Rwanda’s election outcome is already decided

By Filip Reyntjens
July 11, 2017
11
Share:

Only President Paul Kagame has a chance of winning the 2017
presidential election. And he could stay in power until 2034.
President Paul Kagame has been in power since 1994. Credit: UN
Photo/Mark Garten.

President Paul Kagame has been in power since 1994. Credit: UN
Photo/Mark Garten.

“More of a coronation than real contest.” That’s how the Kenyan daily
The Standard characterised Rwanda’s presidential poll slated for 4
August. It sums up the reality well. In countries with competitive
politics, elections are an important moment giving rise to debate and
excitement. Not so in Rwanda.

Rwandans have become accustomed to polls where everything is settled
in advance. This was the case before the genocide, when the country
was officially a one-party state. And it has been the case since 1994,
after which Rwanda became a de facto one-party state under the Rwandan
Patriotic Front (RPF).

The current template for elections was set in 2003, when a
constitutional referendum and the first post-genocide elections were
held. In the run-up to these polls, the last genuine opposition party
was banned, while the campaign was marred by arrests, disappearances
and intimidation. An EU observer mission noted that, ironically,
“political pluralism is more limited than during the transition
period”.

The polls themselves were replete with allegations of fraud,
manipulation of electoral lists, ballot-box stuffing, and flawed
counting. Paul Kagame was declared the winner with 95% of the vote.

Similar dynamics were seen in the 2008 and 2013 parliamentary
elections as well as the 2010 presidential poll. Opposition leaders
were arrested and condemned to long prison sentences, while other
critical voices were killed or went into exile.

In 2010, there were reports of local leaders going from door to door
to collect voters’ cards and submitting their ballots for them. The
Commonwealth observer mission at the time noted that “it was not
possible to ascertain quite where, how and when the tabulation was
completed”.
Kagame until 2034?

The presidential elections in 2010 were expected to be Kagame’s last.
He was beginning his second constitutionally-mandated seven-year term
and denied that he would seek re-election. He even claimed it would be
a failure on his part not to find a replacement and warned that “those
who seek a third term will seek a fourth and a fifth”.

Nevertheless, many remained sceptical that Kagame would step down, and
in May 2013, his position became clearer when Justice Minister
Tharcisse Karugarama was sacked shortly after insisting in an
interview that Kagame would have to leave power in 2017 in accordance
with the law.

By this time, a campaign had already started aimed at “convincing” the
president to stay in office. In 2015, this culminated in 3.7 million
Rwandans signing a petition – some under significant pressure –
demanding that parliament enact constitutional changes that would
allow Kagame to remain in power. It was claimed that this was a
spontaneous action by the people, but it is unlikely such an operation
could have been organised without the president’s knowledge and
direction.

In subsequent “consultations” on the matter held throughout the
country, MPs and senators claimed to have only found ten people – out
of a population of 11 million – who opposed the initiative. Soon
after, both houses unanimously approved a constitutional amendment to
be put to a referendum.

The proposed revision called for maintaining the two-term limit and
reducing term lengths from seven to five years. It also included a
crucial provision allowing the incumbent to first run for an
additional seven-year term, after which he would be eligible to bid
for two more five-year terms. The changes effectively allow Kagame to
stay in power until 2034, by which time he would have ruled Rwanda for
40 years.

While the issue of term limits has led to protests in many African
countries, in Rwanda there was no debate or demonstrations around the
December 2015 referendum. This was not surprising given that since the
RPF took power, no demonstrations have taken place that were not
organised by the regime itself. The amendment passed with 98.3% of the
popular vote.

On 31 December 2015, President Kagame announced that he would run
again, saying: “You requested me to lead this country again after
2017. Given the importance and consideration you attach to this, I can
only accept”.
The candidates

Others also declared their intention to stand in 2017, including a
handful of independents, but they have faced significant obstructions.

In May 2017, 35-year-old Diana Rwigara announced her candidacy, saying
“people are tired, people are angry”. She had previously shown courage
in criticising the government and human rights abuses. In the days
following her announcement, doctored nude photographs of her
circulated on social media.

Another aspirant, the Catholic prelate turned politician Thomas
Nahimana, was denied access to Rwanda. Meanwhile, Gilbert Mwenedata,
claimed that he was refused rooms by hotels in Kigali to hold a press
conference to announce his plans.

The challenges facing independent candidates are dauntingly high to
begin with. To be eligible, they must collect 600 signatures of
support, including at least 12 from each of 30 districts. This may not
seem much, but in an environment that does not tolerate criticism of
the regime, it takes a lot of courage to reveal oneself to be an
opposition supporter. Rwigara claimed that local leaders threatened
her supporters as they tried to gather signatures.

Nevertheless, at least two hopefuls – Rwigara and Mwenedata – claimed
to have met this requirement. But the National Electoral Commission
(NEC) rejected their candidacies, claiming many of the signatures
gathered were invalid. The NEC did not allow the candidates to see
their lists to work out which names were disqualified, and several
diplomats in Kigali expressed concern over the process.

In the end, only one independent hopeful – the little-known former
journalist Philippe Mpayimana – made it onto the NEC’s final list.

The barriers for political parties are less onerous, and the
Democratic Green Party’s (DGP) Frank Habineza was affirmed as the
third and final presidential candidate. All other parties announced
that they would not field nominees, but instead back Kagame.
No level playing field

As in previous elections in Rwanda, 2017’s opposition candidates have
not faced an easy time or a level playing field in the run up to the
polls.

While the RPF benefits from vast financial resources through its
business ventures, other hopefuls were warned by the NEC against
raising funds before being declared eligible. The electoral commission
also announced in May that any social media messages by candidates or
parties had to be submitted for vetting 48 hours prior to publication.
Habineza called the decision “oppressive” and, after strong diplomatic
protest, the measure was rescinded in early-June.

Opposition parties – in particular the non-registered FDU-Inkingi –
have also seen their cadres arrested or disappeared. Amnesty
International recently denounced the climate of fear surrounding the
elections, saying: “Since the ruling Rwandan Patriotic Front took
power 23 years ago, Rwandans have faced huge, and often deadly,
obstacles to participating in public life and voicing criticism of
government policy. The climate in which the upcoming elections take
place is the culmination of years of repression.”

In these tense and oppressive circumstances, and given the widespread
allegations of manipulation in Rwanda’s previous elections, it is not
surprising that the head of the EU delegation in Kigali has said that
“you would not lose any money if you bet on Mr Paul Kagame”.

Indeed, a 90% or higher victory for Kagame on 4 August seems
inevitable in what will be coronation rather than election. All this
is underscored by the latest Bertelsmann Stiftung’s Transformation
Index (BTI) report in which Rwanda scored a mere two out of ten for
“free and fair elections” and “effective power to govern”, and three
for “association/assembly rights” and “freedom of expression”.
Previous Article
Kenya’s 2017 elections will be like none ...
Next Article
Kenya’s whirlwind weekend underscores election uncertainties

-- 
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/d/forum/southsudankob
View this message at 
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/southsudankob/topic-id/message-id
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout
--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"South Sudan Info - The Kob" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/SouthSudanKob.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/SouthSudanKob/CAJb14ooqK7WQWPURHJ6esYT7Op_vJqqX1Uai73px0_th8nASdg%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to