Early this month, the government reshuffled the top leadership of the national prosecuting authority.

Martin Ngoga, the longest-serving prosecutor-general under the current government, was replaced by Richard Muhumuza, who has served in the department for the past 14 years. Mr Muhumuza, a father of three who turns 45 next month, is the fourth prosecutor-general since 1994 when the ruling RPF took over power.

He has previously been chief prosecutor at the intermediate levels in Huye and Nyarugenge before progressing to become a national prosecutor, a position he held until his latest appointment.

“Basically, my life after school has been in the prosecution department,” Mr Muhumuza, a trained lawyer, told Rwanda Today during an interview in his office.

His appointment caught many by surprise because the post had often been associated with prominent senior public officials whose political affiliation was an “open secret.”

But those who have attended high-profile trials are familiar with the face of the new prosecutor-general.

High-level cases

Mr Muhumuza has been deeply involved in cases such as that of Dr Leon Mugesera, a high-level genocide suspect deported from Canada, opposition politician Victoire Umuhoza Ingabire of FDU INKINGI and American lawyer Peter Elinder, who had volunteered legal counsel to Ms Ingabire but found himself in the dock for breaking the law on genocide ideology.

“To me, it is an absolute honour to be appointed to serve my people,” Mr Muhumuza said. “I know the weight of the expectations of the government that has appointed me and the people that I must serve.

“I look forward to working very hard to fulfill these expectations.”

The new boss comes in at an exciting yet challenging time, when most of the challenges inherited by his successive predecessors remain unresolved and new ones have risen.

While the country has reformed its legal infrastructure, improved judicial processes and trained officers such as Gerald Gahima, Jean de Dieu Mucyo and Mr Ngoga, Mr Muhumuza’s tenure will be faced with the challenge of tracking genocide fugitives, an expensive exercise in time and resources.

The International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) winds up next year and the duty to fight impunity related to the 1994 Rwandan genocide will be the sole responsibility of Rwanda and willing states, which legal experts see straining the country’s judicial institutions.

Already, there are reports of financial strain on the Treasury as the government moves to provide legal aid to indigent accused who have been transferred to the national courts from the ICTR and foreign countries. These cases are likely to increase when ICTR closes shop.

READ: Cost of genocide cases runs into millions of francs, public to pay
“This is a matter before the court; I cannot say much,” said Mr Muhumuza. “I can however confirm that Rwanda has the financial ability to provide indigent accused with legal assistance. If the accused transferred here prove to be indigent, legal assistance is provided.”

The closure of ICTR also reawakens a persistent contentious issue between the UN-backed court and Rwanda: The former’s archives, which hold the most comprehensive record of the genocide — scripts, documents, videos and nearly 10,000 documented decisions and trials. Rwanda has argued that it has a moral claim to the archives because it forms part of the national legacy.

“When the ICTR was set up, among other reasons, it was to try the perpetrators of the Rwandan genocide and to contribute to reconciliation and peace in Rwanda,” Mr Muhumuza said in response to the question that has bothered all the post-genocide prosecutors.

“However, being set up in Arusha, the impact on Rwandans, who are meant to be the main beneficiaries, is remote and not really tangible.”

The chief prosecutor comes in when Rwanda is experiencing a surge in dissent. A number of former officials of the ruling RPF and senior army officers have fled the country and publicly spoken against the establishment. Among them is Gerald Gahima, the first post-genocide prosecution boss.

Warrants for dissidents

Arrest warrants for the dissidents have been issued but states on whose territory they live are yet to execute them. But Mr Muhumuza must, of course, have to exercise maximum restraint not to make his office to be seen as a tool for criminalising political dissent.  

Further, Rwanda is still adapting to a relatively new judicial system arising out of the changes in its laws by borrowing from the Common Law system, meaning it is no longer purely guided by civil law system, and lawyers say the legal transition needs to be handled with diligence and expertise.

“We are having a hybrid of civil and common laws, kind of,” Mr Muhumuza said. “It is a transition but we are managing, though this does not happen overnight.”