HOW LONG SHALL THE DOUBLE STANDARD LAST?
How Long Shall the Double Standard Last?
Emmanuel Nkurunziza,
Toronto, Ontario.
August 2005
In a recent report entitled Afghanistan on the Eve of Parliamentary and Provincial Elections, Human Rights Watch has expressed deep concerns because; alleged war criminals and human rights abusers are candidates. This is a sound reason to worry if you care for human rights. Since it is not the first time that this respectable (and indeed respected) human rights organization raises such concerns, one may wonder if such alarms have always triggered appropriate reactions on the part of the world community. For someone from Burundi, where the rule is in the hands of untried war criminals, it is easy to notice that hardly any follow-up is done for such serious matters.
In light of the report in question, we would like to attempt a comparison between today’s ruling group in Burundi and the Afghan warlords who are running for parliamentary and provincial seats. Indeed, rather than lamenting on pardoned crimes, we provide an overview of how today’s Afghanistan parliamentary and provincial elections on the one hand, and the recent elections in Burundi on the other hand, are similar.
Like Afghanistan, where Human Rights Watch warns of potential candidates “with questionable human rights record,” elections in Burundi have just been won by CNDD-FDD, a group claiming to be freedom fighters, albeit those who call a spade, a spade; find in them but a gang of criminals. From a military perspective, it is essential to note that CNDD-FDD did not wage a war against the Burundi government army, it would target unarmed civilians instead. In more than ten years of war, CNDD-FDD never attacked any military barracks or installation, and rarely did they attack a military convoy. On the contrary, scores of civilians were attacked in their homes or ambushed on the road, and then killed. As an example of indiscriminate attacks on civilians, we can mention the IDP’s camp at Bugendana in May and June 1996, or the Junior Seminary of Buta in April 1997, to name but few. They left hundreds of innocent people killed, among whom women and children.
In other words, all of the allegations that prompted Human Rights Watch alarm in Afghanistan (indiscriminate attacks on civilians, shelling of civilian areas, abduction, pillage) are characteristic of CNDD-FDD’s high deeds in their so-called fight for freedom. For this, CNDD-FDD should not have been recognized as a political party. No political party can anchor his ideology in the extermination of an ethnic minority, be it on the pretense that the latter had ruled unchallenged for decades. Yet, when CNDD-FDD staged a major offensive in December 1997, the battle order urged CNDD-FDD fighters and followers to kill at least 5 ethnic Tutsi each, which would ensure a total annihilation of the Tutsi and allegedly free the Hutu one time for all. No wonder that as time flies, the group has changed on surface and declared to be fighting for democracy, justice for all, and all the niceties accompanying a normal political campaign. These were of course tactical moves that did not alter at all their original overall aim.
The December 1997 CNDD-FDD attack took place when the group was under the leadership of Leonard Nyangoma, but neither of his successors at the helms of the gang, including the newly elected President of Burundi, took the trouble to denounce or condemn the original genocidal ideology. Besides, in spite of their past crimes, both men (Leonard Nyangoma, Jean-Bosco Ndayikengurukiye, and Pierre Nkurunziza,) ran their campaign quite naturally last spring. The electorate was fettered by the de facto amnesty that had been granted to all political criminals with the approval of the UN. In the meantime, Human Rights Watch grew silent on the issue. Were/are you expecting untried criminals to mutate in peaceful democrats if they have never been tried?
As one can see, today’s institutions in Burundi reflect the most feared scenario in Afghanistan, that is, that warlords and their proxies may take most seats[1] The perpetrators of crimes against humanity in Burundi are celebrating their firm control over the country, while their victims are frustrated and silenced. Still, like their Afghan counterparts, many Burundian and foreign organizations had voiced their concern to see criminals running for elections, exactly like the Afghan “failure to limit the ability of warlords to stand for office.”[2] In 2000, Human Rights Watch rang the alarm bell, warning that granting amnesty to criminals with no prior trial, would but endanger the whole process.[3] Many a group in Burundi, atop of them the well-known human rights group “Ligue Iteka,” reminded continuously that the CNDD-FDD was characterized by widespread human rights violations, including crimes against humanities and genocide. In the same way, the ACCORD CADRE POUR LA RESTAURATION D’UN ETAT DE DROIT have warned that CNDD-FDD is waging a genocidal war alongside other criminal groups of the region.[4] Obviously, what the two groups were doing is nothing less than the plea that Human Rights Watch is making today so that Afghan election rules “sideline the potential candidates implicated in war crimes and serious rights abuses.”[5]
In a nutshell, if we can campaign for Afghanistan to be ruled by people who are free from any involvement in human rights abuse, the same should be done for Burundi –assuming that all men and nations are equal in terms of rights as provided by the UN Charter. Therefore, since “what is unacceptable in democracy elsewhere is not deemed acceptable in Afghanistan” (page 6), we must, mutatis mutandis, put an end to the rule of impunity in Burundi: for their deal with the former Rwandan army, CNDD-FDD and their allies were deemed negative forces to be disbanded.[6] Thus, the place of CNDD-FDD leaders in Burundi should be neither the parliament nor the government, but in jail.
[1] Afghanistan on the Eve of Parliamentary and Provincial Elections. Human Rights Watch. August 2005, page 5
[2] op cit, page 2
[3] Human Rights Watch Report March 2000
[4] Déclaration de la Ligue Iteka sur les violences des bandes armées. le 10/04/1996
[5] Afghanistan on the Eve of Parliamentary and Provincial Elections, Human Rights Watch. August 2005, page 5
[6] Lusaka Ceasefire Agreement for the Democratic Republic of Congo, Annex A, Chapter 9
Emmanuel Nkurunziza,
Toronto, Ontario.
August 2005
In a recent report entitled Afghanistan on the Eve of Parliamentary and Provincial Elections, Human Rights Watch has expressed deep concerns because; alleged war criminals and human rights abusers are candidates. This is a sound reason to worry if you care for human rights. Since it is not the first time that this respectable (and indeed respected) human rights organization raises such concerns, one may wonder if such alarms have always triggered appropriate reactions on the part of the world community. For someone from Burundi, where the rule is in the hands of untried war criminals, it is easy to notice that hardly any follow-up is done for such serious matters.
In light of the report in question, we would like to attempt a comparison between today’s ruling group in Burundi and the Afghan warlords who are running for parliamentary and provincial seats. Indeed, rather than lamenting on pardoned crimes, we provide an overview of how today’s Afghanistan parliamentary and provincial elections on the one hand, and the recent elections in Burundi on the other hand, are similar.
Like Afghanistan, where Human Rights Watch warns of potential candidates “with questionable human rights record,” elections in Burundi have just been won by CNDD-FDD, a group claiming to be freedom fighters, albeit those who call a spade, a spade; find in them but a gang of criminals. From a military perspective, it is essential to note that CNDD-FDD did not wage a war against the Burundi government army, it would target unarmed civilians instead. In more than ten years of war, CNDD-FDD never attacked any military barracks or installation, and rarely did they attack a military convoy. On the contrary, scores of civilians were attacked in their homes or ambushed on the road, and then killed. As an example of indiscriminate attacks on civilians, we can mention the IDP’s camp at Bugendana in May and June 1996, or the Junior Seminary of Buta in April 1997, to name but few. They left hundreds of innocent people killed, among whom women and children.
In other words, all of the allegations that prompted Human Rights Watch alarm in Afghanistan (indiscriminate attacks on civilians, shelling of civilian areas, abduction, pillage) are characteristic of CNDD-FDD’s high deeds in their so-called fight for freedom. For this, CNDD-FDD should not have been recognized as a political party. No political party can anchor his ideology in the extermination of an ethnic minority, be it on the pretense that the latter had ruled unchallenged for decades. Yet, when CNDD-FDD staged a major offensive in December 1997, the battle order urged CNDD-FDD fighters and followers to kill at least 5 ethnic Tutsi each, which would ensure a total annihilation of the Tutsi and allegedly free the Hutu one time for all. No wonder that as time flies, the group has changed on surface and declared to be fighting for democracy, justice for all, and all the niceties accompanying a normal political campaign. These were of course tactical moves that did not alter at all their original overall aim.
The December 1997 CNDD-FDD attack took place when the group was under the leadership of Leonard Nyangoma, but neither of his successors at the helms of the gang, including the newly elected President of Burundi, took the trouble to denounce or condemn the original genocidal ideology. Besides, in spite of their past crimes, both men (Leonard Nyangoma, Jean-Bosco Ndayikengurukiye, and Pierre Nkurunziza,) ran their campaign quite naturally last spring. The electorate was fettered by the de facto amnesty that had been granted to all political criminals with the approval of the UN. In the meantime, Human Rights Watch grew silent on the issue. Were/are you expecting untried criminals to mutate in peaceful democrats if they have never been tried?
As one can see, today’s institutions in Burundi reflect the most feared scenario in Afghanistan, that is, that warlords and their proxies may take most seats[1] The perpetrators of crimes against humanity in Burundi are celebrating their firm control over the country, while their victims are frustrated and silenced. Still, like their Afghan counterparts, many Burundian and foreign organizations had voiced their concern to see criminals running for elections, exactly like the Afghan “failure to limit the ability of warlords to stand for office.”[2] In 2000, Human Rights Watch rang the alarm bell, warning that granting amnesty to criminals with no prior trial, would but endanger the whole process.[3] Many a group in Burundi, atop of them the well-known human rights group “Ligue Iteka,” reminded continuously that the CNDD-FDD was characterized by widespread human rights violations, including crimes against humanities and genocide. In the same way, the ACCORD CADRE POUR LA RESTAURATION D’UN ETAT DE DROIT have warned that CNDD-FDD is waging a genocidal war alongside other criminal groups of the region.[4] Obviously, what the two groups were doing is nothing less than the plea that Human Rights Watch is making today so that Afghan election rules “sideline the potential candidates implicated in war crimes and serious rights abuses.”[5]
In a nutshell, if we can campaign for Afghanistan to be ruled by people who are free from any involvement in human rights abuse, the same should be done for Burundi –assuming that all men and nations are equal in terms of rights as provided by the UN Charter. Therefore, since “what is unacceptable in democracy elsewhere is not deemed acceptable in Afghanistan” (page 6), we must, mutatis mutandis, put an end to the rule of impunity in Burundi: for their deal with the former Rwandan army, CNDD-FDD and their allies were deemed negative forces to be disbanded.[6] Thus, the place of CNDD-FDD leaders in Burundi should be neither the parliament nor the government, but in jail.
[1] Afghanistan on the Eve of Parliamentary and Provincial Elections. Human Rights Watch. August 2005, page 5
[2] op cit, page 2
[3] Human Rights Watch Report March 2000
[4] Déclaration de la Ligue Iteka sur les violences des bandes armées. le 10/04/1996
[5] Afghanistan on the Eve of Parliamentary and Provincial Elections, Human Rights Watch. August 2005, page 5
[6] Lusaka Ceasefire Agreement for the Democratic Republic of Congo, Annex A, Chapter 9