His regime has over the past years come under heavy criticism following claims of its role in the eastern Congo conflict and systematic killing of opposition leaders. President Kagame spoke with Mugumo Munene about this and other issues.

----------------------------------------

What keeps you going?

I am naturally a very hopeful person; I am also thoughtful about the integrity and dignity that Africans deserve to be treated with. I’m driven and consumed to do the little I can to make sure that is achieved. But at the end of the day I’m a human being, like everybody else.

I want to serve people to the best of my ability, and be honest and frank in doing so. I’m not put out by challenges; I just don’t run away from issues because they are hard.

In less than three months, Rwanda will be marking the 20th anniversary of the 1994 genocide. How is the reconciliation process going?

It’s going very well. Simply put, there is no way our country would have made such significant progress without people’s involvement. Secondly, they would not have worked together without overcoming the challenges that have been there.

At the beginning, we had almost the entire population of the country displaced. They did not know what to hold onto. We had to get involved in trying to pick up the pieces. It is really this soul searching, people finding ways they can work together that has brought us this far.

READ: Concern persists over elusive justice, 20 years after genocide

Did the Gacaca courts produce the results you desired?

The Gacaca courts were designed to achieve twin objectives. One was for the wider population to see that justice is done. The second was to ensure justice while allowing the country to get back together because one tends to affect the other. Thousands have been able to go through the process and go back to their villages.

READ: Survivors cry foul as convicts appeal Gacaca court verdicts

Did the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda produce anything you regard as useful for the country?

The fact that the UN is associated with a process where some form of justice is carried out is important. But that is different from the quality of the process, which I think is where the problem really lies. There’s a lot of politics and wastage of resources.

If you look at the cases that have been successfully tried, they are handful. Less than 60 cases and billions of dollars have been spent. It served those involved in the process rather than those who wanted to see justice done.

Is this pessimism informing your position on the ICC?

It’s the totality of it. You cannot have a justice system that acts universally in the interests of some people and is silent on other people’s interests. You find that it is designed to deal with certain cases. The counter argument is that is about the victims. I’m saying that the totality of it ends up presenting a case of injustice rather than justice.

As part of reconciliation, there is a new initiation called mass apology initiated by some youth groups, which you supported. Tell us about that.

It is something that came under what we call Ndi Umunyarwanda in which Rwandans young and old, look at their history and merge with the commitment to ourselves and our future that whoever did anything wrong and needs a chance to contribute to a better future then so be it. It has done very well.

Every time people are thinking what we can do together. The history of Rwanda is tragedy not business as usual. It has left everybody thinking and searching for ways of building a future and get out of this kind of environment.

READ: Mixed reactions to ‘Ndi Umunyarwanda’ initiative

Critics have said that it is wrong to get the Hutu to apologise to Tutsis because this amounts to victimising one group.

It is not anything that is being forced. It is an idea that came up from the people themselves. It’s something voluntary. Nobody has been held responsible for being silent.

Isn’t it a bit odd that people who were not responsible in any way like your prime minister came out to apologise?

I think critics should take more time to analyse what they are talking about. Even the prime minister, people need to take time to listen to what he’s saying. He was saying that “this should not have happened in my name.”

There are people who used his name and he gave many examples of what he knows when he was in school and in the work place. What is wrong with someone like that saying that someone should not have used his name as part of the group? He was saying that those people who were claiming that they were doing it on our behalf.

We had not sent them to do it. I don’t see anything wrong with it. First of all he is doing it voluntarily. He’s saying that people should not do things in the name of a group. It’s open, more fluid,  more free than critics want to admit.

How long do you think it will take before reconciliation matures fully?

I think there is a foundation. We are more or less in a very good position but as we need to keep building institutions and developing the mindset. But as you also know, these kinds of situations take very long to heal and stabilise.

There are cases that have lived for close to 100 years in other places. We are really doing our best, but this is not something you can give a date to. It will not be realistic. You allow it to flow.

What would you say of Rwanda’s democratic development in the last 20 years?

By far we have made huge progress. Twenty years ago, there was nothing to talk about and that is why the tragedy was there. In learning lessons of our own history, I’m comfortable that progress has been made in all directions. We are not where we want to be or need to be. We still need to work very, very hard.

Tell us about Rwanda’s situation, particularly in 2017. Are you retiring as the Constitution states?

First of all, I don’t think it is about one individual. I know I have become a subject of discussion but someone needs to deflect it to the actual situation. The two things you have said are part of the democratic process. But they are not the only ones.

Elections mean the feelings and the choices of people. If we say democracy is about election and elections are about choices. Sometimes you may run the danger of questioning the choices of people, because sometimes they make a choice and you say no, you should not have made that choice.

This is why I have become uncomfortable answering this question because in any case I’m not satisfying anybody. Again it’s the context. When it comes to Rwanda, it’s a Rwanda coming from genocide. Rwandans, depending on where they have come from the demands, the needs and expectations are completely different even though the aspirations are the same. At the end of the day we are talking about people and their history and their context.

The debate refuses to go away because there is a constitutional term limit. Are you leaving when the time comes?

You are saying that as if the constitution falls from heaven. It’s made by people. The fact that the constitution is in place means that this is what the people put in place. The question is how has this changed?

It changed because the same people changed it and made it so. I’m trying to tell you so that the debate is not always locked down to one person. It’s about people. There is not a single country on earth that has a constitution that has not changed one aspect or the other. Whether I’m going or not should not preoccupy people. Time passes and we will come to know what will happen.

Your critics say you are intolerant of dissent. Your opponents are either in jail, in exile or dead. What is your reaction to this?

Critics don’t have to account to anybody. They are supposed to be taken as credible but for us leaders, we are accountable and when I agreed to be where I am, I knew the challenges that come with it and the heavy lifting that it requires.

I have a problem understanding some of these people. So many of these people have planned to kill Rwandans and there is a mountain of evidence that they belong to organisations that plan on killing Rwandans. Let’s say that some of them have been involved in drugs to mobilise money against their own country. When they are involved in that, they may settle scores within those activities. Or suppose people have an organisation and they have internal problems and sort each other out. How will anyone know even before investigations what happened?

Recently, you said that treason has consequences. A lot of people drew conclusions from about the death of Patrick Karegeya a former Rwandan director ofexternal intelligence. Please explain your statement

I’m I not supposed to say what I want to say? Somebody can take anything out of context. By betraying a cause and a people, why should it not have consequences?

Is it the first time you are hearing about it? I’m reading every day, somebody runs away from a powerful country with secrets and somebody is like; we will get you. When you betray a government, you betray the people of Rwanda.

The fact that these people live in exile has consequences. They are not at peace. People die, but these same people who die, die from different causes. These Karegeyas and others belong to an organisation that has been killing people in Rwanda. There’s evidence. They are killing people. I’m surprised that people are making all kinds of noise about these people who are killing Rwandans. There’s evidence and those who want it can be shown.

So you can tell these critics that it is not agents of the Rwandan government that track these people down and kill them?

Not that I know of. But I have evidence that they have been involved in activities that have killed Rwandans. That’s what I have proof for.

The body of Patrick Karegeya was laid to rest in a cemetery in South Africa. How do you feel considering he was a compatriot in the liberation movement in 1994?

Well, the only question is how did he get there? He should have been buried in Rwanda. But if he got involved in a situation that he brought upon himself, that he found himself in South Africa and met his death there, I don’t think it should be held over anybody apart from himself.

Why didn’t your government allow his body to be buried in Rwanda?

Nobody asked for his body to be buried in Rwanda. In fact, the only thing I heard is that he was to be buried in a neighbouring country. 

Are you concerned about the cumulative effects of these events? Could they change opinion of leaders who admired your leadership style in the past?

I think they have no reason not to, and with time as they see the progress the country is making, they will have reason to be vindicated about me. But for the critics, I have never been their friend or someone they appreciate, from the beginning.