 14, the judge said. Silent on reparations During the trial, prosecutor Emmanuel Ndegeya had requested court to impose Rwf1 million in fines to each of the two teenagers considered as the masterminds of the plan to set the school on fire. But the judge ruled against the wish and did only impose Rwf50,300 on the convicts in court fees. But the ruling, a copy of which The New Times acquired is silent on reparations. It is clear that the fires affected both students and their school. Though it is hard to evaluate the psychological damages and trauma caused by the three fires on students, it is clear the students were affected. After the third fire incident, for instance, some students told this paper that it is hard for them to sleep peacefully as they think fire might break out anytime. “Every time, you keep thinking there might be fire outbreak somewhere again,” one student said. Under such conditions, it was hard for the students to concentrate on their studies. In addition, the fire incidents left the school in ruins: three dormitories and a chapel completely destroyed and equipment of hundreds of students (mattresses, bags, clothes, books, metal beds and others) were reduced to ashes. The extent of the damaged property has been estimated at around Rwf400 million. The reconstruction cost is estimated to be over Rwf700 million, according to school authorities. After the incidents, the Ministry of Education released Rwf255 million to help in the reconstruction process. “With the money we can rebuild the structures (dormitories) but not equip them,” Brother Alphonse Gahima, the school director, told The New Times on Monday. That means the school will remain with a serious problem to furnish the buildings. But, who should pay then? Is it up to the parents of the convicts to bear the cost of the damages or the responsibility goes straight to the school? Is it up to the government to cater for the damages or it is a task of someone else? According to Gahima, the school is looking at the possibility of lodging a lawsuit to seek reparations. The school, he said, is still in talks with legal experts on the right procedure to follow. “This is the reality we are faced with, we cannot close our eyes,” Brother Gahima said. “People cannot abuse public property and we just look on. They need to be held responsible for their acts,” he said. That would also send a strong message to others who would think they can abuse others property and go untouched, according to the cleric. The law Though the trial did not tackle the issue of reparations, perhaps because the issue was not brought up during the proceedings, lawyers argue that there is room to claim for reparations even after a criminal case is completed. According to Yves Sezirahiga, a practicing lawyer and assistant lecturer at the National University of Rwanda (NUR) faculty of law, in case there has not been any appeal against the initial ruling, the school can lodge a civil case seeking reparations. Yet one of the five lawyers making up the teenagers’ defence team told this paper they will lodge an appeal against the ruling. But, according to Sezirahiga, that’s not the main issue. The key element is who should be responsible for reparations. Quoting article 260 paragraph 2 and 3 of the Civil Code Book III, Sezirahiga says within the current legal context, it would be hard for the school to win the case for reparations and the responsibility might finally fall on the shoulders of the school. The article states that “The [parents] are responsible for the damage caused by their children living with them ;(….) Teachers and artisans [are responsible for] the damage caused by their pupils and apprentices during the time they are under their supervision.” For Sezirahiga this article pins the school. “The students were under the care and supervision of the school [when they set it on fire]. So the school is held responsible for all acts committed by the students,” he explains. “Therefore, the school cannot claim reparations due to its failure to control them [the teenagers],” he adds invoking the ‘Nemo auditur propriam turpitudinem allegans’ (No one shall be heard, who invokes his own guilt) principle.