Human Rights Defender at Risk
Charles Ntakirutinka, a former minister in the Rwandan government, is serving a ten-year sentence for inciting civil disobedience and for association with criminal elements following an unfair trial.
He is being held at Kigali Central Prison where he is set to remain until 2012. Amnesty International considers him to be a prisoner of conscience and calls for his immediate and unconditional release.
Charles Ntakirutinka helped launch a new political party, the Democratic Party for Renewal (PDR-Ubuyanja), Parti Démocratique de Renouveau in May 2001 with the former President Pasteur Bizimungu and six others.
In April 2002, Charles Ntakirutinka was one of eight men who were arrested, unfairly tried and then imprisoned. The ruling party, (RPF), claimed the eight men allegedly organized clandestine meetings whose purpose was to disturb public order, provoke civil conflict and target certain government authorities for assassination.
All of the remaining co-defendants, except Charles Ntakirutinka received and served five-year sentences for criminal association. Charles Ntakirutinka was sentenced to 10 years in prison.
The arrest and detention of Charles Ntakirutinka and the other men, as well as the trial itself, fell far short of international standards of fairness. In spite of the gravity of the alleged offenses, the trial took place over only 12 days spread out between April 20 and May 19. 2004. The defendants were only allowed to present a limited number of witnesses.
The trial was further marred by lack of corroborating evidence against the defendants and by the judges' refusal to allow the defense a full cross-examination of prosecution witnesses. Prosecution witnesses either ignored or were told to ignore questions that the defense posed during their cross-examination.
The standards of evidence in the trial in general appeared to be very low, and witness statements were sometimes reportedly extracted under duress or during torture. The testimony of individual prosecution witnesses contradicted testimony they had previously provided and/or contradicted the testimony of other prosecution witnesses.
One prosecution witness told the court that he had lied to the police and Public Prosecutor's office out of fear, because he had been under considerable duress. Another prosecution witness relayed hearsay evidence that he had overheard in a bar.
