A threat to the nation: two Rwandan journalists

Two Rwandan journalists, sentenced last year to seven and 17 years in prison, did not write for a major newspaper, never broke a major story and their texts were mainly commentary and gossip. They had no website and the circulation of their sporadically appearing publication is estimated to have been less than 200 copies. But the articles which were printed in the run up to Rwanda’s 2010 presidential election were considered a threat that crossed the lines for acceptable journalism in the country.
By Steve Terrill, Kigali
In 2010, Agnes Uwimana Nkusi and Saidati Mukakibibi’s Kinyarwanda-language newspaper, Umurabyo, which means “lightning”, was accused by Rwanda’s Media High Council of printing stories “aimed at vilifying the Head of State” after it ran stories critical of Rwandan President Paul Kagame. The paper was also accused of “propagating rumours” and “promoting divisionism among the population, popular discontent against the authorities” and “causing low morale among the armed forces.” Nkusi, the paper’s editor, was given official warnings to apologise for the stories, which she agreed to do in the next issue. But she and her reporter, Mukakibibi, were arrested before the edition went to print.
Ambiguous boundaries
However, The Rwanda Focus, a weekly tabloid considered supportive of the Rwandan government, that same year printed a story denouncing pluralist politics, which are enshrined in Rwanda’s constitution. “We do not exaggerate,” the paper stated, “when we say the ordinary Rwandan in the rural areas still thinks when your tribesman wins the elections you have carte blanche to dust off your machete, hone it and cut up your neighbour from the different ethnic group, or throw him into the river, or carry out pogroms.”
While the language of that piece was widely considered to be divisive, there was no official censure. But the boundaries of what is, or isn’t, appropriate within Rwanda’s media landscape are often ambiguous.

Self-censorship, exiles and murder
American journalist, Heather Murdock, covered Rwanda throughout 2011 for Bloomberg News. Officials strongly and publically criticised her after her most recent piece, which juxtaposed Rwanda’s impressive economic gains with its reputation for oppression. Murdock says it’s hard to know what is allowed or acceptable in Rwandan media and the question of whether Rwanda has a free press is uncertain. “There's definitely self-censorship that prevents people from criticising the government and there is fear,” says Murdock. “Whether that fear is founded in reality – I don't know.”
Moreover, during some degree of media chaos in the run-up to Rwanda’s 2010 presidential elections, three news outlets were shut-down, two journalists were arrested, several scribes went into exile and one writer, Jean Leonard Rugambage, was shot and killed. While one man was convicted for the murder, he was sentenced to just 10 years in prison, a stark contrast to the 17 years given to Umurabyo’s editor for her words.
Media reforms
But in early 2011, the Rwandan government announced a sweeping series of media reforms. Since then, no press outlets have been closed and no journalists have been arrested in the country. It appears that Rwanda’s media environment may be opening. [related-articles]
Rwanda is now half-way through a two-year process of reforming its media laws. Earlier this week the country’s parliament passed laws that will clear the way towards self-regulation of the media and guarantee access to information.
Acting director of Rwanda’s Media High Council, Emmanuel Mugisha, says his country is making progress but is still plagued by a lack of well-trained media professionals. “If one comes up with a true story, covering the truth of the matter, I can assure you that Rwanda is one of the best grounds where they may even reward a journalist for unveiling problems,” says Mugisha. “We have freedom of expression but what we lack is professionalism.”
Final appeal
On Thursday, Nkusi and Mukakibibi, both widows with children, will hear the final verdict in the Supreme Court appeal against their conviction and harsh sentences. Their case has attracted international attention. For their appeal, which is widely considered to be an indicator of the current state of media freedom in Rwanda, they are being represented by a team of international lawyers and media freedom organisations. “We hope the Supreme Court will hand down a fair verdict,” says Nani Jansen, a Dutch lawyer representing the journalists for the Media Legal Defence Initiative. “These two journalists were punished harshly, not only in light of the alleged offences – for which they should have been acquitted – but also in light of their personal circumstances.”
On Saturday, Rwanda will begin an official period of mourning for the 18th anniversary of the 1994 genocide against Tutsis. Rwanda’s media was a driving force behind the slaughter and many Rwandans still have an intense distrust of journalists.