RLR V.4 - 2025
Article 129(3) of Law No 22/2018 does not violate the Constitution, as it provides a justified and reasonable distinction between parties whose objections are dismissed and those who pleaded against them, ensuring both retain the right to appeal in a manner appropriate to their procedural posture; the right to a...
Source-derived case information.
- Parties
- Applicant: Dr Baribwira Cyprien; Respondent: Republic of Rwanda
- Court
- Supreme Court
- Jurisdiction
- Rwanda
- Judgment Date
- 31 October 2025
- Procedural Posture
- Petition Seeking to Declare a Law Unconstitutional / Supreme Court Final Judgment
- Outcome
- petition dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Equality Before the Law, Right to Competent Court, Appeal on Admissibility, Judicial Procedure
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Dr Baribwira Cyprien
Applicant
Republic of Rwanda
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Petition Seeking to Declare a Law Unconstitutional / Supreme Court Final Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether article 129(3) of Law No 22/2018 contradicts article 15 of the Constitution (equality before the law)
- 2 Whether article 129(3) of Law No 22/2018 contradicts article 29(1)(c) of the Constitution (right to appear before a competent court)
Ratio Decidendi
Article 129(3) of Law No 22/2018 does not violate the Constitution, as it provides a justified and reasonable distinction between parties whose objections are dismissed and those who pleaded against them, ensuring both retain the right to appeal in a manner appropriate to their procedural posture; the right to a competent court is preserved, and the provision does not create unconstitutional inequality.
Court Disposition
petition dismissed
Orders
- The application seeking to declare article 129(3) of Law No 22/2018 unconstitutional is dismissed.
- Article 129(3) of Law No 22/2018 is not inconsistent with articles 15 and 29(1)(c) of the Constitution.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
2135 paragraphs
# RLR V.4 - 2025
- Source: Amategeko - Section: Rwanda law reports - Date: 2025-10-31 - Collection: Supreme Court
## Text
## Page 1
i Re Dr BARIBWIRA REPUBLIC OF RWANDA SUPREME COURT P.o. Box. 2197 KIGALI www.judiciary.gov.rw ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO RWANDA LAW REPORTS BY’INKIKO Icyegeranyo V. 4 - 2025 Ukwakira, 2025 Law Reports V. 4 - 2025 October, 2025
## Page 2
ii ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO
## Page 3
iii Re Dr BARIBWIRA ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO RWANDA LAW REPORTS BY’INKIKO REPUBLIC OF RWANDA SUPREME COURT Po. Box. 2197 KIGALI www.judiciary.gov.rw Icyegeranyo V. 4 - 2025 Ukwakira, 2025 Law Reports V. 4 - 2025 October, 2025
## Page 4
iv ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO
## Page 5
v Re Dr BARIBWIRA ISHAKIRO ABAGIZE KOMITE Y’UBWANDITSI...................................iii I. ITSINDA RY’ABANYAMATEGEKO BATEGUYE IMANZA................................................................................iii II. KOMITE YEMEZA IMANZA.........................................iv IRIBURIRO...............................................................................ix IBIKUBIYE MURI IKI CYEGERANYO.................................xi AMATEGEKO YASHINGIWEHO........................................xiii IMANZA ZIFASHISHIJWE....................................................xv AMAGAMBO MPINE............................................................xix Re Dr BARIBWIRA...................................................................1 Re BUCYESENGE MENDE ...................................................23 GATARE v GASANA N’ABANDI.........................................57 MUTABAZI v LETA Y’U RWANDA/MINADEF N’ABANDI ...................................................................................................85 UWANTEGE v. NIYONSHUTI N’ABANDI .......................103 UBUSHINJACYAHA v UWIMANIHAYE ..........................123 RUZIBIZA v MOUNT MERU LOGISTICS RWANDA LTD .................................................................................................139 SANLAM AG Plc v NZAMWITAKUZE..............................179 UWIDUHAYE N’UNDI v HAKIZIMANA N’ABANDI......197 VINTAGES WINES AND LIQUORS LTD v KARASIRA..235 UBUSHINJACYAHA v NZABONITEGEKA ......................269 ISHAKIRO v vii vii viii xiii xv xvii xix xxiii
## Page 6
vi ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO
## Page 7
vii Re Dr BARIBWIRA ABAGIZE KOMITE Y’UBWANDITSI I. ITSINDA RY’ABANYAMATEGEKO BATEGUYE IMANZA KAGABO U. Stephanie KAVUTSE M. Claude KUBWIMANA Jean Claude MUJABI K. Naphtal NZAYISENGA Daniel UWINKINDI Angelique UWIMANA Jean Marie Vianney vii
## Page 8
viii ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO II. KOMITE YEMEZA IMANZA Prof. Dr. Ngagi M. Alphonse Perezida wa Komite, Umucamanza mu Rukiko rw’Ubujurire Dr. Muhire G. Yves Visi Perezida wa Komite, Umwarimu muri Kaminuza y’u Rwanda Bwiza N. Blanche Umwanditsi wa Komite, Umugenzuzi w’inkiko Kalihangabo Isabelle Umucamanza mu Rukiko rw’Ikirenga Rukundakuvuga F. Regis Perezida w’Urukiko rw’Ubujurire Kaliwabo Charles Umucamanza mu Rukiko rw’Ubujurire Dr. Karimunda M. Aimé Umuyobozi Mukuru wa ILPD Habarurema Jean Pierre Perezida w’Urukiko Rukuru Nkurunziza Valens Umugenzuzi Mukuru w’inkiko Umuzayire B: Bibiane Visi Perezida wa Komisiyo y`u Rwanda ishinzwe Ivugururwa ry`Amategeko Nsengiyumva Jean Claude Umugenzuzi w’inkiko
## Page 9
ix Re Dr BARIBWIRA Kibuka Jean Luc Umucamanza mu Rukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi Murererehe Saouda Umucamanza mu Rukiko Rukuru Dr. Nshimiyimana Didace Urugereko Rwihariye rw'Urukiko Rukuru ruburanisha Ibyaha Mpuzamahanga n'Ibyaha byambuka Imbibi Lt Col Kalibu Phanuel Umucamanza mu Rukiko Rukuru rwa Gisirikale Ninahazwa Roselyne Umushinjacyaha ku rwego rw’Igihugu Dr. Bideri Diogène Umushinjacyaha ku rwego rw’Igihugu Kabibi Specioza Intumwa ya Leta Uwimana Christine Umucamanza mu Rukiko Rwisumbuye Giraneza Clémentine Umucamanza mu Rukiko Rwisumbuye Umutesi Vestine Umucamanza mu Rukiko rw’Ubucuruzi KOMITE YEMEZA IMANZA
## Page 10
x ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO Mukamana Valentine Umucamanza mu Rukiko rw’Ibanze Dr Zikamwabahari Jean de Dieu Umwalimu muri University of Kigali Kamali Jean Damascene Umwalimu muri ULK Karake Canisius Umwalimu muri UNILAK Rwamasirabo Olivier Avoka mu Rugaga rw’Abavoka Bagabo Faustin Avoka mu Rugaga rw’Abavoka
## Page 11
xi Re Dr BARIBWIRA
## Page 12
xii ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO
## Page 13
xiii Re Dr BARIBWIRA IRIBURIRO Basomyi bacu, Tunejejwe no kubagezaho Icyegeranyo cy’Ibyemezo by’Inkiko, Volime 4 [2025]. Nk’uko mubizi, tubahitiramo imanza zikubiyemo bimwe mu bisubizo by’ibibazo muhura nabyo kenshi, haba mu mirimo yanyu ndetse no mu buzima bwa buri munsi. Muri iyi nomero murasangamo imanza icumi (10) zikurikira: imanza ebyiri (2) zerekeranye n’ibirego bisaba kwemeza ko Itegeko rinyuranye n’Itegeko Nshinga, imanza ebyiri (2) z’imbonezamubano, urubanza rumwe (1) rw’ubucuruzi, urubanza rumwe (1) rw’inshinjayaha n’imanza eshatu (3) zerekeranye n’imiburanishirize y’imanza. Iki cyegeranyo kiboneka no ku rubuga rwa murandasi: https://amategeko.gov.rw MUKANTAGANZWA Domitilla Perezida w’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga akaba na Perezida w’Inama Nkuru y’Ubucamanza xiii
## Page 14
xiv ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO
## Page 15
xv Re Dr BARIBWIRA IBIKUBIYE MURI IKI CYEGERANYO Iki Cyegeranyo gikubiyemo imanza zaciwe n’Urukiko Rukuru, Urukiko rw’Ubujurire n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga. INYITO Imanza ziri muri iyi volime zikoreshwa muri ubu buryo: [2025] 4 RLR xv
## Page 16
xvi ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO
## Page 17
xvii Re Dr BARIBWIRA AMATEGEKO YASHINGIWEHO a. Amategeko akoreshwa ubu Itegeko Nshinga rya Repubulika y’u Rwanda ryo mu 2003 ryavuguruwe kugeza ubu, ingingo ya 7, 10, 17, 15,19, 29, 34, 96 iya 153 Amasezerano Mpuzamahanga yerekeye Uburenganzira mu by’Imbonezamubano no mu bya Politiki yo mu 1966, ingingo ya 14 n’iya 26. Amasezerano Nyafurika y’Uburenganzira bwa Muntu n’ubw’Abaturage yo mu wa 1981, ingingo ya 3, 7 n’iya 14. Itegeko N°30/20218 ryo ku wa 02/08/2018 rigena ububasha bw’inkiko, ingingo 44, 52, 55 n’iya Itegeko N° 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi, ingingo ya 10, 20, 111,114, 129,154,161, 162, 165 188, 245, 246, 250, 260, 275,253, 255, 275 n’iya 278 Itegeko Nº 027/2019 ryo ku wa 19/09/2019 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’inshinjabyaha, ingingo ya 195; Itegeko N° 66/2018 ryo ku wa 30/08/2018 rigenga umurimo mu Rwanda, ingingo ya 3, 19, 24, 29, 30 n’iya 39. Itegeko N° 05/2015 ryo ku wa 30/03/2015 rigenga imitunganyirize y’ubwiteganyirize bwa pansiyo, ingingo ya 6, 18, 24, 25 n’iya 26. Itegeko N° 075/2021 ryo ku wa 06/12/2021 ryerekeye igihombo, ingingo ya 12. Iteka rya Perezida N° 31/01 ryo ku wa 25/08/2003 rishyiraho uburyo bwo kwishyura indishyi ku bubabare bw’umubiri xvii
## Page 18
xviii ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO buturutse ku mpanuka zitewe n’ibinyabiziga, ingingo ya 18. Itegeko-Teka No 32/75 ryo ku wa 07/08/1975 ryerekeye ubwishingire butegetswe ku buryozwe butewe n’ibigenzwa ku butaka bifite moteri, nk’uko yahinduwe n’Itegeko No 02/2002 ryo ku wa 17/01/2002, ingingo 3 b. Amategeko yakuweho ariko yakoreshwaga igihe ikibazo cyavukaga Itegeko Ngenga N° 10/2007 ryo kuwa 01/03/2007 rihindura kandi ryuzuza Itegeko Ngenga n° 16/2004 ryo kuwa 19/6/2004 rigena imiterere, ububasha n’imikorere by’Inkiko Gacaca, ingingo ya 15. Itegeko N° 22/99 ryo ku wa 12/11/1999 ryuzuza igitabo cya mbere cy'urwunge rw'amategeko mbonezamubano kandi rishyiraho igice cya gatanu cyerekeye imicungire y'umutungo w'abashyingiranywe, impano n' izungura, ingingo ya 50, 307, 308, 318, 324, 328, 329. Itegeko N° 06/2003 ryo ku wa 22/03/2003 rihindura kandi ryuzuza Itegeko-Teka ryo ku wa 22 Kanama 1974 rigenga ubwiteganyirize bw’abakozi, ingingo ya 14, 16 n’iya 22.
## Page 19
xix Re Dr BARIBWIRA IMANZA ZIFASHISHIJWE Re Mironko François Xavier, RS/INCONST/SPEC00005/2023/SC, rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga ku wa 07/03/2025. Re Murangwa Edward, RS/INCONST/SPEC00001/2022, rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga ku wa 16/12/2022. Re Asiimwe Frank, RS/INCONST/SPEC00004/2020/SC, rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga ku wa 26/03/2021. Re Murangwa Edward, RS/INCONST/SPEC00001/2019/SC rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga ku wa 29/11/2019. Re Akagera Business Group (ABG), RS/SPEC/00001/16/CS, rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga ku wa 23/09/2016. Re Feminist Action Development Ambition (FADA), RS/INCONST/SPEC00004/2019/SC, rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga ku wa 26/04/2024. Re Uwombonye Hirwa Sudi, RS/INCONST/SPEC00002/2023/SC rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga ku wa 12/04/2024. Re Kamanzi Anaclet, RS/INCONST/SPEC00002/2022/SC, rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga ku wa 31/03/2023. Re Ngendahayo Kabuye, RS/INJUST/SPEC00004/2021/SC, rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga ku wa 10/02/2023. Re Murangwa Edward, RS/INCONST/SPEC00001/2022/SC, rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga ku wa 16/12/2022. Re Asiimwe Frank, RS/INCONST/SPEC00004/2020/SC, rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga ku wa 26/03/2021. xix
## Page 20
xx ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO Re Murangwa Edward, RS/ INCONST/SPEC00001/2019/SC, rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga ku wa 29/11/2019. Akarere ka Gicumbi v WOORD GROUP LTD, RCOMAA 00035/2022/CA; rwaciwe n’Urukiko ku wa 13/06/2022. SOPROMETAL LTD v BANQUE POPULAIRE DU RWANDA Ltd n’undi, RCOMAA 00031/2020/CA, rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ubujurire ku wa 25/08/2020. Ubushinjacyaha v Kantesi Odette n’undi, RPA 00020/2024/CA; rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ubujurire ku wa 27/09/2024. Special Guarentee Fund (SGF) v Uwanyirigira n’undi, RS/REV/RC 00001/2022/CA, rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ubujurire ku wa 20/04/2023. Mukakimenyi v SANLAM Ag Plc, RS/INJUST/RC00012/2022/SC, rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga kuwa 02/02/2024. Nyetera Jean Baptiste v CORAR, RCAA0202/07/CS, rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga ku wa 09/04/2009. Musengamana v Special Guarentee Fund (SGF), RS/INJUST/RC 00019/2022/SC, rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga ku wa 02/06/2023. Manirarora v Rwanda Rudniki Ltd n’undi, RS/INJUST/RC00013/2021/CA, rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ubujurire ku wa 28/06/2022. Nyirabatesi v Ibitaro byitiriwe Umwami Fayisali, RCAA00073/2018/CA, rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ubujurire ku wa 19/07/2019. Ndizeye v Kibungo Medical Center, RCAA00008/2020/CA, rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ubujurire ku wa 25/06/2021.
## Page 21
xxi Re Dr BARIBWIRA Urubanza RCF/2019/ 655 rwaciwe na Sentare y’Intango ya Gihosha (Tribunal de Résidence) ku wa 26/11/2020 Urubanza N°91/2023, rwaciwe n’Urukiko rushinzwe kurinda Itegeko Inshinga (Cour Constitutionnelle) ku wa 08/06/2023. Affaire Konstantina Frantzeskaki v la Grèce, Arrêt No 57275/17), Strasbourg, rwaciwe ku wa 2019. Urubanza Zubac v Croatie (Requête nᵒ 40160/12), Strasbourg, 4 rwaciwe ku wa 2018. Urubanza AshingdanE v Royaume-Uni, Arrêt No 8225/78), Strasbourg, 28 rwaciwe ku wa 1985. IMANZA ZIFASHISHIJWE
## Page 22
xxii ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO
## Page 23
xxiii Re Dr BARIBWIRA AMAGAMBO MPINE 1. Itegeko Nshinga – Ihame ryo kureshya imbere y’amategeko – Kuba umuburanyi watanze inzitizi ntiyakirwe ahabwa uburenganzira bwo kujuririra icyemezo cyafashwe hamwe n’urubanza mu mizi, atandukanye n’uwayireguragaho uhabwa uburenganzira bwo guhita ajuririra icyemezo cyafashwe gituma urubanza rurangirira aho, ntibisobanuye kutabareshyeshya imbere y’amategeko, kuko bombi batari mu byiciro bimwe kandi bikaba byarateganyijwe uko hashingiwe ku mpamvu zumvikana zishingiye ku ntego ifite ireme (justifié et raisonable), zirimo gukumira ingaruka zatuma habaho ugutinda kw’imanza. Re Dr BARIBWIRA 1 Ihame ryo kureshya kw’abantu imbere y’amategeko – Kuba icyiciro cy’ababuranira mu Rukiko rw’Ubujurire no mu Rukiko rw’Ikirenga batemerewe gutambamira imanza zaciwe n’izo nkiko, naho icy’ababuranira mu zindi nkiko bo bakaba bemerewe gutambamira imanza zaciwe nazo, ntibinyuranyije n’ihame ryo kureshya kw’abantu imbere y’amategeko, kuko bishingiye ku mpamvu yumvikana kandi ifite ireme, irimo ububasha bw’inkiko n’ihame rusange ryo kuba iburanisha ry’imanza rigomba kugira aho rirangirira. Re BUCYESENGE MENDE 23 Uburenganzira bwo kuburanira imbere y’urukiko rubifitiye ububasha – Ni uburenganzira bwo kuburanira imbere y’urukiko rwahawe n’itegeko ububasha bwo guca urubanza. Re Dr BARIBWIRA 1 xxiii
## Page 24
xxiv ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO Ubutabera buboneye – Uburenganzira bwo kuburanira imbere y’urukiko rubifitiye ububasha – Gutambamira urubanza rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ubujurire cyangwa Urukiko rw’Ikirenga – Kuba Umushingamategeko, mu bushishozi bwe, yarifuje gushyiraho igika cya 4 cy’ingingo ya 161 y’Itegeko No 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi, yari agamije intego ifite ireme, yo kubungabunga imigendekere myiza y’ubutabera, aho gutambamira urubanza rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ubujurire cyangwa n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga, byavutsa umuburanyi watsindwa uburenganzira bwo kujurira nibura rimwe, kuko imanza zaciwe n’izi nkiko zitajuririrwa. Re BUCYESENGE MENDE 23 Itegeko rinyuranyije n’Itegeko Nshinga – Uburenganzira ku mutungo bwite – Itegeko ryaba rinyuranyije n’ingingo ya 34 y’Itegeko Nshinga iteganya uburenganzira umuntu afite ku mutungo bwite, ni iryaba rimunyaga uburenganzira afite ku mutungo we cyangwa irituma uvogerwa nta burenganzira abitangiye, cyangwa irimubuza kuwukoresha nta nkomyi. Re BUCYESENGE MENDE 23 2.Amategeko agenga imiburanishirize y’imanza – Gusubirishamo urubanza ingingo nshya – Abari ababuranyi mu rubanza rusubirishwamo ingingo nshya bagomba gutumizwa mu rubanza ruburanisha ingingo nshya, kudatumiza umwe mu bari ababuranyi, n’ubwo yaba ari uwaregeraga indishyi mu rubanza rusabirwa gusubirishwamo ingingo nshya, bifatwa nk’impamvu
## Page 25
xxv Re Dr BARIBWIRA y’akarengane yatuma urwo rubanza rusubirishwamo ku mpamvu z’akarengane. UBUSHINJACYAHA vs UWIMANIHAYE 123 Ibirego byihutirwa – Ibarwa ry’ibihe by’ubujurire ku birego byihutirwa – Ibihe by’ubujurire ku birego by’ihutirwa bibarwa hashingiwe ku biteganywa n’ingingo ya 188 y’Itegeko N° 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/4/2018 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi – Ibikubiye muri iyi ngingo bigaragaza ko aribwo buryo bwihariye bwo kubara ibyo bihe, kandi ikaba ari n’irengayobora ku ihame rusange riteganyijwe mu ngingo ya 275 nayo y’iryo tegeko. UWANTEGE v. NIYONSHUTI N’ABANDI 103 Irangizwa ry’urubanza – Guhuzwa n’urubanza – Kwanga gutanga email - Kuba umuburanyi yaranze gutanga email ngo ahuzwe na cyamunara, ntiyavuga ko umutungo we wagurishijwe ku giciro gito kandi ari we wivukije uburenganzira bwo kwanga igiciro gito yanga guhuzwa na system. GATARE v GASANA N’ABANDI 57 Kugoboka – Uwatije ingwate aba afite inyungu ze bwite kandi zitaziguye zo kugoboka ku bushake. VINTAGES WINES AND LIQUORS LTD v. KARASIRA 235 Ubujurire – Ubujurire kw’iyakirwa ry’ikirego – Umushingamategeko yateganyirije umuburanyi wese uburenganzira n’inzira byo kujuririra icyemezo kimubangamiye cyafashwe ku iyakirwa ry’ikirego – Mu gihe icyemezo cyafashwe gituma urubanza rurangirira aho, uwo kibangamiye ahabwa uburenganzira bwo guhita AMAGAMBO MPINE
## Page 26
xxvi ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO akijuririra; naho mu gihe icyemezo cyafashwe gituma urubanza rukomeza mu mizi, uwo kibangamiye na we ahabwa uburenganzira bwo kijuririra hamwe n’urubanza mu mizi mu gihe atarwishimiye. Re Dr BARIBWIRA 1 Ubujurire – Ikoranabuhanga ridakora – Mu gihe habayeho kurenza ibihe byo kujurira biturutse ku buryo bw’ikoranabuhanga butangirwamo ibirego butari gukora kandi bikaba byaramenyeshejwe Urukiko, ni impamvu idasanzwe ituma ikirego cyakirwa kigasuzumwa. GATARE v GASANA N’ABANDI 57 3. Amategeko agenga ububasha bw’inkiko – Ububasha bw’urukiko rwajuririwe – Indishyi – Iyo hari indishyi zitandukanye ku bantu batandukanye zagenwe n’Urukiko mu rubanza rujuririrwa, ububasha bw’Urukiko rujuririwe, bureberwa ku zagenwe n’Urukiko ku muburanyi wajuriye. MUTABAZI v. LETA Y’U RWANDA/MINADEF N’ABANDI 85 Amategeko agenga imanza z’inshinjabyaha – Icyaha cya jenoside – Ihanagurabusembwa – Mu gusuzuma ko usaba ihanagurabusembwa wahamijwe icyaha cya jenoside arihabwa, ntihasuzumwa gusa ko yujuje ibisabwa kugira ngo arihabwe, ahubwo hasuzumwa n’uburemere bw’icyaha urisaba yahamijwe. – Kubera iyo mpamvu, uwahamijwe icyaha cya jenoside ntakwiye guhabwa ihanagurabusembwa kabone n’ubwo yaba yujuje ibisabwa. UBUSHINJACYAHA v NZABONITEGEKA 269 4.Amategeko agenga imanza z’imbonezamubano – Indishyi z’ikomoka ku mpanuka yakozwe n’ikinyabiziga – Uburyozwe bw’ikinyabiziga – Mu gihe nta ruhare
## Page 27
xxvii Re Dr BARIBWIRA ikinyabiziga cyagize mu mpanuka yabaye, nta buryozwe uwari ugitwaye yashyirwaho kimwe n’umwishingizi we. SANLAM AG Plc v NZAMWITAKUZE 179 Umuryango – Izungura - Ukudateshwa agaciro kw’izungura ryakozwe rikarangira hagati y’abari bafite uburenganzira – Kuba hari umuzungura wamenyekanye byemejwe n’Urukiko nyuma y’uko izungura rishyirwa mu bikorwa, ntibishobora gutesha agaciro izungura ryakozwe rikarangira hagati y’abari bafite uburenganzira bwo kuzungura mbere y’uko hatangwa ikirego kigamije kwemeza se w’umwana. Azungura gusa umutungo wari utaragabanwa kuva igihe yemerejwe n’Urukiko ko akomoka kuri Nyakwigendera. UWIDUHAYE N’UNDI v HAKIZIMANA N’ABANDI 197 Umuryango – Imimerere y’abantu – Kwemeza se w’umwana iyo ababyeyi batashyingiranywe - Kwemeza ko umwana akomoka ku mubyeyi w’umugabo iyo ababyeyi batashyingiranywe, binyura mu nzira yo kumwemera ku bushake; ibyo byaba bitarakozwe, hakabaho ikirego kigamije kwemeza se w’umwana. UWIDUHAYE N’UNDI v HAKIZIMANA N’ABANDI 197 Umuryango - Imimerere y’abantu - Kwemeza se w’umwana iyo ababyeyi batashyingiranywe - Umwana ufite imimerere izwi - Kuba umwana uvuka ku babyeyi batashyingiranywe asanganywe imimerere izwi, biba gusa ikimenyetso mu rubanza rugamije kwemeza se, ariko ubwabyo ntibyashingirwaho ngo hemezwe se hatabaye AMAGAMBO MPINE
## Page 28
xxviii ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO urubanza ngo hemezwe ko se ari runaka, kandi ko ashobora kumuzungura. UWIDUHAYE N’UNDI v HAKIZIMANA N’ABANDI 197 5. Amategeko agenga imanza z’umurimo – Amasezerano y’umurimo – Iseswa ry’masezerano y’umurimo – Indishyi – Umukoresha usheshe amasezerano y’umurimo ntiyubahirize inzira n’uburyo bikorwamo aba yirukanye umukozi mu buryo bunyuranyije n’amategeko, abitangira indishyi. RUZIBIZA v. MOUNT MERU LOGISTICS RWANDA LTD 139 Impanuka y’akazi – Indishyi z’ikomoka ku mpanuka yakozwe n’ikinyabiziga – Indishyi zo kwivuza – Umukoresha afite inshingano zo gushyira umukozi mu bwiteganyirize no kumutangira imisanzu mu Kigo cy’ubwiteganyirize bw’abakozi – Iyo umukoresha atatangiye umukozi imisanzu yo kwivuza ni we umuvuza; atabikora akaba agomba kumuha amafaranga akivuza ubwe. RUZIBIZA v. MOUNT MERU LOGISTICS RWANDA LTD 139 6. Amategeko agenga imanza z’ubucuruzi – Igihombo – Uburenganzira bwo gukurikirana umwenda wishingiwe bukomeza gusubikwa iyo mu gihe kitarenze amezi atandatu abarwa guhera urimo umwenda atanze ikirego, urukiko rwemeje gutangiza izahura ry’ubucuruzi. VINTAGES WINES AND LIQUORS LTD v. KARASIRA 235
## Page 29
xxix Re Dr BARIBWIRA Gutanga ikirego gisaba gutangiza ikurikirana n’irangiza ry’imanza ziturutse ku gihombo, si impamvu yasubika uburenganzira bw’ababerewemo imyenda bishingiwe kimwe n’abafite uburenganzira bw’ifatira, cyeretse uwatanze icyo kirego agaragaje ubushake bwo gutanga gahunda y’izahura. VINTAGES WINES AND LIQUORS LTD v. KARASIRA 235 Uburenganzira buhabwa uwatije ingwate – Gutiza ingwate ntibivuze ko uwayitije yiyambuye uburenganzira kuri yo. VINTAGES WINES AND LIQUORS LTD v. KARASIRA 235 AMAGAMBO MPINE
## Page 30
xxx ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO
## Page 31
xxxi Re Dr BARIBWIRA IBIREGO BYIHARIYE
## Page 32
xxxii ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO
## Page 33
xxxiii Re Dr BARIBWIRA IBIREGO BISABA KWEMEZA KO ITEGEKO RINYURANYE N’ITEGEKO NSHINGA
## Page 34
xxxiv ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO
## Page 35
1 Re Dr BARIBWIRA Re Dr BARIBWIRA [Rwanda URUKIKO RW’IKIRENGA – RS/INCONST/SPEC00007/2023/SC (Mukantaganzwa, P.J., Cyanzayire, Muhumuza, Kazungu na Kalihangabo, J.) 25 Gicurasi 2025] Itegeko Nshinga – Ihame ryo kureshya imbere y’amategeko – Kuba umuburanyi watanze inzitizi ntiyakirwe ahabwa uburenganzira bwo kujuririra icyemezo cyafashwe hamwe n’urubanza mu mizi, atandukanye n’uwayireguragaho uhabwa uburenganzira bwo guhita ajuririra icyemezo cyafashwe gituma urubanza rurangirira aho, ntibisobanuye kutabareshyeshya imbere y’amategeko, kuko bombi batari mu byiciro bimwe kandi bikaba byarateganyijwe uko hashingiwe ku mpamvu zumvikana zishingiye ku ntego ifite ireme (justifié et raisonable), zirimo gukumira ingaruka zatuma habaho ugutinda kw’imanza. Itegeko Nshinga – Uburenganzira bwo kuburanira imbere y’urukiko rubifitiye ububasha – Ni uburenganzira bwo kuburanira imbere y’urukiko rwahawe n’itegeko ububasha bwo guca urubanza. Amategeko agenga imiburanishirize y’imanza – Ubujurire – Ubujurire kw’iyakirwa ry’ikirego – Umushingamategeko yateganyirije umuburanyi wese uburenganzira n’inzira byo kujuririra icyemezo kimubangamiye cyafashwe ku iyakirwa ry’ikirego – Mu gihe icyemezo cyafashwe gituma urubanza rurangirira aho, uwo kibangamiye ahabwa uburenganzira bwo guhita akijuririra; naho mu gihe icyemezo cyafashwe gituma urubanza rukomeza mu mizi, uwo kibangamiye na we ahabwa 1
## Page 36
2 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO uburenganzira bwo kijuririra hamwe n’urubanza mu mizi mu gihe atarwishimiye. Incamake y’ikibazo: Dr Baribwira yatanze ikirego mu Rukiko rw’Ikirenga avuga ko ingingo ya 129, igika cya 3, y’Itegeko No 22/2018 ryo kuwa 29/04/2018 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi nk’uko ryahinduwe, iteganya ko icyemezo gifashwe ku mpamvu zituma ikirego kitakirwa gishobora kujuririrwa cyonyine mu gihe icyo cyemezo gifashwe gituma iburanisha rirangirira aho, inyuranyije n’ingingo ya 15 y’Itegeko rya Repubulika y’u Rwanda, iteganya ko abantu bareshya imbere y’amategeko. Amategeko abarengera ku buryo bumwe, kuko mu rubanza RCA00139/2021/TGI/NYGE rwaciwe n’Urukiko Rwisumbuye rwa Nyarugenge ku wa 28/12/2022, yatanze inzitizi yo kutakira ikirego cy’uwo baburanaga icyo gihe, ntiyakirwa ahubwo iburanisha mu mizi rirakomeza. Avuga ko iyo nzitizi Urukiko rutayihaye ishingiro ahubwo rukomeza iburanisha mu mizi, kuko iyo ngingo iregerwa y’129 igika 3 imubuza uburenganzira bwo kujuririra icyemezo cyafashwe; mu gihe iyo ihabwa ishingiro uwo baburana yari kuba yemerewe kujuririra icyemezo kiyifashweho; bityo akaba asanga iyo ngingo isumbanya ababuranyi kuko iha umuburanyi utaratanze inzitizi uburenganzira bwo kujurira, bikaba binyuranye n’ihame ryo kureshya imbere y’amategeko. Urega avuga kandi ko ingingo ya 129, igika cya 3, y’Itegeko No 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryavuzwe haruguru, inyuranyije n’ingingo ya 29, igika cya 1, agace ka (c) y’Itegeko Nshinga, kubera ko itubahiriza uburenganzira ku butabera buboneye bwo kuburanira imbere y’urukiko rubifitiye ububasha. Ibyo akaba abishingira ku kuba yaratanze inzitizi yo kutakira ikirego cy’uwo
## Page 37
3 Re Dr BARIBWIRA baburanaga mu Rukiko Rwisumbuye rwa Nyarugenge ntiyakirwe ahubwo iburanisha mu mizi rigakomeza. Kuri we, uburenganzira bwo kuburanira imbere y’urukiko rubifitiye ububasha bwari kubaho iyo ubujurire bwe ku nzitizi buhagarika iburanisha mu mizi, hagategerezwa igisubizo kuri bwo, nk’uko uwo baburana abyemerewe iyo inzitizi ituma urubanza rurangirira aho. Uhagarariye Leta y’u Rwanda muri uru rubanza asobanura ko ihame ryo kureshya kw’abantu bose imbere y’amategeko rivugwa mu ngingo ya 15 y’Itegeko Nshinga, ryumvikanisha ko itegeko rireba abantu bose kimwe, ko abantu barebwa n’ikintu kimwe cyangwa bafite ibyo bahuriyeho ari bo bagomba gufatwa kimwe. Avuga ko iyo ngingo y’129, igika cya 3, itanyuranyije n’Itegeko Nshinga kuko urubanza ku nzitizi rutarangirira aho ahubwo ubujurire bw’icyo cyemezo n’ubw’urubanza mu mizi biba bizakorerwa rimwe, ko ntacyo uwatanze inzitizi atakaza. Ahubwo, iyo inzitizi yakiriwe urubanza rugahita rurangira, uyitsinzweho adashoboye guhita ajuririra icyo cyemezo adategereje urubanza mu mizi yaba atakaje uburenganzira bidasubirwaho. Akomeza avuga ko mu nyungu z’abakoresha itegeko ririmo ingingo Urega aregera no mu nyungu z’ubutabera, amagambo “peut” na “may” yavanwamo mu rwego rwo kwirinda urujijo, mu ndimi z’Igifaransa n’Icyongereza, kugirango iyo ngingo yumvikane kimwe mu ndimi zose itegeko ryanditsemo. Uhagarariye Leta avuga kandi ko iyo ngingo iregerwa itanyuranyije n’ingingo ya 29 igika cya 1, agace ka (c) y’Itegeko Nshinga itabangamiye uburenganzira ku butabera buboneye cyane cyane ubwo kuburanira imbere y’urukiko rubifitiye ububasha, kuko umuburanyi uwo ari we wese utishimiye imikirize y’urubanza ku nzitizi yatanzwe, yemerewe kuyijuririra hamwe n’urubanza rw’iremezo mu gihe itabaye impamvu ituma
## Page 38
4 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO urubanza rurangirira aho; cyangwa se kuyijuririra ako kanya mu gihe icyemezo gifashwe ku nzitizi gituma urubanza rurangirira aho. Incamake y’icyemezo: 1. Umushingamategeko yateganyirije umuburanyi wese uburenganzira n’inzira byo kujuririra icyemezo kimubangamiye cyafashwe ku iyakirwa ry’ikirego – Mu gihe icyemezo cyafashwe gituma urubanza rurangirira aho, uwo kibangamiye ahabwa uburenganzira bwo guhita akijuririra; naho mu gihe icyemezo cyafashwe gituma urubanza rukomeza mu mizi, uwo kibangamiye na we ahabwa uburenganzira bwo kijuririra hamwe n’urubanza mu mizi mu gihe atarwishimiye. 2. Kuba umuburanyi watanze inzitizi ntiyakirwe ahabwa uburenganzira bwo kujuririra icyemezo cyafashwe hamwe n’urubanza mu mizi, atandukanye n’uwayireguragaho uhabwa uburenganzira bwo guhita ajuririra icyemezo cyafashwe gituma urubanza rurangirira aho, ntibisobanuye kutabareshyeshya imbere y’amategeko, kuko bombi batari mu byiciro bimwe kandi bikaba byarateganyijwe uko hashingiwe ku mpamvu zumvikana zishingiye ku ntego ifite ireme (justifié et raisonable), zirimo gukumira ingaruka zatuma habaho ugutinda kw’imanza. 3. Uburenganzira bwo kuburanira imbere y’urukiko rubifitiye ububasha ni ubwo kuburanira imbere y’urukiko rwahawe n’itegeko ububasha bwo guca urubanza. Ikirego gisaba kwemeza ko ingingo y’Itegeko, inyuranyije n’Itegeko Nshinga rya Repubulika y’u Rwanda, nta shingiro gifite. Amategeko yashingiweho:
## Page 39
5 Re Dr BARIBWIRA Itegeko Nshinga rya Repubulika y’u Rwanda ryo mu 2003 ryavuguruwe kugeza ubu, ingingo ya 15, 29 n’iya 96. Itegeko Nshinga ry’u Rwanda ryo ku wa 03/06/2003, ingingo ya 19. Amasezerano Mpuzamahanga yerekeye Uburengazira mu by’imbonezamubano no mu bya politiki, ingingo ya 14. Itegeko N°30/20218 ryo ku wa 02/08/2018 rigena ububasha bw’inkiko, ingingo 44. Itegeko N°22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi, ingingo ya 129 n’iya 250. Imanza zifashishijwe: Re Mironko François Xavier, RS/INCONST/SPEC00005/2023/SC, rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga ku wa 07/03/2025. Re Murangwa Edward, RS/INCONST/SPEC00001/2022, rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga ku wa 16/12/2022. Re Asiimwe Frank, RS/INCONST/SPEC00004/2020/SC, rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga ku wa 26/03/2021. Murangwa Edward, RS/INCONST/SPEC00001/2019/SC rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga ku wa 29/11/2019. Re Akagera Business Group (ABG), RS/SPEC/00001/16/CS, rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga ku wa 23/09/2016. RCF/2019/ 655 rwaciwe ku wa 26/11/2020 na Sentare y’Intango ya Gihosha (Tribunal de Résidence). Cour Constitutionnelle, arrêt N°91/2023, rwaciwe ku wa 08/06/2023, B.10, page 13. Affaire Konstantina Frantzeskaki contre la Grèce, Arrêt No 57275/17), Strasbourg, 12 février 2019.
## Page 40
6 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO Affaire Zubac c. Croatie (Requête nᵒ 40160/12), Strasbourg, 4 Avril 2018. Affaire AshingdanE contre Royaume-Uni, Arrêt No 8225/78), Strasbourg, 28 Mai 1985. Inyandiko z’abahanga zifashishijwe: Droit judciaire, Tome 2, Manuel de procédure civile, Bruxelles, Larcier, 2015, Hakim Boularbah, Olivier Caprasse et alii, sous la direction scientifique de Georges de Leval, p.772. Marc Uyttendaele, Précis de droit constitutionnel belge, Regard sur un système instutionnel paradoxal, Bruxelles, Bruylant, 2001, p. 481. A. Fettweis, A. Khol, G. de Leval, Eléments de compétence civile, Liège, P.ULG, 1988, p.1. Cass., 5 mai 2004, Pas., 2004, p.762, in Georges de Leval et Frédéric Georges, Droit judiciaire, Tome 1, Institutions judiciaires et éléments de compétence, Bruxelles, Laricier, 2014, 2è édition, p.78, note 15. Urubanza I. IMITERERE Y’URUBANZA [1] Dr Baribwira Cyprien yatanze ikirego mu Rukiko rw’Ikirenga asaba kwemeza ko igika cya 3, cy’ingingo ya 129 y’Itegeko N°22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi nk’uko ryahinduwe1, inyuranyije 1 Iri tegeko ryahinduwe n’Itegeko N°007/2023 ryo ku wa 22//2023.
## Page 41
7 Re Dr BARIBWIRA n’ingingo ya 15 n’iya 29, igika cya 1, agace ka c, z’Itegeko Nshinga. [2] Asobanura ko impamvu yatanze iki kirego ari uko mu rubanza rw’ubutane yaburanye n’umugore we Dr Gahimbare Laetitia, bukemezwa, mu Rukiko rw’Ibanze rwa Kicukiro no mu Rukiko Rwisumbuye rwa Nyarugenge, yatanze inzitizi yo kutakira ikirego ntiyahabwa ishingiro, urubanza rukomeza kuburanishwa mu mizi. Avuga ko inzitizi yatanze ishingiye ku kuba muri dosiye yabo y’ubutane, inkiko zombi zivuzwe haruguru zica urubanza, zashingiye ku rundi rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’iwabo i Burundi2, rutabanje gukorerwa “exequatur”3, nk’uko biteganywa n’ingingo ya 250, y’Itegeko N°22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryavuzwe hejuru. [3] Akomeza asobanura ko gukomeza iburanisha kandi yajuririye icyemezo kuri iyi nzitizi, byashobotse kubera igika cya 3, cy’ingingo ya 129 y’Itegeko aregera iteganya ko icyemezo gifashwe ku mpamvu zituma ikirego kitakirwa gishobora kujuririrwa cyonyine mu gihe icyo cyemezo gifashwe gituma iburanisha rirangirira aho, akaba asanga binyuranyije n’ingingo z’Itegeko Nshinga yavuze haruguru. 2 RCF/2019/ 655 rwaciwe ku wa 26/11/2020 na Sentare y’Intango ya Gihosha (Tribunal de Résidence). 3 Ingingo ya 44 y’Itegeko N°30/20218 ryo ku wa 02/08/2018 rigena ububasha bw’inkiko, iteganya ko Urukiko Rukuru ruburanisha ibirego bisaba kurangiriza mu Rwanda imanza cyangwa ibyemezo byafashwe n’inkiko zo mu mahanga. Isuzumwa ry’urwo rubanza risuzumwa harebwa ibi bikurikira: 1° ko urubanza rwaciriwe mu mahanga rutanyuranyije n’amategeko rusange ndemyagihugu, n’amahame ashingiweho n’amategeko y’u Rwanda; 2° ko urubanza rwaciwe burundu hakurik ijwe amategeko y’igihugu rwaciriwemo; 3° ko kopi y’urubanza yujuje ibyangombwa byose byemeza ko ari impamo, hakurikijwe ayo mategeko; 4° ko uburenganzira bwo kwiregura bwubahirijwe.
## Page 42
8 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO [4] Uhagarariye Leta y’u Rwanda avuga ko iyo ngingo ntaho inyuranyije n’ingingo ya 15 n’iya 29, igika cya 1, agace ka c, z’Itegeko Nshinga, ariko yemera ko mu nyungu z’abayikoresha, ikwiye guhuzwa mu ndimi zose imyandikire ikaba imwe, uko yanditse mu Kinyarwanda akaba ariko ishyirwa no mu Cyongereza n’Igifaransa. Amagambo “can” na “peut” akoreshwa muri iyi ngingo muri izo ndimi akavanwamo kuko ariyo atera urujijo. [5] Urubanza rwaburanishijwe mu ruhame ku itariki ya 02/04/2025, Dr Baribwira Cyprien ahagarariwe na Me Pierre Claver Zitoni, naho Leta y’u Rwanda ihagarariwe na Me Umwali Munyantwali Claire, Urukiko rubanza gusuzuma ikibazo kirebana n’inyungu Dr Baribwira Cyprien afite mu rubanza. - Ku bijyanye n’inyungu Dr Baribwira Cyprien afite mu rubanza [6] Urukiko rumaze kumva impande zombi zemeranya ko urega afite inyungu mu rubanza, mu cyemezo cyafatiwe mu ntebe, rwemeje ko afite inyungu mu rubanza kuko ingingo y’itegeko aregera ireba abaturage muri rusange ku buryo rishobora kugira ingaruka ku burenganzira bwabo, nawe arimo; iyi ikaba ari imwe mu mpamvu zemejwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga, zishingirwaho mu gusuzuma ikibazo cy’inyungu cy’uregera itegeko kuba rinyuranyije n’Itegeko Nshinga4. [7] Ku birebana n’imizi y’urubanza, ababuranyi bagiye impaka ku bibazo birebana no kumenya niba ingingo ya 129, igika cya 3, y’Itegeko No 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 4 Urubanza rubanziriza urundi rwaciwe ku wa 16/12/2022, mu rubanza RS/INCONST/SPEC00001/2022, haburana Murangwa Edward, §17, p.10.
## Page 43
9 Re Dr BARIBWIRA ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi nk’uko ryahinduwe, inyuranyije n’ingingo ya 15 hamwe n’ingingo ya 29, igika cya 1, agace ka (c) z’Itegeko Nshinga. II. IBIBAZO BIGIZE URUBANZA N’ISESENGURWA RYABYO 1. Kumenya niba ingingo ya 129, igika cya 3, y’Itegeko N°22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi nk’uko ryahinduwe, inyuranyije n’ingingo ya 15 y’Itegeko Nshinga. [8] Dr Baribwira Cyprien avuga ko ingingo ya 129, igika cya 3, y’Itegeko No 22/2018 ryo kuwa 29/04/2018 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi nk’uko ryahinduwe, iteganya ko icyemezo gifashwe ku mpamvu zituma ikirego kitakirwa gishobora kujuririrwa cyonyine mu gihe icyo cyemezo gifashwe gituma iburanisha rirangirira aho, inyuranyije n’ingingo ya 15 y’Itegeko rya Repubulika y’u Rwanda, iteganya ko abantu bareshya imbere y’amategeko. Amategeko abarengera ku buryo bumwe», kuko mu rubanza RCA00139/2021/TGI/NYGE rwaciwe n’Urukiko Rwisumbuye rwa Nyarugenge ku wa 28/12/2022, yatanze inzitizi yo kutakira ikirego cy’uwo baburanaga icyo gihe, ntiyakirwa ahubwo iburanisha mu mizi rirakomeza. [9] Avuga ko iyo nzitizi Urukiko rutayihaye ishingiro ahubwo rukomeza iburanisha mu mizi, kuko ingingo ya 129,
## Page 44
10 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO igika 3 y’Itegeko No 22/2018 ryo kuwa 29/04/2018 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi nk’uko ryahinduwe, iregerwa, imubuza uburenganzira bwo kujuririra icyemezo cyafashwe; mu gihe iyo ihabwa ishingiro uwo baburana yari kuba yemerewe kujuririra icyemezo kiyifashweho; bityo akaba asanga iyo ngingo isumbanya ababuranyi kuko iha uburenganzira bwo kujurira umuburanyi utaratanze inzitizi gusa, bikaba binyuranye n’ihame ryo kureshya imbere y’amategeko. [10] Me Umwali Munyantwali Claire uhagarariye Leta y’u Rwanda avuga ko ihame ryo kureshya kw’abantu bose imbere y’amategeko rivugwa mu ngingo ya 15 y’Itegeko Nshinga, ryumvikanisha ko itegeko rireba abantu bose kimwe, ko abantu barebwa n’ikintu kimwe cyangwa bafite ibyo bahuriyeho ari bo bagomba gufatwa kimwe, bityo ko ingingo ya 129, igika cya 3, y’Itegeko No 22/2018 ryo kuwa 29/04/2018 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi nk’uko ryahinduwe, itanyuranyije naryo kuko urubanza rutarangirira aho ahubwo ubujurire bw’icyo cyemezo n’ubw’urubanza mu mizi biba bizakorerwa rimwe, ko ntacyo uwatanze inzitizi atakaza; mu gihe nyamara iyo inzitizi yakiriwe urubanza rugahita rurangira, uyitsinzweho adashoboye guhita ajuririra icyo cyemezo adategereje urubanza mu mizi yaba atakaje uburenganzira bidasubirwaho. [11] Akomeza avuga ko ku birebana n’ibyo Dr Baribwira Cyprien avuga ko ingingo ya129, igika cya 3 y’Itegeko No 22/2018 ryo kuwa 29/04/2018 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi nk’uko ryahinduwe, mu Kinyarwanda yaba idasobanuye kimwe n’ibiri mu rurimi rw’Igifaransa n’urw’Icyongereza, hakoreshwa ibiri mu Kinyarwanda kuko
## Page 45
11 Re Dr BARIBWIRA arirwo rurimi itegeko ryatowemo, nk’uko biteganywa n’ingingo ya 96 (4) y’Itegeko Nshinga. [12] Asoza avuga ariko ko mu nyungu z’abakoresha itegeko ririmo ingingo aregera no mu nyungu z’ubutabera, amagambo “peut” na “may” yavanwamo mu rwego rwo kwirinda urujijo, mu ndimi z’Igifaransa n’Icyongereza. Bigatuma ingingo iregerwa yumvikana kimwe mu ndimi zose itegeko ryanditsemo. UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [13] Ingingo ya 15 y’Itegeko Nshinga iteganya ko abantu bose bareshya imbere y’amategeko, ko itegeko ribarengera ku buryo bumwe. [14] Ibiteganyijwe muri iyi ngingo byasobanuwe mu manza zinyuranye zaciwe n’uru Rukiko, zirimo urubanza RS/SPEC/00001/16/CS rwaciwe ku wa 23/09/2016, haburana Akagera Business Group (ABG). Muri urwo rubanza, Urukiko rwasobanuye ko ingingo ya 15 y’Itegeko Nshinga iteganya ko abantu bose bareshya imbere y’amategeko kandi bakarengerwa n’amategeko mu buryo bumwe, bishatse kuvuga ko hatagomba kubaho ivangura rituma abantu batarengerwa mu buryo bumwe cyangwa kutagira uburenganzira aho bakabugize5. [15] Urukiko rwavuze kandi ko kureshya imbere y’amategeko no kutavangura bitavuze ko gutandukanya abantu ubwabyo mu bihe byose ari ivangura, ko gutandukanya abantu cyangwa ibyiciro by’abantu bishobora kuba ngombwa bitewe 5Reba urubanza RS/SPEC/00001/16/CS rwaciwe itariki ya 23/09/2016, haburana Akagera Business Group (ABC), igika cya 15.
## Page 46
12 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO n’ikigambiriwe, hari impamvu zumvikana zishingiye ku ntego ifite ireme (legitimate or rational purpose)6. [16] Mu rubanza RS/INCONST/SPEC00001/2019/SC haburana Murangwa Edward, rwaciwe ku wa 29/11/2019, uru Rukiko rwongeye gusobanura uko ihame ry’uko abantu bareshya imbere y’amategeko rikwiye kumvikana, maze ruvuga ko ibintu bimeze kimwe bifatwa kimwe, naho ibintu bitandukanye bigafatwa ku buryo butandukanye hakurikijwe itandukaniro ryabyo7. [17] Umuhanga mu mategeko Marc Uyttendaele nawe yavuze ko ihame ry’uko abantu bareshya imbere y’amategeko risobanura ko abantu bafatwa kimwe nta busumbane cyangwa ivangura, ndetse itegeko rigiyeho rikaba rigomba gufata kimwe abo rireba, ko ariko n’ubwo abantu bagomba kureshya imbere y’amategeko, kubatandukanya cyangwa kubashyira mu byiciro bititwa buri gihe ivangura iyo hari impamvu zumvikana kandi zishingiye ku ntego ifite ireme (justifié et raisonnable)8; ko byitwa ivangura, 6Ibidem, Para 18. 7“Things that are alike should be treated alike, and things that are unalike should be treated unalike in proportion to their unalikeness)”. Reba urubanza RS/INCONST/SPEC00001/2019/SC, rwaciwe ku wa 29/11/2019, haburana Murangwa Edward, igika cya 34. 8 Les regles constitutionnelles de l’égalité des Belges et de la non- discrimination n’excluent pas qu’une différence de traitement soit établie selon certaines catégories de personnes pour autant que le critére de différenciation soit susceptible de justification et raisonable et que l’existence d’une telle justification doit s’apprécier par rapport au but et aux effets de la norme considérée; le principe de l’égalité est violé lorsqu’il est établi qu’il n’existe pas de rapport raisonable de proportionalité entre les moyens employés et le but visé”. ( Marc Uyttendaele, Précis de droit constitutionnel belge, Regard sur un système instutionnel paradoxal, Bruxelles, Bruylant, 2001, P. 481).
## Page 47
13 Re Dr BARIBWIRA iyo gufata abantu mu buryo butandukanye bikozwe nta mpamvu ihari igaragara kandi yumvikana cyangwa bigakorwa mu buryo budafitanye isano n’ikigamijwe kugerwaho9 [18] Ingingo ya 129, y’Itegeko No 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi nk’uko ryahinduwe, igika cyayo cya 3 ari nacyo urega avuga ko kinyuranyije n’ingingo ya 15 y’Itegeko Nshinga, iteganya ko icyemezo gifashwe ku mpamvu zituma ikirego kitakirwa gishobora kujuririrwa cyonyine mu gihe icyo cyemezo gifashwe gituma iburanisha rirangirira aho. Dr Baribwira Cyprien akaba avuga ko iyo ngingo isumbanya ababuranyi kuko uwatanze inzitizi ntihabwe agaciro atemerewe guhita ajurira ahubwo ategereza urubanza mu mizi; nyamara iyonzitizi yahabwaagaciro umuburanyi utarayitanze akemererwa kujurira icyemezo kiyifashweho ako kanya. [19] Abahanga mu mategeko basobanura ko ubujurire ari inzira isanzwe, umuburanyi wumva yararenganyijwe n’urubanza, akoresha asaba urukiko rwisumbuyeho k’urwaruciye kuruvanaho cyangwa kurukosora10. [20] Urukiko rurasanga Umushingamategeko yarateganyirije umuburanyi wese uburenganzira n’inzira byo kujuririra 9Ibi byanagarutsweho n’Urukiko Rushinzwe Itegeko Nshinga rw’Ububiligi, mu rubanza Cour Constitutionnelle, arrêt N°91/2023, rwaciwe ku wa 08/06/2023, B.10, page 13. 10“L’appel est la voie de recours ordinaire par laquelle la partie qui s’estime lésée par un jugement en sollicite l’annulation ou la reformation par une juridiction supérieure” (Droit judciaire, Tome 2, Manuel de procédure civile, Bruxelles, Larcier, 2015, Hakim Boularbah, Olivier Caprasse et alii, sous la direction scientifique de Georges de Leval, p.772).
## Page 48
14 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO icyemezo kimubangamiye cyafashwe ku iyakirwa ry’ikirego. Mu gihe icyemezo cyafashwe gituma urubanza rurangirira aho, uwo kibangamiye ahabwa uburenganzira bwo guhita akijuririra; naho mu gihe icyemezo cyafashwe gituma urubanza rukomeza mu mizi, uwo kibangamiye nawe agira ubureganzira bwo kukijuririra hamwe n’urubanza mu mizi mu gihe atarwishimiye. [21] Urukiko rusanga byakwitwa ivangura mu gihe itegeko ritafata kimwe ababuranyi batanze inzitizi ntiyakirwe: bamwe bakemererwa guhita bajuririra icyemezo cyafashwe badategereje urubanza mu mizi, abandi ntibabyemererwe kandi nyamara bari mu cyiciro kimwe. Kuba mu gihe inzitizi yakiriwe umuburanyi wayireguragaho ahabwa uburenganzira bwo guhita ajurira, birumvikana kuko iyo iyo inzitizi yakiriwe urubanza ruhita rurangirira aho; bivuze ko uwayireguragaho adahise ajurira yaba atakaje burundu ubwo burenganzira. Uyu muburanyi ntiyafatwa nk’uri mu cyiciro kimwe n’uwatanze inzitizi ntiyakirwe. [22] Urukiko rukaba rusanga kuba igika cya 3, cy’ingingo ya 129 y’Itegeko No 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryavuzwe haruguru, gitandukanya abo baburanyi bidasobanuye kutabareshyeshya imbere y’amategeko, kuko n’ubundi batari mu byiciro bimwe kandi bikaba byarateganyijwe uko hashingiwe ku mpamvu zumvikana zishingiye ku ntego ifite ireme (justifié et raisonnable), zirimo gukumira ingaruka zatuma habaho ugutinda kw’imanza. [23] Hashingiwe ku bisobanuro bimaze gutangwa, Urukiko rurasanga ingingo ya 129, igika cya 3, y' Itegeko No 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi nk’uko ryahinduwe, itanyuranyije n’ingingo ya 15 y’Itegeko Nshinga.
## Page 49
15 Re Dr BARIBWIRA 2. Kumenya niba ingingo ya 129, igika cya 3, y’Itegeko No 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi nk’uko ryahinduwe, inyuranyije n’ingingo ya 29, igika cya 1, agace ka (c) y’Itegeko Nshinga. [24] Dr Baribwira Cyprien avuga ko ingingo ya 129, igika cya 3, y’Itegeko No 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi nk’uko ryahinduwe, inyuranyije n’ingingo ya 29, igika cya 1, agace ka (c) y’Itegeko Nshinga, kubera ko itubahiriza uburenganzira ku butabera buboneye bwo kuburanira imbere y’urukiko rubifitiye ububasha. Avuga ko ibyo abishingira ku kuba yaratanze inzitizi yo kutakira ikirego cy’uwo baburanaga mu Rukiko Rwisumbuye rwa Nyarugenge ntiyakirwe ahubwo iburanisha mu mizi rigakomeza. [25] Uhagarariye Leta y’u Rwanda avuga ko ingingo yavuzwe haruguru itanyuranyije n’Itegeko Nshinga; kandi ko itabangamiye uburenganzira ku butabera buboneye cyane cyane ubwo kuburanira imbere y’urukiko rubifitiye ububasha, kuko umuburanyi uwo ari we wese utishimiye imikirize y’urubanza ku nzitizi yatanzwe, yemerewe kuyijuririra hamwe n’urubanza rw’iremezo mu gihe itabaye impamvu ituma urubanza rurangirira aho; cyangwa se kuyijuririra ako kanya mu gihe icyemezo gifashwe ku nzitizi gituma urubanza rurangirira aho. Mu yandi magambo, avuga ko uburenganzira bwo kuburanira imbere y’urukiko rubifitiye ububasha bwasigasiwe mu ngingo ya 129, igika cya 3, y’Itegeko No 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryavuzwe haruguru kuko buri wese, mu bihe bitandukanye, yagenewe n’itegeko uburyo bwo kugaragaza ko atishimiye icyemezo cyafashwe.
## Page 50
16 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [26] Ingingo ya 29, igika cya 1, agace ka (c) y’Itegeko Nshinga iteganya ko buri muntu afite uburenganzira ku butabera buboneye, burimo uburenganzira bwo: … (c) kuburanira imbere y’urukiko rubifitiye ububasha. [27] Ubu burenganzira tubusanga no mu Masezerano Mpuzamahanga u Rwanda rwashyizeho umukono. Twavuga nk’ingingo ya 14, igika cya mbere, y’Amasezerano Mpuzamahanga yerekeye Uburengazira mu by’imbonezamubano no mu bya politiki, iteganya ko […] Umuntu wese afite uburenganzira bwo kuburanishwa mu buryo buboneye kandi mu ruhame mu rukiko rwashyizweho n’amategeko rubifitiye ububasha, rwigenga kandi rutabogamye11. [28] Mu rubanza RS/INCONST/SPEC00004/2020/SC rwaciwe ku wa 26/03/2021, haburana Asiimwe Frank, uru Rukiko rwavuze ko uburenganzira bwo kuburanira imbere y’urukiko rubifitiye ububasha ari bumwe mu burenganzira ku butabera buboneye12. [29] Mu rubanza RS/INCONST/SPEC00005/2023/SC rwaciwe ku wa 07/03/2025, haburana Mironko François Xavier, uru Rukiko rwavuze ko kugira ngo umuburanyi abone 11“All persons shall be equal before the courts and tribunals. In the determination of any criminal charge against him, or of his rights and obligations in a suit at law, everyone shall be entitled to a fair and public hearing by a competent, independent and impartial tribunal established by law. […]”. 12Reba urubanza NᵒRS/INCONST/SPEC 00004/2020/SC rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga ku wa 26/03/2021, haburana Asiimwe Frank, mu gika cya 18 na 19.
## Page 51
17 Re Dr BARIBWIRA uburenganzira ku butabera boboneye (Fair trial) ari uko mu rubanza rwe haba hubahirijwe nibura ibi bikurikira (d): Umuntu wese afite uburenganzira bwo kuburanishwa mu rukiko rwashyizweho n’amategeko, rubifitiye ububasha, rwigenga kandi rutabogamye, ibi bikajyana n’ihame ry’uko nta muntu ushobora kwicira urubanza13. [30] Muri uru rubanza, ikibazo gihari ni icyemezo cyo kutakira ikirego ku nzitizi itarahawe ishingiro, umuburanyi wayitanze yakijuririra ntibihagarike ako kanya iburanisha ry’urubanza mu mizi, ahubwo rigakomeza, imbere y’urukiko rwagifashe. Urega avuga ko asanga uburenganzira ku butabera buboneye bwo kuburanira imbere y’urukiko rubifitiye ububasha, bwari kuba bwubahirijwe iyo ubujurire bwe ku nzitizi buburanishwa akibukora n’urukiko rusumba urwafashe icyemezo; mu yandi magambo, kuri we, uburenganzira bwo kuburanira imbere y’urukiko rubifitiye ububasha bwari kubaho iyo ubujurire bwe ku nzitizi buhagarika iburanisha mu mizi, hagategerezwa igisubizo kuri bwo, nk’uko uwo baburana abyemerewe iyo inzitizi itumye urubanza rurangirira aho. [31] Abahanga mu mategeko basobanura ko ububasha bw’urukiko ari agace kabwo itegeko ryageneye buri rukiko, inkiko zose uzirebeye hamwe14; ububasha ni ubushobozi bwo kuburanisha urubanza no kuruca15. 13Reba urubanza RS/INCONST/SPEC00005/2023 rwaciwe ku wa 07/03/2025, haburana Mironko François-Xavier, igika cya 35. 14“La compétence est la portion de juridiction attribuée par la loi à chacun des tribunaux de l’ordre judiciaire” (A. Fettweis, A. Khol, G. de Leval, Eléments de compétence civile, Liège, P.ULG, 1988, p.1). 15“Pour une juridiction, [la] compétence est l’aptitude à instruire et juger une affaire, à en connaître” (Gerard Cornu, Vocabulaire juridique, V°, compétence).
## Page 52
18 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO [32] Ibi bishatse kuvuga ko ku muburanyi, uburenganzira bwo kuburanira imbere y’urukiko rubifitiye ububasha, ari uburenganzira bwo kuburanira imbere y’urukiko rwahawe n’itegeko ububasha bwo guca urubanza rwe; urwo rukiko rugomba kuba rusanzwe ruteganyijwe n’itegeko aho gushyirwaho ikibazo kimaze kuvuka. Urugero: Ikigo cy’igihugu gishinzwe imisoro (RRA) gikurikiranyeho ikigo cy’ubucuruzi X imisoro kitishyuye. RRA izarega X mu nkiko z’ubucuruzi kuko arizo zahawe n’itegeko ububasha bwo kuburanisha imanza z’imisoro. Nizo zifite ubwo bubasha. [33] Ushaka kumenya “urukiko rubifitiye ububasha ruvugwa mu ngingo ya 29 y’Itegeko Nshinga, yasomera hamwe uduce twa (b) na (c), twayo. Agace ka (b) kanditse gatya: (…) Buri muntu afite uburenganzira ku butabera buboneye burimo gufatwa nk’umwere kugeza igihe urukiko rubifitiye ububasha rumuhamirije icyaha; naho agace ka (c) gateganya kuburanira imbere y’urukiko rubifitiye ububasha. Mu gace ka (b) igitekerezo kirareba imanza z’inshinjabyaha, umuntu acirwa urubanza ku cyaha akurikiranyweho n’urukiko rwagenwe n’itegeko, rwariho icyaha gikorwa runafite ububasha bwo kukiburanisha. [34] Naho mu gace ka (c) k’ingingo ya 29, igitekerezo kireba urukiko rufite ububasha bwo kuburanisha urubanza rw’umuburanyi, muri rusange. Aha naho urukiko ruvugwa ni urugomba kuba ruriho ku bw’itegeko, rusanzweho, rufite ububasha bwo kuburanisha urwo rubanza. Icyo utu duce twa (b) na (c), twombi duhuriraho ni uko urukiko rufite ububasha ari urusanzwe ruteganyijwe n’amategeko; ntabwo ari urukiko rushya, rushyizweho mu buryo bw’umwihariko. [35] Igitekerezo nyamukuru kiri mu ngingo ya 29, (b) na (c) y’Itegeko Nshinga tugisanga no mu yandi Mategeko Nshinga,
## Page 53
19 Re Dr BARIBWIRA urugero iry’Ububirigi, ingingo ya 15 iteganya ko ntawe ushobora kubuzwa kuburanira imbere y’umucamanza itegeko ryamugeneye16. Urukiko Rusesa Imanza rw’iki gihugu rwasobanuye ko ihame riri muri iyi ngingo rishatse kuvuga ko umuntu wese agomba kuburanishwa hashingiwe ku mategeko agenga ububasha bw’inkiko n’ay’imiburanishirize [y’imanza] azwi, ko adashobora kuregerwa urundi rukiko rutari urwateganyijwe n’itegeko17. [36] Mu rubanza rwa Zubac na Croatie, Urukiko rw’Uburayi rushinzwe uburenganzira bwa muntu, rwasobanuye ko uburenganzira bwo kuburanira imbere y’urukiko rubifitiye ububasha ari uburenganzira buteganywa n’ingingo ya 6 § 1 y’Amasezerano y’Ibihugu by’Iburayi yerekeranye n’Uburenganzira bwa muntu, busobanura ko buri muntu afite uburenganzira bwo kuregera urukiko impaka zose zijyanye n’uburenganzira n’inshingano ze, ko kandi hagomba kubaho inzira zihamye zo kuregera inkiko mu rwego rwo gusaba gusubizwa uburenganzira bwahungabanyijwe18. 16“Nul ne peut être distrait, contre son gré, du juge que la loi lui assigne”. Uku iri hame ryanditse ni nako ryari ryanditse mu Itegeko Nshinga ry’u Rwanda ryo ku wa 03/06/2003, mu ngingo ya 19, igika cya 2, mu Gifaransa. 17“L’article 13 de la Constitution (…) énonce que nul ne peut être distrait, contre son gré, du juge que la loi lui assigne, signifie uniquement que toute personne doit être jugée suivant les règles de compétence et de procédure objectivement fixées et ne peut être citée devant une juridiction autre que celle prévue par la loi” (Cass., 5 mai 2004, Pas., 2004, p.762, in Georges de Leval et Frédéric Georges, Droit judiciaire, Tome 1, Institutions judiciaires et éléments de compétence, Bruxelles, Laricier, 2014, 2è édition, p.78, note 15). 18Affaire Zubac c. Croatie (Requête nᵒ40160/12), Strasbourg, 4 Avril 2018, §§ 76 et suivants: “Le droit d’accès à un tribunal a été défini comme un aspect du droit à un tribunal au sens de l’article 6 § 1 de la Convention. Se référant aux principes de la prééminence du droit et de l’interdiction de tout pouvoir arbitraire qui sous-tendent pour une bonne part la Convention, la Cour y avait
## Page 54
20 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO [37] Mu rubanza rwa Ashingdane n’Ubwongereza19 n’urubanza rwa Konstantina Frantzeskaki n’Ubugereki20, Urukiko rw’Uburayi rushinzwe uburenganzira bwa muntu, rwasobanuye ko uburenganzira bwo kuburanira imbere y’inkiko zibifitiye ububasha atari ntakuka, kubera ko ibihugu bishobora gushyira imbibi kuri ubwo burenganzira, hagamijwe intego ifite ireme no kuba hari isano yumvikana hagati y’uburyo bwakoreshejwe n’intego igamijwe. [38] Urukiko rurasanga ibivugwa na Dr Baribwira Cyprien ko uburenganzira k’ubutabera buboneye bwo kuburanira imbere y’urukiko rubifitiye ububasha butubahirijwe kuko atemerewe kujuririra inzitizi yonyine yatanze, nta shingiro byahabwa kubera ko kuba, umushingamategeko yarateganyije ko icyemezo gifashwe ku nzitizi gishobora kujuririrwa cyonyine mu gihe icyo conclu que le droit d’accès à un tribunal était un élément inhérent aux garanties consacrées par l’article 6. Ainsi, l’article 6 § 1 garantit à chacun le droit de faire statuer par un tribunal sur toute contestation portant sur ses droits et obligations de caractère civil”. 19Affaire Ashingdane contre Royaume-uni, Arrêt No 8225/78), Strasbourg, 28 Mai 1985, § 57: “[….] Le droit d’accès aux tribunaux n’est pas absolu. Il peut donner lieu à des limitations implicitement admises car il appelle de par sa nature même une réglementation par l’État, réglementation qui peut varier dans le temps et dans l’espace en fonction des besoins et des ressources de la communauté et des individus. Elles ne se concilient avec l’article 6 par. 1 que si elles poursuivent un but légitime et s’il existe un rapport raisonnable de proportionnalité entre les moyens employés et le but visé”. 20 Affaire Konstantina Frantzeskaki contre la Grèce, Arrêt No 57275/17), Strasbourg, 12 février 2019, § 29-30: “[….] Toutefois, le droit d’accès à un tribunal n’est pas absolu et se prête à des limitations implicitement admises, car il appelle de par sa nature même une réglementation par l’État, lequel jouit à cet égard d’une certaine marge d’appréciation. En outre, les limitations appliquées ne se concilient avec l’article 6 § 1 de la Convention que si elles poursuivent un but légitime et s’il existe un rapport raisonnable de proportionnalité entre les moyens employés et le but visé”.
## Page 55
21 Re Dr BARIBWIRA cyemezo gituma iburanisha rirangirira aho; naho mu gihe icyo cyemezo kitabuza urubanza gukomeza mu mizi, umuburanyi utacyishimimiye akagira uburenganzira bwo kuzakijuririra hamwe n’urubanza rw’iremezo, bitamwambura uburenganzira bwo kuburanira imbere y’Urukiko rubifiye ububasha, nkuko rwasobanuwe hejuru. [39] Kuba umushingamategeko yarateganyije ko icyemezo gifashwe ku nzitizi gishobora kujuririrwa cyonyine mu gihe icyo cyemezo gituma iburanisha rirangirira aho, ntabwo ari umwihariko w’u Rwanda kuko byanateganyijwe mu mategeko y’ibindi bihugu nk’Ubutariyani21. [40] Urukiko rukaba rusanga igika cya 3 cy’ingingo ya 129 y’Itegeko No 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryavuzwe haruguru kitanyuranyije n’ingingo ya 29(1)(c) y’Itegeko Nshinga kandi kitavutsa Dr Baribwira Cyprien uburenganzira ku butabera buboneye bwo kuburanira imbere y’Urukiko rubifitiye ububasha, kuko kuba ataremerewe guhita ajuririra icyemezo gifashwe ku nzitizi yo kutakira ikirego yatanze, bitamubuza kuzabikora igihe urubanza rw’iremezo ruzaba ruciwe ntiyishimire icyemezo cyafashwe. [41] Rurasanga kandi ku birebana n’ibyo Dr Baribwira Cyprien avuga by’uko ingingo aregera irimo amakosa y’imyandikire, gukosora amakosa y’imyandikire bidashobora gukorerwa mu kirego kiregera kwemeza ko ingingo z’itegeko zinyuranyije n’Itegeko Nshinga. 21 “En Italie, selon l'article 340 du Code de procédure civile, une décision rendue sur une fin de non-recevoir est susceptible d'appel séparé si elle met fin à l'instance. Cette règle s'applique également aux décisions interlocutoires, à condition qu'elles aient un effet substantiel sur la poursuite de l'instance”.
## Page 56
22 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO [42] Hashingiwe ku bisobanuro bimaze gutangwa, Urukiko rurasanga ingingo ya 129, igika cya 3, y' Itegeko No 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi nk’uko ryahinduwe, itanyuranyije n'ingingo 29, igika cya 1, agace ka (c) y'ltegeko Nshinga. III. ICYEMEZO CY’URUKIKO [43] Rwemeje ko ikirego cyatanzwe na Dr Baribwira Cyprien gisaba kwemeza ko ingingo ya 129, igika cya 3, y’Itegeko No 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi nk’uko ryahinduwe, inyuranyije n’Itegeko Nshinga rya Repubulika y’u Rwanda, nta shingiro gifite. [44] Rwemeje ko ingingo ya 129, igika cya 3, y’Itegeko No 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi nk’uko ryahinduwe, itanyuranyije n’ingingo ya 15 n’iya 29 igika cya 1, agace ka (c) z’Itegeko Nshinga rya Repubulika y’u Rwanda.
## Page 57
23 Re BUCYESENGE MENDE Re BUCYESENGE MENDE [Rwanda URUKIKO RW’IKIRENGA – RS/INCONST/SPEC00006/2023/SC (Mukantaganzwa, P.J., Hitiyaremye, Cyanzayire, Kazungu na Kalihangabo, J.) 25 Mata 2025] Itegeko Nshinga – Ihame ryo kureshya kw’abantu imbere y’amategeko – Kuba icyiciro cy’ababuranira mu Rukiko rw’Ubujurire no mu Rukiko rw’Ikirenga batemerewe gutambamira imanza zaciwe n’izo nkiko, naho icy’ababuranira mu zindi nkiko bo bakaba bemerewe gutambamira imanza zaciwe nazo, ntibinyuranyije n’ihame ryo kureshya kw’abantu imbere y’amategeko, kuko bishingiye ku mpamvu yumvikana kandi ifite ireme, irimo ububasha bw’inkiko n’ihame rusange ryo kuba iburanisha ry’imanza rigomba kugira aho rirangirira. Itegeko Nshinga – Ubutabera buboneye – Uburenganzira bwo kuburanira imbere y’urukiko rubifitiye ububasha – Gutambamira urubanza rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ubujurire cyangwa Urukiko rw’Ikirenga – Kuba Umushingamategeko, mu bushishozi bwe, yarifuje gushyiraho igika cya 4 cy’ingingo ya 161 y’Itegeko No 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi, yari agamije intego ifite ireme, yo kubungabunga imigendekere myiza y’ubutabera, aho gutambamira urubanza rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ubujurire cyangwa n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga, byavutsa umuburanyi watsindwa uburenganzira bwo kujurira nibura rimwe, kuko imanza zaciwe n’izi nkiko zitajuririrwa. 23
## Page 58
24 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO Itegeko Nshinga – Itegeko rinyuranyije n’Itegeko Nshinga – Uburenganzira ku mutungo bwite – Itegeko ryaba rinyuranyije n’ingingo ya 34 y’Itegeko Nshinga iteganya uburenganzira umuntu afite ku mutungo bwite, ni iryaba rimunyaga uburenganzira afite ku mutungo we cyangwa irituma uvogerwa nta burenganzira abitangiye, cyangwa irimubuza kuwukoresha nta nkomyi. Incamake y’ikibazo: Bucyensenge Mende yatanze ikirego mu Rukiko rw’Ikirenga arusaba kwemeza ko igika cya 4 cy'ingingo ya 161 y’Itegeko No 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi nk’uko ryahinduwe iteganya ko imanza zaciwe n'Urukiko rw’ubujurire cyangwa urw’Ikirenga ntizitambamirwa, kivanwaho kuko kinyuranyije n’ingingo ya 15, iya 29 n’iya 34 z’Itegeko Nshinga rya Repubulika y’u Rwanda. Bucyesenge Mende yatanze iki kirego biturutse ku manza zabanje, zatumye agura mu cyamunara imitungo ya Valois wananiwe kwishyura Dusabe wari waramugurije 61.420 by’amadolari y’Amerika. Mbere y’uko iyo mitungo igurishwa, Umuhesha w’inkiko utari uw’umwuga yasanze Valois ayifatanyije n’Abavandimwe be biba ngombwa kubanza kubiregera mu Rukiko Rwisumbuye rwa Rubavu kugirango habanze kugaragazwa uruhare rwe. Urubanza rwaciwe ku wa 05/04/2019 rutegeka ko imitungo Valois asangiye n’abavandimwe be igabanwa, umugabane we ukagurishwa hagamijwe kurangiza urubanza. Valois na Dusabe bajuririye mu Rukiko Rukuru, Urugereko rwa Musanze, ku wa 31/07/2019 urukiko rugumishaho icyemezo cy’Urukiko Rwisumbuye rwa Rubavu. Valois n’abavandimwe be bajuririye urwo rubanza mu
## Page 59
25 Re BUCYESENGE MENDE Rukiko rw’Ubujurire, ruca urubanza rwemeza ko ubujurire bwabo nta shingiro bufite. Nyuma y’izo manza, Umuhesha w’inkiko utari uw’umwuga yagurishije mu cyamunara imitungo yose, igurwa na Bucyensenge Mende ku mafaranga 111,600,000, hakurwamo umugabane wa Valois hishyurwa Dusabe, asigaye ahabwa abavandimwe be. Valois n'abavandimwe be hamwe na Dusabe batanze ikirego mu Rukiko rw’Ubujurire gisubirishamo ingingo nshya, urwo rubanza rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ubujurire rwari rwemeje ko ubujurire bwabo nta shingiro bufite. Bashyize muri sisitemu ya IECMS amasezerano y'ubwumvikane, maze ku wa 27/06/2025 Urukiko rw’Ubujurire rwemeza ko amasezerano y’ubwumvikane yabaye hagati ya Valois n’abavandimwe be ku ruhande rumwe, na Dusabe ku rundi ruhande, asoje urubanza RC00001/2022/CA kandi ko ibiyakubiyemo aribyo bishyirwa mu bikorwa. Bucyensenge Mende avuga ko amaze kumenya ko urubanza rwashingiweho agura mu cyamunara imitungo rwasimbuwe n’amasezerano y’ubwumvikane, ashatse gutambamira urwo rubanza RC00001/2022/CA kugira ngo arengere inyungu ze, azitirwa n’igika cya 4 cy’ingingo ya 161 y’ Itegeko No 22/2018 ryavuzwe haruguru; giteganya ko imanza zaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ubujurire cyangwa n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga zidatambamirwa. Iyi ikaba ariyo mpamvu yahisemo gutanga ikirego mu Rukiko rw’Ikirenga arusaba kwemeza ko icyo gika kivanwaho kuko kinyuranyije n’ingingo ya 15, iya 29 n’iya 34 z’Itegeko Nshinga. Mende avuga ko itegeko ryemerera umuntu wumva ko yarenganyijwe n’ibyemezo byafashwe mu manza zaciwe n’izindi nkiko gutambamira izo manza, ariko igika cya 4
## Page 60
26 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO cy’ingingo ya 161 y’Itegeko Nᵒ22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryavuzwe haruguru kikaba kibuza uwumva ko yarenganyijwe n’icyemezo cyafashwe mu rubanza rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ubujurire cyangwa n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga gutambamira urwo rubanza, binyuranyije n’ingingo ya 15, iya 29 n’iya 34 z’Itegeko Nshinga. Avuga ko icyo gika cya 4 kibuza umuntu uburenganzira bwo gutambamira urubanza rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ubujurire cyangwa n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga yumva rumurenganya, ariko mu gihe uwumva ko yarenganyijwe n’urwaciwe n’izindi nkiko abwemerewe; asanga kinyuranyije n’ingingo ya 15 y’Itegeko Nshinga kuko kitareshyeshya abantu ngo kibarengere ku buryo bumwe. Mende asobanura ko icyo gika cya 4 kinyuranyije n’ingingo ya 29 y’Itegeko Nshinga kuko cyambura umuntu wumva ko yarenganyijwe n’urubanza rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ubujurire cyangwa n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga uburenganzira bwo kuburanira imbere y’Urukiko rubifitiye ububasha arutambamira kandi ariyo nzira yonyine yari gutuma ashobora kuburanira imbere y’urukiko rwaciye urubanza rubangamiye inyungu ze. Asoza avuga ko icyo gika cya 4 kinyuranyije n’ingingo ya 34 y’Itegeko Nshinga kubera ko kimubuza kurengera umutungo yaguze mu cyamunara harangizwa urubanza rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ubujurire, ntashobore kuwiyandikishaho, kubera urubanza rusubirishamo ingingo nshya rwaciwe n’ubundi n’Urukiko rw’Ubujurire rukarutesha agaciro atarubayemo umuburanyi. Asobanura ko icyo cyemezo cy’Urukiko rw’Ubujurire cyavogereye kandi gihungabanya uburenganzira bwe kuri uwo mutungo; akaba ariyo mpamvu asaba ko icyo gika kivanwaho kugira ngo abone uko atambamira urwo rubanza. Uhagarariye Leta y’u Rwanda muri uru rubanza, asobanura ko igika cya 4 cy’ingingo ya 161 y’Itegeko No 22/2018 ryo ku wa
## Page 61
27 Re BUCYESENGE MENDE 29/04/2018 ryavuzwe haruguru gishyirwa mu itegeko, umushingamategeko yari agambiriye kubuza ko imanza zitangirira mu nkiko nkuru kuko ubusanzwe Urukiko rw’Ubujurire rusuzuma ibirego ku rwego rw’ubujurire gusa; naho Urukiko rw’Ikirenga rugasuzuma ibibazo ku rwego rwa nyuma cyangwa ku rwego rwa mbere n’urwa nyuma hashingiwe ku bubasha ruhabwa n’itegeko. Avuga ko gutambamira ibyemezo byafashwe mu manza zaciwe n’izi nkiko bidashoboka kuko byaba ari ugutangiza urubanza. Akomeza asobanura ko ibyo Urega avuga ko ibyo binyuranyije n’ihame riteganywa n’Itegeko Nshinga ryo kureshya kw’abantu imbere y’amategeko atari byo kuko iryo hame risobanuye gufata kimwe abantu bari mu cyiciro kimwe no mu buryo bumwe. Asobanura ko kuba icyo gika gitandukanya uwumva ko yarenganyijwe n’icyemezo cyafashwe n’Urukiko rw’Ubujurire cyangwa n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga n’uwumva ko yarenganyijwe n’icyemezo cyafashwe n’izindi nkiko, bidasobanuye kutabareshyeshya, kuko batari mu byiciro bimwe. Uhagarariye Leta asobanura nanone ko kuba imanza zaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ubujurire cyangwa n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga zidashobora gutambamirwa, ubwabyo atari ukubuza umuntu uburenganzira bwo kuburanira imbere y’urukiko rubifitiye ububasha, kubera ko amategeko ateganya ubundi buryo yaregera ku rwego rwa mbere ibyo yashakaga kuregera mu rubanza rutambamira urundi. Agaragaza ko Urega ashobora kwiyambaza inzira yo kuregera kuvuguruzanya kw’imanza, kuko hari n’imanza zabitanzeho zaciwe n’izo Nkiko nkuru, nk’urugero urubanza RCOM00001/2016/CA rwaciwe ku wa 03/07/2020 n’urubanza RS/SPEC00002/13/SC rwaciwe ku wa 14/07/2017. Yakomeje agaragaza indi nzira Urega yakwifashisha kugirango agaruze amafaranga ye yatanze agura mu cyamunara ndetse no
## Page 62
28 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO kuba yahabwa amafaranga y’indishyi kubera ko bamushoye mu cyamunara yamara kugura bakamuca inyuma bakumvikana n’uwaterejwe cyamunara. Iyo nzira ni iyo kurega ku rwego rwa mbere umuhesha w’Inkiko na Dusabe wamusabye kurangiza urubanza. Uhagarariye Leta y’u Rwanda muri uru rubanza asoza agaragaza ko icyo gika cya 4 kitanyuranyije n’ingingo ya 34 y’Itegeko Nshinga, kuko Urega adashobora gutambamira urubanza rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ubujurire, ngo bifatwe nko guhungabanya uburenganzira bwe ku mutungo yaguze mu cyamunara, mu gihe hari izindi nzira ashobora kwiyambaza kugira ngo aburengere. Incamake y’icyemezo: 1. Kuba icyiciro cy’ababuranira mu Rukiko rw’Ubujurire no mu Rukiko rw’Ikirenga batemerewe gutambamira imanza zaciwe n’izo nkiko, naho icy’ababuranira mu zindi nkiko bo bakaba bemerewe gutambamira imanza zaciwe nazo, ntibinyuranyije n’ihame ryo kureshya kw’abantu imbere y’amategeko, kuko bishingiye ku mpamvu yumvikana kandi ifite ireme, irimo ububasha bw’inkiko n’ihame rusange ryo kuba iburanisha ry’imanza rigomba kugira aho rirangirira. 2. Kuba Umushingamategeko, mu bushishozi bwe, yarifuje gushyiraho igika cya 4 cy’ingingo ya 161 y’Itegeko No 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi, yari agamije intego ifite ireme, yo kubungabunga imigendekere myiza y’ubutabera, aho gutambamira urubanza rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ubujurire cyangwa n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga, byavutsa umuburanyi watsindwa uburenganzira bwo kujurira nibura rimwe, kuko imanza zaciwe n’izi nkiko zitajuririrwa.
## Page 63
29 Re BUCYESENGE MENDE 3. Itegeko ryaba rinyuranyije n’ingingo ya 34 y’Itegeko Nshinga iteganya uburenganzira umuntu afite ku mutungo bwite, ni iryaba rimunyaga uburenganzira afite ku mutungo we cyangwa irituma uvogerwa nta burenganzira abitangiye, cyangwa irimubuza kuwukoresha nta nkomyi. Ikirego gisaba kwemeza ko ingingo y’itegeko inyuranyije n’Itegeko Nshinga rya Repubulika y’u Rwanda, nta shingiro gifite. Amategeko yashingiweho: Itegeko Nshinga rya Repubulika y’u Rwanda ryo mu 2003 ryavuguruwe kugeza ubu, ingingo ya 15, 29, 34 n’iya 153. Itangazo Mpuzamahanga ryerekeye Uburenganzira bwa Muntu ryo mu wa 1948, ingingo ya 7, 10 n’iya 17. Amasezerano Mpuzamahanga yerekeye Uburenganzira mu by’Imbonezamubano no mu bya Politiki yo mu 1966, ingingo ya 14 n’iya 26. Amasezerano Nyafurika y’Uburenganzira bwa Muntu n’ubw’Abaturage yo mu wa 1981, ingingo ya 3, 7 n’iya 14. Amasezerano y’Ibihugu by’Uburayi yerekeye Uburenganzira bwa Muntu, ingingo ya 6. Itegeko Nᵒ 30/2018 ryo ku wa 02/06/2018 rigena ububasha bw’inkiko, ingingo ya 52. Itegeko No 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi nk’uko ryahinduwe, ingingo ya 161, 162 n’iya 165.
## Page 64
30 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO Imanza zifashishijwe: Re Feminist Action Development Ambition (FADA), RS/INCONST/SPEC00004/2019/SC, rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga ku wa 26/04/2024. Re Uwombonye Hirwa Sudi, RS/INCONST/SPEC00002/2023/SC rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga ku wa 12/04/2024. Re Kamanzi Anaclet, RS/INCONST/SPEC00002/2022/SC, rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga ku wa 31/03/2023. Re Ngendahayo Kabuye, RS/INJUST/SPEC00004/2021/SC, rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga ku wa 10/02/2023. Re Murangwa Edward, RS/INCONST/SPEC00001/2022/SC, rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga ku wa 16/12/2022. Re Asiimwe Frank, RS/INCONST/SPEC00004/2020/SC, rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga ku wa 26/03/2021. Re Murangwa Edward, RS/ INCONST/SPEC00001/2019/SC, rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga ku wa 29/11/2019. Inyandiko z’abahanga zifashishijwe: Conseil de l’Europe et la Cour européenne des droits de l’homme, Manuel de droit Européen en matière d’accès à la Justice, p. 27. Urubanza I. IMITERERE Y’URUBANZA [1] Ku wa 13/12/2023, Bucyensenge Mende Claude yatanze ikirego mu Rukiko rw’Ikirenga arusaba kwemeza ko igika cya 4 cy'ingingo ya 161 y’Itegeko No 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano,
## Page 65
31 Re BUCYESENGE MENDE iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi nk’uko ryahinduwe, kivanwaho kuko kinyuranyije n’ingingo ya 15, iya 29 n’iya 34 z’Itegeko Nshinga rya Repubulika y’u Rwanda, Itegeko Nshinga muri uru rubanza. [2] Asobanura ko uwitwa Dusabe Fazil yagurije Valois Jean Marie 61.420 by’amadolari y’Amerika ($) maze mu gihe cyo kumwishyura akamuha sheki zitazigamiwe, bituma Ubushinjacyaha bumurega mu Rukiko rw’Ibanze rwa Kacyiru, bumukurikiranyeho icyaha cyo gutanga sheki zitazigamiwe. Avuga ko Valois Jean Marie yahamwe n’icyo cyaha agahanishwa igifungo cy’amezi atanu, ihazabu ya 61.420 $, gusubiza Dusabe Fazil 61.420 $ ahwanye na sheki zitazigamiwe yamuhaye na 400.000Frw y’indishyi. [3] Avuga ko urubanza rubaye itegeko, Dusabe Fazil yiyambaje Umuhesha w’inkiko w’umwuga kugira ngo amurangirize urubanza maze asanga imitungo Valois Jean Marie afite ayisangiye n’abandi bavandimwe be1; arayifatira ariko anatanga ikirego mu Rukiko Rwisumbuye rwa Rubavu kigamije kugaragaza uruhare rwa Valois Jean Marie muri iyo mitungo kugira ngo ruzavemo ubwishyu. Urubanza rwaciwe ku wa 05/04/2019 rutegeka ko imitungo Valois Jean Marie asangiye n’abavandimwe be igabanwa, umugabane we ukagurishwa hagamijwe kurangiza urubanza. [4] Dusabe Fazil na Valois Jean Marie bajuririye icyo cyemezo mu Rukiko Rukuru, Urugereko rwa Musanze, ku wa 31/07/2019 urukiko rugumishaho icyemezo cy’ Urukiko Rwisumbuye rwa Rubavu. Valois Jean Marie n’abavandimwe 1Valois Jean Felix, Valois Jean Paul, Valois Jean Pierre, Valois Marie Rose bose ni bene Kaptura Felix bakaba n’abazungura be.
## Page 66
32 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO be bajuririye urwo rubanza mu Rukiko rw’Ubujurire, ruca urubanza RCAA00017/2019/CA ku wa 03/10/2019 rwemeza ko ubujurire bwabo nta shingiro bufite. [5] Ku wa 14/12/2021, mu rwego rwo kurangiza urubanza, Umuhesha w’inkiko w’umwuga Niyonshuti Iddi Ibrahim yagurishije mu cyamunara imitungo ifite UPI: 3/03/04/05/1837, UPI: 3/03/04/05/1838, UPI: 3/03/04/05/1852 na UPI: 3/03/04/05/1853; igurwa na Bucyensenge Mende Claude wishyuye 111.600.000Frw; havanwamo umugabane wa Valois Jean Marie wishyurwa Dusabe Fazil, amafaranga asigaye ahabwa abavandimwe be. [6] Ku wa 10/11/2022, Valois Jean Marie n'abavandimwe be batanze ikirego mu Rukiko rw'Ubujurire gisubirishamo ingingo nshya urubanza RCAA00017/2019/CA rwaciwe ku wa 03/10/2019; ikirego cyandikwa kuri nimero 00001/2022/CA. Iburanisha ry’urwo rubanza ryo ku wa 17/05/2023 ryarimuwe kubera ko abahagarariye ababuranyi bamenyesheje Urukiko ko bifuza gukemura ikibazo bafitanye mu bwumvikane. [7] Ku wa 15/06/2023, ababuranyi bashyize muri sisitemu ya IECMS amasezerano y'ubwumvikane, maze ku wa 27/06/2025 Urukiko rw’Ubujurire rwemeza ko amasezerano y’ubwumvikane yabaye hagati ya Valois Jean Marie n’abavandimwe be ku ruhande rumwe, na Dusabe Fazil ku rundi ruhande, asoje urubanza nimero 00001/2022/CA kandi ko ibiyakubiyemo aribyo bishyirwa mu bikorwa. [8] Bucyensenge Mende Claude avuga ko amaze kumenya ko urubanza rwashingiweho agura mu cyamunara imitungo rwasimbuwe n’amasezerano y’ubwumvikane, yashatse gutambamira urubanza Nᵒ 00001/2022/CA kugira ngo arengere
## Page 67
33 Re BUCYESENGE MENDE inyungu ze, akazitirwa n’igika cya 4 cy’ingingo ya 161 y’ Itegeko No 22/2018 ryavuzwe haruguru; giteganya ko imanza zaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ubujurire cyangwa n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga zidatambamirwa. Iyi ikaba ariyo mpamvu yahisemo gutanga ikirego mu Rukiko rw’Ikirenga arusaba kwemeza ko icyo gika kivanwaho kuko kinyuranyije n’ingingo ya 15, iya 29 n’iya 34 z’Itegeko Nshinga. [9] Iburanisha ryabereye mu ruhame ku wa 10/03/2025, Bucyensenge Mende Claude ahagarariwe na Me Kwizera Bernard naho Leta y’u Rwanda ihagarariwe na Me Kabibi Speciose. Muri iryo buranisha, habanje gusuzumwa niba Bucyensenge Mende Claude afite inyungu muri uru rubanza. - Ku bijyanye n’inyungu Bucyensenge Mende Claude afite muri uru rubanza [10] Nyuma yo gusuzuma ibyo uhagarariye Bucyensenge Mende Claude yanditse mu myanzuro ye ku birebana n’inyungu Bucyensenge Mende Claude afite mu rubanza, Urukiko rwafatiye icyemezo mu ntebe rushingiye ku rubanza rubanziriza urundi RS/INCONST/SPEC00001/2022/SC rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga ku wa 16/12/2022 harega Murangwa Edward, aho rwasobanuye ko kugira ngo rwemeze ko urega afite inyungu mu rubanza, rugomba gushingira nibura kuri imwe mu mpamvu zikurikira: i Kuba itegeko riregwa ko rinyuranyije n’Itegeko Nshinga rireba urega cyangwa icyiciro abarizwamo by’umwihariko, ku buryo afite inyungu ku giti cye zo gutanga ikirego. Urugero ni nk’itegeko rireba abanyamakuru, abaganga, abarimu n’abandi;
## Page 68
34 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO ii Kuba itegeko riregwa ko rinyuranyije n’Itegeko Nshinga rireba abaturage muri rusange ku buryo rishobora kugira ingaruka ku burenganzira bwabo; ibyo akaba ari byo bihesha umuntu uwo ari we wese rishobora kuzagiraho ingaruka inyungu zo kuriregera Urukiko ko rinyuranyije n’Itegeko Nshinga; iii Kuba uwatanze ikirego ari Avoka; uyu mu nyungu z’ubutabera akaba yemerewe gutanga ikirego mu rwego rwo guteza imbere amategeko cyangwa uburenganzira bw’abarebwa n’itegeko riregwa ko rinyuranyije n’Itegeko Nshinga kabone n’ubwo nta nyungu we ku giti cye yaba afite muri icyo kirego. [11] Ku birebana n’iki kirego, Urukiko rwasanze igika cya 4 cy’ingingo ya 161 y’Itegeko No 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryavuzwe haruguru kireba abaturage bose muri rusange na Bucyensenge Mende Claude arimo, maze rwemeza ko afite inyungu muri uru rubanza. [12] Ku birebana n’imizi y’urubanza, uhagarariye Bucyensenge Mende Claude asobanura ko kuba itegeko ryemerera umuntu wumva ko yarenganyijwe n’ibyemezo byafashwe mu manza zaciwe n’izindi nkiko gutambamira izo manza, ariko igika cya 4 cy’ingingo ya 161 y’Itegeko Nᵒ 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryavuzwe haruguru kikaba kibuza uwumva ko yarenganyijwe n’icyemezo cyafashwe mu rubanza rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ubujurire cyangwa n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga gutambamira urwo rubanza, binyuranyije n‘ingingo ya 15, iya 29 n’iya 34 z’Itegeko Nshinga.
## Page 69
35 Re BUCYESENGE MENDE [13] Uhagarariye Leta asobanura ko nta na hamwe igika cya 4 cy’ingingo ya 161 y’Itegeko No 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryavuzwe haruguru kinyuranyije n’ingingo z’Itegeko Nshinga uwatanze ikirego agaragaza. [14] Urukiko rwasuzumye ikibazo cyo kureba niba igika cya 4 cy’ingingo ya 161 y’Itegeko No 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi nk’uko ryahinduwe kinyuranyije n‘ingingo ya 15, iya 29(1)(c) n‘iya 34 z’Itegeko Nshinga. II. IKIBAZO KIGIZE URUBANZA N’ISESENGURWA RYACYO 1. Kumenya niba igika cya 4 cy’ingingo ya 161 y’Itegeko No 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi nk’uko ryahinduwe kinyuranyije n’ingingo ya 15, iya 29(1)(c) n’iya 34 z’Itegeko Nshinga. [15] Uhagarariye Bucyensenge Mende Claude agaragaza ko igika cya mbere cy’ingingo ya 161 y’Itegeko No 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryavuzwe haruguru gisobanura ko gutambamira urubanza ari ugushaka ko urwo rubanza ruvanwaho cyangwa ruhindurwa bisabwe n’umuntu utararuburanye; naho ingingo ya 162 y’iryo tegeko igateganya ko umuntu utareze cyangwa ngo aregwe mu rubanza kandi arufitemo inyungu, ashobora gutambamira urubanza rumurenganya ashaka ko rusubirwamo iyo, yaba we cyangwa abo ahagarariye ntawarutumiwemo.
## Page 70
36 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO [16] Asobanura ko kuba igika cya 4 cy’ingingo ya 161 y’Itegeko No 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryavuzwe haruguru kibuza umuntu uburenganzira bwo gutambamira urubanza rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ubujurire cyangwa n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga yumva rumurenganya, mu gihe uwumva ko yarenganyijwe n’urwaciwe n’izindi nkiko abwemerewe; asanga kinyuranyije n’ingingo ya 15 y’Itegeko Nshinga2 kuko kitareshyeshya abantu ngo kibarengere ku buryo bumwe. [17] Asobanura kandi ko igika cya 4 cy’ingingo ya 161 y’Itegeko No 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryavuzwe haruguru kinyuranyije n’ingingo ya 29(1)(c) y’Itegeko Nshinga3 kuko cyambura umuntu wumva ko yarenganyijwe n’urubanza rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ubujurire cyangwa n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga uburenganzira bwo kuburanira imbere y’Urukiko rubifitiye ububasha arutambamira kandi ariyo nzira yonyine yari gutuma ashobora kuburanira imbere y’urukiko rwaciye urubanza rubangamiye inyungu ze. [18] Asobanura nanone ko igika cya 4 cy’ingingo ya 161 y’Itegeko No 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryavuzwe haruguru kinyuranyije n’ingingo ya 34 y’Itegeko Nshinga4 kubera ko kimubuza kurengera umutungo yaguze mu cyamunara harangizwa urubanza RCAA00017/2019/CA, ntashobore 2Abantu bose barareshya imbere y’amategeko. Amategeko abarengera ku buryo bumwe. 3Buri muntu afite uburenganzira ku butabera buboneye burimo uburenganzira bwo kuburanira imbere y’urukiko rubifitiye ububasha. 4iteganya ko buri muntu afite uburenganzira ku mutungo bwite, waba uwe ku giti cye cyangwa uwo asangiye n’abandi; Umutungo bwite, uw’umuntu ku giti cye cyangwa uwo asangiye n’abandi ntuvogerwa; Uburenganzira ku mutungo ntibuhungabanywa keretse ku mpamvu z’inyungu rusange kandi hakurikije ibiteganywa n’amategeko.
## Page 71
37 Re BUCYESENGE MENDE kuwiyandikishaho kubera urubanza RCAA00001/2022/CA rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ubujurire rukarutesha agaciro atarubayemo umuburanyi. Akomeza asobanura ko icyo cyemezo cy’Urukiko rw’Ubujurire cyavogereye kandi gihungabanya uburenganzira bwe kuri uwo mutungo; akaba ariyo mpamvu asaba ko icyo gika kivanwaho kugira ngo abone uko atambamira urwo rubanza. [19] Uhagarariye Leta asobanura ko igika cya 4 cy’ingingo ya 161 y’Itegeko No 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryavuzwe haruguru gishyirwa mu itegeko, umushingamategeko yari agambiriye kubuza ko imanza zitangirira mu nkiko nkuru kuko ubusanzwe Urukiko rw’Ubujurire rusuzuma ibirego ku rwego rw’ubujurire gusa; naho Urukiko rw’Ikirenga rugasuzuma ibibazo ku rwego rwa nyuma cyangwa ku rwego rwa mbere n’urwa nyuma hashingiwe ku bubasha ruhabwa n’itegeko; ko gutambamira ibyemezo byafashwe mu manza zaciwe n’izi nkiko bidashoboka kuko byaba ari ugutangiza urubanza. [20] Ku birebana n’ibivugwa n’uhagarariye Bucyensenge Mende Claude ko igika cya 4 cy’ingingo ya 161 y’Itegeko No 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryavuzwe haruguru kinyuranyije n’ingingo ya 15 y’Itegeko Nshinga ngo kuko kitareshyeshya abantu bitewe n’uko uwumva ko yarenganyijwe n’urubanza rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ubujurire cyangwa n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga atabayemo umuburanyi atemerewe kurutambamira; ariko uwumva ko yarenganyijwe n’urwaciwe n’urundi rukiko urwo arirwo rwose akaba abyemerewe, Uhagarariye Leta asobanura ko ihame ryo kureshya imbere y’amategeko risobanuye gufata kimwe abantu bari mu cyiciro kimwe no mu buryo bumwe. Asobanura ko kuba icyo gika gitandukanya uwumva ko yarenganyijwe n’icyemezo cyafashwe n’Urukiko
## Page 72
38 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO rw’Ubujurire cyangwa n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga n’uwumva ko yarenganyijwe n’icyemezo cyafashwe n’izindi nkiko, bidasobanuye kutabareshyeshya, kuko batari mu byiciro bimwe. Asobanura kandi ko igika cya 4 cy’ingingo ya 161 y’Itegeko No 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryavuzwe haruguru gifata kimwe abantu bose, kuko batemerewe gutambamira ibyemezo byafashwe mu manza zaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ubujurire cyangwa n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga. [21] Uhagarariye Leta asobanura nanone ko kuba imanza zaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ubujurire cyangwa n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga zidashobora gutambamirwa nk’uko biteganywa n’ingingo ya 1655 y’Itegeko No 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryavuzwe haruguru, ubwabyo atari ukubuza umuntu uburenganzira bwo kuburanira imbere y’urukiko rubifitiye ububasha, kubera ko amategeko ateganya ubundi buryo yaregera ku rwego rwa mbere ibyo yashakaga kuregera mu rubanza rutambamira urundi, kuko kuri we urwo rubanza rudashobora kuba itegeko kubera ko atarebwa n’ihame rya “res judicata”. Agaragaza ko Bucyensenge Mende Claude ashobora kwiyambaza inzira yo kuregera kuvuguruzanya kw’imanza, kuko hari n’imanza zabitanzeho umurongo nk’urubanza RCOM00001/2016/CA rwaciwe ku wa 03/07/2020 n’urubanza RS/SPEC00002/13/SC rwaciwe ku wa 14/07/2017. [22] Uhagarariye Leta asobanura kandi ko Bucyensenge Mende Claude afite uburenganzira bwo kurega ku rwego rwa mbere umuhesha w’Inkiko na Dusabe Fazil wamusabye kurangiza urubanza kugira ngo bamusubize amafaranga yatanze agura imitungo mu cyamunara, kandi bamuhe n’indishyi kubera 5 Ikirego cy’iremezo kigamije gutambamira urubanza gitangwa mu rukiko rwaciye urwo rubanza rusabirwa gusubirwamo…
## Page 73
39 Re BUCYESENGE MENDE ko bamushoye mu cyamunara yamara kugura bakamuca inyuma bakumvikana n’uwaterejwe cyamunara. Akomeza agaragaza ko iyi nzira nayo yamufasha gukemura ikibazo afite atagombye kubinyuza mu guhindura itegeko. [23] Uhagarariye Leta asoza agaragaza ko igika cya 4 cy’ingingo ya 161 y’Itegeko No 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryavuzwe haruguru kitanyuranyije n’ingingo ya 34 y’Itegeko Nshinga, kuko ngo n’ubwo uburenganzira ku mutungo bwite w’umuntu ari ntayegayezwa, bushobora guhungabanywa mu bihe biteganywa n’itegeko. Asobanura kandi ko kuba Bucyensenge Mende Claude adashobora gutambamira urubanza rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ubujurire, bitafatwa nko guhungabanya uburenganzira bwe ku mutungo yaguze mu cyamunara, kubera ko hari izindi nzira ashobora kwiyambaza kugira ngo aburengere nk’uko byasobanuwe haruguru. UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [24] Impaka kuri iki kibazo zishingiye ku kuba uhagarariye Bucyensenge Mende Claude n’Uhagarariye Leta batemeranya ku kuba imanza zaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ubujurire cyangwa n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga zidatambamirwa, bivutsa uburenganzira uwumva ko yarenganyijwe n’izo nkiko mu rubanza atahamagawemo, bwo kuba yasaba ko rwongera kuburanishwa ahari kandi byemerwa mu zindi nkiko; urega akavuga ko ibyo byaba binyuranyije n’ihame ryo kureshya imbere y’amategeko, ihame ryo kuburanira imbere y’urukiko rubifitiye ububasha, n’ihame ry’uburenganzira ku mutungo bwite, naho Intumwa ya Leta ikavuga ko ashobora kurengera ubwo burenganzira mu zindi nzira ziteganyijwe n’amategeko.
## Page 74
40 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO - a) Kumenya niba igika cya 4 cy’ingingo ya 161 y’Itegeko No 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi nk’uko ryahinduwe kinyuranyije n’ingingo ya 15 y’Itegeko Nshinga [25] Kugira ngo hamenyekane niba igika cya 4 cy’ingingo ya 161 y’Itegeko No 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryavuzwe haruguru kinyuranyije n’ihame ryo kureshya kw’abantu imbere y’amategeko, bityo kikaba kinyuranyije n’ingingo ya 15 y’Itegeko Nshinga nk’uko uwatanze ikirego abigaragaza, ni ngombwa kubanza gusobanura ihame ryo kureshya imbere y’amategeko. [26] Ingingo ya 15 y’Itegeko Nshinga iteganya ko abantu bose bareshya imbere y’amategeko kandi ko Itegeko ribarengera ku buryo bumwe. [27] Ibiteganywa n’ingingo ya 15 y’Itegeko Nshinga bihura n’ibiteganywa n’ingingo ya 7 y’Itangazo Mpuzamahanga ry’Uburenganzira bwa Muntu6, ingingo ya 26 y’Amasezerano Mpuzamahanga yerekeye Uburenganzira mu by’Imbonezamubano no mu bya Politiki yo mu 19667 n’ingingo 6 Article 7 of the Assembly, UN General. Universal declaration of human rights. UN General Assembly 302.2 (1948): 14-25 states: “All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law. All are entitled to equal protection against discrimination in violation of this Declaration and against any incitement to such discrimination”. 7 Article 26 of International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights/Pacte International des droits civils et politiques states: “All persons are equal
## Page 75
41 Re BUCYESENGE MENDE ya 3 y’Amasezerano Nyafurika y’Uburenganzira bwa Muntu n’ubw’Abaturage8; zose zihuriza ku kuba abantu bose bareshya imbere y’amatageko kandi abarengera kimwe nta vangura iryo ari ryo ryose. [28] Ihame ry’uko abantu bareshya imbere y’amategeko risobanuye ko abantu bafatwa kimwe imbere y’itegeko, nta busumbane cyangwa ivangura. Iri hame ariko rishobora kugira imbibi (limitation) igihe hari impamvu zumvikana zishingiye ku ntego ifite ireme (legitimate or rational purpose) nk’uko byasobanuwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga mu manza zitandukanye zirimo urubanza RS/INJUST/SPEC00004/2021/SC rwaciwe ku wa 10/02/2023 haburana Ngendahayo Kabuye. Muri urwo rubanza, Urukiko rwasobanuye ko abantu bari mu bihe cyangwa mu byiciro bimwe bafatwa kimwe kandi ko iyo badafashwe kimwe nta mpamvu ifite ireme kandi yumvikana byitwa ivangura. Rwagaragaje ariko ko Leta ishobora gutandukanya abantu cyangwa ibyiciro by’abantu itabangamiye ihame ryo kureshya imbere y’amategeko cyangwa iryo kutavangura, igihe ifite impamvu yumvikana, ifite ireme, ikurikije amategeko kandi igamije inyungu rusange z’abaturage9. before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to the equal protection of the law”. 8Article 3 of African (Banjul) Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (Adopted 27 June 1981, OAU Doc.CAB/LEG/67/3 rev. 5, 21 I.L.M. 58 (1982), entered into force 21 October 1986) states: “Every individual shall be equal before the law. Every individual shall be entitled to equal protection of the law.” 9Reba urubanza RS/INCONST/SPEC00004/2021/SC, rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga ku wa 10/02/2023, haburana Ngendahayo Kabuye na Leta y’u Rwanda, igika cya 36 na 39.
## Page 76
42 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO [29] Mu rubanza RS/INCONST/SPEC 00004/2019/SC, rwaciwe ku wa 26/04/2024, haburana Feminist Action Development Ambition (FADA)10, Urukiko rw’Ikirenga rwasobanuye ko ihame ryo kureshya imbere y’amategeko risobanuye ko itegeko rifata nk’abareshya abantu bari mu cyiciro kimwe kandi rigashyirwa mu bikorwa kimwe kuri bo. Bikumvikana ko abantu batari mu cyiciro kimwe badashobora gufatwa kimwe. [30] Mu rubanza RS/INCONST/SPEC00002/2022/SC, rwaciwe ku wa 31/03/2023 haburana Kamanzi Anaclet, Urukiko rushingiye ku byavuzwe n’umuhanga mu mategeko Erwin Chemerinsky, rwasobanuye ko ibigomba gufatwa kimwe ari ibimeze kimwe, naho ibintu bitandukanye bigafatwa ku buryo butandukanye hakurikijwe itandukaniro ryabyo (Things that are alike should be treated alike, and things that are unalike should be treated unalike in proportion to their unalikeness). Mu yandi magambo, abantu bagomba gufatwa kimwe, ariko hitawe ku byiciro byabo, ku buryo abantu bari mu byiciro bitandukanye bafatwa mu buryo butandukanye. [31] Ku birebana n’uru rubanza, Urukiko rusanga ingingo ya 161 y’Itegeko No 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryavuzwe haruguru iteganya ko gutambamira urubanza ari inzira 10 Reba urubanza RS/INCONST/SPEC00004/2019/SC, rwaciwe ku wa 26/04/2024, haburana Feminist Action Development Ambition (FADA) na Leta y’u Rwanda, mu bika bya 41 na 43. Ni nako kandi bivugwa mu rubanza RS/INCONST/SPEC00003/2019/SC rwaciwe ku wa 31/03/2023 haburana Kamanzi Anaclet na Leta y’u Rwanda, mu gika cya 35 kugeza ku cya 37, mu rubanza RS/INCONST/SPEC00002/2023/SC rwaciwe ku wa 12/04/2024 haburana Uwombonye Hirwa Sudi na Leta y’u Rwanda, mu gika cya 24 n’icya 25 no mu rubanza RS/INCONST/SPEC00001/2019/SC haburana Murangwa Edward rwaciwe ku wa 29/11/2019, mu gika cya 35.
## Page 77
43 Re BUCYESENGE MENDE y’ubujurire idasanzwe, umuntu utarareze cyangwa ngo aregwe mu rubanza kandi arufitemo inyungu, aregera urubanza rwafashwemo icyemezo mu mizi kandi rutagishoboye kujuririrwa mu rukiko rwaruciye ashaka ko ruvanwaho cyangwa ruhindurwa. Iyi ngingo iteganya kandi ko imanza zaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ubujurire cyangwa n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga zidatambamirwa. [32] Urukiko rusanga iyi ngingo yemerera umuntu wese utarabaye umuburanyi mu rubanza rwaciwe ku rwego rwa nyuma n’izindi nkiko, uretse Urukiko rw’Ubujurire n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga, kurutambamira igihe arufitemo inyungu kandi yubahirije ibisabwa byose. [33] Urukiko rusanga ingingo ya 161 y’Itegeko No 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryavuzwe haruguru iteganya ibyiciro bibiri; icyiciro cy’ababuranira mu Rukiko rw’Ubujurire no mu Rukiko rw’Ikirenga batemerewe gutambamira imanza zaciwe n’izo nkiko, n’icyiciro cy’ababuranira mu zindi nkiko bemerewe gutambamira imanza zaciwe nazo. [34] Urukiko rurasanga kuba umushingamategeko yarabiteganyije atyo, ashingiye ku bubasha bw’inkiko no ku ihame rusange ryo kuba iburanisha ry’imanza rigomba kugira aho rirangirira, agamije kubungabunga uburenganzira bw’uwatsindwa mu rubanza rutambamira urwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ubujurire cyangwa n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga akabura aho ajuririra, bitanyuranyije n’ihame ryo kureshya kw’abantu imbere y’amategeko, kuko bishingiye ku mpamvu yumvikana kandi ifite ireme. Bityo, igika cya 4 cy’ingingo ya 161 y’Itegeko No 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryavuzwe haruguru kikaba kitanyuranyije n’ingingo ya 15 y’Itegeko Nshinga.
## Page 78
44 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO - b) Kumenya niba igika cya 4 cy’ingingo ya 161 y’Itegeko No 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi nk’uko ryahinduwe kinyuranyije n’ingingo ya 29(1)(c) y’Itegeko Nshinga [35] Ingingo ya 29(1)(c) y’Itegeko Nshinga iteganya ko buri muntu afite uburenganzira ku butabera buboneye, burimo ubwo kuburanira imbere y’urukiko rubifitiye ububasha. [36] Ibiteganywa n’ingingo ya 29(1)(c) y’Itegeko Nshinga bihura n’ibiteganywa n’ingingo ya 10 y’Itangazo Mpuzamahanga ry’Uburenganzira bwa Muntu11, ingingo ya 14, igika cya 1, y’Amasezerano Mpuzamahanga yerekeye Uburenganzira mu by’Imbonezamubano no mu bya Politiki12, ingingo ya 7, igika cya 1, agace ka (d) y’Amasezerano Nyafurika y’Uburenganzira bwa Muntu n’ubw’Abaturage13 n’ingingo ya 6 (1) y’Amasezerano y’Ibihugu by’Uburayi yerekeye Uburenganzira bwa Muntu14. [37] Uburenganzira bwo kuburanira imbere y’urukiko rubifitiye ububasha, bwasobanuwe n’Urukiko rw’Ibihugu 11Article 10 of the Declaration states: “everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal”. 12 Article 14(1) of the Convenant states: “All persons shall be equal before the courts and tribunals.” 13 Article 7(1)(d) of the Charter stipulates: “Every individual shall have the right to be tried within a reasonable time by an impartial court or tribunal.” 14 Article 6 (1) stipule “Toute personne a droit à ce que sa cause soit entendue équitablement, publiquement et dans un délai raisonnable, par un tribunal indépendant et impartial, établi par la loi, qui décidera, (…) des contestations sur ses droits et obligations de caractère civil (…)”.
## Page 79
45 Re BUCYESENGE MENDE by’Uburayi rushinzwe uburenganzira bwa muntu, rugaragaza ko uburenganzira ku butabera buboneye buteganywa n’ingingo ya 6 (1), bugomba kumvikana hitawe ku ihame ryo kwimakaza amategeko, risaba ko habaho uburyumuburanyi yaregera inkiko kugira ngo akurikirane uburenganzira bwe mu by’imbonezamubano. Urwo Rukiko rwasobanuye ko ubwo burenganzira atari ntakuka, ko bushobora kugira imbibi, zipfa kudatuma umuntu atakaza ishingiro ry’uburenganzira bwe15. [38] Mu rubanza Lurdo v. Italie, Urukiko rw’Ibihugu by’Uburayi rushinzwe uburenganzira bwa muntu rwashimangiye ko uburenganzira bwo kuburanira imbere y’urukiko rubifitiye ububasha bushobora kugira imbibi, nko ku byerekeye ibisabwa kugirango inzira y’ubujurire yemerwe, kuko mu gushyiraho amategeko abigenga Leta ifite ububasha bwo kubikora mu bushishozi bwayo16. 15Le droit à un procès équitable, garanti par l’article 6 § 1, doit s’interpréter à la lumière du principe de la prééminence du droit, qui exige l’existence d’une voie judiciaire effective permettant de revendiquer les droits civils. Chaque justiciable possède le droit à ce qu’un tribunal connaisse de toute contestation relative à ses « droits et obligations de caractère civil[…] .Le « droit à un tribunal », comme le droit d’accès, ne revêtent pas un caractère absolu : ils peuvent donner lieu à des limitations, mais elles ne sauraient restreindre l’accès ouvert à l’individu d’une manière ou à un point tels que le droit s’en trouve atteint dans sa substance même » ; Guide sur l’article 6, Droit à un proces équitable(volet civil), Conseil de l’Europe/Cour européenne des droits de l’homme, 2013, www.echr.coe.int. 16“La Cour rappelle aussi que le « droit à un tribunal » n'est pas absolu ; il se prête à des limitations implicitement admises, notamment pour les conditions de recevabilité d'un recours, car il appelle de par sa nature même une réglementation par l'Etat, qui jouit à cet égard d'une certaine marge d'appréciation”; Affaire Luordo v. Italie, Requete No 32190/96, Arret du 17 Juillet 2003, para 85, https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22itemid%22:[%22001-65798%22]}.
## Page 80
46 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO [39] Nanone mu rubanza rwa Stanev v Bulgarie, Urukiko rw’Ibihugu by’Uburayi rushinzwe uburenganzira bwa muntu rwagaragaje ko uburenganzira bwo kuburanira imbere y’inkiko bushobora kugira imbibi zemewe, kuko hashingiwe no ku miterere yabwo, busaba ko Leta ishyiraho amategeko abugenga ashobora gutandukana hakurikijwe ibikenewe n’ubushobozi bw’ibihugu n’ubw’abantu. Mu gushyiraho ayo mategeko, ibihugu bikora mu bushishozi bwabyo17. [40] Mu nyandiko yakozwe n’Inama y’uburayi (Conseil de l’Europe) hamwe n’Urukiko rw’Ibihugu by’Uburayi rushinzwe uburenganzira bwa muntu isobanura ibijyanye n’uburenganzira ku butabera (accès à la justice), abayanditse bavuga ko imbibi ku burenganzira bwo kuburanira imbere y’inkiko zibifitiye ububasha18, zemerwa iyo zigamije impamvu ifite ireme, mu ntego zifite ireme hakabamo n’imigendekere myiza y’ubutabera19. 17“Le droit d’accès aux tribunaux n’étant pas absolu, il peut donner lieu à des limitations implicitement admises car il « appelle de par sa nature même une réglementation par l’Etat, réglementation qui peut varier dans le temps et dans l’espace en fonction des besoins et des ressources de la communauté et des individus” […] En élaborant pareille réglementation, les Etats contractants jouissent d’une certaine marge d’appréciation”; Affaire Stanev v. Bulgarie, Requête No 36760/06, Strasbourg, 17 janvier 2012, para 230, https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-108696. 18“Le droit d’accès à un tribunal signifie que les tribunaux doivent être accessibles. Cette accessibilité peut concerner la disponibilité des tribunaux compétents […]”, le Conseil de l’Europe et la Cour européenne des droits de l’homme, Manuel de droit Européen en matière d’accès à la Justice, p. 27. 19“Les restrictions sont autorisées si elles poursuivent un but légitime et sont proportionnées. Elles ne doivent pas porter atteinte à la substance même du droit en cause. Exemples de buts légitimes: la bonne administration de la justice […]”, ibidem, p. 125.
## Page 81
47 Re BUCYESENGE MENDE [41] Mu rubanza rwa Ernst et autres v. Belgique, abaregaga bavugaga ko babujijwe uburenganzira buteganywa n’ingingo ya 6(1) y’Amasezerano y’Ibihugu by’Uburayi yerekeye Uburenganzira bwa Muntu yavuzwe haruguru, kuko ikirego cyabo kiregera indishyi hisunzwe ubushinjacyaha kitakiriwe, hashingiwe ku kuba uwaregwaga yari umucamanza ufite ubudahangarwa (privilège de juridiction). Urukiko rw’Ibihugu by’Uburayi rushinzwe uburenganzira bwa muntu rwabanje kugaragaza ko ubudahangarwa bw’abacamanza, nk’uburyo bugamije gutuma habaho imigendekere myiza y’ubutabera, bugamije intego ifite ireme20. [42] Urukiko rw’Ibihugu by’Uburayi rwagaragaje kandi ko, mu rwego rwo kureba niba ubudahangarwa butabangamiye Amasezerano y’Ibihugu by’Uburayi yerekeye Uburenganzira bwa Muntu, ari ngombwa gusuzuma niba abarega bari bafite izindi nzira zo kurengera uburenganzira bemererwa n’ayo Masezerano21. Rwasobanuye ko gutanga ikirego cy’indishyi wisunze Ubushinjacyaha ari uburyo bwo kuregera indishyi, abarega bakaba barashoboraga kwiyambaza izindi nzira kugira ngo baharanire uburenganzira bwabo22. Urukiko rwanzuye ko 20“Elle considère dès lors qu'en l'espèce, la mise en œuvre du privilège de juridiction applicable aux magistrats, en tant que moyen veillant au bon fonctionnement de la justice, poursuivait un but légitime”. CEDH, Affaire Ernst et autres v. Belgique, Requête No 33400/96, 15 juillet 2003, para 50. https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-65779. 21“Pour déterminer si un tel privilège de juridiction est admissible au regard de la Convention, il importe, selon la Cour, d'examiner si les requérants disposaient d'autres voies raisonnables pour protéger efficacement leurs droits garantis par la Convention”, ibidem, para 53. 22“A cet égard, la Cour attache de l'importance au fait qu'en droit belge, la constitution de partie civile entre les mains du juge d'instruction est un des modes d'exercice de l'action civile et que les victimes disposent en principe d'autres voies pour revendiquer leurs droits civils”, ibidem para 54.
## Page 82
48 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO imbibi zashyizwe ku burenganzira bwo kuregera urukiko, hashingiwe ku budahangarwa, zitabangamiye ireme ry’uburenganzira bwo kuregera urukiko, bikaba bitanyuranyije n’ibiteganywa n’ingingo ya 6 (1) y’Amasezerano y’Ibihugu by’Uburayi yerekeye Uburenganzira bwa Muntu23. [43] Mu bisobanuro bimaze gutangwa, humvikanamo ibintu by’ingenzi bikurikira: a. Uburenganzira bwo kuburanira imbere y’urukiko rubifitiye ububasha, ni kimwe mu bigize uburenganzira ku butabera buboneye; b. Leta ishyiraho amategeko yerekeye uburenganzira bwo kuburanira imbere y’urukiko rubifitiye ububasha, mu bushishozi bwayo, ikurikije ibikenewe; c. Ubwo burenganzira bushobora kugira imbibi; izo mbibi zikaba zemerwa iyo zigamije intego ifite ireme. Mu ntego zifite ireme, harimo n’imigendekere myiza y’ubutabera; d. Urega ntashobora kuvuga ko yabujijwe uburenganzira bwo kuburanira imbere y’urukiko rubifitiye ububasha, mu gihe afite izindi nzira zo guharanira uburenganzira bwe. [44] Ku bijyanye n’uru rubanza, Bucyensenge Mende Claude avuga ko igika cya 4 cy’ingingo ya 161 y’Itegeko No 22/2018 23“La Cour estime que se limitant à reconnaître les spécificités liées au privilège de juridiction, les restrictions apportées au droit d'accès n'ont pas porté atteinte à la substance même de leur droit à un tribuna […] la Cour conclut qu'il n'y a pas eu violation du droit d'accès à un tribunal garanti aux requérants par l'article 6 § 1”, ibidem para 56-57.
## Page 83
49 Re BUCYESENGE MENDE ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryavuzwe haruguru kimwambura uburenganzira bwo kuburanira imbere y’urukiko rubifitiye ububasha, kuko kidatuma atambamira urubanza rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ubujurire. [45] Ingingo ya 153(5) y’Itegeko Nshinga iteganya ko itegeko ari ryo rigena imitunganyirize, imikorere n’ububasha by’inkiko. Ibi bisobanuye ko Itegeko Nshinga ryemerera umushingamategeko kugena ububasha bw’inkiko akoresheje itegeko. Ashingiye kuri ubu bubasha, umushingamategeko akaba yarateganyije mu gika cya 4 cy’ingingo ya 161 y’Itegeko No 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryavuzwe haruguru, ko imanza zaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ubujurire cyangwa n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga zidatambamirwa. [46] Urukiko rusanga umushingamategeko ashyiraho iyo ngingo, yarabikoze mu bushishozi bwe, agamije intego ifite ireme yo kubungabunga imigendekere myiza y’ubutabera, kuko gutambamira urubanza rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ubujurire cyangwa n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga, byavutsa umuburanyi watsindwa uburenganzira bwo kujurira nibura rimwe, kuko imanza zaciwe n’izi nkiko zitajuririrwa24. Nk’uko kandi byemejwe mu rubanza RS/INCONST/SPEC00004/2020/SC rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga ku wa 26/03/2021 haburana Asiimwe Frank, uburenganzira bwo kujurira rimwe 24 Ingingo ya 52, igika cya nyuma, y’Itegeko Nᵒ30/2018 ryo ku wa 02/06/2018 rigena ububasha bw’inkiko nk’uko ryahinduwe n’ingino ya 50 y’Itegeko Nᵒ012/2018 ryo ku wa 04/04/2018 rigena imitunganyirize n’imikorere y’Ubutegetsi bw’Ubucamanza.
## Page 84
50 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO nintayegayezwa, n’ubwo nabwo bushobora gushyirwaho imbibi (limitations) hagamijwe intego ifite ireme25. [47] Urukiko rusanga kandi, Bucyensenge Mende Claude adashobora kuvuga ko yabujijwe uburenganzira bwo kuburanira imbere y’urukiko rubifitiye ububasha, kandi afite izindi nzira zo guharanira uburenganzira bwe. Koko rero, nk’uko bisobanurwa na Gasasira Ephrem, gutambamira urubanza si nshinganwa ku muntu ushaka ko havanwaho urubanza rubangamiye inyungu ze, kuko aba afite uburenganzira bwo gutanga ikirego imbere y’urundi rukiko rubifitiye ububasha ku rwego rwa mbere26. [48] Hashingiwe ku bisobanuro byose byatanzwe, Urukiko rurasanga igika cya 4 cy’ingingo ya 161 y’Itegeko No 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi nk’uko ryahinduwe, kitanyuranyije n’ingingo ya 29(1)(c) y’Itegeko Nshinga. 25Urubanza RS/INCONST/SPEC00004/2020/SC rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga ku wa 26/03/2021 haburana Asiimwe Frank, para 26. 26“[…] La tierce opposition n’est pas une procédure obligatoire dans le chef d’un tiers qui veut faire annuler un procès qui préjudicie à ses intérêts”; Gasasira Ephrem, Manuel de Droit Rwandais, Procédure Civile et Commerciale, Printerset, 1993, p. 221.
## Page 85
51 Re BUCYESENGE MENDE c) Kumenya niba igika cya 4 cy’ingingo ya 161 y’Itegeko No 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi nk’uko ryahinduwe kinyuranyije n’ingingo ya 34 y’Itegeko Nshinga [49] Ingingo ya 34 y’Itegeko Nshinga iteganya ko buri muntu afite uburenganzira ku mutungo bwite, waba uwe ku giti cye cyangwa uwo asangiye n’abandi, kandi ko utavogerwa; ko uburenganzira ku mutungo budahungabanywa uretse ku mpamvu z’inyungu rusange kandi hakurikijwe ibiteganywa n’amategeko. [50] Uburenganzira ku mutungo bwite buteganywa kandi mu ngingo ya 17 y’Itangazo Mpuzamahanga ku burenganzira bwa muntu,27 mu ngingo ya 14 y’Amasezerano Nyafurika ku burenganzira bwa muntu n’ubw’abaturage28 no mu ngingo ya 1 y’Amasezerano y’inyongera nomero ya 1 y’amasezerano y’Ibihugu by’Iburayi ku burenganzira bwa muntu29. 27 Article 17 of the Declaration states: “Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property”. 28 Article 17 of the African Charter states: “The right to property shall be guaranteed. It may only be encroached upon in the interest of public need or in the general interest of the community and in accordance with the provisions of appropriate laws” 29 Article 1 states: “Every natural or legal person is entitled to the peaceful enjoyment of his possessions. No one shall be deprived of his possessions except in the public interest and subject to the conditions provided for by law and by the general principles of international law”.
## Page 86
52 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO [51] Mu rubanza rwa Broniowski na Pologne, Urukiko rw’Ibihugu by’Iburayi rushinzwe kurengera uburenganzira bwa muntu rwavuze ko umuntu afite uburenganzira bwo gukoresha umutungo we nta nkomyi (peaceful enjoyment of property), ko iyo ubwo burenganzira butubahirijwe, hagomba gusuzumwa niba ibyakozwe kuri uwo mutungo byarakurikije amategeko kandi ko byari bishingiye ku mpamvu zemewe kandi zumvikana30. [52] Urukiko rurasanga itegeko ryaba rinyuranyije n’ingingo ya 34 y’Itegeko Nshinga iteganya uburenganzira umuntu afite ku mutungo bwite, ari iryaba rimunyaga uburenganzira afite ku mutungo we cyangwa irituma uvogerwa nta burenganzira abitangiye, cyangwa irimubuza kuwukoresha nta nkomyi. [53] Urukiko rurasanga Bucyensenge Mende Claude atarashoboye kurugaragariza uburyo igika cya 4 cy’ingingo ya 161 y’Itegeko No 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryavuzwe haruguru, anenga kimwambura uburenganzira ku mutungo we. [54] Hashingiwe ku bisobanuro byagaragajwe haruguru, Urukiko rurasanga igika cya 4 cy’ingingo ya 161 y’Itegeko No 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryavuzwe haruguru kitanyuranyije n’ingingo ya 34 y’Itegeko Nshinga. 30 Case of Broniowski v. Poland, Strasbourg, 22 June 2004 § 148-149: “Any interference with the enjoyment of a right of property recognised by the Convention must pursue a legitimate aim. it is thus for the national authorities to make the initial assessment as to the existence of a problem of public concern warranting measures to be applied in the sphere of the exercise of the right of property”. https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22itemid%22:[%22001-61828%22]}
## Page 87
53 Re BUCYESENGE MENDE III. ICYEMEZO CY’URUKIKO [55] Rwemeje ko ikirego cyatanzwe na Bucyensenge Mende Claude gisaba gukuraho igika cya 4 cy’ingingo ya 161 y’Itegeko No 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi nk’uko ryahinduwe kuko kinyuranyije n’Itegeko Nshinga rya Repubulika y’u Rwanda nta shingiro gifite. [56] Rwemeje ko igika cya 4 cy’ingingo ya 161 y’Itegeko No 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi nk’uko ryahinduwe, kitanyuranyije n’ingingo ya 15, iya 29 (1)(c) n’iya 34 z’Itegeko Nshinga rya Repubulika y’u Rwanda.
## Page 88
54 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO
## Page 89
55 Re Dr BARIBWIRA IMANZA ZEREKERANYE N’IMIBURANISHIRIZE Y’IMANZA
## Page 90
56 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO
## Page 91
57 GATARE v GASANA N’ABANDI GATARE v GASANA N’ABANDI [Rwanda URUKIKO RUKURU - RS/INJUST/RC 00004/2023/HC/NYZ (Ndagijimana, P.J, Badara, Udahemuka, J.) 24 Mata 2024] Amategeko agenga imiburansihirize y’imanza – Ubujurire – Ikoranabuhanga ridakora - Mu gihe habayeho kurenza ibihe byo kujurira biturutse ku buryo bw’ikoranabuhanga butangirwamo ibirego butari gukora kandi bikaba byaramenyeshejwe Urukiko, ni impamvu idasanzwe ituma ikirego cyakirwa kigasuzumwa. Amategeko agenga imanza z’imbonezamubano – Irangizwa ry’urubanza – Guhuzwa n’urubanza – Kwanga gutanga email - Kuba umuburanyi yaranze gutanga email ngo ahuzwe na cyamunara, ntiyavuga ko umutungo we wagurishijwe ku giciro gito kandi ari we wivukije uburenganzira bwo kwanga igiciro gito yanga guhuzwa na system. Incamake y’ikibazo: Uru rubanza rwatangiye Gatare arega atisunze ubushinjacyaha abitwa Gasana, Nyiransabimana, Minani, Mukamana na Munderere icyaha cyo kuba baratanze ubuhamya bw'ibinyoma mu rubanza rwamuhamije icyaha cyo gukora no gukoresha inyandiko mpimbano asaba ko nabo bahamwa n’icyo cyaha ariko Urukiko ruza gusanga ikirego cye kidafite ishingiro rumutegeka kwishyura indishyi zingana 1.250.000 FRW. Urubanza rwaje kuba itegeko maze Gasana na bagenzi be bashaka umuhesha w’inkiko witwa Niyonzima atangira inzira zo kururangiza agurisha mu cyamunara umutungo (ishyamba) wa Gatare. Uyu yaje kuregera Urukiko rw’Ibanze rwa Kibeho asaba gutesha agaciro icyamunara ngo kuko cyakozwe 57
## Page 92
58 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO mu buryo bunyuranije n’amategeko ariko Urukiko rusanga icyo kirego nta shingiro gifite. Ku wa 13/07/2022 urega yajuririye mu Rukiko Rwisumbuye rwa Nyamagabe ariko abaregwa batanga inzitizi bavuga ko yatanze ubujurire bwe nyuma y’igihe giteganywa n’amategeko bityo ko budakwiye kwakirwa, uregwa we akavuga ko yatanze ubujurire ku gihe ariko bitewe n’uko uburyo bw’ikoranabuhanga butakoraga ntibyashoboka ko ikirego gitangwa kandi ko yabimenyesheje Urukiko. Urukiko rwasanze ubujurire bwe nta shingiro bufite. Urega yagiye mu nzira z’akarengane hanyuma urubanza rwe rwongera kuburanishwa n’Urukiko Rukuru Urugereko rwa Nyanza, hasuzumwa ikibazo cyo kumenya niba ubujurire bwa Gatare bwaragombaga kwakirwa kubera ko hari impamvu zitunguranye kandi zidaturutse ku bushake bwe zatumye ajurira akerewe no kumenya niba cyamunara yakozwe kuwa 15/06/2022 yateshwa agaciro kuko itubahirije amategeko. Gatare asobanura ko yatanze ikirego mu bihe bitegenywa n’amategeko ndetse ikoranabuhanga rimutengushye ku kubasha kwishyura ingwate y’amagarama yabimenyesheje urukiko nk’uko amategeko abiteganya asubizwa ko ategereza system ikongera igakora. Akomeza avuga ko cyamunara ikwiye guteshwa agaciro kuko yakozwe ku mataliki atandukanye n’ayari yatangajwe kandi igatangwa ku giciro gito cyane ndetse akaba atarigeze amenyeshwa imihango yose ya cyamunara. Abaregwa bavuga ko urega yatanze ubujurire impitagihe kandi ko iyo uburyo bw’ikoranabuhanga butari gukora urega ashobora gushyikiriza imyanzuro ye urukiko kandi ibyo akaba atarabikoze. Bakomeza bavuga ko bamumenyesheje imihango ya cyamunara akanga kwakira no gusinya ku nyandiko ndetse ko yanimanye e-
## Page 93
59 GATARE v GASANA N’ABANDI mail ye ngo ahuzwe na system bityo ajye abona amakuru. Urukiko rwasanze ikirego kigomba kwakirwa ariko rusanga cyamunara yarakozwe mu buryo bukurikje amategeko. Incamake y’icyemezo: 1. Mu gihe habayeho kurenza ibihe byo kujurira biturutse ku buryo bw’ikoranabuhanga butangirwamo ibirego butari gukora kandi bikaba byaramenyeshejwe Urukiko, ni impamvu idasanzwe ituma ikirego cyakirwa kigasuzumwa. 2. Kuba umuburanyi yaranze gutanga email ngo ahuzwe na cyamunara, ntiyavuga ko umutungo we wagurishijwe ku giciro gito kandi ari we wivukije uburenganzira bwo kwanga igiciro gito yanga guhuzwa na system. Ikirego cyo gusubirishamo urubanza ku mpamvu z’akarengane nta shingiro gifite. Amategeko yashingiweho: Itegeko N° 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegets, ingingo ya 20, 111, 253, 255, 275, 278. Nta manza zifashishijwe Urubanza IMITERERE Y’URUBANZA [1] Gatare Faustin yatanze ikirego mu rukiko rwisumbuye rwa Nyamagabe atisunze ubushinjacyaha arega Nyiransabimana
## Page 94
60 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO Gaudence, Minani Védaste, Mukamana Louise, Gasana Gilbert na Munderere Alphonsine icyaha cyo kuba baratanze ubuhamya bw'ibinyoma mu rubanza rwamuhamije icyaha cyo gukora no gukoresha inyandiko mpimbano arirwo RP 0109/16/TGI/NYBE akaba yarasabaga ko nabo bahamwa n'icyo cyaha kandi bakagihanirwa imyaka itandatu ihwanye n'iyo yahanishijwe mu rubanza batanzemo ubuhamya bw'ibinyoma. Urubanza rwaje kurangira abaregwa babaye abere ndetse urukiko rutegeka Gatare Faustin kubaha indishyi za miliyoni imwe n’ibihumbi magana abiri na mirongo itanu (1.250.000 FRW). [2] Urubanza rubaye ndakuka, Nyiransabimana Gaudence, Minani Védaste, Mukamana Louise, Gasana Gilbert na Munderere Alphonsine basabye Me Niyonzima Jean Felix ko yarangiza urwo rubanza bagahabwa indishyi batsindiye muri urwo rubanza. Niyonzima Jean Felix yatangiye kurangiza urwo rubanza, cyamunara ikaba yarabaye kuwa 14/06/2022. [3] Tariki ya 22/6/2022, Gatare Faustin yatanze ikirego mu rukiko rw’ibanze rwa Kibeho, asaba gutesha agaciro cyamunara yakozwe kuwa 14/06/2022 kuko hari amategeko atarubahirijwe arimo ateganya ifatira n’amatangazo ya cyamunara, akavuga kandi ko yasojwe nabi ndetse yandikiye umuhesha w’inkiko Me Niyonzima Jean Félix amusaba guhagarika imihango ya cyamunara kuko yashakaga kwishyura ku neza, umuhesha arabimwemerera ariko nyuma abona azanye amatangazo ya cyamunara. [4] Me Niyonzima Jean Felix n’umwunganira bavuga ko nta tegeko na rimwe ritubahirijwe. Ibijyanye n’ifatira, inyandiko ikorerwa mu ikoranabuhanga bakayisohoramo bakajya aho umutungo uherereye na nyirawo ahari ndetse n’ubuyobozi bw’akagali buhagarariwe, ibyo kandi akaba yarabikoze nk’uko
## Page 95
61 GATARE v GASANA N’ABANDI bigaragazwa n’inyandiko y’ifatira yo kuwa 13/05/2022 yasinyweho n’umuyobozi w’akagali ka Mpanda, akandikaho ko Gatare Faustin yanze gusinya kandi ahari. Ibyo avuga ngo yafatiriye umutungo udahari nabyo sibyo kuko ishyamba yafatiriye rirahari kandi rimubaruyeho nk’uko bigaragazwa n‘igenagaciro ryakozwe. Ikijyanye n’amatangazo ya cyamunara, itangazo rya mbere ryakozwe kuwa 25/05/2022, abo bireba barimo na Gatare Faustin ndetse n’akagali baryakira kuwa 26/05/2022, iri tangazo rikaba ryaravugwagamo cyamunara eshatu koko, itangazo rya kabiri naryo baribonye ku itariki ya 06/06/2022 kandi rivugwamo cyamunara ebyiri, ntabwo hari kugarukamo eshatu kandi imwe yaramaze gutambuka, kuba rero hasi handitseho ko yombi akozwe kuri 25/05/2022 Gatare Faustin ntakwiye kubigira urwitwazo kuko ni agakosa kabayemo ko kudahindura itariki, kandi ayo matangazo aruzuzanya. [5] Minani Védaste, Mukamana Louise, Gasana Gilbert, Nyiransabimana Gaudence na Munderere Alphonsine bavuga ko nta murimo numwe wa cyamunara bigeze bakora, bakaba batumva impamvu yatumye Gatare Faustin abazana muri uru rubanza. [6] Mu rubanza RC 00099/2022/TB/KIB rwaciwe kuwa 05/07/2022 n’Urukiko rw’Ibanze rwa Kibeho rwemeje ko cyamunara yabaye kuwa 15/06/2022 hatezwa umutungo wa Gatare Faustin ufite UPI 2/03/03/04/3635 idateshejwe agaciro. Rutegeka Gatare Faustin kwishyura Nyiransabimana Gaudence indishyi z’amafaranga ibihumbi ijana (100.000), akishyura Minani Védaste indishyi zingana n’ibihumbi magana atanu na cumi (510.000), akishyura Mukamana Louise indishyi zingana n’ibihumbi magana atanu na cumi (510.000) na Gasana Gilbert akamwishyura indishyi zingana n’ibihumbi Magana atanu na
## Page 96
62 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO cumi (510.000), Munderere Alphonsine akamwishyura indishyi zingana n’ibihumbi ijana (100.000) na Me Niyonzima Jean Felix akamwishyura indishyi zingana n’ibihumbi Magana atanu na cumi (510.000). [7] Mu gufata icyo cyemezo, ku bijyanye n’ifatira ritubahirije amategeko, urukiko rwasanze hari inyandiko mvugo y’ifatira yakozwe kuwa 11/05/2022, bari aho umutungo washinganishijwe, ikaba igaragaza ko umuhesha w’inkiko yari aho umutungo wagombaga gutezwa cyamunara, hari umunyamabanga nshingwabikorwa w’akagali ka Mpanda Munyaneza Ildephonse nk’uko bigaragazwa ko yarisinyeho agateraho na kashi y’urwego ahagarariye akanandikaho ko Gatare Faustin yanze gusinya. Ku bijyanye n’itangazwa rya cyamunara, urukiko rwasanze amatangazo ya cyamunara yari abiri, rimwe abo bireba baryakiriye kuri 26/05/2022, irindi baryakira kuri 06/06/2022, ko kandi irya mbere ryagaragazaga igihe cyamunara izatangirira n’igihe hazatangarizwa igisubozo, haba hatagize uwegukana umutungo cyamunara ikongera kugera ku nshuro ya gatatu, naho itangazo rya kabiri rikagaraza ko cyamunara yagombaga gukorwa inshuro 2 kuko iya mbere yari yaramaze gutambuka. [8] Ku bijyanye n’uko cyamunara yasojwe nabi, urukiko rwasanze raporo yarakozwe, ikagaragaza uburyo cyamunara yarangiye, uwegukanye umutungo n’uburyo abo yari abereyemo umwenda bishyuwe ndetse nawe agasabwa konti ye ngo hashyirweho amafaranga ye yari yasigaye. Ku bijyanye nuko yasabye umuhesha w’inkiko guhagarika cyamunara kugira ngo yishyure ku bushake, urukiko rwasobanuye ko Gatare Faustin nawe nta bushake yagize bwo kwishyura kuko mu itangazo rya cyamunara yahawe hari harimo numero ya konti ya Me
## Page 97
63 GATARE v GASANA N’ABANDI Niyonzima Jean Félix yari yamenyesheje ko uzegukana uwo mutungo agomba kwishyura kuri konti nº 4004100232354 iri muri EQUIT BANK. [9] Tariki ya 13/07/2022, Gatare Faustin yajuririye Urukiko Rwisumbuye rwa Nyamagabe abaregwa batanga inzitizi yo kutakira ikirego bavuga ko urukiko rutakwakira ubujurire bwa Gatare Faustin kuko yajuriye igihe cyo kujurira giteganywa n’amategeko cyararenze, asobanura ko urubanza yajuririye rwamaze guterwa kashempuruza kuko igihe cyo kujurira cyari cyararangiye ndetse ko ikimenyetso Gatare atanga kiri kuri attachment ari icyo ku itariki ya 13/7/2022, binagaragaza ko n’igarama byamunaniye kuryishyura kuwa 13/7/2022. [10] Gatare Faustin yasobanuye ko yatangiye kujurira kuwa 08/7/2022, ikibihamya ni uko urubanza rwahawe No PST RCA 00021/2022/TGI NYBE ariko akomeje kugerageza biranga kuko igarama ryari ryanze, ko yashyizemo igarama kuwa 13/7/2022 ari nabwo ikirego cyanditswe bigaragazwa n'ifoto yafashe uwo munsi ndetse asanga aba bantu baburana ari bo babigizemo uruhare kuko bamaze guteza kashe mpuruza bihita byemera, asaba ko ikirego cye cyakwakirwa kuko impamvu yatinze kujurira ntabwo zamuturutseho kandi izi mpamvu zarangiriye kuwa 13/7/2022. [11] Mu rubanza RCA 00023/2022/TGI/NYBE rwaciwe n’Urukiko Rwisumbuye rwa Nyamagabe ku wa 26/7/2022 rwemeje kutakira ubujurire bwa Gatare Faustin. Rwemeje ko urubanza RC 00099/2022/TB/KIB rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’ibanze rwa Kibeho kuwa 05/7/2022 rugumanye agaciro karwo. Rwemeje ko Gatare Faustin yishyura Niyonzimana Jean Felix, Mukamana Louise, Gasana Gilbert na Minani Vedaste igihembo cy’avoka kingana na 500.000 FRW uko ari bane buri umwe
## Page 98
64 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO agatwara Frw 125.000, akishyura Niyonzimana Jean Felix amafaranga 50.000 y’ikurikiranarubanza, akishyura Niyonzimana Jean Felix, Mukamana Louise, Gasana Gilbert na Minani Vedaste buri umwe amafaranga 10.000 FRW y’indishyi z’akababaro ku bwo kubashora mu manza z’amaherere, akishyura Munderere Alphonsine na Nyiransabimana Gaudence buri umwe Frw 50.000 y'ikurikiranarubanza, igiteranyo ni Frw 790.000. [12] Mu gufata icyo cyemezo, urukiko rwashingiye ku kuba Gatare Faustin yaratangiye kujurira kuwa 08/7/2022, agahabwa nomero ya PST RCA 00021/2022/TGI NYBE ariko ko yakomeje kugerageza bikanga kuko igarama ryari ryanze, ko yashyizemo igarama kuwa 13/7/2022 ari nabwo ikirego cyanditswe bigaragazwa n'ifoto yafashe uwo munsi, byumvikana ko ubujurire bwe ku cyemezo cyafashwe ku kirego cyihutirwa bwakiriwe nyuma y’igihe giteganywa n’itegeko, byumvikana ko kuva kuwa 05/7/2022 kugeza kuwa 13/7/2022 iminsi itatu y’akazi yari yararenze. Kuba Gatare Faustin yarajuriye impitagihe nyamara iki gikorwa yari yagitangiye ku wa 08/7/2022 ariko imbogamizi ikaba kuba kwishyura ingwate y’amagarama bitarakundaga, ibi nabyo bikorwa mu buryo bw’ikoranabuhanga, akaba yaragombaga kubimenyesha Umwanditsi mukuru w’urukiko, nyamara Gatare Faustin yabimenyesheje Umwanditsi wakira abagana urukiko atitaye na gato ku biteganywa n’iyi ngingo ya 20 CPCCSA kugeza ubwo kujurira kwe bikozwe impitagihe kuwa 13/7/2022 ari nabwo yandikiye Perezida w’Urukiko amumenyesha ko kwishyura igarama byabanje kwanga. Ubujurire bwatanzwe impitagihe nta mpamvu zikomeye zitunguranye kandi zidaturutse ku bushake bwe yagaragaje, nk’uko biteganywa n’itegeko bityo bukaba butakiriwe.
## Page 99
65 GATARE v GASANA N’ABANDI [13] Nyuma y’icibwa ry’urwo rubanza, Perezida w'Urukiko rw'Ikirenga yemeje ko urubanza RCA 00023/2022/TGI/NYBE rwaciwe n’urukiko rwisumbuye rwa Nyamagabe rurimo akarengane, rwoherezwa mu Rukiko Rukuru, urugereko rwa Nyanza kugira ngo abe ari rwo ruruburanisha, rwandikwa kuri No RS/INJUST/RC 00004/2023/HC/NYZ, ruburanishwa mu ruhame ku wa 15/5/2024, ababuranyi bose bitabye urukiko, Gatare Faustin yunganirwa na Me Twagiramungu Vincent, Niyonzima Jean Felix yiburanira naho abandi baregwa bunganirwa na Me Nshimiyimana Celestin. [14] Mu myanzuro no mu miburanire ye, Gatare Faustin n’umwunganira bavuga ko yatanze ikirego mu bihe bitegenywa n’amategeko ndetse ikoranabuhanga rimutengushye ku kubasha kwishyura ingwate y’amagarama abimenyesha urukiko nk’uko amategeko abiteganya nyamara Urukiko rubirengaho rufata icyemezo. Bigaragara ko urukiko rutasesenguye ingingo ya 275 CPCCSA ivuga uko babara ibihe bibarwa mu minsi cyangwa mu masaha, umunsi igikorwa cyabereyeho ntubarwa. Urukiko ruzemeze ko iby’ingingo ya 20 CPCCSA iteganya Gatare Faustin yarabikoze system ntiyamuha billing number yishyuriraho ajya mu Rukiko narwo ruragerageza bikanga yabaha umwanzuro bakamubwira ko ategereza system ikongera ikajyaho agatanga ubujurire bwe kuko ntaho babishyira. [15] Gatare Faustin n’umwunganira bavuga ko cyamunara yakozwe mu buryo budakurikije amategeko kubera ko itangazo rya cyamunara ryatanzwe n’umuhesha w’inkiko w’umwuga Me Niyonzima Jean Felix rigaragaza umutungo wa Gatare Faustin ugomba kugurishwa muri cyamunara, ubuso bwawo, agaciro kawo n’amatariki ya cyamunara, iyo cyamunara igakorwa mbere y’amatariki yavuzwe nyamara umutungo ukagurishwa ku giciro
## Page 100
66 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO kiri munsi cyane ya 75% by’agaciro kagaragajwe n’umugenagaciro kari mu itangazo, kuba cyamunara ku nshuro ya gatatu itarabaye nyamara ariko amategeko abiteganya ndetse akaba ari nabyo byari biteganyijwe mu itangazo rya cyamunara yavuzeho haruguru asanga ibi bihagije kugirango cyamunara yo ku itariki batazi kuko n’uwarangije urubanza ntayo yemeza yakoreyeho ku buryo budashidikanywaho dore ko mu nyandiko yemeza ubugure muri cyamunara avuga ko cyamunara yabaye kuwa 14/06/2022 naho mu nyandiko yerekeranye y’igabana ry’amafaranga yavuye muri cyamunara hakagaragazwa ko cyamunara yakozwe kuwa 15/06/2022 ubwabyo bikaba bigaragaza ko ibyakozwe byarimo guhuzagurika kuko hari ikindi kitari ugushyira mu bikorwa icyemezo cy’urukiko cyarimo gukorwa bityo n’amatariki bakayibeshyaho. [16] Gatare Faustin n’umwunganira bavuga ko Urukiko rw'Ibanze rwirengagije nkana amategeko mu rubanza RC 00099/2022/TB/KIB kuko rwavuze ko amategeko y'ishinganisha n'itangaza rya cyamunara yubahirijwe kandi Umuhesha w'Inkiko yarayishe kuko atakurikije imihango igomba kubahirizwa mu kugurisha muri cyamunara. Umuhesha w'Inkiko ntiyamenyesheje nyir'umutungo Gatare imihango ya cyamunara muri ubu buryo, Umuhesha w'inkiko ntiyamenyesheje nyir'umutuno igenagaciro ry'umutungo we n'iryo yakoresheje bigaragara ko ririmo amakosa agaragarira buri wese kuko umutungo ufite ubuso bwa 19,478Sqm igiciro cy'ubutaka akaba ari 2700/Sqm byumvikane ko ubutaka ubwabwo udashyizemo agaciro k'ibiburiho bufite agaciro ka 52,590,600 Rwf ariko babariye ku gaciro ka 10,700,000Rwf ntazi aho bakuye bityo bituma n'ingwate yacibwaga abapiganwa igabanuka n'igiciro cy'umutungo muri rusange giteshwa agaciro. Umuhesha w'Inkiko ntiyamenyesheje nyir'umutungo Gatare imihango ya cyamunara
## Page 101
67 GATARE v GASANA N’ABANDI uko izagenda ku ikoranabuhanga rikoreshwa mu kurangiza imanza (IECMS) kuko agomba guhuzwa n'iyo system mbere y'uko cyamanara itangira ariko nk'uko bigaragarazwa n'ibaruwa yo kuwa 02/06/2022, Umuhesha w'Inkiko ubwe yamenyesheje Gatare bigaragara ko yamusabye email ye akoresha muri system kuwa 06/06/2022 bigaragara ko cyamunara ku nshuro ya mbere (round 1) yari yararangiye ndetse na round ya 2 yaratangiye kuko cyamunara 1 yatangiye kuwa 27/05/2022 irangira kuwa 03/06/2022 saa 14h00 naho cyamunara round ya 2 itangira kuwa 05/06/2022. [17] Gatare Faustin n’umwunganira bavuga ko imihango ya cyamunara atayimenyeshejwe kugira ngo ashobore gukoresha uburenganzira bwe yemererwa n'amategeko bwo kuba yashaka umuguzi cyangwa kuba yahakana igiciro kuri round ya 1 n'iya 2. nk'uko biteganywa n'ingingo ya 4 y'Iteka rya Minisitiri ryerekeye irangizwa ry’inyandikompesha N° 005/MOJ/AG/21 ryo ku wa 07/06/2021. Umuhesha w'Inkiko ntiyubahirije ingengabihe yitangiye ubwe mu itangazo rya cyamunara mu buryo bukurikira : Cyamunara round ya 1 yatangiye kuwa 27/05/2022 yagombaga kurangira kuwa 03/06/2022 system igatangaza uwatsinze naho cyamunara ya 2 (round 2) igatangira kuwa 05/06/2022 ikarangira kuwa 12/06/2022 izi cyamunara ebyiri zibanza nyir'umutungo utezwa cyamunara n'uwishyurizwa bafite uburenganzira bwo kwanga igiciro cyatanzwe mu gihe kitagejeje kuri 75% by'agaciro k'umutungo nk'uko biteganywa n'iteka ryavuzwe haruguru ndetse n'ingingo ya 255 al.2 ya CPCCSA. [18] Gatare Faustin n’umwunganira bavuga ko Umuhesha w'Inkiko avuga ko uwatsindiye cyamunara yayitsindiye ku nshuro ya 2 tariki ya 14/06/2022 kandi bigaragara ku ngengabihe ye ko ahubwo ariho cyamunara round ya 3 ari nayo ya nyuma
## Page 102
68 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO ariho izaba itangiye yagombaga gusozwa tariki ya 21/06/2022 bigatera kwibaza niba cyamunara yarakoreshejwe uburyo bw'ikoranabuhanga cyangwa niba yarakoreshejwe uburyo busanzwe kuko uburyo system yubatse ntishobora gutangaza uwatsinze n'imyirondoro ye ku munsi wa mbere wa cyamunara wa round ya 3 nk'uko amatangazo abigaragaza. Ikindi iyo urebye inyandiko yemeza ubugure muri cyamunara ubona yarakozwe n'umuhesha w'Inkiko ubwe kandi ubundi ikorwa na system icyo Huissier akora ni ukuyisinya gusa. Ubwe Me Niyonzima Jean Felix mu magambo ye yivugira ko cyamunara yabaye tariki ya 14/06/2022 ku nshuro ya 3 aho yagize ati ".......inyandiko yemeza ubugure n'itangazo rya cyamunara bigaragaza ko cyamunara ku nshuro ya gatatu yabaye kuwa 14/06/2022 bivuguruza ibivugwa na Gatare Faustin. System irangirizwamo imanza nayo igaragazako cyamunara ku ncuro ya gatatu yabaye kuwa 14/06/2022"....... nyamara ibi avuga ubwe bitandukanye n'itangazo rya cyamunara yatanze kuko harimo ko cyamunara ku nshuro ya 3 ari nayo ya nyuma izatangira tariki ya 14/06/2022 ikakarangira tariki ya 21/06/2022 ari nabyo byagombye kuba ari ukuri kuko aribwo buryo system iteganya. [19] Niyonzima Jean Felix avuga ko nta karengane kabaye mu mikirize y'urubanza RCA 00023/2022/TGI/NYBE kubera ko urubanza Gatare Faustin yajuriraga muri TGI Nyamagabe arirwo RC 00099/2022/TB/KIB rwaraciwe kuwa 05/07/2022 mu gihe Gatare Faustin ajurira kuwa 13/07/2022 hashingiwe ku ngingo ya 188 al.2 na 260 al.5 z’itegeko N° 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi ndetse hakanashingirwa ku mirongo yatanzwe mu manza zaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ubujurire mu kwezi kwa 9/2022 kuva kuri page 27 kugeza 29 ishyizwe kuri attachment aha, aho Urukiko
## Page 103
69 GATARE v GASANA N’ABANDI rw'Ubujurire(CA) rwasobanuyeko mu kubara iminsi itatu (3jrs) yo kujurira ikirego cyihutirwa, umunsi igikora cyakoreweho ntukurwamo, ahubwo uwo munsi nawo ubarirwamo, bigaragara ko itariki yo kuwa 05/07/2022 urubanza RC 00099/2022/TB/KIB rwaciriweho hari kuwa mbere nayo ibarwa ukaba umunsi wa mbere, kuwa 06/07/2022 hari kuwa kabiri ukaba umunsi wa kabiri, kuwa 07/07/2022 hari kuwa gatatu ukaba umunsi wa gatatu, ibi bivuze ko Gatare Faustin yagombaga kujurira bitarenze kuwa 07/07/2022 bityo rero hashingiwe ku mvugo ze n’ibimenyetso ubwe yitangiye byagarutsweho mu gika kibanziriza iki ko yatangiye kujurira kuwa 08/07/2022 bigaragara ko nta karengane kari mu rubanza RCA 00023/2022/TGI/NYBE kuko ubujurire bwa Gatare Faustin yabukoze impitagihe nk’uko Urukiko Rwisumbuye rwa Nyamagabe rwabyemeje muri uru rubanza RCA 00023/2022/TGI/NYBE dore ko impamvu Gatare Faustin yavugaga ko system itamuhaga Billing Number yo kwishyuriraho ingwate y’amagarama kuwa 08/07/2022 ubwo we yatangiraga gutegura ubujurire mu rwego rwo gusobanura impamvu ubujurire bwe yabutanze kuwa 13/07/2022 nk’uko system y’uru rubanza RCA 00023/2022/TGI/NYBE ibigaragaza ariko ibi nabyo ntibikuraho ko n’itariki nawe ubwe yivugira yo kuwa 08/07/2022 yatangiye guteguraho ubujurire bwe nabwo yabikoraga igihe cyo kujurira cyaramurangiranye. [20] Niyonzima Jean Felix avuga ko cyamunara yakozwe mu buryo bukurikije amategeko kuko itariki yo kuwa 15/06/2022 yavuzwe mu nyandiko y'igabana ry'amafaranga yavuye muri cyamunara ni ukwibeshya kwabayeho kw'imyandikire dore ko inyandiko yemeza ubugure n'itangazo rya cyamunara bigaragaza ko cyamunara ku nshuro ya gatatu yabaye kuwa 14/06/2022 bivuguruza ibivugwa na Gatare Faustin. System irangirizwamo imanza nayo igaragazako cyamunara ku ncuro ya gatatu yabaye
## Page 104
70 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO kuwa 14/06/2022. Ikindi ni uko iby'iyi tariki ya 15/06/2022 ntabwo byigeze biburanishwaho muri TB Kibeho no muri TGI/Nyamagabe, bisobanuyeko bidakwiye kuvugwa muri uru rubanza ruri HC Nyanza n'ubwo nta n'ishingiro bifite nk'uko bimaze kugaragazwa. [21] Mukamana Louise, Munderere Alphonse, Minani Vedaste, Nyiransabimana Gaudence na Gasana Gilbert biregura bavuga ko Gatare Faustin yashobora gukoreshya uburyo buteganywa n’ingingo ya 20 ya CPCCSA ivuga ko ikirego gishobora gutangwa urega ashyikirije urukiko imyanzuro iregera urukiko bitangiwe uburenganzira mu nyandiko n’umwanditsi mukuru w’urukiko ruregerwa. Icyo gihe, urega ategetswe koherereza urukiko kopi y’iyo myanzuro akoresheje umurongo wa interineti usanzwe, ikibazo cy’ikoranabuhanga cyakemuka, akabyuzuza nk’uko biteganywa mu gika cya mbere cy’iyi ngingo. Barasaba ko inyandiko zigaragazwa na Gatare Faustin zitafatwa nk’imenyetso kuko nta kigaragaza ko zavuye muri system ya iecms kuko iyo umuntu azirebye asanga zanditswe muri Microsoft word bishatse kuvuga ko yaziyandikiye ashaka kugirango atagongwa n’ibihe byo kujurira impamvu bashingiraho bavuga ko izi nyandiko zitavuye muri system ya IECMS nuko na link cyangwa source du document yaba hajuru cyangwa hasi bityo rero bagasaba ko zitashingirwaho. [22] Muri uru rubanza, ibibazo bigiye gusuzumwa ni ibi bikurikira: • Kumenya niba ubujurire bwa Gatare Faustin bwaragombaga kwakirwa kubera ko hari impamvu zitunguranye kandi zidaturutse ku bushake bwe zatumye ajurira akerewe.
## Page 105
71 GATARE v GASANA N’ABANDI • Kumenya niba cyamunara yakozwe kuwa 15/06/2022 yateshwa agaciro kuko itubahirije amategeko. • Kumenya niba hari indishyi zatangwa muri uru rubanza. II. ISESENGURA RY’IBIBAZO BIGIZE URUBANZA i Kumenya niba ubujurire bwa Gatare Faustin bwaragombaga kwakirwa kubera ko hari impamvu zitunguranye kandi zidaturutse ku bushake bwe zatumye ajurira akerewe. [23] Gatare Faustin n’umwunganira bavuga ko yatanze ikirego mu bihe bitegenywa n’amategeko ndetse ikoranabuhanga rimutengushye ku kubasha kwishyura ingwate y’amagarama abimenyesha urukiko nk’uko amategeko abiteganya nyamara Urukiko rubirengaho rufata icyemezo. Bigaragara ko urukiko rutasesenguye ingingo ya 275 CPCCSA ivuga uko babara ibihe bibarwa mu minsi cyangwa mu masaha, umunsi igikorwa cyabereyeho ntubarwa. Urukiko ruzemeze ko iby’ingingo ya 20 CPCCSA iteganya Gatare Faustin yarabikoze system ntiyamuha billing number yishyuriraho ajya mu Rukiko narwo ruragerageza bikanga yabaha umwanzuro bakamubwira ko ategereza system ikongera ikajyaho agatanga ubujurire bwe kuko ntaho babishyira. [24] Niyonzima Jean Felix avuga ko nta karengane kabaye mu mikirize y'urubanza RCA 00023/2022/TGI/NYBE kubera ko urubanza Gatare Faustin yajuriraga muri TGI Nyamagabe arirwo RC 00099/2022/TB/KIB rwaraciwe kuwa 05/07/2022 mu gihe Gatare Faustin ajurira kuwa 13/07/2022 hashingiwe ku ngingo ya 188 al.2 na 260 al.5 z’itegeko N° 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018
## Page 106
72 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi ndetse hakanashingirwa ku mirongo yatanzwe mu manza zaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ubujurire mu kwezi kwa 9/2022 kuva kuri page 27 kugeza 29 ishyizwe kuri attachment aha, aho Urukiko rw'Ubujurire(CA) rwasobanuyeko mu kubara iminsi itatu (3jrs) yo kujurira ikirego cyihutirwa, umunsi igikorwa cyakoreweho ntukurwamo, ahubwo uwo munsi nawo ubarirwamo, bigaragara ko itariki yo kuwa 05/07/2022 urubanza RC 00099/2022/TB/KIB rwaciriweho hari kuwa mbere nayo ibarwa ukaba umunsi wa mbere, kuwa 06/07/2022 hari kuwa kabiri ukaba umunsi wa kabiri, kuwa 07/07/2022 hari kuwa gatatu ukaba umunsi wa gatatu, ibi bivuze ko Gatare Faustin yagombaga kujurira bitarenze kuwa 07/07/2022 bityo rero hashingiwe ku mvugo ze n’ibimenyetso ubwe yitangiye byagarutsweho mu gika kibanziriza iki ko yatangiye kujurira kuwa 08/07/2022 bigaragara ko nta karengane kari mu rubanza RCA 00023/2022/TGI/NYBE kuko ubujurire bwa Gatare Faustin yabukoze impitagihe nk’uko Urukiko Rwisumbuye rwa Nyamagabe rwabyemeje muri uru rubanza RCA 00023/2022/TGI/NYBE dore ko impamvu Gatare Faustin yavugaga ko system itamuhaga Billing Number yo kwishyuriraho ingwate y’amagarama kuwa 08/07/2022 ubwo we yatangiraga gutegura ubujurire mu rwego rwo gusobanura impamvu ubujurire bwe yabutanze kuwa 13/07/2022 nk’uko system y’uru rubanza RCA 00023/2022/TGI/NYBE ibigaragaza ariko ibi nabyo ntibikuraho ko n’itariki nawe ubwe yivugira yo kuwa 08/07/2022 yatangiye guteguraho ubujurire bwe nabwo yabikoraga igihe cyo kujurira cyaramurangiranye. [25] Mukamana Louise, Munderere Alphonse, Minani Vedaste, Nyiransabimana Gaudence na Gasana Gilbert biregura bavuga ko Gatare Faustin yashoboraga gukoresha uburyo
## Page 107
73 GATARE v GASANA N’ABANDI buteganywa n’ingingo ya 20 ya CPCCSA ivuga ko ikirego gishobora gutangwa urega ashyikirije urukiko imyanzuro iregera urukiko bitangiwe uburenganzira mu nyandiko n’umwanditsi mukuru w’urukiko ruregerwa. Icyo gihe, urega ategetswe koherereza urukiko kopi y’iyo myanzuro akoresheje umurongo wa interineti usanzwe, ikibazo cy’ikoranabuhanga cyakemuka, akabyuzuza nk’uko biteganywa mu gika cya mbere cy’iyi ngingo. Barasaba ko inyandiko zigaragazwa na Gatare Faustin zitafatwa nk’imenyetso kuko nta kigaragaza ko zavuye muri system ya iecms kuko iyo umuntu azirebye asanga zanditswe muri Microsoft word bishatse kuvuga ko yaziyandikiye ashaka kugirango atagongwa n’ibihe byo kujurira impamvu bashingiraho bavuga ko izi nyandiko zitavuye muri system ya IECMS nuko na link cyangwa source du document yaba hajuru cyangwa hasi bityo rero bagasaba ko zitashingirwaho. UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [26] Impaka ziri muri uru rubanza zishingiye kumenya niba ubujurire bwa Gatare Faustin bwaragombaga kwakirwa kubera ko hari impamvu zitunguranye kandi zidaturutse ku bushake bwe zatumye ajurira akerewe bigaragara ko system ya iecms itakoraga. [27] Kuri iki kibazo, ingingo ya 20 y’itegeko N° 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 Itegeko ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegets ivuga ko Urukiko ruregerwa hakoreshejwe imyanzuro iregera urukiko hifashishijwe uburyo bw’ikoranabuhanga bwabigenewe bikozwe n’urega ubwe, umwunganira cyangwa umuhagarariye. Icyakora, iyo bidashoboka, ikirego gishobora gutangwa urega ashyikirije urukiko imyanzuro iregera urukiko bitangiwe
## Page 108
74 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO uburenganzira mu nyandiko n’umwanditsi mukuru w’urukiko ruregerwa. Icyo gihe, urega ategetswe koherereza urukiko kopi y’iyo myanzuro akoresheje umurongo wa interineti usanzwe, ikibazo cy’ikoranabuhanga cyakemuka, akabyuzuza nk’uko biteganywa mu gika cya mbere cy’iyi ngingo. [28] Ingingo ya 275 y’itegeko rimaze kuvugwa haruguru iteganya ko ku bihe bibarwa mu minsi cyangwa mu masaha, bibarwa umunsi ku munsi, n’isaha ku isaha hakurikijwe igihe bimara kandi umunsi igikorwa cyakoreweho ntubarwamo, ahubwo habarwa umunsi wa nyuma kigomba kurangiriraho. [29] Ingingo ya 278 y’itegeko rimaze kuvugwa haruguru ivuga ko igihe umuburanyi yakererewe kwiyambaza inzira z’ubujurire bitewe n’impamvu zikomeye zitunguranye kandi zidaturutse ku bushake bwe, igihe cyo kujurira kirongerwa kugeza igihe izo mpamvu zirangiriye. [30] Izi ngingo zimaze kuvugwa haruguru zikemura ibibazo bitandukanye bijyanye no gutanga ikirego, igihe umuburanyi yakerewe kujurira no kubara ibihe bibarwa mu minsi. [31] Urukiko rurasanga Gatare Faustin yajuriye akerewe kubera ko system ya iecms itakoraga akaba yaratangiye kujurira tariki ya 08/07/2022 ariko system ya iecms yongera gukora kuwa 13/07/2022 aribwo yatanze ubwo bujurire akaba yarajuriraga urubanza rwaciwe n’urukiko rw’ibanze rwa Kibeho tariki ya 05/07/2022. [32] Urukiko rurasanga hari ibimenyetso bigaragaza ko system itakoraga hari ibaruwa yandikiye Perezida w’urukiko rwisumbuye rwa Nyamagabe amusaba ko ikirego cye
## Page 109
75 GATARE v GASANA N’ABANDI cyakwakirwa yo kuwa 13/7/2023, hari inyandiko yakozwe na Ndizeye M. Patrick ufasha abantu gutanga ibirego igaragaza ko ubwo yafashaga Gatare Faustin gutanga ikirego ageze aho bashyira igarama system ya iecms yarangaga. Ikirego yagitanze tariki ya 8/7/2022 yahise yandikira urukiko muri help desk bigaragara muri system. Ikindi hari ifoto yafashwe igaragaza ko system itakoraga. [33] Urukiko rurasanga kuba Gatare Faustin yararengeje ibihe byo kujurira kubera ko system ya iecms itarimo gukora kandi akabimenyesha urukiko ni impamvu idasanzwe kandi itamuturutseho yari gutuma ikirego cye cyakirwa kigasuzumwa. ii Kumenya niba cyamunara yakozwe kuwa 15/06/2022 yateshwa agaciro kuko itubahirije amategeko. [34] Gatare Faustin n’umwunganira bavuga ko cyamunara yakozwe mu buryo budakurikije amategeko kubera ko itangazo rya cyamunara ryatanzwe n’umuhesha w’inkiko w’umwuga Me Niyonzima Jean Felix rigaragaza umutungo wa Gatare Faustin ugomba kugurishwa muri cyamunara, ubuso bwawo, agaciro kawo n’amatariki ya cyamunara, iyo cyamunara igakorwa mbere y’amatariki yavuzwe nyamara umutungo ukagurishwa ku giciro kiri munsi cyane ya 75% by’agaciro kagaragajwe n’umugenagaciro kari mu itangazo, kuba cyamunara ku nshuro ya gatatu itarabaye nyamara ariko amategeko abiteganya ndetse akaba ari nabyo byari biteganyijwe mu itangazo rya cyamunara yavuzeho haruguru asanga ibi bihagije kugirango cyamunara yo ku itariki batazi kuko n’uwarangije urubanza ntayo yemeza yakoreyeho ku buryo budashidikanywaho dore ko mu nyandiko yemeza ubugure muri cyamunara avuga ko cyamunara yabaye kuwa 14/06/2022 naho mu nyandiko yerekeranye y’igabana
## Page 110
76 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO ry’amafaranga yavuye muri cyamunara hakagaragazwa ko cyamunara yakozwe kuwa 15/06/2022 ubwabyo bikaba bigaragaza ko ibyakozwe byarimo guhuzagurika kuko hari ikindi kitari ugushyira mu bikorwa icyemezo cy’urukiko cyarimo gukorwa bityo n’amatariki bakayibeshyaho. [35] Gatare Faustin n’umwunganira bavuga ko Urukiko rw'Ibanze rwirengagije nkana amategeko mu rubanza RC 00099/2022/TB/KIB kuko rwavuze ko amategeko y'ishinganisha n'itangaza rya cyamunara yubahirijwe kandi Umuhesha w'Inkiko yarayishe kuko atakurikije imihango igomba kubahirizwa mu kugurisha muri cyamunara. Umuhesha w'Inkiko ntiyamenyesheje nyir'umutungo Gatare imihango ya cyamunara muri ubu buryo, Umuhesha w'inkiko ntiyamenyesheje nyir'umutuno igenagaciro ry'umutungo we n'iryo yakoresheje bigaragara ko ririmo amakosa agaragarira buri wese kuko umutungo ufite ubuso bwa 19,478Sqm igiciro cy'ubutaka akaba ari 2700/Sqm byumvikane ko ubutaka ubwabwo udashyizemo agaciro k'ibiburiho bufite agaciro ka 52,590,600Rwf ariko babariye ku gaciro ka 10,700,000Rwf ntazi aho bakuye bityo bituma n'ingwate yacibwaga abapiganwa igabanuka n'igiciro cy'umutungo muri rusange giteshwa agaciro. Umuhesha w'Inkiko ntiyamenyesheje nyir'umutungo Gatare imihango ya cyamunara uko izagenda ku ikoranabuhanga rikoreshwa mu kurangiza imanza (IECMS) kuko agomba guhuzwa n'iyo system mbere y'uko cyamanara itangira ariko nk'uko bigaragarazwa n'ibaruwa yo kuwa 02/06/2022, Umuhesha w'Inkiko ubwe yamenyesheje Gatare bigaragara ko yamusabye email ye akoresha muri system kuwa 06/06/2022 bigaragara ko cyamunara ku nshuro ya mbere (round 1) yari yararangiye ndetse na round ya 2 yaratangiye kuko cyamunara 1 yatangiye kuwa 27/05/2022 irangira kuwa
## Page 111
77 GATARE v GASANA N’ABANDI 03/06/2022 saa 14h00 naho cyamunara round ya 2 itangira kuwa 05/06/2022. [36] Gatare Faustin n’umwunganira bavuga ko imihango ya cyamunara atayimenyeshejwe kugira ngo ashobore gukoresha uburenganzira bwe yemererwa n'amategeko bwo kuba yashaka umuguzi cyangwa kuba yahakana igiciro kuri round ya 1 n'iya 2. nk'uko biteganywa n'ingingo ya 4 y'Iteka rya Minisitiri ryerekeye irangizwa ry’inyandikompesha N° 005/MOJ/AG/21 ryo ku wa 07/06/2021. Umuhesha w'Inkiko ntiyubahirije ingengabihe yitangiye ubwe mu itangazo rya cyamunara mu buryo bukurikira : Cyamunara round ya 1 yatangiye kuwa 27/05/2022 yagombaga kurangira kuwa 03/06/2022 system igatangaza uwatsinze naho cyamunara ya 2 (round 2) igatangira kuwa 05/06/2022 ikarangira kuwa 12/06/2022 izi cyamunara ebyiri zibanza nyir'umutungo utezwa cyamunara n'uwishyurizwa bafite uburenganzira bwo kwanga igiciro cyatanzwe mu gihe kitagejeje kuri 75% by'agaciro k'umutungo nk'uko biteganywa n'iteka ryavuzwe haruguru ndetse n'ingingo ya 255 al.2 ya CPCCSA. [37] Gatare Faustin n’umwunganira bavuga ko Umuhesha w'Inkiko avuga ko uwatsindiye cyamunara yayitsindiye ku nshuro ya 2 tariki ya 14/06/2022 kandi bigaragara ku ngengabihe ye ko ahubwo ariho cyamunara round ya 3 ari nayo ya nyuma ariho izaba itangiye yagombaga gusozwa tariki ya 21/06/2022 bigatera kwibaza niba cyamunara yarakoreshejwe uburyo bw'ikoranabuhanga cyangwa niba yarakoreshejwe uburyo busanzwe kuko uburyo system yubatse ntishobora gutangaza uwatsinze n'imyirondoro ye ku munsi wa mbere wa cyamunara wa round ya 3 nk'uko amatangazo abigaragaza. Ikindi iyo urebye inyandiko yemeza ubugure muri cyamunara ubona yarakozwe n'umuhesha w'Inkiko ubwe kandi ubundi ikorwa na system icyo
## Page 112
78 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO Huissier akora ni ukuyisinya gusa. Ubwe Me Niyonzima Jean Felix mu magambo ye yivugira ko cyamunara yabaye tariki ya 14/06/2022 ku nshuro ya 3 aho yagize ati ".......inyandiko yemeza ubugure n'itangazo rya cyamunara bigaragaza ko cyamunara ku nshuro ya gatatu yabaye kuwa 14/06/2022 bivuguruza ibivugwa na Gatare Faustin. System irangirizwamo imanza nayo igaragazako cyamunara ku ncuro ya gatatu yabaye kuwa 14/06/2022"....... nyamara ibi avuga ubwe bitandukanye n'itangazo rya cyamunara yatanze kuko harimo ko cyamunara ku nshuro ya 3 ari nayo ya nyuma izatangira tariki ya 14/06/2022 ikakarangira tariki ya 21/06/2022 ari nabyo byagombye kuba ari ukuri kuko aribwo buryo system iteganya. [38] Niyonzima Jean Felix avuga ko cyamunara yakozwe mu buryo bukurikije amategeko kuko itariki yo kuwa 15/06/2022 yavuzwe mu nyandiko y'igabana ry'amafaranga yavuye muri cyamunara ni ukwibeshya kwabayeho kw'imyandikire dore ko inyandiko yemeza ubugure n'itangazo rya cyamunara bigaragaza ko cyamunara ku nshuro ya gatatu yabaye kuwa 14/06/2022 bivuguruza ibivugwa na Gatare Faustin. System irangirizwamo imanza nayo igaragazako cyamunara ku ncuro ya gatatu yabaye kuwa 14/06/2022. Ikindi ni uko iby'iyi tariki ya 15/06/2022 ntabwo byigeze biburanishwaho muri TB Kibeho no muri TGI/Nyamagabe, bisobanuye ko bidakwiye kuvugwa muri uru rubanza ruri HC Nyanza n'ubwo nta n'ishingiro bifite nk'uko bimaze kugaragazwa. UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [39] Impaka ziri muri uru rubanza zishingiye kumenya niba cyamunara yakozwe kuwa 15/06/2022 yateshwa agaciro kuko itubahirije amategeko.
## Page 113
79 GATARE v GASANA N’ABANDI [40] Kuri iki kibazo, ingingo ya 253 y’itegeko N0 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi ivuga ko Mu gihe cy'amasaha mirongo ine n’umunani (48) kuva Umuhesha w'Inkiko yemeje igiciro cy'umutungo ugomba kugurishwa, akora itangazo rya cyamunara rigaragaza umutungo ugomba gutezwa cyamunara, umwirondoro wa nyirawo, umwirondoro w'ugomba kwishyurwa, impamvu ya cyamunara, aho umutungo uherereye, itariki cyamunara izaberaho n'isaha izatangiriraho. Itangazo rya cyamunara rishyirwa ku rubuga rw’imanza zirangizwa, hariho ifoto y’umutungo ugurishwa n’icyemezo gihamya ko nyir’umutungo. Rigomba kandi gushyikirizwa nyir'umutungo ugurishwa, ugomba kwishyurwa, umunyamabanga nshingwabikorwa w’Akagari k'aho umutungo uherereye, rikanatangazwa kuri Radio cyangwa Televiziyo n’ikinyamakuru cyandika bikorera mu Rwanda. Iyo ari umutungo utimukanwa itangazo rya cyamunara rimanikwa ku Biro by’Akagali k’aho uwo mutungo uherereye. Ibintu byafatiriwe ntibishobora kugurishwa muri cyamunara mbere y’iminsi itanu (5) cyamunara itangajwe. [41] Ingingo ya 255 al. 2 y’itegeko rimaze kuvugwa haruguru ivuga ko Uwafatiriye cyangwa uwafatiriwe bafite uburenganzira bwo kwanga ibiciro byatanzwe bitarenze inshuro ebyiri (2), mu gihe muri ibyo biciro nta na kimwe kigejeje ku gaciro k’ijanisha rya mirongo irindwi na gatanu ku ijana (75%) by’agaciro fatizo kagenwe. Ku nshuro ya gatatu (3), umutungo utezwa cyamunara wegukanwa n’uwatanze igiciro kinini. [42] Urukiko rurasanga muri uru rubanza umuhesha w’inkiko yatanze itangazo rya cyamunara rigaragaza ko gupiganwa mu buryo bw'ikoranabuhanga bizatangira taraki ya 27/05/2022 saa
## Page 114
80 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 14h00. Ikoranabuhanga rizatangaza ku nshuro ya mbere igiciro gisumba ibindi kuwa 03/06/2022 saa 14h00. Nihatagira uwegukana umutungo ugurishwa ipiganwa mu cyamunara ku nshuro ya kabiri rizasubukurwa kuwa 05/06/2022 ikoranabuhanga rizatangaza igiciro gisumba ibindi kuwa 12/06/2022 saa 14h00. Nihatagira uwegukana umutungo ugurishwa ipiganwa mu cyamunara ku nshuro ya gatatu ari nayo ya nyuma rizasubukurwa kuwa 14/06/2022 ikoranabuhanga rizatangaza igiciro gisumba ibindi amazina y'abapiganwe n'ibiciro byabo kuwa 21/06/2022 saa 14h00. Maze umutungo ugurishwa wegukanwe n'uwatanze igiciro kinini. [43] Urukiko rurasanga cyamanara yakozwe n’umuhesha w’inkiko yarakurikije amategeko uretse ko hari aho umuhesha w’inkiko yajyaga yibeshya kwandika amatariki ariko wareba mu zindi nyandiko ukabona bikoze neza. Urugero ni igihe cyamunara yabereye hamwe yanditse ko yabaye tariki 15/6/2022 ariko inyandiko y’ukuri wareberaho igihe cyamunara yabereye ni inyandiko yemeza ubugure muri cyamunara yakozwe kuwa 15/6/2022 igaragaza ko cyamunara yabaye kuwa 14/6/2022, uwo mutungo ukegukanwa na Uwizeyimana Celestin ku mafaranga 2.502.000 FRW. Kuba hari aho umuhesha w’inkiko yagiye yibeshya akandika ko cyamunara yabaye kuwa 15/6/2022 bigaragara ko ari ukwibeshya kandi ibi ntabwo ari impamvu yatuma cyamunara iteshwa agaciro. [44] Urukiko rurasanga ibijyanye no kuba Gatare Faustin ataramenyeshejwe ibijyanye na cyamunara, bigaragara ko Gatare Faustin yagiye amenyeshwa cyamunara mu buryo bukurikije amategeko ariko akanga gusinya kuri izo nyandiko nk’uko bigaragazwa n’inyandiko zatanzwe muri system ndetse yasabwe
## Page 115
81 GATARE v GASANA N’ABANDI Email akoresha muri IECM kugirango ashobore guhuzwa na system ya cyamunara ariko ntiyabikora. [45] Ku bijyanye n’uko umutungo wagurishijwe agaciro gato, urukiko rurasanga Gatare Faustin yari afite inshingano yo kwanga ibiciro byatanzwe, nyamara kuba yaranze guhuzwa na system ya cyamunara byatumye atamenya amukuru ajyanye na cyamunara yivutsa uburenganzira yari afite bwo kwanga ibiciro. [46] Urukiko rurasanga hashingiwe ku mpamvu zimaze kuvugwa haruguru, cyamunara yabaye kuwa 14/6/2022 yakurikije amategeko. iii Kumenya niba hari indishyi zatangwa muri uru rubanza. [47] Niyonzima Jean Felix asaba Urukiko Rukuru Urugereko rwa Nyanza gutegeka Gatare Faustin kumusubiza igihembo cy'avoka kingana na 1.000.000frw yishyuwe uwateguye imyanzuro yo kwiregura uzaburana na runo rubanza n'amafaranga y'ikurikirana rubanza angana na 500.000frw akubiyemo gusikana, gufotoza, ku imprima, itumanaho n’ingendo n’indishyi z’akababaro zingana na 2.000.000frw. [48] Mukamana Louise arasaba urukiko gutegeka ko Gatare Faustin yabasubiza amafaranga y’ikurikirarubanza angana na 1.100.000 FRW bakoresheje muri uru rubanza ni ukuvuga igihembo cy’avoka kuri buri umwe kingana 500,000 Frw hamwe n’amafaranga angana n’ibihumbi ijana 100,000 kuri buri umwe hakiyongeraho indishyi z’akababaro no gushorwa mu manza mu buryo bw’amaherere zingana na 500,000 nukuvuga ibihumbi magana atanu kuri buri wese byose bakabisaba hashingiwe ku ngingo ya 111 CPCCSA.
## Page 116
82 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO [49] Minani Vedaste arasaba urukiko gutegeka ko Gatare Faustin yabasubiza amafaranga y’ikurikirarubanza angana na 1.100.000 Frw bakoresheje muri uru rubanza nukuvuga igihembo cy’avoka kuri buri umwe kingana 500,000 Frws hamwe n’amafaranga angana n’ibihumbi ijana 100,000 kuri buri umwe hakiyongeraho indishyi z’akababaro no gushorwa mu manza mu buryo bw’amaherere zingana na 500,000 nukuvuga ibihumbi magana atanu kuri buri wese byose bakabisaba hashingiwe ku ngingo ya 111 CPCCSA. [50] Gaudence Nyiransabimana arasaba urukiko gutegeka ko Gatare Faustin yabasubiza amafaranga y’ikurikirarubanza angana na 1.100,000 Frw bakoresheje muri uru rubanza nukuvuga igihembo cy’avoka kuri buri umwe kingana 500,000 Frw hamwe n’amafaranga angana n’ibihumbi ijana 100,000 kuri buri umwe hakiyongeraho indishyi z’akababaro no gushorwa mu manza mu buryo bw’amaherere zingana na 500,000 nukuvuga ibihumbi magana atanu kuri buri wese byose bakabisaba hashingiwe ku ngingo ya 111 CPCCSA. [51] Munderere Aphonsine arasaba urukiko gutegaka ko Gatare Faustin yabasubiza amafaranga y’ikurikirarubanza angana na 1.100,000 Frw bakoresheje muri uru rubanza nukuvuga igihembo cy’avoka kuri buri umwe kingana 500,000 Frws hamwe n’amafaranga angana n’ibihumbi ijana 100,000 kuri buri umwe hakiyongeraho indishyi zakababaro no gushorwa mu manza mu buryo bwamaherere zingana na 500,000 nukuvuga ibihumbi Magana atanu kuri buri wese byose bakabisaba hashingiwe ku ngingo ya 111 CPCCSA. [52] Gasana Gilberbt arasaba urukiko gutegeka ko Gatare Faustin yabasubiza amafaranga y’ikurikirarubanza angana na 1.100,000 Frw bakoresheje muri uru rubanza nukuvuga igihembo
## Page 117
83 GATARE v GASANA N’ABANDI cy’avoka kuri buri umwe kingana 500,000 Frw hamwe n’amafaranga angana n’ibihumbi ijana 100,000 kuri buri umwe hakiyongeraho indishyi zakababaro no gushorwa mu manza mu buryo bwamaherere zingana na 500,000 nukuvuga ibihumbi magana atanu kuri buri wese byose bakabisaba hashingiwe ku ngingo ya 111 CPCCSA. UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [53] Ingingo ya 111 y’itegeko No 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi ivuga ko ikirego cy’amafaranga y’ikurikiranarubanza ni ikirego gishamikira ku kirego cy’iremezo kigamije kwishyuza ibyakoreshejwe mu rubanza. Ikirego cy’amafaranga y’ikurikiranarubanza kiburanishirizwa rimwe n’ikirego cy’iremezo. Gishobora kandi kwakirwa kikanaburanishwa n’iyo ikirego cy’iremezo cyaba kitakiriwe. [54] Ingingo ya 26 y’amabwiriza no 01/2014 agenga ibihembo mbonera by’abavoka iteganya ko mu kwishyuza imyenda irimo impaka, avoka w’urega wateguye dosiye n’inyandiko ashobora gusaba igihembo fatizo kiri hagati y’amafaranga 500.000 frw n’amafaranga 5.000.000, cyongerwaho iyo hari imyenda yagarujwe na we ubwe cyangwa n’intumwa ye, igihembo cy’inyongera cyo kwishyuza, bikabarwa hakurikijwe ijanisha riteganywa mu gace ka II k’ingingo ya 23. [55] Urukiko rurasanga Nyiransabimana Gaudence, Minani Védaste, Mukamana Louise, Gasana Gilbert na Munderere Alphonsine baburanye uru urubanza bunganiwe bityo Gatare
## Page 118
84 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO Faustin akaba agomba kubaha igihembo cy’avoka kingana n’ibihumbi magana atanu (500 000 FRW) kuri bose. [56] Kubijyanye n’indishyi zisabwa na Niyonzima Jean Felix, urukiko rurasanga mu bushishozi bw’urukiko yahabwa amafaranga y’ikurikiranarubanza angana n’ibihumbi ijana (100 000 FRW) kuko izindi ndishyi asaba atazitangira ibimenyetso. III.ICYEMEZO CY’URUKIKO [57] Rwemeje ko ikirego cyo gusubirishamo urubanza RCA 00023/2022/TGI/NYBE ku mpamvu z'akarengane cyatanzwe na Gatare Faustin nta shingiro gifite; [58] Rwemeje ko imikirize y’urubanza RCA 00023/2022/TGI/NYBE rwaciwe n’Urukiko Rwisumbuye rwa Nyamagabe idahindutse kuri byose. [59] Rutegetse Gatare Faustin guha Nyiransabimana Gaudence, Minani Védaste, Mukamana Louise, Gasana Gilbert na Munderere Alphonsine igihembo cy’avoka kingana n’ibihumbi magana atanu (500.000 FRW) kuri bose no guha Niyonzima Jean Felix amafaranga y’ikurikiranarubanza angana n’ibihihumbi ijana (100.000 FRW) [60] Rutegetse ko amagarama y’urubanza aherera ku isanduku ya Leta.
## Page 119
85 MUTABAZI v LETA Y’U RWANDA/MINADEF N’ABANDI MUTABAZI v LETA Y’U RWANDA/MINADEF N’ABANDI [Rwanda URUKIKO RW’UBUJURIRE – RCOMAA 00009/2024/CA (Nyirandabaruta, P.J., Mukamurenzi na Ngagi, J.) 29 Ugushyingo 2024] Amategeko agenga ububasha bw’Inkiko – Ububasha bw’urukiko rwajuririwe – Indishyi – Iyo hari indishyi zitandukanye ku bantu batandukanye zagenwe n’Urukiko mu rubanza rujuririrwa, ububasha bw’Urukiko rujuririwe, bureberwa ku zagenwe n’Urukiko ku muburanyi wajuriye. Incamake y’ikibazo: Ikigo cy’ubuhinzi n’ubworozi (RAB) cyagiranye amasezerano na MINADEF/ Reserve force yo gusana ibyuzi by’amazi mu Karere ka Kayonza, reserve force iha akazi Rtd.Capt. Mutabazi Steven na Rtd. 2Lt. Muzirankoni Stella nka ba Site Managers, ko gukurikirana no kugenzura ko iyo mirimo ikorwa. Abo bakozi baje guhagarikwa mu mirimo yabo itararangira ndetse ihabwa undi wo kuyikora bituma Mutabazi arega Leta y’u Rwanda/MINADEF mu Rukiko rw’Ubucuruzi avuga ko amasezerano yaseshwe ku buryo budakurikije amategeko, asaba Urukiko ko yishyurwa 119.780.544 Frw yari asigaje kwishyurwa ndetse n’indishyi zinyuranye. Urwo Rukiko rwaciye urubanza rwemeza ko ikirego cya Mutabazi nta shingiro gifite, kuko yahawe akazi nka site manager bityo guhagarikwa bikaba byarakurikije amategeko. Abarimo Habimana Fidèle, Nyandekwe Georges, Mwesigye Emmanuel, Mukimbiri Eric, Maridadi Fred na Nsabimana Paul nabo batanze ikirego mu Rukiko rw’Ubucuruzi barega Mutabazi 85
## Page 120
86 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO basaba urwo Rukiko kumutegeka kubishyura umwenda ababereyemo, ndetse n’inyungu zitandukanye ndetse muri urwo rubanza hagobokeshwamo Leta y’u Rwanda/MINADEF. Urwo Rukiko rwaciye urubanza rwemeza ko MINADEF ariyo igomba kuryozwa umwenda wose buri urega aregera. Izo manza zombi zajuririwe mu Rukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi, Mutabazi avuga ko Urukiko rw’Ubucuruzi rwirengagije ibimenyetso, naho Leta y’u Rwanda ku rundi ruhande yo ijurira ivuga ko nta masezerano ifitanye na Mutabazi na Muzirankoni, kandi nta n’ibimenyetso bagaragaje bishimangira ko ibyo bishyuza ari ukuri; isaba indishyi z’ibyo yatakaje ku rubanza. Urukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi rwahurije hamwe izo manza zombi maze ruca urubanza rwemeza ko ubujurire bwa Leta y’u Rwanda bufite ishingiro kuri bimwe, amasezerano y’imikoranire Leta y’u Rwanda/MINADEF yagiranye na Mutabazi Steven na Muzirankoni Stella yasheshwe mu buryo bukurikije amategeko; ko hari ubwishyu bungana na 31.791.476 Frw Leta y’u Rwanda/MINADEF itahaye Mutabazi Steven na Muzirankoni Stella ikaba igomba kwishyura ayo mafaranga; rwemeza ko nta mwenda Leta y’u Rwanda/MINADEF ifitiye Habimana Fidèle, Nyandekwe George, Mwesigye Emmanuel, Mukimbiri Eric, Maridadi Fred na Nsabimana Paul. Mutabazi yajuririye mu Rukiko rw’Ubujurire avugako Urukiko rutagomba kumutegeka gufatanya na Muzirankoni kwishyura kandi nawe atarishyurwa na Leta. Mu gihe Leta y’u Rwanda itariregura ku mpamvu z’ubujurire itanga inzitizi y’iburabubasha bw’Urukiko rw’ubujurire ishingiye ku mpamvu y’uko indishyi zagenwe mu rubanza rwajuririwe zitageze kuri miliyoni mirongo irindwi n’eshanu (75.000.000 Frw) z’amafaranga y’u Rwanda kuko izo yajuririye ari 31.791.476 Frw zitakongerwa kuri
## Page 121
87 MUTABAZI v LETA Y’U RWANDA/MINADEF N’ABANDI 51.778.100 Frw yategetswe kwishyura Habimana na bagenzi be mu rwego rwo kugena ububasha bw’uru Rukiko. Mutabazi kuri iyi nzitizi avuga ko indishyi zagenwe yaba izo Leta y’u Rwanda igomba kumwishyura ndetse nawe izo agomba kwishyura abandi, byose bikwiye kuba birebwaho hatitawe ku byagenwe kuri buri muburanyi, bityo izo ndishyi zikaba zirenze 75 000 000 Frw. Avuga kandi ko imirimo yakoze ifite agaciro karenze 75 000 000 Frw bityo ibyo byaherwaho hagenwa ububasha bw’Urukiko rw’ubujurire. Incamake y’icyemezo: Iyo hari indishyi zitandukanye ku bantu batandukanye zagenwe n’Urukiko mu rubanza rujuririrwa, ububasha bw’Urukiko rujuririwe, bureberwa ku zagenwe n’Urukiko ku muburanyi wajuriye. Inzitizi y’iburabubasha bw’Urukiko rw’Ubujurire ifite ishingiro. Amagarama ahwanye n’ibyakozwe mu rubanza. Nta mategeko yashingiweho Imanza zifashishijwe: Akarere ka Gicumbi v WOORD GROUP LTD, RCOMAA 00035/2022/CA; rwaciwe n’Urukiko ku wa 13/06/2022.
## Page 122
88 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO Urubanza I. IMITERERE Y’URUBANZA [1] Ku wa 08/01/2021, Ikigo cy’Ubuhinzi n’Ubworozi (RAB) cyagiranye amasezerano na Minisiteri y’Ingabo/Ishami ry’Inkeragutabara (MINADEF/ Reserve Force) yo gusana ibyuzi by’amazi (valley dams /tank) byangiritse mu karere ka Kayonza. Kugira ngo iyo mirimo igenzurwe kandi ishyirwe mu bikorwa, ku wa 21/01/2021 MINADEF/Reserve Force yahaye akazi ba “Site Managers (SMs)” barimo Rtd.Capt. Mutabazi Steven na Rtd. 2Lt. Muzirankoni Stella bahabwa akazi ko kuba kuri site ya Buhabwa I. [2] Ku wa 06/08/2021, Mutabazi Steven na Muzirankoni Stella bahagaritswe mu mirimo hakorwa ihererakanyabubasha (Handover) imirimo bari bashinzwe itararangira, ihabwa undi arayikomeza. Nyuma yo guhagarikwa, bagaragarije Ubuyobozi Bukuru bw’Inkeragutabara imbogamizi bahuye nazo mu kazi, zirimo ibirarane by’imishahara y’abakozi n’ubwishyu bw’abatanze ibikoresho (suppliers). [3] Mutabazi Steven yatanze ikirego RCOM 00117/2021/TC mu Rukiko rw’Ubucuruzi, arega Leta y’u Rwanda/MINADEF avuga ko amasezerano bagiranye yaseshwe mu buryo bunyuranyije n’amategeko, imirimo yakoraga yegurirwa undi; asaba Urukiko gutegeka ko yishyurwa 119.780.544 Frw yari asigaje kwishyurwa hakurikijwe “Bill of Quantites (BoQ)” ivuguruye, agasubizwa kandi amafaranga akomoka ku mirimo yakozwe kubera ikosa ryavutse mu gutegura iyo “BoQ” hakaba imirimo y’inyongera itagaragaramo ndetse asaba guhabwa n’indishyi zinyuranye.
## Page 123
89 MUTABAZI v LETA Y’U RWANDA/MINADEF N’ABANDI [4] Uburanira Leta y’u Rwanda yavuze ko Mutabazi Steven na Muzirankoni Stella bahagaritswe kuko bahombeje umushinga wo gusana ibyuzi by’amazi, kandi ko uretse kuba ari akazi bari bahawe, nta masezerano y’isoko yari hagati yabo na “Reserve Force”, bityo guhagarika iyo mikoranire bikaba byarakurikije amabwiriza yagengaga “Site Managers (SMs). Mu kirego kiregera kwiregura, asaba Urukiko gutegeka ko Mutabazi Steven gusubiza kuri konti y’umushinga 43.760.000 Frw yakuyeho kandi atabyemerewe, akanategekwa gutanga indishyi zikubiyemo amafaranga y’ikurikiranarubanza n’igihembo cya Avoka. [5] Mu rubanza RCOM 00117/2021/TC rwaciwe ku wa 06/04/2022, Urukiko rw’Ubucuruzi rwemeje ko ikirego cya Mutabazi Steven nta shingiro gifite, ko kuba yarahagaritswe kuba “Site Manager” izo nshingano zikegurirwa Major Munyangabe Innocent byakozwe mu buryo bukurikije amategeko; ko amafaranga n’indishyi Mutabazi Steven yasabye kwishyurwa na Leta y’u Rwanda MINADEF ntayo ahawe. Rwemeje kandi ko Mutabazi Steven adategetswe gusubiza amafaranga kuri konti y’umushinga, rumutegeka guha Leta y’u Rwanda MINADEF 500.000 Frw y’igihembo cya Avoka. [6] Habimana Fidèle, Nyandekwe Georges, Mwesigye Emmanuel, Mukimbiri Eric, Maridadi Fred na Nsabimana Paul nabo batanze ikirego RCOM 01475/2021/TC, barega Mutabazi Steven na Muzirankoni Stella basaba Urukiko rw’Ubucuruzi, kwemeza umwenda, inyungu n’indishyi zitandukanye babafitiye, hagobokeshwa Leta y’u Rwanda/MINADEF bisabwe na Mutabazi Steven kuko yavugaga ko ari yo itaratanze ubwishyu ku mirimo yakozwe, bituma nabo batishyura abo babarega.
## Page 124
90 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO [7] Urwo rubanza rwaciwe ku wa 14/04/2022, Urukiko rw’Ubucuruzi rusanga icyifuzo cyo kugobokesha Leta y’u Rwanda/MINADEF/Reserve Force mu rubanza gifite ishingiro; rwemeza ko ari yo igomba kuryozwa umwenda buri wese mu barega aregera ; ruyitegeka kwishyura Nyandekwe Georges 22.271.480 Frw, Mwesigye Emmanuel 10,215,000 Frw, Habimana Fidèle 9.936.000 Frw, Mukimbiri Eric 3.560.000 Frw, Maridadi Fred 4.661.620Frw na Nsabimana Paul 1,134,000 Frw. Rwategetse kandi RF/MINADEF kwishyura buri wese 500.000 Frw y’indishyi z’akababaro, 500.000 Frw y’igihembo cya Avoka na100.000 Frw y’ikurikiranarubanza. [8] Imanza zavuzwe haruguru zose zajuririwe mu Rukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi, Mutabazi Steven ajuririra urubanza RCOM 00117/2021/TC rwaciwe ku wa 06/04/2022, anenga ko Urukiko rw’Ubucuruzi rwirengagije impamvu yashingiyeho arega n’ibimenyetso yatanze. Leta y’u Rwanda/MINADEFF nayo yajuririye urubanza RCOM 01475/2021/TC rwaciwe ku wa 14/04/2022, isaba Urukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi gusuzuma niba yari ikwiye gutegekwa kugenera abavuzwe haruguru ubwishyu n’indishyi zitandukanye kandi nta masezerano bafitanye, nta n’ibimenyetso bagaragaje bishimangira ko ibyo bishyuza ari ukuri ; isoza isaba indishyi z’ibyo yatakaje ku rubanza. [9] Urukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi rwahurije ubwo bujurire hamwe mu rubanza RCOMA 00320/2022/HCC&CMB RCOMA 00352/2022/HCC rwaciwe ku wa 17/11/2023, rumaze kubusuzuma rwemeza ko ubujurire bwa Leta y’u Rwanda/MINADEF bufite ishingiro kuri bimwe ndetse ko n’ubujurire bwa Mutabazi Steven bufite ishingiro kuri bimwe; ko amasezerano y’imikoranire Leta y’u Rwanda/MINADEF yagiranye na Mutabazi Steven na Muzirankoni Stella yaseshwe
## Page 125
91 MUTABAZI v LETA Y’U RWANDA/MINADEF N’ABANDI mu buryo bukurikije amategeko; ko hari ubwishyu bungana na 31.791.476 Frw Leta y’u Rwanda/MINADEF itahaye Mutabazi Steven na Muzirankoni Stella ikaba igomba kwishyura ayo mafaranga; rwemeza ko nta mwenda Leta y’u Rwanda/MINADEF ifitiye Habimana Fidèle, Nyandekwe George, Mwesigye Emmanuel, Mukimbiri Eric, Maridadi Fred na Nsabimana Paul. [10] Rwemeje kandi ko umwenda Habimana Fidèle, Nyandekwe George, Mwesigye Emmanuel, Mukimbiri Eric, Maridadi Fred, Nsabimana Paul baburana ungana wose hamwe na 51.778.100 Frw bagomba kuwishyurwa na Mutabazi Steven afatanyije na Muzirankoni Stella; runemeza ko umwenda wa 31.791.476 Frw Leta y’u Rwanda ifitiye Mutabazi Steven na Muzirankoni Stella uzishyurwa abo babereyemo imyenda, bakayagabana mu buryo bukurikira: Habimana Fidèle akishyurwa 6.100.650 Frw, Kanyandekwe Georges akishyurwa 13.674.569 Frw, Mwesigye Emmanuel akishyura 6.271.955 Frw, Mukimbiri Eric akishyurwa 2.185.821 Frw, Maridadi Fred akishyurwa 2.862.210 Frw, Habimana Paul akishyurwa 696.270 Frw. [11] Rwemeje kandi ko umwenda usigaye kuri buri wese uzishyurwa na Mutabazi Steven afatanyije na Muzirankoni Stella mu buryo bukurikira : Habimana Fidèle akishyura 3.835.350 Frw, Kanyandekwe George 8.596.911 Frw, Mwesigye Emmanuel akishyurwa 3.943.045 Frw, Mukimbiri Eric akishyurwa 1.374.179 Frw, Maridadi Fred akishyurwa 1.799.410 Frw, Habimana Paul akishyurwa 437.730 Frw. [12] Rwategetse ko Mutabazi Steven afatanya na Muzirankoni Stella kwishyura Habimana Fidele, Nyandekwe George, Mwesigye Emmanuel, Mukimbiri Eric, Maridadi Fred,
## Page 126
92 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO Nsabimana Paul 1.500.000 Frw y’igihembo cya Avoka wababuraniye, bagahabwa 600.000 Frw y’ikurikiranarubanza, ni ukuvuga 100,000 Frw kuri buri wese. [13] Mutabazi Steven yajuririye imikirize y’urubanza mu Rukiko rw’Ubujurire, ubujurire bwe bwandikwa kuri RCOMAA 00009/2024/CA, ajurira avuga ko Urukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi rwamurenganyije rukamutegeka gufatanya na Muzirankoni Stella kwishyura Nyandekwe Georges na bagenzi be kandi nawe ubwe atarishyurwa na Leta y’u Rwanda (MINADEF) yamuhaye akazi; ko imirimo yakozwe yashingiraga kuri BoQ yagiye ivugururwa kugeza kuri 248.164.544 Frw, Urukiko rukaba rutaragomba kwemeza ko havanwaho 20% y’ako gaciro; ko rutagombaga kwemeza ko Mutabazi Steven yahombeje umushinga rushingiye ku gaciro k’imirimo katariko; ko rwirengagije ko ibirebana n’imirimo yakozwe itari muri “Bill of Quantites (BoQ)” yamenyeshejwe MINADEF /Reserve Force; ko rwahaye ishingiro ikimenyetso cy’amabwiriza y’akazi kandi kitavuga ukuri guhuje n’ikiburanwa; kandi ko rutahaye ishingiro indishyi z’akababaro yasabye zingana na 10.000.000 Frw. Asoza asaba kwishyurwa indishyi zingana na 2.500.000 Frw z’ibyo yatakaje ku rubanza. [14] Urubanza rwaburanishijwe mu ruhame ku wa 20/11/2024, Mutabazi Steven yunganiwe na Me Mugabo Sharif Yusuf, Leta y’u Rwanda/MINADEF ihagarariwe na Me Kayitesi Pétronille afatanyije na Me Ntwari Emile, Muzirankoni Stella ahagarariwe na Me Pascasie Madamu, Habimana Fidèle, Mukimbiri Eric, Maridadi Fred na Nsabimana Paul bahagarariwe na Me SADI Jashi, anunganiye Mwesigye Emmanuel na Kanyandekwe Georges.
## Page 127
93 MUTABAZI v LETA Y’U RWANDA/MINADEF N’ABANDI [15] Mbere y’uko Leta y’u Rwanda/MINADEF yiregura ku mpamvu z’ubujurire zatanzwe na Mutabazi Steven, yatanze inzitizi yo kutakira ubujurire bwe kabiri bwatanzwe kuko butari mu bubasha bw’Urukiko rw’Ubujurire ku mpamvu y’uko indishyi zagenwe mu rubanza rwajuririwe zitageze kuri miliyoni mirongo irindwi n’eshanu (75.000.000 Frw) z’amafaranga y’u Rwanda, nk’uko biteganywa mu ngingo ya 52, igika cya 2, agace ka 8º, y’Itegeko Nº 30/2018 ryo ku wa 02/06/2018 rigena ububasha bw’inkiko; Urukiko rwemeza ko iyo ngingo ibanza gusuzumwa mbere yo kwinjira mu mizi y’urubanza. II. ISESENGURA RY’IBIBAZO BIGIZE URUBANZA i. Kumenya niba ubujuriire bwatanzwe na Mutabazi Steven butari mu bubasha bw’Urukiko rw’Ubujurire [16] Abahagarariye Leta y’u Rwanda batanze inzitizi y’iburabubasha bw’uru Rukiko, bavuga ko ubujurire bwa Mutabazi Steven budakwiriye kwakirwa kuko butari mu bubasha bwarwo ku mpamvu y’uko nta ndishyi zigeze kuri miliyoni mirongo irindwi n’eshanu (75.000.000 Frw) zagenwe mu rubanza rujuririrwa, ndetse ko na Mutabazi Steven ubwe ari uko yabigaragaje ku ifishi yujuje ajurira. Basobanura ko Urukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi rwemeje ko amafaranga Leta y’u Rwanda/MINADEF yari isigaje kwishyura Mutabazi Steven na Muzirankoni Stella ari 31.791.476 Frw, akaba ari nayo yatumye Mutabazi Steven ajurira, kandi ko indishyi uyu yategetswe kwishyura Habimana Fidèle, Nyandekwe Georges, Mwesigye Emmanuel, Mukimbiri Eric, Maridadi Fred na Nsabimana Paul zingana na 51.778.100 Frw, zitakongerwaho mu rwego rwo
## Page 128
94 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO kugena ububasha bw’uru Rukiko, kuko zo atazijuririye, uretse ko n‘indishyi zagenewe Mutabazi Steven na Muzirankoni Stella n’izo bategetswe kwishyura ziteranyijwe zingana na 51.778.100 Frw akubiyemo 31.791.476 Frw Leta y’u Rwanda/MINADEF igomba guha Mutabazi Steven na Muzirankoni Stella na 19.986.624 Frw azahabwa abo ba suppliers bavuzwe haruguru, nk‘uko byasobanuwe mu gika cya 123 cy’urubanza rujuririrwa. [17] Basoza bavuga ko hashingiwe ku ngingo ya 52, igika cya 2, agace ka 8, y’Itegeko Nº 30/2018 ryo ku wa 02/06/2018 rigena ububasha bw’inkiko1 no ku rubanza RCOMA 00035/2022/ CA rwaciwe ku wa 13/06/2022 haburana Akarere ka Gicumbi na WOORD GROUP Ltd, mu gika cya 15, rwemejwemo ko indishyi zagenwe mu rubanza arizo zigomba gushingirwaho mu kwemeza ububasha bw’Urukiko ku rwego rw‘ubujurire bwa kabiri, ubujurire bwa Mutabazi Steven budakwiriye kwakirwa kuko butari mu bubasha bw’uru Rukiko. [18] Uhagarariye Mutabazi Steven avuga ko hashingiwe ku ngingo ya 62 y’Itegeko No 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 1 Iyo ngingo iteganya ko: “izo manza zagenwemo n’urukiko indishyi zingana nibura na miliyoni mirongo irindwi n’eshanu z’amafaranga y’u Rwanda (75.000.000 FRW) cyangwa zifite agaciro kagenwe n’umucamanza mu gihe habaye impaka kangana na miliyoni mirongo irindwi n’eshanu z’amafaranga y’u Rwanda (75.000.000 FRW);” 2 Iyo ngingo iteganya ko: “Ikiburanwa kigenwa n’ibisabwa na buri muburanyi. Ibisabwa bigaragarira mu myanzuro iregera urukiko n’imyanzuro yo kwiregura, bigashimangirwa burundu mu nama ntegurarubanza ku manza iteganyijwemo. Mu iburanisha, umuburanyi ntashobora guhindura ikiburanwa ababuranyi bose batabyemeye. Ikiburanwa ntigishobora guhindurwa mu rukiko rwajuririwe. Icyakora, ikiburanwa gishobora guhindurwa n’ibirego by’imigereka iyo bifitanye isano ihamye n’ibyo ababuranyi basaba”.
## Page 129
95 MUTABAZI v LETA Y’U RWANDA/MINADEF N’ABANDI ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi, iteganya uko bigenda iyo ababuranyi benshi baburana buri wese afite ibyo asaba cyangwa asabwa, ibyo Leta y’u Rwanda ivuga bidakwiriye guhabwa ishingiro, kuko Urukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi rwemeje ko Leta y’u Rwanda/MINADEF yishyura Mutabazi Steven 31.791.476 Frw, ku rundi ruhande rukanemeza ko Mutabazi Steven yishyura Habimana Fidèle, Nyandekwe Georges, Mwesigye Emmanuel, Mukimbiri Eric, Maridadi Fred na Nsabimana Paul 51.778.100 Frw, bivuze ko harebwe agaciro mbumbe k’izo ndishyi, hatitawe ku byagenewe buri muburanyi, indishyi zagenwe zose hamwe zirenze 75.000.000 Frw. Avuga kandi ko Mutabazi Steven yagaragaje ko imirimo yakozwe yari ifite agaciro ka 248.164.544 Frw, hanyuma Urukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi, mu gika cya 45 n‘icya 48, by’urubanza rujuririrwa, rwemeza ko imirimo yakozwe yari ifite agaciro ka 168.751.890 Frw, ako gaciro akaba ari ko kaherwaho harebwa ububasha bw’uru Rukiko kuko kagenwe n’Urukiko, ari nabyo bihuje n’umurongo watanzwe mu rubanza RCOMA 00035/2022/CA Leta y’u Rwanda/MINADEF ishingiraho imiburanire yayo, aho mu gika cya 15 cyarwo hasobanuwe ko hashingirwa ku gaciro kemejwe n’Urukiko, hadashingirwa ku kagenwe n’umuburanyi ubwe. [19] Uhagarariye Muzirankoni Stella avuga ko mu kugena ububasha bw’Urukiko rw’Ubujurire hagenderwa ku giteranyo cy’indishyi zose zategetswe mu rubanza rujuririrwa hatagendewe ku ndishyi zagenewe buri muntu, nk‘uko ingingo ya 6 y’Itegeko No22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi ibivuga, izo ndishyi zikaba zirenze 75.000.000 Frw.
## Page 130
96 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO [20] Uhagarariye Habimana Fidèle, Nyandekwe Georges, Mwesigye Emmanuel, Mukimbiri Eric, Maridadi Fred na Nsabimana Paul, avuga ko harebwa indishyi zitumvikanwaho zatumye Mutabazi Steven ajurira, hagashingirwa ku biteganywa mu ngingo ya 52, y’Itegeko Nº30/2018 ryo ku wa 02/06/2018 rigena ububasha bw’inkiko. UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [21] Impaka kuri iki kibazo zishingiye ku kumenya ikigomba gushingirwaho mu kwemeza ko ubujurire bwa kabiri bwakirwa niba ari indishyi zagenwe n’urukiko cyangwa se niba ari agaciro k’amasezerano yahereweho habarwa izo ndishyi. Zishingiye kandi nanone ku kumenya, mu gihe mu rubanza rujurirwa hagenwemo indishyi z’uburyo bubiri, niba harebwa igiteranyo cy’indishyi zose zagenwe cyangwa niba harebwa zimwe muri zo gusa. [22] Ikibazo cyo kumenya ikigomba gushingirwaho hagenwa ububasha bw’Urukiko rw’Ubujurire ku rwego rw’ubujurire bwa kabiri, cyatanzweho umurongo mu rubanza RCOMAA 00035/2022/CA rwaciwe n’uru Rukiko ku wa 13/06/2022, haburana Akarere ka Gicumbi na WOORD GROUP Ltd. Muri urwo rubanza, n’ubwo hasuzumwaga ikigomba gushingirwaho hagati y‘indishyi zagenwe n’urukiko n’izasabwe n’umuburanyi, mu gika cyarwo cya 15, Urukiko rwasobanuye ko ingingo ya 52, igika cya kabiri, 8o, y’Itegeko Nº30/2018 ryo ku wa 02/06/2018 rigena ububasha bw’inkiko ivuga ko iyo hari indishyi zagenwe mu rubanza ari zo zigomba gushingirwaho, naho byaba ngombwa ko hashingirwa ku gaciro k’ikiburanwa hakarebwa agaciro kemejwe n’Urukiko nyuma y’impaka z’ababuranyi; haba nta gaciro kagenwe n’inkiko hagashingirwa ku kagenwe
## Page 131
97 MUTABAZI v LETA Y’U RWANDA/MINADEF N’ABANDI n’umuhanga iyo bibaye ngombwa. Mu yandi magambo, ku bijyanye n’iyakirwa ry’ubujurire bwa kabiri, Umushingamategeko akaba atarashatse ko hashingirwa ku gaciro umuburanyi yigeneye ubwe, ahubwo iyo hari indishyi zagenwe n’Urukiko ari zo zishingirwaho hasuzumwa niba ubujurire bwa kabiri bwa kwakirwa. Ibyo ni nako byagiye bigarukwaho mu manza zitandukanye zaciwe n’uru Rukiko3. [23] Muri urwo rubanza kandi mu gika cyarwo cya 16, Urukiko rwagaragaje ko iby’uko iyo hari indishyi zagenwe mu rubanza rujuririrwa ari zo zishingirwaho hasuzumwa ububasha bw’Urukiko mu bujurire bwa kabiri, ari wo murongo ukoreshwa mu Rukiko rw’Ubujurire, runagaragaza izindi manza zinyuranye wakoreshejwemo4. [24] Mu rubanza rujuririrwa, mu gika cya 45-48, Urukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi rwasanze agaciro kose k’isoko nyuma yo kuvugururwa kari 168.75.890 Frw, mu cyemezo rwafashe, rwemeza ko umwenda Leta y’u Rwanda/MINADEF isigaje kwishyura Mutabazi Steven na Muzirankoni Stella ungana na 31.791.476 Frw, ruyitegeka kuyabishyura, runategeka Mutabazi Steven afatanyije na Muzirankoni Stella kwishyura Habimana 3 Urubanza NºRCOMAA 00075/2022/CA rwaciwe ku wa 28/06/2024, haburana BANK OF KIGALI Plc na MUTARA ENTERPRISES Ltd igika cya 16 n’izindi manza nyinshi zaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ubujurire. 4 urubanza No RCOMAA 00013/2021/CA haburana HABYARIMANA Charles na MTN RWANDACELL Ltd n’abandi mu gika cyarwo cya 39; urubanza Nº RSOCAA 0004/2018/CA rwaciwe ku wa 09/11/2018, haburana Georges NIHAL BOPEARATCHY na KARONGI TEA FACTORY Ltd, n’urubanza RCOMAA 00004/2020/CA rwaciwe ku wa 11/12/2020, hajuriyemo MABUYE Joseph, NZIZERA Alexandre, PAJ REAL ESTATE Ltd na WAREHOUSE barega SHANE Martin Dale na MUGIRANEZA Pascal.
## Page 132
98 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO Fidèle, Nyandekwe George, Mwesigye Emmanuel, Mukimbiri Eric, Maridadi Fred, Nsabimana Paul umwenda ungana na 51.778.100 Frw. [25] Uru Rukiko rurasanga nyuma y’impaka z’ababuranyi, Urukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi rwaremeje ko Mutabazi Steven na Muzirankoni Stella bishyurwa na Leta y’u Rwanda/MINADEF umwenda ungana na 31.791.476 Frw akaba ari yo agomba gushingirwaho hasuzumwa ko ubujurire bwe buri mu bubasha bw’Urukiko rw’Ubujurire, hashingiwe ku biteganyijwe mu ngingo ya 52, igika cya 2, agace ka 8º, y’Itegeko N°30/2018 ryo ku wa 02/06/2018 ryavuzwe haruguru. [26] Urukiko rushingiye ku murongo wibukijwe haruguru, uvuga ko iyo mu rubanza rujuririrwa hari indishyi zagenwe, izo ndishyi ari zo zishingirwaho mu kugaragaza ububasha bw’urukiko, rurasanga isuzuma ry’ububasha bw’uru Rukiko bwo kwakira ubujurire bwatanzwe na Mutabazi Steven, indishyi zagenwe n’Urukiko, Mutabazi Steven yajuririye, ari zo zigomba gushingirwaho. Rurasanga rero ibyo Mutabazi Steven n’Avoka umwunganira bavuga ko ububasha bw’Urukiko rw’Ubujurire bwareberwa ku gaciro k’isoko ryose kemejwe n’Urukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi kangana n’amafaranga y’u Rwanda 168.751.890Frw nta shingiro bifite, kuko iyo hari indishyi zagenwe mu rubanza, izo ndishyi ari zo zigomba gushingirwaho mu kugena ububasha bw’Urukiko rw’Ubujurire. [27] Urukiko rurasanga kandi ibyo Mutabazi Steven na Muzirankoni Stella bavuga ko ububasha bw’Urukiko bwareberwa ku giteranyo cy’ibyo Leta yategetswe kwishyura Mutabazi Steven n’ibyo uyu yategetswe kwishyura abo yari abereyemo umwenda (suppliers) [(31.791,476Frw+51.778.100 Frw]) = 83.569.576Frw] nabyo bitahabwa ishingiro, kuko
## Page 133
99 MUTABAZI v LETA Y’U RWANDA/MINADEF N’ABANDI indishyi zagenwe zivugwa zishingirwaho hasuzumwa ububasha bw’uru Rukiko, ari izajuririwe, ni ukuvuga izo Mutabazi Steven atishimiye bigatuma ajuririra uru Rukiko. Bikaba byumvikana ko atari indishyi izo ari zo zose zagenwe mu rubanza rujuririrwa, ahubwo ni izo uwajuriye atishimiye. Ibi bivuze ko muri uru rubanza, indishyi zagenwe zireberwa ku ngano y’umwenda Leta y’u Rwanda/MINADEF yategetswe kwishyura Mutabazi Steven na Muzirankoni Stella mu rubanza rujuririrwa zingana na 31,791,476 Frw, kuko ari zo Mutabazi Steven atishimiye akazijuririra. Kandi nk’uko bigaragara, izo ndishyi ntizigeze kuri miliyoni mirongo irindwi n’eshanu (75.000.000Frw) ziteganywa n’itegeko. [28] Rurasanga ibyo Mutabazi Steven n’Avoka we ndetse n’ibyo Avoka uhagarariye Muzirankoni Stella bavuga ko ububasha bw’Urukiko bwagenwa harebwa igiteranyo cy’indishyi bagenewe n’izo bategetswe kwishyura abagemuriye ibikoresho umushinga (suppliers) hashingiwe ku ngingo ya 6 y‘Itegeko No 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi yavuzwe haruguru, nta shingiro byahabwa, kuko, uretse n’uko byamaze kwemezwa ko indishyi zagenwe ari zo zishingirwaho ububasha bw’urukiko, ibiteganywa muri iyo ngingo ntibyashingirwaho muri uru rubanza, kuko hajuririwe gusa indishyi zagenewe Mutabazi Steven na Muzirankoni Stella naho izo bategetswe kwishyura zo zitajuririwe. [29] Hashingiwe rero ku bisobanuro bimaze gutangwa, Urukiko rw’Ubujurire rurasanga ubujurire bwa Mutabazi Steven budakwiriye kwakirwa kuko butari mu bubasha bw’Urukiko rw’Ubujurire, kubera ko mu rubanza ajuririra, indishyi yagenewe akazijuririra zitageze kuri miliyoni mirongo irindwi n’eshanu
## Page 134
100 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO z’amafaranga y’u Rwanda (75.000.000 Frw) ziteganywa mu ngingo ya 52, igika cya 2, agace ka 8º, y’Itegeko N°30/2018 ryo ku wa 02/06/2018 rigena ububasha bw’inkiko. ii. Kumenya niba amafaranga y’ikurikiranarubanza n’igihembo cya Avoka asabwa muri uru rubanza afite ishingiro. [30] Uhagarariye Habimana Fidèle, Nyandekwe George, Mwesigye Emmanuel, Mukimbiri Eric na Maridadi Fred avuga ko bashowe mu manza z’amaherere kuko iyo baza kwishyurwa nk’uko byategetswe n’inkiko bikubahirizwa n’abatsinzwe, batari kwirirwa bashaka Avoka wo kubaburanira. Ku bw’ibyo asaba Urukiko rw’Ubujurire gutegeka Mutabazi Steven kubishyura buri wese 1.000.000 Frw y’igihembo cya Abavoka na 300.000 Frw y’ikurikiranarubanza mu Rukiko rw’Ubujurire. [31] Uhagarariye Muzirankoni Stella asaba gutegeka Mutabazi Steven kumwishyura 1.500.000 Frw n’igihembo cya Avoka kingana na 3.000.000 Frw. [32] Uhagarariye Mutabazi Steven asaba ko Leta y’u Rwanda/MINADEF imwishyura indishyi zingana na 2.500.000 Frw z’ibyo yatakaje ku rubanza. Avuga ko amafaranga y’ibyatakajwe ku rubanza asabwa n’abagemuye ibikoresho (suppliers) yaryozwa uregwa kuri uru rwego ; naho asabwa na Muzirankoni Stella nta shingiro afite, kuko yivugiye ko yari arwaye atigeze akora inshingano ze, izo ndishyi akaba akwiye kuzisaba uregwa wamuzanye mu rubanza. [33] Abahagarariye Leta y’u Rwanda bavuga ko ibisabwa na Mutabazi Steven nta shingiro bifite, ko adakwiye gusaba Leta y’u
## Page 135
101 MUTABAZI v LETA Y’U RWANDA/MINADEF N’ABANDI Rwanda/MINADEF indishyi izo ari zo zose kuko nta kosa yamukoreye. UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [34] Ingingo ya 111 y’Itegeko N° 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi iteganya ibikurikira: “Ikirego cy’amafaranga y’ikurikiranarubanza ni ikirego gishamikira ku kirego cy’iremezo kigamije kwishyuza ibyakoreshejwe mu rubanza. Ikirego cy’amafaranga y’ikurikiranarubanza kiburanishirizwa rimwe n’ikirego cy’iremezo. Gishobora kandi kwakirwa kikanaburanishwa n’iyo ikirego cy’iremezo cyaba kitakiriwe”. [35] Urukiko rurasanga, kuba Muzirankoni Stella, Habimana Fidèle, Nyandekwe George, Mwesigye Emmanuel, Mukimbiri Eric na Maridadi Fred barakurikiranye uru rubanza bagashaka Avoka wo kubaburanira, byumvikana ko amafaranga basaba afite ishingiro, ariko ayo basaba ari menshi harebwe ko urubanza rugarukiye ku nzitizi y’iburabubasha bw’uru Rukiko; bityo mu bushishozi bwarwo rukaba rugeneye Muzirankoni Stella amafaranga ibihumbi magana atanu (500.000 Frw) y’igihembo cya Avoka n’amafaranga ibihumbi magana abiri (200.000 Frw) y’ikurikiranarubanza, kuri uru rwego, naho Habimana Fidèle, Nyandekwe George, Mwesigye Emmanuel, Mukimbiri Eric na Maridadi Fred bakaba bagenewe bose hamwe amafaranga ibihumbi magana atanu (500.000 Frw) y’igihembo cya Avoka n’amafaranga ibihumbi magana abiri (200.000 Frw) y’ikurikiranarubanza, bose bakaba bagomba kuyahabwa na Mutabazi Steven. Urukiko rurasanga kandi amafaranga y’ibyatakajwe ku rubanza angana na miliyoni ebyiri n’ibihumbi
## Page 136
102 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO magana atanu (2,500,000Frw) Mutabazi Steven asaba guhabwa na Leta y’u Rwanda/MINADEF, atayahabwa kuko ubujurire yatanze butakiriwe. III. ICYEMEZO CY’URUKIKO [36] Rwemeje ko inzitizi y’iburabubasha bw’Urukiko rw’Ubujurire yatanzwe na Leta y’u Rwanda/MINADEF ifite ishingiro; [37] Rwemeje ko ubujurire bwatanzwe na Mutabazi Steven butakiriwe kuko butari mu bubasha bw’Urukiko rw’Ubujurire; [38] Rutegetse Mutabazi Steven kwishyura Muzirankoni Stella amafaranga ibihumbi magana atanu (500.000 Frw) y’igihembo cya Avoka n’amafaranga ibihumbi magana abiri (200.000 Frw) y’ikurikiranarubanza, kuri uru rwego; [39] Rutegetse Mutabazi Steven kwishyura Habimana Fidèle, Nyandekwe George, Mwesigye Emmanuel, Mukimbiri Eric na Maridadi Fred bose hamwe amafaranga ibihumbi magana atanu (500.000Frw) y’igihembo cya Avoka n’amafaranga ibihumbi magana abiri (200.000 Frw) y’ikurikiranarubanza, kuri uru rwego; [40] Ruvuze ko amagarama yatanzwe ahwanye n’ibyakozwe mu rubanza.
## Page 137
103 UWANTEGE v. NIYONSHUTI N’ABANDI UWANTEGE v. NIYONSHUTI N’ABANDI [Rwanda URUKIKO RW’UBUJURIRE – RCOMAA 00043/2024/CA (Rutazana, P.J.) 19 Ugushyingo 2024] Amategeko agenga imiburanishirize y’imanza z’ubucuruzi – Ibirego byihutirwa – Ibarwa ry’ibihe by’ubujurire ku birego byihutirwa – Ibihe by’ubujurire ku birego by’ihutirwa bibarwa hashingiwe ku biteganywa n’ingingo ya 188 y’Itegeko N° 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/4/2018 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi – Ibikubiye muri iyi ngingo bigaragaza ko aribwo buryo bwihariye bwo kubara ibyo bihe, kandi ikaba ari n’irengayobora ku ihame rusange riteganyijwe mu ngingo ya 275 nayo y’iryo tegeko. Incamake y’ikibazo: Uwantege yagiranye amasezerano y’inguzanyo na Access Bank (Rwanda) Ltd imuguriza amafaranga angana na 150 000 000 Frw nawe ayiha ingwate y’umutungo we utimukanwa ubaruye kuri UPI: 3/03/04/02/953 mu rwego rwo kwishingira kuzishyura iyo nguzanyo. Uwantege yananiwe kwishyura uwo mwenda bituma Banki isaba Umwanditsi Mukuru icyemezo cyo kugurishwa ingwate mu cyamunara, irabyemererwa uwo mutungo ugurwa n’uwitwa Nizeyimana Venant. Uwantege yandikiye Umwanditsi Mukuru amusaba gutesha agaciro cyamunara ariko ntiyasubizwa, aregera Urukiko rw’Ubucuruzi arega Nizeyimana Iddi Ibrahim (wagurishije 103
## Page 138
104 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO ingwate), Access Bank, Nizeyimana Venant ndetse na RDB, asaba Urukiko gutesha agaciro cyamunara kuko yakozwe mu buryo bunyuranyije n’amategeko. Urwo Rukiko rwaciye urubanza rwemeza ko Cyamunara yakozwe mu buryo bukurikije amategeko. Uwantege atishimiye icyo cyemezo yarujuririye mu Rukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi avuga ko mu icibwa ry’urubanza rujuririrwa hirengagijwe ibikorwa by’ushinzwe kugurisha ingwate byerekana ko cyamunara yakozwe mu buryo bunyuranyije n’amategeko, no gusaba ko indishyi yategetswe kwishyura abaregwa zivanwaho. Urukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi rubyibwirije rwabyukije ikibazo cyo kumenya niba Uwantege yaba atarajuriye impitagihe, impande zombi zijya impaka kuri icyo kibazo, urwo Rukiko rusanga Uwantege yarajuriye impitagihe rwemeza ko ubujurire bwe nta shingiro bufite. Uwantege yajuririye mu Rukiko rw’Ubujurire avuga ko Urukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi rwemeje ko yajuriye akerewe rwirengagije ibiteganywa n’ingingo ya 275 y’Itegeko Nº 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi iteganya ko mu kubara ibihe byo kujurira bibarwa mu minsi, umunsi igikorwa cyakoreweho utabarwa, agasaba ko ayo makosa Urukiko rwakoze yakosorwa. Ku ruhande rw’abaregwa bavuga ko ubujurire bw’Uwantege budafite ishingiro kuko atabasha kugaragaza inenge asaba ko ikosorwa mu rubanza rujurirwa, akaba atavuguruza Urukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi aho rwemeje ko ibihe byo kujurira ku birebana n’ibirego byihutirwa bibarwa hagendewe ku biteganywa n’ingingo ya 188 igika cya 2 y’Itegeko Nº 22/2018
## Page 139
105 UWANTEGE v. NIYONSHUTI N’ABANDI ryo ku wa 29/04/2018, naho ingingo ya 275 nayo y’iryo tegeko ikaba ikoreshwa ku bujurire bw’ibirego bisanzwe. Incamake y’icyemezo: Ibihe by’ubujurire ku birego byihutirwa bibarwa hashingiwe ku biteganywa n’ingingo ya 188 y’Itegeko N° 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/4/2018 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi. Ibikubiye muri iyi ngingo bigaragaza ko aribwo buryo bwihariye bwo kubara ibyo bihe, kandi ikaba ari n’irengayobora ku ihame rusange riteganyijwe mu ngingo ya 275 nayo y’iryo tegeko. Ubujurire nta shingiro bufite. Amagarama ahwanye n’ibyakozwe mu rubanza. Amategeko yashingiweho: Itegeko N° 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/4/2018 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi, ingingo ya 188, iya 260 n’iya 275. Imanza zifashishijwe: SOPROMETAL LTD v BANQUE POPULAIRE DU RWANDA Ltd n’undi, RCOMAA 00031/2020/CA, rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ubujurire ku wa 25/08/2020. Ubushinjacyaha v Kantesi Odette n’undi, RPA 00020/2024/CA; rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ubujurire ku wa 27/09/2024.
## Page 140
106 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO Urubanza I. IMITERERE Y’URUBANZA [1] Mu mwaka wa 2021 Uwantege Louise yagiranye na ACCESS BANK (RWANDA) Ltd amasezerano y’iguriza, ahabwa inguzanyo ingana na 150.000.000 Frw nawe atanga ingwate y’umutungo we utimukanwa ubaruye kuri UPI : 3/03/04/02/953 mu rwego rwo kwishingira kuzishyura iyo nguzanyo. [2] Uwantege Louise ntiyishyuye iyo nguzanyo nk’uko yabisezeranye na ACCESS BANK (RWANDA) Ltd, bituma iyi banki isaba Umwanditsi Mukuru icyemezo cyo kugurisha ingwate iragihabwa, maze uwitwa Niyonshuti Iddi Ibrahim washinzwe kugurisha iyo ngwate agurisha umutungo wavuzwe haruguru muri cyamunara yabaye ku wa 17/01/2024, wegukanwa na Nizeyimana Venant ku giciro kingana na 188.650.000 Frw. Nyuma y’iyo cyamunara, Uwantege Louise yandikiye Umwanditsi Mukuru amusaba gutesha agaciro iyo cyamunara mu ibaruwa ye yakiriwe n’Ibiro by’Umwanditsi Mukuru ku wa 23/01/2024, ariko ntiyasubizwa. [3] Nyuma y’aho Uwantege Louise yatanze ikirego mu Rukiko rw’Ubucuruzi, arega Nizeyimana Iddi Ibrahim (uwashinzwe kugurisha ingwate), ACCESS BANK (RWANDA) Ltd, Nizeyimana Venant n’Ikigo cy’Igihugu cy’Iterambere (RDB), asaba ko cyamunara yavuzwe haruguru iteshwa agaciro kuko yakozwe mu buryo bunyuranyije n’ingingo ya 25 n’iya 27 z’Amabwiriza No 001/2020/ORG yo kuwa 12/05/2020 y’Umwanditsi Mukuru agenga ibyerekeye gucunga, gukodesha, kugurisha mu cyamunara no kwegukana ingwate, nk’uko
## Page 141
107 UWANTEGE v. NIYONSHUTI N’ABANDI yavuguruwe kugeza ubu, ashingiye ku mpamvu zikurikira: kuba atarashyikirijwe igenagaciro ry’umutungo wagurishijwe kimwe n’izindi mpapuro zirebana na cyamunara, kuba atarahujwe na system ikoreshwa mu guteza cyamunara imitungo, kuba cyamunara yarakozwe mu bwiru bigatuma umutungo we uteshwa agaciro ukagurishwa ku mafaranga macye cyane, kuba igenagaciro ryakoreshejwe atari iryo mu gihe cya cyamunara bikaba byaratumye umutungo ugurishwa ku giciro gito cyane, no kuba imihango yose ya cyamunara itarakorewe muri system ikoreshwa muri cyamunara. [4] Abaregwa bose bireguye bavuga ko cyamunara yakozwe mu buryo bukurikije amategeko bityo ikaba idakwiriye guteshwa agaciro, banasaba guhabwa amafaranga y’ikurikiranarubanza n’igihembo cya Avoka; Nizeyimana Venant anongeraho ikirego kigamije kwiregura, avuga ko atarashyikirizwa inzu yaguze mu cyamunara, ko kandi Uwantege Louise yagiye akura bimwe mu byubatse iyo nzu by’agaciro akabisimbuza ibindi bidafite agaciro, ko rero asaba gusubizwa ikiguzi yatanze nyir’umutungo akawusubirana ndetse agahabwa indishyi z’akababaro. RDB yo ntiyitabye Urukiko, urubanza ruburanishwa idahari kuko Urukiko rwasanze yarahamagawe mu buryo bukurikije amategeko. [5] Mu rubanza RCOM 00774/2024/TC rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ubucuruzi ku wa 25/06/2024 rwasanze cyamunara yavuzwe haruguru yarakozwe mu buryo bukurikije amategeko rushingiye ku mpamvu zikurikira: kuba Uwantege Louise yaramenyeshejwe inyandiko zose zijyanye na cyamunara binyuze ku mwana we witwa Niyo Elie, kuba Uwantege Louise ari we wanze guhuzwa na system irangirizwamo imanza kuko yasabwe gutanga email kugira ngo bamuhuze nayo akabyanga; kuba Uwantege Louise
## Page 142
108 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO yarahawe integuza na Banki mu mpera z’ukwezi kwa 02/2023, mu kwezi gukurikiyeho hagakorwa igenagaciro kandi akarimenyeshwa, akaba rero atavuga ko ritakozwe ku gihe kuko ryari ritaramara umwaka, kandi akaba yari afite uburenganzira bwo kurinyomoza. [6] Urukiko rushingiye kuri izo mpamvu rwemeje ko cyamunara idateshejwe agaciro, rutegeka Uwantege Louise kwishyura Nizeyimana Venant na Niyonshuti Iddi Ibrahim 500.000 Frw y’igihembo cya Avoka buri wese, no kwishyura ACCESS BANK (RWANDA) Ltd 1.000.000 Frw y’igihembo cya Avoka. [7] Uwantege Louise yajuririye urwo rubanza mu Rukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi kuwa 28/06/2024 agamije kugaragaza ko mu icibwa ryarwo hirengagijwe ibikorwa by’ushinzwe kugurisha ingwate byerekana ko cyamunara yakozwe mu buryo bunyuranyije n’amategeko, no gusaba ko indishyi yategetswe kwishyura abaregwa zivanwaho. Abaregwa (uretse RDB itaritabye Urukiko) bireguye bavuga ko ubujurire bwa Uwantege Louise nta shingiro bufite, buri wese asaba amafaranga y’ibyagiye ku rubanza, Nizeyimana Venant anatanga ubujurire bwuririye ku bundi asaba guhabwa indishyi z’akababaro zihwanye n’agaciro k’ibikoresho Uwantege Louise yakuye ku nzu yaguze. [8] Urukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi rwaburanishije urubanza ku wa 12/07/2024 ababuranyi bose bahari uretse RDB ; Urukiko rubyibwirije rwabyukije ikibazo cyo kumenya niba Uwantege Louise yarajuriye mu gihe giteganywa n’amategeko, kigibwaho impaka, Me Komezusenge Déogratias umuhagarariye avuga ko ubujurire bwakozwe hubahirijwe igihe cy’imisi itatu yo kujurira naho abaregwa bose bavuga ko ibihe byo kujurira bitubahirijwe.
## Page 143
109 UWANTEGE v. NIYONSHUTI N’ABANDI Urukiko rwemeza ko ruzasuzumira icyo kibazo hamwe n’urubanza mu mizi. [9] Mu rubanza RCOMA 00397/2024/HCC rwaciwe n’Urukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi ku wa 17/07/2024, rwemeje ko ubujurire bwatanzwe na Uwantege Louise butakiriwe kuko bwatanzwe impitagihe; naho ubujurire bwuririye ku bundi bwatanzwe na Nizeyimana Venant butakiriwe uretse gusa ku birebana n’amafaranga y’igihembo cya Avoka, kuko n’ubujurire bw’ibanze (bwa Uwantege Louise) butakiriwe; rutegeka Uwantege Louise kwishyura abaregwa bose 500.000 Frw y’igihembo cya Avoka ku rwego rw’ubujurire, yiyongera kuyo bagenewe ku rwego rubanza, naho ku bireba Niyonshuti Iddi Ibrahim na ACCESS BANK (RWANDA) hakiyongeraho Plc 100.000 Frw y’ikurikiranarubanza; ku birebana n’amafaranga y’ingwate y’amagarama Uwantege Louise yatanze ajurira, rwemeza ko aguma mu Isanduku ya Leta kuko ahwanye n’ibyakozwe mu rubanza. [10] Uwantege Louise yongeye kujuririra Urukiko rw’Ubujurire ashingiye ku mpamvu y’uko Urukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi rwemeje ko yajuriye akerewe rwirengagije ibiteganywa n’ingingo ya 275 y’Itegeko Nº 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi, agasaba uru Rukiko kubikosora. [11] Abaregwa bose (uretse RDB itarireguye ntinitabe Urukiko) bireguye bavuga ko ubujurire bwa Uwantege Louise nta shingiro bufite, kuko atashoboye kuvuguruza ibyashingiweho n’Urukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi rwemeza ko yajuriye akerewe. Ahubwo basaba ko ategekwa kubishyura amafaranga y’igihembo cya Avoka n’ay’ikurikiranarubanza kuri uru rwego. Nizeyimana
## Page 144
110 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO Venant yasabye Urukiko gutegeka Uwantege Louise kumwishyura agaciro k’ibikoresho yakuye ku nzu nyuma y’uko igurishijwe, n’indishyi z’igihombo aterwa n’amafaranga y’ubukode akomeje kwishyura kandi yagombye kuba akoresha inzu ye yaguze. [12] Urubanza rwaburanishijwe mu ruhame kuwa 11/11/2024 Uwantege Louise ahagarariwe na Me Komezusenge Déogratias na Me Nuwagaba James, Niyonshuti Iddi Ibrahim yunganiwe na Me Kwizera Bernard, Nizeyimana Venant ahagarariwe na Me Rugwizangoga Samuel, ACCESS BANK (RWANDA) Ltd ihagarariwe na Me Uwizeyimana Jean Baptiste, RDB yaramenyeshejwe itariki y’iburanisha ariko ntiyiregura ntiyanitaba Urukiko nta n’impamvu itanze. [13] Hashingiwe ku mpaka zagaragajwe haruguru, Urukiko rurasuzuma ibibazo bikurikira bigize urubanza : a Kumenya niba Urukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi rwarakoze ikosa mu kwemeza ko Uwantege Louise yajuriye akerewe ; b Kumenya niba ubujurire bwuririye ku bundi bwatanzwe na Nizeyimana c Venant bukwiriye kwakirwa ; d Kumenya niba amafaranga y’ikurikiranarubanza n’ay’igihembo cya Avoka asabwa n’ababuranyi afite ishingiro.
## Page 145
111 UWANTEGE v. NIYONSHUTI N’ABANDI II. ISESENGURA RY’IBIBAZO BIGIZE URUBANZA - Kumenya niba Urukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi rwarakoze ikosa mu kwemeza ko Uwantege Louise yajuriye akerewe [14] Abahagarariye Uwantege Louise mu myanzuro yabo no mu miburanire yabo bavuga ko Urukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi rwemeje ko ubujurire bwe butagomba kwakirwa kuko yajuriye akerewe rwirengagije ko ingingo ya 275 y’Itegeko Nº 22/218 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi iteganya ko mu kubara ibihe byo kujurira bibarwa mu minsi, umunsi igikorwa cyakoreweho utabarwa. Bavuga kandi ko harebwe ubwuzuzanye bw’amategeko, ubujurire bwa Uwantege Louise bukwiriye kwakirwa hashingiwe no ku ngingo ya 52 y’Itegeko Nº 30/2018 ryo ku wa 02/06/2028 rigena ububasha bw’inkiko, ngo kuko ari irengayobora ku biteganyijwe mu ngingo ya 188 yavuzwe haruguru y’Itegeko Nº 22/218 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi. [15] Abahagarariye Uwantege Louise kandi bavuga ko n’urubanza RCOMAA 00031/2020/CA rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ubujurire rutagombaga gushingirwaho nk’urwatanze umurongo nk’uko byakozwe mu rubanza rwajuririwe, kuko umurongo urwo rubanza rwatanze wahinduwe n’urubanza RCOMAA 00090/2022/CA narwo rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ubujurire ku wa 14/10/2022, aho mu gika cyarwo cya 24 rwasobanuye ko umunsi urubanza rwasomeweho utabarwa, ko rero hashingiwe kuri ibyo bisobanuro, itariki ya nyuma Uwantege
## Page 146
112 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO Louise yari gutangiraho ubujurire bwe ari iya 28/06/2024 kandi akaba ari nako yabikoze, bityo bukaba bwaragombaga kwakirwa. [16] Abaregwa bose (uretse RDB itarireguye ntinitabe Urukiko) bireguye bavuga ko ubujurire bwa Uwantege Louise nta shingiro bufite. Basobanura ko nk’uko byemejwe mu rubanza rwajuririwe ibihe byo kujurira ku birebana n’ibirego byihutirwa bibarwa hagendewe ku biteganywa n’ingingo ya 188 igika cya 2 y’Itegeko Nº 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryavuzwe haruguru, naho ingingo ya 275 nayo y’iryo tegeko ikaba ikoreshwa ku bujurire bw’ibirego bisanzwe, kandi mu bujurire bwe Uwantege Louise akaba atabasha kubivuguruza ngo agaragaze inenge asaba ko ikosorwa. Naho ku bijyanye n’urubanza RCOMAA 00090/2022/CA abahagarariye Uwantege Louise bavuga ko rwakuyeho umurongo washingiweho mu rubanza rwajuririwe, abaregwa bireguye bavuga ko atari ukuri ku mpamvu y’uko izo manza zombi zidahuje kamere, kuko mu rubanza RCOMAA 00090/2022/CA hasuzumwe ibijyanye n’ibarwa ry’ibihe byo kuregera Umwanditsi Mukuru. UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [17] Impaka kuri iki kibazo zishingiye ku kumenya niba Urukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi rwarakoze ikosa mu kwemeza ko ubujurire Uwantege Louise yatanze ajuririra urubanza rwaciwe ku kirego gisaba gutesha agaciro cyamunara bwatanzwe impitagihe ku buryo butagombaga kwakirwa. [18] Ingingo ya 188 y’Itegeko N° 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/4/2018 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi, yerekeye ibijyanye no kujuririra ibyemezo byafashwe ku birego
## Page 147
113 UWANTEGE v. NIYONSHUTI N’ABANDI byihutirwa, mu gika cyayo cya kabiri igira iti: “(….) Igihe cyo kujuririra icyemezo ni iminsi itarenze itatu (3) y’akazi uhereye ku munsi icyemezo cyasomeweho cyangwa ababuranyi bakimenyeyeho. Urubanza narwo rucibwa mu gihe kitarenze iminsi itatu (3) y’akazi’’ (…). [19] Ingingo ya 260 y’Itegeko N° 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/4/2018 ryavuzwe haruguru, yerekeye ibirego bisaba guhagarika no gutesha agaciro cyamunara, iteganya, mu gika cyayo cya 5, ko bene ibyo birego bitangwa kandi bikaburanishwa mu bihe by'ibirego byihutirwa. [20] Ingingo ya 275 nayo y’Itegeko N° 22/2018 ryavuzwe haruguru iteganya ko, ku bihe bibarwa mu minsi cyangwa mu masaha, bibarwa umunsi ku munsi, n’isaha ku isaha hakurikijwe igihe bimara kandi umunsi igikorwa cyakoreweho ntubarwamo, ahubwo habarwa umunsi wa nyuma kigomba kurangiriraho. [21] Ikibazo cy’ibarwa ry’ibihe byo kujuririra ibyemezo byafashwe n’Urukiko mu manza zerekeye ibirego bisaba guhagarika cyangwa gutesha agaciro cyamunara n’uburyo ingingo ya 188, iya 260 n’iya 275 zavuzwe haruguru zigomba kumvikana, cyasuzumwe mu rubanza RCOMAA 00031/2020/CA rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ubujurire ku wa 25/08/2020 SOPROMETAL Ltd iburana na BANQUE POPULAIRE DU RWANDA Ltd N’UMWANDITSI MUKURU muri RDB. Muri urwo rubanza Urukiko rwasuzumye inzitizi yatanzwe na BANQUE POPULAIRE DU RWANDA Ltd isaba ko ubujurire bwa SOPROMETAL Ltd butakirwa kuko itubahirije igihe cy’iminsi itatu giteganywa mu ngingo ya 188 y’Itegeko N° 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/4/2018 ryavuzwe haruguru, SOPROMETAL Ltd yo ikiregura ivuga ko iyo nzitizi nta shingiro ifite kuko ibihe by’ubujurire bibarwa hashingiwe ku ngingo ya
## Page 148
114 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 275 n’iya 276 nazo z’iryo tegeko, kandi ko hakurikijwe ibyo izo ngingo ziteganya umunsi icyemezo kijuririrwa cyafatiweho utabarwa kimwe n’iminsi y’ikiruhuko. [22] Mu gusuzuma icyo kibazo, Urukiko rw’Ubujurire rwasesenguye ingingo ya 188, iya 260, igika cya 5, n’iya 275 zavuzwe haruguru, maze mu bika bya 16 - 19 by’urubanza RCOMAA 00031/2020/CA Urukiko rw’Ubujurire rusobanura ko: - Ingingo ya 260, igika cya gatanu (5), y’Itegeko N° 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/4/2018 ryavuzwe haruguru yumvikanisha ko ibirego bisaba gutesha agaciro cyamunara bisuzumwa n’inkiko mu bihe biteganywa n’amategeko ku birebana n’ibirego byihutirwa ; - Ibiteganywa mu ngingo ya 275 y’Itegeko N° 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/4/2018 ryavuzwe haruguru, bikurikizwa cyangwa byubahirizwa iyo nta bundi buryo Umushingamategeko yateganyije bwerekana uko ibihe bivugwa mu itegeko ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano bigomba kubarwa; ko rero ibi byumvikanisha ko muri iyo ngingo Umushingamategeko yagaragaje ihame rusange rikurizwa mu kubara ibihe, ariko nk’uko bigaragara muri iryo Tegeko, hari igihe ashyiraho irengayobora kuri iyo ngingo y’imena (règle de droit substantielle), icyo gihe ibihe bikaba bibarwa uko bivugwa muri iyo ngingo yihariye igaragaza irengayobora; - Ibiteganywa mu ngingo ya 188 y’Itegeko N° 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/4/2018 ryavuzwe haruguru ari irengayobora ku biteganyijwe mu ngingo ya 275 yavuzwe haruguru, kuko iteganya ubundi buryo bwo
## Page 149
115 UWANTEGE v. NIYONSHUTI N’ABANDI kubara ibihe byo kujurira ku birebana n’ibirego byihutirwa, ariyo mpamvu by’umwihariko ibivugwa mu ngingo ya 188 bigomba gukurikizwa muri urwo rubanza (RCOMAA 00031/2020/CA). [23] Urukiko rw’Ubujurire kandi rwasobanuye ko ku bireba urwo rubanza, hashingiwe ku biteganywa muri iyo ngingo ya 188 yavuzwe haruguru, igihe cyo kujurira cyagombaga gutangira kubarwa ku wa 9/1/2020, umunsi icyemezo cyasomeweho, iminsi itatu ikaba yaruzuye ku itariki ya 13, bivuze ko ariyo tariki SOTRAPROMETAL Ltd itagombaga kurenza kugira ngo ibe yubahirije ibihe byo kujurira, bityo ubujurire bwayo bwatanzwe ku wa 14/1/2020 bukaba butubahirije ibihe byateganyijwe ku birebana n’ubujurire bw’ibirego byihutirwa; ko rero inzitizi yari yatanzwe na BANQUE POPULAIRE DU RWANDA Ltd ifite ishingiro. [24] Ibijyanye n’ibihe byo kujuririra icyemezo cyafashwe ku kirego cyihutirwa kandi byasuzumwe mu rubanza RPA 00020/2024/CA rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ubujurire ku wa 27/09/2024 haburana Ubushinjacyaha, Kantesi Odette na Kanyabugoyi Pascasie. Muri urwo rubanza Urukiko rwasuzumye ikibazo cyo kumenya niba ubujurire bwatanzwe na Kantesi Odette ajuririra urubanza rwaciwe n’Urukiko Rukuru ku kirego cyihutirwa yari yatanze asaba gutesha agaciro urubanza RS/RECT/RP 00001/2023/HC/KIG kuko ibyakozwe atari ukurukosora ahubwo ari ukwandika urubanza rushya rutandukanye n’urwa mbere, bwaratanzwe impitagihe bityo bukaba budakwiriye kwakirwa. [25] Muri urwo rubanza Urukiko rw’Ubujurire rwasobanuye ko ingingo ya 188, igika cya kabiri, y’Itegeko N° 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/4/2018 ryavuzwe haruguru yumvikanisha ko mu gihe
## Page 150
116 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO urubanza rw’ikirego cyihutirwa rwaburanishijwe umuburanyi ahari, akijuririra mu minsi itarenze itatu y’akazi uhereye ku munsi icyemezo cyasomeweho cyangwa ku munsi ku munsi kopi yacyo yashyizwe muri system ya IECMS, ni ukuvuga kuva ku munsi yakimenyeyeho; maze rushingira kuri ibyo bisobanuro rwemeza ko ubujurire bwa Kantesi Odette butubahirije igihe cy’iminsi itatu giteganywa n’amategeko kuko urubanza RP 00016/2024/HC/KIG yajuririye rurebana n’ikirego cyihutirwa rwasomwe ku wa 21/5/2024, kopi yarwo ishyirwa muri system ya IECMS ku wa 22/5/2024 ari nawo munsi ibarwa ry’ibihe byo kujurira rigomba gutangiriraho, ariko we akaba yarajuriye ku wa 26/5/2024 mu gihe umunsi wa nyuma wo kujurira wari ku wa 24/05/2024, bityo rwemeza ko ubujurire bwe butagomba kwakirwa. [26] Mu rubanza rwajuririwe, Urukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi rushingiye ku ngingo ya 188 n’iya 260 zavuzwe haruguru z’Itegeko N° 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/4/2018 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi, rushingiye kandi ku murongo watanzwe mu rubanza RCOMAA 00031/2020/CA rwemeje, mu gika cya 28, ko Uwantege Louise yajuriye akerewe kuko atubahirije igihe cy’iminsi itatu ibarwa guhera 25/06/2024 kugeza ku wa 27/06/2024 nyamara we akaba yarajuriye ku wa 28/06/2024. [27] Uru Rukiko rurasanga hashingiwe ku byasobanuwe mu bika bya 21-26 by’uru rubanza, nta kosa Urukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi rwakoze mu kwemeza ko Uwantege Louise yajuririye urwo rukiko akerewe, kuko nk’uko dosiye ibigaragaza yajuririye icyemezo cyafashwe ku kirego yatanze asaba gutesha agaciro cyamunara, kandi nk’uko byasobanuwe haruguru bene
## Page 151
117 UWANTEGE v. NIYONSHUTI N’ABANDI ibyo birego bikaba bisuzumwa mu bihe biteganywa n’amategeko ku birebana n’ibirego byihutirwa biburanishwa, ibyo bihe bikaba bigomba kubarwa hashingiwe ku ngingo ya 188 y’Itegeko N° 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/4/2018 ryavuzwe haruguru kuko ari yo iteganya uburyo bwihariye bwo kubara ibihe byo kujurira ku birebana n’ibirego byihutirwa, ikaba irengayobora ku ihame rusange riteganyijwe mu ngingo ya 275 nayo y’iryo tegeko; ibi n’urukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi rukaba ariko rwabikoze. [28] Urukiko rurasanga imiburanire y’abahagarariye Uwantege Louise y’uko umurongo washingiweho haruguru wahinduwe n’urubanza RCOMAA 00090/2022/CA rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ubujurire ku wa 14/10/2022 Muhire Samuel n’abandi baburana na KIGALI BUSINESS CENTER Ltd (KBCLtd) nta shingiro ifite, kuko muri urwo rubanza hasuzumwe ibijyanye n’ibarwa ry’ibihe biteganyijwe mu Mabwiriza y’Umwanditsi Mukuru byo gusaba gutesha gutesha agaciro cyamunara, rukaba rero rutafatwa nk’urutanga umurongo ku kibazo cy’ibarwa ry’ibihe byo kujuririra urubanza rw’ikirego cyihutirwa. [29] Urukiko rurasanga kandi imiburanire y’abahagarariye Uwantege Louise y’uko harebwe ubwuzuzanye bw’amategeko, ubujurire bwe bukwiriye kwakirwa hashingiwe ku ngingo ya 52 y’Itegeko Nº 30/2018 ryo ku wa 02/06/2028 rigena ububasha bw’inkiko ngo kuko ari irengayobora ku biteganyijwe mu ngingo ya 188 y’Itegeko Nº 22/218 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryavuzwe haruguru, nta shingiro ifite kuko uretse no kuba iyo ngingo atari irengayobora ku ngingo ya 188 nk’uko babivuga kuko yo iteganya ibijyanye n’imanza Urukiko rw’Ubujurire rufite ububasha bwo kuburanisha ku rwego rw’ubujurire, nta n’aho ihuriye n’igisuzumwa muri uru rubanza ku buryo yashingirwaho.
## Page 152
118 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO [30] Hashingiwe ku bisobanuro byose byatanzwe, ubujurire bwa Uwantege Louise muri uru rukiko bukaba nta shingiro bufite. - Kumenya niba ubujurire bwuririye ku bundi bwatanzwe na Nizeyimana Venant bufite ishingiro. [31] Nizeyimana Venant asaba Urukiko gutegeka Uwantege Louise kumwishyura 17.137.874 Frw y’agaciro k’ibikoresho byakuwe ku nzu yaguze kugira ngo ashobore kuyisubiza uko yari imeze, na 11.360.000 Frw y’indishyi z’igihombo aterwa n’amafaranga y’ubukode akomeje kwishyura kandi yagombye kuba akoresha inzu ye yaguze, ngo kuko ari we wareze asaba ko cyamunara iteshwa agaciro kandi azi neza ko yakozwe mu buryo bukurikije amategeko. [32] Uwantege Louise avuga ko ibisabwa na Nizeyimana Venant nta shingiro bifite kuko nta bimenyetso abitangira kandi akaba nta n’icyo yamwangirije. UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [33] Ingingo ya 152 y’Itegeko No 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi nk’uko ryahinduwe kandi ryujujwe kugeza ubu iteganya ko uregwa mu rukiko rujuririrwa ashobora na we kugira ibyo asaba yiregura, kandi ko ubujurire bwuririye ku bundi bukorwa n’uwarezwe mu bujurire bwerekeye ku wajuriye cyangwa ku bandi barezwe mu bujurire; ariko ko mu gihe ubujurire bw’ibanze butakiriwe, cyangwa bwasibwe, bitabuza ko uregwa mu ubujurire asaba amafaranga y’ikurikiranarubanza.
## Page 153
119 UWANTEGE v. NIYONSHUTI N’ABANDI [34] Iyi ngingo yumvikanisha ko mu kwiregura kwe, uregwa mu bujurire ashobora kugira ibyo asaba uwajuriye cyangwa abandi baregwa mu bujurire, ko ariko mu gihe ubujurire bw’ibanze butakiriwe cyangwa bwasibwe, uregwa mu bujurire ashobora gusaba gusa amafaranga y’ikurikiranarubanza. [35] Indishyi Nizeyimana Venant asaba yari yazisabye no mu rubanza rwajuririwe Urukiko rwemeza ko ubujurire bwe bwuririye ku bundi butakiriwe kuko n’ubujurire bw’ibanze butakiriwe. Uru Rukiko rurasanga no kuri uru rwego hasuzumwe gusa ibijyanye no kumenya niba ubwo bujurire bw’ibanze bwa Uwantege Louise bwaragombaga kwakirwa, nk’uko byasobanuwe haruguru uru Rukiko rukaba rwasanze butaragombaga kwakirwa ; hashingiwe ku biteganywa mu ngingo ya 152 yavuzwe haruguru, bityo rukaba rukaba ntaho rwahera rusuzuma izo ndishyi zishingiye ku byangijwe ku nzu no ku mafaranga y’ubukode, mu gihe ubujurire bw’ibanze butasuzumwe haba mu rubanza rwajuririwe haba no kuri uru rwego. [36] Hashingiwe kuri ibyo bisobanuro, ubujurire bwuririye ku bundi bwatanzwe na Nizeyimana Venant bukaba butakiriwe. - Kumenya niba amafaranga y’ikurikiranarubanza n’igihembo cya Avoka asabwa muri uru rubanza afite ishingiro. [37] Abaregwa bose kuri uru rwego basabye ko Uwantege Louise ategekwa kubishyura amafaranga y’ikurikiranarubanza n’ay’igihembo cya Avoka: Nizeyimana Venant yasabye 3.000.000 Frw y’igihembo cya Avoka na 500.000 Frw y’ikurikiranarubanza ; ACCESS BANK (RWANDA) Ltd na Niyonshuti Iddi Ibrahim basabye buri wese 1.000.000 Frw
## Page 154
120 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO y’igihembo cya Avoka na 500.000 Frw y’ikurikiranarubanza yiyongera kuyo bagenewe mu rubanza rwajuririwe. [38] Abahagarariye Uwantege Louise bavuga ko amafaranga y’ikurikiranarubanza n’ay’igihembo cya Avoka asabwa n’abaregwa nta shingiro afite kuko atari we wateje imanza ahubwo yareze kuko arengana, akaba asanga akwiriye kurenganurwa. UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [39] Ingingo ya 111 y’Itegeko N° 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi iteganya ibikurikira: “Ikirego cy’amafaranga y’ikurikiranarubanza ni ikirego gishamikira ku kirego cy’iremezo kigamije kwishyuza ibyakoreshejwe mu rubanza. Ikirego cy’amafaranga y’ikurikiranarubanza kiburanishirizwa rimwe n’ikirego cy’iremezo. Gishobora kandi kwakirwa kikanaburanishwa n’iyo ikirego cy’iremezo cyaba kitakiriwe”. [40] Urukiko rurasanga Uwantege Louise ari we wajuriye muri uru Rukiko biba ngombwa ko abaregwa bakurikirana urubanza, banashaka aba Avoka bo kubaburanira, kandi nk’uko byasobanuwe haruguru ubujurire bwe bukaba nta shingiro bufite; bityo hashingiwe ku biteganywa mu ngingo ya 111 yibukijwe haruguru, Urukiko rukaba rugeneye Nizeyimana Venant, ACCESS BANK (RWANDA) Ltd na Niyonshuti Iddi Ibrahim, mu bushishozi bwarwo, 700.000 Frw y’igihembo cya Avoka na 200.000 Frw y’ikurikiranarubanza kuri buri wese kuko ayo basaba batagaragaza ko ariyo yagiye ku rubanza koko.
## Page 155
121 UWANTEGE v. NIYONSHUTI N’ABANDI III. ICYEMEZO CY’URUKIKO [41] Rwemeje ko ubujurire bwatanzwe na Uwantege Louise nta shingiro bufite. [42] Rwemeje ko ubujurire bwuririye ku bundi bwatanzwe na Nizeyimana Venant butakiriwe. [43] Rwemeje ko imikirize y’urubanza RCOMA 00397/2024/HCC rwaciwe n’Urukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi ku wa 17/07/2024 idahindutse. [44] Rutegetse Uwantege Louise kwishyura ACCESS BANK (RWANDA) Ltd, NIYONSHUTI Iddi Ibrahim na Nizeyimana Venant, buri wese, amafaranga ibihumbi magana arindwi (700.000 Frw) y’igihembo cya Avoka n’amafaranga ibihumbi magana abiri (200.000 Frw) y’ikurikiranarubanza kuri uru rwego. [45] Ruvuze ko amagarama yatanzwe ahwanye n’ibyakozwe mu rubanza
## Page 156
122 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO
## Page 157
123 UBUSHINJACYAHA v UWIMANIHAYE UBUSHINJACYAHA v UWIMANIHAYE [Rwanda URUKIKO RUKURU - RS/INJUST/RP 00001/2022/HC/KIG (Juru, P.J., Byakatonda, Mukakarisa, J.) 09 Mata 2024] Amategeko anagenga imiburanishirize y’imanza nshinjabyaha – Gusubirishamo urubanza ingingo nshya – Abari ababuranyi mu rubanza rusubirishwamo ingingo nshya bagomba gutumizwa mu rubanza ruburanisha ingingo nshya, kudatumiza umwe mu bari ababuranyi, n’ubwo yaba ari uwaregeraga indishyi mu rubanza rusabirwa gusubirishwamo ingingo nshya, bifatwa nk’impamvu y’akarengane yatuma urwo rubanza rusubirishwamo ku mpamvu z’akarengane. Incamake y’ikibazo: Uwimanihaye Pierre Celestin yatanze ikirego cyo gusubirishamo ingingo nshya urubanza No RP 01088/2018/TGI/NYGE rwamuhamije icyaha, avuga ko yashinjwaga kugurisha mu buriganya imodoka RAV4 RAD 615P kandi hari urubanza No RP 00759/2018/TGI/NYGE na No RPA 01524- RP1525/2019/HC/KIG muri izi manza Ntihemuka Emmanuel na Hakizimana Daniel bahamijwe icyaha cyo kugurisha mu buriganya iyo modoka hamwe n’izindi, avuga ko yahamijwe icyaha cyakozwe n’abandi, ndetse bakaba baranagihaniwe. Urukiko rwahaye ishingiro ingingo nshya yatanze, rwemeza ko ibyaha yari yahamijwe bitamuhama. Ntabahejeje Théogène waregeraga indishyi mu rubanza rwasubirishijwemo ingingo nshya, yasanze yaragombaga kuba yaratumijwe mu rubanza rusubirishamo ingingo nshya rwagize umwere Uwimanihaye Pierre Celestin maze asubirishamo urwo rubanza ku mpamvu z’akarengane, avuga ko akarengane ari uko 123
## Page 158
124 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO atatumijwe mu rubanza kandi yaragombaga gutumizwamo, ko kandi urukiko Rwisumbuye rutagombaga kwemera ingingo nshya. Incamake y’icyemezo: Abari ababuranyi mu rubanza rusubirishwamo ingingo nshya bagomba gutumizwa mu rubanza ruburanisha ingingo nshya, kudatumiza umwe mu bari ababuranyi, n’ubwo yaba ari uwaregeraga indishyi mu rubanza rusabirwa gusubirishwamo ingingo nshya, bifatwa nk’impamvu y’akarengane yatuma urwo rubanza rusubirishwamo ku mpamvu z’akarengane, bityo kuba urubanza RP 01112/2021/TGI/NYGE rwaraburanishijwe Ntabahejeje Théogène atatumijwe kandi yari umuburanyi mu rubanza rusubirishwamo ingingo nshya, habayeho akarengane. Habaye akarengane mu rubanza rusubirishwamo. Amategeko yashingiweho: Itegeko Nº 027/2019 ryo ku wa 19/09/2019 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’inshinjabyaha, ingingo ya 195; Itegeko n° 30/2018 ryo ku wa 2/6/2018 rigena ububasha bw’inkiko, ingingo ya 55. Imanza zifashishijwe: Special Guarentee Fund (SGF) v Uwanyirigira n’undi, RS/REV/RC 00001/2022/CA, rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ubujurire ku wa 20/04/2023.
## Page 159
125 UBUSHINJACYAHA v UWIMANIHAYE Urubanza IMITERERE Y’URUBANZA [1] Ubushinjacyaha bwatanze ikirego mu rukiko Rwisumbuye burega Gasangwa Innocent na Uwimanihaye Pierre Celestin na Hakizimana Daniel gukora no gukoresha inyandikompimbano, no kwambura ikintu cy’undi hakoreshejwe amayeri, buvuga ko incuro nyinshi Gasangwa Innocent yagiye akodesha imodoka akaziha abantu bakorana ubujura bw’imodoka bakazigurisha cyangwa se bakazitangaho ingwate muri “Lambert”, bakoresheje ibyangombwa by’ibihimbano, hanyuma Gasangwa agahindukira agakoresha “avis de recherche” agaragaza ko imodoka yibwe kandi azi neza ko atari byo. [2] Ngo Gasangwa yacuze umugambi wo kwambura abantu afatanyije na bagenzi be Hakizimana Daniel na Uwimanihaye Pierre Celestin bagurisha imodoka ya RAV4 RAD 615P, y’uwitwa Ntabahejeje Theogene, babikora bakoresheje indangamuntu y’impimbano mu mazina ya Uwimanihaye Pierre Celestin ariko ifoto itari iye, ndetse banakorera Ntabahejeje “mutation” kubera ko imodoka ari Uwimanihaye yari yanditseho, bakoresha ibyo byangombwa bitavugishije ukuri, Uwimanihaye akaba yarajyanye na Hakizimana Daniel kuyigurisha i Musanze dore ko bari mu bo Gasangwa akoresha muri ibyo bikorwa. Nyuma yo kugurisha imodoka na Ntabahejeje Theogene, Gasangwa yihutiye kujya kuri Rwanda Revenue Authority/RRA na polisi kumenyesha ko imodoka ye yibwe n’abantu atazi kandi yarayigurishije. Igihe cy’iburanisha Ubushinjacyaha bwavuze ko Hakizimana akurwa mu kirego kuko ibikorwa biregerwa yabihaniwe mu rundi rubanza RP 00759/2018/TGI/NYGE, maze urukiko Rwisumbuye rwemera ko ava mu rubanza.
## Page 160
126 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO [3] Urukiko Rwisumbuye rushingiye ku mvugo z’abatangabuhamya barimo Isimbi na Rwamakambiza rwahamije ko Uwimanihaye Pierre Celestin yakoze ibyaha byo gukora no gukoresha inyandiko n’impapuro bitangwa n’inzego zabigenewe ndetse n’icyaha cyo kwambura ikintu cy’undi hakoreshejwe amayeri maze rumuhanisha igihano cy’igifungo cy’imyaka irindwi n’ihazabu ya miriyoni eshatu. [4] GASANGWA Innocent na UWIMANIHAYE Pierre Celestin bajuriye mu Rukiko Rukuru, urubanza rwabo ruhabwa nomero RPA 00028/2020/HC/KIG, rwemeza ko rusanga ubujurire bwa Uwimanimpaye Pierre Celestin butakwakirwa ngo busuzumwe kuko atatanze amagarama y’urubanza. Rwemeza ko ubujurire bwa GASANGWA Innocent bufite ishingiro kuri bimwe, rwemeza ko urubanza yajuririye ruhindutse kuri bimwe, ko igihano yari yahawe kigabanywa agahanishwa igihano cy’igifungo cy’imyaka itatu (3 ans) n’ihazabu ya 3.000.000Frw, ko amafaranga NTABAHEJEJE Théogène yari yagenewe mu rwego rwa mbere 3 450 000 frw y’ubukode bw’imodoka, 60.000Frw yo kugura batterie n’amafaranga 200.000Frw yo kugura amapine, avanyweho, rutegeka ko GASANGWA Innocent guha NTABAHEJEJE Théogène amafaranga 500.000Frw y’igihembo cy’avoka yo mu rwego rw’ubujurire. [5] Urubanza rumaze kuba itegeko UWIMANIHAYE Pierre Celestin yatanze ikirego cyo gusubirishamo ingingo nshya urubanza RP 01088/2018/TGI/NYGE rwamuhamije icyaha avuga ko yashinjwaga kugurisha mu buriganya imodoka RAV4 RAD 615P kandi hari urubanza RP 00759/2018/TGI/NYGE na RPA 01524- RP1525/2019/HC/KIG muri izi manza NTIHEMUKA Emmanuel na HAKIZIMANA Daniel bahamijwe icyaha cyo kugurisha mu buriganya imodoka RAV4 RAD 615P hamwe n’izindi, bivuze ko ngo yahamijwe icyaha cyakozwe
## Page 161
127 UBUSHINJACYAHA v UWIMANIHAYE n’abandi, ndetse bakaba baranagihaniwe, ubwo ikirego gisubirishamo urubanza ingingo nshya cyahawe nomero RP 01112/2021/TGI/NYGE. [6] Mu rubanza RP 01112/2021/TGI/NYGE rusubirishamo urubanza RP 01088/2018/TGI/NYGE ingingo nshya, urukiko Rwisumbuye rwemeye ingingo nshya ya UWIMANIHAYE Pierre Celestin maze rwemeza ko kuba UWIMANIHAYE Pierre Celestin yarashinjwaga kugurisha mu buriganya imodoka RAD 615 P, none hakaba haragaragaye abandi bantu bemera ko aribo bagurishije imodoka z’abandi muri ubwo buryo harimo n‘imodoka RAD 615 P, bakaba barasobanuye uburyo babikoraga, ko byumvikana ko ari nabo bahimbye indangamuntu ya UWIMANIHAYE Pierre Celestin bagashyiraho indi foto kugira ngo babone uko bagurisha imodoka RAD 615 P, kuko iyi modoka ubusanzwe yari yanditswe kuri UWIMANIHAYE Pierre Celestin, ko ibyaha UWIMANIHAYE Pierre Celestin yashinjwe mu rubanza RP 01088/2018/TGI/NYGE bitamuhama. [7] NTABAHEJEJE Théogène waregeraga indishyi mu rubanza RP 01088/2018/TGI/NYGE yasanze yaragombaga kuba yaratumijwe mu rubanza RP 01112/2021/TGI/NYGE rusubirishamo urubanza RP 01088/2018/TGI/NYGE ingingo nshya rwagize umwere UWIMANIHAYE Pierre Celestin maze asubirishamo urwo rubanza RP 01112/2021/TGI/NYGE ku mpamvu z’akarengane, avuga ko akarengane ke ni uko atatumijwe mu rubanza RP 01112/2021/TGI/NYGE kandi yaragombaga gutumizwamo, ko kandi urukiko Rwisumbuye rutagombaga kwemera ingingo nshya yuko hari urubanza RP 00759/2018/TGI/NYGE na RPA 01524- RP1525/2019/HC/KIG, NTIHEMUKA Emmanuel na HAKIZIMANA Daniel bahamijwe icyaha cyo kugurisha mu buriganya imodoka RAV4 RAD 615P
## Page 162
128 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO hamwe n’izindi, kuko UWIMANIHAYE Pierre Celestin yari asanzwe azi ibyanavuzweho mu rubanza RP 01088/2018/TGI/NYGE rwasubirishijwemo ingingo nshya, asaba urukiko Rukuru kwemeza ko ikirego gisubirishamo urubanza RP 01088/2018/TGI/NYGE ingingo nshya kitagombaga kwakirwa, gutegeka kumuha amafaranga y’igihembo cy’avoka n’ikurikirana rubanza. [8] Ubushinjacyaha buvuga ko mu rubanza RP 01088/2018/TGI/NYGE NTABAHEJEJE Théogène yaregeraga indishyi, ko habayeho akarengane kutamutumiza mu rubanza RP 01112/2021/TGI/NYGE rwasubirishagamo urubanza RP 01088/2018/TGI/NYGE ingingo nshya, ko kandi n’ibyitwa ingingo nshya ataribyo kuko UWIMANIHAYE Pierre Celestin yari azi ko hari imanza RP 00759/2018/TGI/NYGE na RPA 01524- RP1525/2019/HC/KIG NTIHEMUKA Emmanuel na HAKIZIMANA Daniel bahamijwe ibyaha, mu gihe haburanwaga urubanza RP 01088/2018/TGI/NYGE rwasubirishijwemo ingingo nshya. [9] UWIMANIHAYE Pierre Celestin n’abamwunganira bavuga ko NTABAHEJEJE Théogène yari akwiriye guhamagazwa mu rubanza RP 01112/2021/TGI/NYGE, kuko yaregeraga indishyi mu rubanza RP 01088/2018/TGI/NYGE, ariko kuvuga ko UWIMANIHAYE Pierre Celestin yari azi imanza RP 00759/2018/TGI/NYGE na RPA 01524- RP1525/2019/HC/KIG NTIHEMUKA Emmanuel na HAKIZIMANA Daniel bahamijwe ibyaha, UWIMANIHAYE Pierre Celestin yashinjwaga sibyo. [10] Urubanza rwaburanishijwe ubushinjacyaha buhagarariwe, uregera indishyi ahagarariwe na Me KWIZERA
## Page 163
129 UBUSHINJACYAHA v UWIMANIHAYE Bernard, ushinjwa UWIMANIHAYE Pierre Celestin yunganirwa na Me KANANGA Protegene na Me KAYITANA Evode. [11] Ibibazo bigomba gusuzumwa ni kumenya niba kudatumiza uregera indishyi mu rubanza rusubirishwamo ingingo nshya byafatwa nk’akarengane, no kumenya niba kuba hari urubanza RP 00759/2018/TGI/NYGE na RPA 01524- RP1525/2019/HC/KIG NTIHEMUKA Emmanuel na HAKIZIMANA Daniel bahamijwemo ibyaha UWIMANIHAYE Pierre Celestin yashinjwaga byari kwemerwa nk’ingingo nshya no kumenya niba amafaranga y’igihembo cy’avoka n’ikurikirana rubanza asabwa akwiye gutangwa. II. ISESENGURA RY’IKIBAZO KIGIZE URUBANZA i. Kumenya niba kudatumiza uregera indishyi mu rubanza rusubirishwamo ingingo nshya byafatwa nk’akarengane [12] Ingingo ya 195 y’itegeko Nº 027/2019 ryo ku wa 19/09/2019 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’inshinjabyaha, nkuko ryavuguruwe kugeza ubu, iteganya ko gusubirishamo urubanza ingingo nshya ni ugushaka ko urubanza rwaciwe burundu ruvanwaho rukongera gusuzumwa bundi bushya hubahirijwe impamvu ziteganywa n’iri tegeko. Iyi ngingo yumvikanisha ko iyo ngingo nshya yemewe, urubanza ruburanishwa bundi bushya, bivuze ko abantu bose barubayemo ababuranyi bagomba gutumizwa. Ntibyashoboka kuburanisha urubanza rusubirishamo ingingo nshya hadatumijwe abantu bose bari ababuranyi mu rubanza rusubirishwamo ingingo nshya.
## Page 164
130 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO [13] Ingingo ya 55, igika cya mbere, agace ka 2º, y’Itegeko n° 30/2018 ryo ku wa 2/6/2018 rigena ububasha bw’inkiko iteganya impamvu zishobora gutuma urubanza rusubirishwamo ku mpamvu z’akarengane, harimo no kuba mu icibwa ryarwo harirengagijwe amategeko cyangwa ibimenyetso bigaragarira buri wese. [14] UWIMANIHAYE Pierre Celestin n’abamwunganira bavuga ko kubera ko NTABAHEJEJE Théogène yaregeraga indishyi mu rubanza RP 01088/2018/TGI/NYGE ko byari bikwiye ko ahamagazwa mu rubanza RP 01112/2021/TGI/NYGE rwasubirishagamo urubanza RP 01088/2018/TGI/NYGE. [15] Ubushinjacyaha na Me KWIZERA Bernard uhagarariye uregera indishyi avuga ko byari bikwiye NTABAHEJEJE Théogène atumizwa mu rubanza mu rubanza RP 01112/2021/TGI/NYGE rwasubirishagamo urubanza RP 01088/2018/TGI/NYGE, NTABAHEJEJE Théogène yaregeragamo indishyi UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [16] Urukiko rurasanga kuba bitemewe ko urubanza rusubirishamo urundi ingingo nshya rutaburanishwa abarurimo nk’ababuranyi badahamagajwe bose, nkuko biteganywa n’ingingo ya 195 y’itegeko Nº 027/2019 ryo ku wa 19/09/2019 yavuzwe hejuru, bivuze ko niba mu rubanza RP 01112/2021/TGI/NYGE rwasubirishagamo urubanza RP 01088/2018/TGI/NYGE ingingo nshya rwaraburanishijwe NTABAHEJEJE Théogène atatumijwe kandi yari umuburanyi mu rubanza RP 01088/2018/TGI/NYGE rusubirishwamo
## Page 165
131 UBUSHINJACYAHA v UWIMANIHAYE ingingo nshya, birumvikana ko hishwe itegeko muburyo bugaragarira buri wese, bityo nkuko biteganywa n’ingingo ya 55, igika cya mbere, agace ka 2º, y’Itegeko n° 30/2018 ryo ku wa 2/6/2018 ryavuzwe, habayeho akarengane, birakwiye rero kwemeza ko habayeho akarengane. ii. Kumenya niba kuba hari urubanza RP 00759/2018/TGI/NYGE na RPA 01524- RP1525/2019/HC/KIG NTIHEMUKA Emmanuel na HAKIZIMANA Daniel bahamijwemo ibyaha byashinjwaga UWIMANIHAYE Pierre Celestin byari kwemerwa nk’ingingo nshya [17] Urubanza Nº RS/REV/RC 00001/2022/CA, rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ubujurire ku wa 20/04/2023, urukiko rw’Ubujurire rwafashe umurongo ko ikimenyetso gishya ni ikimenyetso cyari gihari mu gihe urubanza rwaburanwaga ariko umuburanyi akaba atashoboraga kumenya ko gihari, akakibona nyuma cyangwa akaba atarabashaga kukigeraho igihe yaburanaga. Uyu murongo w’urukiko rw’ubujurire wumvikanisha ko iyo umuburanyi yari azi ikimenyetso kandi icyo kimenyetso ashobora kukibona maze ntagikoreshe mu rubanza, ntashobora narimwe kuzana icyo kimenyetso nk’ingingo nshya. [18] UWIMANIHAYE Pierre Celestin n’abamwunganira bavuga ko UWIMANIHAYE Pierre Celestin atamenye urubanza RP 00759/2018/TGI/NYGE na RPA 01524- RP1525/2019/HC/KIG nkuko ubushinjacyaha n’uregera indishyi babivuga ko izo manza yazimenye kuwa 08/06/2021. [19] Ubushinjacyaha n’uhagarariye uregera indishyi bavuga ko mu rubanza RP 01112/2021/TGI/NYGE rusubirishamo
## Page 166
132 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO urubanza RP 01088/2018/TGI/NYGE ingingo nshya, urukiko Rwisumbuye rutagombaga kwemera ko ar’ingingo nshya kubera ko mu rubanza RP 01088/2018/TGI/NYGE rusubirishwamo ingingo nshya havuzwe ibijyanye n’urubanza RP 00759/2018/TGI/NYGE mu gihe havugwaga ko HAKIZIMANA Daniel atakongera kuburana urubanza yaburanye agahamwa n’ibyaha. [20] Mu gika cya 3 by’urubanza RP 01088/2018/TGI/NYGE rusubirishwamo ingingo nshya, Ubushinjacyaha bwavuze ko Hakizimana akurwa mu kirego kuko ibikorwa biregerwa yabihaniwe mu rubanza RP 00759/2018/TGI/NYGE, maze mu gika cya 44 by’urwo rubanza urukiko Rwisumbuye rwemeje ko hari urubanza RP 00759/2018/TGI/NYGE Hakizimana Daniel yahaniwe ibikorwa biregerwa maze akurwa mu rubanza, UWIMANIHAYE Pierre Celestin ntaho yasabye ko adakwiye gukurikiranwa kubera ko ibyo bamushinja bibonye ababikoze. UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [21] Urukiko rurasanga mu rubanza RP 01088/2018/TGI/NYGE havuzwe ko uwitwa Hakizimana Daniel mu rubanza RP 00759/2018/TGI/NYGE yahaniwe icyaha yakurikiranwaga mu rubanza RP 01088/2018/TGI/NYGE arikumwe na UWIMANIHAYE Pierre Celestin, bivuze ko UWIMANIHAYE Pierre Celestin yahise amenya ko Hakizimana Daniel yahaniwe icyaha yakurikiranwagaho kuburyo iyo abishaka yari gusaba urukiko Rwisumbuye ko agirwa umwere kubera ko icyaha bamushinja kibonye uwagikoze, bikaba bikwiye kumvikana rero ko kuva igihe, ubushinjacyaha bwavuze ko Hakizimana Daniel avanwa mu rubanza RP 01088/2018/TGI/NYGE yaburanaga arikumwe na
## Page 167
133 UBUSHINJACYAHA v UWIMANIHAYE UWIMANIHAYE Pierre Celestin, nibwo UWIMANIHAYE Pierre Celestin yamenye urubanza RP 00759/2018/TGI/NYGE, nibwo yari gusaba urukiko Rwisumbuye kutamuhamya icyaha kuko habonetse Hakizimana Daniel wagikoze aranagihanirwa, nkuko rero byafashweho umurongo mu rubanza Nº RS/REV/RC 00001/2022/CA rwavuzwe, ko ikimenyetso gishya ar’ikimenyetso cyari gihari mu gihe urubanza rwaburanwaga ariko umuburanyi akaba atashoboraga kumenya ko gihari, akakibona nyuma cyangwa akaba atarabashaga kukigeraho igihe yaburanaga, niba urubanza RP 00759/2018/TGI/NYGE rwari ruhari ndetse UWIMANIHAYE Pierre Celestin aruzi, anazi ko muri urwo rubanza Hakizimana Daniel yahamijwe icyaha gisa neza n’icyo yashinjwaga, birumvikana ko ikimenyetso avuga ko ari gishya yari akizi, icyo kimenyetso ntibishoboka kwemerwa nk’ingingo nshya. [22] Urukiko rusanga UWIMANIHAYE Pierre Celestin abazwa mu bugenzacyaha yabagijwe niba azi Hakizimana Daniel avuga ko atamuzi, bivuze ko amubonye mu rubanza RP 01088/2018/TGI/NYGE yareganagwamo na Hakizimana Daniel, yarangiza akumva ko hari urubanza RP 00759/2018/TGI/NYGE yahamijwemo icyaha gisa neza n’icyo ashinjwa, yagombaga kumva ko habonetse umunyacyaha maze agahita yuririraho akabigaragariza umucamanza, ariko kubera ko nawe mu bugenzacyaha yari yaremeye ko yagiye Musanze kugurisha imodoka, hari n’abatangabuhamya bamushinja yumvise ko kabone niyo hari urubanza RP 00759/2018/TGI/NYGE Hakizimana Daniel yahamijwemo icyaha bitamuvanaho kumukurikirana kuko mubugenzacyaha abazwa bamubazaga nkaho yakoranaga na Hakizimana Daniel ibyaha, uru rukiko Rukuru rubona bitari bikwiye ko urukiko Rwisumbuye rwemera ko kugaragaza imanza RP 00759/2018/TGI/NYGE na RPA
## Page 168
134 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 01524- RP1525/2019/HC/KIG, ari ingingo nshya, kubera ko UWIMANIHAYE Pierre Celestin yari azi ko zabayeho ni uko Hakizimana Daniel wareganagwa nawe yazihamijwemo ibyaha bisa n’ibyo yashijwaga mu rubanza RP 01088/2018/TGI/NYGE rwasubirishijwemo ingingo nshya. [23] Kubijyanye n’amafaranga y’igihembo cy’avoka asabwa na NTABAHEJEJE Théogène, rubona kubera ko NTABAHEJEJE Théogène yahagarariwe n’avoka birumvikana ko akwiye guhabwa amafaranga y’igihembo cy’avoka, ahwanye n’ibihumbi magana atanu[500,000frw] kuko atamuhagarariye ku buntu. III. ICYEMEZO CY’URUKIKO [24] Rwemeje ko habaye akarengane mu rubanza 01112/2021/TGI/NYGE. [25] Rwemeje ko ikirego gisubirishamo urubanza RP 01088/2018/TGI/NYGE ingingo nshya kitagombaga kwakirwa. [26] Rwemeje ko urubanza RP 01088/2018/TGI/NYGE rugumanye agaciro karwo. [27] Rwemeje ko Uwimanihaye Pierre Celestin aha Ntabahejeje Théogène ibihumbi magana atanu[500,000frw] y’igihembo cy’avoka. [28] Rwemeje ko amagarama y’urubanza yatanzwe ahwanye n’ibyakozwe mu rubanza. [29] Uru rubanza rwagombaga gusomwa kuwa 08/04/2024, ariko kubera ko habayeho konji rusomwe 09/04/2024.
## Page 169
135 Re Dr BARIBWIRA IMANZA ZACIWE MU MIZI
## Page 170
136 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO
## Page 171
137 Re Dr BARIBWIRA URUBANZA RW’UMURIMO
## Page 172
138 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO
## Page 173
139 RUZIBIZA v MOUNT MERU LOGISTICS RWANDA LTD RUZIBIZA v MOUNT MERU LOGISTICS RWANDA LTD [Rwanda URUKIKO RW’IKIRENGA – RS/INJUST/RSOC00003/2024/SC (Hitiyaremye, J.P., Muhumuza na Kazungu, J.) 07 Gashyantare 2025] Amategeko agenga imanza z’umurimo – Amasezerano y’umurimo – Iseswa ry’masezerano y’umurimo – Indishyi – Umukoresha usheshe amasezerano y’umurimo ntiyubahirize inzira n’uburyo bikorwamo aba yirukanye umukozi mu buryo bunyuranyije n’amategeko, abitangira indishyi. Amategeko agenga imanza z’umurimo – Impanuka y’akazi – Indishyi z’ikomoka ku mpanuka yakozwe n’ikinyabiziga – Indishyi zo kwivuza – Umukoresha afite inshingano zo gushyira umukozi mu bwiteganyirize no kumutangira imisanzu mu Kigo cy’ubwiteganyirize bw’abakozi – Iyo umukoresha atatangiye umukozi imisanzu yo kwivuza ni we umuvuza; atabikora akaba agomba kumuha amafaranga akivuza ubwe. Incamake y’ikibazo: Ruzibiza yareze uwari umukoresha we Mount Meru Logistics Rwanda Ltd mu Rukiko Rwisumbuye rwa Nyarugenge asaba ko yategekwa kumuha indishyi zitandukanye zituruka ku mpanuka y’akazi yamukomerekeje bikabije, yabereye mu gihugu cy’Ubugande, kuko yakoraga akazi k’ubushoferi. Mount Meru yireguye ivuga ko Urega yakoze impanuka akiri mu gihe kigeragezwa kuko yari amaze hafi ukwezi atangiye akazi, akaba ariyo mpamvu atamutangiye ubwiteganyirize muri RSSB. Ikindi ngo ni uko yatangiye akazi afite imyaka 60, imyaka ifatirwaho ku rwego rwo hejuru mu 139
## Page 174
140 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO kugena ibigenerwa ubwiteganyirize ndetse akaba ari nabwo buryo bukoreshwa mu kubara ibigenerwa uwamugariye ku kazi. Bityo, ibi bikaba bisobanura ko ikirego cye nta shingiro kigomba guhabwa. Urukiko Rwisumbuye rwaciye urubanza rwemeza ko ikirego cy’Urega gifite ishingiro kuri bimwe rutegeka umukoresha guha Urega indishyi zitandukanye. Iki cyemezo Urega yakijuririye mu Rukiko Rukuru avuga ko urukiko hari indishyi rwirengagije kumugenera. Uregwa yatanze ubujurire bwuririye ku bundi asaba ko rwamugenera indishyi z’ikurikiranarubanza n’igihembo cya Avoka rushingiye ku mategeko no ku bimenyetso yatanze bigaragaza ko yakurikiranye Urega mu buryo bwose bushoboka akimara gukora impanuka. Urukiko Rukuru rwaciye urubanza rwemeza ko ubujurire bw’Urega bufite ishingiro kuri bimwe ariko ko ubwuririye ku bundi bwatanzwe n’Uregwa nta shingiro bufite, maze rutegeka ko Urega ahabwa indishyi zitandukanye. Urega ntiyishimiye iki cyemezo maze yandikira Perezida w’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga asaba ko urubanza rwasubirishwamo ku mpamvu z’akarengane, arabyemererwa, ruburanishwa n’uru Rukiko rw’Ikirenga. Muri uru rubanza rw’akarengane Urega avuga ko akarengane ke gashingiye ku kuba inkiko zabanje zarafashe ibyemezo bidakwiye kandi binyuranyije n’amategeko. Avuga ko yirukanywe mu kazi mu buryo bunyuranyije n’amategeko ku buryo yagenerwa indishyi kuko atamenyeshejwe ko yasezerewe ku kazi, ko nta nteguza yahawe, ko yatunguwe no guhagarikirwa umushahara. Avuga ko itegeko rigenga umurimo mu Rwanda ritegeka umukozi cyangwa umukoresha gutanga integuza mu nyandiko iyo agiye gusesa amasezerano y’umurimo. Ibi akaba yarabigaragarije Urukiko Rukuru ariko ntirwagira icyo rubivugaho, akaba ariyo mpamvu asaba uru Rukiko rw’Ikirenga,
## Page 175
141 RUZIBIZA v MOUNT MERU LOGISTICS RWANDA LTD mu gihe rusanze yarasezerewe mu buryo bunyuranyije n’amategeko, gutegeka ko ahabwa ibirarane by’umushahara kuva igihe wahagarikiwe kugeza igihe ikibazo kizakemukira. Uregwa muri uru rubanza, avuga ko Urega atigeze asezererwa mu kazi ahubwo akazi ke kahagaritswe n’impanuka yagize, akitabwaho, akomeza guhabwa umushahara kugeza mu kwezi kwa 10/2020 ndetse akomeza guhabwa amafaranga yo kwivuza kugera mu kwezi kwa 2/2021. Avuga kandi ko indishyi Urega asaba atagomba kuzihabwa kuko zihabwa umukozi wirukanwe mu buryo bunyuranyije n’amategeko, mu gihe Urega akazi ke kahagaze kubera ko imodoka yatwaraga yari yarangiritse idashobora gusubira mu muhanda. Asoza avuga ko itegeko ry’umurimo ritenganya ko umushahara utangwa ku murimo wakozwe, bityo akaba atari gukomeza guhemba Urega kuko yari atakibasha gukora kubera iyo mpanuka ndetse akaba ntawundi murimo yari kubona amushyiramo. Urega agaragaza kandi ko akarengane ke gashingiye ku kuba Uregwa yaragombaga kumuvuza, akaba ataramuteganyirije muri RSSB bikamugiraho ingaruka kuko yakoze impanuka nta bwishingizi bwo kwivuza afite, akaba asaba ko ubuvuzi n’ibindi bigomba gutangwa n’Uregwa. Ibi abisaba ashingiye kuri raporo ya muganga yemeza ko iyo mpanuka yakoze yamusigiye ubumuga buhoraho bwa 92%, akaba yarahawe “proforma” y’ubuvuzi agomba gukorerwa ariko Uregwa yanga kumuha amafaranga yo kwivuza. Kuri iyo ngingo ijyanye n’ubuvuzi bw’Urega, Uregwa avuga ko umubare w’amafaranga Urega asaba yibaza aho awukura kuko nta tegeko ashingiraho. Urega aregera ibintu bitarimo ukuri kuko ingingo z’amategeko yifashisha zishimangira ko ubwishyu bukorwa ku buvuzi bwamaze gukorerwa umukozi kandi bukishyurwa mu biganza by’ibigo by’ubuvuzi byamuvuye.
## Page 176
142 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO Bityo, ibyo asaba nta shingiro bigomba guhabwa kuko yamaze igihe kinini yakira amafaranga yo kwivuza, ubu muri uru rubanza akaba aribwo avuga ko atigeze afashwa kuvuzwa. Ikindi kibazo cyasuzumwe muri uru rubanza ni ikijyanye no kumenya niba indishyi Urega asaba zahabwa ishingiro; aho avuga ko mu rubanza rusubirishwamo atagenewe indishyi mbangamirabukungu akaba asaba uru Rukiko rw’Ikirenga kubikosora. Asaba ko izo ndishyi zabarwa hashingiwe ku myaka 65, dore ko hirengagijwe ibiteganywa n’amategeko ko umucamanza aca urubanza ku cyasabwe cyose kandi kuri icyo cyonyine. Avuga kandi ko atigeze agenerwa indishyi zijyanye n’akababaro yatewe n’imvune yaturutse ku mpanuka no kutabona ubuvuzi kubera amikoro, ndetse bityo akaba asaba uru Rukiko ko rwamugenera izo ndishyi kuko yarenganye. Urega yasabye uru Rukiko rw’Ikirenga ko rumugenera indishyi z’umukozi wazahajwe burundu n’impanuka y’akazi, gusuzuma niba akeneye umufasha no kugenerwa amafaranga yakoresheje ajya kwivuza. Asobanura ko kuba Uregwa yaramukoresheje atamuteganyirije, akaza kugira impanuka ikamutera ubumuga butandukanye, agomba gutegekwa kumwishyura amafaranga angana nk’ayo yagahawe n’Ikigo cy’Ubwiteganyirize mu Rwanda iyo aza kuba yaramuteganyirije. Ikindi ni uko atabasha kugira icyo yikorera agakenera umufasha mu buzima bwe bwa buri munsi, akaba ariyo mpamvu asaba ko Urukiko rwategeka Uregwa kumwishyurira umufasha ashingiye ku biteganywa n’amategeko ko iyo ufata amafaranga ya pansiyo y’ubumuga agomba gufashwa buri gihe n'undi muntu kugira ngo ashobore gukora uturimo dusanzwe, abona inyongera ingana na mirongo ine ku ijana (40%) by’ayo agomba kubona. Asoza asaba ko Uregwa yamusubiza amafaranga yakoresheje ajya kwivuza
## Page 177
143 RUZIBIZA v MOUNT MERU LOGISTICS RWANDA LTD ashingiye ku kuba yaramutereranye ntagire icyo amumarira mu burwayi bwe. Uregwa yireguye ko niba Urega asaba ko hari ibigomba kugenwa n’amategeko bijyanye n’indishyi zihabwa umukozi wazahajwe burundu n’impanuka y’akazi, zabarwa mu gihe kitarengeje ikigero cy’imyaka 60 kuva igihe ubumuga bwemerejwe kandi hakanabarwa gusa amezi 6 ya buri mwaka. Avuga kandi ko ugendeye ku kuba ubumuga Urega yasigaranye bwagabanutse ukurikije raporo yatanzwe na muganga we, asaba ko uru Rukiko rwabishingiraho rufata icyemezo kuko nta bufasha bw’undi muntu yagenerwa. Incamake y’icyemezo: 1. Umukoresha usheshe amasezerano y’umurimo ntiyubahirize inzira n’uburyo bikorwamo aba yirukanye umukozi mu buryo bunyuranyije n’amategeko, abitangira indishyi. 2. Umukoresha afite inshingano zo gushyira umukozi mu bwiteganyirize no kumutangira imisanzu mu Kigo cy’ubwiteganyirize bw’abakozi. Iyo umukoresha atatangiye umukozi imisanzu yo kwivuza ni we umuvuza; atabikora akaba agomba kumuha amafaranga akivuza ubwe. Ikirego gisaba gusubirishamo urubanza ku mpamvu z’akarengane, gifite ishingiro kuri bimwe. Imikirize y’urubanza rwaciwe n’Urukiko Rukuru rwa Kigali ihindutse ku bimwe. Amategeko yashingiweho: Itegeko N° 66/2018 ryo ku wa 30/08/2018 rigenga umurimo mu Rwanda, ingingo ya 3, 19, 24, 29, 30 n’iya 39.
## Page 178
144 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO Itegeko N° 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi, ingingo ya 10. Itegeko N° 05/2015 ryo ku wa 30/03/2015 rigenga imitunganyirize y’ubwiteganyirize bwa pansiyo, ingingo ya 6, 18, 24, 25 n’iya 26. Itegeko N° 06/2003 ryo ku wa 22/03/2003 rihindura kandi ryuzuza Itegeko-Teka ryo ku wa 22 Kanama 1974 rigenga ubwiteganyirize bw’abakozi, ingingo ya 14, 16 n’iya 22. Iteka rya Perezida N° 31/01 ryo ku wa 25/08/2003 rishyiraho uburyo bwo kwishyura indishyi ku bubabare bw’umubiri buturutse ku mpanuka zitewe n’ibinyabiziga, ingingo ya 18. Imanza zifashishijwe: Mukakimenyi v SANLAM Ag Plc, RS/INJUST/RC00012/2022/SC, rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga kuwa 02/02/2024. Musengamana v Special Guarentee Fund (SGF), RS/INJUST/RC 00019/2022/SC, rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga ku wa 02/06/2023. Nyetera Jean Baptiste v CORAR, RCAA0202/07/CS, rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga ku wa 09/04/2009. Manirarora v Rwanda Rudniki Ltd n’undi, RS/INJUST/RC00013/2021/CA, rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ubujurire ku wa 28/06/2022. Nyirabatesi v Ibitaro byitiriwe Umwami Fayisali, RCAA00073/2018/CA, rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ubujurire ku wa 19/07/2019. Ndizeye v Kibungo Medical Center, RCAA00008/2020/CA, rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ubujurire ku wa 25/06/2021.
## Page 179
145 RUZIBIZA v MOUNT MERU LOGISTICS RWANDA LTD Urubanza I. IMITERERE Y’URUBANZA [1] Ruzibiza Aloys yahawe akazi k’ubushoferi muri Mount Meru Logistics Rwanda LTD, (Mount Meru muri uru rubanza) ariko ntiyafatirwa ubwishingizi bw’ubwiteganyirize bw’abakozi muri RSSB. Ku wa 28/09/2020 ubwo yari mu butumwa bw’akazi mu Gihugu cya Uganda, yakoze impanuka atwaye imodoka y’akazi ifite plaque RAD 765 T arakomereka bikabije. [2] Nyuma yo kutumvikana na Mount Meru nk’uwari umukoresha we ku bijyanye n’indishyi yayisabaga, Ruzibiza Aloys yatanze ikirego mu Rukiko Rwisumbuye rwa Nyarugenge, aregera indishyi zinyuranye zikomoka ku mpanuka y’akazi nk’uko yazisobanuye atanga ikirego. [3] Uhagarariye Mount Meru yireguye avuga ko igihe Ruzibiza Aloys yakoraga impanuka yari amaze hafi ukwezi kumwe atangiye akazi ari nayo mpamvu umukoresha atamwandikishije mu kigo cy’ubwiteganyirize bw’abakozi (RSSB) kuko yari akiri mu gihe cy'igerageza, bityo akaba asanga hashingiwe ku mushahara yahembwaga ndetse n’ikigereranyo cy’umusanzu we wa buri kwezi, hazakurikizwa ibyo itegeko riteganya ku muntu wari ugitangira akazi, akagenerwa ibyo ikigo cy’ubwiteganirize cyari kumugenera iyo aza kuba yaragombaga kwishingirwa koko, ibyo kandi bigakorwa habazwe uruhare rw’ibyasabwaga Mount Meru hashingiwe ku gihe yari imaranye nawe. Avuga kandi ko Ruzibiza Aloys yatangiye akazi yaragejeje imyaka 60 ariyo inafatirwaho ku rwego rwo hejuru mu kugena ibigenerwa ubwiteganyirize ndetse akaba ari nabwo buryo
## Page 180
146 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO bukoreshwa mu kubara ibigenerwa uwamugariye ku kazi, ko asanga rero ikirego cye nta shingiro gifite. [4] Mu rubanza RSOC00292/2021/TGI/NYGE rwaciwe ku wa 06/05/2022, Urukiko Rwisumbuye rwa Nyarugenge rwemeje ko ikirego cya Mount Meru1 gifite ishingiro kuri bimwe; rwemeza ko igomba guha Ruzibiza Aloys amafaranga mu buryo bukurikira: 150.000 Frw × 30% = 45.000 Frw x 6: 270.000Frws; “Rente d’incapacité permanente”: 7950 Frws ya buri kwezi + 3600Frws ya buri kwezi, yose hamwe akaba:11.550Frws. Rwategetse kandi Mount Meru kwishyura Ruzibiza Aloys 700.000Frw y’igihembo cy’Avoka no kumusubiza 20.000 Frw yatanzeho ingwate y’amagarama arega. [5] Ruzibiza Aloys yajuririye urwo rubanza mu Rukiko Rukuru, avuga ko Urukiko Rwisumbuye rwirengagije kumugenera amafaranga yo kwivuza, ayerekeranye n’ugomba kumufasha, ay’indishyi mbangamirabukungu, ay’indishyi mbangamiraburambe, amafaranga agenerwa umukozi uzahajwe burundu n’impanuka y’akazi, indishyi z’akababaro, ko anasanga amafaranga y’ikurikiranarubanza n’ay’igihembo cya Avoka yatanzwe ku rwego rwa mbere adakwiye. Mount Meru na yo yatanze ubujurire bwuririye ku bundi isaba ko Urukiko rwategeka uwareze kuyishyura amafaranga Milioni imwe y'ikurikiranarubanza n'igihembo cya Avoka ngo kuko yagaragaje bimenyetso byerakana ko yitaye mu buryo bwose bushoboka kuri Ruzibiza Aloys igihe yagiraga impanuka, kandi n’Urukiko rukaba rwaramugeneye ibyo amategeko ateganya byose ariko agakomeza kuyishora mu manza ku maherere. 1Aha habayeho kwibeshya kuko Ruzibiza Aloys ariwe wari watanze ikirego
## Page 181
147 RUZIBIZA v MOUNT MERU LOGISTICS RWANDA LTD [6] Mu rubanza RSOCA 00117/2022/HC/KIG rwaciwe ku wa 14/07/2023, Urukiko Rukuru rwemeje ko ubujurire bwa Ruzibiza Aloys bufite ishingiro kuri bimwe, ko ubujurire bwuririye ku bundi bwa Mount Meru nta shingiro bufite, rwemeza ko imikirize y’urubanza rwajuririwe ihindutse kuri bimwe. Rwategetse Mount Meru guha Ruzibiza Aloys 270.000Frw yari yagenewe mu rubanza rwajuririwe kubera ko atajuririwe; ruyitegeka kandi kujya imuha 68.000Frw buri kwezi ya pansiyo y’ubumuga nk’uko yasobanuwe aho kuba 11.550Frw yari yagenwe mu rubanza rwajuririwe; ruyitegeka nanone kumuha 700.000 Frw y’igihembo cya Avoka nk’uko yari yemejwe ku rwego rwa mbere, 100.000Frw y’ikurikiranarubanza ku rwego rw’ubujurire; runayitegeka kumusubiza 20.000Frw yatanzeho ingwate y’amagarama nk’uko yari yagenwe mu rubanza rwajuririwe na 40.000Frw yatanzeho ingwate y’amagarama kuri urwo rwego. [7] Ku wa 10/08/2023, Ruzibiza Aloys yandikiye Perezida w’Urukiko rw’Ubujurire asaba ko urubanza RSOCA00117/2022/HC/KIG rwaciwe n’Urukiko Rukuru ku wa 14/07/2023, rwasubirwamo ku mpamvu z’akarengane. Nyuma yo gusuzuma ubusabe bwe, Perezida w’Urukiko rw’Ubujurire yandikiye Perezida w’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga amusaba ko urwo rubanza rwasubirishwamo ku mpamvu z’akarengane. Perezida w’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga amaze kubona raporo yarukorewe, yafashe icyemezo ko rwakongera kuburanishwa, maze ruhabwa RS/INJUST/RSOC00003/2024/SC. [8] Ruzibiza Aloys avuga ko akarengane ke gashingiye ku kuba inkiko zabanje zarafashe ibyemezo bidakwiye kandi binyuranyije n’amategeko.
## Page 182
148 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO [9] Iburanisha ry’urubanza ryabaye mu ruhame ku wa 09/09/2024, ababuranyi bose bitabye, Ruzibiza Aloys yunganiwe na Me Chuma Ndekezi Claude, Mount Meru ihagarariwe na Me Gakwaya Gilles, maze ababuranyi bajya impaka ku bibazo bikurikira: a. Kumenya niba Ruzibiza Aloys yarirukanywe mu kazi mu buryo bunyuranyije n’amategeko ku buryo yagenerwa indishyi; b. Kumenya niba Mount Meru yaragombaga kuvuza Ruzibiza Aloys; c. Kumenya ishingiro ry’indishyi zinyuranye zisabwa na Ruzibiza Aloys: i. Indishyi mbangamirabukungu; ii. Indishyi mbangamiraburambe; iii. Indishyi z’akababaro; iv. Amafaranga y’umukozi wazahajwe burundu n’impanuka y’akazi; v. Amafaranga y’ugomba kumufasha; vi. Amafaranga y’ingendo yakoresheje ajya kwivuza. d. Kumenya ishingiro ry’indishyi zerekeranye n’amafaranga y’igihembo cya Avoka n’ay’ikurikiranarubanza zisabwa n’ababuranyi. [10] Nyuma yo kumva ibisobanuro by’ababuranyi, Urukiko rwapfundikiye iburanisha rubamenyesha ko urubanza ruzasomwa ku wa 18/10/2024, kuri iyo tariki ntirwasomwa kubera ko hari hakiri ibikirusuzumwamo, isomwa ryarwo ryimuriwa ku wa 01/11/2024. Uwo munsi Urukiko rwaciye
## Page 183
149 RUZIBIZA v MOUNT MERU LOGISTICS RWANDA LTD urubanza rubanziriza urundi, rwemeza ko mbere yo guca urubanza mu mizi, muganga wasuzumye Ruzibiza Aloys agomba kurugaragariza niba uyu akeneye umwitaho kubera ubumuga yasigiwe n’impanuka, runategeka Mount Meru kugaragariza Urukiko ibigize umushahara Ruzibiza Aloys yahembwaga (Fiche de paie). [11] buranisha ryasubukuwe ku wa 17/12/2024, Ruzibiza Aloys yitabye yunganiwe na Me Chuma Ndekezi Claude, Mount Meru ihagarariwe na Me Gakwaya Gilles, ababuranyi bavuga kuri raporo y’umuhanga wapimye Ruzibiza Aloys. II. ISESENGURA RY’IBIBAZO BIGIZE URUBANZA I. Kumenya niba Ruzibiza Aloys yarirukanywe mu kazi mu buryo bunyuranyije n’amategeko ku buryo yagenerwa indishyi [12] Ruzibiza Aloys n’umwunganizi we bavuga ko atamenyeshejwe ko yasezerewe ku kazi, ko nta n’integuza yahawe, ko yatunguwe no guhagarikirwa umushahara. Basobanura ko Umukoresha we yamugejeje i Kigali aramuta, yanga kumuvuza, ataranamuteganyirije mu kigo cy’ubwishingizi, kandi ntiyamuha n’ibyo amategeko amuteganyiriza amaze kumusezerera. [13] Bavuga ko ingingo ya 24 y’Itegeko N° 66/2018 ryo ku wa 30/08/2018 rigenga umurimo mu Rwanda iteganya ko integuza igomba gutangwa n’umukoresha cyangwa umukozi mu buryo bukurikira: 1 º iminsi cumi n’itanu (15) nibura iyo umukozi yakoze igihe kiri munsi y’umwaka umwe (1); Ingingo ya 29
## Page 184
150 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO y’iryo Tegeko igateganya ko integuza igomba kumenyeshwa mu nyandiko uruhande ireba hakagaragazwa n’impamvu zituma amasezerano aseswa….; naho ingingo ya 30 yaryo igateganya ko iseswa ry’amasezerano y’umurimo rinyuranyije n’amategeko rituma hatangwa indishyi; ko basanga indishyi zihabwa umukozi wirukanywe binyuranyije n’amategeko zidashobora kujya munsi y’umushahara w’amezi atatu (3), ariko ntizirenze umushahara ahabwa w’amezi atandatu (6). [14] Bagaragaza ko mu Rukiko Rukuru, Ruzibiza Aloys yari yasabye 150,000Frw x 6 = 900,000Frw y’indishyi z’uko yasezerewe ku kazi mu buryo bunyuranyije n’amategeko, ariko umucamanza ntiyagira icyo abivugaho, bakavuga ko ibyo ari akarengane. Basaba Urukiko ko mu gihe rwasanga yarasezerewe ku kazi mu buryo bunyuranyije n’amategeko, rwazategeka ko yishyurwa ibirarane by’imishahara kuva igihe umushahara wahagarikiwe mu kwezi kwa 10/2020 kugeza igihe ikibazo kizakemukira. [15] Me Gilles Gakwaya uburanira Mount Meru yiregura kuri iyi ngingo avuga ko urega atabasha guhuza ibyo asaba n’amategeko. Asobanura ko Ruzibiza Aloys atigeze asezererwa ku kazi kuko akazi ke kahagaritswe n’uko yagize impanuka aho yitaweho bihagije kugeza mu kwezi kwa 2 ubwo yari agihabwa amafaranga yo kwivuza nk’uko ibimenyetso batanze bibigaragaza. Asobanura ko uregwa ubwe yemeza ko nyuma yo gukora impanuka yakomeje guhabwa umushahara kugera mu kwezi kwa 10/2020 ndetse akaba yari akivuzwa kugera mu kwezi kwa 2/2021. [16] Asoza avuga ko indishyi Ruzibiza Aloys asaba zihabwa umukozi wirukanwe mu buryo bunyuranyije n’amategeko; ko kuri we atari ko bimeze kuko Mount Meru itaba yaramwirukanye
## Page 185
151 RUZIBIZA v MOUNT MERU LOGISTICS RWANDA LTD hanyuma ngo ikomeza kumuhemba no kumuvuza na nyuma y’amezi arenga atandatu akoze impanuka. Arangiza avuga ko kuba atarakomeje guhembwa, icyabaye atari ukumwirukana ku kazi, ko ahubwo ari akazi kahagaze kubera ko imodoka yatwaraga yari yarangiritse idashobora gusubira mu muhanda. Avuga ko Itegeko ry’umurimo riteganya ko umushahara utangwa ku kazi kakozwe, ko kubera ko imodoka Ruzibiza yatwaraga yangiritse kandi ntawundi murimo umukoresha yari kumubonera, byumvikana ko atari gukomeza kumuhemba adakora, hashingiwe ku byo itegeko ry’umurimo riteganya ku bijyanye n’umushahara. UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [17] ngingo ya 24 y’Itegeko N° 66/2018 ryo ku wa 30/08/2018 rigenga umurimo mu Rwanda nk’uko ryahinduwe kugeza ubu, igira iti: haseguriwe ibikubiye mu masezerano rusange, amategeko ngengamikorere cyangwa amasezerano y’umurimo, integuza igomba gutangwa n’umukoresha cyangwa umukozi mu buryo bukurikira: 1 º iminsi cumi n’itanu (15) nibura iyo umukozi yakoze igihe kiri munsi y’umwaka umwe (1); … Gutanga integuza bigomba gukorwa mu nyandiko kandi hakagaragazwa impamvu yo gusesa amasezerano y’umurimo. [18] Ingingo ya 29 y’Itegeko rimaze kuvugwa iteganya ko integuza igomba kumenyeshwa mu nyandiko uruhande ireba hakagaragazwa n’impamvu zituma amasezerano aseswa. [19] Ingingo ya 30 y’iryo Tegeko iteganya ko iseswa ry’amasezerano y’umurimo rinyuranyije n’amategeko rituma hatangwa indishyi; ko indishyi zihabwa umukozi wirukanywe binyuranyije n’amategeko zidashobora kujya munsi
## Page 186
152 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO y’umushahara w’amezi atatu (3), ariko zidashobora kurenza umushahara ahabwa w’amezi atandatu (6). [20] Mu miburanire ye kuri iyi ngingo, Ruzibiza Aloys agaragaza ko umukoresha we atamukoreye ibyo amategeko ateganya ku byerekeye gusezerera umukozi. [21] Urukiko Rukuru mu cyemezo cyarwo rwagaragaje ko amasezerano Ruzibiza Aloys yari afitanye na Mount Meru atahagaritswe no kwirukanwa, ko ahubwo yahagaritswe n’impanuka, ko Ruzibiza atagaragaza ko impanuka yakoze itari kumubuza gusubira ku kazi cyane cyane ko nawe mu miburanire ye yemeraga ko akeneye umurwaza bigaragaza ko atari agishoboye akazi. [22] Iyi myumvire ihura n’imyiregurire ya Mount Meru ivuga ko itasezereye Ruzibiza Aloys ku kazi, ko ahubwo akazi ke kahagaritswe n’uko yagize impanuka, bityo akazi yakoraga kagahagarikwa nuko imodoka yatwaraga yari yarangiritse, umukoresha akaba nta kandi kazi yari kumubonera, ahubwo ko yakomeje kumurwaza, bityo ko hashingiwe ku byo itegeko ry'umurimo riteganya ku mushahara, atari gukomeza guhembwa adakora. [23] Urukiko rurasanga iyi mvugo ya Mount Meru nta shingiro yahabwa kuko nubwo itemera ko yasezereye Ruzibiza ku kazi ngo kubera ko yakoze impanuka akaba atarabashaga kongera gukora nka mbere, kandi n’imodoka yatwaraga ikaba yarangiritse, ntihakana ko atakiyikorera kandi nayo ikaba itakimuhemba. Uko byagenda kose ntibikuraho inshingano Mount Meru yari ifite nk’umukoresha yo kubahiriza ibyo amategeko ateganya ku birebana n’uko amasezerano y’akazi aseswa.
## Page 187
153 RUZIBIZA v MOUNT MERU LOGISTICS RWANDA LTD [24] Hashingiwe ku ngingo ya 24, iya 29 n’iya 30 z’Itegeko N° 66/2018 ryo ku wa 30/08/2018 ryavuzwe haruguru, Urukiko rusanga ibivugwa na Ruzibiza ko yirukanywe mu buryo bunyuranije n’amategeko bifite ishingiro kuko kuba imodoka yatwaraga yari yarakoze impanuka nawe agakomereka, bitari kubuza Mount Meru kumwandikira imumenyesha ko akazi karangiye, bityo kuba itarabyubahirije ikaba igomba kubitangira indishyi. [25] Ingingo ya 3, igika cya 1, agace ka 29 y’Itegeko N° 66/2018 ryo ku wa 30/08/2018 rigenga umurimo mu Rwanda ryariho Ruzibiza avanwa mu kazi isobanura ko ibigize umushahara ari umushahara w’ibanze (basic salary) umukozi ahembwa hiyongereyeho indamunite kubera akazi yakoze. Muri dosiye hari inyandiko Mount Meru yashyikirije urukiko igaragaza ko umushahara Ruzibiza Aloys yahembwaga buri kwezi ari 173,450.60Frw. [26] Hashingiwe ku biteganywa n’ingingo z’Itegeko N° 66/2018 ryo ku wa 30/08/2018 ryavuzwe haruguru, Urukiko rurasanga Mount Meru igomba guha Ruzibiza Aloys indishyi zo kumwirukana mu buryo bunyuranije n’amategeko zingana na 173,450.60Frw x 6= 1,040,703Frw. II. Kumenya niba Mount Meru yaragombaga kuvuza Ruzibiza Aloys [27] Ruzibiza Aloys na Me Chuma Ndekezi umwunganira bavuga ko Mount Meru yamukoreye amakosa yo kutamufatira ubwishingizi muri RSSB, ibyo bakaba basanga binyuranye n’ibiteganywa n’ingingo ya 6, igika cya 2, y’Itegeko N° 05/2015 ryo ku wa 30/03/2015 rigenga imitunganyirize y’ubwiteganyirize
## Page 188
154 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO bwa pansiyo;2 bikaba byaramugizeho ingaruka igihe yakoraga impanuka nta bwishingizi yafatiwe, ko kubera iyo mpamvu ubuvuzi n’ibindi byose asaba bigomba gutangwa na Mount Meru nk’uko biteganywa n’ingingo ya 19 y’Itegeko N⁰ 66/2018 ryo ku wa 30/08/2018 rigenga umurimo mu Rwanda3. [28] Bavuga ko ibijyanye no kuvuza Ruzibiza Aloys babishingira ku ngingo ya 22 y’Itegeko N° 06/2003 ryo ku wa 22/03/2003 rihindura kandi ryuzuza Itegeko-Teka ryo ku wa 22 Kanama 1974 rigenga ubwiteganyirize bw’abakozi iteganya ko ibigize ubuvuzi ku mukozi wagize impanuka y’akazi, ari gusuzumwa, gufatwa ibipimo no kubisesengura, kuvurwa, guca mu byuma, kubagwa, gufatwa neza no guhindurirwa ibyuma bisimbura ahababaye n’ibivura ubumuga,kongera kumenyereza umubiri, guhabwa imiti n’ibimutunga, amatike yo kujya kwivuza mu bitaro no kugaruka imuhira; ko basanga ibyo byose bigomba gukorwa na Mount Meru kuko nta bwiteganyirize yari yaramufatiye muri RSSB. [29] Basobanura ko ubumuga Ruzibiza Aloys yatewe n’iyo mpanuka bugaragazwa na raporo ya muganga wo mu Bitaro bya Gisirikare i Kanombe yo ku wa 14/01/2021 yerekana ko impanuka yamuteye ubumuga buhoraho (incapacité physique 2Ingingo ya 6 igika cya 2 y’Itegeko N° 05/2015 ryo ku wa 30/03/2015 rigenga imitunganyirize y’ubwiteganyirize bwa pansiyo itegamya ko: Umukoresha agomba kandi kwandikisha buri mukozi ahaye akazi mu gihe kitarenze iminsi irindwi (7) y’akazi uhereye igihe amushyiriye mu kazi. 3Ingingo ya 19 y’Itegeko N⁰ 66/2018 ryo ku wa 30/08/2018 rigenga umurimo mu Rwanda iteganya ko: Umukozi wagize impanuka cyangwa indwara bikomoka ku murimo atarateganyirijwe n’umukoresha we mu kigo cy’ubwiteganyirize mu Rwanda yishyurwa n’umukoresha amafaranga angana nk’ayo yagahawe n’ikigo cy’ubwiteganyirize mu Rwanda iyo aza kuba yarateganyirijwe, harimo kumuvuza n’ibindi bijyanye nabyo.
## Page 189
155 RUZIBIZA v MOUNT MERU LOGISTICS RWANDA LTD permanente) ku rwego rwa 92%. Bavuga ko nyuma y’iyo mpanuka, Ruzibiza Aloys yasabye proforma z’ibyo agomba gukorerwa mu buvuzi arazihabwa, ariko azeretse Mount Meru ntiyamuha amafaranga yo kwivuza. [30] Basaba ko Urukiko rwategeka Mount Meru kumuha indishyi ziteye ku buryo bukurikira: - 12.374.672Frw yo kubagwa hashingiwe kuri Proforma yo ku wa 04/11/2021 yakozwe n’Ibitaro byitiriwe Umwami Faysal (KFH); - 7.503.500Frw y’insimburangingo hashingiwe kuri Proforma yo ku wa 09/08/2021 yakozwe na Pharmacie KIPHARMA; - 10.121.828Frw y’ingendo, ay’umurwaza n’ibindi, yose hamwe akaba 30.000.000Frw. [31] Me Gilles Gakwaya uburanira Mount Meru yiregura kuri iyi ngingo avuga ko yibaza aho urega akura umubare wa 30.000.000Frw asaba, kuko nta tegeko ashingiraho. Avuga ko urega ashingira ku ngingo ya 19 y’Itegeko N⁰ 66/2018 ryo kuwa 30/08/2018 rigenga umurimo mu Rwanda, asaba ko igihe umukoresha atashyize umukozi we mu bwiteganirize agomba kumuha ibyo ikigo cy’ubwiteganirize cyakamuhaye iyo aza kuba yarateganyirijwe, no ku ngingo ya 22 y’Itegeko N° 06/2003 ryo ku wa 22/03/2003 rihindura kandi ryuzuza Itegeko-teka ryo kuwa 22 Kanama 1974 rigenga ubwiteganyirize bw’abakozi, iteganya ko …ibarwa rikorwa uhereye igihe ubumuga bwemerejwe kugeza ku myaka 55 ibyo bigakorwa habarwa gusa amezi 6 mu mwaka. Amafaranga y’ukwezi abarwa hagenwa ubwiteganirize buhabwa uwamugaye ni 30% y’umushahara we mpuzandengo yahembwaga; ko hashingiwe kuri izo ngingo, bidashoboka ko
## Page 190
156 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO akora imibare uko abyumva kandi hari umurongo itegeko ryatanze. [32] Asobanura ko ashingiye ku bikubiye mu ngingo ya 25 y’Itegeko N° 05/2015 ryo ku wa 30/03/2015 rigenga imitunganirize y’ubwiteganyirize bwa Pansiyo, asanga kugira ngo haboneke ibikwiye kugenerwa umukozi byagakwiye kuba byaratanzwe na RSSB, hakwiye kubarwa kuva igihe ubumuga bwa Ruzibiza Aloys bwemerejwe na muganga wemewe kugeza igihe yagiriye imyaka 60. Uhagarariye Mount Meru avuga ko hashingiwe kuri iyo ngingo hakwiye kubarwa ikigereranyo cya 30% cy’umushahara we mpuzandengo w’ukwezi ukubye amezi 6 avugwa muri iyo ngingo bigatanga igiteranyo nyacyo cya Pansiyo y’ubumuga. Avuga ko itegeko ritigeze riteganya amafaranga ngo rinavuge ko umuntu azayahabwa ubuzima bwe bwose, ko ahubwo ryerekanye umurongo na formule ikoreshwa (mode of computation). [33] Asoza avuga ko nta hantu Itegeko ryateganyije mu ngingo yavuze haruguru ko umukozi yerekana proforma yakoresheje agamije kuzereka urukiko, cyane cyane ko hamwe mu nzego zabanje yagiye avuga proforma y’insimburangingo ya Miliyoni 4, yarangiza mu myanzuro ye agasaba 7.503.500Frw, ibintu bigaragaza ko urega aregera ibintu bitarimo ukuri kuko ingingo z’amategeko yifashisha zishimangira ko ubwishyu bukorwa ku buvuzi bwamaze gukorerwa umukozi kandi bukishyurwa mu biganza by’ibigo by’ubuvuzi byamuvuye. Avuga ko Umuntu yakwibaza impamvu Ruzibiza Aloys yamaze icyo gihe cyose yakira amafaranga yabaga yakoresheje yivuza nta nkomyi ariko ubu akaba aribwo ari kuvuga ko atigeze afashwa kuvuzwa, ko ibyo asaba nta shingiro byahabwa.
## Page 191
157 RUZIBIZA v MOUNT MERU LOGISTICS RWANDA LTD UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [34] Ingingo ya 19, igika cya 2, y’Itegeko N⁰ 66/2018 ryo ku wa 30/08/2018 rigenga umurimo mu Rwanda nk’uko ryahinduwe kugeza ubu, iteganya ko umukozi wagize impanuka cyangwa indwara bikomoka ku murimo atarateganyirijwe n’umukoresha we mu kigo cy’ubwiteganyirize mu Rwanda yishyurwa n’umukoresha amafaranga angana nk’ayo yagahawe n’ikigo cy’ubwiteganyirize mu Rwanda iyo aza kuba yarateganyirijwe, harimo kumuvuza n’ibindi bijyanye nabyo. [35] Naho ingingo ya 14 y’Itegeko N° 06/2003 ryo kuwa 22/03/2003 ihindura kandi yuzuza Itegeko-Teka ryo ku wa 22 Kanama 1974 rigenga Ubwiteganyirize bw'Abakozi yo isobanura ibigize ubuvuzi bukorerwa uwagiriye impanuka mu kazi4. 4 Ingingo ya 14: Ingingo ya 22 y'Itegeko-Teka ryo ku wa 22 Kanama 1974 rigenga Ubwiteganyirize bw'Abakozi ihinduwe kandi yujujwe ku buryo bukurikira: Ukwivuza kugizwe n' ibi bikurikira: a. Kuvurwa, kubagwa, kuvurwa amenyo, gusuzumwa harimo no guca mu cyuma, gufatwa ibigomba gupimwa no kubisesengura; b. Guhabwa imiti n'ibindi bijyana na yo; c. Kwitabwaho mu bitaro cyangwa mu mavuriro yemewe na Leta no guhabwa ifunguro. Inama y'Ubutegetsi ishyiraho umubare w'amafaranga ahabwa abarwariye mu bitaro bidatanga ibiryo hakurikijwe ikiguzi fatizo cyo mu bitaro binyuranye by'igihugu; d. Gutanga ibyuma bisimbura ingingo n'ibivura ubumuga buturutse ku murimo, kubyitaho no kubihindura kandi bikemezwa na Muganga wemewe na Leta igihe abona ko ari ngombwa kandi bishobora gufasha ingingo kwisubiranya no kwigisha uwamugaye kwibeshaho, ariko, bikemezwa na Muganga Ngishwanama w'Isanduku y'Ubwiteganyirize bw'Abakozi; e. Gutanga no guhindura indorerwamo z'amaso. Ibifata indorerwamo bizatangwa n'Isanduku y'ubwiteganyirize bw'abakozi hakurikijwe igiciro gisanzwe naho indorerwamo zizishyurwa ku giciro cyazo; f. Gufasha ingingo z'uwamugaye kwisubiranya no kumwigisha kwibeshaho;
## Page 192
158 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO [36] Ku byerekeye uru rubanza, impande zombi zemeranywa ko Mount Meru itubahirije ibiteganywa n’Ingingo ya 39, igika cya 1, agace ka 6, y’Itegeko N° 66/2018 ryo ku wa 30/08/2018 ryavuzwe haruguru iteganya ko umukoresha afite inshingano yo gushyira umukozi mu bwiteganyirize no kumutangira imisanzu mu Kigo cy’ubwiteganyirize bw’abakozi mu Rwanda kuko Ruzibiza Aloys akora impanuka nta bwiteganyirize yari yarafatiwe n’umukoresha we muri RSSB, nyamara inyandiko Ruzibiza Aloys yahemberwagaho igaragaza ko yakatwaga umusanzu w’ubwiteganyirize. [37] Dosiye y’urubanza igaragaza ko mu Rukiko Rukuru, Ruzibiza Aloys yasabye ko yahabwa 30.000.000Frw yo kwivuza, ayo mafaranga akaba akubiyemo ayo kubagwa angana na 12.374.672Frw nk’uko bigaragazwa na Proforma Invoice nimero KFH/11/21/06 yo ku wa 4/11/2021 yatanzwe n’Ibitaro byitiriwe g. Gutanga amafaranga y'urugendo kugira ngo umuntu avanwe aho yakomerekeye ajyanwe mu mavuriro cyangwa se imuhira mu gihe ubuzima bwe bubikeneye. h. Uretse kuvurwa byihutirwa bikorwa n'umukoresha, Isanduku y'ubwiteganyirize bw'abakozi ni yo ivuza umukozi ugize impanuka y'akazi, igaha amafaranga, ku buryo butaziguye, abavuzi, abacuruza imiti, abafasha b'abaganga, abaranguza imiti ndetse n'ibigo by'ubuzima bya Leta cyangwa byigenga byemewe n'abategetsi b'ubuvuzi. i. Kwishyura amafaranga ateganywa mu gika kibanza bikorwa hakurikijwe ibiciro biteganywa n'amategeko. j. Amafaranga y'urugendo avugwa kuri g) y'igika cya mbere ashobora gusubizwa uwagize impanuka ari uko abitangiye ibimenyetso. k. Iyo uwiteganyirije yitabye Imana ari mu nzira ajya ku kazi cyangwa se avayo, Isanduku y'Ubwiteganyirize bw'Abakozi itanga amafaranga yakoreshejwe mu kugeza umurambo ku bitaro biri hafi y'aho atuye. lyo ari ngombwa kandi byemejwe n'Akanama k'abaganga, uwiteganyirije ashobora kuvurirwa mu bitaro bifite ubushobozi bwihariye biri mu gihugu cyangwa mu mahanga.
## Page 193
159 RUZIBIZA v MOUNT MERU LOGISTICS RWANDA LTD Umwami Faisal, na 7.503.500Frw y’insimburangingo agaragazwa na “Proforma Invoice” ebyiri zo ku wa 9/8/2021 zatanzwe na Pharmacie ya Kipharma, hamwe na 10.121.828Frw, akubiyemo ay’ingendo, gutunga umurwaza n’ibindi. Urukiko Rukuru rukaba rutarayamugeneye rushingiye ku kuba ibyo asaba bidateganyijwe n’amategeko kuko ngo inshingano za Mount Meru ari ukwishyura ibigo by’ubuvuzi kuri serivisi byahaye Ruzibiza Aloys, ko itari kumuha amafaranga mu ntoki ngo ayakoreshe uko abyumva kandi binyuranyije n’amategeko. [38] Urukiko rurasanga nk’uko byemejwe mu zindi manza5 zaciwe n’uru Rukiko, iyi myumvire y’itegeko ibaye ari ihame, 5 Mu rubanza RCAA0202/07/CS rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga ku wa 09/04/2009, haburana Nyetera Jean Baptiste na Corar, Urukiko rwasuzumye ikibazo gisa n’ikiri muri uru rubanza rusanga, ku byerekeye kuvurwa ubwabyo, nta gikuraho inshingano y’umwishingizi yo guha uwahohotewe n’impanuka uburyo bwo kwivuza, imyiregurire ya CORAR y’uko uwahohotewe ariwe ugomba byanze bikunze kwirihira akazishyurwa nyuma yerekanye impapuro yishyuriyeho amafaranga yo kwivuza, ikaba nta shingiro ifite, kuko kuvuga ko igika cya mbere cy’ingingo ya 13 yavuzwe haruguru cyasobanurwa gutyo, byaba ari ukumvikanisha ko uwagize impanuka adafite uburyo bwo kwitangira mbere amafaranga yo kwivuza adashobora kugobokwa n’umwishingizi, ibi bikaba byaba ari isesengura rikosheje ry’Itegeko, ridashobora rero kwemerwa, hakurikijwe amahame agenga isesengura ry’amategeko. Na none, mu rubanza RS/INJUST/RC00012/2022/SC rwaciwe kuwa 02/02/2024 haburana Mukakimenyi Marie Claire na Sanlam Ag Plc, uru Rukiko rwasanze kimwe mu byo Mukakimenyi Marie Claire yasabaga urubanza rugitangira, kwari ukwemeza ko amafaranga agaragara kuri facture proforma yazishyurwa kugira ngo opération yari yategetswe na muganga ishobore gukorwa; rutegeka Sanlam Ag Plc gukora ibikenewe byose mu gihe kitarenze ukwezi kumwe kuva urubanza rusomwe kugira ngo Mukakimenyi Marie Claire avurwe, bitaba ibyo ikamuha 5.265.000Frw (yari kuri proforma) kugira ngo abashe kwivuza ubwe.
## Page 194
160 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO uwaba adafite ubushobozi bwo kwivuza ntabwo yazigera abona ubufasha. [39] Urukiko rurasanga nk’uko byagaragajwe mu bindi bika by’uru rubanza, bimwe mu byo itegeko riteganyiriza uwahohotwe n’impanuka byerekeranye no kuvurwa harimo gusuzumwa no guca mu cyuma, gufatwa ibigomba gupimwa no kubisesengura; kuba Ruzibiza Aloys yarahawe Proforma Invoice n’ibitaro nuko yari yasuzumwe n’abaganga kugirango hamenyekane ibikenewe ngo azabashe kuvurwa. [40] Dosiye igaragaza ko mu nyandiko yo kuwa 8/02/2021, Ruzibiza Aloys yasabye Mount Meru ko ikibazo bafitanye cyakemurwa mu bwumvikane ariko ntibashobora kumvikana. Urukiko Rurasanga icyo Mount Meru yari gukora imaze kugaragarizwa ibikenewe kugirango Ruzibiza Aloys avurwe ari ugukora ibishoboka byose, (nk’uri mu mwanya w’ikigo cy’ubwiteganyirize) igashakira Ruzibiza Aloys uburyo bwo kwivuza. [41] Raporo yakorewe Ruzibiza Aloys ku Bitaro bya Gisirikare by’i Kanombe igaragaza ko yakomeretse ku buryo bukomeye, impanuka ikaba yaramusigiye ubumuga bwa burundu (permanent disability) ku kigero cya 85%, zimwe mu ngingo z’umubiri we harimo amaguru, amatako amavi n’ibirenge bikaba bidakora neza ku buryo akenera imbago n’ibindi byuma (assistive devices) byamufasha kugenda. Iyi raporo igaragaza ariko ko Ruzibiza Aloys avuwe byuzuye atakenera umuntu wo kumufasha mu mirimo ye ya buri munsi6. 6After final treatment, he will be autonomous and will not require a third person for help in his daily activities.
## Page 195
161 RUZIBIZA v MOUNT MERU LOGISTICS RWANDA LTD [42] Hashingiwe ku ngingo ya 19, igika cya 2, y’Itegeko N⁰ 66/2018 ryavuzwe haruguru, Urukiko rusanga Ruzibiza Aloys agomba kuvuzwa na Mount Meru, itabikora ikishyura factures zagaragajwe haruguru, zikubiyemo ibi bikurikira: 12.374.672Frw agaragara kuri “Proforma Invoice” nimero KFH/11/21/06 yo ku wa 4/11/2021 yatanzwe n’Ibitaro byitiriwe Umwami Faisal, na 7.503.500Frw y’insimburangingo agaragazwa na Proforma Invoice ebyiri zo ku wa 9/8/2021 zatanzwe na Pharmacie ya Kipharma, yose hamwe akaba 19.878.172Frw, ayo mafaranga ikayishyura ibigo byavuzwe haruguru mu gihe cy’ukwezi kumwe uru rubanza rumaze gucibwa, Mount Meru itabikora ikayaha Ruzibiza Aloys akajya kwivuza ubwe. III Kumenya ishingiro ry’indishyi zinyuranye zisabwa na Ruzibiza Aloys. i. Indishyi mbangamirabukungu [43] Ruzibiza Alyos n’umwunganira bavuga ko ingingo ya 18 y’Iteka rya Perezida N° 31/01 ryo ku wa 25/08/2003 rishyiraho uburyo bwo kwishyura indishyi ku bubabare bw’umubiri buturutse ku mpanuka zitewe n’ibinyabiziga iteganya ko ‘‘Iyo ari ubumuga buhoraho burengeje 30%, indishyi y’ibangamirabukungu ikorwa hakurikijwe amategeko akurikira: Iyo uwahohotewe akora umurimo ahemberwa, ahabwa amafaranga abarwa hakurikijwe igihembo umuntu atahana, urwego rw’ubumuga n’imyaka ye. [44] Bavuga ko bashingiye ku rubanza RS/INJUST/RC00013/2021/CA rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ubujurire ku wa 28 Kamena 2022, haburana Manirarora Jean de Dieu n’umukoresha we Rwanda Rudniki Ltd, Sanlam Ag Plc ikaba yararuhamagajwemo nk’umwishingizi, mu gika cyarwo
## Page 196
162 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO cya 54, Urukiko rwageneye Manirarora indishyi mbangamirabukungu kubera ko impanuka y’akazi yamuvukije umusaruro yari asanzwe abona, izo ndishyi zibarirwa ku myaka 65 kuko ariyo yo kujya mu kiruhuko cy’izabukuru, ko hashingiwe kuri urwo rubanza), basanga no muri uru rubanza izo ndishyi zabarirwa ku myaka 65, Ruzibiza Aloys agahabwa indishyi mbangamirabukungu zibariye kuri SMIG ya 5,000Frw ku munsi, ku gipimo cy’ubumuga bwa burundu bungana na 92%, gukuba imyaka 4 yari asigaje gukora, ku gipimo cy’ibitsa cya 7%, akaba asaba ko zabarwa mu buryo bukurikira:(Frw 5,000x30x12x92%x4ans):1+(7%x4)= 5,175,000Frw. [45] Basoza bavuga ko mu rubanza rusabirwa gusubirwamo ku mpamvu z’akarengane, Umucamanza ntacyo yavuze kuri iyi ngingo y’ikirego, bakaba basanga harirengagijwe ibiteganywa n’ingingo ya 10 y’Itegeko N° 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi, iteganya ko umucamanza aca urubanza ku cyasabwe cyose kandi kuri icyo cyonyine, basaba ko uru Rukiko rwakosora ayo makosa. [46] Me Gilles Gakwaya uburanira Mount Meru yiregura kuri iyi ngingo avuga ko ibarwa rya SMIG urega yifashisha, rikoreshwa ku wamugajwe n'impanuka yo mu muhanda, hakurikijwe ibiteganywa n'amategeko agenga ubwishingizi busanzwe, mu gihe urubanza rwa Ruzibiza Aloys ari urw'umurimo rutareba ubwishingizi busanzwe. Avuga ko hashingiwe ku byo amategeko y'ubwiteganyirize agenera utarageza imyaka 60, hakwiye kubarwa gusa igihe cyari gisigaye ngo iyo myaka igere. Arangiza avuga ko ibyo Ruzibiza Aloys yagenerwa ari ibyo yari guhabwa na RSSB iyo aza kuba yarandikishijwe mu icyo kigo, ibyo bikabarwa hashingiwe kuri
## Page 197
163 RUZIBIZA v MOUNT MERU LOGISTICS RWANDA LTD formule iri mu ngingo ya 22, igika cya 2, y’Itegeko N°06/2003 ryo kuwa 22/03/2003 rihindura kandi ryuzuza Itegeko-Teka ryo kuwa 22 Kanama 1974 rigenga ubwiteganyirize bw’abakozi. UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [47] Mu rubanza rwaciwe n’Urukiko Rukuru, Ruzibiza Aloys yasabaga ko yahabwa indishyi mbangamirabukungu, akazisaba ashingiye ku Iteka rya Perezida Nº 31/01 ryo ku wa 25/08/2003 rishyiraho uburyo bwo kwishyura indishyi ku bubabare bw’umubiri buturutse ku mpanuka zitewe n’ibinyabiziga. [48] Ingingo ya 19, igika cya 1, y’Itegeko N⁰ 66/2018 ryo ku wa 30/08/2018 rigenga umurimo mu Rwanda nk’uko ryahinduwe kugeza ubu, iteganya ko umukozi wagize impanuka cyangwa indwara bikomoka ku murimo yarateganyirijwe n’umukoresha we mu kigo cy’ubwiteganyirize mu Rwanda yishyurwa hakurikije amategeko agenga ubwiteganyirize bw’abakozi mu Rwanda. Ibi bikaba bisobanuye ko Iteka rya Perezida Nº 31/01 ryo ku wa 25/08/2003 ryavuzwe haruguru Ruzibiza Aloys ashaka kwiyambaza ridashobora gukoreshwa hasuzumwa iki kibazo, bityo ikirego cye cy’indishyi mbangamirabukungu kikaba nta shingiro cyahabwa. [49] Urukiko rurasanga kandi n’ikibazo cy’indishyi mbangamiraburambe Ruzibiza Aloys asaba bitari ngombwa kugisuzuma kuko nacyo gishingiye ku Iteka rya Perezida Nº 31/01 ryo ku wa 25/08/2003 ryavuzwe, kandi nk’uko bimaze gusobanurwa, iryo Teka rikaba ridahuje kamere n’uru rubanza.
## Page 198
164 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO ii. Indishyi z’akababaro [50] Ruzibiza Alyos na Me Chuma Ndekezi Claude umwunganira bavuga ko yasabye Urukiko Rukuru gushingira ku kubabara gukabije yatewe n’imvune yaturutse ku mpanuka, kuba atabona ubuvuzi bitewe n’amikoro make, maze rugategeka umukoresha we kumuha indishyi z’akababaro zingana na 9,100,000Frw; ariko ko Umucamanza ntacyo yabivuzeho mu cyemezo yafashe, akaba yarirengagije ingingo 10 y’Itegeko N°22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryavuzwe haruguru. Ubusabe babushingira ku byemezo byafashwe mu manza n’Urukiko rw’Ubujurire7 aho ababuranyi bagiye bahabwa indishyi zinyuranye kubera ububabare bagize, bagasaba ko nawe yagenerwa indishyi kuko yarenganye. [51] Me Gilles Gakwaya uburanira Mount Meru yiregura kuriiyi ngingo avuga ko indishyi zose zisabwa mu rwego rw'impanuka nk'uko bazigaragarije ibisobanuro haruguru zitangwa hifashishijwe ibyo amategeko agenga ubwiteganyirize ateganya cyane cyane iyo urega yahisemo iyo nzira agasaba ibyari kuba byaratanzwe na RSSB. Akomeza avuga ko amategeko ateganya kandi ko zibarirwa ku ijanisha rya 30% y’umushahara; ko kandi izindi ndishyi zitangwa ari iziteganywa n'itegeko ry'umurimo kuko uru ari urubanza rw'umurimo, ariko nazo zigatangwa hagaragajwe ibimenyetso byo gusesa 7 Urubanza rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ubujurire haburana Manirarora Jean de Dieu na Rwanda Rudniki Ltd (igika 54 na 55), urubanza RCAA00073/2018/CA rwaciwe ku wa 19/07/2019, haburana Nyirabatesi Laurence n’Ibitaro byitiriwe Umwami Fayisali, hamwe n’urubanza RCAA00008/2020/CA rwaciwe ku wa 25/06/2021, haburana Ndizeye Alphonse na Kibungo Medical Center.
## Page 199
165 RUZIBIZA v MOUNT MERU LOGISTICS RWANDA LTD amasezerano mu buryo budakurikije amategeko. Asoza avuga ko asanga urega yitiranya indishyi zatanzwe hashingiwe ku miterere y’urubanza ndetse n'ibimenyetso byagaragajwe muri izo manza ashingiraho zavuzwe haruguru, ariko bitari kugaragazwa muri uru, kuko bisanzwe bizwi ko ifatwa ry'ubwishingizi bw'umushoferi ari facultatif, bityo ko Urukiko rukwiye kubona ko ibyo asaba bidafite ishingiro. UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [52] Kuva uru rubanza rugitangira impande zombi zemeranya ko Ruzibiza Aloys nta bwiteganyirize Mount Meru yari yaramufatiye muri RSSB; bisobanuye ko ibyo amategeko agenera uwakoze impanuka byagombaga gukorwa na RSSB bikorerwa Ruzibiza Aloys harimo no kumuvuza, bigomba gukorwa na Mount Meru. [53] Ruzibiza Aloys asaba indishyi z’akababaro ashingiye ku kuba yaratereranywe n’umukoresha we nyuma y’impanuka, akaba atabona ubuvuzi bitewe n’amikoro make, Mount Meru igategekwa kumuha indishyi z’akababaro zingana na Frw 9,100,000Frw kuko asanga yaramurangaranye. [54] Raporo ya muganga wapimye Ruzibiza Aloys igaragaza ko impanuka yamusigiye ubumuga bwa 85%. Dosiye y’urubanza igaragaza kandi ko yasuzumwe agahabwa impapuro zerekana ibikenewe mu rwego rwo kumuvura (kubagwa) hamwe n’izo kumuguririra insimburangingo. Ibyo byose ntacyo Mount Meru yabikozeho kandi ariyo yari ifite inshingano zo kumuvuza nk’uko byasobanuwe haruguru, bityo kuba Ruzibiza Aloys yarakoze impanuka ari mu kazi, umukoresha we ntamuvuze uko bikwiye, bikamuzahaza bigatuma ajya mu manza, Urukiko
## Page 200
166 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO rusanga Mount Meru igomba kubitangira indishyi; ariko kubera ko izo Ruzibiza Aloys asaba rusanga ari umurengera, mu bushishozi bw’Urukiko rukaba rumugeneye 2.000.000Frw. iii. Indishyi z’umukozi wazahajwe burundu n’impanuka y’akazi [55] Ruzibiza Aloys n’umwunganira bavuga ko Urukiko Rukuru rwategetse Mount Meru kujya iha Ruzibiza Aloys 68.000Frw buri kwezi ya pansiyo y’ubumuga, mu mwanya wa 11.550Frw yari yaragenwe mu rubanza rwari rwajuririwe, ko basanga icyo cyemezo kinyuranyije n’uburyo amategeko ateganya uko amafaranga agenerwa umukozi uzahajwe burundu n’impanuka y’akazi agomba kubarwa; kandi ko batanumva n’icyashingiweho agenerwa ayo mafaranga. Bakomeza basobanura ko ingingo ya 25 y’Itegeko N° 05/2015 ryo kuwa 30/03/2015 rigenga imitunganirize y’ubwiteganirize bwa Pensiyo iteganya ko uburyo bwo kubara amafaranga ya pansiyo y’ubumuga ari bumwe n’ubukoreshwa mu kubara aya pansiyo y’izabukuru’’. Naho ingingo ya 16 y’Itegeko N° 06/2003 ryo ku wa 22/03/2003 rihindura kandi ryuzuza Itegeko-Teka ryo kuwa 22 Kanama 1974 rigenga ubwiteganyirize bw’abakozi mu gika cyayo cya 2, igateganya ko ‘‘Iyo uwiteganyirije afite ubumuga buhoraho bwo ku rugero rwa 100%, ahabwa amafaranga angana na 85% y’umushahara ngereranyo wa buri kwezi. [56] Bavuga ko basanga rero, kuba Mount Meru yarakoresheje Ruzibiza Aloys adateganyirijwe, akagira impanuka ikamutera ubumuga butandukanye nk’uko bigaragara muri raporo z’abaganga, basaba ko yamwishyura amafaranga angana nk’ayo yagahawe n’ikigo cy’ubwiteganyirize mu Rwanda iyo iza kuba yaramuteganyirije angana na: 150,000 x12= 1,800,000Frw (amafaranga yakorerega ku mwaka); igihe yari asigaje gukora:
## Page 201
167 RUZIBIZA v MOUNT MERU LOGISTICS RWANDA LTD 65-61= imyaka 4; bityo ko Amafaranga yagahawe n’ikigo cy’ubwiteganyirize ari: 1,800,000x4x85% = 6,120,000Frw. Bavuga ko rero hashingiwe ku bisobanuro batanze, basanga iyi ngingo y’amategeko ariyo Urukiko Rukuru rwari gushingiraho mu kubara amafaranga agenerwa umukozi uzahajwe burundu n’impanuka y’akazi. [57] Bakomeza bavuga ko mu bujurire Urukiko rwategetse Mount Meru kujya iha Ruzibiza Aloys 68.000Frw buri kwezi, ko ariko bibaza igihe bizamara kuko Umucamanza atabisobanuye, ibyo bikaba; binyuranye n’ibiteganywa n’ingingo ya 18 y’Itegeko N°05/2015 ryo kuwa 30/03/2015 rigenga imitunganirize y’ubwiteganirize bwa Pansiyo iteganya ko iyo uwiteganyirije ageze ku myaka y’izabukuru kandi atujuje imisanzu y’imyaka cumi n’itanu (15), ahabwa amafaranga y’ingunga imwe (1)’’. Bavuga ko bashingiye kuri iyi ngingo, no kuba Ruzibiza Aloys atakiri umukozi wa Mount Meru, basanga yakagombye kuyahererwa rimwe (rente unique) aho kugira ngo ayishyurwe buri kwezi (rente viagère) atazi n’igihe bizamara ; ko byongeye kandi, gutegeka Mount Meru guha Ruzibiza Aloys indishyi z’ubumuga buri kwezi atakiri umukozi wayo, basanga irangiza ry’urubanza rishobora kuzagorana bigashora Ruzibiza Aloys mu zindi manza; cyane cyane ko hashize imyaka 4 impanuka yarabaye Mount Meru yaranze kumuvuza. Bakaba basanga rero nk’uko byagenze mu rubanza rwa Manirarora Jean de Dieu na Rwanda Rudniki Ltd rwavuzwe haruguru, aho indishyi Manirarora yazigenewe rimwe, atari buri kwezi kuko atari akibarizwa mu bakozi ba Rwanda Rudniki Ltd, ariko bikwiriye kugenda no muri uru rubanza. [58] Me Gilles Gakwaya uburanira Mount Meru yiregura kuri iyi ngingo avuga ko niba urega asaba ko hari ibigomba kugenwa
## Page 202
168 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO n’amategeko yavuzwe haruguru, ibyo akabishingira ku ngingo ya 19 y’Itegeko ry’umurimo, aho asaba ko ibyo RSSB yari kumugenera aribyo bikwiye kwemezwa, adakwiye kandi kwikorera imibare ye idafite aho ihuriye n’amategeko ubwe yatanze. Avuga ko ibarwa ry’ibigenerwa uwamugaye rikorwa hashingiwe ku biteganywa n’ingingo ya 25 y’Itegeko N°05/2015 ryo kuwa 30/03/2015 rigenga imitunganirize y’ubwiteganirize bwa pansiyo, ibarwa ry’ibikwiye kugenerwa uwagize ubumuga (Mode of computation) bwemejwe na muganga nk’uko ingingo ya 24, 4° y’iryo Tegeko ibivuga, ryakorwa mu gihe cyabarwa ntikirenze ikigero cy’imyaka 60 kuva igihe ubumuga bwemerejwe kandi hakanabarwa gusa amezi 6 ya buri mwaka. [59] Akomeza asobanura ko niba urega yari yaragejeje imyaka 60 nubundi bidahindura ko kuva igihe impanuka yabereye, hazabarwa igihe gishize ibaye nk’uko itegeko ribiteganya ubariye ku gihe cy’amezi 6 ya buri mwaka ugakuba ukoresheje uburyo ingingo ya 22, igika cya 2, y’Itegeko N° 06/2003 ryo kuwa 22/03/2003 rihindura kandi ryuzuza Itegeko-Teka ryo ku wa 22 Kanama 1974 rigenga ubwiteganyirize bw’abakozi twavuze haruguru ibiteganya. [60] Agaragaza ko ubusanzwe ibarwa ry’ibyishyurwa na RSSB rikorwa muri ubu buryo bw’ijanisha: Umukozi yiyishyurira 2.4%; Umukoresha yishyura 5.3%; hakanishyurwa Maternity ya 0.3%; ko rero Ruzibiza Aloys yahembwaga umushahara wa 150.000 Frw, akaba yari amaze gukora ukwezi kumwe ahembwa amezi 3, akaba yaragombaga kujya atangirwa n’umukoresha 5.3% bibazwe ku mushahara bikangana na 7386Frw buri kwezi mu gihe we ubwe yari kwitangira angana na 4599Frw yose hamwe akaba 11985 Frw akwiye gusabwa umukoresha.
## Page 203
169 RUZIBIZA v MOUNT MERU LOGISTICS RWANDA LTD [61] Akomeza avuga ko ku bijyanye na “bulletin de paie” Mount Meru yasabwe gutanga igaragaza umushahara Ruzibiza Aloys yahembwaga, asobanura ko net salary yari 150.000Frw, gross salary ikaba 173.450.60Frw, ko umushahara Ruzibiza Aloys yahembwaga ukubiyemo 3% y’ubwiteganyirize, aya maternité 0.3%, maternity benefits zihwanye na 3%, ariko ko nta “transport allowances” cyangwa amafaranga y’icumbi yagenerwaga, ko mu kubara indishyi hazashingirwa kuri “gross salary” ingana na 173.450.60Frw. [62] Ruzibiza Aloys n’umwunganira bavuga ko nk’uko bigaragazwa na bulletin de paie yatanzwe na Mount Meru, indishyi yari yasabye zari zishingiye kuri net salary ingana na 150.000 Frw, kuko nta kindi yari azi kijyanye n’umushahara we. Asaba ko mu gihe cyo kugena indishyi hazashingirwa kuri “gross salary” kuko kugirango asabe ko indishyi zibarirwa kuri net salary byatewe ni uko atari azi “gross salary” ye. UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [63] Ingingo ya 24, y’Itegeko N° 05/2015 ryo ku wa 30/03/2015 rigenga Imitunganyirize y’Ubwiteganyirize bwa Pansiyo iteganya ko uwiteganyirije ugize ubumuga ataruzuza imyaka yo gufata pansiyo y’izabukuru, ahabwa pansiyo y’ubumuga iyo yujuje ibi bikurikira: 1° kuba nibura amaze imyaka itatu (3) mu bwiteganyirize; 2° kuba afite amezi atandatu (6) y’imisanzu y’ubwiteganyirize mu gihe cy’amezi cumi n’abiri (12) abanziriza itariki ubumuga bwe bwemerejweho na muganga. [64] Ku birebana n’amafaranga y’ubwiteganyirize bw’ubumuga, dosiye igaragaza ko Ruzibiza Aloys yakoze impanuka ataruzuza ukwezi atangiye akazi. Ingingo ya 19, igika
## Page 204
170 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO cya 2, y’Itegeko N⁰ 66/2018 ryo ku wa 30/08/2018 rigenga umurimo mu Rwanda nk’uko ryahinduwe kugeza ubu, iteganya ko umukozi wagize impanuka cyangwa indwara bikomoka ku murimo atarateganyirijwe n’umukoresha we mu kigo cy’ubwiteganyirize mu Rwanda yishyurwa n’umukoresha amafaranga angana nk’ayo yagahawe n’ikigo cy’ubwiteganyirize mu Rwanda iyo aza kuba yarateganyirijwe, harimo kumuvuza n’ibindi bijyanye nabyo. Iyi ngingo yumvikanisha ko ibyo Ruzibiza Aloys agomba guhabwa bijyanye na pansiyo y’ubumuga yakagombye kubihabwa na Mount Meru (umukoresha) kuko itamuteganyirije mu kigo cy’ubwiteganyirize. [65] Urukiko rurasanga ariko, n’iyo Ruzibiza Aloys aza kuba yarateganyirijwe nk’uko Itegeko ribiteganya, indishyi zijyanye na Pansiyo y’ubumuga ntazo yari guhabwa hashingiwe ku ngingo ya 24 y’Itegeko N° 05/2015 ryo ku wa 30/03/2015 ryavuzwe haruguru kuko impanuka yamuteye ubumuga yabaye ataruzuza imyaka itatu (3) mu kazi iteganyijwe n’Itegeko. Urukiko rukaba rusanga atari ngombwa kujya mu mukoro wo kubara indishyi zijyanye na pansiyo y’ubumuga Ruzibiza Aloys asaba kandi atari mu mubare w’abazigenewe. [66] Urukiko rurasanga ahubwo amafaranga Ruzibiza Aloys agomba guhabwa ari ajyanye no kuba impanuka yakoze yaratumye atakaza umushahara (rente d’incapacité permanente). Hashingiwe ku ngingo ya 16 y’Itegeko N° 06/2003 ryo ku wa 22/03/2003 rihindura kandi ryuzuza Itegeko-Teka ryo ku wa 22 Kanama 1974 rigenga ubwiteganyirize bw’abakozi, ayo mafaranga akaba agomba kubarwa ku buryo bukurikira: (173.450.60Frw x 85%)x85%x51(ni ukuvuga amezi abazwe
## Page 205
171 RUZIBIZA v MOUNT MERU LOGISTICS RWANDA LTD kuva igihe aherukira guhembwa kugeza igihe cyo kujya mu zabukuru) = 6.391.220Frw. iv. Kumenya niba Ruzibiza Aloys akeneye umufasha [67] Ruzibiza Aloys na Me Chuma Ndekezi Claude umwunganira bavuga ko bashingiye ku ngingo ya 26, igika cya 5, y’Itegeko N° 05/2015 ryo ku wa 30/03/2015 rigenga imitunganyirize y’ubwiteganyirize bwa pansiyo iteganya ko ‘‘iyo ufata amafaranga ya pansiyo y'ubumuga agomba gufashwa buri gihe n'undi muntu kugira ngo ashobore gukora uturimo dusanzwe, abona inyongera ingana na mirongo ine ku ijana (40%) by'ayo agomba kubona’’; basanga Ruzibiza Aloys, kubera ubumuga yatewe n’impanuka, agomba gufashwa mu buryo buhoraho kugira ngo ashobore gukora uturimo dusanzwe. [68] Bongeraho ko nk’uko raporo y’umuhanga washyizweho n’Urukiko ibigaragaza, urwego rw’ubumuga rwa Ruzibiza Aloys buri ku kigero cya 85%; ko basanga iyo raporo igaragaza ko iyo aza kuvuzwa mu buryo bukwiriye kandi bwihuse yashoboraga gukira, akaba yaba autonome (atakenera umuntu ukomeza kumufasha), ko bashingiye ku gihe amaranye ubumuga afashwa n’inshuti n’abavandimwe, basanga amafaranga y’ugomba kumufasha yasabye yayahabwa. [69] Basoza bavuga ko mu Rukiko Rukuru Ruzibiza Aloys yasabye amafaranga y’ugomba kumufasha abaze mu buryo bukurikira: 6,120,000 Frw (rente d’incapacité permanente) x 40%= 2,448,000Frw; ko yanagaragazaga ibimenyetso ashingiraho ayasaba, ariko ko mu cyemezo umucamanza yafashe ntacyo yavuze kuriiyo ngingo, akaba atarubahirije ingingo ya 10 y’Itegeko N° 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi,
## Page 206
172 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi iteganya ko umucamanza aca urubanza ku cyasabwe cyose kandi kuri icyo cyonyine. [70] Uhagarariye Mount Meru we avuga ko raporo ya muganga igaragaza ko Ruzibiza Aloys nta bufasha bw’undi muntu akeneye, ko raporo inagaragaza ko ubumuga asigaranye bwagabanutse kuko bwavuye kuri 92% bukagera kuri 85%, agasaba Urukiko kuzabishingiraho rufata icyemezo. UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [71] Urukiko rurasanga nk’uko bigaragara muri dosiye, Umuganga wiyambajwe n’Urukiko mu rubanza rubanziriza urundi (Dr Hope J.M.V) kugira ngo arugaragarize niba Ruzibiza Aloys akeneye umufasha, yaratanze raporo ku wa 17/12/2024 avuga ko mu gihe Ruzibiza Aloys yaba yarangije kuvurwa, atazaba agikeneye umufasha mu mirimo ye ya buri munsi (After his final treatment, he will be autonomous and will not require a third person for help in his daily activities). [72] Urukiko rurasanga, hashingiwe kuri Raporo ya muganga no kuba muri uru rubanza rwemeje ko Ruzibiza Aloys avuzwa, amafaranga asaba y’ugomba kumufasha atayahabwa kuko muganga wamupimye yemeje ko navurwa agakira atazaba agikeneye umufasha. v. Kumenya niba Ruzibiza Aloys yahabwa amafaranga y’ingendo yakoresheje ajya kwivuza [73] Ruzibiza Aloys avuga ko asaba amafaranga y’ingendo yakoresheje ajya kwivuza n’andi yakoresheje mu burwayi bwe angana na 10.121.828Frw, ayasaba ashingiye ku kuba Mount Meru yaramutereranye ntigire icyo imumarira mu burwayi bwe.
## Page 207
173 RUZIBIZA v MOUNT MERU LOGISTICS RWANDA LTD [74] Uhagarariye Mount Meru avuga ko amafaranga y’ingendo Ruzibiza Aloys asaba atayahabwa kuko ntacyo agaragaza ashingiraho ayasaba. UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [75] Ingingo ya 14 y’Itegeko N° 06/2003 ryo ku wa 22/03/2003 rihindura kandi ryuzuza Itegeko-Teka ryo ku wa 22 Kanama 1974 rigenga ubwiteganyirize bw’abakozi, iteganya ko ibigize ubuvuzi ku mukozi wagize impanuka y’akazi; mu byo iteganya harimo …amatike yo kujya kwivuza mu bitaro no kugaruka imuhira. [76] Urukiko rurasanga amafaranga y’ingendo n’andi ajyanye n’ibindi avuga yakoresheje ajya kwivuza Ruzibiza Aloys asaba ayakwiriye, ariko 10.121.828Frw asaba akaba ari umurengera kuko atanagaragaza uko yagiye ayakoresha, bityo hashingiwe ku gihe gishize (hafi imyaka itanu) n’urugero rw’ubumuga yagize (85%) no ku ngingo y’Itegeko yagaragajwe haruguru, mu bushishozi bw’Urukiko akaba agenewe 500.000Frw. IV. Kumenya ishingiro ry’indishyi zerekeranye n’amafaranga y’igihembo cya Avoka n’ay’ikurikiranarubanza yasabwe n’ababuranyi [77] Me Chuma Ndekezi Claude uhagarariye Ruzibiza Alyos avuga ko Urukiko Rukuru rwategetse Mount Meru guha Ruzibiza Aloys amafaranga 700.000Frw y’igihembo cya Avoka (yari yagenwe mu rubanza rwari rwajuririwe), bikaba bitumvikana ukuntu rwamugeneye igihembo cya Avoka cyari cyagenwe ku rwego rwa mbere kandi rwemeje ko ubujurire bwe bufite ishingiro. Avuga kandi ko aya mafaranga asanga ari make ugereranyije nuko Ruzibiza Aloys na Avoka bemeranyije
## Page 208
174 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO igihembo cya 5.000.000 Frw kuva mu muhango wo kumvikana hagati y’umukozi n’umukoresha mu bugenzuzi bw’umurimo, ndetse no kumuburanira mu Rukiko ku rwego rwa mbere nk’uko bigaragara mu masezerano y’ubwunganizi bagiranye yashyikirijwe Urukiko. [78] Avuga kandi ko ingingo ya 23 y’Amabwiriza N⁰ 01/2014 yo kuwa 11/08/2014 agena ibihembo mbonera by’abavoka iteganya ko Avoka w’urega wateguye dosiye n’inyandiko ashobora gusaba igihembo fatizo kiri hagati ya 500.000Frw na 5.000.000Frw, cyongerwaho iyo hari imyenda yagarujwe nawe ubwe cyangwa intumwa ye, igihembo cy’inyongera cyo kwishyuza, kibarwa hakurikijwe ijanisha riteganywa mu gace ka II k’ingingo ya 23; ko rero hashingiwe kuri iyi ngingo, ntaho bigaragara ko amasezerano yavuze haruguru anyuranyije n’amategeko. Avuga ko bitewe n’uko urubanza rwakomeje kugera kuri uru rwego, asaba ko Ruzibiza Aloys yagenerwa igihembo cya Avoka kingana na 1,000,000Frw mu Rukiko Rukuru, 1,000,000 Frw mu Rukiko rw’Ubujurire na 1,000,000Frw mu Rukiko rw’Ikirenga cyiyongera ku gihembo cya 5.000.000 Frw yari yasabye mbere, yose akaba 8,000,000Frw. [79] Ku byererekeye amafaranga y’ikurikiranarubanza, Me Chuma Ndekezi Claude avuga ko Ruzibiza Aloys yari yarasabye Urukiko gutegeka Mount Meru kumwishyura 1.000.000Frw, Urukiko rumugenera 100.000Frw yonyine ku rwego rwabanjirije Urukiko Rukuru. Avuga ko asanga aya mafaranga ari make ugereranyije n’amafaranga yakoresheje kuva mu muhango wo kumvikana hagati ye n’umukoresha, mu Bugenzuzi bw’umurimo, kuburana mu Rukiko Rwisumbuye no mu Rukiko Rukuru; cyane cyane ko muri izo nzego zose hemejwe ko ikirego
## Page 209
175 RUZIBIZA v MOUNT MERU LOGISTICS RWANDA LTD cye gifite ishingiro. Bityo rero akaba asaba ko izo ndishyi z’ikurikiranarubanza yasabye zingana na 1,000,000Frw yazigenerwa; cyane cyane ko hiyongereyeho ikirego cyo gusubirishamo urubanza ku mpamvu y’akarengane mu Rukiko rw’Ubujurire no kuruburana mu Rukiko rw’Ikirenga. Asoza asaba Urukiko kandi gutegeka Mount Meru kwishyura amagarama Ruzibiza Aloys yatanze aregera Urukiko ku rwego rwa mbere no mu bujurire angana na 60,000Frw. [80] Me Gilles Gakwaya uburanira Mount Meru yiregura kuri iyi ngingo avuga ko hari ibihembo bya Avoka ndetse n'ikurikiranarubanza inkiko zari zageneye urega, ko rero asanga kuba yarakomeje kwishora mu manza, amafaranga zimutwara ariwe ugomba kuyirengera. UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [81] Urukiko rurasanga amafaranga y’igihembo cya Avoka n’ay’ikurikiranarubanza Aloys asaba ntayo agomba guhabwa kubera ko hari ibyo atsindiwe mu rubanza. III. ICYEMEZO CY’URUKIKO [82] Rwemeje ko ikirego cyatanzwe na Ruzibiza Aloys asaba gusubirishamo ku mpamvu z’akarengane urubanza RSOCA00117/2022/HC/KIG rwaciwe n’Urukiko Rukuru rwa Kigali ku wa 14/07/2023, gifite ishingiro kuri bimwe. [83] Rwemeje ko imikirize y’urubanza RSOCA00117/2022/HC/KIG rwaciwe n’Urukiko Rukuru rwa Kigali ku wa 14/07/2023 ihindutse ku bimwe.
## Page 210
176 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO [84] Rutegetse Mount Meru Logostics Rwanda Ltd guha Ruzibiza Aloys 1,040,703Frw y’indishyi zo kwirukanwa ku kazi mu buryo bunyuranyije n’amategeko. [85] Rutegetse Mount Meru gukora ibikenewe byose mu gihe kitarenze ukwezi kumwe kuva urubanza rusomwe kugira ngo Ruzibiza Aloys avurwe, bitaba ibyo ikamuha 19.878.172Frw kugira ngo abashe kwivuza ubwe. [86] Rutegetse Mount Meru guha Ruzibiza Aloys 500.000Frw yakoresheje mu ngendo yivuza. [87] Rutegetse Mount Meru guha Ruzibiza Aloys 6.391.220Frw asimbura umushahara yatakaje kubera impanuka. [88] Rutegetse Mount Meru Logostics Rwanda Ltd guha Ruzibiza Aloys 2.000.000Frw y’indishyi z’akababaro.
## Page 211
177 Re Dr BARIBWIRA IMANZA Z’IMBONEZAMUBANO
## Page 212
178 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO
## Page 213
179 SANLAM AG Plc v NZAMWITAKUZE SANLAM AG Plc v NZAMWITAKUZE [Rwanda URUKIKO RW’IKIRENGA - RS/INJUST/RC 00003/2023/SC (Cyanzayire, P.J., Muhumuza, Kalihangabo, J.) 16 Gashyantare 2024] Amategeko agenga imanza z’imbonezamubano – Indishyi z’ikomoka ku mpanuka yakozwe n’ikinyabiziga – Uburyozwe bw’ikinyabiziga – Mu gihe nta ruhare ikinyabiziga cyagize mu mpanuka yabaye, nta buryozwe uwari ugitwaye yashyirwaho kimwe n’umwishingizi we. Incamake y’ikibazo: Ku wa 01/05/2017, Sebanani wari utwaye igare yagonze moto ifite plaque No RC 132 X yari itwawe na Makuza, biviramo Nzamwitakuze yari ihetse gukomereka. Nzamwitakuze ashingiye ku kuba moto yari imutwaye yari ifite ubwishingizi muri SORAS AG Ltd yahindutse SANLAM AG Plc, yatanze ikirego mu Rukiko Rwisumbuye rwa Nyarugenge arusaba ko rwamugenera indishyi zikomoka kuri iyo mpanuka zingana na 9.630.969 Frw. Urukiko rwaciye urubanza, rwemeza ko icyo kirego gifite ishingiro, rwemeza ko SANLAM AG Plc igomba kumuha indishyi zingana na 6.603.044 Frw. Mu bujurire, Urukiko Rukuru rwemeje ko ubujurire bwatanzwe na SANLAM AG Plc nta shingiro bufite, naho ubwuririye ku bundi bwatanzwe na Nzamwitakuze ko bufite ishingiro, rwemeza ko imikirize y’urubanza rujuririrwa igumyeho, ahubwo hakiyongeraho 108.000 Frw y’indishyi z’ibangamira ry’uburanga na 1.000.000 Frw y’indishyi z’ibyatanzwe mu rubanza rujuririrwa SANLAM AG Plc igomba guha Nzamwitakuze. 179
## Page 214
180 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO SANLA AG Plc yagiye mu nzira z’akarengane, urubanza ruhabwa Urukiko rw’Ikirenga, mu iburanisha hasuzumwa ikibazo cyo kumenya niba SANLAM AG Plc yaryozwa indishyi zikomoka ku mpanuka yatewe n’umunyegare. SANLAM AG Plc ivuga ko yategetswe kwishyura indishyi zikomoka ku mpanuka kandi nta kosa uwo yishingiye yakoze. Nzamwitakuze yireguye avuga ko nubwo igare ariryo ryateje impanuka, moto yari imutwaye ari yo yamukubise hasi, kandi yari yarishingiwe na SANLAM AG Plc. Ikaba ntaho yahera yivanaho inshingano zo kwirengera ingaruka zatewe n’iyo mpanuka, cyane ko itagaragaza ko amasezerano y’ubwishingizi agarukira gusa ku kuba ikinyabiziga cyishingiwe ari cyo cyaba kiri mu makosa kugira ngo umwishingizi aryozwe indishyi. Uru Rukiko rwasanze kugwa kwa moto byabaye ingaruka itaziguye y’uko kugongwa n’igare. Nta ruhare na rumwe uregwa yagaragaje moto yaba yaragize mu mpanuka yabaye. Mu gihe rero nta ruhare moto yagize mu mpanuka yabaye, nta buryozwe uwari uyitwaye yashyirwaho kimwe n’umwishingizi we, kuko ibyago byabaye kuri Nzamwitakuze wari kuri moto byatejwe n’iryo gare, ari naryo ryabazwa uburyozwe bw’ibyo byago. Incamake y’icyemezo: Mu gihe nta ruhare ikinyabiziga cyagize mu mpanuka yabaye, nta buryozwe uwari ugitwaye yashyirwaho kimwe n’umwishingizi we. Ikirego cyo gusubirishamo ku mpamvu z’akarengane gifite ishingiro.
## Page 215
181 SANLAM AG Plc v NZAMWITAKUZE Amategeko yashingiweho: Itegeko N° 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi, ingingo ya 111; Itegeko-Teka No 32/75 ryo ku wa 07/08/1975 ryerekeye ubwishingire butegetswe ku buryozwe butewe n’ibigenzwa ku butaka bifite moteri, nk’uko yahinduwe n’Itegeko No 02/2002 ryo ku wa 17/01/2002, ingingo 3. Imanza zifashishijwe: Musengamana Jean Marie Vianney v SGF, RS/INJUST/RC 00019/2022/SC, rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga ku wa 02/06/2023. Urubanza IMITERERE Y’URUBANZA [1] Uru rubanza rukomoka ku mpanuka yabaye ku wa 01/05/2017, ubwo mu gihe cya 18h30’, mu Mudugudu wa Nyarucyamo II, Akagari ka Gahogo, Umurenge wa Nyamabuye, Akarere ka Muhanga, Sebanani Gilbert wari utwaye igare yagongaga moto ifite plaque no RC 132 X yari itwawe na Makuza Léonard, bikaviramo Nzamwitakuze Thérèse wari uhetswe kuri iyo moto gukomereka. Nzamwitakuze Thérèse ashingiye ku kuba moto yari imutwaye yari ifite ubwishingizi muri SORAS AG Ltd yahindutse SANLAM AG Plc, yasabye iyo sosiyete ko bakemura ikibazo mu bwumvikane ariko ntibyakunda, bituma atanga ikirego mu Rukiko Rwisumbuye rwa
## Page 216
182 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO Nyarugenge arusaba ko rwamugenera indishyi zikomoka kuri iyo mpanuka zingana na 9.630.969 Frw. [2] SANLAM AG Plc yireguye ivuga ko itemera indishyi iregwa kuko impanuka yabaye itaturutse ku makosa y’uwari utwaye Nzamwitakuze Thérèse kuri moto, ahubwo ko iyo mpanuka yatewe n’uwari utwaye igare wataye umukono we, bityo ko mu gihe nta kosa uwo yishingiye yakoze, binayivanaho uburyozwe bw’indishyi isabwa. [3] Mu rubanza No RC 00783/2018/TGI/NYGE rwaciwe ku wa 31/05/2019, Urukiko Rwisumbuye rwa Nyarugenge rwasanze: i. Makuza Léonard wari utwaye moto yagushije hasi Nzamwitakuze Thérèse, agomba kuryozwa indishyi zikomoka kuri iyo mpanuka nk’uko byateganywaga n’ingingo ya 2581 y’igitabo cya gatatu cy’urwunge rw’amategeko mbonezamubano; icyakora kuba yari afite ubwishingizi muri SANLAM AG Plc, iyo sosiyete ikaba ariyo iryozwa izo ndishyi hashingiwe ku ngingo ya 2602 y’igitabo cyavuzwe haruguru kuko iyo mpanuka yasigiye Nzamwitakuze Thérèse ubumuga bwa 35%; ii. Nta ndishyi mbangamiraburanga Nzamwitakuze Thérèse akwiye guhabwa kuko aterekanye ikimenyetso cyemeza urwego yashyizwemo ruhuye n’ubusembwa bw’umubiri yatewe n’impanuka. 1 Iyo ngingo yateganyaga ko “igikorwa cyose cy’umuntu cyangirije undi gitegeka nyir’ugukora ikosa rigikomokaho kuriha ibyangiritse.” 2 Iyo ngingo yateganyaga ko “umuntu ntaryozwa gusa ibyangiritse kubera ibikorwa bye bwite, ahubwo anaryozwa ibyangijwe n'ibikorwa by'abantu yishingiye cyangwa n'ibintu ashinzwe kurinda.”
## Page 217
183 SANLAM AG Plc v NZAMWITAKUZE [4] Urukiko rwanzuye ko ikirego cyatanzwe na Nzamwitakuze Thérèse gifite ishingiro, rwemeza ko SANLAM AG Plc igomba kumuha indishyi zingana na 6.603.044 Frw akubiyemo 4.007.572 Frw3 y’indishyi z’ibangamirabukungu, 432.000 Frw4 y’indishyi mbangamiramubano, 540.000 Frw5 y’indishyi z’ibangamira ry’uburambe mu kazi, 623.469 Frw y’ibyakoreshejwe bitewe n’impanuka; 800.000 Frw y’igihembo cya Avoka, 200.000 Frw y’ikurikiranarubanza, ndetse na 20.000 Frw yatanze ku ngwate y’amagarama y’urubanza. [5] SANLAM AG Plc yajuririye Urukiko Rukuru ivuga ko umwishingizi yishyura gusa igihe uwo yishingiye ari we uri mu makosa, bityo ko kuba uwishingiwe nta kosa yakoze nta n’indishyi igomba kuryozwa, ahubwo ko izo ndishyi zakaryojwe uwateje impanuka. Ibyo SANLAM AG Plc ibishingira ku ibaruwa yo ku wa 20/06/2018 yanditse isubiza iyari yanditswe na Nzamwitakuze Thérèse yo ku wa 09/03/2018, ndetse n’inyandiko ya Polisi igaragaza uburyo impanuka yagenze n’icyayiteye. Nzamwitakuze Thérèse yatanze ubujurire bwuririye ku bundi asaba Urukiko Rukuru ko rwamugenera indishyi z’ibangamira ry’uburanga atahawe. [6] Mu rubanza No RCA 00295/2019/HC/KIG rwaciwe ku wa 18/06/2020, Urukiko Rukuru rwasanze: i. N’ubwo uwari utwaye igare ariwe wateje impanuka, Atari we watuye hasi Nzamwitakuze Thérèse, kuko ibyo byakozwe n’uwari utwaye moto kandi ikaba yari ifite ubwishingizi muri SANLAM AG Plc; 3Zibazwe mu buryo bukurikira:3.000 Frw x 30 x 12 x 35x35%1+(6,575% x 35)=13.230.000 3,30125=4.007.572 Frw. 4 Zibazwe mu buryo bukurikira: 3.000 ܨݎݓݔ40 % ݔ30 ݔ12=432.000 ܨݎݓ. 5 Zibazwe mu buryo bukurikira 3.000 ܨݎݓݔ30 ݔ6=540.000 ܨݎݓ.
## Page 218
184 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO ii. Ntaho SANLAM AG Plc yahera yivanaho inshingano cyangwa ngo yirengagize ingaruka zatewe n’iyo mpanuka cyane ko itagaragaza ko amasezerano y’ubwishingizi yari ifitanye n’uwari utwaye moto yagarukiraga gusa ku kuba ikinyabiziga cyishingiwe ari cyo kiri mu makosa; iii. Kuba Nzamwitakuze Thérèse yaragushijwe hasi na moto ifite plaque no RC 132 X kandi iyo moto ikaba yari ifite ubwishingizi muri SANLAM AG Plc bihagije kugira ngo iryozwe ingaruka zatewe n’impanuka; noneho nyuma yakumva hari undi ugomba kubiryozwa, ikabona gukurikirana uwari utwaye igare ryateje impanuka hashingiwe ku ngingo ya 258 y’igitabo cya gatatu cy’urwunge rw’amategeko y’imbonezamubano; iv. Nzamwitakuze Thérèse agomba kwishyurwa 108.000 Frw y’indishyi z’ibangamira ry’uburanga kuko yazitangiye ibimenyetso. [7] Urukiko rwanzuye ko ubujurire bwatanzwe na SANLAM AG Plc nta shingiro bufite, naho ubwuririye ku bundi bwatanzwe na Nzamwitakuze Thérèse ruvuga ko bufite ishingiro, rwemeza ko imikirize y’urubanza No RC 00783/2018/TGI/NYGE rwaciwe ku wa 31/05/2019 igumyeho, ahubwo hakiyongeraho 108.000 Frw y’indishyi z’ibangamira ry’uburanga na 1.000.000 Frw y’indishyi z’ibyatanzwe mu rubanza rujuririrwa SANLAM AG Plc igomba guha Nzamwitakuze Thérèse. [8] Ku wa 03/07/2020, SANLAM AG Plc yandikiye Perezida w'Urukiko rw'Ubujurire isaba ko urubanza No RCA 00295/2019/HC/KIG rwaciwe n’Urukiko Rukuru ku wa 18/06/2020, rusubirwamo ku mpamvu z'akarengane. Perezida w'Urukiko rw'Ubujurire amaze gusuzuma ubwo busabe,
## Page 219
185 SANLAM AG Plc v NZAMWITAKUZE yandikiye Perezida w’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga asaba ko urwo rubanza rusubirwamo, maze mu cyemezo No 176/CJ/2022 cyo ku wa 01/09/2022, yemeza ko rwoherezwa mu Bwanditsi bw’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga kugira ngo ruzongere ruburanishwe. [9] Urubanza rwaburanishijwe mu ruhame ku wa 10/01/2024, SANLAM AG Plc ihagarariwe na Me Niyindora Nsengiyumva na Me Nkeza Sempundu Clément, naho Nzamwitakuze Thérèse ahagarariwe na Me Nsabayezu Evariste, ababuranyi bajya impaka ku bibazo bitatu bikurikira: a. Kumenya niba SANLAM AG Plc yaryozwa indishyi zikomoka ku mpanuka yatewe n’umunyegare. b. Kumenya niba Nzamwitakuze Thérèse yategekwa gusubiza amafaranga yose yishyuwe. c. Kumenya ishingiro ry’indishyi zisabwa muri uru rubanza. II. ISESENGURA RY’IBIBAZO BIGIZE URUBANZA II.1. Kumenya niba SANLAM AG Plc yaryozwa indishyi zikomoka ku mpanuka yatewe n’umunyegare [10] Me Niyindora Nsengiyumva na Me Nkeza Sempundu Clément bahagarariye SANLAM AG Plc bavuga ko ibyemezo byafashwe n’Urukiko Rukuru mu rubanza no RCA 00295/2019/HC/KIG rusabirwa gusubirwamo, byaranzwe no kwivuguruza kuko rwategetse SANLAM AG Plc kwishyura indishyi zikomoka ku mpanuka kandi nta kosa uwo yishingiye yakoze, rurongera ruvuga ko uwari utwaye igare yari kuryozwa
## Page 220
186 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO ingaruka zatewe n’impanuka ari uko iryo gare rigonze Nzamwitakuze Thérèse. [11] Basobanura ko kuba Urukiko Rukuru rwaremeje ko Sebanani Gilbert wari utwaye igare ariwe wateje impanuka, nyuma rukongera rukemeza ko SANLAM AG Plc ariyo igomba kwishyura indishyi rushingiye gusa ku kuba moto yakubise hasi Nzamwitakuze Thérèse yari ifite ubwishingizi muri iyo sosiyete; byerekana ko Urukiko rwafashe icyo cyemezo rushaka kugaragaza ko habayeho impanuka ebyiri, rwirengagiza ko kuba uwari utwaye igare yarabisikanye nabi ari byo byateye impanuka mu buryo butaziguye (la cause immédiate et directe de l’accident), bigatuma Nzamwitakuze Thérèse yitura hasi, agakomereka. [12] Bavuga ko Urukiko Rukuru rwirengagije ko umwishingizi yishyura indishyi zishingiye ku buryozwe bwatewe n’amakosa atagambiriwe y’uwo yishingiye wenyine. Bavuga kandi ko Urukiko Rukuru rwafashe uwari utwaye moto nk’uryozwa ko yagonzwe n’igare, rutabanje gusuzuma niba nta kosa cyangwa uburangare yagize muri iyo mpanuka. Bongeraho ko impamvu SANLAM AG Plc itari kuryozwa ibyangijwe n’uwo itishingiye, ari uko yishingira ibyago uwishingiwe yateye abandi atabigendereye, ariko ko itishingira ibyago abandi bateza uwishingiwe. [13] Bakomeza bavuga ko Urukiko Rukuru rwirengagije ko kugira ngo umwishingizi yishyure indishyi, ari uko uburyozwe bw’uwishingiwe bugomba kuba bwagaragajwe, bivuze ko uburyozwe bw’umwishingizi budashobora kurenga amakosa yatewe n’uwo yishingiye, ngo bugere no ku byangijwe n’uwo atishingiye, nk’uko bihura n’ibikubiye mu ngingo ya 2 y’Itegeko- Teka No 32/75 ryo ku wa 07/08/1975 ryerekeye ubwishingire
## Page 221
187 SANLAM AG Plc v NZAMWITAKUZE butegetswe ku buryozwe butewe n’ibigenzwa ku butaka bifite moteri6 ryakoreshwaga ubwo impanuka yabaga, ndetse bigashimangirwa n’ingingo ya mbere y’amasezerano y’ubwishingizi (police d’assurance ya SANLAM). [14] Bavuga ko kuba Sebanani Gilbert yarakoze amakosa yabaye intandaro yo kugwa kwa Nzamwitakuze Thérèse bikamuviramo kuvunika ukuboko, bitaryozwa umwishingizi, ahubwo ko kuba Urukiko Rukuru rwarabonye ko impanuka yatewe n’igare ubwabyo byari bihagije kugira ngo rwemeze ko nta n’indishyi SANLAM AG Plc ikwiye kuryozwa. [15] Bavuga kandi ko Urukiko Rukuru rutari gushingira ku ihame rya action subrogatoire ngo rwemeze ko SANLAM AG Plc igomba kwishyura indishyi, nyuma igakurikirana uwateje impanuka mu mwanya w’uwo yari yishingiye, kuko uwo yishingiye nta nshingano yari afite yo kwishyura indishyi kuko atari we wateje impanuka, bityo ko n’umwishingizi nta nshingano yagira yo kwishyura. 6 Iyo ngingo iteganya ko “Ibigenzwa ku butaka bifite moteri byemerewe gusa kugenda mu muhanda nyabagendwa, ahantu rubanda rwemerewe kunyura n’ahantu hatari aha rusange ariko abantu bamwe na bamwe bafite uburenganzira bwo kunyura, iyo uburyozwe bushobora kuba bwabaturukaho bwishingiwe, hakurikijwe ibivugwa muri iri tegeko-teka.” Les véhicules automoteurs ne sont admis à circuler sur la voie publique, sur les terrains ouverts au public et sur les terrains non publics mais ouverts à un certain nombre de personnes ayant droit de les fréquenter, que si la responsabilité civile à laquelle ils peuvent donner lieu est couverte par une assurance conforme aux dispositions du présent décret-loi N° 32/75 du 07 aout 1975 relatif à l’assurance obligatoire de la responsabilité civile en matière de véhicule automoteurs.
## Page 222
188 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO [16] Basobanura ko hashingiwe ku biteganywa n’ingingo ya 1287 y’Itegeko No 030/2021 ryo ku wa 30/06/2021 rigenga imitunganyirize y’umurimo w’ubwishingizi, basanga Urukiko Rukuru rutari gutegeka SANLAM AG Plc kwishyura igihombo cyatewe na Sebanani Gilbert wari utwaye igare kuko atari umufatabwishingizi cyangwa umugenerwabwishingizi wayo, ko hakomeje kugenderwa kuri uwo murongo byaba bisobanuye ko uwo ariwe wese waba nyirabayazana w’impanuka mu muhanda, ibigo by’ubwishingizi byategekwa kwishyura ibyo yangije hatitawe ku kureba niba uwakoze ikosa yari yarishingiwe, binasobanuye ko amasezerano y’ubwishingizi ntacyo yaba akimaze, ndetse n’umurimo w’ubwishingizi ukaba utashoboka. [17] Me Nsabayezu Evariste wunganira Nzamwitakuze Thérèse yireguye avuga ko ibimaze kuvugwa n’ababuranira SANLAM AG Plc nta shingiro bikwiye guhabwa, kuko n’ubwo igare ariryo ryateje impanuka, moto yari imutwaye ari yo yamukubise hasi, kandi yari yarishingiwe na SANLAM AG Plc. Asobanura ko kuba moto yari imuhetse ari yo yamuteje impanuka yamuviriyemo no gukomereka, ntaho SANLAM AG Plc yahera yivanaho inshingano zo kwirengera ingaruka zatewe n’iyo mpanuka, cyane ko itagaragaza ko amasezerano y’ubwishingizi agarukira gusa ku kuba ikinyabiziga cyishingiwe ari cyo cyaba kiri mu makosa kugira ngo umwishingizi aryozwe indishyi. [18] Avuga ko SANLAM AG Plc idakwiye kwirengagiza ko amasezerano y’ubwishingizi ategeka umwishingizi kwishyura 7 Iyo ngingo iteganya ko “iyo ikigo cy’ubwishingizi cyishyuye indishyi hakurikijwe amasezerano y’ubwishingizi bw’indishyi, cyemerewe gukoresha uburenganzira bwo gusimbura mu kwishyuza uryozwa igihombo cyangwa ibyangiritse, ku rugero cyishyuriyeho umufatabwishingizi cyangwa umugenerwabwishingizi.” […]
## Page 223
189 SANLAM AG Plc v NZAMWITAKUZE ibyangijwe n’ikinyabiziga yishingiye, ikajya mu mwanya w’uwishingiwe mu burenganzira yakabaye afite bwo gukurikirana uwateje impanuka (subrogation), ari nabyo bihita biha SANLAM AG Plc inshingano zo kwishyura indishyi zikomoka ku mpanuka yaviriyemo Nzamwitakuze Thérèse ubumuga, nyuma mu gihe yaba ibikeneye ikikurikiranira uwari utwaye igare ryagonze moto. [19] Asobanura ko igingo ya 1 ya Police d’Assurance Automobile, ivuga ko umwishingizi afite inshingano zo kwishyura indishyi zijyanye n’ibyo ikinyabiziga cyishingiwe gishobora guteza cyangwa kwangiza. “Par le présent contrat, la société couvre, aux conditions ci-après indiquées, la responsabilité civile de l’Assuré du chef des dommages causés au Rwanda par le véhicule automoteur désigné aux conditions particulieres”. [20] Avuga kandi ko ashingiye ku biteganywa n’ingingo ya 28 y’Itegeko no 41/2001 ryo ku wa 19/09/2001 ryerekeye imyishyurire y’abangirijwe n’impanuka zitewe n’ibinyabiziga bigenzwa na moteri kandi bigenda ku butaka, asanga uwo aburanira nta ruhare yagize mu kugwa kwe, kuko moto yari imuhetse ariyo yamutuye hasi kandi yari ifite inshingano yo kumugeza aho ajya amahoro, kabone nubwo igare ari ryo ryabaye intandaro y’iyo mpanuka. Kuba rero SANLAM AG Plc ari yo yari yishingiye iyo moto, ikwiriye no kuryozwa indishyi hashingiwe ku biteganywa n’ingingo ya 258 ndetse n’iya 260 z’igitabo cya gatatu cy’urwunge rw’amategeko 8 Iyo ngingo iteganya ko “indishyi zivugwa kuva mu ngingo ya 4 kugeza kuya 10 z’iri tegeko zigabanywa hakurikije uruhare uwangirijwe yagize mu mpanuka yabaye. Ikosa ry’uwangirijwe ntirimwemerera uruhare ku ndishyi cyangwa abafite uburenganzira ku bintu bye”.
## Page 224
190 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO mbonezamubano; rukanemeza ko nta karengane kagaragara mu rubanza No RCA 00295/2019/HC/KIG rwasabiwe gusubirwamo. UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [21] Mu gusuzuma iki kibazo, ni ngombwa gusesengura ibyishingirwa mu bwishingire butegetswe ku buryozwe butewe n’ibigenzwa ku butaka bifite moteri (responsabilité civile obligatoire en matière de véhicule automoteurs), kugira ngo harebwe niba koko SANLAM AG Plc yaragombaga kuryozwa ibyago (dommage) bikomoka ku mpanuka yatejwe n’umunyegare. [22] Ingingo ya 3 y’Itegeko-Teka No 32/75 ryo ku wa 07/08/1975 ryerekeye ubwishingire butegetswe ku buryozwe butewe n’ibigenzwa ku butaka bifite moteri, nk’uko yahinduwe n’Itegeko No 02/2002 ryo ku wa 17/01/2002, mu gika cya 2, igira iti: “Ubwishingizi bugomba kwishingira ibyago biba ku bantu no ku bintu biturutse ku mpamvu zabereye mu Rwanda. Bugomba kwishingira ibyago biba ku bantu bari bahetswe n’ibinyabiziga ku mpamvu izo ari zo zose, mu gihe icyo kinyabiziga cyateje ibyo byago. Ibintu bihetswe n’ikinyabiziga bishobora kutabarirwa mu bwishingizi habayeho amasezerano yihariye.”9 [23] Ingingo ya mbere y’amasezerano rusange y’ubwishingizi (Conditions Générales) SANLAM AG Plc (yitwaga SORAS AG Ltd) yakoreshaga igihe cy’impanuka, ivuga ko sosiyete yishingira ibyago byatejwe n’ikinyabiziga cyishingiwe.10 9 Iri tegeko ni ryo ryakurikizwaga igihe impanuka yabaga. 10 “Par le présent contrat, la Société couvre, aux conditions ci-après indiquées, la responsabilité civile de l‘Assuré du chef des dommages causés au Rwanda par le véhicule automoteur désigné aux conditions particulières”.
## Page 225
191 SANLAM AG Plc v NZAMWITAKUZE [24] Mu rubanza No RS/INJUST/RC 00019/2022/SC rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga ku wa 02/06/2023, haburana Musengamana Jean Marie Vianney n’Ikigega Cyihariye cy’Ingoboka ku bwishingizi bw’uburyozwe bw’impanuka z’ibinyabiziga bifite moteri bigendera ku butaka n’izikomoka ku nyamaswa (SGF), Urukiko rwifashishije ibisobanuro by’Abahanga mu mategeko, rwagaragaje ko uburyozwe busobanurwa nk’inshingano zo kwishyura ibyo umuntu yangirije undi, naho ubwishingizi bw’uburyozwe bugasobanurwa nk’ubwishingizi bugamije kwishyurira uwishingiwe ibyo yakurikiranwaho n’abo yangirije.11 Urukiko rwasobanuye kandi ko uwangirijwe ari we ugomba kugaragaza uruhare rw’uwo avuga wamwangirije.12 [25] Ibimaze kuvugwa bigaragaza ko icyishingirwa ari ibyago byatejwe n’ikinyabiziga cyishingiwe. Kugira ngo rero umwishingizi yishyurire uwo yishingiye, ni ngombwa ko habanza kugaragazwa ko uwishingiwe ari we wateje ibyago; uwangirijwe akaba ari we ufite inshingano zo kubigaragaza. [26] Muri uru rubanza, ababuranyi bombi bemeranya ko umunyegare ari we wateje impanuka yagushije moto, nk’uko binagaragara mu nyandikomvugo y’uburyo impanuka yagenze yakozwe na Polisi. Icyo batumvikanaho ni uwateje ibyago Nzamwitakuze Thérèse yagize ubwo yari ahetswe kuri moto. [27] Sebanani Gilbert wari utwaye igare ni we wagonze moto yari itwawe na Makuza Leonard. Inyandikomvugo ya polisi igaragaza ko impanuka yatewe n’inyuranaho ribi ryakozwe na 11 Urubanza No RS/INJUST/RC 00019/2022/SC rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga ku wa 02/06/2023, igika cya 24. 12 Ibidem
## Page 226
192 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO Sebanani Gilbert wataye umukono we akajya mu mukono utari uwe, akagonga moto babisikanaga, bigatuma hakomereka umugenzi wari utwawe kuri moto. Iyi raporo nta na hamwe igaragaza ko moto yaba yaragize uburangare, umuvuduko ukabije cyangwa ikindi cyaba cyarayiteye kugwa, ndetse nta n’umuburanyi ushidikanya ku bivugwa muri raporo ya polisi. [28] Hakurikijwe ibimaze kugaragazwa, kugwa kwa moto byabaye ingaruka itaziguye y’uko kugongwa n’igare. Nta ruhare na rumwe uregwa yagaragaje moto yaba yaragize mu mpanuka yabaye. Mu gihe rero nta ruhare moto yagize mu mpanuka yabaye, nta buryozwe uwari uyitwaye yashyirwaho kimwe n’umwishingizi we, kuko ibyago byabaye kuri Nzamwitakuze Thérèse wari kuri moto byatejwe n’iryo gare, ari naryo ryabazwa uburyozwe bw’ibyo byago. [29] Hashingiwe ku bisobanuro byose byatanzwe, Urukiko rurasanga SANLAM AG Plc itaryozwa indishyi zikomoka ku mpanuka yatewe n’umunyegare. II.2. Kumenya niba Nzamwitakuze Thérèse yategekwa gusubiza amafaranga yose yishyuwe. [30] Me Niyindora Nsengiyumva na Me Nkeza Sempundu Clément bahagarariye SANLAM AG Plc bavuga ko mu gihe Urukiko rwasanga Sosiyete baburanira itaragombaga kuryozwa indishyi, rwategeka Nzamwitakuze Thérèse gusubiza SANLAM AG Plc 7.731.044 Frw yishyuwe harangizwa urubanza rusabirwa gusubirwamo nk’uko agaragazwa n’inyemezabwishyu yo ku wa 23/07/2020. [31] Me Nsabayezu Evariste uhagarariye Nzamwitakuze Thérèse avuga ko asanga nta mpamvu n’imwe Urukiko
## Page 227
193 SANLAM AG Plc v NZAMWITAKUZE rwashingiraho rumutegeka gusubiza indishyi yishyuwe, kuko nta makosa cyangwa amategeko yirengagijwe ubwo yagenerwaga izo ndishyi yahawe. UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [32] Ingingo ya 3, igika cya 2, y’Itegeko-Teka No 32/75 ryo ku wa 07/08/1975 ryerekeye ubwishingire butegetswe ku buryozwe butewe n’ibigenzwa ku butaka bifite moteri nk’uko ryahinduwe n’Itegeko No 02/2002 ryo ku wa 17/01/2002 iteganya ko uburyozwe bubaho igihe ibyago byatejwe n’ikinyabiziga cyishingiwe. [33] Urukiko Rukuru rwageneye Nzamwitakuze Thérèse indishyi rushingiye gusa ku kuba moto yari imutwaye yaraguye, ntirwasuzuma niba hari uruhare cyangwa amakosa y’uwari utwaye moto muri iyo mpanuka. Nk’uko byasobanuwe haruguru, Nzamwitakuze Thérèse ntiyashoboye kugaragaza uruhare rwa Makuza Léonard wari utwaye moto mu mpanuka yakomerekeyemo. Ni nayo mpamvu SORAS AG Ltd yahindutse SANLAM AG Plc itagombaga gutegekwa kwishyura indishyi zikomoka ku mpanuka uwo yari yishingiye atagizemo uruhare; bivuga ko amafaranga yishyuye Nzamwitakuze Thérèse harangizwa urubanza rusabirwa gusubirwamo ku mpamvu z’akarengane igomba kuyasubizwa. [34] Urukiko rurasanga muri dosiye harimo inyandiko yitwa “Claims estimate advice slip/Claims payment requisition” igaragaza ko mu rwego rwo kurangiza urubanza rwaciwe n’Urukiko Rukuru ku wa 18/06/2020, SANLAM AG Plc yishyuye Nzamwitakuze Thérèse 7.731.044 Frw ku wa 23/07/2020. Bitewe n’uko ayo mafaranga yishyuwe
## Page 228
194 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO ataragombaga kwishyurwa nk’uko byasobanuwe, Urukiko rurasanga SANLAM AG Plc igomba kuyasubizwa nk’uko ibisaba. II. 3. Kumenya ishingiro ry’indishyi zisabwa muri uru rubanza. [35] Me Niyindora Nsengiyumva na Me Nkeza Sempundu Clément bahagarariye SANLAM AG Plc bavuga ko kuba Sosiyete baburanira ntaho ihuriye n’impanuka yabaye, nta n’impamvu n’imwe yagombaga gushorwa mu manza kuko itishingiye igare ryateye iyo mpanuka. Bongeraho ko kuba Nzamwitakuze Thérèse yarashoye SANLAM AG Plc mu manza zidafite ishingiro, byatumye igira ibyo itakaza, bityo ko igomba kugenerwa 3.000.000 Frw y’igihembo cya Avoka yishyuye kuva ku rwego rwa mbere kugeza ubu, ndetse na 1.000.000 Frw y’ikurikiranarubanza. [36] Me Nsabayezu Evariste uhagarariye Nzamwitakuze Thérèse yireguye avuga ko indishyi yagenewe zidakwiriye gukurwaho kuko yazihawe azikwiriye, cyane ko nyirabayazana w’impanuka yamukomerekeje ari moto yishingiwe na SANLAM AG Plc. Avuga ko yagenerwa 2.000.000 Frw y’igihembo cya Avoka na 500.000 Frw y’ikurikiranarubanza kubwo gukomeza gushorwa mu manza. UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [37] Ingingo ya 111 y’Itegeko N° 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi iteganya ko ikirego cy’amafaranga y’ikurikiranarubanza ari
## Page 229
195 SANLAM AG Plc v NZAMWITAKUZE ikirego gishamikiye ku kirego cy’iremezo kigamije kwishyuza ibyakoreshejwe mu rubanza. Ikirego cy’amafaranga y’ikurikiranarubanza kiburanishirizwa rimwe n’ikirego cy’iremezo. Gishobora kandi kwakirwa kikanaburanishwa n’iyo ikirego cy’iremezo cyaba kitakiriwe. [38] Urukiko rurasanga amafaranga y’ikurikiranarubanza n’ay’igihembo cya Avoka Me Nsabayezu Evariste asabira Nzamwitakuze Thérèse atayahabwa kubera ko ntacyo atsindiye mu rubanza. Urukiko rurasanga ayo Me Niyindora Nsengiyumva na Me Nkeza Sempundu Clément basabira SANLAM AG Plc afite ishingiro kuko byabaye ngombwa gukurikirana urubanza no gushaka abayiburanira. Rurasanga ariko ayo basaba ari menshi kandi batayatangira ibimenyetso, SANLAM AG Plc ikaba igenewe mu bushishozi bw’Urukiko 300.000 Frw y’ikurikiranarubanza na 1.500.000 Frw y’igihembo cya Avoka kuva ku rwego rwa mbere kugeza kuri uru rwego. III. ICYEMEZO CY’URUKIKO [39] Rwemeje ko ikirego cyatanzwe na SANLAM AG Plc cyo gusubirishamo ku mpamvu z’akarengane urubanza No RCA 00295/2019/HC/KIG, rwaciwe n’Urukiko Rukuru ku wa 18/06/2020, gifite ishingiro; [40] Rwemeje ko urubanza No RCA 00295/2019/HC/KIG rwaciwe n’Urukiko Rukuru ku wa 18/06/2020, ruhindutse kuri byose; [41] Rutegetse Nzamwitakuze Thérèse gusubiza SANLAM AG Plc 7.731.044 Frw yari yishyuwe harangizwa urubanza No RCA 00295/2019/HC/KIG;
## Page 230
196 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO [42] Rutegetse Nzamwitakuze Thérèse guha SANLAM AG Plc 300.000 Frw y’ikurikiranarubanza na 1.500.000 Frw y’igihembo cya Avoka.
## Page 231
197 UWIDUHAYE N’UNDI v HAKIZIMANA N’ABANDI UWIDUHAYE N’UNDI v HAKIZIMANA N’ABANDI [Rwanda URUKIKO RW’IKIRENGA - RS/INJUST/RC 00004/2022/SC (Mukamurisa, J.P, Cyanzayire, Hitiyaremye, J.) 14 Nyakanga 2023] Amategeko agenga imanza z’imbonezamubano - Umuryango – Izungura - Ukudateshwa agaciro kw’izungura ryakozwe rikarangira hagati y’abari bafite uburenganzira – Kuba hari umuzungura wamenyekanye byemejwe n’Urukiko nyuma y’uko izungura rishyirwa mu bikorwa, ntibishobora gutesha agaciro izungura ryakozwe rikarangira hagati y’abari bafite uburenganzira bwo kuzungura mbere y’uko hatangwa ikirego kigamije kwemeza se w’umwana. Azungura gusa umutungo wari utaragabanwa kuva igihe yemerejwe n’Urukiko ko akomoka kuri Nyakwigendera. Amategeko agenga imanza z’imbonezamubano – Umuryango - Imimerere y’abantu – Kwemeza se w’umwana iyo ababyeyi batashyingiranywe - Kwemeza ko umwana akomoka ku mubyeyi w’umugabo iyo ababyeyi batashyingiranywe, binyura mu nzira yo kumwemera ku bushake; ibyo byaba bitarakozwe, hakabaho ikirego kigamije kwemeza se w’umwana. Amategeko agenga imanza z’imbonezamubano – Umuryango - Imimerere y’abantu - Kwemeza se w’umwana iyo ababyeyi batashyingiranywe - Umwana ufite imimerere izwi - Kuba umwana uvuka ku babyeyi batashyingiranywe asanganywe imimerere izwi, biba gusa ikimenyetso mu rubanza rugamije kwemeza se, ariko ubwabyo ntibyashingirwaho ngo hemezwe se 197
## Page 232
198 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO hatabaye urubanza ngo hemezwe ko se ari runaka, kandi ko ashobora kumuzungura. Incamake y’ikibazo: Ku wa 10/11/2006, Uwiduhaye na Uwineza bemejwe n’Urukiko Rwisumbuye rwa Nyarugenge ko ari bene Kayitsinga wishwe muri Jenoside yakorewe Abatutsi mu 1994, agapfana n’umugore basezeranye n’abana babyaranye. Bamaze kwemezwa ko ari bene Kayitsinga, batanze ikirego mu Rukiko rw’Ibanze rwa Nyarugenge basaba gucunga imitungo yasizwe na Se, ikirego cyabo gihabwa ishingiro. Iraguha (nyina wa Kayitsinga) yatambamiye urwo rubanza, ikirego cye gihabwa ishingiro, hemezwa ko imikirize y’urubanza rwatambamiwe ivuyeho kuko Uwiduhaye na Uwineza basabye gucunga umutungo wamaze kuzungurwa ku wa 17/12/2000 ubwo inama y’umuryango y’izungura ihuriwemo n’abarokotse Jenoside yakorewe Abatutsi bo mu muryango wa Kayitsinga n’abo mu muryango wa Mukandekezi yemezaga ko abazungura ku ruhande rwa Kayitsinga bafata ½ cy’imitungo izungurwa cyaje gufatwa na Iraguha, ikindi ½ kigafatwa n’abazungura ku ruhande rwa Mukandekezi. Uwiduhaye na Uwineza batanze ikindi kirego mu Rukiko Rwisumbuye rwa Nyarugenge, barega Iraguha na Hakizimana (umuvandimwe wa Kayitsinga) ko bigaruriye imitungo ya se. Bavugaga ko izungura ritakurikije amategeko, kuko ryakozwe bafite imimerere izwi nk’abana ba Kayitsinga, bakaba aribo bagombaga kumuzungura. Urukiko rwategetse ko imitungo yose ya Kayitsinga isubizwa abana be bakayicunga kugeza igihe izungura rizabera. Hakizimana na Iraguha bajuririye urwo rubanza mu Rukiko Rukuru, ubujurire bwabo buhabwa ishingiro
## Page 233
199 UWIDUHAYE N’UNDI v HAKIZIMANA N’ABANDI mu rubanza Nº RCA 0637/13/HC/KIG rwaciwe ku wa 13/05/2014. Uwiduhaye na Uwineza ntibishimiye icyo cyemezo, basaba ko urubanza rwasubirwamo ku mpamvu z’akarengane ruhabwa Urukiko rw’Ikirenga rusuzuma ikibazo nyamukuru cyo kumenya niba izungura ryakozwe ku mutungo wasizwe na Kayitsinga ku wa 17/12/2000 ryateshwa agaciro kugirango Uwiduhaye na Uwineza bemejwe n’Urukiko nk’abana be ku wa 10/11/2006, babe aribo bamuzungura. Abarega bavuga ko aribo bari bafite uburenganzira bwo kuzungura kuko bari bafite imimerere izwi (possession d’etat) nk’abana ba Kayitsinga yabyaye ku mugore utari uw’isezerano kandi bakaba barabanaga na nyirakuru Iraguha mu mwaka wa 1996 bizwi ko ari abana ba Kayitsinga bakavuga ko aribo bagombaga kuzungura kuko iyo ababyeyi bombi bapfuye bagasiga abana umutungo wose uzungurwa n’abana bagafasha ba sekuru na ba nyirakuru. Hakizimana na Iraguha biregaura basobanura ko Kayitsinga n’umugore we w’isezerano n’abana babo babiri (2) bishwe muri jenoside yakorewe abatutsi bapfa nta wundi mwana basize. Izungura ry’imitungo yabo ryabaye mu mwaka wa 2000 mu gihe urukiko rwemeje ko abarega bakomoka kuri Kayitsinga mu mwaka wa 2006. Bakomeza basobanura ko Uburenganzira bw’abana babyawe na Kayitsinga butangira igihe byemerejwe n'urukiko ko ari we se, ni ukuvuga kuva ku wa 30/06/2006. Bivuze ko ibyo bagiraho uburenganzira ari umutungo waba utari wagabanywa (indivision) kuva aho imanza zabemereje zaciriwe. Incamake y’icyemezo: 1. Kuba hari umuzungura wamenyekanye byemejwe n’Urukiko nyuma y’uko izungura rishyirwa mu bikorwa, ntibishobora gutesha agaciro izungura
## Page 234
200 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO ryakozwe rikarangira hagati y’abari bafite uburenganzira bwo kuzungura mbere y’uko urubanza rugamije kwemeza se w’umwana rucibwa ahubwo azungura gusa umutungo wari utaragabanwa kuva igihe yemerejwe n’Urukiko ko akomoka kuri nyakwigendera; 2. Kuba umwana uvuka ku babyeyi batashyingiranywe asanganywe imimerere izwi (possession d’état d’enfant naturel), biba gusa ikimenyetso mu rubanza rugamije kwemeza se, ariko ubwabyo ntibyashingirwaho ngo hemezwe se hatabaye urubanza ngo hemezwe ko se ari runaka, kandi ko ashobora kumuzungura. Ikirego gifite ishingiro kuri bimwe. Amategeko yifashishijwe atagikoreshwa: Itegeko N° 22/99 ryo ku wa 12/11/1999 ryuzuza igitabo cya mbere cy'urwunge rw'amategeko mbonezamubano kandi rishyiraho igice cya gatanu cyerekeye imicungire y'umutungo w'abashyingiranywe, impano n' izungura, ingingo ya 50, 307, 308, 318, 324, 328, 329. Inyandiko z’abahanga zifashishijwe: CDPF -Centre de Droit Privé Fondamental, 2011, p.4, consulté le 12/ 06/ 2023; Yves - Henri LELEU, Droit des personnes et des familles, Bruxelles, 4 ème édit., Larcier, 2020, p. 637, No 675; M. T. Meulders-Klein, L'établissement et les effets personnels de la filiation selon la loi belge du 31 mars 1987, annales de droit de Louvain, dans Revue Trimestrielle de Droit Belge, Tome XLVII 3-4/1987, p. 48, No 85.
## Page 235
201 UWIDUHAYE N’UNDI v HAKIZIMANA N’ABANDI Urubanza I. IMITERERE Y’URUBANZA [1] Uru rubanza rukomoka ku kibazo cyavutse mu izungura ry’imitungo yasizwe na Kayitsinga Emmanuel wishwe muri Jenoside yakorewe Abatutsi mu 1994, akicirwa hamwe n’umugore we w’isezerano Mukandekezi Emeriane n’abana babyaranye. Ku wa 17/12/2000, hateranye inama y’umuryango y’izungura ihuriwemo n’abarokotse Jenoside yakorewe Abatutsi bo mu muryango wa Kayitsinga Emmanuel n’abo mu muryango wa Mukandekezi Emeriane. Abari muri iyo nama bemeje ko abazungura ku ruhande rwa Kayitsinga Emmanuel bafata ½ cy’imitungo izungurwa, ikindi ½ kigafatwa n’abazungura ku ruhande rwa Mukandekezi Emeriane hakurikijwe ibiteganywa n’itegeko. [2] Ku wa 18/11/2005, Uwiduhaye Maurice na Uwineza Marie la Douce bahagarariwe na nyina Mukantaganzwa Léonille batanze ikirego mu Rukiko rw’Ibanze rwa Nyarugenge, barusaba kwemeza ko babyawe na Kayitsinga Emmanuel. Mu rubanza No RC 0526/05/TD/NGY rwaciwe ku wa 30/06/2006, Urukiko rwemeje ko batsinzwe kubera kubura ibimenyetso. Bajuririye icyo cyemezo, Urukiko Rwisumbuye rwa Nyarugenge mu rubanza No RCA 0059/06/TGI/NYGE rwaciwe ku wa 10/11/2006, rwemeza ko Uwiduhaye Maurice na Uwineza Marie la Douce ari bene Kayitsinga Emmanuel, ko bahabwa uburenganzira bemererwa n’amategeko. Muri uru rubanza hagobokeshejwe ku gahato Iraguha Spéçiose umubyeyi wa Kayitsinga Emmanuel n’umuvandimwe we Hakizimana Vincent. Uyu yajuriye mu Rukiko Rukuru mu rubanza Nº RCAA
## Page 236
202 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 0654/06/HC/KIG rwaciwe ku wa 30/11/2007, rwemeza ko ubujurire bwe nta shingiro bufite. [3] Aho bamariye kwemezwa n’Urukiko ko ari bene Kayitsinga Emmanuel, Uwiduhaye Maurice na Uwineza Marie la Douce batanze ikirego mu Rukiko rw’Ibanze rwa Nyarugenge bahagarariwe na nyina Mukantaganzwa Léonille, basaba gucunga imitungo yasizwe na Se, urubanza rwandikwa kuri Nº RC 0222/08/TB/Nyg, rucibwa ku wa 18/07/2008, Urukiko rwemeza ko ikirego cyabo gifite ishingiro. Iraguha Spéçiose yatambamiye uru rubanza, ikirego cye cyandikwa kuri Nº RC 0309/08/TB/Nyg, urubanza rucibwa ku wa 31/10/2008. Urukiko rwemeje ko ikirego cye gifite ishingiro, ko imikirize y’urubanza rwatambamiwe ivuyeho kuko Uwiduhaye Maurice na Uwineza Marie la Douce basabye gucunga umutungo wamaze kuzungurwa, ukaba utakiriho. [4] Uwiduhaye Maurice na Uwineza Marie la Douce bahagarariwe na Mukantaganzwa Léonille bajuriye mu Rukiko Rwisumbuye rwa Nyarugenge, bavuga ko bajuririye urubanza Nº RC 0222/08/TB/Nyge rwaciwe ku wa 31/08/2008, ubujurire bwabo bwandikwa kuri Nº RCA 0149/08/TGI/Nyge, urubanza rucibwa ku wa 17/04/2009. Urukiko rwemeje ko ubujurire bwabo butakiriwe kubera ko bareze Iraguha Spéçiose utarigeze uba umuburanyi mu rubanza Nº RC 0222/08/TB/Nyge, bakaba kandi barakererewe kujurira kuko urubanza bavuze ko bajuririye rwaciwe ku wa 18/07/2008, bo bakajurira ku wa 17/11/20081. 1 Aha iyo usuzumye neza usanga Mukantaganzwa Léonille wajuriye ahagarariye Uwiduhaye na Uwineza, yaranditse nimero y’urubanza yashakaga kujuririra nabi, aho kwandika urubanza Nº RC 0309/08/TB/Nyg rwatambamiye urubanza Nº RC 0222/08/TB/Nyg, yandika uru rwatambamiwe
## Page 237
203 UWIDUHAYE N’UNDI v HAKIZIMANA N’ABANDI [5] Uwiduhaye Maurice na Uwineza Marie la Douce bahagarariwe na Mukantaganzwa Léonille batanze ikindi kirego mu Rukiko Rwisumbuye rwa Nyarugenge bavuga ko imitungo ya Se Kayitsinga Emmanuel yigaruriwe na Iraguha Spéçiose na Hakizimana Vincent, kubera ko izungura ritakurikije amategeko, basaba n’indishyi zinyuranye. Urubanza rwanditswe kuri Nº RC 0408/09/TGI/Nyge, rucibwa ku wa 08/07/2011, Urukiko rwemeza ko ikirego gisibwe mu bitabo by’urukiko kubera ko rwashajishijwe no kudakurikiranwa. [6] Uwiduhaye Maurice yabyukije urubanza kuri Nº RC 0758/11/TGI/Nyge, ariko aribeshya yandika ko urubanza abyukije rwasomwe ku wa 31/08/2011, bituma ikirego kitakirwa kubera ko cyatanzwe mu buryo bunyuranyije n’amategeko. [7] Uwiduhaye Maurice afatanyije na Uwineza Marie la Douce bongeye gutanga ikirego cyo kubyutsa urubanza Nº RC 0408/09/TGI/Nyge, cyandikwa kuri Nº RC 0162/13/TGI/Nyge, urubanza rucibwa ku wa 25/10/2013. Urukiko rwemeje ko ikirego cyabo cyakiriwe ko kandi gifite ishingiro, rutegeka ko imitungo yose ya Kayitsinga Emmanuel isubijwe mu mutungo we kugeza izunguwe, rutegeka ko isubijwe abana be bakayicunga kugeza igihe izungura rizabera, rutegeka Hakizimana Vincent na Iraguha Spéçiose gufatanya kwishyura abana ba Kayitsinga Emmanuel indishyi zingana na 5.580.000 Frw. [8] Urukiko rwasobanuye ko izungura ryari ryakozwe mu buryo budakurikije amategeko kandi ko ibyakozwe byose byakozwe mu buriganya, kuko Uwiduhaye Maurice yabaga kwa se mbere y’uko apfa, nyuma ya jenoside yakorewe Abatutsi akajyanwa na Iraguha Spéçiose kurererwa iwe, bikaba byari
## Page 238
204 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO bizwi ko ari umwana wa Kayitsinga Emmanuel n’ubwo byari bitaremezwa n’Urukiko. [9] Hakizimana Vincent na Iraguha Spéçiose bajuririye urwo rubanza mu Rukiko Rukuru, ikirego cyandikwa kuri Nº RCA 0637/13/HC/KIG, urubanza rucibwa ku wa 13/05/2014, Urukiko rwemeza ko ubujurire bwabo bufite ishingiro, ko Uwiduhaye Maurice na Uwineza Marie la Douce batsinzwe, ko imikirize y’urubanza rwajuririwe ivanyweho. Urukiko rwasobanuye ko: a. Hashingiwe ku ngingo ya 49, igika cya 22, y’Itegeko Nº 22/99 ryo ku wa 12/11/1999 ryuzuza igitabo cya gatatu cy’urwunge rw’amategeko mbonezamubano kandi rishyiraho igice cya gatanu cyerekeye imicungire y’umutungo w’abashakanye impano n’izungura, rusanga ubwo izungura ryatangiraga abari bahari bagomba guhita bazungura Kayitsinga Emmanuel mu buryo bwemewe n’amategeko ari ababyeyi be n’abavandimwe be kubera ko nta mwana yasize. b. Ku wa 17/12/2000, abagize umuryango wa Kayitsinga Emmanuel n’umugore we bateranye bakagabana umutungo basize, hakurikijwe ibiteganywa n’Itegeko Nº 22/99 ryo ku wa 12/11/1999 ryavuzwe haruguru ryari rimaze gusohoka, bumvikana ko buri ruhande rufata ½ cy’umutungo wagombaga kuzungurwa, bikorerwa inyandiko. c. Nta bimenyetso by’uko izungura ryakozwe ku wa 17/12/2000 ryakozwe mu buriganya hagamijwe 2 Izungura ritangira iyo umuntu amaze gupfa, rikabera ahantu yari atuye cyangwa aho yabaga.
## Page 239
205 UWIDUHAYE N’UNDI v HAKIZIMANA N’ABANDI kwambura abana ba Kayitsinga Emmanuel imitungo, kuko ba nyakwigendera bapfuye nta mwana basize nta n’uwo bemeye, Uwiduhaye Maurice na Uwineza Marie la Douce bakaba baremejwe nyuma y’uko abagize umuryango wabo bamaze kugabana umutungo uburanwa. d. Ibyo Urukiko Rwisumbuye rwashingiyeho ko abo mu muryango wa Kayitsinga Emmanuel bari bazi abo bana, ndetse baranageze mu rugo rwabo, bitafatwa nk’ikimenyetso cy’imimerere( Possession d’état) cyashingirwaho kugira ngo Urukiko rwemeze ko bari basanzwe bazwi ko ari abana ba Kayitsinga Emmanuel, bafite uburenganzira bwo kumuzungura, ko ahubwo uburenganzira bwabo butangira igihe Urukiko rubemereje, bivuze ko ibyo bagiraho uburenganzira ari ibyari bitaragabanywa kuva aho urubanza rubemeza ruciriwe ku wa 10/11/2006. e. Mwiseneza nawe bivugwa ko ari umuzungura wa Kayitsinga Emmanuel atari umwana yabyaranye na Mukandekezi Emeriane nk’uko bivugwa mu rubanza rujuririrwa, kuko icyemezo cy’amavuko ye kigaragaza ko abyarwa na Mukangarambe, hakaba nta kigaragaza ko igihe umutungo wagabanywaga bari bazi ko ahari, kandi ko yemewe nk’umuzungura. f. Kuba igabana ryarashingiye ku itegeko ryasohotse nyuma y’aho Kayitsinga Emmanuel apfiriye atari impamvu yaritesha agaciro, kuko ntawe ryarenganyije mu bari bafite uburenganzira bwo kumuzungura mu 1994. [10] Ku wa 30/06/2014, Uwiduhaye Maurice yandikiye Urwego rw’Umuvunyi asaba ko urubanza Nº RCA
## Page 240
206 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 0637/13/HC/KIG rwaciwe ku wa 13/05/2014 rusubirwamo ku mpamvu z’akarengane. Ku wa 27/08/2015, Umuvunyi Mukuru yamwandikiye amusubiza ko nta karengane kari mu rubanza. Uwiduhaye Maurice yongeye kwandikira Urwego rw’Umuvunyi ku wa 27/07/2017, asaba ko akarengane ke kongera gusuzumwa. Ku wa 23/08/2018, Urwego rw’Umuvunyi rwandikiye Perezida w’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga rusaba ko urubanza Nº RCA 0637/13/HC/KIG rusubirwamo ku mpamvu z’akarengane. [11] Ku wa 01/04/2022, Perezida w’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga yemeje ko urubanza No RCA 0637/13/HC/KIG rwongera kuburanishwa, ikirego gihabwa No RS/INJUST/RC 00004/2022/SC, iburanisha ry’urubanza rishyirwa ku wa 19/09/2022. Kuri iyi tariki, iburanisha ryabereye mu ruhame, Uwiduhaye Maurice na Uwineza Marie la Douce bahagarariwe na Me Nsabayezu Evariste afatanyije na Me Nsabimana Jean Baptiste, Iraguha Spéçiose na Hakizimana Vincent bahagarariwe na Me Nduwamungu Jean Vianney. [12] Mbere y’uko urubanza rwinjira mu mizi, Me Nduwamungu Jean Vianney yatanze inzitizi avuga ko ikirego cyatanzwe na Uwiduhaye Maurice kitagombaga kwakirwa kubera ko Urwego rw’Umuvunyi rwivuguruje ruvuga ko nta karengane kari mu rubanza, nyuma rukongera kuvuga ko karimo. Mu cyemezo cyafatiwe mu ntebe, Urukiko rwemeje ko iyo nzitizi nta shingiro ifite, ko icyo kibazo cyafashweho umurongo mu rubanza Nº RS/INJUST/RC 00008/2019/SC haburana Mukarushakiro Gloriose, Bagenzi Théogene, Higiro James na Gahire Athanase. [13] Me Nduwamungu Jean Vianney yongeye gutanga inzitizi avuga ko ikirego cyatanzwe na Uwiduhaye Maurice kitagombaga kwakirwa, kubera ko atagaragaje ibimenyetso bigaragarira buri
## Page 241
207 UWIDUHAYE N’UNDI v HAKIZIMANA N’ABANDI wese byirengagijwe mu rubanza asaba ko rusubirwamo ku mpamvu z’akarengane. Me Nsabayezu Evariste na Me Nsabimana Jean Baptiste bahagarariye abarega basobanuye ko ibyo Me Nduwamungu Jean Vianney yita inzitizi atari yo, kuko aribyo byashingiweho hemezwa ko urubanza rusubirwamo ku mpamvu z’akarengane. [14] Nyuma yo kwiherera, Urukiko rwemeje ko inzitizi yatanzwe na Me Nduwamungu Jean Vianney nta shingiro ifite, kuko ibijyanye n’iyakirwa ryo gusubirishamo urubanza ku mpamvu z’akarengane bikorwa na Perezida w’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga, bikaba bitagarukwaho n’inteko iburanisha urubanza mu mizi cyeretse igihe hagaragajwe impamvu ndemyagihugu, nk’igihe haba harabayeho kwibeshya ku bihe byo gutanga ikirego; ibyo bikaba byarafashweho umurongo mu manza zinyuranye3. [15] Iburanisha ryarakomeje ababuranyi bagira icyo bongera ku myanzuro batanze, ariko ntiryasozwa kuko Urukiko rwasanze hari ibikenewe gukorwa mu rubanza kugira ngo rucibwe burundu. Ni muri urwo rwego Me Nduwamungu Jean Vianney uhagarariye abaregwa yasabwe kugaragaza inyandiko zose zijyanye n’ikibanza gifite m 100 x m 44, izijyanye n’ikibanza gifite m 38 x m 28, hamwe n’inyandiko zirebana n’ubugure bw’ibyo bibanza byombi.Yasabwe kandi kugaragaza ibyangombwa bishya byanditse kuri Iraguha Spéçiose na Hakizimana Vincent, no kugira icyo avuga ku nyandiko 3 Urubanza Nº RS/INJUST/RC 00022/2018/SC rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga ku wa28/06/2019, haburana BUSORO Gervais na MUGUNGA n’abandi; Urubanza Nº RS/INJUST/CIV 00011/2019/CS rwaciwe ku wa 12/02/2021, haburana MUKAMUSONI Petronille na NKUNDIMANA Edison.
## Page 242
208 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO uruhande rw’abarega rwashyize muri IECMS nyuma y’inama ntegurarubanza igaragaza ko hari abandi bantu banditse kuri iyo mitungo. Iburanisha ryimuriwe ku wa 16/11/2022. [16] Mu nyandiko yashyize muri IECMS, Me Nduwamungu Jean Vianney yasobanuye ibi bikurikira: a. Mu gihe cy’izungura ryo ku wa 17/12/2000 hari ibibanza bibiri, igifite m 100 x m 44 n’igifite m 38 x m 28. Ubutaka bwari bufite m 38 x m 28 bwazunguwe na Iraguha Spéçiose, naho ubufite m 100 x m 44 buzungurwa na Munyagihe Eliabu. Mu gihe cy’ibarura ry’ubutaka, ubutaka bwazunguwe na Iraguha Spéçiose bwanditswe kuri UPI:1/03/10/01/1208 naho ubwazunguwe na Munyagihe Eliabu bwandikwa kuri UPI:1/03/10/01/1383. b. Ku wa 14/02/2012, Iraguha Spéçiose yagurishije uwitwa Gasana Callixte ubutaka bwanditse kuri UPI:1/03/10/01/1208, na we arabugurisha amaze kubugabanyamo ibibanza bibiri bifite UPI:1/03/10/01/4923 na UPI:1/03/10/01/4924. c. Ubutaka Munyagihe Eliabu yazunguye yabugurishije Hakizimana Vincent. Nyuma yo kubugura yabugabanyijemo ibibanza bine bifite UPI:1/03/10/01/4074, UPI:1/03/10/01/4075, UPI:1/03/10/01/4076, na UPI:1/03/10/01/4077. Muri ibyo bibanza bine, ubutaka bwanditse kuri UPI:1/03/10/01/4076 ni bwo Hakizimana Vincent yagumanye, ibindi bibanza arabigurisha. [17] Ku wa 16/11/2022 iburanisha ryabereye mu ruhame, ababuranyi bunganiwe cyangwa bahagarariwe nk’uko amategeko
## Page 243
209 UWIDUHAYE N’UNDI v HAKIZIMANA N’ABANDI abiteganya, habanza gusuzumwa ubusabe bwa Munyagihe Eliabu bwo kugoboka ku bushake mu rubanza. Mu nyandiko yashyikirije Ubwanditsi bw’Urukiko, Me SONGA Jean Claude wari umuhagarariye yasobanuye ko afite inyungu mu rubanza, kuko izungura ryaregewe riramutse riteshejwe agaciro nk’uko abarega babisaba, byamugiraho ingaruka zo gutakaza uburenganzira bwo kuzungura umukobwa we. [18] Nyuma yo kumva icyo buri ruhande ruvuga ku busabe bwa Munyagihe Eliabu, Urukiko rwafatiye icyemezo mu ntebe ko butagomba kwakirwa ngo busuzumwe kuko nta nyungu bwite kandi itaziguye afite mu rubanza. [19] Urukiko rwasanze mbere y’uko iburanisha rikomeza, ari ngombwa kubanza gusaba amakuru Ikigo gishinzwe imicungire n’imikoreshereze y’ubutaka mu Rwanda ku bijyanye n’uburyo ibibanza bifite UPI: :1/03/10/01/1208 na UPI:1/03/10/01/1383 byagiye bihererekanywa, rukanasaba icyo Kigo kuba gihagaritse ihererekanya ry’ubutaka kuri ibyo bibanza. [20] Ikigo gishinzwe imicungire n’imikoreshereze y’ubutaka mu Rwanda cyatanze amakuru cyari cyasabwe, kigaragaza ko ubutaka bwavuzwe mu gika kibanza bwahererekanyijwe mu buryo bukurikira: a. Ubutaka bufite UPI:1/03/10/01/1208 bwakuwe ku mazina ya Succ Kayitsinga Emmanuel bwandikwa kuri Iraguha Spéciose, abugurisha Gasana Callixte wabugabanyijemo ibibanza 2, kimwe akakigurisha GANZA PEACE COMPANY Ltd, ikindi akakigurisha Kwizera Fabrice na BIRARO Christine. b. Ubutaka bufite UPI: 1/03/10/01/1383 bwakuwe ku mazina ya Succ Kayitsinga Emmanuel bwandikw kuri
## Page 244
210 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO Hakizimana Vincent na Izabiriza Tamari, babugabanyamo ibibanza 4. Ikibanza kimwe barakigumanye, ibindi babigurisha Mukamana Edisa, Mwesigye John na Mukakayumba Immaculée, Kankindi Nina na Habimana Augustin. c. Mwesigye John na Mukakayumba Immaculée nabo bagurishij Sibomana Alphonse na Mukarugwiza Florentine. [21] Urubanza rwongeye gushyirwa kuri gahunda y’iburanisha ku wa 24/02/2023, ariko rurasubikwa kugirango abantu bavuzwe mu gika kibanza bagiye bagura ubutaka buburanwa bagobokeshwe mu rubanza ku gahato. Urukiko rwemeje kandi ko abantu bagaragara ku nyandiko y’izungura yo ku wa 17/12/2000 bahamagarwa mu rubanza nk’abatangamakuru. Abo ni Mukagahame Domithille, Munyagihe Eliabu, Mukeshimana Marie Claire, Mukamwezi Evelyne, Nyiridandi Vénuste, Ngaboyisonga Emmanuel, Mavubi James, Kandiko Tharcisse, Kabirigi Simon na Uwimpundu Eugénie. [22] Urubanza rwahamagawe ku wa 22/05/2023, ababuranyi bose baritaba bahagarariwe cyangwa bunganiwe nk’uko amategeko abiteganya. Abagobokeshejwe nabo bitabye bahagarariwe na Me Murigande Jean Claude, uretse GANZA PEACE COMPANY Ltd yari ihagarariwe n’Umuyobozi wayo Ndizeye Jean Bosco, akavuga ko adashobora kwishyura Avoka, kandi ko atahabwa icyangombwa cy’ubukene kuko atari mu cyiciro cy’abatishoboye. Urukiko rwafatiye icyemezo mu ntebe ko iburanisha rikomeza akaburanishwa nk’udahari, kubera ko ataburana atunganiwe kandi akaba yarahawe umwanya wo
## Page 245
211 UWIDUHAYE N’UNDI v HAKIZIMANA N’ABANDI gushaka umwunganira ntabikore. Hitabye kandi na bamwe mu batangamakuru bari batumijwe. [23] Me Murigande Jean Claude uhagarariye abagobokeshejwe yatanze inzitizi avuga ko ikirego cyo gusubirishamo urubanza ku mpamvu z’akarengane cyatanzwe na Uwiduhaye Maurice kitagombaga kwakirwa, kubera ko yarengeje ibihe byo kugitanga. Asobanura ko yabanje kugitanga mu 2015 agasubizwa ko nta karengane kagaragara mu rubanza, mu 2017 akongera kwandika agasubizwa mu 2018. Urukiko rwafatiye icyemezo mu ntebe, rwemeza ko iyo nzitizi nta shingiro ifite, rutegeka ko iburanisha rikomeza humvwa abatangamakuru bahamagajwe hamwe n’abagobokeshejwe. [24] Mu batangamakuru bahamagajwe n’Urukiko, habonetse Mukagahame Domithille wari mu bagize umuryango wa Kayitsinga Emmanuel, Mukeshimana Marie Claire na Mukamwezi Evelyne bari mu bagize umuryango wa Mukandekezi Emeriane, aba bakaba barumviswe hakoreshejwe ikoranabuhanga kuko baba mu mahanga. Habonetse kandi Kandiko Tharcisse, Ngaboyisonga Emmanuel bagaragara mu nyandiko nk’abagabo, na Uwimpundu Eugénie wari umwanditsi w’inama akaba ari n’umukobwa wa Iraguha Spéçiose. Bose bahurije ku kuba izungura ryo ku wa 17/12/2000 ryarabayeho, kandi ko bari bahari. Abenshi mu batangamakuru kandi bahurije ku kuba mu kugabana ibyazunguwe, bumvikanye ko Iraguha Spéçiose afata ubutaka buto, akabwongeraho ubwo Kayitsinga Emmanuel yari afite ku ivuko. [25] Muri uru rubanza, hasuzumwe ikibazo nyamukuru cyo kumenya niba izungura ryakozwe ku wa 17/12/2000 ryateshwa agaciro kugirango Uwiduhaye Maurice na Uwineza Marie la Douce babe aribo bazungura umutungo wasizwe na Kayitsinga
## Page 246
212 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO Emmanuel. Hasuzumwe kandi n’ikibazo kirebana n’indishyi zasabwe n’ababuranyi. II. IBIBAZO BIGIZE URUBANZA N’ISESENGURA RYABYO A. Kumenya niba izungura ryakozwe ku wa 17/12/2000 ryateshwa agaciro kugirango Uwiduhaye Maurice na Uwineza Marie la Douce babe aribo bazungura umutungo wasizwe na Kayitsinga Emmanuel. [26] Me Nsabayezu Evariste na Me Nsabimana Jean Baptiste bahagarariye Uwiduhaye Maurice na Uwineza Marie la Douce bavuga ko izungura ryashingiweho n’Urukiko Rukuru ritagombaga guhabwa agaciro, bashingiye ku mpamvu zikurikira: a. Kuba izungura ritari gukurikiza ingingo ya 49 agace ka 2, y’Itegeko No 22/99 ryo ku wa 12/11/1999 ryuzuza igitabo cya gatatu cy’urwunge rw’amategeko mbonezamubano kandi rishyiraho igice cya gatanu cyerekeye imicungire y’umutungo w’abashakanye impano n’izungura, kandi abana ba Kayitsinga Emmanuel bari bahari. Bavuga ko Uwiduhaye Maurice na Uwineza Marie la Douce bemejwe mu rubanza No RCA 0059/06/TGI/NYGE rwaciwe ku wa 10/11/2006, bakaba bari bafite imimerere isanzwe izwi (possession d’état) nk’abana ba Kayitsinga Emmanuel, nk’uko byavuzwe n’abatangabuhamya. b. Izungura ryagombaga gukurikiza ibyavugwaga mu ngingo ya 70, igika cya 2, y’Itegeko no 22/99 ryo ku
## Page 247
213 UWIDUHAYE N’UNDI v HAKIZIMANA N’ABANDI wa 12/11/1999 ryavuzwe haruguru, yateganyaga ko “iyo ababyeyi bombi bapfuye bagasiga abana, umutungo wose uzungurwa n’abana bagafasha ba sekuru na ba nyirakuru….”. c. Urukiko rwirengagije inyandiko yemejwe n’ubuyobozi bw’Akagari ka Kamashashi ku wa 04/08/2008, igaragaza ko ubwo buyobozi buri kumwe n’abafite umutungo wa Kayitsinga Emmanuel bweretse abana bemejwe ko ari abe umutungo yasize, bigatuma bawiyandikishaho, Iraguha Spéçiose na Hakizimana Vincent ntibabitambamire kandi byarakozwe bahari. d. Uwiduhaye Maurice na Uwineza Marie la Douce babanaga na nyirakuru mu 1996, bivuze ko bari basanzwe bafite imimerere y’abana ba Kayitsinga Emmanuel. e. Ibiri mu nyandiko yiswe iy’izungura yo ku wa 17/12/2000 ntibyabayeho kuko nta kigaragaza ko ibyavugiwe muri iyo nama aribyo byanditswe. f. Izungura ryakozwe na Iraguha Spéciose na Hakizimana Vincent ryakozwe mu buryo bunyuranyije n’amategeko, kuko hashingiwe ku ngingo ya 2 y’Itegeko Nº 32/2016 ryo ku wa 28/08/2016 rigenga abantu n’umuryango, hibazwa uburyo Hakizimana Vincent yagiye mu bazungura. g. Abatangamakuru bose bavuga ko habaye izungura, ariko ko iby’igabana bitigeze bibaho. Bigaragara kandi ko hafashwe ibindi byemezo bitajyanye n’izungura, bikaba biritesha agaciro. h. Amakuru yatanzwe na Ngaboyisonga Emmanuel y’uko Hakizimana Vincent yari asanzwe
## Page 248
214 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO atuye muri iyo mitungo, ko kandi ahagabanywe batigeze baherekwa, atandukanye n’ibyavuzwe n’abandi batangamakuru. Ibyo bikaba bigaragaza ko ibyanditswe mu nyandiko yo ku wa 17/12/2000 bitabayeho, bivuze ko n’ izungura ritarabayeho. i. Mu nyandiko y’izungura handitse ko buri ruhande rwazunguye, nyamara abatangamakuru bakaba bavuga ko hazunguye Munyagihe Eliabu na Iraguha Spéciose. [27] Ku bijyanye n’amafaranga 500.000 avugwa mu kirego, abarega n’ababahagarariye bavuga ko ibibanza byari bitatu, ariko icya gatatu Hakizimana Vincent akakigurisha uwitwa Kayonga Jean Marie Vianney, amafaranga yavuyemo akaba ariyo yabitswe ku Murenge wa Nyarugunga bisabwe na Mukantaganzwa, nyina w’abarega. [28] Me Nduwamungu Jean Vianney uhagarariye Iraguha Spéçiose na Hakizimana Vincent yatanze ibisobanuro bikurikira: a Kayitsinga Emmanuel n'umugore we w’isezerano, ndetse n’abana babiri bari barabyaranye, bishwe muri Jenoside yakorewe Abatutsi, bapfa nta wundi mwana basize, nta n'uwo bemeye ko babyaye hanze. N’igihe izungura ryakorwaga ku wa 17/12/2000, nta bana bari bahari bazwi ko bakomoka kuri Kayitsinga Emmanuel cyangwa kuri Mukandekezi Emeriane, ahubwo Urukiko rwaje kwemeza ko Uwiduhaye Maurice na Uwineza Marie la Douce ari abana ba Kayitsinga Emmanuel ku wa 30/06/2006, nyuma y’imyaka 6 izungura rikozwe. b N’ubwo Uwiduhaye Maurice ahakana ko izungura ryo ku wa 17/12/2000 ryabayeho, hari inyandiko yakozwe mu buryo n’inzira bikurikije amategeko, ikaba ari
## Page 249
215 UWIDUHAYE N’UNDI v HAKIZIMANA N’ABANDI inyandiko bwite nkuko bisobanurwa n’ingingo ya 14 y’Itegeko N°15/2004 ryerekeye ibimenyetso mu manza n’itangwa ryabyo. Ingingo ya 15 y’iryo Tegeko iteganya ko inyandikobwite “iba gihamya kugeza igihe ivugurujwe n’ibindi bimenyetso byose byemerwa n’amategeko”. c Ibyo Uwiduhaye Maurice yita ibimenyetso by’uko yari asanzwe azwi ko ari umwana wa Kayitsinga Emmanuel (possession d’état), birimo icyo yise icyemezo cy’uko yigaga muri ESA Nyarugunga aba kwa Nyirakuru Iraguha Spéçiose, nta shingiro byahabwa kuko iyo aba koko yarahabaye, Nyirakuru atari kujya gutambamira urubanza No RC 0059/06/TGI/NYGE ahakana ko abo bana atari bene Kayitsinga Emmanuel. d Abo Uwiduhaye Maurice yita ko ari abatangabuhamya babajijwe mu rubanza No RCA 0059/06/TGl/NYGE, ni bamwe mu baryozwaga imitungo ya Kayitsinga Emmanuel, bakaza kumvikana ko nibamutangira ubuhamya mu rukiko na we azabitura kubasonera kwishyura iyo mitungo. e Inyandiko abarega bavuga ko ari iy’Inzego z'Ibanze zakoze zibereka imitungo ya se, ni inyandiko yakozwe ku wa 21/04/2008 yashyiraga mu bikorwa ibyavuye mu rubanza No RCA 0059/06/TGl/NYGE rwo ku wa 10/11/2006 rwaciwe n'Urukiko Rwisumbuye rwa Nyarugenge rwemeje ko babyarwa na Kayitsinga Emmanuel ; iyo nyandiko na yo ikaba yarakozwe nyuma y’imyaka 8 habayeho izungura, akaba atari ikimenyetso kigaragaza ko igihe izungura ryabaga mu 2000, Uwiduhaye Maurice na Uwineza Marie la
## Page 250
216 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO Douce bari bazwi ko ari abana ba Kayitsinga Emmanuel. f Kuba Uwiduhaye Maurice yaravuze ko bafite ibyangombwa by'umutungo uburanwa kandi ko ubabaruyeho, si ikimenyetso kigaragaza ko bari bazwi ko ari abana ba Kayitsinga Emmanuel, kuko babyiyandikishijeho ku wa 07/06/2010, hashize imyaka icumi (10) izungura ribaye, babihabwa mu 2011. g Ku bijyanye n’abatangabuhamya babajijwe n’Urukiko bakemeza ko babonaga Mukantaganzwa Léonille azanye abana kwa Iraguha Spéçiose, umwe muri bo yabajijwe igihe yaba yaraboneye abo bana avuga ko ari mu 2001, nyuma y’igihe izungura rikozwe (2000), bisobanuye ko igihe ryakorwaga, abo bana batari bazwi ko ari aba Kayitsinga Emmanuel. h Uburenganzira bw’abana babyawe na Kayitsinga Emmanuel butangira igihe byemerejwe n'urukiko ko ari we se, ni ukuvuga kuva ku wa 30/06/2006. Bivuze ko ibyo bagiraho uburenganzira ari umutungo waba utari wagabanywa (indivision) kuva aho imanza zabemereje zaciriwe. [29] Ku byavuzwe n’abatangamakuru, Me Nduwamungu Jean Vianney avuga ko bose bemeje ko izungura ryabaye, kandi bose bahuriza ku kuba abazunguye bataragabanye mu buryo bungana, kuko Munyagihe Eliabu ariwe wafashe igice kinini; ibyo bikaba bigaragaza ko inyandiko y’izungura ifite agaciro. [30] Me Murigande Jean Claude wunganira Mukamana Edisa, Mwisigye John, Mukakayumba Immaculée, Habimana Augustin, Kankindi Nina, Gasana Callixte, Sibomana Alphonse,
## Page 251
217 UWIDUHAYE N’UNDI v HAKIZIMANA N’ABANDI Mukarugwiza Florentine, Kwizera Fabrice na Biraro Christine, avuga ko umutungo uburanwa ugizwe n’ubutaka wagiye uhererekanywa ukaba waragurishijwe n’abawuzunguye ku buryo bwemewe n’amategeko. Avuga kandi ko amaze kubona ibikubiye mu rubanza rw’akarengane katanzwe na Uwiduhaye Maurice na Uwineza Marie la Douce, asanga ibyo baregera nta shingiro byahabwa, kuko igihe izungura ryakorwaga bari bataremezwa nk’abana ba Kayitsinga Emmanuel. [31] Avuga ko muri ubwo butaka bwagiye buhererekanywa, Kwizera Fabrice na BIRARO Christine bafitemo inzu; Mukamana Edisa, Sibomana Alphonse, Mukarugwiza Florentine, Habimana Augustin na Kankindi Nina nabo bakaba bafitemo inzu. [32] Ku byavuzwe n’abatanze amakuru, Me Murigande Jean Claude avuga ko byerekana ukuri kose kuko bemeje ko izungura ryabayeho, kandi bemeza ko buri ruhande rwari ruhagarariwe. [33] Me Murigande Jean Claude avuga kandi ko Urukiko rusanze izungura ritarabayeho n’ubwo ku bw’ibanze asanga ryarabayeho, abagiye bagurisha hagati yabo basubizanya cyangwa abaguze bagasubizwa agaciro. Avuga ko ubu batazi agaciro ibibanza birimo bigezeho, akaba asaba Urukiko ko bibaye ngombwa hakoreshwa amagenagaciro ya buri mutungo. UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [34] Mu gusubiza ikibazo cyo kumenya niba izungura ryakozwe ku wa 17/12/2000 ryateshwa agaciro kugirango Uwiduhaye Maurice na Uwineza Marie la Douce babe aribo bazungura umutungo wasizwe na Kayitsinga Emmanuel,
## Page 252
218 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO harabanza gusuzumwa niba iryo zungura ryarabayeho kuko abarega bavuga ko ritabaye. Mu gihe byagaragara ko ryabayeho, hasuzumwe ikibazo cyo kumenya niba, igihe ryabaga, Uwiduhaye Maurice na Uwineza Marie la Douce bari bazwi nk’abazungura ba Kayitsinga Emmanuel ku buryo abamuzunguye ku wa 17/12/2000 baba barabikoze bagamije kubaheza mu mutungo w’umubyeyi wabo. - Ku bijyanye no kumenya niba izungura ryo ku wa 17/12/2000 ryarabayeho. [35] Mu nyandiko zigize dosiye, harimo iyitwa “Inama y’izungura hagati y’umuryango wa Kayitsinga Emmanuel na Mukandekezi Emeriane yo ku wa 17/12/2000”. Muri iyo nyandiko, hagaragaramo ko inama y’umuryango yateranye irimo abagize imiryango ku mpande zombi, abagabo batanzwe ku mpande zombi, Umuyobozi (Responsable) wa Nyarugunga ndetse n’umwanditsi w’inama. Iyo nyandiko igaragaza kandi ko hagabanywe isambu ingana na 100 m kuri 44 m, n’indi ingana na 38 m kuri 28 m, abasimbura bo kwa Kayitsinga Emmanuel bagafata kimwe cya kabiri, n’abo kwa Mukandekezi Emeriane bagafata kimwe cya kabiri. Inyandiko igaragaza nanone ko inama y’umuryango yahaye Hakizimana Vincent uburenganzira bwo gucungira umutungo kwa Munyagihe Eliabu. [36] Urukiko rwahamagaje abavugwa muri iyi nyandiko batari ababuranyi, nk’uko bagaragara mu gika cya 24 cy’urubanza, bose bemeza ko inama y’izungura yo ku wa 17/12/2000 yabaye, ko bari bayirimo, kandi ko ibigaragara mu nyandiko aribyo byayivugiwemo. [37] Ku bijyanye no kuba Munyagihe Eliabu yarafashe isambu ingana na m 100 kuri m 44, iruta iyafashwe na Iraguha Spéçiose
## Page 253
219 UWIDUHAYE N’UNDI v HAKIZIMANA N’ABANDI ingana na m 38 kuri m 28, kandi mu nyandiko y’izungura handitsemo ko bagabana mu buryo bungana, abatanze amakuru bose uretse Mukagahame Domithille, bemeje ko igihe cyo kugabana abazunguye bumvikanye ko Munyagihe Eliabu afata isambu nini, Iraguha Spéçiose agafata intoya ariko akazongeraho ubutaka bugize umunani wa Kayitsinga Emmanuel buherereye aho avuka i Huye. Urukiko rusanga ibyo impande zombi zumvikanyeho nta tegeko ryabibabuzaga, bikaba kandi bitavanaho kuba inama y’izungura yarabaye cyangwa ngo biyiteshe agaciro. [38] Hashingiwe ku bisobanuro bimaze gutangwa, Urukiko rurasanga izungura ryo ku wa 17/12/2000 ryarabayeho. - Kumenya niba igihe izungura ryabaga, Uwiduhaye Maurice na Uwineza Marie la Douce bari bazwi nk’abazungura ba Kayitsinga Emmanuel ku buryo abamuzunguye ku wa 17/12/2000 baba barabikoze bagamije kubaheza mu mutungo w’umubyeyi wabo. [39] Ingingo ya 50 y’Itegeko N° 22/99 ryo ku wa 12/11/1999 ryuzuza igitabo cya mbere cy'urwunge rw'amategeko mbonezamubano kandi rishyiraho igice cya gatanu cyerekeye imicungire y'umutungo w'abashyingiranywe, impano n' izungura, ryakoreshwaga igihe habaga izungura ku wa 17/12/2000, yateganyaga ko abana amategeko mbonezamubano yemera ko ari aba nyakwigendera, bazungura ku buryo bungana nta vangura hagati y'umwana w'umuhungu n'uw'umukobwa. [40] Ku bijyanye no kumenya abana amategeko mbonezamubano yemera ko ari aba nyakwigendera, Itegeko No 42/1988 ryo ku wa 27/10/1988 rishyiraho interuro y’ibanze n’igitabo cya mbere cy’urwunge rw’amategeko mbonezamubano
## Page 254
220 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO ritandukanya ibimenyetso byemeza ko umuntu akomoka ku bashyingiranywe (mu buryo bwemewe n’amategeko), n’ibyemeza inkomoko ku bana bavuka ku batarashyingiranywe. [41] Ku bireba abakomoka ku bashyingiranywe, ingingo ya 307 y’Itegeko No 42/1988 ryo ku wa 27/10/1988 rimaze kuvugwa, iteganya ko kugirango abantu bemerweho ko bakomoka ku bashyingiranywe bigaragazwa n’inyandiko iri mu bitabo by’irangamimerere. Ingingo ya 308 y’iryo Tegeko yo igateganya ko iyo inyandiko y’amavuko ibuze, kuba umuntu asanzwe azwiho ko akomoka ku bashyingiranywe (la possession constante de l’état d’enfant légitime) bihagije kugirango byemezwe ko abakomokaho. [42] Ku bireba abakomoka ku batarashyingiranywe, kugirango hemezwe uwo bakomokaho, hashobora kubaho kwemera umwana nk’aho yavutse ku bashyingiranywe (légitimation), bigasaba ko se na nyina babemera mbere yo gushyingiranwa, igihe bashyingiranwa (dans l’acte de célébration du mariage), cyangwa nyuma yaho (ingingo ya 318 y’Itegeko No 42/1988 ryo ku wa 27/10/1988 ryavuzwe haruguru). Hashobora kandi kubaho kwemera umwana (reconnaissance) bikozwe mu nyandikompano (ingingo ya 324 y’Itegeko rimaze kuvugwa). Hashobora nanone kubaho ikirego cy’umwana ushaka kugira se (recherche de paternité) cyangwa kugira nyina (recherche de maternité). [43] Hakurikijwe ibiteganywa n’ingingo ya 329 y’Itegeko No 42/1988 ryo ku wa 27/10/1988 ryavuzwe haruguru, ikirego kigamije kwerekana nyina w’umwana kiremerwa iyo umwana asanganywe imimerere izwi (possession d’état). Ku bijyanye n’ikirego cy’umwana ushaka kugira se, ingingo ya 328 y’Itegeko
## Page 255
221 UWIDUHAYE N’UNDI v HAKIZIMANA N’ABANDI No 42/1988 ryo ku wa 27/10/1988 rimaze kuvugwa, iteganya ko cyemerwa cyane cyane muri ibi bihe bikurikira: a Iyo nyina w’umwana yatwawe ku ngufu, iyo yagumishijwe ahantu afungiwe baramufashe cyangwa yarasambanyijwe ku ngufu; b Iyo nyina w’umwana yasambanyijwe bakoresheje uburiganya, igitugu, bamusezeranya ko bazamurongora cyangwa se bazamusaba; c Iyo nyina w’umwana yabanye n’umugabo batashyingiranywe; d Iyo hari inyandiko cyangwa imvugo idashidikanywa byemeza ko umugabo amurera; e Iyo umugabo yemeye gufata neza umwana, akamurera, akamugenera ibintu bye bwite nk’aho ari se. [44] Mu mpamvu zivugwa n’itegeko zituma ikirego cy’umwana ushaka kugira se cyemerwa, ntihavugwamo ku buryo bweruye kuba umwana asanganywe imimerere izwi (possession d’état), bivuga ko atari ikimenyetso kihagije nk’uko bimeze ku kirego kigamije kwerekana nyina w’umwana. [45] Ingingo z’Itegeko No 42/1988 ryo ku wa 27/10/1988 zavuzwe mu bika bibanza, zumvikanamo ibintu by’ingenzi bikurikira: a Kugirango umuntu yemerweho ko akomoka ku bashyingiranywe, bigaragazwa n’inyandiko iri mu bitabo by’irangamimerere. Iyo iyo nyandiko ibuze, kuba umuntu asanzwe azwiho ko akomoka ku bashyingiranywe (la
## Page 256
222 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO possession constante de l’état d’enfant légitime), biba bihagije kugirango byemezwe ko abakomokaho. b Ku bijyanye no kwemeza ko umuntu akomoka ku batarashyingiranywe: i. Itegeko ryateganyaga inzira eshatu: - Inzira yo kwemera umwana nk’aho yavutse ku bashyingiranywe (légitimation), iyo ababyeyi batari barashyingiranywe ariko nyuma bakaza gushyingiranwa. - Inzira yo kwemera umwana (reconnaissance) bikozwe mu nyandikompano. - Iyo izo nzira zombi zitabayeho, hateganyijwe inzira y’ ikirego cy’umwana ushaka kugira se (recherche de paternité) cyangwa kugira nyina (recherche de maternité). ii. Kuba umwana asanganywe imimerere izwi (possession d’état), ntibyemeza ubwabyo ko umwana akomoka ku mubyeyi runaka iyo ababyeyi batashyingiranywe (la possession d’état n’établit pas la filiation naturelle), ahubwo biba ikimenyetso mu rubanza rugamije kwemeza nyina cyangwa se w’umwana. Biba ari ikimenyetso kihagije kugirango ikirego kigamije kwemeza nyina w’umwana cyemerwe, bikaba n’ikimenyetso ariko kitihagije kugirango ikirego kigamije kwemeza se w’umwana cyemerwe. [46] Ibyateganywaga n’ingingo z’Itegeko No 42/1988 ryo ku wa 27/10/1988 zimaze kuvugwa ku bijyanye no kwemeza ko umuntu akomoka ku batarashyingiranywe, si umwihariko w’u
## Page 257
223 UWIDUHAYE N’UNDI v HAKIZIMANA N’ABANDI Rwanda. Mu Gihugu cy’Ububiligi, kwemeza ko umuntu akomoka ku mubyeyi w’umugabo iyo ababyeyi batashyingiranywe, bikorwa binyuze mu nzira yo kwemera umwana (reconnaissance). Iyo bidakozwe bityo, binyura mu nzira y’ urubanza. Muri icyo Gihugu, kuba umwana uvuka ku babyeyi batashyingiranywe asanganywe imimerere izwi, ntibyemeza ubwabyo ko akomoka ku mubyeyi w’umugabo4. [47] Muri uwo murongo, umuhanga mu mategeko Yves-Henri LELEU avuga ko kuba umwana asanganywe imimerere izwi, biba ikimenyetso mu kirego kigamije kwemeza se w’umwana; icyo kimenyetso kitaboneka, hakiyambazwa ibindi5. [48] Umuhanga mu mategeko M.T. Meulders-Klein avuga ko uburyo bwonyine bwo kwemeza se w’umwana iyo ababyeyi batashyingiranywe, ari ukwemera umwana ku bushake, no 4 La filiation paternelle hors mariage peut être établie par une reconnaissance volontaire de l’enfant par son père naturel. A défaut, elle peut être établie par un jugement déclaratif, rendu par le tribunal de première instance. En revanche, en droit belge, la possession d’état d’enfant naturel n’est pas un mode autonome d’établissement de la paternité naturelle; Article publié par le CDPF -Centre de Droit Privé Fondamental, 2011, p.4, consulté le 12/ 06/ 2023. Lorsque le père naturel n’a pas reconnu l’enfant, une action peut être exercée contre lui devant le tribunal de première instance aux fins d’établir la filiation à son égard. Si la paternité est prouvée, elle est établie par un jugement déclaratif; la possession d’état de l’enfant peut servir de preuve de la paternité (art.324 du code civil); Ibidem, p. 5. 5 Action en recherche de paternité. La possession d'état de l’enfant à l’égard du père prétendu prouve la paternité (art. 324, al.1er). A défaut de possession d’état, la preuve de la paternité est rapportée par toutes voies de droit; Yves- Henri LELEU, Droit des personnes et des familles, Bruxelles, 4 ème édit., Larcier, 2020, p. 637, No 675.
## Page 258
224 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO gutanga ikirego kigamije kwemeza se w’umwana6. Asobanura ko ibijyanye no kuba umwana asanganywe imimerere izwi, byashyizwe mu gitabo cy’amategeko mbonezamubano mu gice kerekeranye n’ibirego bigamije kugaragaza uwo umuntu akomokaho, kubera ko kitakiri ikimenyetso cyemeza inkomoko hatabaye urubanza, ahubwo ari ikimenyetso mu rubanza rugamije kwemeza nyina cyangwa se w’umwana...7. Avuga ko kuba ibijyanye no kuba umwana asanganywe imimerere izwi byaravanywe mu bimenyetso byemeza inkomoko hatabaye urubanza, bisobanurwa n’uko ari ikimenyetso gisaba igihe kugirango kibeho, kikaba atari ikimenyetso kizewe 8. [49] Icyumvikana mu ngingo z’amategeko zavuzwe haruguru, zirebewe hamwe n’ibisobanuro bitangwa n’abahanga mu mategeko, ni uko: a. Abana amategeko mbonezamubano yemera ko ari aba nyakwigendera, aribo bamuzungura; 6 Les seuls modes d'établissement de la paternité hors mariage restent, avant comme après la réforme: la reconnaissance volontaire, l'action en recherche de paternité, M. T. Meulders-Klein, L'établissement et les effets personnels de la filiation selon la loi belge du 31 mars 1987, annales de droit de Louvain, dans Revue Trimestrielle de Droit Belge, Tome XLVII 3-4/1987, p. 48, No 85. 7 La définition de la possession d'état et de ses éléments constitutifs se trouve reléguée à l'article 331nonies du Code civil, c'est-à-dire au chapitre consacré aux actions relatives à la filiation, parce que celle-ci a cessé d'être un mode de preuve extra-judiciaire de la filiation pour n'être qu'un élément de preuve judiciaire tant de la maternité (art. 314, al. 4, C. civ.) que de la paternité (art. 324, al. 1, C. civ.) …….; Ibidem, p.68, No 129. 8 L'éviction de la possession d'état comme mode de preuve extra-judiciaire de la filiation se justifiait sans doute par le caractère peu commode de cette preuve qui demande en outre du temps pour se constituer et demeure relativement incertaine; Ibidem, p. 24, No 38.
## Page 259
225 UWIDUHAYE N’UNDI v HAKIZIMANA N’ABANDI b. Kwemeza ko umwana akomoka ku mubyeyi w’umugabo iyo ababyeyi batashyingiranywe, binyura mu nzira yo kumwemera ku bushake; ibyo byaba bitarakozwe, hakabaho ikirego kigamije kwemeza se w’umwana. c. Kuba umwana uvuka ku babyeyi batashyingiranywe asanganywe imimerere izwi (possession d’état), biba gusa ikimenyetso mu rubanza rugamije kwemeza se, ariko ubwabyo ntibyashingirwaho ngo hemezwe se hatabaye urubanza. [50] Ku bijyanye n’uru rubanza, Uwiduhaye Maurice na Uwineza Marie la Douce bemejwe ko ari aba Kayitsinga Emmanuel mu rubanza No RCA 0059/06/TGI/NYGE, rwaciwe n’Urukiko Rwisumbuye rwa Nyarugenge ku wa 10/11/2006, ariko bakavuga ko mbere y’uko izungura ryo ku wa 17/12/2000 riba, bari basanganywe imimerere izwi nk’abamukomokaho (possession d’état). [51] Bitabaye ngombwa gusuzuma niba igihe izungura ryabaga ku wa 17/12/2000 bari basanganywe imimerere izwi nk’abakomoka kuri Kayitsinga Emmanuel, Urukiko rusanga hakurikijwe ibisobanuro byatanzwe haruguru, kugira imimerere isanzwe izwi bitarashoboraga kwemeza ubwabyo ko ari bene Kayitsinga Emmanuel hatabayeho urubanza. Urukiko rusanga ahubwo, ari ibyashoboraga gukoreshwa nk’ikimenyetso mu rubanza rwemeje ko ari abana ba Kayitsinga Emmanuel. [52] Urukiko rusanga kuva aho urubanza No RCA 0059/06/TGI/NYGE rwavuzwe haruguru ruciriwe ku wa 10/11/2006, Uwiduhaye Maurice na Uwineza Marie la Douce aribwo bemejwe ko ari aba Kayitsinga Emmanuel, akaba ari
## Page 260
226 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO nabwo bagize uburenganzira bwo kumuzungura. Bivuga rero ko igihe izungura ryo ku wa 17/12/2000 ryabaga, batari bazwi nk’abazungura ba Kayitsinga Emmanuel, bityo Urukiko rukaba ntaho rwahera rwemeza ko abamuzunguye babikoranye uburyarya kugira ngo babaheze mu mutungo w’umubyeyi wabo. [53] Mu ngingo zikurikira, Urukiko rurasuzuma aho uburenganzira bwa Uwiduhaye Maurice na Uwineza Marie la Douce ku mutungo uzungurwa butangirira, niba bazungura gusa ibyari bihari kuva igihe bemerejwe n’Urukiko, cyangwa niba bashobora no gusaba ko ibyagabanywe bataremezwa bigaruka mu mutungo uzungurwa bakabigiraho uruhare. - Kumenya niba Uwiduhaye Maurice na Uwineza Marie la Douce bafite uburenganzira bwo kuzungura gusa umutungo wari uhari kuva igihe bemerejwe nk’abakomoka kuri Kayitsinga Emmanuel ku wa 10/11/2006, cyangwa niba bashobora no gusaba ko ibyagabanywe ku wa 17/12/2000 bigaruka mu mutungo w’umubyeyi wabo kugirango babizungure. [54] Nta ngingo mu Itegeko N° 22/99 ryo ku wa 12/11/1999 ryuzuza igitabo cya mbere cy'urwunge rw'amategeko mbonezamubano kandi rishyiraho igice cya gatanu cyerekeye imicungire y'umutungo w'abashyingiranywe, impano n' izungura, yasubizaga iki kibazo. [55] Ingingo ya 9 y’Itegeko No 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi iteganya ko umucamanza aca urubanza ashingiye ku ngingo z’amategeko zirebana n’ikirego yaregewe. Iyo nta tegeko rijyanye n’ikiburanwa ashingira ku mategeko asanga yashyiraho mu gihe
## Page 261
227 UWIDUHAYE N’UNDI v HAKIZIMANA N’ABANDI yaba ashinzwe kuyashyiraho, yifashishije ibyemezo byagiye bifatwa n’inkiko, umuco, amahame rusange agenga amategeko n’inyandiko z’abahanga mu mategeko. [56] Urukiko Rusesa Imanza rwo mu Bufaransa, mu rubanza rwaciwe ku wa 11/04/2018, rwemeje ko kuba hari umuzungura wamenyekanye byemejwe n’Urukiko nyuma y’uko izungura rishyirwa mu bikorwa, bidashobora gutesha agaciro izungura ryakozwe rikarangira hagati y’abari bafite uburenganzira bwo kuzungura mbere y’uko hatangwa ikirego kigamije kwemeza se w’umwana9 (muri urwo rubanza, hari umubyeyi w’umugabo wapfuye ku wa 27/04/1996, izungura ry’umutungo asize rikorwa ku wa 28/10/1996 hagati y’abari abazungura icyo gihe, nyuma yaho ku wa 10/11/2005 habaho urubanza rwemeje ko nyakwigendera ari se w’uwaregaga, uyu yongera gutanga ikirego ku wa 10/08/2010 asaba kuzungura umutungo wa nyakwigendera). [57] Urukiko rusanga ibyasuzumwe mu rubanza rumaze kuvugwa, bihura n’ibisuzumwa muri uru rubanza Uwiduhaye Maurice na Uwineza Marie la Douce baregamo abazunguye Kayitsinga Emmanuel mbere y’uko Urukiko rwemeza ko ari abana be, rukaba rwemeranya n’umwanzuro warufashwemo. Koko rero, igihe izungura ry’umutungo wasizwe na Kayitsinga Emmanuel ryabaga mu mwaka wa 2000, Uwiduhaye Maurice na 9 “Mais attendu qu'après avoir énoncé que l'article 887 ancien du code civil ne prévoit la rescision du partage que pour cause de violence et de dol ou lorsqu'un des héritiers établit à son préjudice une lésion de plus du quart, la cour d'appel a exactement retenu que l'erreur, par omission d'un héritier tardivement révélé, ne pouvait entraîner la nullité du partage, intervenu de façon définitive entre toutes les personnes ayant la qualité d'héritier avant l'introduction de l'action en recherche de paternité ; que le moyen n'est pas fondé”;
## Page 262
228 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO Uwineza Marie la Douce bari bataremezwa nk’abamukomokaho, bivuga ko bari bataremezwa nk’abazungura be. [58] Urukiko rurasanga rero, Uwiduhaye Maurice na Uwineza Marie la Douce badashobora gusaba ko ibyagabanywe ku wa 17/12/2000 bigaruka mu mutungo wa Kayitsinga Emmanuel kugirango babizungure, bakaba ahubwo bafite uburenganzira bwo kuzungura umutungo wari uhari kuva igihe bemerejwe nk’abakomoka kuri Kayitsinga Emmanuel ku wa 10/11/2006. [59] Urukiko rusanga ababuranyi bemeranywa ko nta mutungo utimukanwa wa Kayitsinga Emmanuel wasigaye utazunguwe ku wa 17/12/2000. Rusanga ariko hari amafaranga 500.000 abarega bavuga ko yavuye mu kibanza cya gatatu bari baregeye, Hakizimana Vincent yari yagurishije uwitwa Kayonga10. Basobanura ko umubyeyi wabo yayatambamiye mu Murenge wa Nyarugunga ari naho akibitse; abaregwa bakaba batarabivuguruje. [60] Urukiko rusanga ayo mafaranga 500.000 cyangwa ikibanza akomokaho bitavugwa mu nyandiko y’izungura ryo ku wa 17/12/2000, bivuga ko atigeze azungurwa, akaba rero agomba guhabwa Uwiduhaye Maurice na Uwineza Marie la Douce. - Umwanzuro rusange [61] Hashingiwe ku ngingo z’amategeko zagaragagajwe no ku bisobanuro byose byatanzwe, Urukiko rurasanga izungura 10 Mu rubanza No RC 0162/13/TGI/NYGE rwaciwe n’Urukiko Rwisumbuye rwa Nyarugenge ku wa 25/10/2013, abarega bavugaga ko ayo mafaranga akomoka ku kibanza Hakizimana Vincent yaburanye n’uwitwa KAYONGA Jean Marie Vianney wari warengereye ku kibanza cya Kayitsinga (reba para 5).
## Page 263
229 UWIDUHAYE N’UNDI v HAKIZIMANA N’ABANDI ryakozwe ku wa 17/12/2000 ritateshwa agaciro kugirango Uwiduhaye Maurice na Uwineza Marie La Douce babe aribo bazungura umutungo wasizwe na Kayitsinga Emmanuel. Rurasanga icyo bafiteho uburenganzira ari 500.000 Frw yafatiriwe mu Murenge wa Nyarugunga, kuko atagaragara mu byazunguwe. B. Ibyerekeye indishyi zisabwa mu rubanza [62] Me NSABAYEZU Evariste na Me NSABIMANA Jean Baptiste bahagarariye abarega, bavuga ko Urukiko nirusanga ibyo Uwiduhaye Maurice na Uwineza Marie la Douce bavuga bifite ishingiro, rwategeka Iraguha Spéçiose na Hakizimana Vincent kubasubiza amafaranga 2.000.000 yishyuwe Avoka, na 500.000 Frw y’ikurikiranarubanza. Ayo mafaranga akiyongera ku yari yatanzwe mu rubanza No RC 0162/13/TGI/NYGE basabye ko imikirize yarwo igumaho. [63] Me Nduwamungu Jean Vianney uharariye Iraguha Spéçiose na Hakizimana Vincent, avuga ko indishyi zisabwa n’abarega zikubiyemo igihembo cy’Avoka ndetse n’amafaranga y’ikurikiranarubanza, nta shingiro zifite. [64] Hakurikijwe ibigaragara muri IECMS, Gasana Callixte wagobokeshejwe mu rubanza, yatanze ikirego kiregera kwiregura, avuga ko ku mpamvu z’uko abarega bakomeza gushora abagobokeshejwe mu manza z’amaherere, basaba ko buri wese yagenerwa amafaranga 2.000.000 yo guteshwa igihe no gusiragizwa mu manza, hakiyongeraho n’amafaranga 500.000 y’igihembo cy’Avoka azasubizwa buri wese. UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA
## Page 264
230 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO [65] Urukiko rurasanga amafaranga y’ikurikiranarubanza n’igihembo cy’Avoka Uwiduhaye Maurice na Uwineza Marie la Douce basaba guhabwa na Iraguha Spéçiose na Hakizimana Vincent batayahabwa, kuko buri wese yagize icyo atsindira mu rubanza. [66] Urukiko rurasanga 2.000.000 Frw yo guteshwa igihe no gusiragizwa mu manza Gasana Callixte asaba abarega mu kirego kiregera kwiregura (demande reconventionnelle) atayahabwa, kuko yagobokeshejwe ku gahato hatagamijwe kumutesha igihe cyangwa kumusiragiza mu manza nk’uko abivuga, ahubwo ari ukugirango arengere inyungu ze mu rubanza. [67] Urukiko rurasanga ariko 500.000 Frw Gasana Callixte asaba y’igihembo cy’Avoka yayahabwa, kuko byabaye ngombwa kwiyambaza Avoka umuhagararira mu rubanza, kandi amafaranga asaba akaba ari mu rugero. Urukiko rurasanga ababuranyi ku mpande zombi bagomba gufatanya kuyamwishyura kuko bose bagize icyo batsindirwa, ni ukuvuga ko Uwiduhaye Maurice na Uwineza Marie la Douce bagomba gufatanya kumwishyura 250.000 Frw, Iraguha Spéçiose na Hakizimana Vincent nabo bagafatanya kumwishyura 250.000 Frw. [68] Ku birebana n’abandi bagobokeshejwe mu rubanza Gasana Callixte asabira amafaranga y’igihembo cy’Avoka, Urukiko rurasanga ntayo bagomba guhabwa kubera ko atigeze agaragaza ko hari ubutumwa bari bamuhaye kugira ngo abatangire ikirego.
## Page 265
231 UWIDUHAYE N’UNDI v HAKIZIMANA N’ABANDI III. ICYEMEZO CY’URUKIKO [69] Rwemeje ko ikirego rwashyikirijwe na Uwiduhaye Maurice na Uwineza Marie la Douce cyo gusubirishamo ku mpamvu z’akarengane urubanza Nº RCA 0637/13/HC/KIG, rwaciwe n’Urukiko Rukuru ku wa 13/05/2014, gifite ishingiro kuri bimwe. [70] Rwemeje ko imikirize y’urubanza Nº RCA 0637/13/HC/KIG, rwaciwe n’Urukiko Rukuru ku wa 13/05/2014, ihindutse kuri bimwe; [71] Rwemeje ko izungura ryakozwe ku wa 17/12/2000 rigumana agaciro karyo; [72] Rwemeje ko nta burenganzira Uwiduhaye Maurice na Uwineza Marie la Douce bafite ku mitungo yazunguwe ku wa 17/12/2000; [73] Rutegetse ko amafaranga ibihumbi magana atanu (500.000) yafatiriwe mu Murenge wa Nyarugunga ahabwa Uwiduhaye Maurice na Uwineza Marie la Douce; [74] Rutegetse Uwiduhaye Maurice na Uwineza Marie la Douce gufatanya kwishyura Gasana Callixte amafaranga ibihumbi magana abiri na mirongo itanu (250.000) y’igihembo cy’Avoka; [75] Rutegetse Iraguha Spéçiose na Hakizimana Vincent gufatanya kwishyura Gasana Callixte amafaranga ibihumbi magana abiri na mirongo itanu (250.000) y’igihembo cy’Avoka.
## Page 266
232 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO
## Page 267
233 Re Dr BARIBWIRA URUBANZA RW’UBUCURUZI
## Page 268
234 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO
## Page 269
235 VINTAGES WINES AND LIQUORS LTD v KARASIRA VINTAGES WINES AND LIQUORS LTD v KARASIRA [Rwanda URUKIKO RW’UBUJURIRE – RCOMAA 00044/2023/CA (Rutazana, P.J.,) 05 Nyakanga 2024] Amategeko agenga imanza z’ubucuruzi – Uburenganzira buhabwa uwatije ingwate – Gutiza ingwate ntibivuze ko uwayitije yiyambuye uburenganzira kuri yo. Amategeko agenga imiburanishirize y’imanza z’ubucuruzi – Kugoboka – Uwatije ingwate aba afite inyungu ze bwite kandi zitaziguye zo kugoboka ku bushake. Amategeko agenga imanza z’ubucuruzi – Igihombo – Uburenganzira bwo gukurikirana umwenda wishingiwe bukomeza gusubikwa iyo mu gihe kitarenze amezi atandatu abarwa guhera urimo umwenda atanze ikirego, urukiko rwemeje gutangiza izahura ry’ubucuruzi. Amategeko agenga imiburanishirize y’imanza z’ubucuruzi – Gutanga ikirego gisaba gutangiza ikurikirana n’irangiza ry’imanza ziturutse ku gihombo, si impamvu yasubika uburenganzira bw’ababerewemo imyenda bishingiwe kimwe n’abafite uburenganzira bw’ifatira, cyeretse uwatanze icyo kirego agaragaje ubushake bwo gutanga gahunda y’izahura. Incamake y’ikibazo: Sosiyete Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd ivuga ko yagiranye na Equity Bank Rwanda Plc amasezerano y’inguzanyo ingana na 180.000.000Frw, maze uwitwa Nzamukosha Sylvie ayitiza ingwate y’inzu ye, iyo ngwate yandikwa mu Bitabo by’Umwanditsi Mukuru muri RDB kugira 235
## Page 270
236 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO ngo izavemo ubwishyu mu gihe Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd izaba itishyuye inguzanyo yahawe. Iyi sosiyete rero ntiyishyuye iyo nguzanyo, bituma Equity Bank Rwanda Plc yandikira Umwanditsi Mukuru muri RDB isaba uburenganzira bwo kugurisha ingwate, irabuhabwa, ariko Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd itanga ikirego mu Rukiko rw’Ubucuruzi isaba gushyirwa mu izahura ry’ubucuruzi, irangiza ry’ibibazo biturutse ku gihombo no gushyiraho umucungamutungo w’agateganyo, inandikira Umwanditsi Mukuru imusaba guhagarika iyo cyamunara. Uru rukiko rwemeza ko ikirego kitakiriwe Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd yajuririye Urukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi, Equity Bank Rwanda Plc nayo yongera kwandikira Umwanditsi Mukuru imusaba uburenganzira bwo kugurisha ingwate, maze igurishwa ku giciro kingana na 320.000.000Frw, yegukanwa na Club House La Palisse Ltd. Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd yatanze ikirego mu Rukiko rw’Ubucuruzi irega uwashinzwe kugirisha ingwate, Me Karasira Colette Ratifa, Equity Bank Rwanda Plc, Club House la Palisse Ltd n’Umwanditsi Mukuru muri RDB isaba ko cyamunara iteshwa agaciro, ivuga ko yagurishijwe mu buryo bunyuranyije n’amategeko. Uru rukiko rwemeje ko cyamunara iteshejwe agaciro. Abaregwa bose bajuririye mu Rukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi bagaragaza ko cyamunara itagombaga guteshwa agaciro kuko yakozwe mu buryo bukurikije amategeko, Club House la Palisse Ltd ivuga ko Urukiko rw’Ubucuruzi rwavugishije amategeko ibyo atavuga naho Equity Bank Rwanda Plc ivuga ko yari ifite uburenganzira ntayegayezwa ku ngwate yahawe, bityo ikaba
## Page 271
237 VINTAGES WINES AND LIQUORS LTD v KARASIRA yaragombaga kugurishwa mu cyamunara. Uru rukiko rwemeje ko ubujurire bufite ishingiro, bityo ko cyamunara igumanye agaciro kayo. Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd yajuririye urwo rubanza mu Rukiko rw’Ubujurire, igamije igaragaza ko Urukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi rwirengagijwe gusuzuma ibiteganyijwe mu Itegeko ryerekeye igihombo ngo rugaragaze niba ibyemejwe mu rubanza rwajuririwe bifite ishingiro cyangwa nta shingiro bifite. Abaregwa mu bujurire bose bavuga ko Nzamukosha Sylvie nta nyungu afite mu rubanza kandi ko impamvu ashingiraho ikirego cye asaba ko cyamunara iteshwa agaciro ari ibirego bishya bidashobora gutangwa bwa mbere ku rwego rw’ubujurire, bityo ko ibyo ari impamvu kutakira ikirego cye. Nzamukosha yiregura avuga ko afite inyungu yemewe n’amategeko, itaziguye kandi ye bwite, yo kugoboka ku bushake muri uru rubanza, kuko rukomoka ku kirego cyatanzwe na Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd isaba gutesha agaciro cyamunara yakozwe hagurishwa umutungo we bwite yayitije ikawutangaho ingwate muri Equity Bank Rwanda Plc, bityo ikirego cye kikaba kigomba kwakirwa. Abaregwa bose bavuga ko impamvu Nzamukosha Sylvie ashingiraho asaba gutesha agaciro cyamunara zitakirwa ngo zisuzumwe kuko ari impamvu nshya zitanzwe bwa mbere ku rwego rw’ubujurire bwa kabiri. Club House la Palisse Ltd yegukanye umutungo uburanwa nayo ivuga ko impamvu Nzamukosha atanga asaba ko cyamunara iteshwa agaciro zitabanje gushyikirizwa Umwanditsi Mukuru
## Page 272
238 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO muri RDB ngo azifateho icyemezo mbere y’uko zigezwa ku Rukiko. Nzamukosha avuga ko imiburanire y’abaregwa nta shingiro ifite kuko itegeko ryemera kugoboka mu rubanza aho rwaba rugeze hose, kandi ibisobanuro ku kirego cye akaba abitanga mu mujyo umwe n’uw’ikirego cy’iremezo cya Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd gisaba gutesha agaciro cyamunara, bityo ibyo asaba bikaba bidakwiriye kwitwa ibirego bishya. Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd yiregura ivuga kandi ko itegeko ryerekeye igihombo riteganya ko iyo igihe cy’amezi atandatu kirangiye urukiko rwaramaze gufata icyemezo ku kirego cy’ubereyemo abandi umwenda gisaba gutangiza gahunda y’izahura, bituma uberewemo umwenda ahita atakaza uburenganzira bwo gusaba icyemezo cyo kugurisha ingwate yahawe, ariko ko mu rubanza rwajuririwe, Urukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi rwemeje ko cyamunara igumaho, rwirengagije ibyateganyijwe n’itegeko, bityo ko isaba urukiko kuvanaho icyemezo cyafashwe cy’uko cyamunara igumana agaciro. Abaregwa bose basaba uru Rukiko kwemeza ko imikirize y’urubanza rwajuririwe igumaho; Club House la Palisse Ltd wegukanye ingwate muri cyamunara ivuga ko mu gihe urukiko rwabibona ukundi, Equity Bank Rwanda Plc yayisubiza amafaranga yishyuye muri cyamunara hiyongereyeho inyungu zayo zibariwe kuri 18%. Incamake y’ icyemezo: 1. Gutiza ingwate ntibivuze ko uwayitije yiyambuye uburenganzira kuri yo. 2.Uwatije ingwate aba afite inyungu ze bwite kandi zitaziguye zo kugoboka ku bushake.
## Page 273
239 VINTAGES WINES AND LIQUORS LTD v KARASIRA 3. Gutanga Ikirego gisaba gutangiza ikurikirana n’irangiza ry’imanza ziturutse ku gihombo, si impamvu yasubika uburenganzira bw’ababerewemo imyenda bishingiwe kimwe n’abafite uburenganzira bw’ifatira, cyeretse uwatanze icyo kirego agaragaje ubushake bwo gutanga gahunda y’izahura. 4.Uburenganzira bwo gukurikirana umwenda wishingiwe bukomeza gusubikwa iyo mu gihe kitarenze amezi atandatu abarwa guhera urimo umwenda atanze ikirego, urukiko rwemeje gutangiza izahura ry’ubucuruzi. Ubujurire nta shingiro; Amagarama y’urubanza ahwanye n’ibyarukozwemo. Amategeko yashingiweho: Itegeko No 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi, ingingo ya 114 niya 154; Itegeko N° 075/2021 ryo ku wa 06/12/2021 ryerekeye igihombo, ingingo ya 12. Nta manza zifashishijwe. Urubanza I. IMITERERE Y’URUBANZA [1] Kuwa 15/05/2019 Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd yagiranye na Equity Bank Rwanda Plc amasezerano y’inguzanyo ingana na 180.000.000Frw, kugira ngo Vintages Wines and
## Page 274
240 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO Liquors Ltd ihabwe iyo inguzanyo, Nzamukosha Sylvie ayitiza ingwate y’inzu ye iri mu kibanza kibaruye kuri UPI: 1/02/13/02/635 giherereye mu Mudugudu wa Kigabiro II, Akagari ka Nyarutarama, Umurenge wa Remera, Akarere ka Gasabo mu Mujyi wa Kigali; iyo ngwate yandikwa mu Bitabo by’Umwanditsi Mukuru muri RDB kugira ngo izavemo ubwishyu mu gihe Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd izaba itishyuye inguzanyo yahawe. [2] Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd ntiyishyuye iyo nguzanyo, bituma Equity Bank Rwanda Plc yandikira Umwanditsi Mukuru muri RDB isaba uburenganzira bwo kugurisha ingwate yavuzwe haruguru, irabuhabwa hanashyirwaho ushinzwe kuyigurisha muri cyamunara witwa Kayumba Godfrey ndetse atangira imirimo ijyanye nabyo ariko ku wa 20/03/2022 Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd itanga ikirego mu Rukiko rw’Ubucuruzi isaba gushyirwa mu izahura ry’ubucuruzi, irangiza ry’ibibazo biturutse ku gihombo no gushyiraho umucungamutungo w’agateganyo, inandikira Umwanditsi Mukuru imusaba guhagarika iyo cyamunara ishingiye kuri icyo kirego, ku wa 31/03/2022 Umwanditsi Mukuru yandikira uwo yari yashinze kugurisha ingwate amusaba guhagarika cyamunara. [3] Mu rubanza RCOM 00438/2022/TC rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ubucuruzi kuwa 02/09/2022 rwemeje ko ikirego cyatanzwe na Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd isaba gushyirwa mu izahura ry’ubucuruzi, irangiza ry’ibibazo biturutse ku gihombo no gushyiraho umucungamutungo w’agateganyo kitakiriwe, kuko itatanze ibisabwa by’ibanze nk’uko biteganywa n’Itegeko N° 075/2021 ryo ku wa 06/12/2021 ryerekeye igihombo. Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd yajuririye Urukiko Rukuru
## Page 275
241 VINTAGES WINES AND LIQUORS LTD v KARASIRA rw’Ubucuruzi, Equity Bank Rwanda Plc nayo yongera kwandikira Umwanditsi Mukuru imusaba uburenganzira bwo kugurisha ingwate yavuzwe haruguru yahawe na Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd, kuwa 26/04/2023 Umwanditsi Mukuru atanga ubwo burenganzira anashyiraho Me Karasira Colette Ratifa nk’ushinzwe kugurisha iyo ngwate mu cyamunara, ayigurisha ku wa 15/06/2023 ku giciro kingana na 320.000.000Frw, yegukanwa na Club House La Palisse Ltd. [4] Hagati aho, urubanza RCOMA 00617/2022/HC ku bujurire bwavuzwe haruguru bwakozwe na Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd ku kirego gisaba itangizwa ry’izahura ry’ubucuruzi rwaciwe n’Urukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi ku wa 19/01/2024, rwemeza ko ubujurire bwayo nta shingiro bufite. [5] Ku wa 16/06/2023 Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd yandikiye Umwanditsi Mukuru imusaba gusesa cyamunara y’ingwate yahaye Equity Bank Rwanda Plc yakozwe kuwa 15/06/2023, ishingiye ku mpamvu y’uko Me Karasira Colette Ratifa washinzwe kuyigurisha yatangije imihango ya cyamunara kandi hari ikirego Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd yari yaratanze isaba gushyirwa mu izahura ry’ubucuruzi, irangiza ry’ibibazo biturutse ku gihombo no gushyiraho umucungamutungo w’agateganyo ngo kandi icyo gihe urubanza rwari rutaracibwa ngo rube itegeko; ku wa 06/07/2023 Umwanditsi Mukuru amusubiza ko ntacyo yagaragarijwe yashingiraho asesa cyamunara. [6] Ku wa 22/06/2023 Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd yatanze ikirego mu Rukiko rw’Ubucuruzi irega uwashinzwe kugirisha ingwate, Me Karasira Colette Ratifa, Equity Bank Rwanda Plc, Club House la Palisse Ltd n’Umwanditsi Mukuru
## Page 276
242 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO muri RDB; isaba ko cyamunara yavuzwe haruguru iteshwa agaciro, ishingiye ku mpamvu zikurikira: -Kuba yarakozwe hirengagijwe ko mu Rukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi hari hakiri urubanza RCOMA 00617/2022/HCC rushingiye ku kirego gisaba gushyirwa mu izahura ry’ubucuruzi, rwari rutaracibwa ngo rube itegeko kuko rwari ruteganyijwe kuzaburanishwa ku wa 19/10/2023; -Kuba cyamunara yarakozwe mu buryo bunyuranyije n’amategeko agenga ifatira, ishinganisha n’itangazwa ryayo; -Kuba ingwate yaragurishijwe ku gaciro katari akayo. [7] Uwashinzwe kugurisha ingwate, Me Karasira Colette Ratifa, yireguye avuga ko cyamanura yakozwe mu buryo bukurikije amategeko kuko yatangajwe mu buryo bw’ikoranabuhanga ku rubuga rw’imanza zirangizwa, inatangazwa mu kinyamakuru IGIHE ndetse no kuri Radio Isango star, kandi amatangazo yayo amanikwa ku Biro by’Akagari ka Nyarutarama umutungo uherereyemo. [8] Equity Bank Rwanda Plc nayo yireguye ivuga ko cyamunara yakozwe mu buryo bukurikije amategeko kuko gufatira umutungo, gutangaza cyamunara no kuwugurisha byakozwe mu buryo bukurikije amategeko, kandi Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd ikaba yariyambuye nkana uburenganzira yemererwa n’itegeko ry’izahura bwo gusaba kongererwa igihe mu gihe urubanza rurengeje amezi atandatu mu nkiko rutaraba ndakuka; bityo kuba hari urubanza rwerekeranye n’izahura rwajuririwe rwari rutaracibwa ngo rube itegeko, bikaba bitari kubuza Equity Bank Rwanda Plc kugurisha ingwate.
## Page 277
243 VINTAGES WINES AND LIQUORS LTD v KARASIRA [9] Club House la Palisse Ltd nayo yireguye ivuga ko cyamunara yakozwe mu buryo no mu nzira bikurikije amategeko, kandi ko nyuma y’uko iguze uwo mutungo yawiyandikishijeho bityo cyamunara ikaba ikwiriye kugumana agaciro; ko ariko mu gihe Urukiko rwasanga ikwiye guteshwa agaciro, Equity Bank Rwanda Plc yategekwa gusubiza Club House la Palisse Ltd amafaranga yishyuye mu cyamunara n’inyungu zayo. [10] Umwanditsi Mukuru ntiyireguye kuko urubanza rwaburanishijwe atitabye Urukiko ariko yaramenyeshejwe umunsi w’iburanisha mu buryo bukurikije amatgeko. [11] Mu rubanza RCOM 01117/2023/TC rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ubucuruzi ku wa 18/07/2023, rwategetse ko cyamunara yakozwe kuwa 15/06/2023 ku mutungo wavuzwe haruguru ubaruye kuri UPI 1/02/13/02/635 iteshejwe agaciro kuko yakozwe kandi hari urubanza rutaracibwa ku kirego Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd yatanze isaba itangizwa ry’izahura ry’ubucuruzi no gushyiraho umucungamutungo w’agateganyo; rutegeka Equity Bank Rwanda Plc gusubiza Club House la Palisse Ltd 320.000.000 Frw yishyuye igura muri cyamunara umutungo wavuzwe haruguru, no gufatanya na Me Karasira Colette Ratifa gusubiza mu buryo bungana Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd 500.000 Frw y’igihembo cya Avoka, 200.000 Frw y’ikurikiranarubanza na 20.000 Frw y’ingwate y’amagarama y’urubanza. [12] Abaregwa bose bajuririye urwo rubanza mu Rukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi bagamije kugaragaza ko cyamunara itagombaga guteshwa agaciro. Muri make Me Karasira Colette Ratifa avuga ko yakozwe mu buryo bukurikije amategeko, Club House la Palisse Ltd ivuga ko Urukiko rw’Ubucuruzi rwavugishije amategeko ibyo atavuga naho Equity Bank Rwanda
## Page 278
244 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO Plc ivuga ko yari ifite uburenganzira ntayegayezwa ku ngwate yahawe, bityo ikaba yaragombaga kugurishwa mu cyamunara. [13] Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd yireguye ivuga ko nta kosa Urukiko rw’Ubucuruzi rwakoze mu kwemeza ko cyamunara iteshwa agaciro, kuko yakozwe hirengagijwe ko yatanze ikirego isaba gushyirwa mu izahura ry’ubucuruzi, irangiza ry’ibibazo biturutse ku gihombo no gushyiraho umucungamutungo w’agateganyo; naho ku bireba impamvu z’ubujurire zatanzwe na Equity Bank Rwanda Plc uhagarariye Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd avuga ko zitagomba kwakirwa kuko zatanzwe impitagihe. [14] Mu rubanza RCOMA 00374/2023/HCC & CMB RCOMA 00376/2023/HCC rwaciwe n’Urukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi ku wa 01/09/2023, rwemeje ko ubujurire bwa Club House la Palisse Ltd , ubwa Me Karasira Colette Raftifa n‘ubwa Equity Bank Rwanda Plc bufite ishingiro, rutegeka ko cyamunara yavuzwe haruguru yakozwe kuwa 15/06/2023 ku mutungo wa Nzamukosha Sylvie ubaruye kuri UPI1/02/13/02/635 Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd yatanzeho ingwate muri Equity Bank Rwanda Plc igumanye agaciro; rutegeka Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd kwishyura Club House la Palisse Ltd, Me Karasira Colette Raftifa na Equity Bank Rwanda Plc 1.200.000 Frw y’indishyi z’ikurikiranarubanza n’igihembo cya Avoka na 40.000 Frw y’amagarama buri wese. [15] Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd yajuririye urwo rubanza mu Rukiko rw’Ubujurire, igamije kugaragaza ko Urukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi rwirengagijwe gusuzuma ibiteganyijwe mu gika cya 5 cy’ingingo 12 y’Itegeko N° 075/2021 ryo ku wa 06/12/2021 ryerekeye igihombo ngo rugaragaze niba ibyemejwe mu rubanza rwajuririwe bifite ishingiro cyangwa nta shingiro
## Page 279
245 VINTAGES WINES AND LIQUORS LTD v KARASIRA bifite, kandi ari cyo kibazo cyagombaga gusuzumwa, ahubwo rusuzuma ibitararegewe bitanagiweho impaka mu rubanza, bituma rugera ku mwanzuro utari wo; bagasaba ko urubanza rwajuririwe ruvanwaho mu ngingo zarwo zose. [16] Abaregwa bose bireguye bavuga ko ubujurire bwa Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd nta shingiro bufite. Me Karasira Colette Ratifa n’umwunganira basobanura ko uwajuriye ntacyo agaragaza kivuguruza ibyashingiweho n’Urukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi uretse gusobanura ingingo y’amategeko kandi Urukiko rwarayisobanuye mu rubanza rwajuririwe, bakaba bemeranya n’ibisobanuro rwatanze; abahagarariye Equity Bank Rwanda Plc bo basobanura ko ibiteganyijwe mu gika cya 5 cy’ingingo ya 12 yavuzwe haruguru byasuzumwe. Urukiko rugera ku mwanzuro w’uko nta cyari kubuza ko ingwate igurishwa; abahagarariye Club House la Palisse Ltd basobanura ko uwajuriye atagaragaza ko cyamunara yakozwe mu buryo bunyuranyije n’amategeko n’amakosa Club House la Palisse Ltd yakoze, akaba kandi yirengagiza ibivugwa mu gika cya 4 n’icya 5 by’ingingo ya 12 yavuzwe haruguru, ndetse ko n’ikirego cy’izahura yitwaza cyateshejwe agaciro; bavuga ko ariko Urukiko rubibonye ukundi Club House la Palisse Ltd yasubizwa amafaranga yishyuye mu cyamunara, ikanishyurwa inyungu zayo zingana na 18% n‘indishyi zinyuranye. [17] Kuri uru rwego kandi uwitwa Nzamukosha Sylvie yagobotse ku bushake mu rubanza avuga ko arufitemo inyungu ngo kuko umutungo wagurishijwe mu cyamunara ari uwe yatije Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd, asaba ko iteshwa agaciro ashingiye ku kuba imihango ijyanye no kwishyura ingwate y’ipiganwa, kwishyura uberewemo umwenda no gusubiza
## Page 280
246 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO nyir’umutungo watanzweho ingwate amafaranga yasagutse muri cyamunara, byarakozwe mu buryo bunyuranyije n’amategeko. [18] Abaregwa mu bujurire bose bavuga ko Nzamukosha Sylvie nta nyungu afite mu rubanza kandi ko impamvu ashingiraho ikirego cye asaba ko cyamunara iteshwa agaciro ari ibirego bishya bidashobora gutangwa bwa mbere ku rwego rw’ubujurire, bagasaba ko ikirego cye kitakirwa. Abahagarariye Club House la Palisse Ltd bakongeraho ko no kuba izo mpamvu ashingiraho ikirego cye zitarabanje gushyikirizwa Umwanditsi Mukuru muri RDB mbere yo kuziregera mu Rukiko ari indi mpamvu ituma ikirego cye kitagomba kwakirwa kuri uru rwego. [19] Iburanisha mu ruhame ryabaye ku wa 13/05/2024 Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd ihagarariwe na Me Micomyiza Liliane na Me Rugwizangonga Marcellin, ari nabo bahagarariye Nzamukosha Sylvie, uwashinzwe kugurisha ingwate Me Karasira Colette Ratifa, ahagarariwe na Me Murekatete Henriette, Club House la Palisse Ltd ihagarariwe na Me Sebukonoke Innocent na Me Kayitare Jean Pierre, Equity Bank Rwanda Plc ihagarariwe na Me Muhiganwa Damas, Umwanditsi Mukuru muri RDB atitabye ariko yaramenyeshejwe umunsi w’iburanisha mu buryo bukurikije amategeko, iburanisha rirapfundikirwa isomwa ryarwo rishyirwa ku wa 29/05/2024; mu gihe Urukiko rwasuzumaga urubanza mu mwiherero rusanga mbere yo gufata icyemezo cya burundu ari ngombwa gupfundura iburanisha kugira ngo ababuranyi bagire ibisobanuro batanga ku nyandiko zashyizwe muri dosiye nyuma y’uko iburanisha ripfundikiwe, rutegeka ko iburanisha ry’uru rubanza rizapfundurwa kuwa 10/06/2024; kuri uwo munsi ababuranyi bitaba Urukiko bahagararaiwe mu buryo bumwe n’ubwavuzwe haruguru, uretse Equity Bank Rwanda Plc yari ihagagariwe na
## Page 281
247 VINTAGES WINES AND LIQUORS LTD v KARASIRA Me Murindabigwi Mariam naho Club House la Palisse Ltd ihagarariwe na Me Sebukonoke Innocent gusa. [20] Hashingiwe ku mpaka zagaragajwe haruguru, Urukiko rugomba gusuzuma ibibazo bikurikira bigize urubanza: - Kumenya niba Nzamukosha Sylvie nta nyungu afite yo gutanga ikirego gisaba kugobokamo ku bushake muri uru rubanza; - Kumenya niba impamvu Nzamukosha Sylvie ashingiraho asaba ko cyamunara iteshwa agaciro ari ibirego bishya bidashobora gutangwa bwa mbere ku rwego rw’ubujurire; - Kumenya niba izo mpamvu zifite ishingiro, mu gihe zaba zakiriwe; - Kumenya niba Urukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi rwarakoze ikosa ryo kwemeza ko cyamunara igumaho, rwirengagije ko icyemezo ku kirego gisaba gushyirwa mu izahura cyafashwe igihe cy’amezo 6 giteganyijwe mu ngingo ya 12, igika cya 5, y’Itegeko N° 075/2021 ryo ku wa 06/12/2021 ryerekeye igihombo kitarashira; - Kumenya niba amafaranga y‘’ikurikiranarubanza n’ay’igihembo cya Avoka asabwa muri uru rubanza afite ishingiro.
## Page 282
248 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO II. ISESENGURA RY’IBIBAZO BIGIZE URUBANZA 1. Kumemya niba Nzamukosha Sylvie nta nyungu afite yo gutanga ikirego gisaba kugobokamo ku bushake muri uru rubanza [21] Muri rusange, abahagarariye abaregwa bose bavuga Nzamukosha Sylvie nta nyungu afite yo gutanga ikirego gisaba kugoboka ku bushake muri uru rubanza, bagasaba ko kitakirwa. Uhagarariye Me Karasira Ratifa Colette asobanura ko Nzamukosha Sylvie nta nyungu itaziguye afite muri uru rubanza kuko ubwo yatizaga Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd umutungo we ngo iwutangeho ingwate yari yemeye ingaruka zabyo zose, akaba kandi atabasha kugaragaza aho we ubwe atandukaniye na Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd; uhagarariye Equity Bank Rwanda Plc nawe asobanura ko Nzamukosha Sylvie yiyambuye inyungu itaziguye igihe yatizaga Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd ingwate; naho abahagarariye Club House la Palisse Ltd bakavuga Nzamukosha Sylvie yamenye ko umutungo we ugiye kugurishwa mu cyamunara, akaba rero yagombaga kuyitambamira cyangwa gusaba ko ivaho mu buryo bukurikije amategeko. [22] Abahagarariye Nzamukosha Sylvie bavuga ko afite inyungu yemewe n’amategeko, itaziguye kandi ye bwite, yo kugoboka ku bushake muri uru rubanza, kuko rukomoka ku kirego cyatanzwe na Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd isaba gutesha agaciro cyamunara yakozwe hagurishwa umutungo we bwite yayitije ikawutangaho ingwate muri Equity Bank Rwanda Plc, bityo ikirego cye kikaba kigomba kwakirwa hashingiwe ku ngingo ya 114, igika cya kabiri, y’Itegeko No 22/2018 ryo ku wa
## Page 283
249 VINTAGES WINES AND LIQUORS LTD v KARASIRA 29/04/2018 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi. UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [23] Ingingo ya 114 y’Itegeko No 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi iteganya ibijyanye no kugoboka ku bushake, igira iti: “Ushaka kuburana mu rubanza ataregeye cyangwa atarezwemo abikora mu buryo bwo kuregera inkiko kandi agatanga ingwate y’amagarama. Kugira ngo ikirego cye cyakirwe, ugoboka ku bushake agomba kugaragaza inyungu yemewe n’amategeko, itaziguye kandi ye bwite.” [24] Ibijyanye n’inyungu urega agomba kuba afite mu rubanza byasobanuwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga mu rubanza RC 0002/16/CS rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga ku wa 27/01/2017, aho mu gika cya 19 cyarwo, Urukiko rushingiye ku nyandiko z’abahanga mu mategeko, rwasobanuye ko inyungu urega agomba kuba afite kugira ngo ikirego cye cyakirwe, ari itaziguye (direct) kandi bwite (personnel), ku buryo rero urega abyemererwa gusa, ari uko inyungu zibangamiwe ari ize bwite, kandi n’icyemezo cyazafatwa n’Urukiko ari we ubwe cyagirira akamaro. [25] Ku birebana n’uru rubanza, dosiye yarwo igaragaza ko rukomoka ku kirego cyatanzwe na Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd isaba gutesha agaciro cyamunara yakozwe kuwa 15/06/2023 ku mutungo wa Nzamukosha Sylvie ubaruye kuri UPI 1/02/13/02/635, uherereye mu kibanza kiri mu Mudugudu wa Kigabiro II, Akagari ka Nyarutarama, Umurenge wa Remera,
## Page 284
250 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO Akarere ka Gasabo, Umujyi wa Kigali, watanzweho ingwate na Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd [26] Kuba kandi uwo mutungo wari uwa Nzamukosha Sylvie mbere y’uko cyamunara ikorwa bishimangirwa n’Amasezerano y’Ubukode burambye ari muri dosiye, agaragaza ko wari umwanditseho, kandi ko ubukode bwawo burambye bwari bwaratangiye ku wa 30/03/2017 bukaba bwaragombaga kurangira ku wa 05/04/2037; no kuba uwo mutungo yarawutije Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd kugira ngo iwutangeho ingwate hishingirwa inguzanyo iyo sosiyete y’ubucuruzi yahawe na Equity Bank Rwanda Plc bishimangirwa n’amasezerano y’inguzanyo yakozwe hagati y’impande zombi, muri ayo masezerano hakaba nta havugwa ko Nzamukosha Sylvie nta burenganzira agifite kuri uwo mutungo, hakaba nta n’ikindi Urukiko rwagaragarijwe cyerekana ko yiyambuye ubureganzira kuri uwo mutungo. [27] Urukiko rurasanga abaregwa kuri uru rwego rw’ubujurire nta kimenyetso batanze kivuguruza ibimaze kugaragazwa haruguru, bityo ibyo bavuga ko Nzamukosha Sylvie yiyambuye inyungu itaziguye kuri uwo mutungo ubwo yawutizaga Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd bikaba nta shingiro bifite kuko ntacyo bagaragaza babishingiraho. [28] Urukiko rurasanga kandi mu rwego rw’amategeko Nzamukosha Sylvie (personne physique) na Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd (personne morale) ari abantu babiri batandukanye, bityo hashingiwe ku bisobanuro byatanzwe mu bika bibanziriza iki, akaba afite inyungu bwite kandi itaziguye yo kugoboka ku bushake muri uru rubanza rwerekeye cyamunara y’umutungo we yatije Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd kuko byumvikana ko hari inyungu ze bwite zibangamiwe, kandi akaba atarabaye
## Page 285
251 VINTAGES WINES AND LIQUORS LTD v KARASIRA umuburanyi muri uru rubanza ku rwego rwa mbere no ku rwego rw‘ubujurire. Hashingiwe kuri ibyo bisobanuro byose, ibyo abaregwa bavuga ko adafite inyungu yo kugoboka ku bushake muri uru rubanza bikaba nta shingiro bifite. 2. Ku bijyanye no kumenya niba impamvu Nzamukosha Sylvie ashingiraho asaba ko cyamunara iteshwa agaciro ari ibirego bishya bidashobora gutangwa bwa mbere ku rwego rw’ubujurire [29] Abahagarariye abaregwa bahuriza ku gusaba ko impamvu Nzamukosha Sylvie ashingiraho asaba gutesha agaciro cyamunara zitakirwa ngo zisuzumwe kuko ari impamvu nshya zitanzwe bwa mbere ku rwego rw’ubujurire bwa kabiri. Basobanura ko ku rwego rwa mbere Urukiko rw’Ubucuruzi rwemeje ko cyamunara iteshwa agaciro rushingiye gusa ku mpamvu imwe y’uko yakozwe hirengagijwe ko hari urubanza Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd yarezemo isaba gushyirwa mu izahura rwari rutaracibwa, iyo mpamvu iba ari nayo yonyine ijuririrwa inasuzumwa mu Rukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi, rwemeza ko cyamunara itagombaga guteshwa agaciro, Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd ijuririra uru Rukiko nanone kuri iyo mpamvu yonyine; ko rero impamvu Nzamukosha Sylvie ashingiraho ikirego cye kuri uru rwego zitaburanyweho haba ku rwego rwa mbere haba no ku rwego rw’ubujurire, zikaba kandi nta nenge zigaragaza yakozwe mu rubanza rujuririrwa asaba ko ikosorwa, bityo izo mpamvu zikaba zidakwiye kwakirwa ngo zisuzumwe kuko ari ibirego bishya, hashingiwe ku ngingo ya 154 y’Itegeko No 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi iteganya ko ibirego bishya bibujijwe ku rwego rw’ubujurire, n’ingingo ya 155 nayo y’iryo tegeko
## Page 286
252 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO iteganya ko urukiko rwajuririwe ruburanisha mu mbibi z’icyajuririwe. [30] Abahagarariye Club House la Palisse Ltd banongeraho ko izo mpamvu zitabanje gushyikirizwa Umwanditsi Mukuru muri RDB ngo azifateho icyemezo mbere y’uko zigezwa ku Rukiko, hashingiwe ku biteganywa mu ngingo ya 260, igika cya 6, y’Itegeko ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi n’iz’ubutegetsi. [31] Abahagarariye Nzamukosha Sylvie bavuga ko imiburanire y’abaregwa nta shingiro ifite kuko itegeko ryemera kugoboka mu rubanza aho rwaba rugeze hose, kandi ibisobanuro ku kirego cye akaba abitanga mu mujyo umwe n’uw’ikirego cy’iremezo cya Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd gisaba gutesha agaciro cyamunara, bityo ibyo asaba bikaba bidakwiriye kwitwa ibirego bishya. Bavuga kandi ko n’ibimenyetso ashingiraho byabonetse nyuma y’uko atanze ikirego kandi bikaba bidahindura ikirego cy’iremezo ahubwo bicyuzuza cyangwa bigishimangira, ko rero nabyo bitakwitwa ibirego bishya kuko nabyo icyo bigamije ari ugutesha agaciro cyamunara. UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [32] Ingingo ya 154, igika cya mbere, y’Itegeko No 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryavuzwe haruguru, igira iti: “Mu rwego rw’ubujurire ntihashobora gutangirwa ikirego gishya keretse kuregera guhwanya imyenda, cyangwa gutanga ikirego cyo kwiregura ku kirego cy’ibanze cyatanzwe mu rukiko rw’ubujurire” ; naho ingingo ya 156 nayo y’iryo tegeko igateganya ko Urukiko rw’ubujurire ruburanisha gusa mu mbibi z’icyajuririwe.
## Page 287
253 VINTAGES WINES AND LIQUORS LTD v KARASIRA [33] Ku birebana n’uru urubanza, dosiye yarwo igaragaza ko mu Rukiko rw’Ubucuruzi Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd yatanze ikirego isaba gutesha agaciro cyamunara ishingiye ku mpamvu zikurikira: kuba yarakozwe hirengagijwe ko hari urubanza rushingiye ku kirego gisaba gushyirwa mu izahura ry’ubucuruzi rwari rutaracibwa ngo rube itegeko; kuba yarakozwe mu buryo bunyuranyije n’agenga ifatira, ishinganisha n’itangazwa ryayo no kuba ingwate yaragurishijwe ku gaciro katari akayo; mu guca urubanza Urukiko rw’Ubucuruzi rwemeza ko cyamunara iteshejwe agaciro ku mpamvu ya mbere (y’uko yakozwe hirengagijwe ko hari urubanza rushingiye ku kirego gisaba gushyirwa mu izahura ry’ubucuruzi rwari rutaracibwa ngo rube itegeko) naho izindi mpamvu ruvuga ko nta shingiro zifite; Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd yemeye imikirize y’urubanza ntiyajurira, ahubwo hajurira abaregwaga kuri iyo mpamvu yonyine, iba ari nayo ijuririrwa na Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd muri uru Rukiko, bivuze ko icyo ari cyo kibazo gisigaye hagati y’ababuranyi (Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd n’abo yareze) kuri uru rwego rw’ubujurire. Nzamukosha Sylvie we yagobotse mu rubanza kuri uru rwego asaba ko cyamunara iteshwa agaciro ashingiye ku mpamvu zikurikira: kuba imihango ijyanye no kwishyura ingwate y’ipiganwa, kwishyura amafaranga ya cyamunara no gusubiza nyir’umutungo watanzweho ingwate ayasagutse byarakozwe mu buryo bunyuranyije n’amategeko. [34] Urukiko rurasanga impamvu Nzamukosha Sylvie ashingiraho ikirego cye ari impamvu nshya zidafite aho zihuriye n’izo Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd yashingiyeho itanga ikirego ku rwego rwa mbere, (n’ubwo bombi basaba gutesha agaciro cyamunara); zikaba kandi zinatandukanye n’impamvu yaburanyweho mu Rukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi inajuririrwa na
## Page 288
254 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd muri uru Rukiko; bityo ibyo Nzamukosha Sylvie avuga ko ikirego cye cyuzuza kandi kigashimangira icya Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd bikaba nta shingiro bifite; uru rukiko rukaba ntaho rwahera ruzisuzuma kuko byaba binyuranyije n’ibiteganywa mu ngingo ya 154 n’iya 156 zavuzwe haruguru ziteganya ko ku rwego rw’ubujurire hatemerwa ibirego bishya kandi ko urubanza ruburanishwa mu mbibi z’icyajuririwe. [35] Urukiko rushingiye ku bimaze gusobanurwa haruguru rurasanga atari ngombwa gusuzuma ibijyanye no kuba impamvu Nzamukosha Sylvie ashingiraho ikirego cye atarabanje kuzishyikiriza Umwanditsi Mukuru muri RDB, kimwe n’ibijyanye n’ishingiro ryazo, mu gihe rwasanze ari ibirego bishya bitemewe ku rwego rw’ubujurire. 3. Kumenya niba Urukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi rwarakoze ikosa ryo kwemeza ko cyamunara y’ingwate yatanzwe na Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd igumaho, rwirengagije ko icyemezo ku kirego cyayo gisaba gutangiza gahunda y’izahura cyafashwe igihe cy’amezi 6 giteganywa n’itegeko kitarashira [36] Abahagarariye Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd bavuga ko ingingo ya 12, igika cya 5, y’Itegeko N° 075/2021 ryo ku wa 06/12/2021 ryerekeye igihombo iteganya ko iyo igihe cy’amezi atandatu kirangiye urukiko rwaramaze gufata icyemezo ku kirego cy’ubereyemo abandi umwenda gisaba gutangiza gahunda y’izahura, bituma uberewemo umwenda ahita atakaza uburenganzira bwo gusaba icyemezo cyo kugurisha ingwate yahawe, kandi ko ibi ari nako Urukiko rw’Ubucuruzi rwabibonye mu rubanza RCOM 01117/2023/TC kuko rwemeje ko cyamunara y’ingwate yatazwe na Vintages Wines and Liquors
## Page 289
255 VINTAGES WINES AND LIQUORS LTD v KARASIRA Ltd iteshwa agaciro rushingiye ku mpamvu y‘uko ikirego yatanze isaba gushyirwa mu izahura cyafashweho icyemezo n’Urukiko igihe cy’amezi atadantu giteganywa n’ingingo ya 12 yavuzwe haruguru kitarashira; nyamara mu rubanza rwajuririwe Urukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi rukaba rwaremeje ko cyamunara igumaho rudasuzumye ibiteganyijwe muri iyo ngigo ya 12 yavuzwe haruguru ngo rugaragaze niba ibyemejwe n’Urukiko rw’Ubucuruzi nta shingiro bifite kandi aricyo kibazo cyagombaga gusuzumwa. [37] Bakomeza basobanura ko ahubwo Urukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi rwasuzumye ibitararegewe bitanagiweho impaka n’ababuranyi mu rubanza, bijyanye n’ikirego gisaba gushyirwa mu izahura, no mu gika cya 40 cy’urubanza rwajuririwe rutanga umurongo uhabanye n’ibiteganyijwe mu ngingo ya 12 yavuzwe haruguru, aho rwavuze ko izahura ridatangizwa n‘ikirego cyatanzwe mu Rukiko, ko ahubwo ritangizwa n’umucamanza yemeza ko hari gahunda ifatika ishobora gutuma ibintu bisubira mu buryo. [38] Abahagarariye Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd bashingira kuri ibyo bisobanuro bagasaba uru Rukiko gukosora ibyo bavuga ko ari amakosa yakozwe n’Urukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi, rugasesengura ibiteganywa n’ingingo ya 12, yavuzwe haruguru kandi rukavanaho icyemezo cyafashwe cy’uko cyamunara igumana agaciro. [39] Abahagarariye abaregwa bose bahuriza ku kuvuga ko ubujurire bwa Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd nta shingiro bufite kuko Urukiko Rukuru w’Ubucuruzi rwasuzumye ibiteganyijwe mu ngingo ya 12 yavuzwe haruguru, kandi hashingiwe ku byo rwasobanuye mu rubanza rwajuririwe rukaba nta kosa rwakoze mu kwemeza ko cyamunara igomba
## Page 290
256 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO kugumaho; ko ahubwo Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd ariyo isobanura iyo ngingo uko itari, yirengagije ko iyo igihe cy’amezi 6 kiyivugwamo gishize nta rukiko rwemeje ko hari gahunda ifatika yatuma hatangizwa izahura, biha uwari uberewemo umwenda uburenganzira bwo kwishyurwa; ko rero nta mpamvu n’imwe yari gutuma cyamunara iteshwa agaciro; abahagarariye Equity Bank Rwanda Plc na Club House la Palisse Ltd bongeraho ko kuba cyamunara itaragombaga guteshwa agaciro bishimangirwa no kuba ubu Urukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi narwo rwaramaze gufata icyemezo cyo kutakira ikirego cya Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd gisaba kwemeza ko hatangizwa gahunda y’izahura. [40] Abaregwa bose basaba uru Rukiko kwemeza ko imikirize y’urubanza rwajuririwe igumaho; uhagarariye Club House la Palisse Ltd we yongeraho ko mu gihe urukiko rwabibona ukundi, Equity Bank Rwanda Plc yayisubiza amafaranga yishyuye muri cyamunara hiyongereyeho inyungu zayo zibariwe kuri 18%. UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [41] Impaka hagati y’ababuranyi kuri iyi ngingo zigaragaza ko ipfundo ry’ikibazo rishingiye ku kumenya niba icyemezo cyo gutesha agaciro cyamunara y’umutungo Equity Bank Rwanda Plc yahaweho ingwate cyaragombaga kugumaho hashingiwe ku mpamvu y’uko yakozwe mu gihe ikurikirana ry’imyenda Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd ibereyemo abandi, harimo na Equity Bank Rwanda Plc, ryari ryarasubitswe kuko ikirego Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd yatanze isaba gutangiza gahunda y’izahura cyafashweho icyemezo n’Urukiko igihe cy’amezi 6 giteganywa mu ngingo ya 12, igika cya 5, y’Itegeko
## Page 291
257 VINTAGES WINES AND LIQUORS LTD v KARASIRA N° 075/2021 ryo ku wa 06/12/2021 ryerekeye igihombo kitarashira. [42] Ingingo ya 12 y’Itegeko N° 075/2021 ryo ku wa 06/12/2021 ryerekeye igihombo, iteganya ibijyanye n’isubika ryo gukurikirana umwenda ufite ingwate, igira iti: - “Uburenganzira bw’ababerewemo imyenda bishingiwe kimwe n’abafite uburenganzira bw’ifatira ntibusubikwa n’itangiza ry’urubanza rw’ikurikirana n’irangiza ry’imanza ziturutse ku gihombo. - Ariko iyo urimo umwenda agaragaje ko afite ubushake bwo gutanga gahunda y’izahura hamwe n'ikirego cye, imyenda yose harimo n’imyenda ifite ingwate hamwe n’uburenganzira bw’ifatira birasubikwa uhereye ku munsi w’ubusabe. - -Urimo umwenda agomba gutanga gahunda y’izahura mu rukiko mu gihe kitarenze amezi atatu (3) uhereye ku itariki yo gutangiza urubanza. - -Igihe cy’isubika gitangwa ntigishobora kurenza amezi atandatu (6) harimo n’amezi atatu (3) yo gutanga gahunda y’izahura. - -Iyo igihe kivugwa mu gika cya 4 cy’iyi ngingo kirangiye urukiko rutarafata icyemezo ku busabe, uberewemo umwenda wishingiwe ahita agira uburenganzira ku ngwate hakurikijwe amategeko abigenga. - -Uberewemo umwenda ashobora gusaba ko yakurirwaho isubikwa mu gihe agaragaje impamvu yumvikana.”
## Page 292
258 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO - Urukiko rurasanga isesengura ry’iyi ngingo ryumvikanisha iby’ingenzi bikurikira ku birebana n’isubika ryo gukurikirana umwenda ufite ingwate: - -Kuba ihame ari uko iyo ubereyemo abandi imyenda atanze ikirego gitangiza urubanza rw’ikurikirana n’irangiza ry’imanza ziturutse ku gihombo, bidasubika uburenganzira bw’ababerewemo imyenda bishingiwe kimwe n’abafite uburenganzira bw’ifatira; - -Kuba habaho irengayobora (exception) iyo urimo umwenda agaragaje ko afite ubushake bwo gutanga gahunda y’izahura ry’ubucuruzi bwe hamwe n'ikirego cyavuzwe haruguru, uburenganzira bw’ababerewemo imyenda bwavuzwe haruguru bugasubikwa; - -Kuba, ku ruhande rumwe iryo subika riba rigamije guha urimo umwenda amahirwe yo gutegereza icyemezo cy’urukiko ku busabe bwe kugira ngo rusuzume niba gahunda yo kuzahura ubucuruzi bwe ishoboka ku buryo yakomeza kwishyura imyenda ye bitabaye ngombwa ko ingwate yatanze zigurishwa; - -Kuba, no ku rundi ruhande, iyi ngingo idateganya ko uburenganzira bw’uberewemo umwenda wishingiwe busubikwa kugeza igihe urubanza ruzacibwa ku rwego rwa nyuma hagafatwa icyemezo ndakuka ku kirego cyavuzwe haruguru; ko ahubwo iteganya igihe cy‘amezi atandatu isubika ridashobora kurenza, icyo gihe cyarenga nta cyemezo kirafatwa n’Urukiko ku busabe bwe, uberewemo umwenda wishingiwe ntakomeze gutegereza, ahubwo agahita asubirana ubureganzira bwe bwo kwegukana ingwate;
## Page 293
259 VINTAGES WINES AND LIQUORS LTD v KARASIRA - Hagendewe ku kuba isubika ry‘uburenganzira bwo gukurikirana umwenda wishingiwe riba ryakozwe mu buryo bw’irengayobora ku mpamvu y’uko urimo umwenda yagaragaje ko afite ubushake bwo kuzahura ubucuruzi bwe ku buryo iryo zahura rishobotse yakwishyura imyenda ye bitabaye ngombwa ko ingwate yatanze zigurishwa, byumvikanisha ko mu guteganya ko iyo hashize amezi atandatu urukiko rutarafata icyemezo uberewemo umwenda ahita asubirana uburenganzira bwo kwegukana ingwate, icyo Umushingamategeko yari agamije ari uko isubika ry‘uburenganzira bw’uberewemo umwenda wishingiwe rigira igihe rirangirira, ntategereze igihe kirekire hashingiwe gusa ku kirego cyatanzwe n’urimo umwenda, nta cyemezo cy’urukiko ku bijyanye no gutangiza izahura; mu yandi magambo, ni ukugira ngo igihe cy’amezi atandatu nikirenga urukiko rutaremeza gutangiza izahura ry’ubucuruzi, uberewemo umwenda wishingiwe azahite asubirana uburenganzira bwe bwo kwegukana ingwate. - Ibivuzwe haruguru byumvikanisha ko uburenganzira bwo gukurikirana umwenda wishingiwe bukomeza gusubikwa iyo mu gihe kitarenze amezi atandatu abarwa guhera urimo umwenda atanze ikirego, urukiko rwemeje gutangiza izahura ry’ubucuruzi; naho iyo rutemeje gutangiza izahura fashe icyemezo ko iyo gutangiza izahura bitemejwe, impamvu y’isubika ry’ubwo burenganzira iba itakiriho, bigatuma uberewemo umwenda ufite ingwate asubirana uburenganzira bwo kuyegukana hakurikijwe amategeko abigenga.
## Page 294
260 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO [43] Ku birebana n’uru rubanza, Urukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi rwatesheje agaciro urubanza RCOM 01117/2023/TC rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ubucuruzi, rwemeza ko cyamunara yakozwe kuwa 15/06/2023 hagurishwa umutungo wa Nzamukosha Sylvie watanzweho ingwate na Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd igumanye agaciro, rushingiye ku mpamvu zikurikira: - Kuba umutungo wagurishijwe muri cyamunara utari uwa Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd ahubwo ari uwo yatijwe na Nzamukosha Sylvie, ukaba kandi utari mu mitungo iyi sosiyete yagaragaje ko izayifasha muri iyo gahunda y‘izahura, kuko usaba gutangiza izahura ry’ubucuruzi aba agamije ko imitungo ye yazamufasha mu kwishyura imyenda yatumye ajya mu gihombo; ko rero ibi bivuguruza ibiteganywa n’ingingo ya 12 y’Itegeko N° 075/2021 ryo kuwa 06/12/2021 ryerekeye igihombo, kuko umwenda wakabaye usubikwa mu gihe umutungo watanzweho ingwate ugaragara mu mitungo izafasha mu izahura kandi ukaba ari uw’uwasabye izahura cyangwa se agaragaza ko nyirawo yawumuhaye byemewe n’amategeko ngo uzifashishwe muri iyo gahunda y’izahura; - Kuba, n’iyo uwo mutungo wari kuba uri mu mitungo Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd yatanze kugira ngo izayifashe muri gahunda y’izahura ry’ubucuruzi bwayo, ntacyo byari kuyimarira kuko izahura ridatangizwa n’uko hatanzwe ikirego mu rukiko, ahubwo ritangizwa n’icyemezo cy’Umucamanza cy’uko hari gahunda ifatika ishobora gutuma ibintu bisubira mu buryo; bityo gutanga ikirego cy’izahura bikaba bitatuma cyamunara yabaye iteshwa agaciro.
## Page 295
261 VINTAGES WINES AND LIQUORS LTD v KARASIRA [44] Ubujurire bwa Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd bugamije kugaragaza ko Urukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi rwirengagije ibiteganywa n’ingingo ya 12 yavuzwe haruguru, ko iyo igihe cy’amezi atandatu kirangiye urukiko rwarafashe icyemezo ku kirego gisaba gutangiza izahura bituma uberewemo umwenda ahita atakaza uburenganzira bwo gusaba icyemezo cyo kugurisha ingwate agategereza ko urubanza ku kirego gisaba gutangiza izahura rurangira, ko kandi ari nako Urukiko rw’Ubucuruzi rwabibonye, ahubwo rushingira icyemezo cyarwo ku bitararegewe bitanaburanyweho. [45] Urukiko rurasanga hashingiwe ku biteganywa mu ngingo ya 12 yavuzwe haruguru, uburenganzira bw’uberewemo umwenda ufite ingwate busubikwa iyo urimo umwenda agaragaje ko afite ubushake bwo gutanga gahunda y’izahura ry’ubucuruzi bwe hamwe n'ikirego cye gitangiza urubanza rw’ikurikirana n’irangiza ry’imanza ziturutse ku gihombo, iyo ngingo ikaba idatandukanya umwenda ufite ingwate igizwe n’umutungo bwite w’urimo umwenda n’ingwate igizwe n’umutungo utari uwe (nk’ingwate yaba yaratijwe), ikaba itanateganya ko kugira ngo umwenda ufite ingwate usubikwe iyo ngwate igomba kuba ari umutungo bwite w’urimo umwenda kandi ikaba iri mu mitungo izamufasha muri gahunda y’izahura ry’ubucuruzi bwe; bityo impamvu y’uko ingwate yagurishijwe muri cyamunara itari umutungo wa Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd ntibe no mu mitungo yagaragaje ko izayifasha muri gahunda y’izahura ry’ubucuruzi bwayo ikaba itaragombaga gushingirwaho n’Urukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi rwemeza ko umwenda wa Equity Bank Rwanda Plc utasubitswe, ikaba nta shingiro ifite kuko idahuye n’ibiteganywa mu ngingo ya 12 yavuzwe haruguru.
## Page 296
262 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO [46] Urukiko rurasanga kandi iyo mpamvu kimwe n’iy’uko izahura ridatangizwa n’uko hatanzwe ikirego mu rukiko ahubwo ritangizwa n’icyemezo cy’Umucamanza cy’uko hari gahunda ifatika ishobora gutuma ibintu bisubira mu buryo, zisa n‘izinjira mu ishingiro ry‘ikirego gitangiza gahunda y’izahura, hashingiwe ku bisobanuro byose byatanzwe haruguru zikaba zitaragombaga gushingirwaho n’Urukiko Rukuru rw‘Ubucuruzi rwemeza ko cyamunara yakozwe hagurishwa ingwate Equity Bank Rwanda Plc yahawe na Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd igumana agaciro. [47] Urukiko rurasanga ariko n’ubwo impamvu zavuzwe haruguru zitagombaga gushingirwaho hemezwa ko cyamunara igumanye agaciro hashingiwe ku mpamvu zasobanuwe, kuri uru rwego hagomba gusuzumwa niba impamvu Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd ishingiraho ubujurire bwayo ivuga ko hagomba kugumaho icyemezo cyafashwe n’Urukiko rw’Ubucuruzi cy’uko cyamunara iteshwa agaciro, zifite ishingiro. [48] Nk’uko byavuzwe haruguru, mu bujurire bwa Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd ivuga ko ingingo ya 12 y’Itegeko N° 075/2021 ryo kuwa 06/12/2021 ryerekeye igihombo iteganya ko iyo igihe cy’amezi atandatu kirangiye urukiko rwarafashe icyemezo ku kirego gisaba gutangiza izahura bituma uberewemo umwenda ahita atakaza uburenganzira bwo gusaba icyemezo cyo kugurisha ingwate, agategereza ko urubanza ku kirego gisaba gutangiza izahura rurangira; igasaba uru Rukiko kubishingiraho rukemeza ko cyamunara yaregewe muri uru rubanza iteshwa agaciro kuko yakozwe nyamara ikirego cya Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd gisaba gutangiza izahura cyari cyarafashweho icyemezo n’Urukiko rw’Ubucuruzi amezi atandatu atarashira. § Uru Rukiko rushingiye ku byasobanuwe haruguru mu gika cya 43 cy’uru rubanza ku bijyanye n’icyo ingingo
## Page 297
263 VINTAGES WINES AND LIQUORS LTD v KARASIRA ya 12 yavuzwe haruguru yumvikanisha, rurasanga ibyo abahagarariye Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd bavuga nta shingiro bifite, kuko nk’uko byasobanuwe haruguru, uburenganzira bwo gukurikirana umwenda wishingiwe bukomeza gusubikwa iyo mu gihe kitarenze amezi atandatu abarwa guhera urimo umwenda atanze ikirego, urukiko rwemeje gutangiza izahura ry’ubucuruzi; naho iyo rutemeje gutangiza izahura, impamvu y’isubika ry’ubwo burenganzira iba itakiriho, bigatuma uberewemo umwenda ufite ingwate asubirana uburenganzira bwo kuyegukana hakurikijwe amategeko abigenga. [49] Urukiko rurasanga ku bireba ikirego Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd yari yatanze isaba gushyirwa mu izahura, nta cyemezo cyo gutangiza izahura ry’ubucuruzi cyafashwe n’Urukiko rw’Ubucuruzi kuko icyo rwemeje mu rubanza RCOM 00438/2022/TC rwaciwe kuwa 02/09/2022 (ari nacyo abahagarariye bavuga ko cyagombaga gutuma Equity Bank Rwanda Plc itakaza amahirwe yo kwegukana ingwate yayo) ari uko ikirego cyayo kitakiriwe kuko itatanze ibisabwa by’ibanze nk’uko biteganywa n’itegeko; iki cyemezo kikaba cyaranashimangiwe ku rwego rw’ubujurire n’Urukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi mu rubanza RCOMA 00617/2022/HC rwaciwe ku wa 19/01/2024; uru rukiko rukaba rusanga hashingiwe ku byasobanuwe haruguru, nta makosa yakozwe mu kuba umutungo wavuzwe haruguru waragurishijwe mu cyamunara ku wa 15/06/2023 hagamijwe kwishyura Equity Bank Rwanda Plc yari yarawuhaweho ingwate kuko nta cyayibuzaga gusubirana uburenganzira bwo kuyegukana; bityo ubujurire bwa Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd bukaba nta shingiro bufite.
## Page 298
264 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 4. Kumenya niba indishyi zisabwa muri uru rubanza zifite ishingiro. [50] Uhagarariye Me Karasira Colette Ratifa asaba Urukiko kugenerwa 1.000.000Frw y’ikurikiranarubanza n’igihembo cya Avoka kuri uru rwego. Abahagarariye Club House la Palisse Ltd nabo basaba Urukiko gutegeka Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd kuyishyura 1.000.000Frw y’igihembo cya Avoka na 500.000Frw yo gusiragizwa mu nkiko. Izi ndishyi ntacyo abahagarariye Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd bazivuzeho. [51] Abahagarariye Nzamukosha Slyvie nabo basaba urukiko gutegeka abaregwa bose gufatanya kumwishyura 20.000.000 Frw y’indishyi z’akababaro, gushorwa mu manza, ikurikirana rubanza n’igihembo cya Avoka. UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [52] Ingingo ya 111 y’Itegeko N° 22/2018 ryo ku wa 29/04/2018 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi iteganya ibikurikira: “Ikirego cy’amafaranga y’ikurikiranarubanza ni ikirego gishamikira ku kirego cy’iremezo kigamije kwishyuza ibyakoreshejwe mu rubanza. Ikirego cy’amafaranga y’ikurikiranarubanza kiburanishirizwa rimwe n’ikirego cy’iremezo. Gishobora kandi kwakirwa kikanaburanishwa n’iyo ikirego cy’iremezo cyaba kitakiriwe”. [53] Urukiko rurasanga Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd ari yo yajuriye biba ngombwa ko abaregwa mu bujurire bose bakurikirana urubanza banashaka abavoka bababuranira; nyamara nk’uko byasobanuwe haruguru ubujurire bwayo bukaba
## Page 299
265 VINTAGES WINES AND LIQUORS LTD v KARASIRA nta shingiro bufite, bityo hashingiwe ku ngingo ya 111 yibukijwe haruguru Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd ikaba igomba kwishyura Club House la Palisse Ltd, Me Karasira Colette Ratifa na Equity Bank Rwanda Plc , 700.000Frw y’igihembo cya Avoka na 200.000Frw y’ikurikiranarubanza kuri buri wese, agenwe mu bushishozi bw’urukiko kuko ayo basaba ari menshi kandi nta bisobanuro bayatangiye. Naho indishyi zisabwa na Nzamukosha Sylvie akaba atazihabwa kuko ikirego cye kitakiriwe. III. ICYEMEZO CY’URUKIKO [54] Rwemeje ko ubujurire bwa Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd Ltd nta shingiro bufite. [55] Rwemeje ko ikirego cya Nzamukosha Sylvie gisaba kugoboka mu rubanza ku bushake kitakiriwe ngo gisuzumwe mu mizi. [56] Rwemeje ko icyemezo cyafashwe mu rubanza RCOMA 00374/2023/HCC & CMB RCOMA 00376/2023/HCC cy’uko cyamunara yakozwe kuwa 15/06/2023 ku mutungo ufite UPI: 1/02/13/02/635 urimo inzu ya Nzamukosha Sylvie yatanzweho ingwate na Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd igumanye agaciro, kidahindutse. [57] Rwemeje ko Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd igomba kwishyura Me Karasira Colette Ratifa, Equity Bank Rwanda Plc na Club House la Palisse Ltd, buri wese, amafaranga ibihumbi magana arindwi (700.000 frw) y’igihembo cya Avoka n’ibihumbi magana abiri (200.000 Frw) y’ikurikiranarubanza kuri uru rwego.
## Page 300
266 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO [58] Rutegetse ko cyamunara yakozwe kuwa 15/06/2023 ku mutungo ufite UPI: 1/02/13/02/635 urimo inzu ya Nzamukosha Sylvie yatanzweho ingwate na Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd igumanye agaciro. [59] Rutegetse Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd kwishyura Me Karasira Colette Ratifa, Equity Bank Rwanda Plc na Club House la Palisse Ltd, buri wese, amafaranga miliyoni imwe n’ibihumbi magana abiri (1.200.000Frw) y’ikurikiranarubanza n’igihembo cya Avoka n’ibihumbi mirongo ine (40.000Frw) y’amagarama yagenwe mu rubanza rwajuririwe, n’ibihumbi magana arindwi (700.000frw) y’igihembo cya Avoka n’ibihumbi magana abiri (200.000 Frw) y’ikurikiranarubanza agenwe kuri uru rwego. [60] Ruvuze ko amagarama yatanzwe ahwanye n’ibyakozwe mu rubanza.
## Page 301
267 VINTAGES WINES AND LIQUORS LTD v KARASIRA URUBANZA RW’INSHINJABYAHA
## Page 302
268 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO
## Page 303
269 UBUSHINJACYAHA v NZABONITEGEKA UBUSHINJACYAHA v NZABONITEGEKA [Rwanda URUKIKO RUKURU - RP 00051/2023/HC/KIG (Uwamariya, P.J) 13 Werurwe 2024] Amategeko agenga imanza z’inshinjabyaha – Icyaha cya jenoside – Ihanagurabusembwa – Mu gusuzuma ko usaba ihanagurabusembwa wahamijwe icyaha cya jenoside arihabwa, ntihasuzumwa gusa ko yujuje ibisabwa kugira ngo arihabwe, ahubwo hasuzumwa n’uburemere bw’icyaha urisaba yahamijwe. – Kubera iyo mpamvu, uwahamijwe icyaha cya jenoside ntakwiye guhabwa ihanagurabusembwa kabone n’ubwo yaba yujuje ibisabwa. Incamake y’ikibazo: Ku wa 06/06/2023, Nzabonitegeka Gabriel yatanze ikirego mu Rukiko Rukuru asaba ihanagurabusembwa ku cyaha cya Jenoside yahamijwe n’Urukiko Gacaca ku wa 29/08/2007 akaba yari yarakatiwe igifungo cy’imyaka 9. Asobanura ko ibisabwa abyujuje kuko amaze imyaka 16 afunguwe, kandi akaba yarakomeje kugaragaza imyitwarire myiza kuva aho afunguriwe, akaba yahanagurwaho ubusembwa kugira ngo abashe guhabwa akazi akomeze gufatanya n’abandi banyarwanda kubaka igihugu. Ubushinjacyaha buvuga ko nubwo yagaragaje imyitwarire myiza kuva aho afunguriwe, ko ariko ihanagurabusembwa asaba atarihabwa kubera uburemere bw’icyaha cya genocide cyamuhamye. Incamake y’icyemezo: Mu gusuzuma ko usaba ihanagurabusembwa wahamijwe icyaha cya jenoside arihabwa, 269
## Page 304
270 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO ntihasuzumwa gusa ko yujuje ibisabwa kugira ngo arihabwe, ahubwo hasuzumwa n’uburemere bw’icyaha urisaba yahamijwe. Kubera iyo mpamvu, uwahamijwe icyaha cya jenoside ntakwiye guhabwa ihanagurabusembwa kabone n’ubwo yaba yujuje ibisabwa. Ikirego nta shingiro gifite. Amategeko yashingiweho: Itegeko Nº 027/2019 ryo ku wa 19/09/2019 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’inshinjabyaha, ingingo ya 245 na 246; Itegeko Ngenga N° 10/2007 ryo kuwa 01/03/2007 rihindura kandi ryuzuza Itegeko Ngenga n° 16/2004 ryo kuwa 19/6/2004 rigena imiterere, ububasha n’imikorere by’Inkiko Gacaca, ingingo ya 15. Nta manza zifashishijwe Urubanza IMITERERE Y’URUBANZA [1] Ku itariki ya 29/08/2007 Urukiko Gacaca rw’Umurenge wa Kanza mu cyahoze ari Akarere ka Mutobo, mu Ntara ya Ruhengeri, ubu akaba ari mu Murenge wa Muko, Akarere ka Musanze, Intara y’Amajyaruguru, rwahamije Nzabonitegeka Gabriel icyaha cya Jenoside, rumuhanisha igifungo cy’imyaka icyenda (9). Maze kuko yari amaze gufungwa imyaka irenze iyo
## Page 305
271 UBUSHINJACYAHA v NZABONITEGEKA yakatiwe, Ubuyobozi bwa Gereza ya Gisenyi aho yari afungiye, ku wa 05/09/2007 bwamufunguye burundu. [2] Ku wa 06/06/2023, Nzabonitegeka Gabriel yatanze ikirego mu Rukiko Rukuru asaba ihanagurabusembwa, ikirego cye cyandikwa kuri No RP 00051/2023/HC/KIG, urubanza ruburanishwa mu ruhame ku wa 21/02/2024 yiburanira, ubushinjacyaha buhagarariwe na HABIMANA Cabin, umushinjacyaha ku rwego rw’igihugu. [3] Nzabonitegeka Gabriel asobanura ko ibisabwa abyujuje kugira ngo ahabwe ihanagurabusembwa kuko amaze imyaka 16 afunguwe, kandi akaba yarakomeje kugaragaza imyitwarire myiza kuva aho afunguriwe, akaba yahanagurwago ubusembwa kugira ngo abashe guhabwa akazi akomeze gufatanya n’abandi banyarwanda kubaka igihugu. [4] Ubushinjacyaha buvuga ko nubwo Nzabonitegeka Gabriel yagaragaje imyitwarire myiza kuva aho afunguriwe, ko ariko ihanagurabusembwa asaba atarihabwa kubera uburemere bw’icyaha cya genocide cyamuhamye. · Icyo urukiko rugomba gusuzuma muri uru rubanza, ni ukumenya niba kuba Nzabonitegeka Gabriel yarahamwe n’icyaha cya jenoside byatuma adahabwa ihanagurabusembwa.
## Page 306
272 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO II. ISESENGURA RY’IKIBAZO KIGIZE URUBANZA - Kumenya niba kuba Nzabonitegeka Gabriel yarahamwe n’icyaha cya jenoside byatuma adahabwa ihanagurabusembwa [5] Nzabonitegeka Gabriel n’umwunganizi we bavuga ko ku itariki ya 29/08/2007 Urukiko Gacaca rw’Umurenge wa Kanza mu cyahoze ari Akarere ka Mutobo, mu Ntara ya Ruhengeri, uyu munsi hakaba ari mu kagari ka Mburabuturo, umurenge wa Muko, Akarere ka Musanze, Intara y’Amajyaruguru, rwahamije Nzabonitegeka Gabriel icyaha cya Genocide rumuhanisha igifungo cy’imyaka icyenda (9). Bavuga ko muri icyo gihano yagombaga gufungwa umwaka n’amezi atandatu, agasubikirwa igihano mu myaka itatu naho imyaka ine isigaye n’amezi atandatu akabikoramo imirimo nsimburagifungo ifitiye igihugu akamaro (TIGE), ariko aza gufungurwa ku wa 05/09/2007 amaze gufungwa imyaka icumi (10), arekurwa burundu nk’uwari umaze gukora igihano cye cyose hatitawe ku bindi yari yarahawe mu rwego rwo kumugabanyiriza igihano nk’uwireze akemera icyaha agasaba imbabazi bikemerwa. [6] Bavuga ko ku wa 12/03/2008 Nzabonitegeka Gabriel ashingiye ku biteganyijwe mu ngingo ya 76 igika cyayo cya 4 y’ Itegeko ryagengaga inkiko Gacaca ryo ku wa 1/03/2007, yandikiye Umunyamabanga Nshingwabikorwa w’Inkiko Gacaca mu Gihugu asaba ko yahabwa uburenganzira buteganyijwe muri iyo ngingo yavuzwe haruguru, bityo akaba yahabwa amahirwe yo kwaka akazi k’uburezi cyane ko iyo ngingo yabimwereraga nk’umutu wahamijwe icyaha cya Genoside yakorewe abatutsi uri mu rwego rwa kabiri ivuga ko uretse imirimo ya Politiki ko ibijyanye n’akandi kazi yari yemerewe kubikora.
## Page 307
273 UBUSHINJACYAHA v NZABONITEGEKA [7] Avuga ko agendeye ku biteganyijwe na ririya tegeko rigenga inkiko Gacaca, Nzabonitegeka Gabriel akimara gusoza amashuri Makuru nkuko yari yayatangiye mbere yo gufungwa nyuma akayasubukura kuva 2012 kugeza 2014 muri Kabare University aho yarangije afite Impamyabumenyi y’Amashuri Makuru ( A1) mu ndimi, nyuma akayakomereza muri Mount Kenya Universty Rwanda aho yabonye A0 mu Burezi bwo kwigisha Icyongereza n’Igiswahili, ubu akaba yarahawe akazi k’uburezi mu Karere ka Ruhango, muri GS Rwinyana, mu Murenge wa Bweramana kuva muri Werurwe 2022 kugeza uyu munsi. [8] Bavuga ko mu rwego rwo kongera gushimangira ibyo yiyemeje ubwo yemeraga icyaha kandi akanagisabira imbabazi kugeza uyu munsi, Nzabonitegeka Gabriel akaba ari muri sosiyete nyarwanda aho agerageza kimwe n’abandi banyarwanda gutanga umusanzu we mu kubaka igihugu asaba ko yakurirwaho ubusembwa yasigiwe na kiriya cyaha yahamijwe ubu akaba amaze imyaka 16 arangije igifungo, kandi akaba yaragerageje kubana neza n’abanyarwanda yari asanze muri sosiyete nyuma yuko afunguwe. [9] Ubushinjacyaha buvuga ko buhereye ku Itegeko Nº 027/2019 ryo ku wa 19/09/2019 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’inshinjabyaha nk’uko ryahinduwe n’Itegeko Nº 058/2023 ryo ku wa 04/12/2023 mu ngingo yaryo ya 246, burasanga bigaragara ko Nzabonitegeka Gabriel yararangije igihano yahawe n’urukiko Gacaca kandi igihe cy’imyaka 05 gisabwa kugirango abe yasaba ihanagurabusembwa cyararangiye (29/08/2007 – 28/08/2012). Nzabonitegeka Gabriel akaba arebwa n’igika cya mbere n’icya kabiri, by’ingingo ya 246 y’Itegeko rivugwa haruguru.
## Page 308
274 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO [10] Buvuga ko bushingiye no ku iperereza ryakozwe aho Nzabonitegeka Gabriel atuye, ryagaragaje ko nta myitwarire mibi azwiho, ko yitabira gahunda za Leta, ko abanye neza n’ubuyobozi n’abaturage nk’uko bikubiye muri raporo yo ku wa 08/01/2024 yatanzwe n’Akagari ka Kamutora, Umurenge wa Rushaki hamwe no mu buhamya bwatanzwe na Nyirantashya Marie Gaudence bwo ku wa 07/01/2024, busanga Nzabonitegeka Gabriel yaragize imyitwarire myiza nyuma yo gukatirwa n’urukiko. [11] Buvuga ko ariko busaba Urukiko kudaha Nzabonitegeka Gabriel ihanagurabusembwa asaba hashingiwe ku buremere bw’icyaha yahamijwe cya jenoside, kuko busanga ari icyaha kiremereye cyane kandi cy’ubugome bukabije ku buryo umuntu wagihamijwe atagakwiye guhabwa ihanagurabusembwa. [12] Buvuga ko kuba uburemere bw’icyaha uwakatiwe yahamijwe ari kimwe mu byashingirwaho mu kumuha cyangwa kumwima ihanagurabusembwa byemejwe n’Umuhanga mu mategeko Jean Pradel1 aho mu gitabo yanditse avuga ngo « …La loi ne donnant aucune indication sur la motivation de l’arrêt, la jurisprudence a été amenée à préciser que les juges du fond devraient s’attacher à la fois à la gravité objective des faits et à la conduite ultérieure du condamné ». [13] Buvuga ko rumwe mu manza Jean Pradel agarukaho mu gitabo kimaze kuvugwa ari urubanza Crim., 20 Février 1973, pourvoi N°72-91.270, Bull. crim. 1973 N° 84 (cassation) aho Urukiko Rusesa imanza rwo mu Bufaransa rwahaye agaciro kuba 1 Jean PRADEL, Droit pénal général, 22eme Edition, Editions Cujas, Paris 2019, p.794.
## Page 309
275 UBUSHINJACYAHA v NZABONITEGEKA Urukiko rw’Ubujurire rwarashingiye ku buremere bw’ibyaha ntirwatanga ihanagurabusembwa2. [14] Buvuga ko na none mu rubanza Crim., 12 Février 1963, pourvoi N°62-90.725, Bull. crim. 1963, N° 72 (cassation) Urukiko Rusesa Imanza rw’u Bufaransa rwemeje ko mu gusuzuma ikirego gisaba ihanagurabusembwa, Urugereko Mpanabyaha rw’Urukiko rw’Ubujurire rwa Paris rwashoboraga kwita ku buremere bw’ibikorwa byatumye uwasabye ihanagurabusembwa ahanwa n’inkiko, gusa rwemeza ko Urugereko rutari burebe icyo gusa ahubwo rwagombaga no kureba ibirebana n’imyitwarire ye nyuma y’uko ahawe imbabazi3. 2 “Attendu que la gravité des faits commits par X ainsi que leurs conséquences et le retentissement que ses agissements frauduleux avaient eu dans l'opinion publique en Gironde, département où il reside toujours, constituent des éléments de fait dont les juges de la chambre d'accusation avaient le droit de tenir compte, en même temps que des gages d'amendement que X... pouvait donner, dans l'examen de la demande dont ils étaient saisis ; que cette appréciation est souveraine et échappe au contrôle de la Cour de cassation; d'où il suit que le moyen ne saurait être accueilli ; et attendu que l'arrêt est regulier en la forme”. 3Attendu, en effet, que la rehabilitation est une mesure de bienveillance instituée par la loi en faveur des individus qui, après avoir été condamnés et avoir subi leur peine ou avoir satisfait aux conditions du décrêt de grace qui les en a dispensés, se sont rendus dignes, par les gages d'amendement qu'ils ont donnés pendant le délai d'epreuve, d'être replacés dans l'integralité de leur état ancien; que si, pour apprécier ces gages d'amendement, la chambre d'accusation peut tenir compte des faits qui ont motivé la condemnation et de leur gravité, ladite chambre ne saurait, pour rejeter la demande en rehabilitation, se fonder uniquement sur ces faits et s'abstenir d'examiner la conduite du condamné pendant le délai prévu par les articles 786 et suivants du code de procédure pénale
## Page 310
276 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO [15] Buvuga ko ibyo imanza zimaze kuvugwa zemeje ari nabyo byemejwe mu zindi manza, nk’urubanza Crim., 7 Janvier 2020, pourvoi N° 19-80.839, Bull. crim. 2020, N°1 (cassation), p.1155. Muri uru rubanza naho, Urukiko Rusesa Imanza rw’u Bufaransa rwemeje ko Urukiko rw’Ubujurire rutagombaga kwita gusa ku buremere bw’ibyaha uwasabaga ihanagurabusembwa yahamijwe ngo rurimwime ahubwo ko rwagombaga no kureba ku myitwarire ye nyuma y’uko arangije ibihano yahawe. Ibi bisobanuye ko uburemere bw’ibyaha usaba ihanagurabusembwa yahamijwe nabwo byitabwaho mu gufata umwanzuro. Ibi ngo byanemejwe mu zindi manza zitandukanye, nk’urubanza Crim., 10 décembre 1975, pourvoi N° 74-91.203, Bull. crim. 1975, n° 75 (cassation) n’urubanza Crim., 16 octobre 1974, pourvoi N° 73-91.238, Bull. crim. 1974, n° 295 (cassation). [16] Buvuga ko rero mu gusuzuma ikirego gisaba ihanagurabusembwa, uburemere bw’ibyaha cyangwa icyaha usaba ihanagurabusembwa yahamijwe byitabwaho nka kimwe mu bishingirwaho mu gutanga cyangwa kwanga ihanagurabusembwa, Nzabonitegeka Gabriel akaba atahabwa ihanagurabusembwa asaba kubera uburemere bw’icyaha cya genocide yahamijwe. [17] Umwunganizi wa Nzabonitegeka Gabriel avuga ko izi manza zaciriwe mu mahanga zitagomba gushingirwaho mu kudaha uwo yunganira ihanagurabusembwa, mu gihe ingingo ya 245 y’itegeko ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’inshinjabyaha nta we ikumira mu bahamwe n’ibyaha, na ririya tegeko ryerekeye inkiko gacaca ryashingiweho mu kumuhana rikaba ryarateganyaga ko yemerewe uburenganzira bugenewe abandi banyarwanda.
## Page 311
277 UBUSHINJACYAHA v NZABONITEGEKA UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [18] Ingingo ya 245 n’iya 246 z’Itegeko Nº 027/2019 ryo ku wa 19/09/2019 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’inshinjabyaha, ziteganya ko uwakatiwe wese igihano ashobora guhanagurwaho ubusembwa. Ihanagurabusembwa rishobora gutangwa iyo hashize imyaka itanu (5) kandi niba muri icyo gihe uwakatiwe yarakomeje kugaragaraho ibimenyetso nyakuri by’imyifatire myiza. Icyo gihe gitangira kubarwa, 1° kuva ku munsi imikirize y’urubanza rumuhana rutagishoboye gusubirwaho ku wakatiwe igihano cy’ihazabu cyangwa igihano cy’imirimo y’inyungu rusange; 2° kuva ku munsi yafunguriweho burundu cyangwa kuva ku munsi yaboneyeho ifungurwa ry’agateganyo iyo atigeze aryamburwa ku wakatiwe igihano cy’igifungo. Ku byerekeye abasubiracyaha n’abarengeje igihe cyo gukurikiranwaho ibihano, igihe kibarwa ni icy’imyaka icumi (10) kuva bafunguwe cyangwa kuva ku munsi igihe cyo kudashobora gukurikirana ibihano cyatangiriye. Naho iya 252 igateganya ko ihanagurabusembwa rikuraho igihano n’inkurikizi zacyo zose. [19] Urukiko rubona ko nubwo iyi ngingo ya 245 ivuzwe haruguru iteganya ko uwakatiwe wese igihano ashobora guhanagurwaho ubusembwa iya 252 igateganya ko ihanagurabusembwa rikuraho igihano n’inkurikizi zacyo zose, icyaha cya jenocide ni icyaha kidasaza nkuko biteganywa n’ingingo ya 185 y’Itegeko Nº 027/2019 ryo ku wa 19/09/2019 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’inshinjabyaha. [20] Ingingo ya 15, agace ka 1o, a na b, y’itegeko Ngenga N° 10/2007 ryo kuwa 01/03/2007 rihindura kandi ryuzuza Itegeko Ngenga n° 16/2004 ryo kuwa 19/6/2004 rigena imiterere,
## Page 312
278 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO ububasha n’imikorere by’Inkiko Gacaca zishinzwe gukurikirana no gucira imanza abakoze ibyaha bya jenoside n’ibindi byaha byibasiye inyokomuntu byakozwe hagati y’itariki ya mbere Ukwakira 1990 n'iya 31 Ukuboza 1994 nk’uko ryahinduwe kandi ryujujwe kugeza ubu, ihindura ingingo ya 76 y’itegeko Ngenga n° 16/2004 ryo kuwa 19/6/2004 rigena imiterere, ububasha n’imikorere by’Inkiko gacaca zishinzwe gukurikirana no gucira imanza abakoze ibyaha bya jenoside n’ibindi byaha byibasiye inyokomuntu byakozwe hagati y’itariki ya mbere Ukwakira 1990 n'iya 31 Ukuboza 1994 ihinduwe kandi yujujwe mu buryo bukurikira : “Abantu bahamwe n’icyaha cya jenoside cyangwa ibyaha byibasiye inyokomuntu bamburwa uburenganzira bari bafite mu buryo bukurikira: abantu bo mu rwego rwa mbere n’abo mu rwa kabiri bamburwa uburenganzira bwo : a. gutorwa, b. kuba abayobozi, abasirikari, abapolisi n’abandi bashinzwe umutekano, abarimu, abaganga, abacamanza, abashinjacyaha n’ abunganira abandi mu manza. Agace ka 4o k’iyi ngingo gateganya ko abo mu rwego rwa kabiri, agace ka mbere, aka 2° n’aka 3°, bireze bikemerwa kimwe n’abo mu gace ka 4°, aka 5° n’aka 6° bamburwa uburenganzira bwavuzwe mu gace ka mbere k’iyi ngingo mu gihe cy’igihano bakatiwe n’urukiko. [21] Rubona ko mu Masezerano Mpuzamahanga yerekeye gukumira no guhana icyaha cya jenoside, yemejwe n’itegeko- teka No 8/75 ryo ku wa 6 Gashyantare 1975, yatowe we mu Mwanzuro wa 260 (III) A w’Inama Rusange y’Umuryango w’Abibumbye ku wa 09 Ukuboza 1948, yatangiye gukurikizwa ku wa 12 Mutarama 1951 nk’uko biteganywa n’ingingo ya XIII, mu ngingo yayo ya mbere hateganywa ko Ibihugu byashyize umukono kuri aya Masezerano byemeranyije ko Jenoside, yaba iyakozwe mu bihe by’amahoro cyangwa mu bihe by’intambara, ari icyaha mu mategeko mpuzamahanga kandi byiyemeje
## Page 313
279 UBUSHINJACYAHA v NZABONITEGEKA kugikumira no kugihana. Aya masezerano u Rwanda rwasinye, agaragaza ko icyaha cya genocide ari icyaha ndengakamere, ndengamipaka, ko isi yose yahagurukiye kukirwanya no kugihana. [22] Rubona ko icyaha cya jenocide ari icyaha kidasaza nkuko biteganywa n’ingingo ya 185 y’Itegeko Nº 027/2019 ryo ku wa 19/09/2019 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’inshinjabyaha, kandi ko mu irangashingiro ry’Itegeko Nshinga rwa Repubulika y’u Rwanda ryo mu 2003 ryavuguruwe muri 2015, hateganywa ko abanyarwanda bagomba kwibuka jenoside yakorewe Abatutsi igahitana abana b‟u Rwanda barenga miliyoni. [23] Rubona kandi ko hari imirimo imwe n’imwe itemerewe guhabwa abahamwe n’icyaha cya jenoside yakorewe abatutsi, nko kuba umukozi wa Leta, umwarimu, kuba avoka, n’iyindi. [24] Kuba umukozi wa Leta, ingingo ya 9 y’Itegeko N° 017/2020 ryo ku wa 07/10/2020 rishyiraho sitati rusange igenga abakozi ba Leta, iteganya ibisabwa kugira ngo umuntu yinjire mu bakozi ba Leta, mu gace ka 7o hateganywa ko umuntu ushaka kwinjira mu bakozi ba Leta agomba kuba atarakatiwe burundu kubera icyaha cya jenoside cyangwa icy’ingengabitekerezo ya jenoside n’ibindi byaha bifitanye isano na yo. [25] Ku kuba mwarimu, ingingo ya 97 agace ka 6º y’ Iteka rya Perezida No 064/01 ryo ku wa 16/03/2020 rishyiraho sitati yihariye igenga abarimu b’amashuri y’incuke, abanza, ayisumbuye n’ay’imyuga n’ubumenyingiro, iteganya ko Umwarimu ahanishwa igihano cyo kwirukanwa burundu ku kazi, iyo yakatiwe burundu n’urukiko kubera icyaha cya jenoside cyangwa icy’ingengabitekerezo ya jenoside.
## Page 314
280 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO [26] Ku kuba yaba avoka, ingingo ya 6, 6º y’ Itegeko Nº 83/2013 ryo ku wa 11/09/2013 rishyiraho urugaga rw’abavoka mu Rwanda, rikanagena imitunganyirize n’imikorere byarwo, iteganya ko ntawe ushobora gukora umwuga w’ubwavoka cyangwa gukora imirimo ijyana nawo atujuje ibirimo kuba atarahamwe n’icyaha cya jenoside yakorewe Abatutsi. [27] Ibi byose urukiko rwerekanye, ni ibigaragaza uburyo icyaha cya jenoside amategeko y’u Rwanda yagihaye uburemere, n’ubusanzwe akaba ari icyaha cy’ubugome bw’indengakamere kidasaza n’ibihano byabyo ntibisaze, kandi kitagomba kwibagirana mu mateka y’abanyarwanda, ari yo mpamvu ari itegeko kwibuka genocide kugira ngo ntizongere ukundi, urukiko rukabona ko niba igomba kwibukwa, ibihano byahawe abayihamijwe bitagomba gusibanganywa n’ihanagurabusembwa. [28] Izi ngingo ziteganya ko uwahamwe n’icyaha cya genocide atagomba guhabwa akazi ka Leta, ak’ubwarimu, gukora umurimo wigenga wo kuba Avoka, Umushingamategeko ashyiraho aya mategeko, iri Tegeko Ngenga N° 10/2007 ryo ku wa 01/03/2007 rihindura kandi ryuzuza Itegeko Ngenga n° 16/2004 ryo ku wa 19/6/2004 rigena imiterere, ububasha n’imikorere by’Inkiko Gacaca (….) ryari rihari. Ntiyari ayobewe ko hariho inzira yo gusaba ihanagurabusembwa, rikuraho igihano n’inkurikizi zacyo. Ariko naho ihanagurabusembwa ryaba ryaratanzwe mu buryo buteganywa n’iriya ngingo ya 246 y’Itegeko ryerekeye imiburanishirizize y’imanza z’inshinjabyaha yavuzwe haruguru, aka kazi kagatangwa, iyo bimenyekanye uwagahawe arirukanwa (ku bwarimu cyangwa akandi kazi ka Leta), ibi bikaba byumvikanisha uburemere n’ubukama icyaha
## Page 315
281 UBUSHINJACYAHA v NZABONITEGEKA cya genocide gifite, bituma ibihano byatanzwe mu kugihana bitapfa gusibanganywa. [29] Urukiko rurasanga imanza zaciwe n’Urukiko rusesa imanza rwo mu Bufaransa ubushinjacyaha bwagaragarije urukiko mu mwanzuro wabwo zigaragaza ko mu rubanza rusaba ihanagurabusembwa hitabwa no ku buremere bw’icyaha cyakozwe zigomba gushingirwaho, kuko no muri aya mategeko u Rwanda rugenderaho, ihanagurabusembwa ryemewe ku byaha byose, ariko byagera ku cyaha cya genocide ugasanga naho ryatangwa ntacyo ryamarira abarihawe mu mirimo imwe n’imwe, bityo akaba ari nta cyabuza ko mu gusuzuma ihanagurabusembwa hasuzumwa n’uburemere bw’icyaha urisaba yahamijwe. [30] Kubera izi mpamvu zose zisobanuwe, nubwo Nzabonitegeka Gabriel yagaragaje imyitwarire myiza nyuma yo gufungurwa, kubera uburemera bw’icyaha cya genocide yahamijwe, ihanagurabusembwa asaba ntagomba kurihabwa. III. ICYEMEZO CY’URUKIKO [31] Rwemeje ko ikirego cya Nzabonitegeka Gabriel kidafite ishingiro. [32] Rwemeje ko Nzabonitegeka Gabriel adahanaguweho ubusembwa bw’icyaha cyo jenoside yahamijwe. [33] Rutegetse ko 40.000 frw Nzabonitegeka Gabriel yatanzeho ingwate arega aheze mu isanduku ya Leta.
## Page 316
i SUBJECT INDEX
RWANDA LAW REPORTS ENGLISH VERSION
## Page 317
ii RWANDA LAW REPORTS
## Page 318
iii SUBJECT INDEX
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TEAM OF EDITORS ................................................................ iii I. LAW REPORTING TEAM ............................................. iii II. MULTI-INSTITUTIONAL COMMITTEE ................... iv PREFACE ................................................................................ vii SCOPE OF THE REPORTS ..................................................... ix CITATION ................................................................................ ix LIST OF STATUTES AND STATUTORY INSTRUMENTS CONSIDERED .......................................................................... xi LIST OF CASES CONSIDERED ........................................... xiii SUBJECT INDEX .................................................................. xvii Re. Dr BARIBWIRA ................................................................. 1 Re. BUCYENSENGE MENDE ............................................... 23 GATARE v GASANA ET AL. ................................................ 53 MUTABAZI v. THE GOVERNMENT OF RWANDA/MINADEF ET AL................................................. 81 UWANTEGE V. NIYONSHUTI ET AL. .............................. 101 PROSECUTION v UWIMANIHAYE ................................... 119 RUZIBIZA v. MOUNT MERU LOGISTICS RWANDA LTD ................................................................................................ 137 SANLAM AG Plc v. NZAMWITAKUZE ............................ 179 UWIDUHAYE ET.AL. v HAKIZIMANA ET. AL. .............. 195 VINTAGES WINES & LIQUARS LTD v KARASIRA ....... 231 PROSECUTION v. NZABONITEGEKA ............................. 263 iii v v ix xi xi vi xiii xv xix
## Page 319
iv RWANDA LAW REPORTS
## Page 320
v SUBJECT INDEX
TEAM OF EDITORS
I. LAW REPORTING TEAM
KAGABO U. Stephanie
KAVUTSE M. Claude
KUBWIMANA Jean Claude
MUJABI K. Naphtal
NZAYISENGA Daniel
UWINKINDI Angelique
UWIMANA Jean Marie Vianney
v
## Page 321
vi RWANDA LAW REPORTS
II. MULTI-INSTITUTIONAL COMMITTEE
Prof. Dr. Ngagi M. Alphonse President of the Committee, Judge of the Court of Appeal Dr. Muhire G. Yves Vice President of the Committee Lecturer in the School of Law University of Rwanda Bwiza N. Blanche Secretary of the Committee Inspector of courts Kalihangabo Isabelle Judge of the Supreme Court Rukundakuvuga F. Regis President of the Court of Appeal Kaliwabo Charles Judge of the Court of Appeal Dr. Karimunda M. Aimé Rector of Institute of Legal Practice and Development Habarurema Jean Pierre President of the High Court Nkurunziza Valens Inspector General of Courts Umuzayire B: Bibiane Vice-Chairman of Rwanda Law Reform Commission vi
## Page 322
vii SUBJECT INDEX
Nsengiyumva Jean Claude Inspector of courts Kibuka Jean Luc Judge of Commercial High Court Murererehe Saouda Judge of the High Court Dr. Nshimiyimana Didace Judge of the High Court Chamber for International and Cross-border Crimes Lt Col Kalibu Phanuel Judge of Military Court Ninahazwa Roselyne Prosecutor at National Level Dr. Bideri Diogène Prosecutor at National Level Kabibi Specioza State Attorney Uwimana Christine Judge of the Intermediate Court Giraneza Clémentine Judge of the Intermediate Court Umutesi Vestine Judge of the Commercial Court Mukamana Valentine Judge of the Primary Court MULTI-INSTITUTIONAL COMMITTEE
## Page 323
viii RWANDA LAW REPORTS
Dr Zikamwabahari Jean de Dieu Lecturer at the University of Kigali Kamali Jean Damascene Lecturer at UNILAK Karake Canisius Lecturer at ULK Rwamasirabo Olivier Advocate at Rwanda Bar Association Bagabo Faustin Advocate at Rwanda Bar Association
## Page 324
ix SUBJECT INDEX
PREFACE Dear Readers, We are pleased to present to you the Law Reports Volume 4 [2025]. As usual, we select cases that solve some of the legal issues you encounter, either in your career or in your daily life. This volume contains ten (10) cases, which includes; two (2) cases relating to the petition seeking to declare the law unconstitutional, two (2) civil cases, one (1) criminal case, one (1) commercial case and three (3) procedural cases. These law reports can be accessed on https://amategeko.gov.rw/
MUKANTAGANZWA Domitilla President of the Supreme Court and President of the High Council of Judiciary
ix
## Page 325
x RWANDA LAW REPORTS
## Page 326
xi SUBJECT INDEX
SCOPE OF THE REPORTS These reports cover cases decided by the High Court, Court of Appeal and Supreme Court.
CITATION The Reports in this volume are cited as: [2025] 4 RLR
xi
## Page 327
xii RWANDA LAW REPORTS
## Page 328
xiii SUBJECT INDEX
LIST OF STATUTES AND STATUTORY INSTRUMENTS CONSIDERED a. Current laws The Constitution of the Republic of Rwanda 2003 revised to date, article 7, 10, 17, 15,19, 29, 34, 96 iya 153 International covenant on civil and political rights of 16 December, article 14 and 26. African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights of 1981, article 3, 7 and 14. article 44 of the Law N°30/20218 of 02/06/2018 determining the jurisdiction of courts, article 44, 52 and 55. Law N0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 relating to the civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure, article 10, 20, 111,114, 129,154,161, 162, 165 188, 245, 246, 250, 260, 275,253, 255, 275 and 278. Law nº 027/2019 of 19/09/2019 relating to the criminal procedure, article 195. Law N° 66/2018 of 30/08/2018 regulating labour in Rwanda, article 3, 19, 24, 29, 30 and 39. Law N° 05/2015 of 30/03/2015 governing the organization of pension schemes, articles 6, 18, 24, 25 and 26. Law N0 075/2021 of 06/12/2021 relating to insolvency, article 12. Presidential Order No 31/01 of 25/08/2003 relating to compensation for personal injury resulting from accidents caused by motor vehicles 18. Decree-Law n⸰ 32/75 of 07/08/1975 relating to compulsory insurance risk coverage for road-using motorised vehicles as modified by Law n⸰ 02/2002 of 17/01/2002, article 3. xiii
## Page 329
xiv RWANDA LAW REPORTS
b. Repealed laws Organic Law nº 10/2007 of 01/03/2007 modifying and complementing Organic Law n°16/2004 of 19/6/2004 establishing the organisation, competence and functioning of Gacaca Courts, article 15. Law N° 22/99 of 12/11/1999 to supplement book one of the civil code and to institute part five regarding matrimonial regimes, liberalities and successions articles 50, 307, 308, 318, 324, 328 and 329. Law N° 06/2003 modifying and completing the Law-Decree of August 22, 1974 governing social security, articles 14, 16 and 22.
## Page 330
xv SUBJECT INDEX
LIST OF CASES CONSIDERED
Re Mironko François Xavier, RS/INCONST/SPEC00005/2023/SC, rendered by the Supreme Court on 07/03/2025. Re Murangwa Edward, RS/INCONST/SPEC00001/2022, rendered by the Supreme Court on 16/12/2022. Re Asiimwe Frank, RS/INCONST/SPEC00004/2020/SC, rendered by the Supreme Court on 26/03/2021. Re Murangwa Edward, RS/INCONST/SPEC00001/2019/SC rendered by the Supreme Court on 29/11/2019. Re Akagera Business Group (ABG), RS/SPEC/00001/16/CS, rendered by the Supreme Court on 23/09/2016. Re Feminist Action Development Ambition (FADA), RS/INCONST/SPEC00004/2019/SC, rendered by the Supreme Court on 26/04/2024. Re Uwombonye Hirwa Sudi, RS/INCONST/SPEC00002/2023/SC rendered by the Supreme Court on 12/04/2024. Re Kamanzi Anaclet, RS/INCONST/SPEC00002/2022/SC, rendered by the Supreme Court on 31/03/2023. Re Ngendahayo Kabuye, RS/INJUST/SPEC00004/2021/SC, rendered by the Supreme Court on 10/02/2023. Re Murangwa Edward, RS/INCONST/SPEC00001/2022/SC, rendered by the Supreme Court on 16/12/2022. Re Asiimwe Frank, RS/INCONST/SPEC00004/2020/SC, rendered by the Supreme Court on 26/03/2021. xv
## Page 331
xvi RWANDA LAW REPORTS
Re Murangwa Edward, RS/ INCONST/SPEC00001/2019/SC, rendered by the Supreme Court on 29/11/2019. Mukakimenyi v SANLAM Ag Plc, RS/INJUST/RC00012/2022/SC, rendered by the Supreme Court on 02/02/2024. Nyetera Jean Baptiste v CORAR, RCAA0202/07/CS rendered by the Supreme Court on 09/04/2009. Musengamana v Special Guarentee Fund (SGF), RS/INJUST/RC 00019/2022/SC, rendered by the Supreme Court on 02/06/2023. Akarere ka Gicumbi v WOORD GROUP LTD, RCOMAA 00035/2022/CA; rendered by the Court of Appeal on 13/06/2022. SOPROMETAL LTD v BANQUE POPULAIRE DU RWANDA Ltd rendered by the Court of Appeal on25/08/2020. Ubushinjacyaha v Kantesi Odette n’undi, RPA 00020/2024/CA; endered by the Court of Appeal ona 27/09/2024. Special Guarentee Fund (SGF) v Uwanyirigira n’undi, RS/REV/RC 00001/2022/CA, rendered by the Court of Appeal on 20/04/2023. Manirarora v Rwanda Rudniki Ltd n’undi, RS/INJUST/RC00013/2021/CA, rendered by the Court of Appeal on 28/06/2022. Nyirabatesi v King Fayisali Hospital, RCAA00073/2018/CA, rendered by the Court of Appeal on 19/07/2019. Ndizeye v Kibungo Medical Center, RCAA00008/2020/CA, rendered by the Court of Appeal on 25/06/2021.
## Page 332
xvii SUBJECT INDEX
RCF/2019/ 655 endered by the Primary Court of Gihosha (Residence Court) on 26/11/2020. Constitutional Court, Decision N°91/2023, rendered on 08/06/2023, B.10, page 13. Case Konstantina Frantzeskaki v. Greece, Decision No 57275/17), Strasbourg, 12 February 2019. Affaire Zubac c. Croatie (Requête nᵒ 40160/12), Strasbourg, 4 April 2018. Affaire AshingdanE contre Royaume-Uni, Arrêt No 8225/78), Strasbourg, 28 May 1985.
LIST OF CASES CONSIDERED
## Page 333
xviii RWANDA LAW REPORTS
## Page 334
xix SUBJECT INDEX
SUBJECT INDEX 1. The Constitution – The principle of equality before the law – Due to the fact that a party who raised the objection which was dismissed is entitled to file appeal against the ruling together with the judgment on the merits, he/she is different from a litigant who pleaded against it, who is entitled to immediately lodge appeal against the court decision which leads to the termination of proceedings; this does not imply the inequality before the law, because the two litigants are not in the same situation, and it has been so provided with reference to justified and reasonable grounds so as to avoid unnecessary dilatory proceedings. Re Dr BARIBWIRA 1 The principle of equality before the law – The fact that a category of parties before the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court are not allowed to make a third party opposition against judgments rendered by those courts, while parties before other courts are allowed to make a third party opposition against judgments rendered there, does not contradict the principle of equality before the law, as it is based on a reasonable and legitimate ground, namely the jurisdiction of the courts and the general principle that judicial proceedings have an end. Re BUCYESENGE MENDE 23 The right to appear before a competent court – The right to appear before a competent court – It is the right to appear before a court with the jurisdiction over the case. Re Dr BARIBWIRA 1 The right to due process of law – The right to appear before a competent court – A third party opposition against xix
## Page 335
xx RWANDA LAW REPORTS
judgments rendered by the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court – The fact that the legislator, in their discretion, chose to include article 161, paragraph 4 of Law n0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 relating to the civil, commercial, labour, and administrative procedure, intended a legitimate purpose of ensuring fair administration of justice, whereby a third party opposition against a judgment rendered by the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court would deprive the losing party of the right to appeal at least once, since the judgments rendered by these courts are not subject to appeal. Re BUCYESENGE MENDE 23 Unconstitutional – Right to private property – A law would be deemed contrary to article 34 of the Constitution, which guarantees the right to private property, either it deprives an individual of their property rights or permits interference without granting them any rights in return, or prevents them from freely enjoying their property. Re BUCYESENGE MENDE 23 2. Procedural laws – Case review — All parties to the case under review must be summoned to appear to the review proceedings, and failure to summon any of the parties, even if it was a civil party in the case under review, constitutes a ground of injustice which may justify the review of the case on grounds of justice. UBUSHINJACYAHA v UWIMANIHAYE 119 Summary Procedures- Calculating appeal time limit for summary procedures- Appeal time limits for summary procedures are calculated with reference to article 188 of the Law n0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 relating to civil,
## Page 336
xxi SUBJECT INDEX
commercial, labour and administrative procedure- the provision of the above mentioned article is the sole special guidance for calculating such appeals time limit, and its content constitutes an exception to the provisions of article 275 of the same law. UWANTEGE v. NIYONSHUTI ET.AL 101 Execution of the judgement – Getting linked to the case file –Refusal to provide email address – When a party to the proceedings refuses to provide an email address for purposes of being notified during auction proceedings, he or she may not later claim that his or her property was sold at an undervalued price, as he or she voluntarily forfeited their right to contest such price by refusing to be notified through the system. GATARE v GASANA ET. AL 53 Intervening into a court case – The mortgage lender has a personal and direct interest to intervene into a court case. VINTAGES WINES AND LIQUORS LTD v. KARASIRA 231 Appeal – Appeal on the admissibility of a claim – The Legislator provided for the right and procedure for any party who is dissatisfied by the court’s decision on the admissibility of his/her claim – If the court decision can lead to the termination of proceedings, a dissatisfied party has the right to immediately file his/her appeal, but if the decision cannot prevent the continuation of the hearing of the case on the merits, a dissatisfied party has the right to lodge appeal against it together with the judgment on the merits. Re Dr BARIBWIRA 1
## Page 337
xxii RWANDA LAW REPORTS
Appeal– System failure– Where the statutory time limits for lodging an appeal are exceeded due to a malfunction in the electronic case management system through which claims are submitted, and this failure was duly reported to the Court, such a circumstance constitutes an exceptional ground warranting the admission and examination of the appeal. GATARE v GASANA ET. AL 53 3. Jurisdiction of courts – Jurisdiction on Appeal – Damages – Where a judgment under appeal awards different damages to different parties, the appellate court's jurisdiction is determined only in respect of the damages awarded by the previous court to the appellant. MUTABAZI v. LETA Y’U RWANDA/MINADEF ET. AL 81 3. Laws relating to criminal cases – Genocide – Rehabilitation – In determining whether an applicant who was convicted of the crime of genocide should be granted rehabilitation, the analysis does not only focus on whether the applicant has met the requirements, but also the gravity of the crime for which the applicant was convicted, is also considered. For this reason, a person convicted of the crime of genocide should not be granted rehabilitation, even if s/he should meet the requirements. PROSECUTION v NZABONITEGEKA 264 4. Laws relating to civil cases – Damages arising from road accidents – Civil liability – When a vehicle was not the cause of the accident which, neither the driver nor the insurer are liable for damages. SANLAM AG Plc v NZAMWITAKUZE 179
## Page 338
xxiii SUBJECT INDEX
Family – Succession – Irrevocability of succession carried out and completed among the rightful heirs – The fact that a heir is later identified and confirmed by the court after the execution of the succession does not invalidate the succession carried out among the rightful heirs prior to filing the claim for paternity. The newly recognized heir shall only inherit the portion of the property that had not been distributed as of the time the court declared as the descendant from the deceased. UWIDUHAYE N’UNDI v HAKIZIMANA ET. AL 197 Family – Status of persons – Declaration of paternity out of wedlock – Declaration of paternity out of wedlock is done through voluntary recognition, unless a claim for paternity is instituted. UWIDUHAYE N’UNDI v HAKIZIMANA ET. AL 195 Family – Status of persons – Declaration of paternity out of wedlock –– A child with a known status – The fact that a child is born out of wedlock and already has a known status, only serves as evidence in a claim for paternity, however, it cannot by itself form the basis for declaring paternity without a case to declare that a given man is the father and that the child should inherit from him. UWIDUHAYE N’UNDI v HAKIZIMANA ET. AL 195 5. Law governing labour cases – Employment contract - Termination of an employment contract – Damages – An employer who terminates an employment contract without adhering to the prescribed procedures and requirements for
## Page 339
xxiv RWANDA LAW REPORTS
termination is deemed to have unlawfully dismissed the employee and shall be liable for damages. RUZIBIZA v. MOUNT MERU LOGISTICS RWANDA LTD 137 Occupational accident – Damages resulting from motor vehicle accidents – Medical damages – The employer has the obligation to register the employee with the social security scheme and to remit contributions on behalf of the employee to the Social Security Fund – Where the employer fails to remit health insurance contributions for the employee, he or she shall bear the medical expenses; if the employer does not do so, he or she shall provide the employee with the necessary funds to personally cover medical treatment. RUZIBIZA v. MOUNT MERU LOGISTICS RWANDA LTD 137 6. Laws relating to commercial cases – Insolvency – The rights on a secured debt remains suspended for a period of six months due to the debtor’s application for insolvency proceedings and the court’s approval of the applicant’s business reorganisation plan. VINTAGES WINES AND LIQUORS LTD v. KARASIRA 231 Application for initiating insolvency proceedings – Application for initiating insolvency proceedings is not a ground for suspending the rights of secured creditors neither can it stay property retention rights; unless the application is thereby accompanied by the applicant’s proper plan for business recovery. VINTAGES WINES AND LIQUORS LTD v. KARASIRA 231
## Page 340
xxv SUBJECT INDEX
The rights of a mortgage lender – Lending a loan collateral does not mean that the lender has surrendered his/ her ownership rights. VINTAGES WINES AND LIQUORS LTD v. KARASIRA 231
## Page 341
xxvi RWANDA LAW REPORTS
## Page 342
xxvii SUBJECT INDEX
SPECIAL CLAIMS
## Page 343
xxviii RWANDA LAW REPORTS
## Page 344
xxix SUBJECT INDEX
PETITIONS SEEKING TO DECLARE A LAW UNCONSTITUTIONAL
## Page 345
xxx RWANDA LAW REPORTS
## Page 346
1 Re. Dr BARIBWIRA
Re. Dr BARIBWIRA [Rwanda SUPREME COURT-RS/INCOST/SPEC 00007/2023/SC (Mukantaganzwa, P.J., Cyanzayire, Muhumuza, Kazungu and Kalihangabo, J.) 25 May 2025] The Constitution –The principle of equality before the law- Due to the fact that a party who raised the objection which was dismissed is entitled to file appeal against the ruling together with the judgment on the merits, he/she is different from a litigant who pleaded against it, who is entitled to immediately lodge appeal against the court decision which leads to the termination of proceedings; this does not imply the inequality before the law, because the two litigants are not in the same situation, and it has been so provided with reference to justified and reasonable grounds so as to avoid unnecessary dilatory proceedings. The Constitution – The Constitution –The right to appear before a competent court – It is the right to appear before a court with the jurisdiction over the case. Procedural law – Appeal – Appeal on the admissibility of a claim – The Legislator provided for the right and procedure for any party who is dissatisfied by the court’s decision on the admissibility of his/her claim – If the court decision can lead to the termination of proceedings, a dissatisfied party has the right to immediately file his/her appeal, but if the decision cannot prevent the continuation of the hearing of the case on the merits, a dissatisfied party has the right to lodge appeal against it together with the judgment on the merits. Facts : Dr Baribwira seized the Supreme Court and contended that the article 129, paragraph 3 of the Law N0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 1
## Page 347
2 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
relating to the civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure as amended to date, which provides that the decision establishing the inadmissibility of a claim may be subject to a separate appeal if such a decision can lead to the termination of proceedings, is contrary to the provisions of the article 15 of the Constitution of the Republic of Rwanda, which provides that all human beings are equal before the law. They enjoy equal protection of the law. He relates his argument to the case RCA 00139/2021/TGI/NYGE rendered by the Intermediate Court of Nyarugenge on 28 December 2022, wherein he raised an objection against the admissibility of the other party’s claim instantly, and it was dismissed, rather the hearing on the case merits proceeded. He argues that the Court never considered his objection, as it rather proceeded with the hearing on the merits, because the challenged article 129, paragraph 3 deprives him of the right for appealing against the Court’s decision; in case the Court admitted his objection, the other party would have thereof been entitled to immediately file the appeal against the decision related to it; therefore, he notes that the above article discriminates litigants as it entitles the party who did not raise the objection to lodge appeal, this contradicts the principle of equality before the law.
The claimant as well states that article 129, paragraph 3 of the abovementioned Law N0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 contradicts the provisions of article 29, paragraph 1, sub-paragraph c of the Constitution, since it does not safeguard the right to appear before a competent court. He refers his argument to a fact that when he raised an objection against the admissibility of the other party’s claim before the Intermediate Court of Nyarugenge and it was dismissed, rather the hearing on the case merits proceeded. For him, the right to appear before a competent court would have been observed, if his appeal against the decision preventing the
## Page 348
3 Re. Dr BARIBWIRA
continuation of the hearing of the case on the merits, pending a decision on the objection, as it is the case for the other party, the objection immediately leads to the termination of the proceedings. The State Attorney present in the hearing explains that the principle of equality of all human beings before the law provided under article 15 of the Constitution denotes that the law is equally applied to all human beings, only the human beings who are in the same category or in same situations should be equally treated. She submits that the article 129, paragraph 3, does not contradict the Constitution since the judgment about the objection does not end with the court’s decision, as the appeal against it is filed together with the judgment on the merits, the party that raises the objection is not wronged. Conversely, when the objection is admitted and it instantly terminates the proceedings while the losing party is unable to immediately file appeal against such decision without waiting for the decision of the judgment on the merits, he/she irreversibly loses his/her right. She further avers that in the interest of the enforcers of a law with the challenged article and the interest of the justice, the terms “peut” and “may” should be removed from the versions of French and English languages to avoid confusion for the provision to be uniformly construed in all languages in which the law is drafted. The State Attorney also submits that the challenged article does not contradict the provision of article 29, paragraph 1, sub-paragraph c of the Constitution and neither does it conflict the principle of the right to due process of law such as the right to appear a competent court because any party dissatisfied with the ruling about the raised objection, has the right to file appeal against it together with the judgment on the merits when the decision cannot prevent the continuation of the hearing of the case on the merits, or he/she can immediately file appeal if the decision can lead to the termination of proceedings.
## Page 349
4 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
Held: 1. The Legislator provided for the right and procedure for any party who is dissatisfied by the court’s decision on the admissibility of his/her claim- If the decision can lead to the termination of proceedings, the dissatisfied party has the right to instantly file his/her appeal, but when the decision cannot prevent the continuation of the hearing of the case on the merits, the dissatisfied party has the right to lodge appeal against it together with the judgment on the merits. 2. Due to the fact that the party who raised the objection which was dismissed is entitled to file appeal against the ruling together with the judgment on the merits, he/she is different from a litigant who pleaded against it, who is entitled to immediately lodge appeal against the court decision which leads to the termination of proceedings; this does not imply the inequality before the law, because the two litigants are not in the same situation, and it has been so provided with reference to justified and reasonable grounds so as to avoid unnecessary dilatory proceedings. 3. The right to appear before a competent court is the right to be heard by a court entitled to hear the case. The petition lacks merit. Statutes referred to: Constitution of the Republic of Rwanda of 2003 as revised to date, articles 15, 29 and 96, Constitution of the Republic of Rwanda of 3/06/2003, article 19, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, article 14, Law N0 30/2018 of 02/08/2018 determining the jurisdiction of courts, article 44, Law N0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 relating to the civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure, articles 129 and 250.
## Page 350
5 Re. Dr BARIBWIRA
Cases referred to : Re Mironko François Xavier, RS/INCONST/SPEC00005/2023/SC, rendered by the Supreme Court on 07/03/2025. Re Murangwa Edward, RS/INCONST/SPEC00001/2022, rendered by the Supreme Court on 16/12/2022. Re Asiimwe Frank, RS/INCONST/SPEC00004/2020/SC, rendered by the Supreme Court on 26/03/2021. Murangwa Edward, RS/INCONST/SPEC00001/2019/SC rendered by the Supreme Court on 29/11/2019. Re Akagera Business Group (ABG), RS/SPEC/00001/16/CS, rendered by the Supreme Court on 23/09/2016. RCF/2019/ 655 endered by the Primary Court of Gihosha (Residence Court) on 26/11/2020. Constitutional Court, Decision N°91/2023, rendered on 08/06/2023, B.10, page 13. Case Konstantina Frantzeskaki v. Greece, Decision No 57275/17), Strasbourg, 12 February 2019. Affaire Zubac c. Croatie (Requête nᵒ 40160/12), Strasbourg, 4 April 2018. Affaire AshingdanE contre Royaume-Uni, Arrêt No 8225/78), Strasbourg, 28 May 1985. Scholars’ doctrines referred to: Droit judiciaire, Tome 2, Manuel de procédure civile, Bruxelles, Larcier, 2015, Hakim Boularbah, Olivier Caprasse et alii, sous la direction scientifique de Georges de Leval, p.772. Marc Uyttendaele, Précis de droit constitutionnel belge, Regard sur un système institutionnel paradoxal, Bruxelles, Bruylant, 2001, p. 481. A. Fettweis, A. Khol, G. de Leval, Eléments de compétence civile, Liège, P.ULG, 1988, p.1.
## Page 351
6 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
Cass., 5 Mai 2004, Pas., 2004, p.762, in Georges de Leval et Frédéric Georges, Droit judiciaire, Tome 1, Institutions judiciaires et éléments de compétence, Bruxelles, Larcier, 2014, 2è édition, p.78, note 15. Judgment I. BACKGROUND OF THE CASE
Dr Baribwira Cyprien filed a claim before the Supreme Court and requested the Court to declare that article 129, paragraph 3 of the Law N0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 relating to the civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure as amended to date1 contradicts the articles 15 and 29, paragraph 1, sub-paragraph c of the Constitution.
He argues that the ground for filing this claim is that in the divorce judgment he pleaded against his wife, Dr. Gahimbare Laetitia, the divorce was granted, before the Primary Court of Kicukiro and the Intermediate Court of Nyarugenge, wherein he raised an objection related to the claim inadmissibility, but the Court dismissed his objection and the hearing of the judgment on the merits proceeded. He states that the objection he raised is based on the fact that in the divorce case file, the above mentioned Courts referred their rulings on a related judgment rendered by the Burundian Court2, their home country, without observing any
1 This Law was amended by the Law N°007/2023 of 22/2023. 2 RCF/2019/ 655 rendered on 26/11/2020 by the Primary Court of Gihosha (Residence Court).
## Page 352
7 Re. Dr BARIBWIRA
procedure of “exequatur”3 as provided under the article 250 of the above mentioned Law N0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018.
He further submits that the continuation of the hearing while he had filed appeal against the decision about such objection, was possible in reference to the article 129, paragraph 3 of the challenged Law which provides that the decision establishing the inadmissibility of a claim may be subject to a separate appeal if such a decision can lead to the termination of proceedings, he notes that such a stance contradicts the above mentioned articles of the Constitution.
The State Attorney of the Republic of Rwanda submits that the impugned article does not contradict the articles 15 and 29, paragraph 1, sub-paragraph c of the Constitution, but she agrees that in the interest of the law enforcers, its drafting should be harmonized, its drafting in Kinyarwanda should be uniformly translated into English and French. The terms “can” and “peut” must be removed since they cause confusion.
The case was heard in public on 2 April 2025, Dr Baribwira Cyprien was represented by Counsel Pierre Claver Zitoni, while the Republic of Rwanda was represented by Counsel Umwali
3 The article 44 of the Law N°30/20218 of 02/06/2018 determining the jurisdiction of courts provides that the High Court hears cases for exequatur of judgments and decisions rendered by foreign courts. The consideration of such a judgment is conducted to ascertain whether: 1° the foreign judgment does not comprise an element incompatible with the public order and Rwandan law principles; 2° the judgment has acquired the force of res judicata in accordance with the laws of the country of origin; 3° the copy of the judgment fulfils all the conditions necessary for its authenticity in accordance with such laws; 4° the rights of defence have been respected.
## Page 353
8 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
Munyentwali Claire and the Court firstly examined the issue related to the interest that Dr Baribwira Cyprien has into this case. - Concerning the interest that Dr. Baribwira Cyprien has into this case
Having heard both parties concurring on the fact that the claimant has interest into this case and the bench made an instant decision, the Court held that he has interest into the case since the article he is challenging concerns all citizens in general, including himself, so that it can affect their right; this is one of the grounds held by the Supreme Court that justify the analysis of the issue related to the interest of the plaintiff who files the claim about the unconstitutionality4.
With regard to the merits of the case, the parties debated on whether the article 129, paragraph 3 of the Law N0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 relating to the civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure as amended to date, contradicts the articles 15, and 29, paragraph 1, sub-paragraph c of the Constitution.
4 Interlocutory judgment rendered on 16/12/2022, case RS/INCONST/SPEC00001/2022, party: Murangwa Edward, §17, p.10.
## Page 354
9 Re. Dr BARIBWIRA
II. ANALYSIS OF THE ISSUES OF THE CASE 1. Whether the article 129, paragraph 3 of Law N0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 relating to the civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure as amended to date contradicts the article 15 of the Constitution
Dr Baribwira Cyprien argues that the article 129, paragraph 3 of the Law N0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 relating to the civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure as amended to date, which provides that the decision establishing the inadmissibility of a claim may be subject to a separate appeal if such a decision can lead to the termination of proceedings, contradicts the article 15 of the Constitution of the Republic of Rwanda, which provides that all human beings are equal before the law. They enjoy equal protection of the law. In the case RCA 00139/2021/TGI/NYGE rendered by the Intermediate Court of Nyarugenge on 28/12/2022, he raised an objection related to the inadmissibility of the other party’s claim, but his objection was dismissed, and the hearing rather proceeded with the judgment on the merits.
He states that his objection was not considered by the Court, rather it proceeded with the hearing of the case merits, because the challenged article 129, paragraph 3 of the Law N0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 relating to the civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure as amended to date, prevents him from appealing against the court’s decision; in case his objection was considered, the other party would have been allowed to file an immediate appeal; therefore he notes that such a provision discriminates the litigants, since it only allows the party who did
## Page 355
10 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
not raise the objection to lodge appeal, a scenario that conflicts the principle of equality before the law.
The State Attorney, Counsel Umwali Munyentwali Claire, who represented the Republic of Rwanda, states that the principle of equality before the law which is provided under the article 15 of the Constitution, denotes that the law is equally applied to the human beings, the human being in the same category or in similar situations should be equally treated; the article 129, paragraph 3 of the Law N0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 relating to the civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure as amended to date, is not unconstitutional, as the decision does not terminate the proceedings, rather the appeal against such decision should be filed together with the judgment on the merits, the party that raised the objection is not wronged; while when the objection is admitted, the proceedings are immediately terminated, while the party losing about the objection is unable to immediately file appeal against such decision without waiting for the judgment on the merits, he/she is irreversibly deprived of the right.
Pleading about the statements of Dr Baribwira Cyprien, she sustains that the interpretation in Kinyarwanda of the article 129, paragraph 3 of the Law N0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 relating to the civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure as amended to date, is different from its versions in English and French languages, the Kinyarwanda version should be applied as it is the language of the law adoption, as provided under the article 96 (4) of the Constitution.
She however concludes by submitting that in the interest of the challenged law enforcers and of justice, the terms “peut” and “may” should be removed for avoiding the confusion in French and
## Page 356
11 Re. Dr BARIBWIRA
English, so that the challenged article should be uniformly construed in all languages. DETERMIANTION OF THE COURT
Article 15 of the Constitution provides that all human beings are equal before the law. They enjoy equal protection of the law.
The provisions of the above article have been explained by this Court through different cases that include the case RS/SPEC 00001/16/CS rendered on 23 September 2016, wherein the party was Akagera Business Group (ABG). In that case, the Court explained that the article 15 of the Constitution which provides that all human beings are equal before the law. They enjoy equal protection of the law; this implies that there should not be discrimination which should cause their inequality or non- enjoyment of their entitled rights5.
The Court has also explained that equality before the law and non-discrimination may not mean that differentiating the human beings in all circumstances is discrimination, differentiating the people or categories of people might be necessary depending on legitimate and rational purpose6.
In the case RS/INCONST/SPEC 00001/2019/SC rendered on 29 November 2019, wherein the party was Murangwa Edward, the Court again explained how the principle of equality before the law should be interpreted, it held that things that are alike should
5 See Judgment RS/SPEC/00001/16/CS rendered on 23/09/2016, wherein the party was Akagera Business Group (ABC), paragraph 15 6 Ibidem, Para 18.
## Page 357
12 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
be treated alike, and things that are unalike should be treated unalike in proportion to their unlikeness7.
The legal scholar Marck Uyttendaele has as well stated that the equality before the law should mean that all persons must be equally treated without inequality nor discrimination, an enacted law should equally treat the targeted people; however, even if the human beings should be equal before the law, differentiating or categorizing them cannot always be considered as discrimination in case of justified and reasonable purpose (justifié et raisonnable)8; the discrimination can be considered when the people are differentiated without justified nor reasonable purpose9.
The provision of the article 129, paragraph 3 of the Law N0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 relating to the civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure as amended to date, challenged by the claimant alleging that it contradicts the article 15 of the Constitution, it provides that the decision establishing the inadmissibility of a claim may be subject to a separate appeal if such a decision can lead to the termination of proceedings. Dr Baribwira Cyprien states that such article creates the inequality of
7 See Judgment RS/INCONST/SPEC00001/2019/SC, rendered on 29/11/2019, wherein the party was Murangwa Edward, paragraph 34. 8 Les regles constitutionnelles de l’égalité des Belges et de la non-discrimination n’excluent pas qu’une différence de traitement soit établie selon certaines catégories de personnes pour autant que le critére de différenciation soit susceptible de justification et raisonable et que l’existence d’une telle justification doit s’apprécier par rapport au but et aux effets de la norme considérée; le principe de l’égalité est violé lorsqu’il est établi qu’il n’existe pas de rapport raisonable de proportionalité entre les moyens employés et le but visé”. ( Marc Uyttendaele, Précis de droit constitutionnel belge, Regard sur un système instutionnel paradoxal, Bruxelles, Bruylant, 2001, P. 481). 9 Issues reiterated by the Belgium Constitutional Court, Constitutional Court, Decision N°91/2023renderd on 08/06/2023, B.10, page 13.
## Page 358
13 Re. Dr BARIBWIRA
parties because the party that raises the objection which is not considered, is not entitled to immediately file appeal, but he/she waits for the judgment on the merits; however, in case such objection is considered, the party who does not raise the objection is entitled to immediately file appeal against the decision taken on it.
The legal scholars explain that an appeal is an ordinary procedure by which a party that feels aggrieved by a judgement requests the court higher than the one having heard the case to quash or rectify such judgment.10
The Court finds that the Legislator provided to any aggrieved party the right and the procedure for filing appeal against the court’s decision on the admissibility of his/her claim. In case the decision leads to the termination of proceedings, the dissatisfied party is entitled to immediately file appeal, but when the court’s decision allows proceeding with the hearing on the case merits, the unsatisfied party is entitled to file appeal against it together with the judgment on the merits.
The Court finds that discrimination is considered when the law unequally treats the litigants whose objections are dismissed : whereby some are entitled to lodge immediate appeal against the decision without waiting for the judgment on the merits, others are not entitled to so proceed while they are all in a similar situation. Due to the fact that when the raised objection is admitted, the party
10 “L’appel est la voie de recours ordinaire par laquelle la partie qui s’estime lésée par un jugement en sollicite l’annulation ou la reformation par une juridiction supérieure” (Droit judiciaire, Tome 2, Manuel de procédure civile, Bruxelles, Larcier, 2015, Hakim Boularbah, Olivier Caprasse et alii, sous la direction scientifique de Georges de Leval, p.772).
## Page 359
14 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
pleading about it is entitled to immediately file appeal, it is evident that when the raised objection is admitted, the proceedings are terminated; this means that the party pleading about it does not immediately file appeal, is irreversibly deprived of such right. Such party should not be considered as being in the same situation as the one who raised the objection which is not admitted.
The Court therefore finds that the fact that paragraph 3 of article 129 of the above mentioned Law N0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 differentiating the parties cannot be interpreted as inequality before the law, more so that they are not in the same situations and it has been so provided due to justified and reasonable grounds that include avoiding unnecessary dilatory proceedings.
Considering all the above provided explanations, the Court finds that article 129, paragraph 3 of the Law N0 22/2018 of 29/04/2019 relating to the civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure as amended to date, does not contradict the provisions of article 15 of the Constitution. 2. Whether the article 129, paragraph 3 of the Law N0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 relating to the civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure as amended to date contradicts the article 29, paragraph 1, sub-paragraph c of the Constitution
Dr Baribwira Cyprien avers that the article 129 paragraph 3 of the Law N0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 relating to the civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure as amended to date contradicts the provisions of article 29, paragraph 1, sub- paragraph c of the Constitution, because it violates the rights to due process of law, notably the litigant’s right to appear before a competent court. He submits that he bases his argument on the fact
## Page 360
15 Re. Dr BARIBWIRA
that he raised the objection related to the inadmissibility of his other party’s claim before the Intermediate Court of Nyarugenge and it was not admitted, rather the hearing of the case on the merits proceeded.
The State Attorney states that the above mentioned article does not contradict the Constitution, neither does it violate the right to due process of law, especially the party’s right to appear before a competent court, because any litigant dissatisfied with the ruling of the judgment on the merits about the raised objection, has the right to file appeal against it together with the judgment on the merits, in case such decision cannot lead to the termination of the proceedings or to immediately lodge appeal against it in case such decision can lead to the termination of the proceedings. In other words, she sustains that the right to appear before a competent court provided under the article 129, paragraph 3 of the above mentioned Law N0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018, because each party, depending on the situations, is entitled with the procedure of proving that he/she is dissatisfied with the ruling. DETERMINATION OF THE COURT
Article 29, paragraph 1, sub-paragraph c of the Constitution provides that everyone has the right to due process of law, which includes the right to appear before a competent court.
The above mentioned right is also enshrined in International Conventions that Rwanda has ratified. We can hereby cite article 14, paragraph 1 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights which provides that […] everyone shall be entitled to a fair
## Page 361
16 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
and public hearing by a competent, independent and impartial court established by law11.
In the judgment RS/INCONST/SPEC 00004/2020/SC rendered on 26 March 2021, wherein the party was Asiimwe Frank, this Court held that the right to appear before a competent court is one of the rights meant for due process of law12.
In the judgment RS/INCONST/SPEC 00005/2023/ SC rendered on 07 March 2025, wherein the party was Mironko François-Xavier, this Court held that for a litigant to enjoy the right to fair trial, the litigant’s case must have observed the following (d): everyone has the right to be heard by a competent, independent and impartial court established by law, and this requirement is coupled with the principle that no one should be a judge for his/ her own cause13.
In this case, the issue at hand is the decision about the inadmissibility of the objection which was not considered, when the party who raised it filed appeal, the hearing of the judgment on the merits was not immediately terminated, rather it proceeded, before the Court which took such decision. The applicant states that he notes that the right to due process of law by appearing before a competent court would have been observed if his appeal on the
11 “All persons shall be equal before the courts and tribunals. In the determination of any criminal charge against him, or of his rights and obligations in a suit at law, everyone shall be entitled to a fair and public hearing by a competent, independent and impartial tribunal established by law. […]”. 12 See Judgment Nᵒ RS/INCONST/SPEC 00004/2020/SC rendered by the Supreme Court on 26/03/2021, wherein the party was Asiimwe Frank, paragraphs 18 and 19. 13 See Judgment RS/INCONST/SPEC00005/2023 rendered on 07/03/2025, wherein the party was Mironko François-Xavier, paragraph 35
## Page 362
17 Re. Dr BARIBWIRA
objection was immediately heard by the court higher than the one having heard the case. In other words, for him, his right to appear before a competent court would have been respected, only if his appeal on the objection had led to the termination of proceedings, pending a ruling on his objection ; just as it is the case for the other party, if the objection leads to the termination of proceedings.
The legal scholars explain that the court’s jurisdiction is its portion entitled to each court, in consideration of all courts14, the jurisdiction is the authority to hear and render a case15.
This denotes that, for a litigant, the right to appear before a competent court is the right to be heard by a court that has been legally established to hear his /her case; such a court must be firstly provided under the law, instead of being established by the time when the issue occurs. For example, if Rwanda Revenue Authority (RRA) incriminates a company X for the unpaid taxes, it will take X to the commercial courts, since it is the commercial courts that have the jurisdiction to hear tax-related claims. Therefore, they are entitled with such jurisdiction.
Anyone who needs to understand “the competent court” as it is provided under article 29 of the Constitution, he/she should read jointly all its sub-paragraphs (b) and (c). The sub-paragraph (b) reads that (…), Everyone has a right to due process of law which includes the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty by a competent court, while the sub-paragraph (c) provides for the right
14 “La compétence est la portion de juridiction attribuée par la loi à chacun des tribunaux de l’ordre judiciaire” (A. Fettweis, A. Khol, G. de Leval, Eléments de compétence civile, Liège, P.ULG, 1988, p.1). 15 “Pour une juridiction, [la] compétence est l’aptitude à instruire et juger une affaire, à en connaître” (Gerard Cornu, Vocabulaire juridique, V°, compétence).
## Page 363
18 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
to appear before a competent court. The provision of sub-paragraph (b) concerns the criminal matters, a suspect is tried by a court firstly provided under the law and which exists by the time of the offence commission and has the jurisdiction to hear the case.
[34] In the sub-paragraph (c) of the article 29, the idea is about the competent court in general. Even at this point, such a court must be established by the law, existing and competent to hear the party’s case. The common idea in sub-paragraphs (b) and (c) is that a competent court must have been established by a law, it cannot be an ad-hoc court, specifically established.
The underlying idea of article 29 (b) and (c) of the Constitution is as well reflected in other countries’ Constitutions. For example, article 15 of the Belgium Constitution provides under the article 15 that no one shall be barred from being heard by his/her legally entitled judge16. The Cassation Court of Belgium explained that the rationale of such article is that everyone must be tried with reference to the existing laws relating to the jurisdiction of courts and judicial procedures, none shall be brought before any court other than the legally provided and existing ones17.
16 Nul ne peut être distrait, contre son gré, du juge que la loi lui assigne”. This was the language of the principle under the Rwandan Constitution of 03 June 2003. See article 19, paragraph 2, French translation. 17 “L’article 13 de la Constitution (…) énonce que nul ne peut être distrait, contre son gré, du juge que la loi lui assigne, signifie uniquement que toute personne doit être jugée suivant les règles de compétence et de procédure objectivement fixées et ne peut être citée devant une juridiction autre que celle prévue par la loi” (Cass., 5 mai 2004, Pas., 2004, p.762, in Georges de Leval et Frédéric Georges, Droit judiciaire, Tome 1, Institutions judiciaires et éléments de compétence, Bruxelles, Larcier, 2014, 2è édition, p.78, note 15).
## Page 364
19 Re. Dr BARIBWIRA
In the case Zubac v. Croatia, the European Court of Human Rights explained that the right to appear before a competent court is a right that is provided under article 6 (1) of the European Convention on Human Rights, the Court elucidated that everyone has the right to have his rights and obligation grievances referred to a court, and the court clarified about a need for well-structured judicial procedures for referring matters to courts and seeking restoration of any violated rights18.
In the case Ashingdone v. United Kingdom19, and the case Konstantina Frantzeskaki v. Greece20, the European Court of
18 Affaire Zubac c. Croatie (Requête nᵒ 40160/12), Strasbourg, 4 Avril 2018, §§ 76 et suivants: “Le droit d’accès à un tribunal a été défini comme un aspect du droit à un tribunal au sens de l’article 6 § 1 de la Convention. Se référant aux principes de la prééminence du droit et de l’interdiction de tout pouvoir arbitraire qui sous-tendent pour une bonne part la Convention, la Cour y avait conclu que le droit d’accès à un tribunal était un élément inhérent aux garanties consacrées par l’article 6. Ainsi, l’article 6 § 1 garantit à chacun le droit de faire statuer par un tribunal sur toute contestation portant sur ses droits et obligations de caractère civil”. 19 Affaire Ashingdane contre Royaume-Uni, Arrêt No 8225/78), Strasbourg, 28 Mai 1985, § 57: “[….] Le droit d’accès aux tribunaux n’est pas absolu. Il peut donner lieu à des limitations implicitement admises car il appelle de par sa nature même une réglementation par l’État, réglementation qui peut varier dans le temps et dans l’espace en fonction des besoins et des ressources de la communauté et des individus. Elles ne se concilient avec l’article 6 par. 1 que si elles poursuivent un but légitime et s’il existe un rapport raisonnable de proportionnalité entre les moyens employés et le but visé”. 20 Affaire Konstantina Frantzeskaki contre la Grèce, Arrêt No 57275/17), Strasbourg, 12 février 2019, § 29-30: “[….] Toutefois, le droit d’accès à un tribunal n’est pas absolu et se prête à des limitations implicitement admises, car il appelle de par sa nature même une réglementation par l’État, lequel jouit à cet égard d’une certaine marge d’appréciation. En outre, les limitations appliquées ne se concilient avec l’article 6 § 1 de la Convention que si elles poursuivent un but légitime et s’il existe un rapport raisonnable de proportionnalité entre les moyens employés et le but visé”.
## Page 365
20 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
Human Rights clarified that the litigant’s right to be heard by a competent court should not be considered absolute. It was so held since States always reserve a right to limit such a right due to some justified purpose and the existence of reasonable nexus between the applied procedure and the purpose.
The Court finds that the statements of Dr Baribwira Cyprien that his right to appear before a competent court was violated, as he is not entitled to lodge appeal against the objection he only raised, cannot be considered because the fact that the Legislator provided that the court’s decision on an objection can only be separately appealed when such decision can lead to the termination of the proceedings, but when such a decision does not lead to the termination of the case on the merits, any dissatisfied party has the right to file appeal against it together with the judgment on the merits, does not deprive him of his right to appear before a competent court, as above elucidated.
The fact that the Legislator provides that the decision on the objection can be separately appealed when such a decision can lead to the termination of the proceedings, is not a particularity of Rwanda, since it is also provided under the laws of other countries such as Italy21.
The Court finds that article 129, paragraph 3 of the above mentioned Law N0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 does not contract the article 29, paragraph 1, sub-paragraph c of the Constitution, neither does it deprive Dr Baribwira Cyprien of his right to due process of
21 “En Italie, selon l'article 340 du Code de procédure civile, une décision rendue sur une fin de non-recevoir est susceptible d'appel séparé si elle met fin à l'instance. Cette règle s'applique également aux décisions interlocutoires, à condition qu'elles aient un effet substantiel sur la poursuite de l'instance”.
## Page 366
21 Re. Dr BARIBWIRA
law, more especially his right to appear before a competent court, because, the fact that he is not entitled to immediately lodge appeal against the decision on the objection related to the inadmissibility of the claim he filed, does not deprive him of the right to so proceed when the judgment on the merits is pronounced and he is dissatisfied with its decision.
Regarding the statements of Dr Baribwira Cyprien that the impugned article contains typographical errors in the judgement copy, the rectification of typographical errors cannot be effectuated along with the application seeking to declare unconstitutional the legal provisions.
Considering all the above provided explanations, the Court finds that article 129, paragraph 3 of the Law N0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 relating to the civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure, does not contradict the provisions of article 29, paragraph 1, sub-paragraph c of the Constitution. III. DECISION OF THE COURT
Holds that the application filed by Dr Baribwira Cyprien seeking to declare unconstitutional the article 129, paragraph 3 of the Law N0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 relating to the civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure as amended to date, is unfounded.
Holds that article 129, paragraph 3 of the Law N0 22/2028 of 29/04/2018 relating to the civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure as amended to date, does not contradict the articles 15 and 29, paragraph 1, sub-paragraph c of the Constitution of the Republic of Rwanda.
## Page 367
22 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
## Page 368
23 Re BUCYESENGE MENDE
Re. BUCYENSENGE MENDE [Rwanda SUPREME COURT – RS/INCONST/SPEC00006/2023/SC (Mukantaganzwa, P.J., Hitiyaremye, Cyanzayire, Kazungu and Kalihangabo, J.) April 25, 2025] The Constitution – The principle of equality before the law – The fact that a category of parties before the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court are not allowed to make a third party opposition against judgments rendered by those courts, while parties before other courts are allowed to make a third party opposition against judgments rendered there, does not contradict the principle of equality before the law, as it is based on a reasonable and legitimate ground, namely the jurisdiction of the courts and the general principle that judicial proceedings have an end. The Constitution – The right to due process of law – The right to appear before a competent court – A third party opposition against judgments rendered by the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court – The fact that the legislator, in their discretion, chose to include article 161, paragraph 4 of Law n0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 relating to the civil, commercial, labour, and administrative procedure, intended a legitimate purpose of ensuring fair administration of justice, whereby a third party opposition against a judgment rendered by the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court would deprive the losing party of the right to appeal at least once, since the judgments rendered by these courts are not subject to appeal. The Constitution – Unconstitutional – Right to private property – A law would be deemed contrary to article 34 of the Constitution, which guarantees the right to private property, either it deprives 23
## Page 369
24 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
an individual of their property rights or permits interference without granting them any rights in return, or prevents them from freely enjoying their property. Facts: Bucyensenge Mende filed a petition before the Supreme Court, seeking to declare article 161, paragraph 4 of Law n0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 relating to the Civil, Commercial, Labour and Administrative Procedure as amended, which provides that judgments rendered by the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court shall not be subject to third party opposition, repealed as it contradicts articles 15, 29, and 34 of the Constitution of the Republic of Rwanda. Bucyesenge Mende filed this petition following previous cases which led him to buy, through auction, the property of Valois, who had failed to repay Dusabe, his creditor, an amount of 61,420 US dollars. Before the properties being sold, a non-professional court bailiff discovered that Valois co-owned them with his siblings, which required first bringing the matter before the Intermediate Court of Rubavu to determine his share. The judgment was decided on 05/04/2019, decided that the properties jointly owned by Valois and his siblings should be partitioned, and that his share shall be sold to execute the judgment. Valois and Dusabe appealed to the High Court, Musanze Chamber, which, on 31/07/2019, upheld the decision of the Intermediate Court of Rubavu. Valois and his siblings then appealed to the Court of Appeal, which declared their appeal unfounded. After those judgments, the non-professional court bailiff auctioned all properties, which were bought by Bucyesenge Mende for 111,600,000 Rwandan francs. From that amount, Valois’s share was deducted to pay Dusabe, and the remaining was allocated to his siblings.
## Page 370
25 Re BUCYESENGE MENDE
Valois and his siblings, together with Dusabe, filed a case review before the Court of Appeal, the case was rendered by the Court of Appeal which had previously declared their appeal unfounded. They apploaded a settlement agreement in the IECMS, and on 27/06/2025, the Court of Appeal confirmed that agreement reached between Valois and his siblings on one side, and Dusabe on the other side, thereby concludes case RC00001/2022/CA, and that their terms shall be enforced. Bucyensenge Mende states that after learning that the judgment in which he based on buying the properties at auction was replaced by a settlement agreement, he sought to apply for third party opposition against the said case RC00001/2022/CA in order to protect his interests, and was prevented by article 161, paragraph 4 of Law n0 22/2018 mentioned above; which provides that judgments rendered by the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court shall not be subject to third party opposition. It is on the ground that he decides to file a petition to the Supreme Court seeking to declare paragraph repealed as it contradicts articles 15, 29 and 34 of the Constitution. Mende argues that the law allows a person who feels aggrieved by decisions rendered by other courts to for application for thirdy party opposition against those decisions, however, article 161, paragraph 4 of Law n0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 mentioned above, prohibits a person who feels aggrieved by a decision rendered by the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court from application for third party opposition against that decision, contradicts articles 15, 29, and 34 of the Constitution. He states that this paragraph 4 deprives a person of the right to make a third-party opposition against a decision of the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court in case they feel aggrieved, whereas a person who feels aggrieved by decisions of other courts is allowed to do so. He considers this contrary to
## Page 371
26 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
article 15 of the Constitution because it does not equally treat all individuals to seek redress. Mende explains that paragraph 4 contradicts article 29 of the Constitution because it deprives a person who feels aggrieved by a decision of the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court of the right to have their case heard before a competent court during third party opposition, which is the only means by which they could seek redress before a court which rendered a decision that adversely affected their interests. He concludes saying that paragraph 4 also contradics article 34 of the Constitution because it prevents him from protecting property he bought at an auction while enforcing the judgment rendered by the Court of Appeal, and from registering that property, especially since a judgment under case review was also rendred by the Court of Appeal which declared it invalid, never appeared as a party. He explains that the Court of Appeal’s decision infringes upon and undermines his rights over that property; therefore, he requests that paragraph 4 be repealed to allow him to make a third-party opposition against that judgment. The State attorney in this instant case explains that by the time article 161, paragraph 4 of Law n0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 mentioned above, was included in the law, the legislator intended to prevent from initiating new cases in higher courts because the Court of Appeal ordinarily only hears cases at appeal level, while the Supreme Court examines matters either at the last instance or at both first and last instance, depending on the competence granted by law. He adds that application for a third-party opposition against decisions rendered by these courts is not possible, as doing so would amount to initiating a new lawsuit. He further explains that the plaintiff’s claim that this provision contradicts the principle of equality before the law is incorrect, because that principle means treating individuals who are in the
## Page 372
27 Re BUCYESENGE MENDE
same category with the same condition. He explains that the fact that this paragraph distinguishes between a person who feels aggrieved by a decision of the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court and a person who feels aggrieved by a decision of other courts does not amount to unequal treatment since they do not belong to the same category. The State attorney further explains that the fact that judments rendered the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court cannot be subject to third party opposition does not, by itself, deprive a person of the right to have their case heard before a competent court, because the law provides alternative procedure to seek redress at the first instance for matters that could otherwise be raised in judgment for third party opposition. He notes that the plaintiff can use the procedure of claim for the inconsistency of judgments, since there are precedents where such matters were addressed in cases decided by these higher courts such as case RCOM00001/2016/CA decided on 03/07/2020, and case RS/SPEC00002/13/SC decided on 14/07/2017. He further mentions another procedure in which the plaintiff could use to recover the amount paid for the property at auction and to claim compensation for being dragged into aunction after buying he was cheated by reaching agreement with the owner of the auctioned property. This procedure involves filing a lawsuit at the first instance against the court bailiff and Dusabe, who requested him to execute the judgment. The State attorney in this case concludes by stating that paragraph 4 does not contradict article 34 of the Constitution, because plaintiff cannot make a third party oopposition against a judgment rendered by the Court of Appeal in a way that would be considered an infringement on his rights over property bought at auction, since there are other legal remedies, he can use to seek redress.
## Page 373
28 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
Held: 1. The fact that the category of the parties appears before the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court are not allowed to make a third-party opposition against judgments rendered by those courts, while the category of the parties appears before other courts are permitted to make a third-party opposition against judgments rendered therein, does not contradict the principle of equality before the law. This distinction is based on a reasonable and well- founded justification, namely the jurisdictional competence and the general principle that judicial proceedings must have an end. 2. The fact that the legislator, in their discretion, deemed it necessary to include article 161 paragraph 4 of of Law n0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 relating to the civil, commercial, labour, and administrative procedure, intended a legitimate purpose of safeguarding the proper administration of justice instead of making a third party opposition against judgments rendered by the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court which would deprive the losing party of the right to appeal at least once, given that judgments rendered by these courts are not subject to appeal. 3. A law would be considered contrary to article 34 of the Constitution, which guarantees the right to private property, if it deprives an individual of their property rights, or allows interference with such property without due process, or prevents the owner from from freely enjoying their property. Petition seeking to declare a provison of law inconsistent with the Constitutional of the Republic of Rwanda, unfounded. Statutes and statutory referred to: The Constitutional of the Republic of Rwanda of 2003 revised todate, article 15, 29, 34 and 153.
## Page 374
29 Re BUCYESENGE MENDE
Unviversal Declaration of Human Rights 1948, article 7, 10 and 17. Internation Covenant on Civil and Political of 1966, article 14 and 26. African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights of 1981, article 3, 7 and 14. European Convention on Human Right, article 6. Law nᵒ 30/2018 of 02/06/2018 determining the jurisdiction of courts, article 52. Law no 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 relating to the civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure, article 161, 162 and 165. Caselaws referred to: Re Feminist Action Development Ambition (FADA), RS/INCONST/SPEC00004/2019/SC, rendered by the Supreme Court on 26/04/2024. Re Uwombonye Hirwa Sudi, RS/INCONST/SPEC00002/2023/SC rendered by the Supreme Court on 12/04/2024. Re Kamanzi Anaclet, RS/INCONST/SPEC00002/2022/SC, rendered by the Supreme Court on 31/03/2023. Re Ngendahayo Kabuye, RS/INJUST/SPEC00004/2021/SC, rendered by the Supreme Court on 10/02/2023. Re Murangwa Edward, RS/INCONST/SPEC00001/2022/SC, rendered by the Supreme Court on 16/12/2022. Re Asiimwe Frank, RS/INCONST/SPEC00004/2020/SC, rendered by the Supreme Court on 26/03/2021. Re Murangwa Edward, RS/ INCONST/SPEC00001/2019/SC, rendered by the Supreme Court on 29/11/2019.
## Page 375
30 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
Doctrines referred to: Conseil de l’Europe et la Cour européenne des droits de l’homme, Manuel de droit Européen en matière d’accès à la Justice, p. 27. Judgment I. BACKGROUND OF THE CASE
On December 13, 2023, Bucyensenge Mende Claude filed a petition before the Supreme Court, seeking to declare article 161 paragraph 4 of Law n0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 relating to the civil, commercial, labour, and administrative procedure as amended, repealed on the grounds that it is inconsistent with articles 15, 29, and 34 of the Constitution of the Republic of Rwanda.
He explained that a person named Dusabe Fazil had borrowed Valois Jean Marie 61,420 US dollars ($), and when the time came for repayment, Valois issued bouncing checks. As a result, the Prosecution charged him before the Primary Court of Kacyiru with the offense of issuing bouncing checks. He states that Valois Jean Marie was found guilty and sentenced to five months’ imprisonment, a fine of 61,420 USD, an order to reimburse Dusabe Fazil 61,420 USD corresponding to the bouncing checks he had issued, and 400,000Frw of damages.
He stated that after the judgment became final, Dusabe Fazil sought for a professional court bailiff for execution and it was discovered that the property belonging to Valois Jean Marie was
## Page 376
31 Re BUCYESENGE MENDE
jointly owned with his siblings1. The professional court bailiff seized the property, and filed a case before the Intermediate Court of Rubavu seeking to determine the share of Valois Jean Marie in that property so that it could be used for repayment. The case was decided on April 5, 2019, and the court declared the property jointly owned by Valois Jean Marie and his siblings divided, and his share be sold for judgment execution.
Dusabe Fazil and Valois Jean Marie appealed that decision to the High Court, Musanze Chamber, which on July 31, 2019, upheld the decision of the Intermediate Court of Rubavu. Valois Jean Marie and his siblings further appealed the case to the Court of Appeal, which rendered judgment n0 RCAA00017/2019/CA on October 3, 2019, declared their appeal unfounded.
On December 14, 2021, for the purpose of judgment execution, the professional court bailiff, Niyonshuti Iddi Ibrahim, sold at auction the properties with UPIs: 3/03/04/05/1837, 3/03/04/05/1838, 3/03/04/05/1852, and 3/03/04/05/1853. The properties were bought by Bucyensenge Mende Claude for 111,600,000Frw. From the proceeds, Valois Jean Marie’s share was used to repay Dusabe Fazil, and the remaining amount was given to his siblings.
On November 10, 2022, Valois Jean Marie and his siblings filed a case before the Court of Appeal seeking a case review n0 RCAA00017/2019/CA, which had been decided on October 3, 2019. The new case was registered under 00001/2022/CA. The hearing of May 17, 2023, was postponed after the parties’ counsels
1 Valois Jean Felix, Valois Jean Paul, Valois Jean Pierre, Valois Marie Rose are all the children of Kaptura Felix and his heirs.
## Page 377
32 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
informed the Court that they wished to settle their disputes amicable.
On June 15, 2023, the parties uploaded their settlement agreement to the IECMS, and on June 27, 2025, the Court of Appeal declared the amicable settlement reached between Valois Jean Marie and his siblings on one side, and Dusabe Fazil on the other, concluded case n0 00001/2022/CA and ordered that the terms of the settlement agreement be enforced.
Bucyensenge Mende Claude stated that after learning that the judgment on the basis of which he had purchased the property at auction had been replaced by a settlement agreement, he sought to make a third party opposition against case n0 00001/2022/CA to protect his interests but was prevented from doing so by article 161, paragraph 4 of the aforementioned Law n0 22/2018, which provides that judgments rendered by the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court shall not be subject to third party opposition. For this reason, he decided to file a petition before the Supreme Court, seeking to declare a paragraph unconstitutional as it contracts articles 15, 29, and 34 of the Constitution.
The hearing was held in public on March 10, 2025, with Bucyensenge Mende Claude represented by Counsel Kwizera Bernard while the Government of Rwanda represented by Counsel Kabibi Speciose. During the hearing, the Court first examined whether Bucyensenge Mende Claude had interest in the case. Regarding the interest that Bucyensenge Mende Claude has in this case
After examining the submission prepared by counsel for Bucyensenge Mende Claude regarding the interest of Bucyensenge
## Page 378
33 Re BUCYESENGE MENDE
Mende Claude has in the case, the Court rendered the judgment in bench based on the interlocutory judgment RS/INCONST/SPEC00001/2022/SC decided by the Supreme Court on December 16, 2022 of Re Murangwa Edward where the Court explained that in order to declare that the plaintiff has interest in the case, it must atleast base on one of the following grounds: 1) The fact that a law which is alleged to be unconstitutional specifically concerns the plaintiff or category to which s/he belongs, so that s/he has a personal interest in filing the case. For instance, a law concerning journalists, medical professionals, teachers, and others; 2) The fact that a law which is alleged to be unconstitutional in general concerns the general public in a way that it may affect their rights; in such a case, any person who may be affected by it has the interest to bring it before the Court to declare it unconstitutional; 3) The fact that the plaintiff is an advocate; in the interest of justice, they are allowed to file a case to promote the law or the rights of those affected by the law alleged to be unconstitutional, even if they have no personal interest in the case.
Regarding this case, the Court found that article 161, paragraph 4 of Law n0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 mentioned above concerns all citizens in general, including Bucyensenge Mende Claude, and therefore ruled that he has the interest in this case.
Regarding the merits of the case, the counsel for Bucyensenge Mende Claude explained the fact that the law allows
## Page 379
34 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
a person who feels aggrieved by decisions made in cases tried by other courts to make a third party opposition against those decisions, article 161, paragraph 4 of Law n0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 mentioned above prohibits a person who feels aggrieved by a decision made in a case tried by the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court from applying for third party opposition against such case, contradicts article 15, 29, and 34 of the Constitution.
The State Attorney explains that nowhere does article 161, paragraph 4 of Law n0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 mentioned above contradicts the provisions of the Constitution as alleged by the plaintiff.
The Court examined the issue of whether article 161, paragraph 4 of Law n0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 as amended, relating to the civil, commercial, labour, and administrative procedure, contradicts article 15, 29(1)(c) and 34 of the Constitution. II. ANALYSIS OF LEGAL ISSUE Whether article 161, paragraph 4 of Law n0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 as amended, relating to the civil, commercial, labour, and administrative procedure, contradicts article 15, 29(1)(c) and 34 of the Constitution
The counsel for Bucyensenge Mende Claude states that article 161, paragraph one of Law n0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 mentioned above, provides that third party opposition considers as a claim for the annulment or modification of a judgment requested by a person who was not a party to the case, while article 162 of the same law states that a person who was not a party to a case but who has an interest in it may make a third-party opposition to set
## Page 380
35 Re BUCYESENGE MENDE
aside a judgement which is prejudicial to his or her rights and if neither that person nor the person he or she represents were summoned at the trial.
He explains that the fact that of article 161, paragraph 4 of Law n0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 mentioned above, denies a person the right to make a third-party opposition against a judgment rendered by the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court when s/he feels aggrieved, while allowing such a right to those who feel aggrieved by judgments rendered by other courts, contradicts article 15 of the Constitution2 because it does not treat all persons equally nor protect them in the same manner.
He further explains that article 161, paragraph 4 of Law n0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 mentioned above, contradicts article 29(1)(c) of the Constitution3 because it deprives a person who feels aggrieved by a judgment rendered by the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court of the right to seek justice before a competent court by making a third party opposition, even though it was the only procedure through which they could have defended their interests before the court that rendered the judgment adversely affecting them.
He also explains that article 161, paragraph 4 of Law n0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 mentioned above, contradicts article 34 of the Constitution4 because it prevents him from protecting the
2 All human beings are equal before the law. They enjoy equal protection of the law. 3 Everyone has the right to due process of law which includes the right to appear before a competent Court 4 It provides that everyone has the right to private property, whether individually or collectively owned. Private property, whether owned individually or
## Page 381
36 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
property purchased through a public auction carried out in execution of judgment RCAA00017/2019/C as he failed to register it in his name due to judgment RCAA00001/2022/CA rendered by the Court of Appeal which annulled the previous judgment to which he did not appear. He further explains that the decision of the Court of Appeal infringed and undermined his property rights over that asset; hence, he requests that the said paragraph be repealed so that he may have the opportunity to challenge that judgment.
The State attorney explains that article 161, paragraph 4 of Law n0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 mentioned above, was included in the law, because the legislator intended to prevent cases from being initiated before higher courts, given that the Court of Appeal ordinarily hears cases only at the appellate level, while the Supreme Court examines matters either at the final level or at both the first and final instance based on the competence granted to it by law and that application for third party opposition against decisions rendered by these courts is not possible as doing so, would amount to initiating a new case.
Regarding the submission made by the counsel for Bucyensenge Mende Claude that article 161, paragraph 4 of Law n0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 mentioned above, contradicts article 15 of the Constitution on the grounds that it does not treat people equally since a person who feels aggrieved by a judgment rendered by the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court in which they were not a party is not allowed to make third party opposition against it, while a person who feels aggrieved by a judgment rendered by any other court is permitted to do so, the State attorney explains that the
collectively, is inviolable. The right to property shall not be encroached upon except in public interest and in accordance with the provisions of the law.
## Page 382
37 Re BUCYESENGE MENDE
principle of equality before the law means treating equally those who are in the same category and under the same conditions. He explains that the fact that such paragraph distinguishes between a person who feels aggrieved by a decision rendered by the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court and the one who feels aggrieved by a decision rendered by other courts does not mean that they are not treated equally, because they do not belong to the same category. He further explains that article 161, paragraph 4 of Law n0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 mentioned above, treats all people equally, since none of them are allowed to make a third-party opposition against decisions rendered by the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court.
The State attorney further explains that the fact that judgments rendered by the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court shall not be subject to third party opposition as provided under article 1655 of Law n0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 mentioned above, does not in itself deprive a person of the right to bring a case before a competent court, because the law provides other procedure through which they can file a claim at the first instance level concerning matters they intended to raise in a case meant for third party opposition against another judgment because, according to him, such a case cannot be final as he is not bound by the principle of “res judicata”. He notes that Bucyensenge Mende Claude may use the procedure for filing a claim based on conflicting judgments, as they are precedents such as case RCOM00001/2016/CA decided on 03/07/2020 and case RS/SPEC00002/13/SC decided on 14/07/2017.
The State attorney also explains that Bucyensenge Mende Claude has the right to file a first-instance case against the court
5 A third-party opposition against a judgement in principal action is brought before the court which rendered the contested judgemen…
## Page 383
38 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
bailiff and Dusabe Fazil, who requested the execution of the judgment, so that they may refund the money he paid to purchase the property at the public auction and compensate him for the damages suffered since they involved him in an auction only to later bypass him and reach an agreement with the person whose property had been auctioned. He adds that this procedure could also enable him to handle his issue without the need to amend the law.
The State attorney concludes by stating that article 161, paragraph 4 of Law n0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 mentioned above, does not contradict article 34 of the Constitution, because although the right to private property is inviolable, it may be restricted under circumstances provided by law. He further explains that the fact that Bucyensenge Mende Claude cannot make a third-party opposition against a judgment rendered by the Court of Appeal cannot be considered a violation of his property rights over the property he purchased at a public auction, since there are other procedures, he may follow to protect those rights as explained above. DETERMINATION OF THE COURT
The debate on this issue is based on the disagreement between the counsel for Bucyensenge Mende Claude and the counsel for State attorney regarding whether judgments rendered by the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court are not subject to third party opposition, thereby depriving a person who believes they were aggrieved by those courts in a case to which they were not a party of the right to request a retrial in his presence, as it is permitted in other courts, the plaintiff argues that such would be contrary to the principle of equality before the law, the right to be heard before a competent court, and the right to private property,
## Page 384
39 Re BUCYESENGE MENDE
while the State attorney contends that such rights can be protected through other legal remedies provided by law. a) Whether article 161, paragraph 4 of Law n0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 relating to the civil, commercial, labour, and administrative procedure as amended, contradicts article 15 of the Constitution
In order to determine whether article 161, paragraph 4 of Law n0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 mentioned above, is inconsistent with the principle of equality before the law and, consequently, contradicts article 15 of the Constitution as alleged by the plaintiff, it is necessary first to explain the principle of equality before the law.
Article 15 of the Constitution provides that all human beings are equal before the law. They enjoy equal protection of the law.
The provisions of article 15 of the Constitution are consistent with those of article 7 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights6, article 26 of the 19667 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and article 3 of the African Charter on
6 Article 7 of the Assembly, UN General. Universal declaration of human rights. UN General Assembly 302.2 (1948): 14-25 states: “All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law. All are entitled to equal protection against discrimination in violation of this Declaration and against any incitement to such discrimination”. 7 Article 26 of International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights/Pacte International des droits civils et politiques states: “All persons are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to the equal protection of the law”.
## Page 385
40 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
Human and Peoples’ Rights8; all of them emphasize that all human beings are equal before the law and are entitled to equal protection without any form of discrimination.
The principle of equality before the law means that all individuals are treated equally before the law, without inequalities or discrimination. However, this principle may have limitations based on a legitimate or rational purpose as explained by the Supreme Court in various cases, including case n0 RS/INJUST/SPEC00004/2021/SC, decided on 10/02/2023 of Ngendahayo Kabuye. In that case, the Court explained that individuals who are in the same situation or belong to the same category are treated equally, and that when they are treated differently without a legitimate or rational purpose, it constitutes discrimination. However, the Court noted that the State may differentiate between individuals or categories of persons without violating the principle of equality before the law or the principle of non-discrimination, provided that there is a legitimate and reasonable purpose, established in accordance with the law and serves the public interest9.
In the case RS/INCONST/SPEC 00004/2019/SC, decided on 26/04/2024 of Feminist Action Development Ambition (FADA)10, the Supreme Court explained that the principle of
8 Article 3 of African (Banjul) Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (Adopted 27 June 1981, OAU Doc.CAB/LEG/67/3 rev. 5, 21 I.L.M. 58 (1982), entered into force 21 October 1986) states: “Every individual shall be equal before the law. Every individual shall be entitled to equal protection of the law.” 9See Case RS/INCONST/SPEC00004/2021/SC, decided by the supreme Court on 10/02/2023, Ngendahayo Kabuye v. State OF Rwanda, paragraph 36 and 39. 10 See Case RS/INCONST/SPEC00004/2019/SC, decided on 26/04/2024, Feminist Action Development Ambition (FADA) v. State of Rwanda, in paragraphs of 41 and 43. Which is also reiterated in the Case
## Page 386
41 Re BUCYESENGE MENDE
equality before the law means that the law treats as equal those who belong to the same category and is applied to them in the same manner. It is clear that those individuals who do not belong to the same category cannot be treated equally.
In the case RS/INCONST/SPEC00002/2022/SC, decided on 31/03/2023 of Kamanzi Anaclet, the Court, based on the position of legal scholar Erwin Chemerinsky, explained that things that are alike should be treated alike, and things that are unalike should be treated unalike in proportion to their unalikeness. In other words, people must be treated equally, but with consideration of their respective categories, meaning that individuals belonging to different categories should be treated differently.
Regarding this case, the Court finds that article 161 of Law n0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 mentioned above, provides that third party opposition is an extraordinary appeal procedure, a person who was not a party to a case but who has an interest in it, can file a claim against a judgment that has been rendered on the merits and which is no longer subject to appeal in the court that has rendered it seeking its annulment or modification. This article also provides that judgments rendered by the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court shall not be subject to third party opposition.
The Court finds that this provision allows any person who was not a party to a case decided at the final level by other courts, except the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court, to make a third-
RS/INCONST/SPEC00003/2019/SC decided on 31/03/2023, Kamanzi Anaclet v. State of Rwanda, in paragraph 35 up to 37, in Case RS/INCONST/SPEC00002/2023/SC decided on 12/04/2024 Uwombonye Hirwa Sudi v. State of Rwanda, in paragraph 24 and 25 and in Case RS/INCONST/SPEC00001/2019/SC Murangwa Edward decided on 29/11/2019, in paragraph 35.
## Page 387
42 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
party opposition against it if they have an interest in the case and comply with all the required conditions.
The Court finds that article 161 of Law n0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 mentioned above, provides for two categories: the first category includes parties in the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court, who are not allowed to make a third-party opposition against judgments rendered by those courts; the second category includes parties in other courts, who are allowed to make a third-party opposition against judgments rendered by those courts.
The Court finds the fact that the legislator provided for this based on the competence of courts and the general principle that judicial proceedings must have an end, aiming to protect the rights of a person who loses a case of third-party opposition against the judgment rendered by the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court and left without a remedy, does not contradict the principle of equality before the law, as it is based on a legitimate or rational purpose. Therefore, article 161, paragraph 4 of Law n0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 mentioned above, does not contradict article 15 of the Constitution. b) Whether Article 161, paragraph 4 of Law n0 22/2018 of 29/o4/2018, relating to the civil, commercial, labour, and administrative procedure as amended, contradicts article 29(1)(c) of the Constitution
Article 29(1)(c) of the Constitution provides that everyone has the right to due process of law which includes the right to appear before a competent court.
The provisions of article 29(1)(c) of the Constitution are consistent with the provisions of article 10 of the Universal
## Page 388
43 Re BUCYESENGE MENDE
Declaration of Human Rights11, article 14(1) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights12, article 7(1)(d) of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights13, and article 6(1) of the European Convention on Human Rights14.
The right to appear before a competent court, as interpreted by the European Court of Human Rights, indicates that the right to due process of law provided under article 6(1) must be understood in light of the principle of the rule of law. It requires the fact that a party can bring their case before the courts to claim their civil rights. The Court explained that this right is not absolute and may be subject to limitations, provided that such limitations do not deprive a person of the essence of their right15.
11 Article 10 of the Declaration states: “everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal”. 12 Article 14(1) of the Convenant states: “All persons shall be equal before the courts and tribunals.” 13 Article 7(1)(d) of the Charter stipulates: “Every individual shall have the right to be tried within a reasonable time by an impartial court or tribunal.” 14 Article 6 (1) stipule “Toute personne a droit à ce que sa cause soit entendue équitablement, publiquement et dans un délai raisonnable, par un tribunal indépendant et impartial, établi par la loi, qui décidera, (…) des contestations sur ses droits et obligations de caractère civil (…)”. 15Le droit à un procès équitable, garanti par l’article 6 § 1, doit s’interpréter à la lumière du principe de la prééminence du droit, qui exige l’existence d’une voie judiciaire effective permettant de revendiquer les droits civils. Chaque justiciable possède le droit à ce qu’un tribunal connaisse de toute contestation relative à ses « droits et obligations de caractère civil[…] .Le « droit à un tribunal », comme le droit d’accès, ne revêtent pas un caractère absolu : ils peuvent donner lieu à des limitations, mais elles ne sauraient restreindre l’accès ouvert à l’individu d’une manière ou à un point tels que le droit s’en trouve atteint dans sa substance même » ; Guide sur l’article 6, Droit à un proces équitable(volet civil), Conseil de l’Europe/Cour européenne des droits de l’homme, 2013, www.echr.coe.int.
## Page 389
44 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
In the case of Lurdo v. Italy, the European Court of Human Rights upheld that the right to appear before a competent court may be subject to limitations, such as, requirements for the admissibility of appeal, because in establishing the governing rules, the State has the discretional power16.
Similarly, in the case of Stanev v. Bulgaria, the European Court of Human Rights declared that the right to appear before the courts may have legitimate limitations because, given its nature, it requires the State to establish governing rules that may vary according to the needs and capacities of the country and its people. In enacting such laws, States act within their discretion17.
In a manual prepared by the Council of Europe together with the European Court of Human Rights explaining the right to access justice, the authors state that limitations on the right to be appear before competent courts18 should be admissible for
16“La Cour rappelle aussi que le « droit à un tribunal » n'est pas absolu ; il se prête à des limitations implicitement admises, notamment pour les conditions de recevabilité d'un recours, car il appelle de par sa nature même une réglementation par l'Etat, qui jouit à cet égard d'une certaine marge d'appréciation”; Affaire Luordo v. Italie, Requete No 32190/96, Arret du 17 Juillet 2003, para 85, https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22itemid%22:[%22001- 65798%22]}. 17“Le droit d’accès aux tribunaux n’étant pas absolu, il peut donner lieu à des limitations implicitement admises car il « appelle de par sa nature même une réglementation par l’Etat, réglementation qui peut varier dans le temps et dans l’espace en fonction des besoins et des ressources de la communauté et des individus” […] En élaborant pareille réglementation, les Etats contractants jouissent d’une certaine marge d’appréciation”; Affaire Stanev v. Bulgarie, Requête No 36760/06, Strasbourg, 17 janvier 2012, para 230, https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-108696. 18 “Le droit d’accès à un tribunal signifie que les tribunaux doivent être accessibles. Cette accessibilité peut concerner la disponibilité des tribunaux
## Page 390
45 Re BUCYESENGE MENDE
legitimate purposes, and the legitimate purposes should include the fair administration of the justice19.
In the case of Ernst et al. v. Belgium, the applicants claimed that their right under article 6(1) of the European Convention on Human Rights mentioned above, had been violated because their civil action within criminal proceedings was dismissed, given that the defendant was a judge enjoying immunity. The European Court of Human Rights first noted that judicial immunity, as a measure aimed at ensuring the fair administration of justice, serves a legitimate purpose20.
The European Court of Human Rights also noted that, in order to determine whether judicial immunity does not violate the European Convention on Human Rights, it is necessary to examine whether the applicants had access to other remedies to protect the rights guaranteed by the Convention21. It explained that filing a civil action within criminal proceedings, is a remedy of claim for damages, and the applicants would have resorted to other remedies
compétents […]”, le Conseil de l’Europe et la Cour européenne des droits de l’homme, Manuel de droit Européen en matière d’accès à la Justice, p. 27. 19“Les restrictions sont autorisées si elles poursuivent un but légitime et sont proportionnées. Elles ne doivent pas porter atteinte à la substance même du droit en cause. Exemples de buts légitimes: la bonne administration de la justice […]”, ibidem, p. 125. 20“Elle considère dès lors qu'en l'espèce, la mise en œuvre du privilège de juridiction applicable aux magistrats, en tant que moyen veillant au bon fonctionnement de la justice, poursuivait un but légitime”. CEDH, Affaire Ernst et autres v. Belgique, Requête No 33400/96, 15 juillet 2003, para 50. https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-65779. 21“Pour déterminer si un tel privilège de juridiction est admissible au regard de la Convention, il importe, selon la Cour, d'examiner si les requérants disposaient d'autres voies raisonnables pour protéger efficacement leurs droits garantis par la Convention”, ibidem, para 53.
## Page 391
46 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
to claim their rights22. The Court concluded that the limitations imposed on the right to file a claim before a court, based on judicial immunity, do not undermine the essence of the right to file a claim before a court and are not inconsistent with the provisions of article 6(1) of the European Convention on Human Rights23.
From the aforementioned explanations, the following key points can be understood: a. The right to appear before a competent court is one of the components of the right to due process of law; b. The State enacts laws governing the right to appear before a competent court, at its discretion and in accordance with necessity; c. This right may be subject to limitations, such limitations should be admissible for legitimate purpose. Among such legitimate purposes include the fair administration of justice; d. A plaintiff cannot claim to have been denied the right to appear before a competent court if other remedies exist through which they can claim their rights.
22“A cet égard, la Cour attache de l'importance au fait qu'en droit belge, la constitution de partie civile entre les mains du juge d'instruction est un des modes d'exercice de l'action civile et que les victimes disposent en principe d'autres voies pour revendiquer leurs droits civils”, ibidem para 54. 23“La Cour estime que se limitant à reconnaître les spécificités liées au privilège de juridiction, les restrictions apportées au droit d'accès n'ont pas porté atteinte à la substance même de leur droit à un tribuna […] la Cour conclut qu'il n'y a pas eu violation du droit d'accès à un tribunal garanti aux requérants par l'article 6 § 1”, ibidem para 56-57.
## Page 392
47 Re BUCYESENGE MENDE
Regarding to this instant case, Bucyensenge Mende Claude argues that article 161, paragraph 4 of Law n0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 as mentioned above, deprives him of the right to appear before a competent court, because it prevents him from making a third-party opposition against the judgment rendered by the Court of Appeal.
Article 153(5) of the Constitution provides that a law determines the organisation, functioning and jurisdiction of Courts. This means that the Constitution empowers the legislator to define the competence of courts through legislation. Based on this power, the legislator provided in article 161, paragraph 4 of Law n0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 as mentioned above, that judgments rendered by the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court shall not be subject to third party opposition.
The Court finds that, in enacting that provision, the legislator acted within his/her discretion for a legitimate purpose of ensuring the fair administration of justice because to make a third- party opposition against judgments rendered by the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court would deprive the losing party of the right to appeal at least once, given such decisions of these courts are not subject to appeal24. As was also upheld in the case RS/INCONST/SPEC00004/2020/SC decided by the Supreme Court on 26/03/2021of Asiimwe Frank, the right to appeal once is inviolable, although it may be subject to limitations for a legitimate purpose.25.
24 Article 52, last paragraph of Law n0 30/2018 of 02/06/2018 determing the jurisdiction of courts as amended by article 50 of the Law n0 012/2018 of 04/04/2018 determining organization and functioning of the Judiciary. 25Case RS/INCONST/SPEC00004/2020/SC decided by the Supreme Court on 26/03/2021 Asiimwe Frank, paragraph 26.
## Page 393
48 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
The Court also finds that Bucyensenge Mende Claude cannot claim to have been denied the right to appear before a competent court, since he has other remedies through which to claim his rights. Indeed, as explained by Gasasira Ephrem, to make a third-party opposition against a judgment is not the only remedy available to a person seeking to have a decision that infringes upon their interests set aside, as such a person has the right to file a claim before another competent court of first instance26.
Based on all the aforementioned explanations, the Court finds that article 161, paragraph 4 of Law n0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 relating to the Civil, Commercial, Labour, and Administrative Procedure as amended, is not inconsistent with article 29(1)(c) of the Constitution. c) Whether article 161, paragraph 4 of Law n0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 relating to the Civil, Commercial, Labour, and Administrative Procedure as amended, contradicts article 34 of the Constitution.
Article 34 of the Constitution provides that every one has the right to private property, whether individually or collectively owned, and that such property is inviolable. It further stipulates that the right to property may not be interfered with except for reasons of public interest and in accordance with the provisions of law.
26“[…] La tierce opposition n’est pas une procédure obligatoire dans le chef d’un tiers qui veut faire annuler un procès qui préjudicie à ses intérêts”; Gasasira Ephrem, Manuel de Droit Rwandais, Procédure Civile et Commerciale, Printerset, 1993, p. 221.
## Page 394
49 Re BUCYESENGE MENDE
The right to private property is also guaranteed under article 17 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights27, article 14 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights28, and article 1 of Protocol n0 1 to the European Convention on Human Rights29.
In the case of Broniowski v. Poland, the European Court of Human Rights stated that a person has the right to the peaceful enjoyment of property, and that when this right is not respected, it must be examined whether the interference with that property was in accordance with the law and based on legitimate and reasonable grounds30.
The Court finds that a law would be inconsistent with article 34 of the Constitution, which guarantees a person’s right to private property, if it either deprives the person of the property they own,
27 Article 17 of the Declaration states: “Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property”. 28 Article 17 of the African Charter states: “The right to property shall be guaranteed. It may only be encroached upon in the interest of public need or in the general interest of the community and in accordance with the provisions of appropriate laws”. 29 Article 1 states: “Every natural or legal person is entitled to the peaceful enjoyment of his possessions. No one shall be deprived of his possessions except in the public interest and subject to the conditions provided for by law and by the general principles of international law”. 30 Case of Broniowski v. Poland, Strasbourg, 22 June 2004 § 148-149: “Any interference with the enjoyment of a right of property recognised by the Convention must pursue a legitimate aim. it is thus for the national authorities to make the initial assessment as to the existence of a problem of public concern warranting measures to be applied in the sphere of the exercise of the right of property”. https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22itemid%22:[%22001- 61828%22]}
## Page 395
50 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
subjects them to interference without their consent, or prevents them from using it peacefully.
The Court finds that Bucyensenge Mende Claude failed to prove how article 161, paragraph 4 of Law n0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 mentioned above, allegedly deprives him of his property rights.
Based on the aforementioned explanations, the Court finds that article 161, paragraph 4 of Law n0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 mentioned above, does not contradict article 34 of the Constitution. III. DECISION OF THE COURT
Declares the claim filed by Bucyensenge Mende Claude, seeking to repeal article 161, paragraph 4 of Law n0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 relating to the Civil, Commercial, Labour, and Administrative Procedure on the grounds that it contradicts the Constitution of the Republic of Rwanda, unfounded.
Declares article 161, paragraph 4 of Law n0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 relating to the Civil, Commercial, Labour, and Administrative Procedure as amended, does not contradict articles 15, 29(1)(c), and 34 of the Constitution of the Republic of Rwanda.
## Page 396
51 SUBJECT INDEX
PROCEDURAL CASES
## Page 397
52 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
## Page 398
53 GATARE v GASANA ET AL.
GATARE v GASANA ET AL. [Rwanda HIGH COURT-RS/INJUST/RC 00004/2023/HC/NYZ (Ndagijimana, P.J., Badara, Udahemuka, J.) 24 April 2024] Judicial Procedure – Appeal– System failure– Where the statutory time limits for lodging an appeal are exceeded due to a malfunction in the electronic case management system through which claims are submitted, and this failure was duly reported to the Court, such a circumstance constitutes an exceptional ground warranting the admission and examination of the appeal. Civil procedure – Execution of the judgement – Getting linked to the case file –Refusal to provide email address – When a party to the proceedings refuses to provide an email address for purposes of being notified during auction proceedings, he or she may not later claim that his or her property was sold at an undervalued price, as he or she voluntarily forfeited their right to contest such price by refusing to be notified through the system. Facts: This case started with Gatare’s private prosecution against Gasana, Nyiransabimana, Minani, Mukamana and Munderere for the offence of providing the court with a false testimony during a trial that convicted him of an offence of using forged documents; he as well wanted the accused to be convicted for providing the court with false testimony but the court found his allegation unfounded, and it ordered him to pay Frw 1,250, 000 for damage compensation. The judgement turned res judicata and Gasana and his co-winners approached Niyonzima, a court bailiff, for their judgement execution, and the latter initiated the execution procedure by auctioning one of Gatare’s property (a forest). Gatare found the auction illegal, and seized the Primary Court of 53
## Page 399
54 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
Kibeho for its annulment, but the court found his allegation without merit. On 1/07/2022, the complainant appealed the above ruling before the Intermediate Court of Nyamagabe but the accused argued that the complainant’s appeal is legally time-barred and thus his appeal is inadmissible. On the other hand, the claimant argued that he had filed his appeal in due time limits, but owing to a failure of case management system, his appeal was not submitted and he thereof notified the court. However, the court found his appeal baseless. The claimant proceeded with application for injustice related case review and his case was reheard by the High Court, Nyanza Chamber, and the latter examined whether Gatare’s appeal was supposed to be admitted due to some unpredictable and compelling circumstances that made his appeal come in late and whether the public auction of 15/06/2022 should be nullified due to the alleged illegality. Gatare explains that he filed his claim within the legally prescribed time limits and that, having been prevented by a technical system failure from paying the required court fees, he duly notified the Court in accordance with the applicable legal provisions and was advised to wait until the system resumed functionality. He further argues that the auction should be nullified because it was conducted on dates different from those officially announced, the property was sold at an excessively low price, and he was not properly notified of the auction proceedings. The accused argued that the claimant’s appeal came in late arguing that should the system fail to work, he could have handed his submissions to the Court but he did not. They went on to say
## Page 400
55 GATARE v GASANA ET AL.
that they informed him of the public auction proceedings but he declined to sign related documents and refused to provide his email address to get a system link for related information. The court found his claim admissible but held that the contested auction has been legally conducted. Held: 1. Where the statutory time limits for lodging an appeal are exceeded due to a malfunction in the electronic case management system through which claims are submitted, and this failure was duly reported to the Court, such a circumstance constitutes an exceptional ground warranting the admission and examination of the appeal. 2. When a party to the proceedings refuses to provide an email address for purposes of being notified during auction proceedings, he or she may not later claim that his or her property was sold at an undervalued price, as he or she voluntarily forfeited their right to contest such price by refusing to be notified through the system. The application for the review of the judgment on ground of being vitiated by injustice lacks merit. Statutes and statutory instruments referred to: Law n0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 relating to civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure, articles 20, 111, 253, 255, 275 and 275. No cases were referred to.
## Page 401
56 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
Judgment BACKGROUND OF THE CASE
Gatare Faustin seized the Intermediate Court of Nyamagabe of a private indictment against Nyiransabimana Gaudence, Minani Védaste, Mukamana Louise, Gasana Gilbert for an offence of providing the court with false testimonies during a trial on case RP 0109/16/TGI/NYBE that convicted him on the offense of using forgery; he as well wanted them to be convicted and sentenced for an equal term of his six years of imprisonment for their offence of providing the court with false testimonies. The trial ended with the court acquitting the accused, and Gatare was ordered to give them one million and two hundred and fifty thousand (Frw 1,250,000) for damage compensation.
When the judgement turned final, Nyiransabimana Gaudence, Minani Vedaste, Mukamana Louise, Gasana Gilbert and Munderere Alphonsine, approached Counsel Niyonzima Jean Felix, the Court bailiff, and requested him to execute the judgement and give them the compensations they won. Counsel Niyonzima Jean Felix initiated the execution by a certain public auction that was conducted on 14/06/2022.
On 22/6/2022, Gatare Faustin filed a claim before the Primary Court of Kibeho and prayed for the annulment of the public auction of 14/06/2022, lamenting of its illegalities and the violation of auction seizure and notice procedures; lamenting that the auction was poorly concluded and grieving that he had written to the Court Bailiff, Counsel Niyonzima Jean Félix, requesting the suspension of the auction proceedings in order to settle the debt amicably. The bailiff agreed to this request,
## Page 402
57 GATARE v GASANA ET AL.
however, the latter disappointed him by later serving him with the auction notices.
Counsel Niyonzima Jean Felix and his attorney assert to have broken no law; arguing that for issues to do with the seizure, a related document is electronically generated, printed out and taken to the property location in the presence of both the property owner and local administration authorities; and such a procedure was fully observed as it is evidenced by the seizure statement of 13/05/2022 as signed by the Executive Secretary of Mbanda Cell, who, as well indicated Gatare Faustin’s refusal to sign the document, yet present. The claimant’s argument about the auction seizure on a non-existing property is equally wrong since the seized forest exists as it is evidenced by the property valuation report. With regard to the auction notices, the first auction notice was issued on 26/05/2022, and it has been handed to the concerned persons including the Cell Administration and Gatare Faustin himself on 26/05/2022, and it is true that the notice scheduled about three rounds of auctioning, and the second auction notice was issued to them on 06/06/2022 scheduling two rounds of auctioning as it could not include the third round, yet one round had already been done. Therefore, a simple fact that both notices were footnoted as done on the 25/05/2022 is not material enough to call for auction annulment. This concern is a minor typographical error, and both notices came completing each other.
Minani Vedaste, Mukamana Louise, Gasana Gilbert, Nyiransabimana Gaudence and Munderere Alphonsine submitted that they were not involved in any aspect of the public auction proceedings and thus do not understand why Gatare Faustin included them as parties to the present case.
## Page 403
58 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
In judgment RC 00099/2022/TB/KIB rendered on 05/07/2022, the Primary Court of Kibeho held that the public auction conducted on 15/06/2022 involving the property of Gatare Faustin registered under UPI 2/03/03/04/3635 was valid and not nullified. The Court ordered Gatare Faustin to pay damages in the amount of Frw 100,000 to Nyiransabimana Gaudence, Frw 510,000 to Minani Védaste; Frw 510,000 to Mukamana Louise; Frw 510,000 to Gasana Gilbert; Frw 100,000 to Munderere Alphonsine; and Frw 510,000 to Counsel Niyonzima Jean Felix.
For making the above decision, with regard to the alleged illegal seizure, the court considered the existence of the seizure statement of 11/05/2022 done at the address of the caveated property, whereby the statement indicates that the court bailiff came around the address of the seized property along with Munyaneza Ildephonse, the Executive Secretary of Mpanda Cell, who signed and sealed the seizure statement with an endnote about Gatare Faustin’s refusal to sign the property seizure statement. With regard to the auction notices, the court found the existence of two auction notices, whereby one the notices were handed to the concerned persons on 26/06/2022, while the other was served on 06/06/2022. The court found that the first auction notice clarified about the auction starting and results dates, and in case of no successful bidder, the auction was supposed to be relaunched up to its’ third round. While the second notice indicated that the auction was at its second round, as the first round had already been done with.
Regarding the claim that the public auction was improperly concluded, the Court found that a report had been duly prepared, detailing how the auction was finalized,
## Page 404
59 GATARE v GASANA ET AL.
identifying the successful bidder and how the creditors were paid. Furthermore, the Court noted that Gatare Faustin was requested to provide his bank account so that the remaining balance due to him could be transferred. Concerning his assertion that he had requested the court bailiff to suspend the auction in order to settle the debt voluntarily, the Court clarified that Gatare Faustin had shown no genuine willingness to pay, as the auction notice he received clearly included the bank account number of Counsel Niyonzima Jean Félix, which was account nº 4004100232354 at EQUITY BANK, and had indicated that the successful bidder was required to make payment into that account.
On 13/07/2022, Gatare Faustin appealed the above ruling before the Intermediate Court of Nyamagabe, but the accused raised an objection over his appeal admissibility due to his appeal prescription, they argued that the appealed judgement has already turned decisive as it now bears an enforcement formula since he delayed for file his appeal. They argued that the evidence for Gatare’s late appeal is his appended evidence of 13/07/2022 which proves that his failure in paying the appeal filing fee occurred on the 13/07/2022.
Gatare Faustin argued that he initiated the appeal process on 08/07/2022, evidenced by the fact that the case was registered under No. PST RCA 00021/2022/TGI NYBE. However, his attempts to proceed were unsuccessful due to the rejection of the court fee. He stated that he managed to pay the fee on 13/07/2022, which is also the date on which the claim was officially filed, as evidenced by a screenshot he took that day. He argued that his opponents contributed to the delay by already initiating enforcement formula, which were immediately accepted. He therefore requested that his appeal be admitted, as the delay in
## Page 405
60 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
filing was due to factors beyond his control and the causes of the delay ceased as of 13/07/2022.
On 26/07/2022, the Intermediate Court of Nyamagabe rendered the judgment RCA 00023/2022/TGI/NYABE and dismissed Gatare’s appeal, and the same Court held that the judgment RC 00099/2022/TB/KIB rendered by the Primary Court of Kibeho stays. The Court has also ordered Gatare Faustin to give Niyonzima Jean Felix, Mukamana Louise, Gasana Gilbert and Minani Vedaste a total amount of Frw 500,000 for counsel fees at ratios of Frw 125,000 for each. The court has as well ordered Gatare Francis to give Niyonzima Jean Felix Frw 50,000 for the procedural costs, and to give Niyonzima Jean Felix, Mukamana Louise, Gasana Gilbert, and Minani Vedaste, each Frw 100,000 for compensation over dragging them into unnecessary lawsuits. The Court has also enjoined him to give Munderere Alphonsine and Nyiransabimana Gaudence Frw 50,000 each for the procedural costs, and all the total charges amounted to Frw 790,000.
For reaching the above decision, the court considered facts that he started filing his appeal on 08/07/2022, whereby his appeal attempt got docketed under PST RCA 00021/2022/TGI/ NYBE, he kept trying filing his appeal but it never worked out due to a failing court fee payment system, which kept failing him until 13/07/2022, the date on which he finally managed to upload his appeal as it is evidenced by a related screenshot he took on the very date. It is therefore clear that his appeal on a summary procedure was legally time-barred since from 05/7/2022 up to 13/07/2022, the three working days have already elapsed. A fact that Gatare Faustin started his appeal filing on 08/7/2022 whereby he had a technical challenge with the court fee payment
## Page 406
61 GATARE v GASANA ET AL.
system, which is also done online, where he notified the court’s help desk clerk instead of communicating his challenge to the Court’s Chief Registrar, denotes that he contravened the provisions of article 20 of civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure, until his appeal came in late on 13/7/2022, the date on which he wrote to the President of the Court explaining about a failure in court fee payment system. His appeal was time-barred, and he presented no any legal unpredictable and compelling reasons that led to his late appeal, and therefore not admitted.
Following the above ruling, the President of the Supreme Court confirmed that the judgment RCA 00023/2022/ TGI/NYBE rendered by the Intermediate Court of Nyamagabe is vitiated by injustice and the case was sent to High Court, Nyanza Chamber for rehearing. The case was registered under RS/INJUST/RC 00004/2023/HC/NYZ, and it was heard in public on 15/05/2024 with all the parties present. Gatare Faustin was assisted by Counsel Twagiramungu Vincent, Niyonzima Jean Felix stood for himself, while the other accused were assisted by Counsel Nshyimiyimana Celestin.
In his submission and pleading before the court, Gatare Faustin and his counsel argued that he made his appeal in due time limits, and even when the electronic court fee payment system failed him, he thereof notified the court as required, but the court went ahead and made a disfavouring decision; they argued that the court misinterpreted the provision of article 275 of CCLA procedure which clarifies about calculating days and hours deadlines, whereby the day of the concerned event must be excluded. They prayed the court to hold that Gatare Faustin observed the appeal time-limits, and he only delayed due to a
## Page 407
62 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
system failure for court fees payment, and even when he approached the court for help, he was told to wait until the system refunctions, and that is when he filed his appeal as he had no any other option.
Gatare Faustin and his legal counsel argued that the conducted public auction was illegal. They lamented that the auction announcement made by Counsel Niyonzima Jean Felix, the Court bailiff, had clarified about Gatare Faustin’s auctionable property, its surface area and its actual market value, but the property was auctioned before the scheduled dates, and moreover on a derisory price, far less than 75% of its value as indicated by the announced property valuation report. They also averred that the auction was illegal due to a fact that it had no third round as it is legally provided, and as scheduled in the aforementioned announcement. The above facts make such an auction conducted on an unknown date questionable, more so that even the court bailiff who conducted it has no sure knowledge of its date since his auction deed states that the auction was conducted on 14/06/2022, while the statement on the auction proceeds distribution indicates that the property was auctioned on 15/06/2022. They argued that such a contradiction proves the existence of confusions during the auction process, and it is clear that the involved individuals had a different hidden agenda, other than executing the court’s decision and that is why the actual auction date was mistaken.
Gatare Faustin and his legal counsel argued that the Primary Court of Kibeho deliberately disregarded the law for judgment RC 00099/2022/TB/KIB by holding that the Court bailiff abode by the rules of the property seizure and auction announcement yet he violated all the auction-related modalities.
## Page 408
63 GATARE v GASANA ET AL.
The Court bailiff never notified Gatare, the property owner, of the auction modalities, he never informed the property owner of the property valuation report, leave alone the report’s prima facie imperfections whereby a land property of 19,478 Sqm considered at the current market value of 2700/Sqm, with the land alone costing Frw 52,590,600 without including the crops on it, was simply auctioned at unjustified derisory price of Frw 10,700,000, whereby the auction security fee was remarkably reduced, and the property value generally rebated. The court bailiff did not inform Gatare, the distrainee, of any details about IECMS auction modalities neither did he link him to the system before the auction is launched just as the letter of 02/06/2022 indicates it, the Court bailiff asked for Gatare’s email address on the 06/06/2022, yet the auction’s first round had already ended, and even the second round had already started since the first round began on 27/05/2022 and ended on the 03/06/2022 at 2 pm while the second round started on 05/06/2022.
Gatare Faustin and his legal counsel argued that the distrainee was not informed of the auction arrangement for him to exercise his legal rights that include looking for a preferable buyer or objecting to the inadequate prices from the first and the second rounds as it is provided under article 4 of the Ministerial Order n0 005/MOJ/AG/21 of 07/06/2021 relating to Execution of Enforcement Orders. Besides, the Court bailiff did not stick to his own auction timetable as it featured in the auction announcement and he violated the timetable as follows : The auction’s first round started on 27/05/2022 was meant to end on 03/06/2022 with the system releasing the successful bidder; while the second round was supposed to start on 05/06/2022 and end on 12/06/2022; and for these two first rounds, both the distrainer and the distrainee have a right to decline any auction price that is
## Page 409
64 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
less than 75% of the property reference value as per the provisions of the above mentioned article 255 (2) of civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure (CCLAP).
Gatare Faustin and his legal counsel argued against the Court bailiff’s submission whereby the latter stated that the successful bidder won the auction on its second round on 14/06/2022 and yet looking at his timetable, that was the date for starting the auction’s third round as it was slated to end on the 21/06/2022, arguing that such changes pose a question of whether the auction was really electronic or whether it was conducted analogly; since the electronic auction system cannot release the auction successful bidder’s names and his identity on the eve of the auction’s third round just as the announcements so display. Besides, the auction deed looks to be the court bailiff’s own creation yet such a document is normally electronically generated, and the Court bailiff simply signs it. They argued that Counsel Niyonzima Jean Felix has himself averred that the auction’s third round took place on 14/06/2022 as he said “… the auction deed and the auction announcement indicate that the auction’s third round took place on 14/06/2022, and this alone debunks Gatare Faustin’s argument. Furthermore, judgement enforcement system indicates that the auction’s third round took place on the 14/06/2022” …. However, this very statement of his, contradicts his announced auction timetable, since it states that the auction’s third round would start on 14/06/ 2022 and end on 21/06/202, and this arrangement would be more appropriate as it better aligns with the system outlay.
Niyonzima Jean Felix argues that there the judgment RCA 00023/2022/TGI/NYBE is not vitiated by any injustice because the judgment RC 00099/2022/TB/KIB which Gatare
## Page 410
65 GATARE v GASANA ET AL.
Faustin was appealing before the Intermediate Court of Nyamagabe was rendered on 05/07/2022, while Gatare Faustin lodged his appeal on 13/07/2022, based on Article 188 paragraph 2 and Article 260 paragraph 5 of Law No. 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 relating to civil, commercial, labor, and administrative procedure, and also based on legal directions issued in decisions rendered by the Court of Appeal in September 2022, from page 27 to 29 attached herein, where the Court of Appeal clarified that when counting the three (3) days to appeal a summary case, the day on which the decision is rendered is not excluded but is counted as the first day. It appears that 05/07/2022, the day the RC 00099/2022/TB/KIB judgment was delivered, was a Monday and is counted as the first day, 06/07/2022 was Tuesday and is the second day, and 07/07/2022 was Wednesday and is the third day, meaning that Gatare Faustin was required to file his appeal no later than 07/07/2022. Therefore, based on his own statements and evidence he submitted as discussed in the previous paragraph, where he began to appeal on 08/07/2022, it is evident that there was no injustice in case RCA 00023/2022/TGI/NYBE because Gatare Faustin filed his appeal out of time, as confirmed by the Intermediate Court of Nyamagabe in this judgment RCA 00023/2022/TGI/NYBE. Although Gatare Faustin claimed that the system did not generate a Billing Number for payment of court fees on 08/07/2022 when he began preparing his appeal as justification for filing on 13/07/2022, as shown by the system records of case RCA 00023/2022/TGI/NYBE, this does not override the fact that the date he himself admits, 08/07/2022, when he began preparing his appeal, was already beyond the legal time limit for filing an appeal.
Niyonzima Jean Felix argues that the auction was legally conducted. He explains that a date of 15/06/2022 that featured in
## Page 411
66 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
the auction act as a date of the distribution of the auction proceeds was just a typographical error, more so that the auction deed together with the auction announcement make it clear that the auction’s third round took place on the 14/06/2022, and this version debunks Gatare’s arguments. He also argues that even the judgements enforcement system proves that the auction’s third round took place on 14/06/2022. Besides, he adds that the issue concerning the date of 15/06/2022 has never been litigated neither before the Primary Court of Kibeho, nor before the Intermediate Court of Nyamagabe, and regardless of its irrelevance, it still cannot be brought during the appeal before High Court, Nyanza Chamber.
In their defense, Mukamana Louise, Munderere Alphonse, Minani Vedaste, Nyiransabimana Gaudence and Gasana Gilbert, argue that Gatare Faustin could have filed his appeal with reference to article 20 of civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure, which allows him to file his appeal by handing his appeal submission to the seized court upon a written approval by the very Court’s chief Registrar. Under such a circumstance, the plaintiff can always submit his claim via the usual online system, and as paragraph one of the above article clarifies, and then later uploads his claim when the appropriate filing system reworks. They request the court to dismiss Gatare Faustin’s submitted evidence arguing that such documents are not generated from IECMS, as they look to be Gatare Faustin’s own creation, just a mere Microsoft Word document he falsified to justify his late appeal. They asserted that his document is not from IECMS since it features no IECMS link, neither does it display its generation source.
For this case, the following issues shall be examined.
## Page 412
67 GATARE v GASANA ET AL.
Whether Gatare Faustin’s appeal was supposed to be admitted due to some unpredictable and compelling circumstances that made his appeal come in late ; Whether the public auction of the 15/06/2022 should be nullified due to its illegality ; Whether this case shall involve allowing damage compensations. II. ANALYSIS OF LEGAL ISSUES Whether Gatare Faustin’s appeal was supposed to be admitted due to some unpredictable and compelling circumstances that made his appeal come in late
Gatare Faustin and his legal counsel argue that he lodged his appeal in due time limits, and even when the electronic court fee payment system failed him, he thereof notified the court as the law requires, but the court went ahead and made a disfavouring decision; arguing that the court misinterpreted the provision of article 275 of CCLA procedure which clarifies about calculating days and hours delay, whereby the day of the concerned event must be excluded. They pray the court to hold that Gatare Faustin observed the appeal time-limits, and he only delayed due to a system failure for court fees payment that, and even when he approached the court for help, he was told to wait until the system reworks, and that is when he filed his appeal as he had no any other option.
Niyonzima Jean Felix argues that there the judgment RCA 00023/2022/TGI/NYBE is not vitiated by any injustice because the judgment RC 00099/2022/TB/KIB which Gatare
## Page 413
68 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
Faustin was appealing before the Intermediate Court of Nyamagabe was rendered on 05/07/2022, while Gatare Faustin lodged his appeal on 13/07/2022, based on Article 188 paragraph 2 and Article 260 paragraph 5 of Law No. 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 relating to civil, commercial, labor, and administrative procedure, and also based on legal directions issued in decisions rendered by the Court of Appeal in September 2022, from page 27 to 29 attached herein, where the Court of Appeal clarified that when counting the three (3) days to appeal a summary case, the day on which the decision is rendered is not excluded but is counted as the first day. It appears that 05/07/2022, the day the RC 00099/2022/TB/KIB judgment was delivered, was a Monday and is counted as the first day, 06/07/2022 was Tuesday and is the second day, and 07/07/2022 was Wednesday and is the third day, meaning that Gatare Faustin was required to file his appeal no later than 07/07/2022. Therefore, based on his own statements and evidence he submitted as discussed in the previous paragraph, where he began to appeal on 08/07/2022, it is evident that there was no injustice in case RCA 00023/2022/TGI/NYBE because Gatare Faustin filed his appeal out of time, as confirmed by the Intermediate Court of Nyamagabe in this judgment RCA 00023/2022/TGI/NYBE. Although Gatare Faustin claimed that the system did not generate a Billing Number for payment of court fees on 08/07/2022 when he began preparing his appeal as justification for filing on 13/07/2022, as shown by the system records of case RCA 00023/2022/TGI/NYBE, this does not override the fact that the date he himself admits, 08/07/2022, when he began preparing his appeal, was already beyond the legal time limit for filing an appeal.
In their defense, Mukamana Louise, Munderere Alphonse, Minani Vedaste, Nyiransabimana Gaudence and
## Page 414
69 GATARE v GASANA ET AL.
Gasana Gilbert, argue that Gatere Faustin could have filed his appeal with reference to article 20 of civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure, which allows him to file his appeal by handing his appeal submission to the seized court upon a written approval by the seized Court’s chief Registrar. Under such a circumstance, the plaintiff can always submit his claim via the usual online system, and as paragraph one of the above article clarifies, and he then later uploads his claim as the appropriate filing system reopens. They requeste the court to dismiss Gatare Faustin’s submitted evidence arguing such documents are not generated from IECMS, as they look to be Gatare Faustin’s own creation, just a mere Microsoft Word document he falsified to justify his late appeal. They assert that his document is not from IECMS since it features no IECMS link, neither does it display its’ generation source. DETERMINATION OF THE COURT
For this case, the disagreement lies into whether Gatare Faustin’s appeal was supposed to be admitted due to some unpredictable and compelling circumstances that made his appeal come in late owing to IECMS failure.
For the above issue, article 20 of the Law n0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 relating to civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure provides that the claimant him/herself, his or her counsel or representative files a claim by submitting submissions in a court through an approved electronic means. However, if this is not possible, the claim can be filed by the claimant by presenting the submissions to the court after obtaining a written approval for the Chief Registrar of the court to which the case is referred. In this case, the claimant is required
## Page 415
70 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
to send to the court a copy of his/her submissions through an available electronic means and refer the case as provided for under paragraph one of this article, once the electronic problem ceases to exist.
Article 275 of the above mentioned Law provides that time limits set in terms of days and hours shall be calculated from date to date, or hour to hour. The day of the act or of an event that gave rise to the claim is not taken into account, but the day of expiration is included.
Article 278 of the same Law provides that if a party delays in complying with time limits of appeal procedures due to exceptional reasons that are beyond his/her control, the time limit for filing the appeal is extended until such reasons cease to exist.
The above mentioned provisions help resolving various issues related to claims filing, late appeals, and calculating time limits set in days.
The Court finds that Gatare Faustin filed his appeal late due to IECMS failure whereby he started filing his appeal on 08/07/2022, but IECMS failed him, and it refunctioned on13/07/2022, and that is when he successfully submitted his appeal against a certain judgment of 05/07/ 2022 rendered by the Primary Court of Kibeho.
The Court finds evidence proving that the IECMS was really down, and the evidence include a letter that Gatare Faustin wrote to the President the Intermediate Court of Nyamagabe on 13/07/2022 praying for the admission of his appeal. The evidence also includes an affidavit from Ndizeye M. Patrick, an Electronic Filing System (EFS) agent, who attempted helping Gatare file the
## Page 416
71 GATARE v GASANA ET AL.
appeal, and who testified that the court fee payment system was then not responding. He initiated his appeal on 08/07/2022, and he immediately reported the challenge to the Court’s help desk as the system so displays. Furthermore, he presented a screenshot that proves that the IECMS was down.
The Court finds that a fact that Gatare Faustin attempted filing his appeal and only failed due to a system failure, and of which he immediately reported to the court, constitutes an unpredictable circumstance that is beyond his control, which could have made his appeal admissible. Whether the 15/06/2022 auction should be nullified on the grounds that it was conducted unlawfully
Gatare Faustin and his legal counsel contend that the conducted public auction was illegal. They argue that the auction announcement made by Counsel Niyonzima Jean Felix, the Court bailiff, had clarified about Gatare Faustin’s auctionable property, its surface area and its actual market value, but the property was auctioned before the scheduled dates, and moreover on a derisory price, far less than 75% of its value as indicated by the announced property valuation report. They also aver that the auction was illegal due to a fact that it had no third round as it is legally provided and was scheduled in the aforementioned announcement. The above facts make such auction conducted on unknown date questionable, more so that even the court bailiff who conducted it has no sure knowledge of its date since his auction deed states that the auction was conducted on the 14/06/2022, while the statement on the auction proceeds distribution indicates that the property was auctioned on the 15/06/2022. They argue that such contradiction proves about confusions during the auction process, and it is clear that the
## Page 417
72 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
involved individuals had a different hidden agenda, other than executing the court’s decision and that is why the actual auction date was mistaken.
Gatare Faustin and his legal counsel argue that the Primary Court of Kibeho has deliberately disregarded the law for judgment RC 00099/2022/TB/KIB by holding that the Court bailiff abode by the rules of the property seizure and auction announcement yet he violated all the auction related modalities. The Court bailiff never notified Gatare, the property owner, of the auction modalities, he never informed the property owner of the property valuation report, leave alone the report’s prima facie imperfections whereby a land property of 19,478 Sqm considered at the current market value of 2700/Sqm, with the land alone costing Frw 52,590,600 without including the crops on it, was simply auctioned at unjustified derisory price of Frw 10,700,000, whereby the auction security fee was remarkably reduced, and the property value generally downturned. The court bailiff did not inform Gatare, the distrainee, of any details about IECMS auction modalities, neither did he link him to the system before the auction is launched just as the letter of 02/06/2022 indicates it, the Court bailiff asked for Gatare’s email address on 06/06/2022, yet the auction’s first round had already ended, and even the second round had already started since the first round began on 27/05/2022 and ended on the 03/06/2022 at 2 pm while the second round started on 05/06/2022.
Gatare Faustin and his legal counsel argue that the distrainee was not informed of the auction arrangement for him to exercise his legal rights that include looking for a preferable buyer or objecting to the inadequate prices from the first and the second rounds as it is provided under article 4 of the Ministerial
## Page 418
73 GATARE v GASANA ET AL.
Order n0 005/MOJ/AG/21 of 07/06/2021 relating to execution of enforcement orders. Besides, the Court bailiff did not stick to his own auction timetable as it featured in the auction announcement and he violated the timetable as follows : The auction’s first round that started on 27/05/2022 was meant to end on 03/06/2022 with the system releasing the successful bidder; while the second round was supposed to start on 05/06/2022 and end on the 12/06/2022; and for these two first rounds, both the distrainer and the distrainee have a right to decline any auction price that is less than 75% of the reference value as per the provisions of the above mentioned article 255 (2) of civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure (CCLAP).
Gatare Faustin and his legal counsel argue against the Court bailiff’s submission whereby the latter stated that the successful bidder won the auction at its second round on 14/06/2022 and yet looking at his timetable, that was the date for starting the auction’s third round as it was slated to end on 21/06/2022, arguing that such changes pose a question of whether the auction was really electronic or whether it was conducted analogly; since the electronic auction system cannot release the auction successful bidder’s names and his identity on the eve of the auction’s third round just as the announcements so display. Besides, the auction deed looks to be the court bailiff’s own creation yet such a document is normally electronically generated, and the Court bailiff simply signs it. They argue that Counsel Niyonzima Jean Felix has himself averred that the auction’s third round took place on 14/06/2022 as he said “… the auction deed and the auction announcement indicate that the auction’s third round took place on 14/06/2022, and this alone debunks Gatare Faustin’s argument. Furthermore, judgements enforcement system indicates that the auction’s third round took
## Page 419
74 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
place on 14/06/2022” …. However, this very statement of his, contradicts his announced auction timetable, since it states that the auction’s third round will start on 14/06/ 2022 and end on 21/06/202, and this arrangement would be more appropriate since it better aligns with the system outlay.
Niyonzima Jean Felix argues that the auction was legally conducted, explaining that a date of 15/06/2022 that featured in the auction act as a date of the distribution of the auction proceeds was just a typographical error, more so that the auction deed together with the auction announcement make it clear that the auction’s third round took place on 14/06/2022, and this version debunks Gatare’s arguments. He also argues that even the judgements enforcement system proves that the auction’s third round took place on 14/06/2022. Besides, he adds that the issue concerning the date of 15/06/2022 has never been litigated neither before the Primary Court of Kibeho, nor before the Intermediate Court of Nyamagabe, and regardless of its irrelevance, it still cannot be brought before the High Court, Nyanza Chamber. DETERMINATION OF THE COURT
The disputes in this case include whether the 15/06/2022 auction should be nullified on the grounds that it was conducted unlawfully.
For the above issue, article 253 of the Law n0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 relating to civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure provides that the Court bailiff is required, within forty-eight (48) hours after he or she has approved the value of the property to be auctioned, publish a
## Page 420
75 GATARE v GASANA ET AL.
notice of public auction that specifies the property to be auctioned, the owner of the property, the creditor, the purpose of the auction, location of the property, the date and time of the public auction . The notice of the public auction is published on the Database for judgements enforcement together with a photo and tittle of the property subject to public auction. A copy of the announcement must be given to the owner of the property, the creditor and the Executive Secretary of the Cell where the property is located and announced on the radio, television and in a newspaper operating in Rwanda. If the auction concerns an immovable property, the notice of a public auction is publicised by posting at the location of the property. The seized property cannot be auctioned within less than five (5) days from the publication of the auction announcement.
Article 255 (2) of the above mentioned Law provides that both the distrainer and the distrainee have the right to decline the offered prices for not more than twice in case no price reaches seventy-five per cent (75%) of the reference value. At the third round, the auctioned property is given to a bidder who offered the highest price.
For this case, it is in the finding of the court that the court bailiff issued an announcement for an electronic auction, and the first round was slated on 27/05/2022 from 2 pm ; and the system was to release the highest price on 03/06/2022 at 2 pm. And in case of no successful bidder, the second round of the auction was to resume on 05/06/2022, and the auction system was to release the highest price on 12/06/2022 at 2 pm. And again if no bidder succeeds, the auction’s third round was to resume on 14/06/2022, and the system was to release the highest price, and the names of the involved bidders and their respective prices on 21/06/2022 at
## Page 421
76 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
2 pm, and the auctioned property was to be taken by a bidder with the highest offer.
The Court finds that the concerned public auction was generally legally conducted ; a part from some slight typographical errors, such as proper dating, whereby the Court bailiff made some minor errors, but for the majority of the deed, the auction was successful. Some of the errors include an incorrect date of 15/06/2022 which was mistaken for the auction date yet the correct date of the auction was 14/06/2022 as it is indicated by the auction deed of 15/06/2022 ; whereby the auctioned property was bought by Uwizeyimana Celestin at a tune of Frw 2,502,000. Therefore, a mere fact that the Court bailiff mistook the auction date for 15/06/2022, is an obvious error and is not material enough to call for the auction invalidation.
With regard to Gatare Faustin’s complaint over having not been informed of the auction’s arrangement, the Court finds that he got legally informed of the auction’s details but he kept declining signing the related documents as it is evidenced by a set of the appended proof, whereby he personally declined to provide his Email address for a link into IECMS auction procedure.
With regard to the property’s alleged derisory price, the Court finds that Gatare Faustin had all the rights to oppose any inadequate price ; but since he declined to provide his Email address for auction related information, he deprived himself all the rights to oppose any derisory price.
Considering all the above provided explanations, the Court finds that the public auction of 14/06/2022 had been legally conducted.
## Page 422
77 GATARE v GASANA ET AL.
Whether this case involves allowing damage compensations.
Counsel Niyonzima Jean Felix prayed the High Court, Nyanza Chamber to order Gatare Faustin to refund him for Frw 1,000,000 that he paid a lawyer who prepared submissions and pleaded this case, he also requested for a bill cost of Frw 500,000 for expenses incurred on paper scanning, photocopying, printing, communications and transport, and he then requested for 2,000,000 for moral damages.
Mukamana Louise and her co-defendants prayed the Court to order Gatare Faustin to refund them for Frw 1,100,000 for procedural fees they each spent for this case, the sum includes Frw 500,000 for Counsel fee per each, 100,000 Rwf for the bill costs per each, and each requested Frw 500,000 for moral damage compensation over dragging them into unnecessary lawsuits. Their request was made with reference to article 111 of CCLA procedure.
Minani Vedaste prayed the Court to order Gatare Faustin to refund them for Frw 1,100,000 for procedural fees they each spent on this case. the sum includes Frw 500,000 for counsel fee per each, Frw 100,000 for the bill costs per each, and each requested Frw 500,000 for moral damage compensation over dragging them into unnecessary lawsuits. Their request was made with reference to article 111 of CCLA procedure.
Nyiransabimana Gaudence prayed the Court to order Gatare Faustin to refund them for Frw 1,100,000 for procedural fees they each spent on this case, the sum includes Frw 500,000 for counsel fee per each, Frw 100,000 for the bill costs per each, and each requested Frw 500,000 for moral damage compensation
## Page 423
78 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
over dragging them into unnecessary lawsuits. Their request was made with reference to article 111 of CCLA procedure.
Munderere Alphonsine prayed the Court to order Gatare Faustin to refund them for Frw 1,100,000 they each spent on this case, the sum includes Frw 500,000 for counsel fee per each, Frw 100,000 for the bill costs per each, and each requested Frw 500,000 for moral damage compensation over dragging them into unnecessary lawsuits. Their request was made with reference to article 111 of CCLA procedure.
Gasana Gilbert prayed the Court to order Gatare Faustin to refund them for Frw1,100,000 they each spent on this case, the sum includes Frw 500,000 for counsel fee per each, Frw 100,000 for the bill costs per each, and each requested Frw 500,000 for moral damage compensation over dragging them into unnecessary lawsuits. Their request was made with reference to article 111 of CCLA procedure. DETERMINATION OF THE COURT
Article 111 of the Law n0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 relating to civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure provides that a claim for representation fees is an incidental claim to the principal claim aiming to repay expenses incurred during judicial proceedings. The claim for legal costs is adjudicated at the same time with the principal claim. It can also be admitted and adjudicated even if the principal claim has not been admitted.
Article 26 of regulation n0 01/2014 fixing the scale of fees for Advocates provides that The Advocate for the applicant who has prepared the file and drafted documents may claim a base fee
## Page 424
79 GATARE v GASANA ET AL.
ranging from 500,000 RWF to 5,000,000 FRW, to which shall be added, in the event of recovery whether doing it directly or indirectly through his/her Agent, an additional fee for recovery determined according to the percentages set up in point II of Article 23.
The Court finds that Nyiransabimana Gaudence, Minani Vedaste, Mukamana Louise, Gasana Gilbert and Munderere Alphonsine were legally represented in these proceedings, therefore, Gatare Faustin ishould be ordered to pay them legal representation fees (counsel fee) in the amount of five hundred thousand Rwandan Francs (500,000 FRW) collectively.
With regard to the damages claimed by Niyonzima Jean Felix, the Court finds, in its discretion, that he should be awarded procedural fees in the amount of one hundred thousand Rwandan Francs (FRW 100,000), as he did not provide supporting evidence for the other damages he claimed. III. DECISION OF THE COURT
Holds that the application filed by Gatare Faustin for the review of judgment RCA 00023/2022/TGI/NYBE on grounds of injustice lacks merit;
Holds that judgment RCA 00023/2022/TGI/NYBE rendered by the Intermediate Court of Nyamagabe is sustained ;
Orders Gatare Faustin to pay Nyiransabimana Gaudence, Minani Vedaste, Mukamana Louise, Gasana Gilbert and Munderere Alphonsine, five hundred thousand (Frw 500,000) for
## Page 425
80 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
Counsel fee collectively, and give Niyonzima Jean Felix one hundred thousand (Frw 100,000) for procedural costs.
Orders that the court fee be transferred to Public treasury.
## Page 426
81 MUTABAZI v. THE GOVERNMENT OF RWANDA/MINADEF ET AL.
MUTABAZI v. THE GOVERNMENT OF RWANDA/MINADEF ET AL. [Rwanda THE COURT OF APPEAL – RCOMAA 00009/2024/CA (Nyirandabaruta, P.J., Mukamurenzi and Ngagi, J.) November 29, 2024] Jurisdiction of courts – Jurisdiction on Appeal – Damages – Where a judgment under appeal awards different damages to different parties, the appellate court's jurisdiction is determined only in respect of the damages awarded by the previous court to the appellant. Facts: Rwanda Agriculture and Animal Resources Development Board (RAB) entered into a contract with MINADEF/Reserve Force for the rehabilitation of valley dams in Kayonza District. The Reserve Force appointed Rtd. Capt. Mutabazi Steven and Rtd. 2Lt. Muzirankoni Stella as Site Managers, tasked with monitoring and supervising the execution of the works. However, these employees were dismissed from their roles before the completion of the project, and their duties were assigned to another individual. Consequently, Mutabazi filed a lawsuit before the Commercial Court against the Government of Rwanda/MINADEF, alleging that the termination of the contract was unlawful. He sought compensation amounting to FRW 119,780,544, representing the outstanding payments, in addition to various other damages. The Commercial Court rendered a judgment declaring that Mutabazi's claim was unfounded, on the grounds that he had been 81
## Page 427
82 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
hired in the capacity of a Site Manager, and his dismissal was carried out in accordance with the law. Subsequently, individuals including Habimana Fidèle, Nyandekwe Georges, Mwesigye Emmanuel, Mukimbiri Eric, Maridadi Fred, and Nsabimana Paul filed a separate claim before the Commercial Court against Mutabazi seeking an order compelling him to repay debts he owed them, along with various forms of interest. In that case, the Government of Rwanda/MINADEF was brought in as a third-party intervener. The Court ruled that MINADEF was ultimately liable for the entire amount of the debt claimed by each of the claimants. Both cases were appealed before the Commercial High Court. Mutabazi claimed that the Commercial Court had disregarded crucial evidence, while the Government of Rwanda, on the other hand, appealed on grounds that it had no contractual agreement with Mutabazi and Muzirankoni, and that no sufficient evidence had been presented to substantiate the amounts claimed. The Government further sought compensation for the losses incurred as a result of the litigation. The Commercial High Court joined both cases and rendered a judgment in which it held that the Government of Rwanda’s appeal was partially founded. The Court found that the contracts entered into between the Government of Rwanda/MINADEF and Mutabazi Steven and Muzirankoni Stella had been lawfully terminated. However, it held that the Government of Rwanda/MINADEF still owed an outstanding amount of FRW 31,791,476 to Mutabazi Steven and Muzirankoni Stella, which it must pay. The Court also ruled that the Government of Rwanda/MINADEF was not indebted to Habimana Fidèle, Nyandekwe George, Mwesigye Emmanuel, Mukimbiri Eric, Maridadi Fred, or Nsabimana Paul.
## Page 428
83 MUTABAZI v. THE GOVERNMENT OF RWANDA/MINADEF ET AL.
Mutabazi appealed to the Court of Appeal, arguing that the Court should not have ordered him to be jointly liable with Muzirankoni for payment, especially considering that he himself had not yet been paid by the Government. While the Government of Rwanda had not yet submitted a substantive response to the grounds of appeal, it raised a preliminary objection challenging the jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal. The Government’s objection was based on the ground that the monetary value of the judgment under appeal did not meet the threshold of seventy-five million Rwandan Francs (FRW 75,000,000) required to trigger the appellate jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal. Specifically, it argued that the amount of FRW 31,791,476 awarded to Mutabazi could not be added to the FRW 51,778,100 he was ordered to pay to Habimana and others in order to determine jurisdiction. In response to this objection, Mutabazi contended that both sets of claims the compensation due to him from the government and the amounts he was ordered to pay to others should be considered, irrespective of the damages awarded to each litigant. He emphasized that the total value of the damages awarded exceeded FRW 75,000,000. Furthermore, he argued that the total value of his work exceeded FRW 75,000,000 and that this should also be considered when determining the jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal. Held: Where a judgment under appeal awards different damages to different parties, the appellate court's jurisdiction is determined only in respect of the damages awarded by the previous court to the appellant. The objection IS sustained. No statutes and statutory instruments were referred to.
## Page 429
84 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
Cases referred to: Gicumbi District v WOORD GROUP Ltd RCOMAA 00035/2022/CA; rendered by the Court of Appeal on 13/06/2022. Judgment I. BACKGROUND OF THE CASE
On 08/01/2021, Rwanda Agriculture and Animal Resources Development Board (RAB) entered into a contract with the Ministry of Defence/Reserve Force (MINADEF/Reserve Force) for the rehabilitation of damaged valley dams located in Kayonza District. To oversee and execute these works, on 21/01/2021, MINADEF/Reserve Force appointed Site Managers (SMs), including Rtd. Capt. Mutabazi Steven and Rtd. 2Lt. Muzirankoni Stella, assigning them to Buhabwa I site.
On 06/08/2021, both Mutabazi Steven and Muzirankoni Stella were relieved of their duties through a formal handover process, even though the contracted works had not yet been completed, and their responsibilities were reassigned to another individual who proceeded with the execution of the project. Following their dismissal, they submitted a grievance to the Reserve Force Command, outlining challenges encountered during their assignment, including salary arrears for workers and outstanding payments owed to suppliers.
Mutabazi Steven subsequently filed a lawsuit under reference RCOM 00117/2021/TC before the Commercial Court,
## Page 430
85 MUTABAZI v. THE GOVERNMENT OF RWANDA/MINADEF ET AL.
bringing a claim against the Government of Rwanda/MINADEF, alleging that the termination of the contractual relationship was unlawful and that the work he had initiated had been improperly transferred to another person. He requested the Court to order payment of FRW 119,780,544, representing the outstanding balance based on the revised Bill of Quantities (BoQ), and sought reimbursement for work executed but excluded due to an error in the preparation of the BoQ, including additional works not accounted for. He also sought various heads of damages.
The State Attorney of the Republic of Rwanda submitted that Mutabazi Steven and Muzirankoni Stella were dismissed on the grounds that they had caused financial loss to the project for the rehabilitation of valley dams. It was further argued that, beyond the nature of their assignment, there was no formal procurement contract between them and the Reserve Force, and therefore the termination of their collaboration complied with internal regulations governing Site Managers (SMs). In the counterclaim, the State Attorney asked the Court to order Mutabazi Steven to refund the amount of FRW 43,760,000 withdrawn from the project account without proper authorization, and to award damages, including procedural and counsel fees.
In the judgment RCOM 00117/2021/TC rendered on 06/04/2022, the Commercial Court held that Mutabazi Steven’s claim was unfounded, affirming that his dismissal from the position of Site Manager, and the reassignment of his responsibilities to Major Munyangabe Innocent, had been carried out in accordance with the law. The Court rejected Mutabazi’s claim for payment of outstanding balances and damages against the Government of Rwanda/MINADEF. It also ruled that Mutabazi Steven was not required to reimburse funds to the
## Page 431
86 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
project account, but ordered him to pay FRW 500,000 to the Government of Rwanda/MINADEF as counsel fees.
In a related case, Habimana Fidèle, Nyandekwe Georges, Mwesigye Emmanuel, Mukimbiri Eric, Maridadi Fred, and Nsabimana Paul filed case RCOM 01475/2021/TC before the Commercial Court, suing Mutabazi Steven and Muzirankoni Stella, seeking a ruling confirming the debt owed to them, along with interest and various heads of damages. The Government of Rwanda/MINADEF was also requested to intervene as a third party upon the request of Mutabazi Steven, who argued that the Government had failed to pay for the work performed, which in turn prevented him and Muzirankoni from paying the claimants.
The judgment was rendered on 14/04/2022, in which the Commercial Court held that the application to order the intervention of the Government of Rwanda/MINADEF/Reserve Force as a third party to the proceedings was well-founded, thus ruling that that the Government was liable for the debts claimed by each of the claimants, and ordered it to pay the following amounts: FRW 22,271,480 to Nyandekwe Georges, FRW 10,215,000 to Mwesigye Emmanuel, FRW 9,936,000 to Habimana Fidèle, FRW 3,560,000 to Mukimbiri Eric, FRW 4,661,620 to Maridadi Fred, and FRW 1,134,000 to Nsabimana Paul. Furthermore, the Court ordered MINADEF/Reserve Force to pay each of the claimants FRW 500,000 as moral damages, FRW 500,000 as counsel fees, and 100,000 FRW as procedural fees.
All aforementioned cases were appealed before the Commercial High Court. Mutabazi Steven appealed against the judgment RCOM 00117/2021/TC, rendered on 06/04/2022, arguing that the Commercial Court had disregarded the legal
## Page 432
87 MUTABAZI v. THE GOVERNMENT OF RWANDA/MINADEF ET AL.
basis of his claim as well as the evidence he had submitted. The Government of Rwanda/MINADEF also appealed against the judgment RCOM 01475/2021/TC, rendered on 14/04/2022, requesting the Commercial High Court to determine whether it was justifiable to be ordered to pay and award damages to the aforementioned individuals despite the absence of contractual relations or supporting evidence substantiating their claims. The Government concluded by seeking compensation for its expenses incurred as a result of the proceedings.
The Commercial High Court joined the two appeals under case numbers RCOMA 00320/2022/HCC&CMB RCOMA 00352/2022/HCC, and rendered judgment on 17/11/2023. After consideration, the Court found that both of Government of Rwanda/MINADEF appeal and that of Mutabazi Steven had merit in part. It held that the termination of the contractual relations between the Government of Rwanda/MINADEF and Mutabazi Steven and Muzirankoni Stella was lawful, but also found that the Government had failed to pay FRW 31,791,476 due to Mutabazi Steven and Muzirankoni Stella, and ordered the Government to settle that amount. The Court further held that the Government of Rwanda/MINADEF was not indebted to Habimana Fidèle, Nyandekwe Georges, Mwesigye Emmanuel, Mukimbiri Eric, Maridadi Fred, and Nsabimana Paul.
The Commercial High Court further ruled that the total debt of FRW 51,778,100 claimed by Habimana Fidèle, Nyandekwe George, Mwesigye Emmanuel, Mukimbiri Eric, Maridadi Fred, and Nsabimana Paul must be paid jointly by Mutabazi Steven and Muzirankoni Stella. The Court further determined that the sum of FRW 31,791,476, owed to Mutabazi Steven and Muzirankoni Stella by the Government of Rwanda,
## Page 433
88 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
shall be used to pay part of the debt owed to the claimants, with the distribution as follows: FRW 6,100,650 to Habimana Fidèle, 13,674,569 FRW to Nyandekwe George, FRW 6,271,955 to Mwesigye Emmanuel, FRW 2,185,821 to Mukimbiri Eric, FRW 2,862,210 to Maridadi Fred, FRW 696,270 to Nsabimana Paul.
The Court held that the remaining balance of the debt owed to each claimant shall be paid jointly by Mutabazi Steven and Muzirankoni Stella, as follows: FRW 3,835,350 to Habimana Fidèle, FRW 8,596,911 to Nyandekwe George, FRW 3,943,045 to Mwesigye Emmanuel, FRW 1,374,179 to Mukimbiri Eric, FRW 1,799,410 to Maridadi Fred, FRW 437,730 to Nsabimana Paul.
The Court also ordered Mutabazi Steven and Muzirankoni Stella to jointly pay the claimants — Habimana Fidèle, Nyandekwe George, Mwesigye Emmanuel, Mukimbiri Eric, Maridadi Fred, and Nsabimana Paul — an amount of FRW 1,500,000 as counsel fees, and FRW 600,000 as procedural fees, equivalent to FRW 100,000 for each claimant.
Mutabazi Steven appealed this ruling to the Court of Appeal, and the appeal was registered under RCOMAA 00009/2024/CA, alleging that the Commercial High Court rendered an unfair decision by ordering him to jointly pay Nyandekwe Georges and others together with Muzirankoni Stella, despite the fact that he himself had not yet been paid by the Government of Rwanda (MINADEF) which had assigned him the work. He contended that the work performed was based on a revised Bill of Quantities (BoQ) which had increased to FRW 248,164,544, and that the Court erred in approving a deduction of 20% from that value. He argued that the Court should not have concluded that he caused losses to the project
## Page 434
89 MUTABAZI v. THE GOVERNMENT OF RWANDA/MINADEF ET AL.
based on an inaccurate valuation of the works, and that it failed to consider that additional works not listed in the BoQ had been duly communicated to MINADEF/Reserve Force. He further challenged the Court's reliance on an internal regulations document as evidence, asserting that it did not reflect the factual context of the case, and faulted the Court for not awarding him moral damages of 10,000,000 FRW he had claimed. He concluded by seeking compensation of FRW 2,500,000 for the costs incurred due to the case.
The case was heard in public on 20/11/2024 with Mutabazi Steven being represented by Counsel Mugabo Sharif Yusuf; the Government of Rwanda/MINADEF represented by Counsel Kayitesi Pétronille and Counsel Ntwari Emile; Muzirankoni Stella represented by Counsel Pascasie Madamu; Habimana Fidèle, Mukimbiri Eric, Maridadi Fred, and Nsabimana Paul represented by Counsel SADI Jashi, who also represented Mwesigye Emmanuel and Kanyandekwe Georges.
Prior to submitting to Mutabazi Steven’s grounds of appeal, the Government of Rwanda/MINADEF raised a preliminary objection challenging the admissibility of the appeal on the grounds of lack of jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal, arguing that the compensation awarded in the judgment under appeal did not reach the threshold of FRW 75,000,000, as required under Article 52, paragraph 2, subparagraph 8º of Law Nº 30/2018 of 02/06/2018 determining the jurisdiction of courts, and the Court decided that this provision must be considered prior to examining the merits of the case.
## Page 435
90 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
II. ANALYSIS OF LEGAL ISSUES IN THIS CASE 1. Whether the appeal lodged by Mutabazi Steven does not fall under the jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal
The State Attorneys of the Republic of Rwanda raised a jurisdictional objection, arguing that Mutabazi Steven’s appeal should be declared inadmissible on the ground that it falls outside the jurisdiction of this Court, since the compensation awarded in the judgment under appeal does not reach seventy-five million Rwandan francs (FRW 75,000,000), and Mutabazi Steven himself had indicated as much in the appeal form he submitted. They explain that the Commercial High Court ruled that the amount the Government of Rwanda/MINADEF still owed to Mutabazi Steven and Muzirankoni Stella is FRW 31,791,476, which is the basis of Mutabazi Steven’s appeal. They further argue that the compensation Mutabazi Steven was ordered to pay Habimana Fidèle, Nyandekwe Georges, Mwesigye Emmanuel, Mukimbiri Eric, Maridadi Fred and Nsabimana Paul, amounting to FRW 51,778,100, should not be added for purposes of determining this Court’s jurisdiction, because he did not appeal against that portion of the decision. Moreover, they note that even if one were to combine the total compensation awarded to Mutabazi Steven and Muzirankoni Stella with the amount they were ordered to pay, the sum would still be FRW 51,778,100, comprised of FRW 31,791,476 due from the Government of Rwanda/MINADEF to Mutabazi Steven and Muzirankoni Stella, and FRW 19,986,624 allocated to the aforementioned suppliers, as explained in paragraph 123 of the appealed judgment.
## Page 436
91 MUTABAZI v. THE GOVERNMENT OF RWANDA/MINADEF ET AL.
They concluded by arguing that, based on Article 52, paragraph 2, subparagraph 8 of Law no30/2018 of 02/06/2018 determining the jurisdiction of courts1, and in reference to judgment RCOMA 00035/2022/CA rendered on 13/06/2022, Gicumbi District v WOORD GROUP Ltd, particularly in its paragraph 15, where it was ruled that only the compensation awarded in the judgment should be considered in determining the jurisdiction of the appellate Court. Therefore, they argue that Mutabazi Steven’s appeal should be declared inadmissible, as it does not fall within the jurisdiction of this Court.
The representative of Mutabazi Steven argues that, based on Article 62 of Law no 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 relating to the civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure, which provides for the handling of cases involving multiple parties where each has distinct claims or is subject to different claims, the arguments presented by the Government of Rwanda should not be upheld. He stated that the Commercial High Court ruled that the Government of Rwanda/MINADEF must pay FRW 31,791,476 to Mutabazi Steven, and on the other hand, also ruled that Mutabazi Steven must pay FRW 51,778,100 to Habimana
1 This article reads that: “…if such cases have ordered the award of damages of at least seventy-five million Rwandan francs (FRW 75,000,000) or in case of disagreement between the parties, the same amount is ordered by the judge; 2 This article stipulates that: “The subject-matter of the claim is determined by parties’ respective arguments. Arguments are laid down in the document instituting proceedings and in the defence submissions and are definitely confirmed during the pretrial conference, where applicable. No party may modify the subject-matter in the course of the proceedings unless such modification is agreed upon by all parties to the case. The subject-matter cannot be changed before the appellate court. However, the subject matter may be changed by incidental claims if these are sufficiently linked to the original arguments of parties.
## Page 437
92 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
Fidèle, Nyandekwe Georges, Mwesigye Emmanuel, Mukimbiri Eric, Maridadi Fred and Nsabimana Paul, which means that the total value of the compensation, without considering the individual allocation per party, exceeds FRW 75,000,000. He further argues that Mutabazi Steven demonstrated that the work performed has a value of FRW 248,164,544, and that the Commercial High Court, in paragraphs 45 and 48 of the appealed judgment, acknowledged the value of the work performed to be FRW 168,751,890. He maintains that this value, as determined by the Court, should be used to assess the jurisdiction of this Court, in line with the direction established in case RCOMA 00035/2022/CA, which the Government of Rwanda/MINADEF relies upon, where paragraph 15 clarifies that the value determined by the Court, not the one submitted by the party, is the relevant figure for jurisdictional purposes.
The representative of Muzirankoni Stella submits that, in determining the jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal, it must be considered the aggregate total of all compensation awarded in the appealed judgment, without considering the compensation allocated to each individual separately, as provided under Article 6 of Law no 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 relating to the civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure. She stated that the total compensation exceeds FRW 75,000,000.
The representative of Habimana Fidèle, Nyandekwe Georges, Mwesigye Emmanuel, Mukimbiri Eric, Maridadi Fred and Nsabimana Paul submits that only the disputed compensation that prompted Mutabazi Steven to appeal should be considered, and then apply the provision of Article 52 of Law no 30/2018 of 02/06/2018 determining the jurisdiction of courts.
## Page 438
93 MUTABAZI v. THE GOVERNMENT OF RWANDA/MINADEF ET AL.
DETERMINATION OF THE COURT
The dispute in this matter centers on determining the appropriate basis for assessing the admissibility of a second-level appeal—specifically, whether it should be based on the amount of damages awarded by the court or on the value of the underlying contractual agreement used to calculate those damages. Additionally, it concerns whether, in cases where the appealed judgment grants multiple types of damages, the assessment should consider the total sum of all damages awarded or only a portion thereof.
The issue of determining the basis for establishing the jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal at the second level of appeal was addressed in judgment no RCOMAA 00035/2022/CA, rendered by this Court on 13/06/2022, Gicumbi District v WOORD GROUP Ltd. Although the case specifically examined whether to rely on the damages awarded by the court or those claimed by the claimants, in paragraph 15 of this judgment, the Court clarified that Article 52, paragraph 2, subparagraph 8, of Law no 30/2018 of 02/06/2018 determining the jurisdiction of courts, provides that when damages are awarded by the court, it is those damages that should be used as the basis for determining jurisdiction. In cases where it is necessary to refer to the value of the claim, that value must be the one determined by the court following arguments presented by both parties. If no value has been determined by the court, then the valuation provided by an expert may be used when necessary. In other words, for the purposes of admissibility of a second-level appeal, the Legislator did not intend for jurisdiction to be based on a value unilaterally claimed by a party; instead, it must be based on the damages actually awarded by the court. This principle has also been
## Page 439
94 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
consistently reaffirmed in various judgments rendered by this Court3.
In the same judgment, under paragraph 16, the Court affirmed that when damages have been awarded in the judgment under appeal, it is those awarded damages that must serve as the basis for assessing the jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal at the second level of appeal. The Court further indicated that this is the consistent position adopted by the Court of Appeal and cited various other cases in which this position has been applied4.
In the present judgment under appeal, from paragraph 45 to 48, the Commercial High Court found that the total revised contract value was FRW168,750,890. In its ruling, the court confirmed that the Government of Rwanda/MINADEF owed Mutabazi Steven and Muzirankoni Stella the amount of FRW31,791,476 and ordered the Government to pay that amount. It also ordered Mutabazi Steven jointly with Muzirankoni Stella to pay Habimana Fidèle, Nyandekwe George, Mwesigye Emmanuel, Mukimbiri Eric, Maridadi Fred, and Nsabimana Paul a debt amounting to FRW51,778,100.
3 Judgment NºRCOMAA 00075/2022/CA rendered on 28/06/2024, BANK OF KIGALI Plc v MUTARA ENTERPRISES Ltd paragraph 16, among other various judgments rendered by the Court of Appeal. 4 Judgment no RCOMAA 00013/2021/CA, HABYARIMANA Charles v MTN RWANDACELL Ltd et al in its paragraph 39 ; judgment nº RSOCAA 0004/2018/CA rendered on 09/11/2018, Georges NIHAL BOPEARATCHY v KARONGI TEA FACTORY Ltd, and judgment RCOMAA 00004/2020/CA rendered on 11/12/2020, MABUYE Joseph, NZIZERA Alexandre, PAJ REAL ESTATE Ltd and WAREHOUSE v SHANE Martin Dale and MUGIRANEZA Pascal.
## Page 440
95 MUTABAZI v. THE GOVERNMENT OF RWANDA/MINADEF ET AL.
This Court finds that, following the arguments presented by the parties, the Commercial High Court determined that the Government of Rwanda/MINADEF must pay Mutabazi Steven and Muzirankoni Stella the sum of FRW31,791,476, and it is this amount that must be used to assess whether the appeal falls within the jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal, in accordance with Article 52, paragraph 2, subparagraph 8 of Law no 30/2018 of 02/06/2018 referred to above.
Based on the position reiterated above—namely that when damages are awarded in the judgment under appeal, those awarded damages serve as the basis for determining the jurisdiction of the appellate court—this Court finds that the assessment of its jurisdiction to hear the appeal filed by Mutabazi Steven must be based on the damages awarded in the judgment being appealed. Consequently, the claim by Mutabazi Steven and his Counsel that the jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal should be assessed based on the entire contract value confirmed by the Commercial High Court, which amounts to FRW 168,751,890, is without merit, since when damages are awarded in the judgment under appeal, it is those specific damages—not the total contract value—that must be considered when determining the jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal.
The Court further finds that the argument presented by Mutabazi Steven and Muzirankoni Stella—that jurisdiction should be based on the sum of the amount the Government was ordered to pay to Mutabazi Steven and the amount he was ordered to pay to his creditors (suppliers), i.e. (FRW 31,791,476 + FRW 51,778,100) = FRW 83,569,576 —also lacks legal basis on grounds that the damages relevant for assessing the jurisdiction of this Court are only those appealed, meaning those which the
## Page 441
96 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
appellant contests. It follows that not all damages awarded in the judgment under appeal are relevant, but only those that are challenged by the appellant. Therefore, in this case, the applicable amount for assessing jurisdiction is the FRW 31,791,476 that the Government of Rwanda/MINADEF was ordered to pay to Mutabazi Steven and Muzirankoni Stella—since these are the damages contested by Mutabazi Steven in his appeal. As it stands, those damages do not reach the statutory threshold of seventy- five million (FRW 75,000,000) required by law.
The Court finds that the argument advanced by Mutabazi Steven and his Counsel, as well as by the Counsel representing Muzirankoni Stella—namely that the Court's jurisdiction should be determined based on the total of the damages awarded to them and the amount they were ordered to pay to the suppliers of project materials, relying on Article 6 of Law no 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 relating to civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure—cannot be upheld. Not only has it already been established that it is the awarded damages which form the basis for determining the jurisdiction of the Court, but also the aforementioned article cannot apply in this case, given that only the damages awarded to Mutabazi Steven and Muzirankoni Stella were appealed, while the damages they were ordered to pay were not subject to appeal.
Based on the above analysis, the Court of Appeal finds that the appeal lodged by Mutabazi Steven is inadmissible for lack of jurisdiction of this Court. This is because the damages awarded to him and challenged in the appeal do not reach the statutory threshold of seventy-five million Rwandan Francs (FRW 75,000,000) as required under Article 52, paragraph 2,
## Page 442
97 MUTABAZI v. THE GOVERNMENT OF RWANDA/MINADEF ET AL.
subparagraph 8 of Law no 30/2018 of 02/06/2018 determining the jurisdiction of courts. 2. Whether procedural and counsel fees requested in this case should be awarded
The legal representative of Habimana Fidèle, Nyandekwe George, Mwesigye Emmanuel, Mukimbiri Eric, and Maridadi Fred argues that his clients were unnecessarily dragged into these lawsuits, as they would not have needed to hire a legal counsel had the judgments ordering their compensation been properly executed by the losing party. He therefore requests the Court of Appeal to order Mutabazi Steven to pay each of them FRW 1,000,000 as counsel fees and FRW 300,000 as procedural fees at the appellate level.
The legal representative of Muzirankoni Stella requests the Court to order Mutabazi Steven to pay her FRW 1,500,000 in damages and FRW 3,000,000 as counsel fees.
The representative of Mutabazi Steven requests that the Government of Rwanda/MINADEF be ordered to pay him FRW 2,500,000 as compensation for expenses incurred during the litigation. He argues that the case-related costs claimed by the suppliers should be borne by the defendant in this case, and that the claim made by Muzirankoni Stella is unfounded, as she herself admitted that she had been ill and did not perform her responsibilities. Therefore, she should seek such damages from the defendant who involved her in this lawsuit.
The State Attorneys of the Republic of Rwanda argue that the claims brought by Mutabazi Steven are baseless and that he
## Page 443
98 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
should not be entitled to any compensation from the Government of Rwanda/MINADEF, as it did not cause him any harm. DETERMINATION OF THE COURT
Article 111 of Law n° 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 relating to the civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure stipulates as follows: “The claim for representation fees is an incidental claim to the principal claim aiming to repay expenses incurred during judicial proceedings. The claim for legal costs is adjudicated at the same time with the principal claim. It can also be admitted and adjudicated even if the principal claim has not been admitted”.
The Court finds that, since Muzirankoni Stella, Habimana Fidèle, Nyandekwe George, Mwesigye Emmanuel, Mukimbiri Eric, and Maridadi Fred actively participated in the proceedings and hired legal counsel to represent them, the amounts they are claiming are justified. However, considering that the case was dismissed on the basis of this Court’s lack of jurisdiction, the Court, in its discretion, awards Muzirankoni Stella five hundred thousand Rwandan Francs (FRW 500,000) as counsel fees and two hundred thousand Rwandan Francs (FRW 200,000) as procedural fees at this level. Habimana Fidèle, Nyandekwe George, Mwesigye Emmanuel, Mukimbiri Eric, and Maridadi Fred are jointly awarded five hundred thousand Rwandan Francs (FRW 500,000) as counsel fees and two hundred thousand Rwandan Francs (200,000 Frw) as procedural costs, all to be paid by Mutabazi Steven. The Court further finds that the FRW 2,500,000 claimed by Mutabazi Steven from the Government of Rwanda/MINADEF as expenses incurred in the litigation are not to be granted, given that his appeal was not admitted.
## Page 444
99 MUTABAZI v. THE GOVERNMENT OF RWANDA/MINADEF ET AL.
III. DECISION OF THE COURT
Holds that the objection of lack of jurisdiction raised by the Government of Rwanda/MINADEF is well-founded;
Holds that the appeal filed by Mutabazi Steven is inadmissible as it falls outside the jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal;
Orders Mutabazi Steven to pay Muzirankoni Stella five hundred thousand Rwandan Francs (FRW 500,000) as counsel fees and two hundred thousand Rwandan Francs (200,000 Frw) as procedural costs at this instance;
Orders Mutabazi Steven to pay Habimana Fidèle, Nyandekwe George, Mwesigye Emmanuel, Mukimbiri Eric, and Maridadi Fred jointly the sum of five hundred thousand Rwandan Francs (FRW 500,000) as attorney’s fees and two hundred thousand Rwandan Francs (FRW 200,000) as procedural costs at this instance;
Declares that the deposited court fees cover expenses incurred in this case.
## Page 445
100 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
## Page 446
101 UWANTEGE V. NIYONSHUTI ET AL.
UWANTEGE V. NIYONSHUTI ET AL. [Rwanda COURT OF APPEAL- RCOMAA 00043/2024/CA (Rutazana, P.J.) 19 November 2024] Commercial procedure- Summary Procedures- Calculating appeal time limit for summary procedures- Appeal time limits for summary procedures are calculated with reference to article 188 of the Law n0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 relating to civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure- the provision of the above mentioned article is the sole special guidance for calculating such appeals time limit, and its content constitutes an exception to the provisions of article 275 of the same law. Facts: Uwantege contracted a loan facility from Access Bank Rwanda Ltd, and they gave her 150,000,000 Rwf upon presentation of a certain collateral registered under UPI: 3/03/04/02/ 953 for repayment security. Uwantege failed to reimburse the loan, and the Bank petitioned the Registrar General, and sought a permission for auctioning the attached collateral. The auction permission was granted and the collateral was bought by one Nizeyimana Venant. Uwantege petitioned the Registrar General and pleaded for revocation of the auction, but she did not succeed. She then seized the Commercial Court and she sued Nizeyimana Iddi Ibrahim (the auctioneer), Access Bank, Nizeyimana Venant, and RDB, and she sought for annulment of the auction for its alleged illegality. The seized court heard the case and held that the concerned auction has been legally conducted. Uwantage was not satisfied 101
## Page 447
102 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
with the ruling and she appealed the decision before the Commercial High Court. She lamented that the appealed ruling disregarded her claims about the auctioneer’s illegal procedures, and she as well requested for invalidation of the charged damages. The Commercial High Court, on its own motion, wondered whether Uwantege’s appeal was not time-barred. Parties argued on the motion, and the Court found that Uwantege’s appeal was filed late, and it held hat her appeal has no justification. Uwantege appealed the above ruling before the Court of Appeal; and she complained that the Commercial High Court held that her appeal was time- barred, lamenting that the court held it so in violation of article 275 of the Law n0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 relating to civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure which states that for delays that are calculated in terms of days, the event day must not be included, and she prayed for redress of the previous court’s errors. For the respondents, they argued that Uwantege’s appeal is pointless as she cannot pinpoint the defects of the appealed ruling since she cannot rebut the Commercial High Court’s stance in the computation of urgent claims appeals time-limits, whereby the court held that such appeals deadlines are calculated with reference to article 188 (2) of the Law n0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018, while article 257 of the same law is only meant for ordinary appeals. Held: Appeal time limits for summary procedures are calculated with reference to article 188 of the Law n0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 relating to civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure. The provision of the above mentioned article is the sole special guidance for calculating such appeals time limit, and
## Page 448
103 UWANTEGE V. NIYONSHUTI ET AL.
its content constitutes an exception to the provisions of article 275 of the same law. The appeal lacks merit. Statutes referred to: Law No 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 relating to civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure, articles 188, 260, and 274 Cases referred to: SUPROMETAL Ltd v BANQUE POPULAIRE DU RWANDA Ltd and RDB’s REGISTRAR GENERAL RCOMAA 00031/2020/ CA, rendered by the Court of Appeal on the 25/08/2020. Prosecution v Kantesi Odette et.al, RPA 00020/2024/CA rendered by the Court of Appeal on the 27/09/2024. Judgment I. BACKGROUND OF THE CASE
In the year 2021, Uwantege Louise contracted a loan facility from Access Bank Rwanda Ltd, and the Bank gave her 150,000,000 Rwf upon presentation of a certain immovable property registered under UPI: 3/03/04/953 for collateral.
Uwantege Louise failed to reimburse the loan as per the terms of her agreement with Access Bank Rwanda Ltd, and her failure made the Bank to seek a permission for auctioning the
## Page 449
104 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
collateral from the Registrar General. The Bank got the auction permission, and the collateral was auctioned on the 17/01/2024 by Niyonshuti Iddi Ibrahim, the auctioneer. And the collateral was bought on 188, 650,000 Rwf by Nizeyimana Venant. Following the auction, on the 23/ 01/2024, Uwantege Louise petitioned the Registrar General, and dropped a letter for revocation the auction, but her letter got no reply.
Later on, Uwantege Louise filed a claim before the Commercial Court and sued Nizeyimana Iddi Ibrahim (the auctioneer), Access Bank Rwanda Ltd, Nizeyimana Venant and Rwanda Development Board (RDB), and she requested for the annulment of the auction due to its’ alleged violation of articles 25 and 27 of the Registrar General’s regulations n0 001/2020/ORG of 12/05/2020 relating to management, lease, auction and acquisition of attached mortgages as revised to date. She based her claim on the following grounds: a fact that she never received the auctioned property valuation report, neither was she given any auction related document, a fact that she was not linked to the IECMS’s property auctioning window, a fact that the auction arrangement was kept secret and such a secrecy led her property into a derisory purchase price, a fact that by the auction time, the auctioneer used an obsolete valuation report, and then a fact that some of the auction procedures were conducted outside the public auction technology.
All respondents argued that the auction was legally conducted and that it cannot be revoked. They also requested for refund over courtroom representation fees and the incurred case related bill costs. Meanwhile, Nizeyimana Venant made a cross- appeal, and thereby argued that he has not yet received a house he bought under the public auction, and he lamented that
## Page 450
105 UWANTEGE V. NIYONSHUTI ET AL.
Uwantege Louise kept dismounting some of the house’s high value features, and she kept replacing them with some other low quality materials. He requested for cancelling the purchase and be refunded the cost, and claimed for related damage- compensations. RDB did not appear for the hearing, but since they had been lawfully summoned, the case was heard in their absence.
On 05/06/2024, the Commercial Court heard case RCOM 00774/2024/TC and held that the above mentioned auction was legally conducted and the court backed its decision with the following reasons: a fact that Uwantege Louise had been notified of all the auction-related documents via her own son Niyo Elie, a fact that Uwantege Louise has deliberately declined a linkage into IECMS auction system when she refused to provide her email address for a proposed link. A fact that the Bank served Uwantege Louise with the auction notice in February 2023, and then got her served with the property valuation report in the following month, she cannot allege an obsolescence for a valuation report of less than one-year old, and of which she all along had a right to oppose.
With reference to the above provided grounds, the court stayed the contested auction and ordered Uwantege Louise to give Nizeyimana Venant and Niyonshuti Iddi Ibrahim 500,000 Rwf each for court representation costs, and ordered her to give Access Bank Rwanda 1,000,000 Rwf for Counsel fee.
On the 28/06/2024, Uwantege Louise appealed the above ruling before the Commercial High Court; she argued that for the above judgement, the court disregarded her claims about the auctioneer’s illegal procedures, and she also requested for invalidation of the charged damages. The respondents (a part
## Page 451
106 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
from RDB who did not appear) argued that Uwantege Louise’s appeal has no justification, and each requested for damages on the incurred case related expenses and Nizeyimana Venant closs- appealed and sought moral damage compensations that are equivalent to the house features that Uwatege Louise dismounted from his house.
On the 12/07/2024, the Commercial High Court heard the appellant’s case, and all the parties, apart from RDB, were present. On its own motion, the court questioned whether the appeal by Uwantege Louise was filed in due legal time limits. Parties debated on the motion, and Counsel Komezusenge Deogratias, who represented the appellant, argued that the appeal complied with the provided three-days appeal deadline; while respondents were arguing that the appeal time limit was not observed. And the Court moved that the submissions on the motion will be examined together with the merit of the case.
On the 17/07/2024, the Commercial High Court heard case RCOMA 00397/2024/HCC and held that the appeal by Uwantege Louise is not admitted since it is time-barred, while the cross-appeal made by Nizeyimana Venant is as well not admitted since its principal appeal (made by Uwantege Louise was equally not admitted). However, Nizeyimana Venant’s cross-appeal will solely be examined on the issue concerning the incurred case costs. The Court ordered Uwantege Louise to give each respondent 500,000 Rwf for court representation cost before the appellate court, adding to charges from the first instance. While for Niyonshuti Iddi Ibrahim and Access Bank Rwanda Plc, she shall give them 100,000 Rwf for case bill costs. The filing fee that Uwantege Louise deposited shall remain in the State treasury, as it was used to cover the proceedings expenditures.
## Page 452
107 UWANTEGE V. NIYONSHUTI ET AL.
Uwantege Louise appealed the above ruling before the Court of Appeal and she lamented about the Commercial High Court’s ruling on her violation of the appeal time limits, and she argued that the court held it so in a blatant contravention of article 275 of the Law n0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 relating to civil, commercial, labor and administrative procedure, and she pleaded the court for the errors rectification.
All respondents present (apart from RDB who did not appear for the hearing) argued that the appeal by Uwantege Louise has no justification since she has not been able to rebut the Commercial High Court’s findings on her late appeal. They therefore requested the court to order her refund them for Counsel fee, and for all related costs that were incurred for this appeal level. Furthermore, Nizeyimana Venant prayed the court to order Uwantege Louise to pay him for some features she later dismounted from the purchased house, and compensate him for all the rentals he kept paying yet he had his own house.
The case was heard in public on the 11/11/ 2014 with Uwantege Louise represented by Counsel Komezusenge Deogratias and Counsel Nuwagaba James, while Niyonshuti Iddi Ibrahim was assisted by Counsel Kwizera Bernard, Niyeyimana Venant was represented by Counsel Rugwizangoga Samuel, Access Bank Rwanda Ltd was represented by Counsel Uwizeyimana Jean Baptiste. RDB had been legally summoned but they never appeared before the court, neither did they provide an explanation for their default.
With reference to the above provided disagreements, the court examined the following issues:
## Page 453
108 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
a. Whether the Commercial High court made an error by holding that the appeal by Uwantege Louise is time- barred; b. Whether the cross-appeal made by Nizeyimana Venant is admissible; c. Whether parties’ requests for representation fees and for case bills costs are worth-considering. II. THE ISSUES OF THE CASE AND THEIR ANALYIS 1. Whether the Commercial High Court made an error by holding that the appeal by Uwantege Louise is time- barred.
In their submissions and pleadings, Uwantege Louise’s attorneys argued that the Commercial High Court held that Uwantage’s appeal was time-barred, and the court held it so in violation of article 275 of the Law n0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 relating to civil, commercial, labor and administrative procedure which provides that while calculating time for appeals deadlines, the day that give rise to an appeal right is not included. They also argued that looking at the complementarity nature of laws, the appeal by Uwantege Louise should be admitted with reference to article 52 of the Law n0 30/2018 of 02/06/2018 determining the jurisdiction of courts, calling it an exception to the above mentioned article 188 of the Law n0 22/ 2018 of 29/04/2018 relating to civil, commercial, labor and administrative procedure.
Uwantege Louise’s attorneys argued that the Commercial High Court should not have made reference to a certain precedent
## Page 454
109 UWANTEGE V. NIYONSHUTI ET AL.
from case RCOMAA 00031/2020/CA rendered by the Court of Appeal since such a precedent has been overturned by another precedent along case RCOMAA 00090/2022/CA still rendered by the Court of Appeal on the 14/10/2022, whereby in its’ 24th paragraph, the court held that while computing the appeal delay time limits, the judgement pronouncement day is not included. They therefore argued that considering all provided explanations, Uwantege Louise’s appeal deadline date was the 28/06/2024, and she observed it. And therefore, her appeal should have been admitted.
All respondents (apart from RDB who did not appear) argued that the appeal by Uwantege Louise has no justification. In their explanations, they concurred with the ruling on the appealed judgement, and argued that while calculating the appeals time limits for summary procedures, reference is made to article 188 (2) of the above mentioned Law n0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018, while article 275 of the same law is only meant for the ordinary appeals. And they argued that in her appeal, Uwantege Louise cannot debunk the above stance, and neither does she highlight the committed error. While for the issue of a precedent from case RCOMAA 00090/2022/CA which the appellant’s attorneys allege to have replaced the court’s reference, respondents argued that such an allegation is irrelevant since those cases are not of the same nature; arguing that the precedent from case RCOMAA 00090/2022/CA only concerns issues to do with deadlines for filing appeals to the Registrar General.
## Page 455
110 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
DETERMINATION OF THE COURT
For this issue, the disagreement lies into whether the Commercial High Court made an error by holding that Uwantege Louise’s appeal on her claim for annulment of a public auction was time-barred and therefore inadmissible
Article 188 (2) of the Law n0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 relating to civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure, concerning summary procedures appeals deadlines provides the following “… the appeal is made within three (3|) working days from the time the order was pronounced or from the day the parties were notified of the decision. The case is also decided in a period not exceeding three (3) working days’ (…)
Article 260 (5) of the above mentioned Law n0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 concerning application for annulment of public auctions provides that such applications are filed and heard within the time limits meant for summary procedures.
Article 275 of the same above mentioned Law n0 22/2018 provides that for the time limits set in terms of days and hours, shall be calculated from a day to day, or an hour to hour. However, the day of the act or of an event that gave rise to the claim shall not be taken into account, but the deadline date shall be included.
The issue of calculation of deadlines for appeals against courts’ decisions on claims for annulments of public auctions together with the interpretations of the above mentioned articles 188, 260, and 275, have been examined along case RCOMAA 00031/2020/CA with SOPROMETAL Ltd v. BANQUE POPULAIRE DU RWANDA AND RDB’s REGISTRAR
## Page 456
111 UWANTEGE V. NIYONSHUTI ET AL.
GENERAL rendered by the Court of Appeal on the 25/08/2020. For that case, the court examined an objection raised by BANQUE POPULAIRE DU RWANDA Ltd, whereby the Bank requested the court to dismiss the appeal by SOPROMETAL Ltd due to the latter’s appeal violation of the three days’ time limit provided under article 188 of the above mentioned Law n0 22/ 2018 of 29/04/2018, and whereby SOPROMETAL Ltd was arguing that the raised objection is pointless, adding that the appeal deadline was observed with reference to articles 275 and 276 of the same law, whereby those articles make it clear that when calculating for the appeals time limits, the ruling pronouncement day together with the official public holidays are not included .
While examining the above issue, the court analyzed the provisions of the above mentioned articles 188, 260 (5) and 275, and under paragraph 16 to 19 of case RCOMAA 00031/2020/CA, the Court of Appeal held the following: - Article 260 (5) of the above mentioned Law n0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 denotes that the application for annulment of public auctions are file to courts with reference to deadlines provided for summary procedures; - Under civil procedure, the provisions of article 275 of the above mentioned Law n0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 only apply in the absence of any other legislative precision on the computation for delay time limits. It is therefore clear that by the above article, the Legislator intended to give a general guidance for calculating time deadlines. Nevertheless, as the above mentioned Law indicates, the Legislator can at times
## Page 457
112 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
thereby insert a related exception for a specific context, and in such a situation, it is the exceptional provision that applies. - The provision of article 188 of the aforementioned Law n0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 is an exception to the provisions of article 275 of the very Law. This is so true since article 188 provides for a specific guidance for computing appeal time deadlines for summary procedures. And that is why it is the provisions of article 188 that applied for case RCOMAA 00031/2020/CA.
For the above case, the Court of Appeal explained that with reference the above mentioned article 188, the appeal time deadline started running from 9th /01/2020, the pronouncement date, and the three days’ time limit elapsed on the 13th, and that was the deadline date for SOTRAPROMETAL Ltd’s appeal. Therefore, their appeal of 14th /01/2020 was not in line with legal provisions for appeals on summary procedures. And the court therefore held that the objection raised by BANQUE POPULAIRE DU RWANDA Ltd has justification.
Issues about summary procedures appeals deadlines have also been examined along case RPA 00020/2024/CA with the Prosecution v. Kantesi Odette and Kanyabugoyi Pascasie rendered by the Court of Appeal on the 27/09/2024. For that case, the court examined whether the appeal made by Kantesi Odette against the High Court’s ruling on her urgent claim about invalidating the court’s ruling on case RS/RECT/RP 00001/2023/HC/KIG, whereby she complained that a judgement copy she handed back for errors rectification was actually
## Page 458
113 UWANTEGE V. NIYONSHUTI ET AL.
rewritten since it was returned different from the original, and her appeal was found time-barred and therefore inadmissible.
For the above case, the Court of Appeal held that article 188 (2) of the above mentioned Law n0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 denotes that when a summary procedure was heard in the presence of a party, the latter has to file a related appeal within three working from the ruling pronouncement, or from the date the pronouncement was uploaded into the IECMS technology, that is, the party’s notification of the ruling. The court referred to the foregoing explanations, and held that the appeal made by Kantesi Odette against the ruling on case RP 00016/2024/HC/KIG did not comply with the due three days’ time deadline for a summary procedure that was pronounced on the 21/05/2024, and for which the judgement copy was upload into the IECMS on the 22/05/2024, the date taken for her notification of the ruling ; but she filed her appeal on the 26/05/2024, yet her appeal deadline elapsed on the 24/05/2024, and her appeal was therefore found inadmissible.
Coming back to the appealed case, the Commercial High Court made reference to articles 188 and 260 of the above mentioned Law n0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 relating to civil, commercial , labor and administrative procedure, and it also referred to a precedent from case RCOMAA 00031/2020/CA, and under paragraph 28, it held that the appeal by Uwantege Louise came in late due to her failure to observe the three days’ time limit that started running from 25/06/2024 and ended on 27/06/2024, since she filed her appealed on the 28/06/2024.
Considering all the explanations that are provided from paragraph 21 -26 of this case, this court found that when the Commercial High Court held that Uwantege Louise filed her
## Page 459
114 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
appeal late, it made no error. Just as the case file indicates, she appealed against the court’s decision on a claim for the annulment of a public auction, and as it has been above elucidated, such claims are handled within time limits meant for summary procedures. And such time limits are computed with reference to the provisions of article 188 of the above mentioned Law n0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018, since it is the sole that provides for a specific way for calculating appeals deadlines for summary procedures; and it constitutes an exception to the provisions of article 275, which is a general guidance for all appeals time deadlines, and this is exactly the Commercial High Court’s stance.
With regard to arguments made by Uwantege Louise’s attorneys contending that the court’s reference precedent has been superseded by a precedent from case RCOMAA 00090/2020/CA with Muhire Samuel et al. v Kigali Business Centre Ltd (KBC Ltd), the court found such an argument void, since for the above mentioned case, the court examined about appeals time deadlines with regard to the Registrar General’s regulations on applications for annulment of public auctions. It is therefore clear, that such a judgement cannot be taken as a precedent for appealing a judicial summary procedure.
With regard to an argument by Uwantege Louise’s attorneys by which the court should consider the complementarity of laws and admit Uwantege’s appeals with reference to article 52 of the Law n0 30/2018 of 02/06/2018 determining the jurisdiction of courts, and calling it as an exception to the provisions of article 188 of the above mentioned Law n0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018; the court found it irrelevant. Article 52 constitutes no exception to the provisions of articles
## Page 460
115 UWANTEGE V. NIYONSHUTI ET AL.
188 as they allege; it only concerns about the Court of Appeal’s jurisdictions, and it has nothing to do with the litigation at hand, and it therefore serves no reference for this case.
Considering all the above provided explanations, before this court, the appeal made Uwantege Louise has no justification. Whether the cross-appeal made by Nizeyimana Venant has justification.
Nizeyimana Venant prayed the Court to order Uwantege Louise to give him 17,137, 874 Rwf, equivalent to the house features that she dismounted from the house he bought, and he claims the sum will help him refurbish his house. He also requested for a refund over 11,360,000 Rwf that he has so far paid for rentals, yet he was supposed to be using a house he bought. He claimed such a compensation from Uwantege Louise accusing her of initiating a claim for annulment of an auction for which she well knew it was lawfully conducted.
Uwantege Louise argued the claims by Nizeyimana Venant are null, more so that he presented no supporting evidence, and she claimed of committing no vandalism on the house. DETERMINATION OF THE COURT
Article 152 of the Law n0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 relating to civil, commercial, labor and administrative procedure as modified and completed to date provides that the respondent before an appellate court may also have claims to be made in his or her defense. The cross-appeal is filed by the respondent against
## Page 461
116 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
the appellant or against other respondents; However, when the principal appeal is not admitted, or when it is struck off the roll, such a situation does not prevent the appellant from seeking refund for the case bill costs.
The above mentioned article denotes that while presenting his/her defense before an appellate court, a respondent may raise a claim against the the appellant or against co- respondents. However, when the principal appeal is not admitted or struck off the appeals roll, the appellant can only claim for the incurred appeal related expenses.
Nizeyimana Venant is claiming for the same compensation he had sought along the appealed ruling, but the appellate court held that his cross-appeal is not admitted due to the dismissal of the principal appeal. This court has as well examined about the admissibility of the principal appeal as filed by Uwantege Louise; as this court has above explained, the principal appeal has not been admitted, and the court based its decision on the aforementioned article 152. Therefore, the court found no way of examining a cross-appeal on the damaged house, and paid rentals, yet the related principal appeal has not been admitted neither by the previous appellate court nor by this very court.
Considering all the above provided explanations, the cross-appeal made by Nizeyimana Venant is hereby not admitted.
## Page 462
117 UWANTEGE V. NIYONSHUTI ET AL.
About the parties’ requests for refund for court representation fees and the incurred case related expenses.
All respondents have prayed the Court of Appeal to order Uwantege Louise to refund them for courtroom representation fees and for the incurred case bill costs: Nizeyimana Venant requested for 3,000,000 Rwf meant for Counsel fee, and 500,000 Rwf for the incurred case related expenses; Access Bank Rwanda Ltd and Niyonshuti Iddi Ibrahim each requested for 1,000,000 Rwf for courtroom representation fee , and 500,000 Rwf for case bill expenses, and the requests came adding to charges granted by the previous court.
Uwantege Louise’s attorneys argued that the respondents’ requests for court representation fees and for the incurred case related expenses are not worth-considering since it is not Uwantege Louise who wanted lawsuits; she only sued because she was grieved and she needs justice. DETERMIANTION OF THE COURT
Article 111 of the Law n0 22/2018 of the 29/04/2018 relating to civil, commercial, labor and administrative procedure provides the following: The claim for representation fees is incidental to the principal claim, and it aims at repaying expenses incurred during judicial proceedings. The claim for legal costs is adjudicated at the same time with the principal claim. However, it can also be admitted and adjudicated even if the principal claim has not been admitted.
## Page 463
118 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
The court found that it is Uwantege Louise who appealed the ruling, and therefore made respondents to make a follow-up on the case and look for lawyers to plead the case for them. And as it has been above explained, Uwantege Louise’s appeal was found void, and therefore the court referred to the above mentioned article 111, and by its own discretion, it allowed Nizeyimana Venant, Access Bank Rwanda Ltd, and Niyonshuti Iddi Ibrahim, each 700,000 Rwf for court representation fee, and 200,000 Rwf for the incurred case related expenses. The court held it so since their respective requested amounts were not surely accounted for. III. DECISION OF THE COURT
Holds that the appeal made by Uwantege Louise has no justification;
Holds that the cross-appeal by Nizeyimana Venant is not admitted;
Holds that the ruling on case RCOMA 00397/2024/HCC rendered by the Commercial High Court on the 17/07/2024, is stayed;
Orders Uwantege Louise to give Access Bank Rwanda Ltd, Niyonshuti Iddi Ibrahim and Nizeyimana Venant, each seven thousand (700,000 Rwf) for court representation fees, and two hundred thousand (200,000 Rwf) for the incurred case related costs for this appeal.
Rules that the deposited court fees covered the proceedings expenditures.
## Page 464
119 PROSECUTION v UWIMANIHAYE
PROSECUTION v UWIMANIHAYE [Rwanda HIGH COURT - RS/INJUST/RP 00001/2022/HC/KIG (Juru, P.J., Byakatonda, Mukakarisa, J.) 09 April 2024] Criminal procedure — Case review — All parties to the case under review must be summoned to appear to the review proceedings, and failure to summon any of the parties, even if it was a civil party in the case under review, constitutes a ground of injustice which may justify the review of the case on grounds of justice. Facts: Uwimanihaye Pierre Celestin applied for the review of the judgment no RP 01088/2018/TGI/NYGE, in which he had been convicted of fraudulently selling a RAV4 vehicle with plate number RAD 615P, arguing that there exist other separate judgments, specifically the judgment No RP 00759/2018/TGI/NYGE and the judgment No RPA 01524- RP1525/2019/HC/KIG in which other individuals, namely Ntihemuka Emmanuel and Hakizimana Daniel, were convicted for the fraudulent sale of the same vehicle along with other cars. He stated that he was wrongly convicted for an offense committed by others who were already prosecuted and sentenced. The Court declared founded the new ground he presented and decided that he was not held guilty of the offenses for which he had been convicted. Ntabahejeje Théogène who had been the civil party in the case under review, argued that he should have been summoned in the review proceedings in which Uwimanihaye Pierre Celestin was acquitted. He subsequently applied for the review of that 119
## Page 465
120 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
judgment on the grounds of injustice, claiming that the alleged injustice resulted from the failure to summon him while he should be summoned, and the Intermediate Court should not have admitted the application for the judgment review. Held: All parties to the case under review must be summoned to appear to the review proceedings, and failure to summon any of the parties, even if it was the civil party in the case under review, constitutes a ground of injustice which may justify the review of the case on grounds of justice. Therefore, the fact that case RP 01112/2021/TGI/NYGE was adjudicated without summoning Ntabahejeje Théogène, who was a party in the case under review, amounts to injustice. The application for review due to injustice has merit. Statutes and statutory instruments referred to: Law nº 027/2019 of 19/09/2019 relating to the criminal procedure, article 195; Law n° 30/2018 of 2/6/2018 determining the jurisdiction of courts, article 55. Cases referred to: Special Guarantee Fund (SGF) v Uwanyirigira Josée et al., RS/REV/RC 00001/2022/CA, rendered by the Court of Appeal on 20/04/2023.
## Page 466
121 PROSECUTION v UWIMANIHAYE
Judgment BACKGROUND OF THE CASE
The Prosecution indicted before the Intermediate Court Gasangwa Innocent, Uwimanihaye Pierre Celestin and Hakizimana Daniel, accusing them of forgery and use of forged documents, as well as fraud. The Prosecution alleges that on several occasions, Gasangwa Innocent rented vehicles and handed them over to individuals involved in vehicle theft with him, who would then sell them or use them as collateral in “Lambert,” using falsified documents, afterwards, Gasangwa used search notice, reporting that the vehicles had been stolen, while he well knew that it was not the case.
It is alleged that Gasangwa orchestrated a scheme to defraud individuals in collaboration with his associates, namely Hakizimana Daniel and Uwimanihaye Pierre Celestin, by selling a RAV4 vehicle with plate number RAD 615P, owned by Ntabahejeje Théogène. The fraudulent transaction was executed using a forged national identification card in the name of Uwimanihaye Pierre Celestin, though the photo did not match with his identity. They also fraudulently processed an ownership transfer from Ntabahejeje, since the vehicle was registered under Uwimanihaye’s name. These falsified documents were used without the owner's knowledge. Uwimanihaye, along with Hakizimana Daniel, one of Gasangwa’s accomplices, went to Musanze to sell the car. After the sale to Ntabahejeje Théogène, Gasangwa promptly reported to the Rwanda Revenue Authority (RRA) and the police, falsely claiming that the car had been stolen by unknown individuals, despite having sold it himself. During the trial proceedings, the Prosecution requested the
## Page 467
122 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
exclusion of Hakizimana from the case, stating that the acts under prosecution had already been adjudicated in another case, RP 00759/2018/TGI/NYGE and the Intermediate Court ruled that he should be removed from the case.
The Intermediate Court, based on the testimonies of witnesses including Isimbi and Rwamakambiza, found that Uwimanihaye Pierre Celestin committed the offenses of forging and using forged documents and official papers issued by competent authorities, as well as the offense of fraud. Consequently, the Court sentenced him to the imprisonment for a term of seven (7) years and a fine of three million Rwandan Francs (3,000,000 Frw).
GASANGWA Innocent and UWIMANIHAYE Pierre Celestin appealed to the High Court, and their case was registered under RPA 00028/2020/HC/KIG. The Court ruled that the appeal filed by Uwimanihaye Pierre Celestin was inadmissible for review because he had not paid the required court fees. It further held that GASANGWA Innocent’s appeal was partially founded and, accordingly, the appealed judgment was partially reversed. The sentence previously imposed on him was reduced to the imprisonment for a term of three (3) years and a fine of three million Rwandan Francs (3,000,000 Frw). The amount of money previously awarded to NTABAHEJEJE Théogène by the lower court, 3,450,000 Frw for car rental, 60,000 Frw for a battery sale, and 200,000 Frw for tires, was overruled. The Court ordered to GASANGWA Innocent to pay to NTABAHEJEJE Théogène a sum of 500,000 Frw as legal representation fees at the appellate level.
After the judgment became final, UWIMANIHAYE Pierre Celestin applied for review of the case RP
## Page 468
123 PROSECUTION v UWIMANIHAYE
01088/2018/TGI/NYGE in which he had been convicted. He claimed that he was accused of fraudulently selling the vehicle RAV4 bearing the plate number RAD 615P, while there were the judgments RP 00759/2018/TGI/NYGE and RPA 01524- RP1525/2019/HC/KIG, wherein NTIHEMUKA Emmanuel and HAKIZIMANA Daniel were convicted for fraudulently selling the same vehicle along with others. This, according to him, indicated that he had been convicted for an offence committed by others, who were already prosecuted and punished. Consequently, the application for review was registered under RP 01112/2021/TGI/NYGE.
In the case RP 01112/2021/TGI/NYGE, which constitutes a review of the case RP 01088/2018/TGI/NYGE, the Intermediate Court admitted the new ground presented by UWIMANIHAYE Pierre Celestin and held that, although he had been convicted of fraudulently selling the vehicle RAD 615 P, it had since emerged that other individuals admitted to having sold various vehicles through fraudulent means, including the said RAD 615 P. These individuals also explained the modus operandi they used, including forging a national ID under the name of UWIMANIHAYE Pierre Celestin but with a different photograph, in order to facilitate the fraudulent sale of the vehicle which, at the time, was registered in the name of UWIMANIHAYE Pierre Celestin. The Court ruled that UWIMANIHAYE Pierre Celestin is not held guilty of the offences for which he was convicted in the case RP 01088/2018/TGI/NYGE.
NTABAHEJEJE Théogène who was a civil party in the case RP 01088/2018/TGI/NYGE, argued that he should have been summoned in the case RP 01112/2021/TGI/NYGE under
## Page 469
124 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
review, which acquitted UWIMANIHAYE Pierre Celestin. He therefore filed a motion to review the judgment RP 01112/2021/TGI/NYGE on grounds of injustice, asserting that the injustice is in the fact that he has not been summoned to participate in proceedings in which he had legal standing. He further contended that the Intermediate Court should not have admitted the new grounds on the basis of the existence of the judgments RP 00759/2018/TGI/NYGE and RPA 01524– RP1525/2019/HC/KIG, in which NTIHEMUKA Emmanuel and HAKIZIMANA Daniel were found guilty of fraudulently selling the vehicle RAV4 RAD 615P and others, arguing that UWIMANIHAYE Pierre Celestin had prior knowledge of the issues raised in the case RP 01088/2018/TGI/NYGE. He thus requested the High Court to rule that the review based on new ground in case RP 01088/2018/TGI/NYGE should not have been admitted, and to award him counsel and procedural fees.
The Prosecution argued that in case RP 01088/2018/TGI/NYGE, NTABAHEJEJE Théogène had filed a civil claim for damages, and that there was an injustice by not summoning him in case RP 01112/2021/TGI/NYGE, which was a review of case RP 01088/2018/TGI/NYGE. They further submitted that what was presented as "new grounds" did not constitute such within the meaning of the law, since UWIMANIHAYE Pierre Celestin was already aware, at the time of the original trial, of the existence of judgments RP 00759/2018/TGI/NYGE and RPA 01524– RP1525/2019/HC/KIG, in which NTIHEMUKA Emmanuel and HAKIZIMANA Daniel had been convicted for the same criminal conduct.
## Page 470
125 PROSECUTION v UWIMANIHAYE
UWIMANIHAYE Pierre Celestin and his legal counsels stated that NTABAHEJEJE Théogène should indeed have been summoned in case RP 01112/2021/TGI/NYGE, since he had filed a claim for damages in case RP 01088/2018/TGI/NYGE, but it is not true to submit that UWIMANIHAYE Pierre Celestin was aware of the existence of cases RP 00759/2018/TGI/NYGE and RPA 01524–RP1525/2019/HC/KIG, wherein NTIHEMUKA Emmanuel and HAKIZIMANA Daniel were held guilty of the offences for which UWIMANIHAYE Pierre Celestin was accused.
The case was heard with the Prosecution duly represented, the civil party represented by Counsel KWIZERA Bernard, while the accused, UWIMANIHAYE Pierre Celestin, was assisted by Counsel KANANGA Protogene and Counsel KAYITANA Evode.
The issues to be analyzed are whether the failure to summon the civil party in the review constitutes a ground of injustice ; whether the existence of judgments RP 00759/2018/TGI/NYGE and RPA 01524– RP1525/2019/HC/KIG, in which NTIHEMUKA Emmanuel and HAKIZIMANA Daniel were convicted for the same offences with which UWIMANIHAYE Pierre Celestin was charged, qualifies as new ground; and whether the requested counsel and procedural fees should be awarded.
## Page 471
126 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
II. ANALYSIS OF LEGAL ISSUES I. Whether the failure to summon the civil party in the review constitutes a ground of injustice
Article 195 of the Law Nº 027/2019 of 19/09/2019 relating to the criminal procedure, as amended to date, stipulates that review means a procedure that aims to annul a judgment that has become final and re-try the case on the grounds provided under this Law. This provision implies that once new ground is accepted, the case is reheard anew, meaning that all parties to the original case must be summoned. It is not possible to conduct a rehearing on new grounds without summoning all the parties who were involved in the case under review.
Article 55, paragraph one, subparagraph 2º, of the Law n° 30/2018 of 2/6/2018 determining the jurisdiction of courts provides the grounds upon which a case may be reviewed on grounds of injustice, including situations where during its judgment there was a disregard of applicable laws or evidence that is apparent to everyone.
UWIMANIHAYE Pierre Celestin and his legal counsel aver that since NTABAHEJEJE Théogène was claiming damages in case RP 01088/2018/TGI/NYGE, it was appropriate that he should be summoned to appear in case RP 01112/2021/TGI/NYGE, which was a review of the aforementioned case.
The Prosecution and Counsel KWIZERA Bernard, the legal counsel of the civil party, state that NTABAHEJEJE Théogène ought to have been summoned in case RP 01112/2021/TGI/NYGE, which was a review of case RP
## Page 472
127 PROSECUTION v UWIMANIHAYE
01088/2018/TGI/NYGE, in which NTABAHEJEJE Théogène was claiming damages. DETERMINATION OF THE COURT
The Court finds that since it is impermissible for a case being reviewed to proceed without summoning all the parties to the original case as litigants, as provided under Article 195 of Law Nº 027/2019 of 19/09/2019 referenced above, it follows that if in case RP 01112/2021/TGI/NYGE, which was a review of case RP 01088/2018/TGI/NYGE on the grounds of new ground, NTABAHEJEJE Théogène was not summoned although he was a party in the original case RP 01088/2018/TGI/NYGE, then the law was clearly violated. Therefore, in accordance with Article 55 paragraph one, subparagraph 2º of Law nº 30/2018 of 2/6/2018 mentioned earlier, an injustice was committed, and it is appropriate to affirm that injustice indeed occurred. II. Whether the existence of judgments RP 00759/2018/TGI/NYGE and RPA 01524– RP1525/2019/HC/KIG, in which NTIHEMUKA Emmanuel and HAKIZIMANA Daniel were convicted for the same offences with which UWIMANIHAYE Pierre Celestin was charged, qualifies as new ground.
In judgment No RS/REV/RC 00001/2022/CA, rendered by the Court of Appeal on 20/04/2023, the Court of Appeal established the legal position that new evidence is any piece of evidence that existed at the time the original case was being heard but which the litigant could not have known about or could not access during the trial, only discovering it afterwards. This legal position by the Court of Appeal clarifies that where a litigant was
## Page 473
128 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
aware of the evidence and had access to it yet failed to present it during the proceedings, such evidence cannot under any circumstances be submitted later as new ground.
UWIMANIHAYE Pierre Celestin and his legal counsel argue that UWIMANIHAYE Pierre Celestin was not aware of the cases RP 00759/2018/TGI/NYGE and RPA 01524– RP1525/2019/HC/KIG, contrary to the claims made by the Prosecution and the civil party, who allege that he became aware of those cases on 08/06/2021.
The Prosecution and the legal counsel of the civil party argue that, in the case RP 01112/2021/TGI/NYGE which sought the review of the case RP 01088/2018/TGI/NYGE, the Intermediate Court should not have accepted presented grounds as “new” because in the original case RP 01088/2018/TGI/NYGE that was subject to review, reference had already been made to case RP 00759/2018/TGI/NYGE at the time it was mentioned that HAKIZIMANA Daniel could no longer be prosecuted since he had already been tried and convicted for the same offences.
In paragraph 3 of the judgment RP 01088/2018/TGI/NYGE, which was later subject to review, it was stated that Hakizimana was removed from the case because the acts alleged against him had already been adjudicated in case RP 00759/2018/TGI/NYGE. Subsequently, in paragraph 44 of the same judgment, the Intermediate Court confirmed that there existed a judgment, RP 00759/2018/TGI/NYGE, in which Hakizimana Daniel had been convicted for the same acts that were being pursued in the current proceedings, and thus he was removed from the case. However, UWIMANIHAYE Pierre Celestin at no point requested that he should not be prosecuted on
## Page 474
129 PROSECUTION v UWIMANIHAYE
the grounds that the acts he was accused of had already been committed and punished in respect of other individuals. DETERMINATION OF THE COURT
The Court finds that in judgment RP 01088/2018/TGI/NYGE, it was stated that in case RP 00759/2018/TGI/NYGE, Hakizimana Daniel had already been convicted for the offence for which he was being jointly prosecuted with UWIMANIHAYE Pierre Celestin in case RP 01088/2018/TGI/NYGE. This implies that UWIMANIHAYE Pierre Celestin became aware that Hakizimana Daniel had already been sentenced for the offence in question, and thus, had he so wished, he could have petitioned the Intermediate Court to acquit him on the grounds that the offence he was charged with had already been committed by another individual who had also been punished. Consequently, it must be understood that from the moment the Prosecution stated that Hakizimana Daniel was removed from case RP 01088/2018/TGI/NYGE, in which he was being prosecuted alongside UWIMANIHAYE Pierre Celestin, UWIMANIHAYE Pierre Celestin became aware of the existence of judgment RP 00759/2018/TGI/NYGE and should have requested the Intermediate Court not to convict him, given that Hakizimana Daniel, who committed the offence, had already been identified and convicted. Accordingly, as established in the precedent set by judgment Nº RS/REV/RC 00001/2022/CA, a newly discovered evidence is one that existed at the time the case was being adjudicated but was unknown or inaccessible to the party; hence, if judgment RP 00759/2018/TGI/NYGE existed and UWIMANIHAYE Pierre Celestin was aware of it, including the fact that Hakizimana Daniel had been convicted for the same offence he was charged with, then the alleged newly discovered
## Page 475
130 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
evidence was already known to him and cannot be accepted as a new evidence.
The Court finds that during the investigation, UWIMANIHAYE Pierre Celestin was asked whether he knew Hakizimana Daniel, to which he replied that he did not; this implies that upon seeing him in judgment RP 01088/2018/TGI/NYGE, in which they were co-accused, and subsequently learning that there was a case RP 00759/2018/TGI/NYGE in which Hakizimana Daniel had been convicted for an offence similar to the one he himself was charged with, he should have understood that the true perpetrator had been identified and should have immediately raised this with the judge. However, given that during the investigation UWIMANIHAYE admitted to having travelled to Musanze to sell the vehicle, and given the existence of witnesses testifying against him, he was aware that even the existence of case RP 00759/2018/TGI/NYGE in which Hakizimana Daniel had been convicted would not absolve him of liability, since the investigation was treating him as someone who had acted in concert with Hakizimana Daniel. Therefore, this High Court finds that the Intermediate Court should not have accepted the presentation of judgments RP 00759/2018/TGI/NYGE and RPA 01524-RP1525/2019/HC/KIG as new grounds, given that UWIMANIHAYE Pierre Celestin was already aware of their existence and of the fact that his co-accused, Hakizimana Daniel, had been convicted in those cases for offences that were materially identical to those for which he himself had been prosecuted in case RP 01088/2018/TGI/NYGE, which was being reviewed.
## Page 476
131 PROSECUTION v UWIMANIHAYE
With regard to the counsel’s fees claimed by NTABAHEJEJE Théogène, the Court finds that since NTABAHEJEJE Théogène was represented by a counsel, it is evident that he is entitled to be awarded counsel fees in the amount of five hundred thousand Rwandan francs (500,000 Frw), as the representation was not provided on a pro bono basis. III. DECISION OF THE COURT
Holds that the judgment no 01112/2021/TGI/NYGE is vitiated by injustice.
Holds that the application for review of the judgment no RP 01088/2018/TGI/NYGE should not have been admitted.
Holds that the judgment no RP 01088/2018/TGI/NYGE is sustained.
Holds that UWIMANIHAYE Pierre Celestin shall pay to NTABAHEJEJE Théogène five hundred thousand Rwandan francs (500,000 Frw) as counsel fee.
Decides that the court fee paid covers the expenses incurred in the case proceedings.
This judgment was scheduled to be delivered on 08/04/2024, but because it was public holiday, it is pronounced on 09/04/2024.
## Page 477
132 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
## Page 478
133 SUBJECT INDEX
CASES ON MERIT
## Page 479
134 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
## Page 480
135 SUBJECT INDEX
LABOUR CASE
## Page 481
136 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
## Page 482
137 RUZIBIZA v. MOUNT MERU LOGISTICS RWANDA LTD
RUZIBIZA v. MOUNT MERU LOGISTICS RWANDA LTD [Rwanda SUPREME COURT – RS/INJUST/RSOC00003/2024/SC (Hitiyaremye, P.J, Muhumuza and Kazungu, J.) 07 February 2025] Law governing labor cases – Employment contract - Termination of an employment contract – Damages – An employer who terminates an employment contract without adhering to the prescribed procedures and requirements for termination is deemed to have unlawfully dismissed the employee and shall be liable for damages. Law governing labor cases – Occupational accident – Damages resulting from motor vehicle accidents – Medical damages – The employer has the obligation to register the employee with the social security scheme and to remit contributions on behalf of the employee to the Social Security Fund – Where the employer fails to remit health insurance contributions for the employee, he or she shall bear the medical expenses; if the employer does not do so, he or she shall provide the employee with the necessary funds to personally cover medical treatment. Facts : Ruzibiza filed a lawsuit against his former employer, Mount Meru Logistics Rwanda Ltd, before the Intermediate Court of Nyarugenge seeking an order compelling the Company to pay to him various damages arising from an occupational accident that occurred in Uganda where he was employed as a driver and sustained serious injuries. Mount Meru pleaded that the claimant had the accident while he was still serving his 137
## Page 483
138 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
probationary period, as he had been employed for only about one month. For this reason, the Company did not remit social security contributions to the Rwanda Social Security Board. Furthermore, it contended that he commenced employment at the age of 60, which is both the maximum age for determining social security benefits and the age used in calculating entitlements for victims of occupational hazards. On these grounds, Mount Meru maintained that the claim should be dismissed. The Intermediate Court ruled that the claim filed by the claimant has merit in part and ordered to the employer to pay to him various damages. The claimant appealed against this decision before the High Court, claiming that there are other damages which the Court disregarded to award to him. The defendant lodged an incidental appeal requesting to be awarded the procedural and counsel fees based on the law and the evidence he provided showing that they did their best to take care of the appellant just immediately after the accident. The High Court ruled that the appeal has merit in part but declared baseless the incidental appeal, and ordered that the claimant be awarded various damages. The claimant was once again not satisfied with this decision and wrote to the President of the Supreme Court requesting that the judgment be reviewed on the grounds of injustice, and his case was heard by the Supreme Court. In this case related to the review of the judgment on grounds of injustice, the applicant alleges that the alleged injustice is based on the fact that the previous Courts made wrongful and unlawful decisions. He claims that he was so unlawfully dismissed that he should be granted damages because he was not notified of his dismissal, he was given no notice, and that he was surprised by the withholding of his salary. He alleges that the Law governing
## Page 484
139 RUZIBIZA v. MOUNT MERU LOGISTICS RWANDA LTD
labor in Rwanda requires the employee or employer to give written notice prior the termination of employment contract. He showed this to the High Court but it did not decide about it, and this is the reason why he requests the Supreme Court, in case it finds that he was dismissed unlawfully, to order that he should be given salary arrears from the time it was withheld until the time the matter is resolved. The defendant alleges that the applicant was not dismissed from work but instead, his work was suspended due to the accident he suffered, he was taken care of, continued receiving his salary until October 2020, and he continued receiving medical fees until February 2021. The defendant also alleges that the damages requested by the applicant should not be granted because such the damages are allocated to an employee who was unlawfully dismissed, while the applicant’s job was suspended because the car he was driving was damaged and could not get back on the road. The defendant concluded by stating that the labor law provides that wages are paid for the work done, so he would not continue paying the applicant because he was no longer able to work because of the accident and there was no other job to which the Company could appoint him. The applicant also points out that the injustice he was subjected to is based on the fact that the defendant had to cover his medical expenses, and he did not pay the social security contributions to RSSB, which affected him because he had an accident without medical insurance, and for this, he requests that the medical treatment and other accident-related expenses be covered by the defendant. This request is based on a medical report confirming that the accident left him with a permanent disability of 92%, and he was awarded a proforma invoice of medical treatment that
## Page 485
140 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
should be provided to him but the defendant refused to provide him with his medical fees. On that issue related to the claimant's medical treatment, the defendant alleges that it does not figure out the legal basis of the amount of money requested by the claimant. The claimant puts forward wrong claims because the provisions of the law that he relied upon are based on the payment made for the treatment provided to the employee and is made to the medical institutions that treated him/her. Therefore, his request should not be granted because he had been receiving money for medical treatment for a long time, and now in this case he alleges that has never received any support for treatment. Another issue considered in this case is whether the damages requested by the claimant should be granted; where he alleges that in the judgment under review, he was not granted economic damages and he requests to the Supreme Court to correct it. He requests that these damages be calculated on the basis of 65 years of age, since the Court disregarded the provisions of the law that the judge does not decide more than he/she has been asked to. He also claims that he has not been awarded moral damages for the suffering caused by the fracture resulting from the accident and the lack of medical care due to financial reasons, and therefore he requests this Court to award him those damages because he was wronged. The applicant prayed the Supreme Court to award him damages reserved for an employee who seriously suffered an occupational accident, and to assess whether he needs an assistant as well as whether he should be refunded medical expenses he paid. He explains that, as Mount Meru Logistics Ltd refused to pay social security contributions for him, and he had an accident that caused him various disabilities, this Company should be ordered to pay
## Page 486
141 RUZIBIZA v. MOUNT MERU LOGISTICS RWANDA LTD
to him the same amount that would have been given to him by the Rwanda Social Security Board if the employer had affiliated him to it. Another thing is that he is unable to do anything for himself and needs another person to assist him in his daily life, the reason why he requests that the Court order the defendant to pay to him an assistant based on the provisions of the law stipulating that if a person receives pension, and must always be assisted by another person to be able to do normal work, he/she gets an additional forty percent (40%) of what he/she should get. He concludes by requesting that the defendant should refund to him the money he spent on medical treatment based on the fact that it abandoned him and did not help him during his illness. The defendant submitted that if the claimant states that there are some issues to be determined by law regarding the damages granted to an employee who has been permanently incapacitated by an occupational accident, such damages should be calculated within a period not exceeding the age of 60 years from the time the disability was recognized and only for 6 months of each year has to be counted. He also states that based on the fact that the remaining disability has been reduced according to the medical report, he requests that this Court should rely on it to make a decision because he does not need any other person to assist him. Held: 1. An employer who terminates an employment contract without adhering to the prescribed procedures and requirements for termination is deemed to have unlawfully dismissed the employee and shall be liable for damages. 2. The employer has the obligation to register the employee with the social security scheme and to remit contributions on behalf of the employee to the Social Security Fund, failure to do so, the employer shall bear the medical expenses; if the employer does
## Page 487
142 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
not do so, he or she shall provide the employee with the necessary funds to personally cover medical treatment. The application for review has merit in part. Statutes and statutory instruments referred to: Law N° 66/2018 of 30/08/2018 regulating labour in Rwanda, articles 3, 19, 24, 29, 30 and 39; Law N° 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 Law relating to the civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure, Article 10; Law N° 05/2015 of 30/03/2015 governing the organization of pension schemes, articles 6, 18, 24, 25 and 26; Law N° 06/2003 modifying and completing the Law-Decree of August 22, 1974 governing social security, articles 14, 16 and 22; Presidential Order N° 31/01 of 25/08/2003 on compensation for personal injury due to accidents caused by motor vehicles, article 18. Cases referred to: Mukakimenyi Marie Claire v. SANLAM AG Plc, RS/INJUST/RC00012/2022/SC, rendered by the Supreme Court on 02/02/2024. Nyetera Jean Baptiste v. CORAR, RCAA0202/07/CS, rendered by the Supreme Court on 09/04/2009; Manirarora Jean de Dieu v. Rwanda Rudniki Ltd, Sanlam Ag Plc, RS/INJUST/RC00013/2021/CA, decided by the Court of Appeal on 28/06/2022; Nyirabatesi Laurence v. King Faisal Hospital, RCAA00073/2018/CA, rendered on 19/07/2019;
## Page 488
143 RUZIBIZA v. MOUNT MERU LOGISTICS RWANDA LTD
Ndizeye Alphonse v.
Kibungo Medical Center, RCAA00008/2020/CA, rendered on 25/06/2021. Judgment I. BACKGROUND OF THE CASE
Ruzibiza Aloys was hired as a driver at Mount Meru Logistics Rwanda LTD, (hereinafter referred to as Mount Meru in this case) but was not affiliated to Rwanda Social Security Board. On 28/09/2020 while he was on a work mission in Uganda, Ruzibiza Aloys had an accident while driving a work vehicle with plate number RAD 765 T and was seriously injured.
After a disagreement with Mount Meru as his employer regarding the damages he was asking for, Ruzibiza Aloys filed a case before the Intermediate Court of Nyarugenge, claiming various damages arising from the occupational accident as he explained it while filing the case.
The legal counsel of Mount Meru submitted in defense that at the time the claimant, Ruzibiza Aloys, sustained the accident, he had been in employment for only about one month and was still under the probation period. For that reason, the employer had not yet registered him with the Rwanda Social Security Board (RSSB). He therefore argued that, based on the salary the claimant was earning and the proportion of his monthly contribution, the applicable legal provisions governing a person who had just commenced employment should apply, such that he should be granted the benefits that the Social Security Fund would have provided had he been duly registered, with Mount
## Page 489
144 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
Meru bearing its share of contributions proportionate to the period of employment. He further argued that the claimant commenced work at the age of sixty, which is the maximum age considered for the determination of social security entitlements and the basis for calculating benefits for victims of occupational hazards. He therefore maintained that the claim has no legal basis.
In the judgment RSOC00292/2021/TGI/NYGE rendered on 06/05/2022, the Intermediate Court of Nyarugenge held that the claim of Mount Meru had merit in part, and decided to award to Ruzibiza Aloys the following amount : 150,000 Frw × 30% = 45,000 Frw x 6: 270,000 Frw; “Permanent disability pension": 7950 Frw per month + 3600 Frw per month, making a total of: 11,550 Frw. This Court also ordered to Mount Meru1 to pay RDP00380/2023/TB/NYGE to Ruzibiza Aloys 700,000 Frw for the counsel fee and the refund of 20,000 Frw for the court fees.
Ruzibiza Aloys appealed against the judgment before the High Court, alleging that the Intermediate Court disregarded to award to him the medical fees, expenses related to the person assisting him, damages for financial loss, damages for career loss, damages for the employee who is permanently disabled as a result of the occupational accident, moral damages, and that he also found the procedural and counsel fees given at the first level inappropriate. Mount Meru also filed an incidental appeal requesting that the Court to order to the claimant to pay one million in procedural and counsel fees because the Company presented evidence that it took care of Ruzibiza Aloys in every way possible when he had an accident, and the Court awarded to him all legal benefits but continued to drag it into court.
1There was a mistake because Ruzibiza Aloys was the one who filed the claim.
## Page 490
145 RUZIBIZA v. MOUNT MERU LOGISTICS RWANDA LTD
In judgment RSOCA 00117/2022/HC/KIG, delivered on 14/07/2023, the High Court held that the appeal lodged by the claimant, Ruzibiza Aloys, was partly founded, whereas the incidental appeal lodged by Mount Meru lacked merit. The Court accordingly modified the decision under appeal in part. It ordered to Mount Meru to pay to Ruzibiza Aloys the amount of 270,000 Frw that had already been awarded in the first instance judgment, given that he had not been appealed against in that regard; further ordered to Mount Meru to pay to him a monthly disability pension of 68,000 Frw as explained in the judgment, in lieu of the 11,550 Frw previously granted by the first instance court; additionally ordered the payment of 700,000 Frw as advocate’s fees as awarded at first instance, 100,000 Frw as appeal costs, and directed Mount Meru to refund to him 20,000 Frw deposited as court fee in the first instance proceedings and 40,000 Frw deposited as court fee at the appellate level.
On 10/08/2023, Ruzibiza Aloys wrote to the President of the Court of Appeal requesting that the judgment RSOCA00117/2022/HC/KIG rendered by the High Court on 14/07/2023, should be reviewed on grounds of injustice. After considering his request, the President of the Court of Appeal wrote to the President of the Supreme Court requesting that the judgment should be reviewed on grounds of injustice. When the President of the Supreme Court received the report, he decided that the case should be heard again, and it was registered under RS/INJUST/RSOC00003/2024/SC.
Ruzibiza Aloys alleges that the injustice he was subjected to is based on the fact that the previous courts made unfair and illegal decisions.
## Page 491
146 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
The case hearing in public was held on 09/09/2024, all parties appeared before the Court, Ruzibiza Aloys assisted by Counsel Chuma Ndekezi Claude, Mount Meru represented by Counsel Gakwaya Gilles, and the parties debated on the following issues: a. Whether Ruzibiza Aloys was unlawfully dismissed from work in such a way that he can be awarded damages; b. Whether Mount Meru should have covered medical expenses for Ruzibiza Aloys; c. The basis of the various damages requested by Ruzibiza Aloys: i. Damages for financial loss; ii. Damages for career loss; iii. Moral damages iv. Damages to the employee permanently disabled as a result of an occupational accident; v. Payment of an assistant; vi. Travel expenses for medical care. d. The basis of the counsel and procedural fees requested by the parties.
After listening to the explanations of the parties, the Court closed the hearing informing them that the judgment would be pronounced on 18/10/2024, and on that date, the judgment was not pronounced because there were still matters to be considered, its pronouncement was adjourned to 01/11/2024. On that day, the Court delivered a provisional ruling, affirming that before the
## Page 492
147 RUZIBIZA v. MOUNT MERU LOGISTICS RWANDA LTD
judgment on the merits, the doctor who examined Ruzibiza Aloys must show whether he needs someone to take care of him due to the disability resulting from the accident, and ordered to Mount Meru to show to the Court the salary that Ruzibiza Aloys was receiving (Pay slip).
The case hearing was resumed on 17/12/2024, Ruzibiza Aloys was assisted by Counsel Chuma Ndekezi Claude, Mount Meru represented by Counsel Gakwaya Gilles, and the parties debated on the report of the medical expert who examined Ruzibiza Aloys. I. ANALYSIS OF THE LEGAL ISSUES A. Whether Ruzibiza Aloys was unlawfully dismissed in such a way that he is entitled to damages
Ruzibiza Aloys and his counsel allege that he was not notified that he was dismissed from work, that he was not even given notice, that he was surprised by the fact that his salary was on hold. They explain that his employer took him to Kigali and abandoned him, refused to cover his medical expenses, and did not pay his contributions for social security, and did not even allocate him what the law provides for him after he was dismissed.
They sustain that the Article 24 of Law n° 66/2018 of 30/08/2018 regulating labour in Rwanda provides that the notice must be given by the employer or employee in the following manner: 1 º at least fifteen (15) days, in case an employee has served for less than one (1) year; Article 29 of the Law provides
## Page 493
148 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
that the notice must be notified in writing to the concerned party, specifying the grounds for contract termination.; and article 30 of the very Law provides that unlawful termination of employment contract gives rise to the payment of damages; that they find that the damages granted to an employee unlawfully dismissed cannot be less than three (3) months' salary, but not more than six (6) months' salary.
They point out that before the High Court, Ruzibiza Aloys had requested 150,000 Frw x 6 = 900,000 Frw in damages for having been dismissed unlawfully, but the judge did not decide about it, alleging that this is unfair. They request to the Court that if it finds that he was dismissed unlawfully, it will order that he should be paid back arrear wages from the time the wages were put on hold in the month of 10/2020 until the matter is resolved.
Counsel Gilles Gakwaya, representing Mount Meru, submits in defense on this issue that the claimant fails to reconcile his claims with the applicable law. He argued that Ruzibiza Aloys was never dismissed from employment, but rather that his contract was suspended as a result of the accident, during which he was adequately attended to until February, while he continued to receive medical allowances as evidenced by the exhibits adduced. Counsel further explained that the defendant himself acknowledged that following the accident he continued to be paid his salary until October 2020, and that he was still receiving medical treatment up to February 2021.
He concludes by alleging that the damages requested by Ruzibiza Aloys are granted to an employee who was dismissed unlawfully ; that for him, it was not the case because Mount Meru could not have dismissed him and continued paying his salary and cover his medical expenses for more than six months after
## Page 494
149 RUZIBIZA v. MOUNT MERU LOGISTICS RWANDA LTD
the accident. He concludes by alleging that since his salary was on hold, what happened was not that he was dismissed, but that his job stopped because the car he was driving was damaged and could not return to the road. He alleges that the labor law stipulates that salary is given for the work done, that since Ruzibiza's car was damaged and there was no other work for him, it is understood that they would not keep paying him for not working, based on the provisions of the labor law regarding salaries. DETERMINATION OF THE COURT
Article 24 of Law n° 66/2018 of 30/08/2018 regulating labour in Rwanda as amended to date provides that: Subject to the provisions of the collective agreement, rules of procedure or employment contract, the period of notice given by the employer or employee must be as follows: 1 º at least fifteen (15) days, in case an employee has served for less than one (1) year. The notice must be given in writing and state reasons for termination of labor contract.
Article 29 of the aforementioned Law provides that the notice must be given in writing to the concerned party and the reasons for the termination of the contract must be stated.
Article 30 of the Law provides that the unlawful termination of labor contract gives rise to the payment of damages; that the damages given to an employee dismissed unlawfully cannot be less than three (3) months' salary, but cannot exceed six (6) months' salary.
## Page 495
150 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
In his arguments on this point, Ruzibiza Aloys points out that his employer did not comply with the law regarding the dismissal of an employee.
The High Court in its decision established that the contract Ruzibiza Aloys had with Mount Meru was not terminated by the dismissal, that it was terminated by the accident, that Ruzibiza did not prove that the accident he had had would not prevent him from returning to work, especially that he also admitted in his arguments that he needed another person to assist him, which shows that he is no longer able to work.
This view is in line with Mount Meru's rebuttal that it did not dismiss Ruzibiza Aloys from work, that instead, his work was put on hold because he had an accident, so his work was stopped because the car he was driving was damaged, and the employer did not have another job for him, but that the Company continued to take care of him, so based on the provisions of the labor law on wages, he should not keep receiving his salary while he was not working.
The Court finds that the submissions of Mount Meru cannot be upheld, since although it denies having dismissed Ruzibiza from employment, it admits that due to the accident he was no longer able to perform his duties as before, and the car he was driving was damaged. It does not, however, dispute that he ceased working and that the employer stopped remunerating him. In any case, this does not absolve Mount Meru, as the employer, from its statutory obligation to comply with the legal provisions governing the termination of employment contracts.
Based on Articles 24, 29 and 30 of Law n° 66/2018 of 30/08/2018 mentioned above, the Court finds that Ruzibiza's
## Page 496
151 RUZIBIZA v. MOUNT MERU LOGISTICS RWANDA LTD
allegations that he was dismissed unlawfully are well-founded. The fact that the car he was driving was involved in an accident, resulting in injury, and he was injured could not prevent Mount Meru from notifying him that his employment had ended. Therefore, due to the fact that it failed to comply with its obligations, it should be held liable for damages.
Article 3, Paragraph 1, section 29 of Law n° 66/2018 of 30/08/2018 regulating labour in Rwanda in force at the time when Ruzibiza was dismissed stipulates that the salary components are the basic salary the worker is paid in addition to the allowance for the work done. The casefile contains a document that Mount Meru submitted to the Court showing that Ruzibiza Aloys was paid a monthly salary of 173,450.60 Frw.
Based on the provisions of Law N° 66/2018 of 30/08/2018 mentioned above, the Court finds that Mount Meru must pay to Ruzibiza Aloys the damages for his unlawful dismissal amounting to 173,450.60 Frw x 6= 1,040,703 Frw. B. Whether Mount Meru should cover the medical expenses of Ruzibiza Aloys
Ruzibiza Aloys and his Counsel Chuma Ndekezi, allege that Mount Meru made a mistake by not affiliating him to RSSB, which they find contrary to the provisions of article 6, paragraph 2, of Law n° 05/2015 of 30/03/2015 governing the organization of pension schemes;2 which affected him when he had an accident
2Article 6, Paragraph 2 of Law n° 05/2015 of 30/03/2015 governing the organization of pension reads that the employer must have a newly hired
## Page 497
152 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
without insurance, that for this reason the medical treatment and everything else he requests must be provided by Mount Meru as stipulated in Article 19 of Law n° 66/2018 of 30/08/2018 regulating labour in Rwanda3.
They contend that the medical care afforded to Ruzibiza Aloys is governed by Article 22 of Law n° 06/2003 of 22/03/2003 modifying and completing the decree-law of August 22, 1974 concerning organization of social security. This provision stipulates that medical treatment for an employee who sustains an occupational accident shall include medical examinations, laboratory tests and analyses, treatment, radiological services, surgical interventions, orthopedic care and prosthetic devices, rehabilitation and physiotherapy, provision of medicines and dietary supplements, as well as transport expenses to and from hospital facilities. They submit that all these obligations must be borne by Mount Meru, since the latter had not registered him under the Rwanda Social Security Board (RSSB).
They explain that Ruzibiza Aloys' disability resulting from the accident is shown by the doctor's report from Kanombe Military Hospital dated 14/01/2021 which shows that the
employee registered within seven (7) working days from the date of employment. 3 Article 19 of Law n° 66/2018 of 30/08/2018 regulating labour in Rwanda provides that an employee having an occupational accident or disease while the employer has not contributed for him/her in a social security body in Rwanda, receives from the employer compensation equivalent to the social benefits he/she would have received from a social security body in Rwanda if the employer had contributed for him/her, including medical and related expenses.
## Page 498
153 RUZIBIZA v. MOUNT MERU LOGISTICS RWANDA LTD
accident caused him permanent physical disability at the 92% level. They allege that after the accident, Ruzibiza Aloys asked for a Proforma invoice for the medical care, which was issued to him, but Mount Meru did not give him money for his medical care.
They pray the Court to order to Mount Meru to pay to him the following damages: - 12,374,672 Frw for surgical intervention, based on the Proforma invoice dated 04/11/2021 by King Faysal Hospital (KFH); - 7,503,500 Frw for prosthetic devices, based on the Proforma invoice of 09/08/2021 by KIPHARMA Pharmacy; - 10,121,828 Frw for transport expenses, assistant, etc., making a total of 30,000,000 Frw.
Counsel Gilles Gakwaya, representing Mount Meru, submits in response to this claim that he questions the legal basis upon which the claimant derives the figure of 30,000,000 Frw sought, as it is unsupported by any statutory provision. He argues that the claimant relies on Article 19 of Law No. 66/2018 of 30/08/2018 regulating labour in Rwanda, which provides that where an employer fails to register an employee under social security, the employer must provide the employee with the benefits that would have been granted by the social security scheme had he been duly registered. He further refers to Article 22 of Law n° 06/2003 of 22/03/2003 modifying and completing the decree-law of August 22, 1974 concerning organization of social security, which provides that the calculation is conducted from the time the disability is recognized until the age of fifty-
## Page 499
154 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
five (55), with only six (6) months in each year being taken into account. He underscores that the monthly benefits payable to the disabled person amount to thirty percent (30%) of his average wage. He therefore contends that, based on these provisions, it is impermissible for the claimant to make arbitrary calculations when the law has expressly established the proper method.
He submits that, pursuant to Article 25 of Law No. 05/2015 of 30/03/2015 governing the organization of the pension scheme, the benefits to which an employee is entitled ought to have been provided by RSSB, and must be computed from the time the disability of Ruzibiza Aloys was certified by a recognized medical practitioner until the attainment of sixty (60) years of age. Counsel for Mount Meru argues that, under this provision, the computation must be based on thirty percent (30%) of the employee’s average monthly salary, multiplied by the six (6) months referred to in the said Article, thereby yielding the precise total of the disability pension. He further stresses that the law neither prescribes a lump sum payment nor stipulates that such benefits are payable for the claimant’s entire lifetime, but rather sets out a clear methodology and formula for computation.
In conclusion, he contends that nowhere in the provisions of law he previously cited is it envisaged that an employee should produce a proforma invoice for purposes of persuading the Court, particularly given that in earlier proceedings the claimant referred to a prosthesis proforma amounting to four million (4,000,000) Rwandan Francs, yet in his final submissions he now prays for seven million five hundred three thousand five hundred (7,503,500) Rwandan Francs. Counsel argues that this inconsistency demonstrates that the claimant is advancing claims that are not truthful, since the legal provisions relied upon
## Page 500
155 RUZIBIZA v. MOUNT MERU LOGISTICS RWANDA LTD
explicitly provide that reimbursement is only effected for medical care already rendered to the employee and is paid directly to the medical institutions that provided the treatment. He further submits that one would reasonably question why Ruzibiza Aloys had, for such a long period, continued to receive funds he allegedly spent on medical care without impediment, only now to assert that he was never assisted with his treatment, which renders his claims devoid of merit. DETERMINATION OF THE COURT
[34] Article 19, paragraph 2, of Law n° 66/2018 of 30/08/2018 regulating labour in Rwanda as amended so far, provides that an employee having an occupational accident or disease while the employer has not contributed for him/her in a social security body in Rwanda, receives from the employer compensation equivalent to the social benefits he/she would have received from a social security body in Rwanda if the employer had contributed for him/her, including medical and related expenses.
Article 14 of Law n° 06/2003 of 22/03/2003 modifying and completing the decree-law of August 22, 1974 concerning organization of social security defines the components of medical care provided to victims of an occupational accident4.
4Article 14: Article 22 of Decree- Law of August 22, 1974 concerning organization of Social Security is modified and completed as follows: " Medical Care comprises the following: a. medical assistance, surgical, dental as well as x-rays, laboratory examinations and analysis; b. supplying drugs pharmaceuticals products and accessories;
## Page 501
156 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
[36] Regarding this case, both sides agree that Mount Meru did not comply with the provisions of Article 39, Paragraph 1, Subparagraph 6, of Law N° 66/2018 of 30/08/2018 mentioned above, which provides that an employer has the responsibility to affiliate and contribute for an employee to the social security
c. treatment in approved hospital plus feeding. The Board of Directors fixes the amount of food allowances for victims hospitalized where food is not provided taking into consideration the average cost in several hospitals in the country; d. the supply, the up-keep and the renewal of prosthesis or orthopedics necessitated by infirmity which are recommended by an authorized Doctor and approved by the Social Security Fund's medical advisor as indispensable or of the nature that ameliorates the functional re - adaptation or professional re -education; e. the supply or the renewal of eyeglasses, frames will only be supplied by the Social Security Fund at the price of ordinary frames while glasses will be supplied at their price; f. functional re-adaptation and re-education of the victim; g. transport expenses of the victim from the place of accident to hospital and to his/her residence whenever the state of his /her health so requires. h. A part from emergency care provided by the employer, it is the Social Security Fund which is responsible for the victim’s medical care. In this case, the Social Security Fund pays directly to the doctors, medical assistants, the suppliers of drugs or health centers, public or private, approved by medical authorities. i. The reimbursement of the money spent as in the preceding section is based on the rates in current regulations. The transport expenses provided for in g. of paragraph one may be refunded to the victim on condition that he/she produces clear proof. j. If death occurs when the victim is on the way to or from the place of work, the Social Security Fund pays for expenses of transporting the body to the nearest hospital from his/her usual residence. k. Where necessary and as confirmed by the Medical Committee, the victim can receive specialized medical treatment inside the country or abroad."
## Page 502
157 RUZIBIZA v. MOUNT MERU LOGISTICS RWANDA LTD
organ in Rwanda on grounds that Ruzibiza Aloys sustained an accident, his employer did not register him with RSSB, while Ruzibiza Aloys' pay slip shows that social security contributions were deducted from his salary.
The case file shows that before the High Court, Ruzibiza Aloys requested to receive 30,000,000 Frw for medical care, which includes surgery amounting to 12,374,672 Frw as shown by Proforma Invoice number KFH/11/21/06 dated 4/11/2021 issued by King Faisal Hospital, and 7,503,500 Frw of the prosthetic devices accounted for by two “Proforma Invoices” dated 9/8/2021 issued by Kipharma Pharmacy, with 10,121,828 Frw, which includes travels for medical care, catering for an assistant of the victim, among others. The High Court did not grant him such claims on the basis that they are not provided for by law, holding that Mount Meru’s obligation is limited to paying medical institutions for the services rendered to Ruzibiza Aloys, and not to remit money directly into his hands for him to use at his discretion, as such would be contrary to the law.
The Court finds that, as established in other cases5 decided by this Court, if this interpretation of the law becomes a
5 In the judgment RCAA0202/07/CS rendered by the Supreme Court on 09/04/2009, in Nyetera Jean Baptiste v. CORAR, the Court examined a similar issue in this case and found that, regarding the treatment itself, it does not remove the obligation of the insurer to provide the victim of the accident with medical treatment, CORAR's arguments that the victim must pay for it and he will be paid later, he shows a paper for medical expenses, which is baseless, because to say that the first paragraph of the above-mentioned article 13 could be interpreted like that, would be to understand that the victim of the accident who does not have the means to pay for medical expenses in advance cannot be covered by the insurer.
## Page 503
158 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
principle, a person with no means to afford medical care, would never get any support.
The Court finds that, as stated in other paragraphs of this case, some of the benefits that the law grants to the victim of an accident regarding medical care include medical examinations, laboratory tests and analyses, radiological services; the fact that Ruzibiza Aloys was given a proforma invoice entails that he was examined by doctors to assess the needs for his medical care.
The case file shows that in a document dated 8/02/2021, Ruzibiza Aloys Ruzibiza Aloys requested that his dispute with Mount Meru be settled amicably, but no agreement was reached. The Court finds that, once Mount Meru had been notified of the medical needs required for Ruzibiza Aloys’ treatment, its obligation was to take all necessary measures, acting in the capacity of a social security institution, to secure and facilitate the claimant’s access to medical care.
The report made on Ruzibiza Aloys’ health condition by Kanombe Military Hospital shows that he was seriously injured, the accident left him with permanent disability level of 85%, some of his body parts including legs, hips, knees and feet are not functioning properly so he needs clutches and other prosthetic
Again, in the judgment RS/INJUST/RC00012/2022/SC rendered on 02/02/2024 in Mukakimenyi Marie Claire v. Sanlam Ag Plc, this Court found that one of the things Mukakimenyi Marie Claire requested at the beginning of the case was to confirm that the amount shown on the proforma invoice would be paid so that the operation ordered by the doctor could be carried out; orders Sanlam Ag Plc to do whatever is necessary within one month from the date of the judgment so that Mukakimenyi Marie Claire can be treated, otherwise it will pay her 5,265,000 Frw (it was on a proforma basis) so that she can pay her medical expenses.
## Page 504
159 RUZIBIZA v. MOUNT MERU LOGISTICS RWANDA LTD
devices which would help him walk. This report shows that if Ruzibiza Aloys were fully treated, he would not need someone to help him in his daily activities6.
Pursuant to article 19, paragraph 2, of the aforementioned Law N⁰ 66/2018, the Court finds that Ruzibiza Aloys must be treated at the cost of Mount Meru, failing which, it would pay the invoices shown above, which include the following: 12,374,672 Frw appearing on the proforma invoice number KFH/11/21/06 dated 4/11/2021 issued by King Faisal Hospital, and 7,503,500Frw of assistive devices shown by two Proforma invoices dated 9/8/2021 issued by Kipharma Pharmacy, totaling 19,878,172 Frw, these amounts are paid to the aforementioned medical institutions in one month after this judgment is pronounced, failing which, Mount Meru should give that amount to Ruzibiza Aloys to allow him to get cover medical expenses by himself. C. The basis of the various damages requested by Ruzibiza Aloys i. Economic damages
Ruzibiza Aloys and his counsel submit that Article 18 of Presidential Order No. 31/01 of 25/08/2003 on compensation for personal injury due to accidents caused by motor vehicles provides that “Where permanent incapacity exceeds 30%, compensation for financial loss shall be granted according to the following rules: where the victim has a paid work, a calculated
6After final treatment, he will be autonomous and will not require a third person for help in his daily activities.
## Page 505
160 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
capital shall be granted according to net income, degree of incapacity and age.”
They state that, based on the judgment RS/INJUST/RC00013/2021/CA, Manirarora Jean de Dieu v. Rwanda Rudniki Ltd, rendered by the Court of Appeal on June 28, 2022, wherein Sanlam Ag Plc was requested to intervene as the insurer, in its paragraph 54, the Court awarded to Manirarora economic damages due to the occupational accident that deprived him of the income he used to receive, these damages were calculated based on 65 years of age because it is the retirement age (based on that case), they find that in this case the damages are calculated at the age of 65, Ruzibiza Aloys will receive the economic damages calculated at the interprofessional guaranteed minimum wage of 5,000 Frw per day, at the rate of permanent disability equal to 92%, because he had 4 years left to work, at the deposit rate of 7%, which he requests that they should be calculated as follows: (5,000x30x12x92%x4ans):1+(7%x4) = 5,175,000 Frw.
They conclude by stating that in the judgment subject to review on the grounds of injustice, the judge did not decide about this issue of the claim, and they find that the provisions of Article 10 of Law n° 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 relating to the civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure, providing that a judge may not decide more than he/she has been asked to, were disregarded and they request that those errors should be corrected.
Counsel Gilles Gakwaya representing Mount Meru contends that the calculation of the interprofessional guaranteed minimum wage on which relies the claimant, is used for a person injured in a road accident, according to the provisions of the law
## Page 506
161 RUZIBIZA v. MOUNT MERU LOGISTICS RWANDA LTD
governing ordinary insurance, while the case of Ruzibiza Aloys is for work that does not refer to usual insurance. He alleges that based on what the social security law provides for in case of a person below 60 years of age, only the time left until that age should be counted. He concludes by stating that what Ruzibiza Aloys should be allocated is what he would have received from RSSB if he had been registered in that institution, which is calculated based on the formula mentioned in Article 22, paragraph 2, of Law N° 06/2003 of 22/03/2003 amending and completing the Decree-Law of 22 August 1974 governing social security. DETERMINATION OF THE CASE
In the case adjudicated by the High Court, Ruzibiza Aloys sought compensation for economic loss, grounding his claim on Presidential Order No 31/01 of 25/08/2003 on compensation for personal injury due to accidents caused by motor vehicles.
Article 19, paragraph 1, of Law N° 66/2018 of 30/08/2018 regulating labour in Rwanda as amended to date, provides that an employee who has an occupational accident or disease while his/her employer has contributed for him/ her in a social security body in Rwanda, he/she is entitled to compensation in accordance with laws governing social security in Rwanda. This means that the Presidential Order No 31/01 of 25/08/2003 mentioned above, which Ruzibiza Aloys wants to refer to cannot be used when considering this issue, so his claim for economic damages is groundless.
The Court further finds that it is unnecessary to examine the issue of permanent disability compensation sought by
## Page 507
162 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
Ruzibiza Aloys, since it is equally based on the Presidential Order No 31/01 of 25/08/2003, which, as has already been clarified, is not of the same nature as the present case. ii. Moral damages
Ruzibiza Aloys and his Counsel Chuma Ndekezi Claude state that he prayed the High Court to rely on the severe pain he suffered from the fracture caused by the accident, the fact that he did not receive medical care due to lack of financial means, to order his employer to pay him 9,100,000 Frw as damages; however, the judge did not decide about it in the judgment he rendered, and he disregarded the article 10 of Law N° 66/2018 of 30/08/2018 abovementioned. The request is based on the decisions made in the cases decided by the Court of Appeal7 wherein the parties were granted various moral damages for the incurred suffering, and they request that he should also be compensated because he was wronged.
Counsel Gilles Gakwaya, representing Mount Meru, pleading on this issue submits that all claimed damages arising from an accident, as already set out in the foregoing submissions, are granted in accordance with the provisions of social security laws, particularly where the claimant has opted for that procedure and seeks what would ordinarily have been provided by the Rwanda Social Security Board (RSSB). He further contends that the law provides that such damages are calculated at a rate of 30%
7 The judgment was rendered by the Court of Appeal in Manirarora Jean de Dieu v. Rwanda Rudniki Ltd (paragraphs 54 and 55), judgment RCAA00073/2018/CA rendered on 19/07/2019, in Nyirabatesi Laurence v. King Faisal Hospital, and judgment RCAA00008/2020/CA rendered on 25/06/2021, in Ndizeye Alphonse v. Kibungo Medical Center.
## Page 508
163 RUZIBIZA v. MOUNT MERU LOGISTICS RWANDA LTD
of the average monthly salary; and that other forms of damages are only those expressly provided for under the Law governing labour, since this is a labour dispute, but may only be awarded upon proof of unlawful termination of employment contract. He concludes by stating that the claimant is confusing the damages awarded in different cases on the basis of their own facts and evidence, which are not applicable in the present matter, emphasizing that it is a well-established principle that the insurance subscription for a driver is optional, and therefore, the Court should find that the claimed damages are unfounded. DETERMINATION OF THE COURT
Since the beginning of this case, both parties agree that Mount Meru did not register Ruzibiza Aloys with RSSB; which means that what the law allocates to the person who had an accident should have been done by RSSB for Ruzibiza Aloys including covering his medical expenses, should fall under the responsibility of Mount Meru.
Ruzibiza Aloys requests moral damages based on the fact that he was abandoned by his employer after the accident, and he is not receiving medical care due to the lack of financial resources, and requests that Mount Meru should be ordered to pay to him moral damages amounting to 9,100,000 Frw because he finds that this Company failed to take care of him.
The medical report issued after the diagnosis of Ruzibiza Aloys indicates that the accident caused to him the permanent disability assessed at 85%. The case file further shows that he was examined and provided with medical prescriptions for surgery and for the acquisition of a prosthesis. Mount Meru did not take any
## Page 509
164 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
action in this regard, notwithstanding its legal obligation to ensure his medical treatment as previously established. Consequently, since Ruzibiza Aloys sustained the accident in the course of his employment and his employer failed to provide him with the required medical care—causing his condition to deteriorate and leading him to pursue litigation—the Court finds Mount Meru liable to pay the damages. However, given that the amounts claimed by Ruzibiza Aloys are excessive, the Court, in its discretion, awards to him the damages amounting to 2,000,000 Frw. iii. The damages to be granted to the employee with total incapacity due to occupational accident
Ruzibiza Aloys and his Counsel state that the High Court ordered Mount Meru to give Ruzibiza Aloys 68,000 Frw per month of disability pension, instead of 11,550 Frw that was granted in the judgment that was appealed against, that they find that this decision against the method of calculating pensions for incapacity caused by occupational hazards; and that they do not even understand the basis for the allocation of that money. They continue to explain that Article 25 of Law N° 05/2015 of 30/03/2015 governing the organization of pension schemes provides that the method of calculating incapacity pensions is the same as that used to calculate the retirement pension. Article 16 of Law N° 06/2003 of 22/03/2003 modifying and completing the Decree-Law of August 22, 1974 regulating the social security in its paragraph 2, which provides that `` Where the total permanent incapacity of the victim is 100 per cent, he/she is entitled to a pension of 85 per cent of his /her average monthly remuneration.
## Page 510
165 RUZIBIZA v. MOUNT MERU LOGISTICS RWANDA LTD
They state that, since Mount Meru employed Ruzibiza Aloys and did not arrange for his social security contributions, and he had an accident that caused him various disabilities as seen in the medical reports, they request that Mount Meru should pay to him the amount of money: 150,000 x12= 1,800,000 Frw (his income per year); remaining working time before retirement age: 65-61= 4 years; meaning that the amount he would have received from Rwanda Social Security Board is: 1,800,000x4x85% = 6,120,000 Frw, which is the same amount that he would have been given by Rwanda Social Security Board if they had paid his contributions. They state that based on the information they provided, they find that this provision of law was the one that the High Court should have relied on while calculating the amount allocated to the employee with permanent incapacity due to an occupational accident.
They further submit that, at the appeal instance, the Court ordered to Mount Meru to pay to Ruzibiza Aloys a monthly allowance of 68,000 Frw. However, they question the duration of such payments since the judge did not specify it, which in their view contradicts Article 18 of Law Nº 05/2015 of 30/03/2015 governing the organization of pension benefits. That provision stipulates that where an insured person reaches retirement age without having contributed for fifteen (15) years, he shall be entitled to a one-off lump sum payment. They argue that, based on this provision, and given that Ruzibiza Aloys is no longer an employee of Mount Meru, he should have been granted a lump sum payment instead of a life annuity of unspecified duration. Furthermore, they contend that ordering to Mount Meru to pay monthly disability benefits to Ruzibiza Aloys, who is no longer in its employment, may complicate enforcement of the judgment and expose him to further litigation—especially since four years
## Page 511
166 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
have passed since the accident and Mount Meru has consistently refused to provide medical treatment. They therefore submit that, as in the precedent of Manirarora Jean de Dieu v. Rwanda Rudniki Ltd, where the Court awarded damages in a lump sum rather than monthly payments on the basis that the claimant was no longer employed by the respondent Company, the same approach should apply in the present case.
Counsel Gilles Gakwaya representing Mount Meru contends that if the claimant requests that something is to be determined by the above-mentioned law, relying on Article 19 of the Law regulating labour, whereby he requests that what the RSSB would allocate to him is what should be approved, and he should not use his own calculations that are not related with the law he himself presented. He states that the calculation of benefits for the disabled is done based on the provisions of Article 25 of Law N° 05/2015 of 30/03/2015 governing the organization of pension schemes, the calculation of what should be allocated to the disabled (Mode of computation) certified by a doctor according to article 24, 4° of that Law, it will be done in a period not exceeding 60 years from the time the disability was certified and only 6 months of each year will be counted.
He goes on explaining that if the claimant had reached the age of 60, this does not change the fact that since the accident took place, the time passed will be calculated according to the law, counting for a period of 6 months of each year and using the method of article 22, paragraph 2, of Law N° 06/2003 of 22/03/2003 modifying and completing the Decree-Law of 22 August 1974 governing the social security of the above mentioned provisions.
## Page 512
167 RUZIBIZA v. MOUNT MERU LOGISTICS RWANDA LTD
It is submitted that, ordinarily, the contributions payable to the Rwanda Social Security Board (RSSB) are calculated as follows: the employee contributes 2.4%, the employer contributes 5.3%, and an additional 0.3% is paid for maternity cover. Considering that Ruzibiza Aloys earned a monthly salary of 150,000 Frw and had worked for one month—receiving three months’ salary—the employer ought to have contributed 5.3% of his salary, equivalent to 7,386 Frw per month, while the employee himself would have contributed 4,599 Frw. The total monthly contribution would therefore amount to 11,985 Frw, which should properly be claimed from the employer.
He further submits that concerning the pay slip that Mount Meru was required to show to prove the salary Ruzibiza Aloys was receiving, explaining that the net salary was 150,000 Frw, the gross salary being 173,450.60 Frw, that the salary Ruzibiza Aloys was paid includes 3% of social security, 0.3% for maternity, 3% for maternity benefits , but he was not entitled to transport allowances nor accommodation allowance, that in calculating the damages, it should be based on gross salary amounting to 173,450.60 Frw.
Ruzibiza Aloys and his counsel allege that according to the pay slip issued by Mount Meru, the damages he requested were based on a net salary of 150,000 Frw, because he did not know anything more about his salary. He requests that in determining damages, the gross salary should be relied on because in order for him to claim that the compensation is calculated based on the net salary, he did not know his gross salary.
## Page 513
168 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
DETERMINATION OF THE COURT
Article 24, of Law N° 05/2015 of 30/03/2015 governing the organization of pension schemes provides that an insured who becomes disabled before reaching retirement age shall have the right to disability benefits if he/she fulfils the following conditions: 1° to have contributed for at least three (3) years; 2° to have contributed up to six (6) months within a period of twelve (12) months before the date on which his/her disability is certified by a medical doctor.
With regard to disability pension benefits, the case file shows that Ruzibiza Aloys sustained the accident before completing one full month of employment. Article 19, paragraph 2, of Law N⁰ 66/2018 of 30/08/2018 regulating labour in Rwanda as amended to date, provides that an employee having an occupational accident or disease while the employer has not contributed for him/her in a social security body in Rwanda, receives from the employer compensation equivalent to the social benefits he/she would have received from a social security body in Rwanda if the employer had contributed for him/her, including medical and related expenses. This article states that what Ruzibiza Aloys should receive in relation to the disability pension, should in fact be given by Mount Meru (the employer) because it did not contribute for him in the social security board.
The Court finds, however, that even if the employer had contributed for Ruzibiza Aloys in accordance with the Law, the damages related to the disability pension would not have been received based on Article 24 of Law No 05/2015 of 30/03/2015 mentioned above because the accident that caused his disability happened before he completed three (3) years of employment as
## Page 514
169 RUZIBIZA v. MOUNT MERU LOGISTICS RWANDA LTD
provided for by the Law. The Court finds that it is not necessary to embark on calculating the damages related to the disability pension that Ruzibiza Aloys is requesting while he is not among those entitled to such benefits.
The Court finds that the damages to be awarded to Ruzibiza Aloys relates instead to the loss of salary resulting from the accident (permanent disability pension). Pursuant to Article 16 of Law N° 06/2003 of 22/03/2003 modifying and completing the Decree-Law of August 22, 1974 concerning organization of social security, the damages must be calculated as follows: (173,450.60 Frw × 85%) × 85% × 51 (i.e., the number of months counted from the last salary received until retirement age) = 6,391,220 Frw. iv. Whether Ruzibiza Aloys needs another person to assist him
Ruzibiza Aloys and his Counsel Chuma Ndekezi Claude allege that, based on article 26, paragraph 5, of Law N° 05/2015 of 30/03/2015 governing the organization of pension schemes which provides that " where the member receiving disability pension benefits requires constant assistance from another person to be able to perform everyday tasks, he/she shall be given an increase of forty percent (40%) of disability benefits he/she is entitled to. ''; they find that Ruzibiza Aloys, due to the disability caused by the accident, must be assisted in a permanent way to be able to perform everyday tasks.
They further submit that, as indicated in the report of the expert appointed by the Court, the degree of disability of Ruzibiza Aloys stands at 85%. The report also shows that had he received proper and timely medical treatment, he could have
## Page 515
170 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
recovered and remained autonomous (not requiring permanent assistance). Considering the length of time, he has lived with this disability while relying on the assistance of friends and relatives, they find that the amount he claimed for the costs of an assistant should be granted.
In conclusion, they state that before the High Council, Ruzibiza Aloys requested compensation for the costs of an assistant calculated as follows: 6,120,000 Frw (annuity for permanent disability) × 40% = 2,448,000 Frw. They argue that he also produced supporting evidence for this claim. However, the judgment rendered by the trial judge did not address this issue at all, thereby failing to comply with Article 10 of Law Nº 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 relating to the civil, commercial, labor and administrative procedure, which requires the judge to render a decision on each and every claim submitted and only on those claims.
The lawyer of Mount Meru states that the medical report shows that Ruzibiza Aloys does not need any other person to assist him, that the report shows that the remaining disability has decreased from 92% to 85%, and he asks the Court to rely on it while making a decision. DETERMINATION OF THE COURT
The Court finds that, according to the case file, the medical doctor, (Dr. Hope J.M.V), appointed by the Court in the pretrial conference to confirm whether Ruzibiza Aloys needs another person to assist him in his everyday works, submitted a report on 17/12/2024 stating that after his final treatment, he will
## Page 516
171 RUZIBIZA v. MOUNT MERU LOGISTICS RWANDA LTD
be autonomous and will not require a third person for help in his daily activities.
The Court finds that, based on the medical report and the decision in this case that Ruzibiza Aloys has to be treated, he must not be awarded the money to pay the third person to assist him because the doctor who examined him confirmed that after treatment, he will no longer need such an assistant. v. Whether Ruzibiza Aloys should be granted travel expenses spent for medical treatment
Ruzibiza Aloys states that he requests travel expenses for medical treatment and other expenses for his illness amounting to 10,121,828 Frw, based on the fact that Mount Meru abandoned him and did not look after him during his illness period.
The lawyer of Mount Meru states that Ruzibiza Aloys cannot be granted travel fees he requests because he did not provide any evidence to support his request. DETERMINATION OF THE COURT
Article 14 of Law N° 06/2003 of 22/03/2003 modifying and completing the Decree-Law of August 22, 1974 concerning organization of social security, provides that among the components of medical care for an employee who had an occupational accident includes transport expenses of the victim from the place of accident to hospital and to his/her residence.
The Court finds that the travel expenses and other related expenses that Ruzibiza Aloys claims are appropriate, but
## Page 517
172 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
10,121,828 Frw he requests is excessive because he failed to justify how he used such an amount; consequently, based on the elapsed period of time (about five years) and the level of his disability incurred (85%), and also based on the provisions of the law indicated above, at the Court’s discretion, he is granted 500,000 Frw. D. Determining the basis of the counsel and procedural fees requested by the parties
Counsel Chuma Ndekezi Claude representing Ruzibiza Aloys alleges that the High Court ordered to Mount Meru to give to Ruzibiza Aloys 700,000 Frw for counsel fee (which was determined in the judgment under appeal), and it is not clear how it awarded him the counsel fee that was determined at the first level and yet, confirmed that his appeal has merit. He also states that this amount awarded is insufficient compared to the fact that Ruzibiza Aloys and his counsel agreed to an award of 5,000,000 Frw from process stepping from the agreement between the employee and the employer before the labor inspection, as well as to represent him in the Court at the first instance as shown in the lawyer-client agreement they entered into which was submitted to the Court.
He further submits that Article 23 of the Regulation n° 01/2014 fixing the scale of fees for Advocates provides that an advocate for the claimant who prepared the case file and written submissions may claim a basic fee ranging from 500,000 Frw to 5,000,000 Frw. This fee may be increased where debts are recovered by the advocate or his representative, in which case an additional fee is calculated in accordance with the percentage prescribed under Part II of Article 23. Therefore, based on this provision, there is no indication that the above-mentioned
## Page 518
173 RUZIBIZA v. MOUNT MERU LOGISTICS RWANDA LTD
agreement contravenes the law. He contends that, given the procedural stage reached in the present case, Ruzibiza Aloys should be awarded advocate’s fees in the amount of 1,000,000 Frw at the level of the High Court, 1,000,000 Frw at the level of the Court of Appeal, and 1,000,000 Frw at the level of the Supreme Court, in addition to the 5,000,000 Frw previously claimed, the total is 8,000,000 Frw.
Regarding the procedural fee, Counsel Chuma Ndekezi Claude alleges that Ruzibiza Aloys had requested the Court to order to Mount Meru to pay to him 1,000,000 Frw, but the Court awarded him only 100,000 Frw at the level of the High Court. He states that he finds this amount to be less than the amount he spent from the amicable settlement agreement between him and the employer, at the level of the Labor Inspection, in the case hearing before the High Court and the Supreme Court; especially since at all these levels it has been confirmed that his claim had merit. Therefore, he requests that the procedural fees he requested equal to 1,000,000 Frw should be granted especially with the addition of the review of the judgment on the grounds of injustice in the Court of Appeal and during the case hearing before the Supreme Court. He concludes by requesting to the Court to order Mount Meru to refund Ruzibiza Aloys the court fees deposited to file the case at the first level and at appeal level amounting to 60,000 Frw.
Counsel Gilles Gakwaya, representing Mount Meru, submits in defence on this point that the Courts had already awarded to the claimant certain counsel fees as well as procedural costs. He therefore contends that, since the claimant chose to persist in litigation, he must personally bear the additional expenses thereby incurred.
## Page 519
174 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
DETERMINATION OF THE COURT
The Court finds that the counsel and procedural fees requested by Aloys should not be granted because he partially lost the case. III. DECISION OF THE COURT
Holds that the application filed by Ruzibiza Aloys seeking review of the judgment RSOCA00117/2022/HC/KIG rendered by the High Court of Kigali on 14/07/2023 on grounds of being vitiated by injustice, has merit in part ;
Holds that the judgment RSOCA00117/2022/HC/KIG rendered by the High Court of Kigali on 14/07/2023 is hereby partially reversed ;
Orders to Mount Meru Logistics Rwanda Ltd to pay to Ruzibiza Aloys 1,040,703 Frw as damages for unlawful dismissal.
Orders to Mount Meru to take all necessary measures, within one month from the date of the judgment pronouncement, to ensure that Ruzibiza Aloys receives medical treatment ; otherwise, Mount Meru shall pay to him the sum of 19,878,172 Frw to enable him to undergo the treatment at his own initiative ;
Orders to Mount Meru to refund to Ruzibiza Aloys 500,000 Frw which he used for his travels for medical care;
## Page 520
175 RUZIBIZA v. MOUNT MERU LOGISTICS RWANDA LTD
Orders to Mount Meru to pay to Ruzibiza Aloys 6,391,220 Frw as damages for the loss of salary resulting from the accident;
Orders to Mount Meru Logistics Rwanda Ltd to pay to Ruzibiza Aloys 2,000,000 Frw as moral damages.
## Page 521
176 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
## Page 522
177 SUBJECT INDEX
CIVIL CASES
## Page 523
178 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
## Page 524
179 SANLAM AG Plc v. NZAMWITAKUZE 179
SANLAM AG Plc v. NZAMWITAKUZE [Rwanda SUPREME COURT-RS/INJUST/RC 00003/2023/SC (Cyanzayire, P.J., Muhumuza, Kalihangabo, J.) 16 February 2024] Laws relating to civil cases – Damages arising from road accidents – Civil liability – When a vehicle was not the cause of the accident which, neither the driver nor the insurer are liable for damages. Facts: On 1st May 2017, Sebanani who was riding a bike collided with a motorcycle with plate number RC 132 X, which was ridden by Makuza, so that Nzamwitakuze who was transported by it, got injured. Basing on the fact that the motorbike was insured by SORAS AG Ltd, which later was rebranded SANLAM AG Plc, Nzamwitakuze filed a claim before the Intermediate Court of Nyarugenge seeking the damages amounting to FRW 9,630,969. The Court adjudicated the case and held that her claim has merit, it ruled that SANLAM AG Plc should pay to her the damages amounting to FRW 6,603,044. At the appellate level, the High Court held that the appeal filed by SANLAM AG Plc is unfounded, while the cross-appeal lodged by Nzamwitakuze has merit, it decided that the appealed judgment is sustained, in addition, it held that SANLAM AG Plc should pay to Nzamwitakuze FRW 108,000 as aesthetic damages and FRW 1,000,000 as procedural fee. SANLAM AG Plc applied for the review of the judgment on grounds of injustice; the case was transferred to the Supreme Court, and the latter examined whether SANLAM AG Plc is liable for an accident caused by a cyclist. SANLAM AG Plc alleged that it was ordered to pay the damages arising from an accident while the insured person
## Page 525
180 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
did not commit any fault. Nzamwitakuze pleads that, though the accident was caused by a cyclist, it is the motorbike which transported her, which knocked her over, and the motorbike was insured by SANLAM AG Plc., and therefore the latter cannot escape its liability arising from the accident, especially that it does not explain that the insured vehicle should have committed a fault for the insurer to be held liable for damages. This Court found that the collapse of the motorbike was directly a cause of being hit by bicycle. The respondent did not demonstrate any involvement of the motorbike in the accident. Therefore, since the motorbike was not involved in the accident that occurred, neither the motorcyclist nor the insurer are liable; because the accident caused to Nzamwitakuze who was transported by the motorbike was due to that bicycle, and it should therefore be held liable. Held: When a vehicle was not the cause of the accident which, neither the driver nor the insurer are liable for damage. The application for review of the judgment on grounds of injustice has merit. Statutes referred to: Law No 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 Law relating to the civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure, article 111. Decree-Law n⸰ 32/75 of 07/08/1975 relating to compulsory insurance risk coverage for road-using motorised vehicles as modified by Law n⸰ 02/2002 of 17/01/2002, article 3. Cases referred to:
## Page 526
181 SANLAM AG Plc v. NZAMWITAKUZE
Musengamana Jean Marie Vianey v. SGF, RS/INJUST/RC 00019/2022/SC, rendered by the Supreme Court on 02/06/2023. Judgment I. BACKGROUND OF THE CASE
This case originates from an accident that occurred on 01 May 2017 at around 6:30 pm in Nyarucyamo II Village, Gahogo Cell, Nyamabuye Sector, Muhanga District, when Sebanani Gilbert, a cyclist, hit a motorbike with plate number RC 132, ridden by Makuza Leonard, it was transporting Nzamwitakuze Thérèse and the latter got injured. Basing on the fact that the motorbike was insured by SORAS AG Ltd, which later was rebranded SANLAM AG Plc, she requested the Company to amicably settle the issue, but in vain. Nzamwitakuze filed a claim before the Intermediate Court of Nyarugenge seeking the damages amounting to FRW 9,630,969.
SANLAM AG Plc declined the damages arguing that the accident was not caused by the motorcyclist who transported Nzamwitakuze Thérèse, adding that the accident was rather caused by the cyclist who deviated from his traffic lane, SANLAM AG Plc stated that the insured vehicle was not involved, and therefore, the insurer bears no liability for the requested damages.
In the judgment RC 00783/2018/TGI/NYGE rendered on 31 May 2019, the Intermediate Court of Nyarugenge held that: i. Makuza Léonard, a motorist, who knocked over Nzamwitakuze Thérèse is liable for the accident- related damages as per the provisions of article
## Page 527
182 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
2581 of the civil code, Book III; however, since the motorist was insured by SANLAM AG Plc, and given the fact that Nzamwitakuze Thérèse sustained an incapacity of 35%, it is that Company that is liable for damages as provided for by article 2602 of the above mentioned civil code. ii. Nzamwitakuze Thérèse deserves no aesthetical damages since she did not present any evidence that can prove that the level of incapacity matches the physical impairment caused by the accident.
The Court held that the claim filed by Nzamwitakuze Thérèse has merit and ruled that SANLAM AG Plc should pay to her the damages amounting to FRW 6,603,044 including FRW 4,007,572 3 for income loss, FRW 432,0004 for loss of marriage opportunity, FRW 540,0005 for career damage, FRW 623,469 for accident-related expenses, FRW 800,000 for the advocate fee, FRW 200,000 for the procedural fee and FRW 20,000 for the court fee.
SANLAM AG Plc appealed against the judgment before the High Court and argued that the insurer can only pay for damages when the insured person has done some wrong, and alleged that since the insured person committed no torts, the insurer is not liable for any damages, and it
1 That article provided that “anyone causing damage to others may pay for the damage caused” 2 That article provided that “a person shall not always be civilly liable for his or her own personal torts, as he/she can also be liable for damages caused by third parties under his/her stewardship” 3 Calculated as follows: FRW 3000 x 30 x 12 x 35 x 35% 1+ (6,575 x 35) = 13, 230, 000 3,30125= FRW 4, 007.572 4 Calculated as follows: FRW 3000 x 40% x 30 x 12 = FRW 432,000 5 Calculated as follows: FRW 3000 x 30 x 6 = FRW 540,000
## Page 528
183 SANLAM AG Plc v. NZAMWITAKUZE
insisted that the damages should be paid by a person who caused the accident. SANLAM AG Plc made the above submission with reference to their letter of 20 June 2018, written in a reply to the letter of Nzamwitakuze Thérèse of 9 March 2018, coupled with the Police statement on the cause of the accident; Nzamwitakuze Therese filed a cross appeal and requested to the High Court to grant her aesthetical damages she was not awarded.
In the case No RCA 00295/2019/HC/KIG decided, the High Court found that: i. Though the cyclist caused the accident, he/she did not knock over Nzamwitakuze Thérèse, as she was knocked over by the motorcyclist and the motorbike was insured by SANLAM AG Plc; ii. SANLAM AG Plc cannot avoid responsibility or disregard the consequences of the accident, more so that they cannot demonstrate that the insurance contract it entered into with the motorcyclist is exclusively limited to the fact that the insured vehicle is involved in the accident. iii. The fact that Nzamwitakuze Thérèse was knocked over by a motorbike with plate n⸰ RC 132 X and insured by SANLAM AG Plc, it is enough for the insurance Company to be held liable for the damages and then make a recursory action as provided for under article 258 of Civil code book III. iv. Nzamwitakuze Thérèse should be granted FRW 108,000 as damages for aesthetical impairment since she provided evidence thereof.
The Court held that the appeal filed by SANLAM AG Plc has no merit while the cross-appeal filed by Nzamwitakuze Therese has merit, and confirmed the
## Page 529
184 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
judgment RC 00783/2018/TGI/NYGE rendered on 31/05/2019, and added that SANLAM AG Plc should pay to Nzamwitakuze Thérèse FRW 108,000 as damages for aesthetical impairment and FRW 1,000,000 for the expenses of the appeal proceedings.
On 03 July 2020, SANLAM AG Plc wrote to the President of the Court of Appeal requesting that the judgment RCA 00295/2019/HC/KIG rendered by the High Court on 18 June 2020, should be reviewed on grounds of injustice. After examining the application, the President of the Court of Appeal wrote to the President of the Supreme Court requesting the review of the case. On 1 September 2022, by the decision No 176/CJ/2022, the President of the Supreme Court ordered that the case should be transferred t to the Registry of the Supreme Court for review.
The case was heard in public on 10 January 2024 when SANLAM AG Plc was represented by Counsel Niyindora Nsengiyumva together with Counsel Nkeza Sempundu Clement, while Nzamwitakuze Thérèse was represented by Counsel Nsabayezu Evariste; and the parties debated the three following issues: a. Determining whether SANLAM AG Plc is liable for an accident caused by a cyclist; b. Determining whether Nzamwitakuze Thérèse can be ordered to refund all the money she received; c. Determining the basis of the damages requested in this case.
## Page 530
185 SANLAM AG Plc v. NZAMWITAKUZE
II. ANALYSIS OF LEGAL ISSUES OF THE CASE II.1. Determining whether SANLAM AG Plc is liable for an accident caused by a cyclist
Counsel Niyindora Nsengimana and Counsel Nkeza Sempundu Clement representing SANLAM AG Plc allege that the High Court’s decision in the case RCA n⸰ 00295/2019/HC/KIG for which the review is sought, was characterized by contradictions. As it ordered to SANLAM AG Plc to pay the accident-related damages, yet there was no fault and held that the cyclist could only be liable for the accident, if the bicycle had knocked over Nzamwitakuze Thérèse.
They submit that the fact that the High court held that it is Sebanani Gilbert, the cyclist, who caused the accident, and then held that SANLAM AG Plc should pay the damages owing to the fact that a motorbike that knocked over Nzamwitakuze Thérèse was insured by SANLAM AG Plc, denotes that the Court made the decision that connotes the occurrence of two different accidents, and disregarded the fact that the cyclist who recklessly changed the traffic lane, and caused an accident that knocked over Nzamwitakuze Thérèse and she got injured.
They allege that the Court disregarded the fact that the insurer only covers liability resulting from the insured’s unintentional personal torts. They also state that the Court held the motorcyclist liable for having been hit by a cyclist, prior examination of whether there was the motorcyclist’s fault or absent-mindedness that led to the accident. They also added that one of the reasons that discharge SANLAM AG Plc from such a liability, is that the insurance Company is not responsible for an uninsured person, as it only covers its clients for unintentional damages caused on third parties.
## Page 531
186 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
Thy also allege that he High Court disregarded the fact that for the insurer to pay damages the responsibility of the insured person must be substantiated, which means that the liability of the insurer cannot never cover more that the insured’s faults and then extend to the uninsured torfeasors just as it is provided under article 2 of the Decree-Law N0 32/75 of 07/08/1975 relating to compulsory insurance for road using motorized vehicles6 in force by the time of the accident, a version that is even emphasized by article one of SANLAM AG Plc of the contract (risk coverage policy).
They sustain that it is Sebanani Gilbert who committed the tort that directly led to knocking over Nzamwitakuze Thérèse and got her arm broken, cannot engage the insurer’s liability, rather the fact that the High Court found that the accident was caused by a bicycle, is enough to absolve SANLAM AG Plc of liability.
They also allege that the High Court should not have relied upon the right of subrogation to charge SANLAM AG Plc the damages and later exercise a recourse action against the tortfeasor who caused the accident on behalf of the insured person because the insured person was not bound to pay the damages since it is not him who caused the accident. Therefore, the insurer has no obligation to pay.
6 That article provides that « motor vehicles are only permitted to circulate on public roads, on land open to the public, and on private land open to certain persons entitled to use them on a condition that the civil liability that might thereby arise is covered by the Insurance in accordance with the provisions of this Decree-Law n0 32/75 of 7 August 1975 relating to compulsory insurance for civil liabilities for motorized vehicles”.
## Page 532
187 SANLAM AG Plc v. NZAMWITAKUZE
They explain that pursuant to article 1287 of the Law N⸰ 030/2021 of 30/06/2021 relating the organization of the insurance business, the High Court should not have ordered to SANLAM AG Plc to cover the losses that were caused by Sebanani Gilbert, the cyclist who was neither the policy holder nor the rightful beneficiary, arguing that once such a precedent is set, any tortfeasor causing a road accident, the insurance company would be ordered to cover his/her torts without considering whether the tortfeasor is or is not insured, which means that the insurance policy would be meaningless and the insurance business would no longer be possible.
Counsel Nsabayezu Evariste assisting Nzamwitakuze Thérèse contended that the submissions made by the advocates of SANLAM AG Plc, arguing that though the accident was caused by a bicycle, it is the motorcyclist who knocked over his client, and the motorbike was insured by SANLAM AG Plc. He explains that the fact that the motorbike that was transporting her is the one that caused the accident that got her injured, thus, SANLAM AG Plc cannot avoid responsibility to cover losses resulting from that accident, more so that it does not prove that the insurance policy is exclusively limited to the sole faults committed by the insured vehicle alone.
He alleges that SANLAM AG Plc should not disregard the fact that the insurance policy stipulates that in case of an accident, the insurer covers the damages caused by the insured vehicle and then subrogates the insured in the right of recovering the compensation from the real tortfeasor
7 That article provides that « when the Insurer has paid for a claim under a contract of indemnity insurance, the insurer is entitled to exercise a subrogation right against a third party who is liable for the damage to the extent the insurer has indemnified the policyholder or the beneficiary”
## Page 533
188 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
(right of subrogation). And this is a principle by which SANLAM AG Plc should pay damages arising from the accident that knocked over and impaired Nzamwitakuze Thérèse, and then seek a refund from the cyclist at its convenience.
He explains that the article one of Automobile Insurance policy provides that the insurer has an obligation to cover accident-related damages caused or occasioned by the insured vehicle “Par le présent contrat, la société couvre, aux conditions ci-après indiquées, la responsabilité civile de l’Assuré du chef des dommages causés au Rwanda par le véhicule automoteur désigné aux conditions particulières”.
He also alleges that based on article 28 of the Law N⸰ 41/2001 of 19/09/2001 relating to compensation to victims’ physical accidents caused by motor vehicles and argued that his client was not involved in the accident, as she was just knocked over by a motorcyclist who was transporting her and had a responsibility of taking her to her destination safely, irrespective of the cyclist who caused the accident. Therefore, the fact that the motorbike was insured by SANLAM AG Plc., it is clear that the insurance company should assume the responsibility and pay for the involved damages per the provisions of article 260 of Civil code, book III, hold that the judgment N⸰ RCA 00295/2019/HC/KIG under review is not tainted with injustice.
8 That article provides that “The compensations provided for under article 4 to 10 hereunder are reduced in the ratios of shared responsibility incumbent upon the victim in the occurrence of the accident. The victim’s faults prevent him/her or their beneficiaries from obtaining compensations.
## Page 534
189 SANLAM AG Plc v. NZAMWITAKUZE
DETERMINATION OF THE COURT
While examining this issue, it is important to first thoroughly analyse the nature of risks that are insured under the compulsory insurance for motorised vehicles, such prior analysis is so crucial for determining whether SANLAM AG Plc was really liable for civil damages resulting from an accident caused by a cyclist.
Article 3 (2) of the Decree-Law N⸰ 32/75 of 07 August 1975 relating to compulsory insurance for road using motorised vehicles as modified by Law N⸰ 02/2002 of 17 January 2002 provides the following: “insurance must cover the risks that befall persons or properties that occur in Rwanda. It must include injuries caused to people being transported, in whatever capacity, by the vehicle that caused the injury. The goods transported by that vehicle may be exempted from the insurance coverage by conventional clauses9” .
Article one of general insurance scheme of SANLAM AG Plc (the former SORAS AG Ltd), in force by the time of accident, provided that the company covers civil liabilities that are caused by the insured vehicle10.
In the judgment RS/INJUST/RC 00019/2022/SC rendered by the Supreme Court on 02 June 2023 wherein the parties were Musengamana Jean Marie Vianey v. the Special Guarantee Fund for accidents caused by road-using automobiles and animals (SGF), the Court made reference
9 This was the law in force by the time of the accident. 10 “ As per this contract, the insurance company covers, according to the conditions mentioned below, the civil liability of an insured person for the damages caused in Rwanda by the motorised vehicle mentioned according to the particular conditions .
## Page 535
190 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
to the scholars’ explanations and explained that liability must be understood as an obligation to pay for the caused damage, while the liability insurance is defined as a commitment to pay for damages that an insured person might cause to third parties11.The Court has also held that it is the claimant victim who must prove about the damage liability of the accused offender.12
The above explanations denote that the insured risks are damages that are caused by the insured vehicle. Therefore, for the insurer to pay for the caused damages, it is important to first highlight that the concerned damage was caused by the insured person, and it is the claiming victim who must prove it.
For this case at hand, both parties concur that the accident was caused by a cyclist who knocked down a motorcycle as it is indicated by the Police statement. The only point of disagreement is about the person who caused the accident which befell Nzamwitakuze Thérèse, when she was being transported on a motorbike.
It is Sebanani Gilbert, the cyclist, who hit the motorcycle ridden by Makuza Leonard. The Police statement indicates that the accident was caused by Sebanani Gilbert, the cyclist, who made an awkward overtaking, and left his traffic lane and crossed into another lane, and hit the motorcycle that was riding in the opposite direction and left the motorbike’s passenger injured. And, the Police statement contains no single detail on the motorist’s possible recklessness, neither does it blame him for over speeding or any other fault that could lead to the
11 Case RS/INJUST/RC 00019/2022/SC rendered by the Supreme Court on 02 June 2023, paragraph 24. 12 Idem
## Page 536
191 SANLAM AG Plc v. NZAMWITAKUZE
accident, and none of the litigants has doubt about the police statement.
Based on all the above provided explanations, the motorbike accident was directly caused by the cyclist. And, the respondent did not substantiate the fact that the motorbike was involved in the accident, that could have led to the accident. As long as the motorcycle was not involved in the accident that took place, neither the motorcyclist nor the insurer should bear liability since the accident that befell Nzamwitakuze Thérèse, transported by the motorcycle, was caused by the bicycle, which should be held liable for all damages.
Based on all the above provided elucidations, the Court finds that SANLAM AG Plc bears no liability for the accident that was caused by the cyclist. II.2. Determining whether Nzamwitakuze Thérèse should be ordered to refund all the amount she received
Counsel Niyindora Nsengiyumva and Counsel Sempundu Clement, representing SANLAM AG Plc, sustain that in case the Court finds that SANLAM AG Plc was unduly ordered to pay for the accident-related damages, Nzamwitakuze Thérèse should be ordered to refund FRW 7,731,044 she received during the execution of the judgement under review as indicated by the payment slip of 23 July 2020.
Counsel Nsabayezu Evariste representing Nzamwitakuze Thérèse contended that there is no reason the Court would rely on to order her to refund the money she had received, since there was no fault or violated law while granting the damages.
## Page 537
192 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
DETERMINATION OF THE COURT
Article 32, paragraph 2 of the Decree-Law N⸰ 32/75 of 07/08/1975 relating to compulsory insurance for civil liability of road-using motorised vehicles as modified by the Law N⸰ 02/2002 of 17/01/2002, which provides that civil liability insurance applies when the damage was caused by an insured vehicle.
The High Court granted to Nzamwitakuze Thérèse the damages based on the fact that she got into an accident while being transported on a motorbike, but the Court did not examine the role and the faults of the motorcyclist in the course of the accident. As explained above, Nzamwitakuze Thérèse did not substantiate the role of Makuza Leonard in the accident that caused her injuries and that is why SORAS AG Ltd was rebranded as SANLAM AG Plc should not have been ordered to pay the damages resulting from the accident in which the insured person did not play any role; which means that it must get the refund of the money it payed to Nzamwitakuze Thérèse during the execution of judgement under review.
The Court finds that the case file contains a document titled as “claims estimate advice slip/claims payment requisition” indicating that for the purpose of execution of the judgment rendered by the High Court on 18 June 2020, SANLAM AG Plc paid to Nzamwitakuze Thérèse FRW 7,731,044 on 23/07/2020. But due to the fact that the amount was unduly paid as explained above, the Court finds that SANLAM AG Plc should be refunded as it so requests.
## Page 538
193 SANLAM AG Plc v. NZAMWITAKUZE
II. 3. Determining the basis of the damages requested in this case
[35] Counsel Niyindora Nsengiyumva and Counsel Nkeza Sempundu Clement representing SANLAM AG Plc allege that the fact that SANLAM AG Plc had nothing to do with the accident that took place, tit should not have been brought into such unnecessary lawsuits, more so that SANLAM AG Plc is not the insurer of the bicycle that caused the accident. They also contended that the unnecessary lawsuits that Nzamwitakuze Thérèse initiated made the Company incur some costs, and they request FRW 3,000,000 for the advocate fee paid from the first instance to the current proceedings, and FRW 1,000,000 for the procedural fee.
[36] Counsel Nsabayezu Evariste who represented Nzamwitakuze Thérèse contended that all the damages granted should not be invalidated because she was deservedly granted them, especially that the cause of the accident due to which she got injured is the motorbike insured by SANLAM AG Plc. She also requested FRW 2,000,000 for the advocate fee and FRW 500,000 as procedural fee for having been dragged into courts. DETERMINATION OF THE COURT
Article 111 of the Law N0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 relating to the civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure, provides that the claim for representation fees is incidental to the principal claim, and it aims at repaying expenses incurred during judicial proceedings. The claim for legal costs is adjudicated at the same time with the principal claim, but it can even be admitted and adjudicated even when the principal claim has not been admitted.
## Page 539
194 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
The Court finds that the procedural and advocate fees requested by Counsel Nzabayezu Evariste for Nzabamwita Thérèse are not granted since the latter wins nothing from this case. Instead, the Court finds that SANLAM AG Plc’s refund requests made by Counsel Niyindora Nsengiyumva and Counsel Nkeza Sempundu Clement for SANLAM AG Plc are relevant since the Company was compelled to hire lawyers to plead this case. However, the Court finds that the amounts of money requested are excessive and moreover unaccounted for. Therefore, at the discretion of the Court, SANLAM AG Plc is granted FRW 3,000,000 for the procedural fee and FRW 1,500,000 for the advocate fee computed from the first instance up to this very level. III. DECISION OF THE COURT
Holds that the application filed by SANLAM AG Plc for review on grounds of injustice of the judgment N0 RCA 00295/2019/HC/KIG rendered by the High Court on the 18 June 2020, has merit;
Holds that the judgment No RCA 00295/2019/HC/KIG rendered by the High Court on the 18 June 2020 is entirely overturned;
Orders to Nzabamwita Thérèse to refund to SANLAM AG Plc FRW 7,731,044 she received during the execution of the judgment N0 RCA 00295/2019/HC/KIG;
Orders to Nzabamwita Thérèse to pay to SANLAM AG Plc FRW300,000 as the procedural fee and FRW 1,500,000 as the advocate fee.
## Page 540
195 UWIDUHAYE ET.AL. v HAKIZIMANA ET. AL.
UWIDUHAYE ET.AL. v HAKIZIMANA ET. AL. [Rwanda SUPREME COURT - RS/INJUST/RC 00004/2022/SC (Mukamurisa, J.P, Cyanzayire, Hitiyaremye, J.) July 14, 2023] Law governing the civil cases – Family – Succession – Irrevocability of succession carried out and completed among the rightful heirs – The fact that a heir is later identified and confirmed by the court after the execution of the succession does not invalidate the succession carried out among the rightful heirs prior to filing the claim for paternity. The newly recognized heir shall only inherit the portion of the property that had not been distributed as of the time the court declared as the descendant from the deceased. Law governing the civil cases – Family – Status of persons – Declaration of paternity out of wedlock – Declaration of paternity out of wedlock is done through voluntary recognition, unless a claim for paternity is instituted. Law governing the civil cases – Family – Status of persons – Declaration of paternity out of wedlock –– A child with a known status – The fact that a child is born out of wedlock and already has a known status, only serves as evidence in a claim for paternity, however, it cannot by itself form the basis for declaring paternity without a case to declare that a given man is the father and that the child should inherit from him. Facts: On November 10, 2006, Uwiduhaye and Uwineza were declared by the Intermediate Court of Nyarugenge as the children of Kayitsinga, who was killed during the 1994 Genocide against the Tutsi, along with his legally married 195
## Page 541
196 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
wife and their children. After being declared as Kayitsinga’s children, they filed a claim before the Primary Court of Nyarugenge seeking for administration of the properties left by their father, their claim was upheld. Iraguha (the mother of Kayitsinga) filed a third party opposition, and her claim was upheld. The court quashed the challenged judgment because Uwiduhaye and Uwineza requested to administer the property that had already been inherited on 17/12/2000. During the process, a succession family council composed of survivors of the Genocide against the Tutsi from both Kayitsinga’s and Mukandekezi’s families greed that the heirs on Kayitsinga’s side would inherit ½ of the property which was later inherited by Iraguha and the other ½ would be inherited by the heirs on Mukandekezi’s side. Uwiduhaye and Uwineza filed another case before the Intermediate Court of Nyarugenge, suing Iraguha and Hakizimana (Kayitsinga’s sibling) for having taken possession of their father’s property. They argued that the succession had not followed the legal procedures, since it was conducted while they were recognized as Kayitsinga’s children and therefore should have been the rightful heirs. The court ordered that all of property of Kayitsinga should be returned to his children for them to manage until the opening of the succession process takes place. Hakizimana and Iraguha appealed against this decision before the High Court, and their appeal was upheld with the judgment nº RCA 0637/13/HC/KIG rendered on May 13, 2014. Uwiduhaye and Uwineza were not satisfied with that judgment and applied for the review of the judgment on grounds of injustice. The case was referred to the Supreme Court to examine the key issue of whether the succession conducted over the property left by Kayitsinga on December 17, 2000, should be annulled, given that Uwiduhaye and
## Page 542
197 UWIDUHAYE ET.AL. v HAKIZIMANA ET. AL.
Uwineza who were recognized by the court as his children on November 10, 2006, and therefore should be the ones to succeed him. The claimants argued that they were the rightful heirs because their status was known as Kayitsinga’s children, born out of wedlock, and were living with their grandmother, Iraguha, in 1996, publicly known as Kayitsinga’s children. They contended that they should have inherited from him because, when both parents die and leave children, the entire property is inherited by the children, who may then assist their grandparents. Hakizimana and Iraguha, in their defense, explained that Kayitsinga, his lawful wife, and their two children were killed during the genocide against the Tutsi, and died without leaving any other children. The succession of their property took place in the year 2000, whereas the court only declared the claimants as Kayitsinga’s descendants in 2006. They further argued that the rights of children born to Kayitsinga counted from the date the court declared that he was their father, which is June 30, 2006. This means that the only property they may have a right to is that one which is not distributed from the time the judgment recognizing them was rendered. Held: 1. The fact that a heir was later recognized by a court after the succession had already taken place cannot invalidate the succession that was completed among those who had the legal right to inherit at the time. Instead, the newly recognized heir may only inherit from the portion of the property that remained undistributed as of the date the court recognised their descendant from the deceased; 2. The fact that a child is born out of wedlock and already has a known status, only serves as evidence in a claim for parternity, however, it cannot by itself, form the basis for
## Page 543
198 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
declaring paternity without a case to declare that a given man is the father and that the child should inherit from him. The case has some merit Statutes and statutory referred to: Law N° 22/99 of 12/11/1999 to supplement book one of the civil code and to institute part five regarding matrimonial regimes, liberalities and successions articles 50, 307, 308, 318, 324, 328, 329. No case refferred to. Legal writings referred to: CDPF -Centre de Droit Privé Fondamental, 2011, p.4, consulté le 12/ 06/ 2023; Yves - Henri LELEU, Droit des personnes et des familles, Bruxelles, 4 ème édit., Larcier, 2020, p. 637, No 675; M. T. Meulders-Klein, L'établissement et les effets personnels de la filiation selon la loi belge du 31 mars 1987, annales de droit de Louvain, dans Revue Trimestrielle de Droit Belge, Tome XLVII 3-4/1987, p. 48, No 85. Judgment I. BACKGROUND OF THE CASE
This case orginates from the dispute that arose during the succession of the property left by Kayitsinga Emmanuel, killed during the 1994 Genocide against the Tutsi, along with his lawful wife, Mukandekezi Emeriane, and their children. On December 17, 2000, a family meeting was held, bringing together survivors of the Genocide
## Page 544
199 UWIDUHAYE ET.AL. v HAKIZIMANA ET. AL.
against the Tutsi from both Kayitsinga Emmanuel’s family and Mukandekezi Emeriane’s family. Those present in the meeting agreed that a half (½) of the property would be inherited by Kayitsinga Emmanuel’s heirs and the other half (½) by Mukandekezi Emeriane’s heirs, in accordance with the legal provisions.
On November 18, 2005, Uwiduhaye Maurice and Uwineza Marie la Douce, represented by their mother Mukantaganzwa Léonille, filed a claim before the Primary Court of Nyarugenge, requesting the court to declare that they were children of Kayitsinga Emmanuel. In the judgment n0 RC 0526/05/TD/NGY, decided on June 30, 2006, the court heldthat they lost their case due to lack of evidence. They appealed the decision, and the Intermediate Court of Nyarugenge, in case n0 RCA 0059/06/TGI/NYGE decided on November 10, 2006, ruled that Uwiduhaye Maurice and Uwineza Marie la Douce were indeed the children of Kayitsinga Emmanuel and that they are entitled to the legal rights that come with that status. In this case, Iraguha Spéciose, the mother of Kayitsinga Emmanuel, and his brother Hakizimana Vincent were forced intervened. The latter appealed to the High Court in case n0 RCAA 0654/06/HC/KIG, which was decided on November 30, 2007, and the court declared that his appeal lacks merit.
After the court declared them the children of Kayitsinga Emmanuel, Uwiduhaye Maurice and Uwineza Marie la Douce filed a case before the Primary Court of Nyarugenge, represented by their mother Mukantaganzwa Léonille, requesting to administer the property left by their late father. The case was registered under n⸰ RC 0222/08/TB/Nyg and was decided on July 18, 2008, with the court declared their claim founded. Iraguha Spéçiose filed a third party opposition, a case was registered under nº RC 0309/08/TB/Nyg, which was decided on October 31, 2008.
## Page 545
200 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
The court declared her third party opposition founded and overturned the initial judgment since Uwiduhaye Maurice and Uwineza Marie la Douce had requested to administer property that had already been inherited.
Uwiduhaye Maurice and Uwineza Marie la Douce represented by Mukantaganzwa Léonille, lodged an appeal before the Intermediate Court of Nyarugenge, stating that they were appealing against the judgment nº RC 0222/08/TB/Nyge decided on 31/08/2008. Their appeal was registered under nº RCA 0149/08/TGI/Nyge, and the judgment was rendered on 17/04/2009. The Court declared their appeal inadmissible because they filed it against Iraguha Spéçiose, who had not been a party to case nº RC 0222/08/TB/Nyge additionally, the appeal was filed out of time, since the judgment they claimed to be appealing was decideded on 18/07/2008, whereas they filed the appeal on 17/11/20081.
Uwiduhaye Maurice and Uwineza Marie la Douce represented by Mukantaganzwa Léonille, filed another case before the Intermediate Court of Nyarugenge, claiming that the property of their father, Kayitsinga Emmanuel, had been taken over by Iraguha Spéçiose and Hakizimana Vincent, arguing that the succession was unlawful. They also requested various damages. The case was registered under nº RC 0408/09/TGI/Nyge, and the judgment was decided on 08/07/2011. The Court ordered that the case be removed from the list of cases due to its expiration and lack of follow- up.
1 Upon examination, it appears that Mukantaganzwa Léonille, who lodged the appeal on behalf of Uwiduhaye and Uwineza, wrote down the wrong case number for the judgment she intended to appeal against. Instead of writing Case nº RC 0309/08/TB/Nyg, which challenged Case nº RC 0222/08/TB/Nyg, she mistakenly wrote the latter case that had been challenged
## Page 546
201 UWIDUHAYE ET.AL. v HAKIZIMANA ET. AL.
Uwiduhaye Maurice reintroduced the case under nº RC 0758/11/TGI/Nyge, but he made an error by stating that the judgment in the case he was re-introducing had been pronounced on 31/08/2011 which made the claim inadmissible as it had been filed in a manner that was contrary to the law.
Uwiduhaye Maurice, together with Uwineza Marie la Douce, again filed an application for reintroduction of a case nº RC 0408/09/TGI/Nyge and was registered under nº RC 0162/13/TGI/Nyge, and the judgment was decided on 25/10/2013. The Court declared it admissible and well- founded, ordered that all the properties belonging to Kayitsinga Emmanuel be returned to his property until succession takes place. The Court ordered that the property be handed over to his children, who shall manage it until the succession takes place. The Court ordered Hakizimana Vincent and Iraguha Spéçiose to jointly pay damages of 5,580,000 Frw to the children of Kayitsinga Emmanuel.
The Court explained that the succession had been conducted unlawfully and that all actions were fraudulently made, as Uwiduhaye Maurice had been living with his father before his death. After the Genocide against the Tutsi, he was taken and raised by Iraguha Spéçiose, and it was known that he was the child of Kayitsinga Emmanuel, even though it was not yet declared by the Court.
Hakizimana Vincent and Iraguha Spéçiose appealed against the judgment befre the High Court, the appeal was registered under nº RCA 0637/13/HC/KIG, and the judgment was rendered on 13/05/2014. The Court declared their appeal well-founded, that Uwiduhaye Maurice and Uwineza Marie la Douce lost the case, and overturned the previous judgment. The Court explained that:
## Page 547
202 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
a. Based on article 49, paragraph 22, of Law nº 22/99 of 12/11/1999 supplementing the civil code book three and establishing part 5 relating to matrimonial regimes, liberalties and succession, the Court found that at the time the succession was initiated, those who were present had to lawfully inherit Kayitsinga Emmanuel namely, his parents and siblings because he had not left behind any child. b. On 17/12/2000, the family members of Kayitsinga Emmanuel and his wife convened and shared the property they had left behind, in accordance with the provisions of Law nº 22/99 of 12/11/1999 mentioned above, which had just come into force. They agreed that each side would take a half (½) of the property subject to succession, and this was recorded. c. There is no evidence that the succession conducted on December 17, 2000, was done fraudulently with the intent to deprive the children of Kayitsinga Emmanuel of the property, because the deceased passed away without leaving behind any recognized children. Uwiduhaye Maurice and Uwineza Marie la Douce were acknowledged only after the family members had already shared the disputed property among themselves. d. The grounds relied upon by the Intermediate Court that members of Kayitsinga Emmanuel’s family knew the children and had even visited their home could not be considered as evidence of status of persons that would justify the court to declare them children of Kayitsinga Emmanuel with the right to inherit from him but instead, their inheritance rights only began once the court officially recognized
2 The succession starts at the death of the cujus, at his/her domicile or residence.
## Page 548
203 UWIDUHAYE ET.AL. v HAKIZIMANA ET. AL.
them, meaning they are entitled only to the portion of the property that had not yet been distributed as of the date the judgment recognizing them was decided on November 10, 2006. e. It is also stated that Mwiseneza is a heir of Kayitsinga Emmanuel, not a child born to him and Mukandekezi Emeriane as claimed in the appeal case, because his birth certificate indicates that he was born to Mukangarambe. There is no evidence that at the time the property was being distributed they knew of his existence or that he was recognized as a heir. f. The fact that the succession of the property was based on a law enacted after the death of Kayitsinga Emmanuel does not invalidate it, as no one who had the right to inherit from him in 1994 was disadvantaged.
On June 30, 2014, Uwiduhaye Maurice wrote to the Office of the Ombudsman requesting a review of case n⸰ RCA 0637/13/HC/KIG, which was decided on May 13, 2014, on grounds of injustice. On August 27, 2015, the Chief Ombudsman responded to him stating that there was no injustice in the case. Uwiduhaye Maurice again wrote to the Office of the Ombudsman on July 27, 2017, requesting that his injustice should be examined again. On August 23, 2018, the Office of the Ombudsman wrote to the President of the Supreme Court requesting that case n⸰ RCA 0637/13/HC/KIG be reviewed on grounds of injustice.
On April 1, 2022, the President of the Supreme Court approved that the case n⸰ RCA 0637/13/HC/KIG should be reheard, the case was registered under n⸰ RS/INJUST/RC 00004/2022/SC. The hearing was scheduled for September 19, 2022. On that date, the hearing was held in public, with Uwiduhaye Maurice and Uwineza Marie la Douce
## Page 549
204 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
represented by Counsel Nsabayezu Evariste together with Counsel Nsabimana Jean Baptiste, and Iraguha Spéciose and Hakizimana Vincent represented by Counsel Nduwamungu Jean Vianney.
Before the case proceeded to the merits, Counsel Nduwamungu Jean Vianney raised an inadmissibility objection stating that, the claim filed by Uwiduhaye Maurice should not have been admitted because the Office of the Ombudsman had contradicted itself. Initially, the Office of the Ombudsman stated that there was no injustice in the case, but later asserted that there was. In a decision handed down on the bench, the Court declared the objection unfounded, stating that position on that matter had already been set in case nº RS/INJUST/RC 00008/2019/SC involving Mukarushakiro Gloriose, Bagenzi Théogene, Higiro James and Gahire Athanase.
Counsel Nduwamungu Jean Vianney raised another inadmissibility objection, arguing that the claim filed by Uwiduhaye Maurice should not have been admitted because he failed to present clear evidence that had been ignored in the case he sought to have reviewed on grounds of injustice. In response, Counsel Nsabayezu Evariste and Counsel Nsabimana Jean Baptiste, representing the claimants, explained that what counsel Nduwamungu Jean Vianney referred to as an objection was not valid, as those were the very elements forming the basis upon which the case was approved for review on grounds of injustice.
After deliberation, the Court declared the objection raised by Counsel Nduwamungu Jean Vianney unfounded, stating that matters relating to the admissibility of a case for review on grounds of injustice fall under the responsibility of the President of the Supreme Court and is not subject to the bench hearing the case on its merits unless a error of public order is demonstrated, such as a mistake regarding
## Page 550
205 UWIDUHAYE ET.AL. v HAKIZIMANA ET. AL.
the time limits for filing the claim, the legal positions on this matter have been set in various cases3.
The hearing proceeded, and the parties added arguments to their submissions however, the case was not concluded because the Court found that additional steps were necessary before a final judgment could be rendered. It is in that context that Counsel Nduwamungu Jean Vianney, representing the defendants, was requested to produce all documents related to the plot measuring 100m x 44m, those concerning the plot measuring 38m x 28m, as well as documents related to the purchase of both plots. He was also requested to present new ownership land titles registered under Iraguha Spéçiose and Hakizimana Vincent, and to comment on a document submitted by the plaintiffs via the IECMS after the pre-trial conference, which indicates that there are other individuals registered as owners of the said properties. The hearing was adjourned to 16/11/2022.
In the document submitted via the IECMS, Counsel Nduwamungu Jean Vianney provided the following explanations: a. During succession of 17/12/2000, there were two plots of land: one measuring m100 x m 44, and another measuring m 38 x m 28. The land measuring m 38 x m 28 was inherited by Iraguha Spéçiose, while the one measuring m100 x m 44 was inherited by Munyagihe Eliabu. During the land registration process, the land inherited by Iraguha Spéçiose was registered under UPI: 1/03/10/01/1208, and the land
3 Case nº RS/INJUST/RC 00022/2018/SC decided by Supreme Court on 28/06/2019, BUSORO Gervais v. MUGUNGA. Others; Case nº RS/INJUST/CIV 00011/2019/CS decided on 12/02/2021, MUKAMUSONI Petronille v. NKUNDIMANA Edison.
## Page 551
206 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
inherited by Munyagihe Eliabu was registered under UPI: 1/03/10/01/1383. b. On 14/02/2012, Iraguha Spéçiose sold the land registered under UPI: 1/03/10/01/1208 to an individual named Gasana Callixte. He later subdivided the land into two plots, which were registered under UPI: 1/03/10/01/4923 and UPI: 1/03/10/01/4924. c. The land inherited by Munyagihe Eliabu was sold to Hakizimana Vincent. After selling it, he subdivided it into four plots with the following UPI: 1/03/10/01/4074, 1/03/10/01/4075, 1/03/10/01/4076, and 1/03/10/01/4077. Among these four plots, Hakizimana Vincent remained the one registered under UPI: 1/03/10/01/4076 and sold the other plots.
On November 16, 2022, the hearing was held in public, with the parties assisted or represented in accordance with the law. The court first examined the request by Munyagihe Eliabu to voluntarily intervene in the case. In a written submission presented to the Court’s Registry, Counsel SONGA Jean Claude, who was representing him, explained that his client had an interest in the case because, if the disputed succession was to be annulled as requested by the plaintiffs, it would negatively affect his right to inherit from his daughter.
After hearing each party’s arguments regarding Munyagihe Eliabu’s request, the Court ruled in bench that the request should not be admitted for examination, as he does not have personal and direct interest in the case.
The Court found it necessary, before proceeding with the hearing, to first request information from the
## Page 552
207 UWIDUHAYE ET.AL. v HAKIZIMANA ET. AL.
National Land Authority regarding the transfer history of the plots registered under UPI: 1/03/10/01/1208 and UPI: 1/03/10/01/1383. The Court also requested the Authority to suspend any further transactions involving those plots.
The National Land Authority provided the requested information, showing that the land mentioned in the previous paragraph was transferred as follows: a. The land registered under UPI: 1/03/10/01/1208 was transferred from the name of Succ Kayitsinga Emmanuel to Iraguha Spéciose, who then sold it to Gasana Callixte. He subdivided it into two plots, selling one to GANZA PEACE COMPANY Ltd and the other to Kwizera Fabrice and BIRARO Christine. b. The land registered under UPI: 1/03/10/01/1383 was transferred from the name of Succ Kayitsinga Emmanuel to Hakizimana Vincent and Izabiriza Tamari. They subdivided it into four plots, kept one for themselves, and sold the remaining plots to Mukamana Edisa, Mwesigye John and Mukakayumba Immaculée, Kankindi Nina and Habimana Augustin. c. Mwesigye John and Mukakayumba Immaculée also sold to Sibomana Alphonse and Mukarugwiza Florentine.
The case was rescheduled for a hearing on February 24, 2023, but was postponed to allow the individuals mentioned in the previous paragraph who purchased the disputed land to be forced to intervene in the case. The Court also ordered that the persons appearing in the succession record of 17/12/2000, be summoned to the case as informants. These individuals are Mukagahame Domithille,
## Page 553
208 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
Munyagihe Eliabu, Mukeshimana Marie Claire, Mukamwezi Evelyne, Nyiridandi Vénuste, Ngaboyisonga Emmanuel, Mavubi James, Kandiko Tharcisse, Kabirigi Simon, and Uwimpundu Eugénie.
The case was called on May 22, 2023, with all the parties present, represented, or assisted in accordance with the law. The forced intervened parties also appeared, represented by Counsel Murigande Jean Claude, except for GANZA PEACE COMPANY Ltd, which was represented by its Manager, Ndizeye Jean Bosco who stated that he could not afford to pay for a lawyer and cannot benefit from a certificate of indigence because he did not qualify as a person in need. The Court handed down the decision from the bench that the hearing would continue in absentia, since he failed to appear despite being duly summoned and given the opportunity to seek legal representation but did not do so and he cannot plead without legal assistance. Some of informants who had been summoned also appeared.
Counsel Murigande Jean Claude, representing the parties forced to intervene in the case, raised the admissibility objection, stating that the application for review of the judgment on grounds of injustice filed by Uwiduhaye Maurice would not have been admitted because it was filed after the time limit. He explained that the application was initially filed in 2015 but was dismissed for lack of evident injustice in the case, and that a second application was submitted in 2017 and responded again in 2018. The Court handed down the judgment from the bench that this objection lacks merit and ordered the hearing to proceed with the testimony of the summoned informants and the parties forced to intervene.
Among the informants summoned by the Court, Mukagahame Domithille, a member of Kayitsinga Emmanuel’s family, Mukeshimana Marie Claire and
## Page 554
209 UWIDUHAYE ET.AL. v HAKIZIMANA ET. AL.
Mukamwezi Evelyne, members of Mukandekezi Emeriane’s family, appeared before the court and were virtually heard as they reside abroad. Also present were Kandiko Tharcisse, Ngaboyisonga Emmanuel, identified as witnesses in a document, and Uwimpundu Eugénie, who was the minutes taker of the family council meeting and also the daughter of Iraguha Spéçiose. All agreed that the succession of 17/12/2000, occurred and that they were present. Most of the informants also agreed that in sharing the inherited property, consented that Iraguha Spéçiose took a small piece of land, which she added to the land that Kayitsinga Emmanuel owned at the birthplace
In this case at hand, the main issue examined was whether the succession conducted on 17/12/2000, should be annulled so that Uwiduhaye Maurice and Uwineza Marie la Douce could be the ones to inherit the property left by Kayitsinga Emmanuel. The Court also examined the issue concerning the damages claimed by the parties. II. ANALYSIS OF LEGAL ISSUES A. Whether the succession conducted on 17/12/2000, should be annulled so that Uwiduhaye Maurice and Uwineza Marie la Douce could be the ones to inherit the property left by Kayitsinga Emmanuel.
Counsel Nsabayezu Evariste and Counsel Nsabimana Jean Baptiste, representing Uwiduhaye Maurice and Uwineza Marie la Douce, argued that the succession on which the High Court relied on, should not have been considered based on the following reasons: a. The fact that the succession should not have complied with article 49, paragraph 2, of Law n⸰ 22/99 of 12/11/1999, which supplements the civil
## Page 555
210 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
code book three and establishing the fifth part relating to matrimonial regimes, liberalties and successions, despite the fact that Kayitsinga Emmanuel's children were present. They stated that Uwiduhaye Maurice and Uwineza Marie la Douce had been legally recognized as the children of Kayitsinga Emmanuel in the case n0 RCA 0059/06/TGI/NYGE decided on 10/11/2006, and that they already had a known status as his children, as stated by witnesses. b. The succession was supposed to comply with the provisions of article 70, paragraph 2, of Law n0 22/99 of 12/11/1999 mentioned above, which provided that: “when both spouses are survived by children, the latter shall succeed to the entire patrimony, but must also assist their grandfathers and grandmothers ….” c. The court ignored a document dated August 4, 2008 approved by Kamashashi Cell authorities, which indicates that this local authority, together with the heirs of Kayitsinga Emmanuel’s patrimony, presented the children who had been recognized as his rightful heirs to inherit the propert he left, leading to the registration of the property in their names. Iraguha Spéciose and Hakizimana Vincent did not object, while they were present. d. Uwiduhaye Maurice and Uwineza Marie la Douce were living with their grandmother in 1996, which indicates that they already had the status of children of Kayitsinga Emmanuel. e. The content of the document referred to as the succession record of December 17, 2000, did not happen because there is no evidence that what was
## Page 556
211 UWIDUHAYE ET.AL. v HAKIZIMANA ET. AL.
discussed in that meeting is what was actually recorded. f. The succession conducted by Iraguha Spéciose and Hakizimana Vincent was carried out n breach of the law, because according to article 2 of Law nº 32/2016 of 28/08/2016 governing persons and family, it is worth wondering how Hakizimana Vincent was included among the heirs. g. All informants state that the succession took place, but the distribution of the property never occurred. It also appears that other decisions unrelated to the succession were made, which renders it invalid. h. The information provided by Ngaboyisonga Emmanuel that Hakizimana Vincent was already living on the property and that, no formal handover of the distributed property ever took place differs from what other informants stated. This indicates that the contents of the document of 17/12/2000, did not occur, which means that the succession itself never took place. i. In the succession document, it is written that each party inherited, yet the informants state that it was Munyagihe Eliabu and Iraguha Spéciose who inherited.
Regarding the 500,000 Frw mentioned in the claim, the claimants and their representatives state that there were three plots of land, but Hakizimana Vincent Hakizimana Vincent sold the third one was sold to someone named Kayonga Jean Marie Vianney. The proceeds were deposited at the Nyarugunga Sector Office at the request of Mukantaganzwa, the claimants' mother.
## Page 557
212 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
Counsel Nduwamungu Jean Vianney, the counsel for Iraguha Spéciose and Hakizimana Vincent, provided the following explanations: a. Kayitsinga Emmanuel and his legally wife, along with their two children, were killed during the Genocide against the Tutsi. They died without leaving any other child or no legal recognition of a child born out of the wedlock. At the time the succession was carried out on 17/12/2000, there were no known children of Kayitsinga Emmanuel or Mukandekezi Emeriane, and It was only later, on June 30, 2006, 6 years after the succession took place that the Court declared Uwiduhaye Maurice and Uwineza Marie la Douce children of Kayitsinga Emmanuel. b. Although Uwiduhaye Maurice denies that the succession of 17/12/2000, took place, there is a document that was drawn up in accordance with legal procedures, and it is a private deed as defined by article 14 of Law n⸰ 15/2004 relating to evidence and its production. Article 15 of that law provides that a private deed “serves as proof until it is contradicted by other evidence provided by law”. c. The statements that Uwiduhaye Maurice serves as evidence that he was recognized as a child of Kayitsinga Emmanuel, including what he calls a certificate indicating that he was studying at ESA Nyarugunga living with his grandmother Iraguha Spéciose, has no merit because if it was true, the grandmother would not have filed a third party opposition against the Case n⸰ RC 0059/06/TGI/NYGE denying that those children are descendants of Kayitsinga Emmanuel.
## Page 558
213 UWIDUHAYE ET.AL. v HAKIZIMANA ET. AL.
d. Those whom Uwiduhaye Maurice refers to as witnesses testified in case n⸰ RCA 0059/06/TGI/NYGE are among the individuals who were accused of unlawfully possession of the property of Kayitsinga Emmanuel. They later agreed that if they testified before the court, he would compensate them by exempting from the payment for that property. e. The document alleged by the claimants to have been’ was drawn by the local authorities to show them their father's property is a document of 21/04/2008, which executed the decision of the Case n⸰ RCA 0059/06/TGI/NYGE of 10/11/2006 decided by the Intermediate Court of Nyarugenge, declaring that they were born to Kayitsinga Emmanuel. This document was also drawn up eight years after the succession took place and therefore does not serve as evidence that, at the time of the succession in 2000, Uwiduhaye Maurice and Uwineza Marie la Douce were recognized as children of Kayitsinga Emmanuel. f. The fact that Uwiduhaye Maurice stated that they had the titles of disputed property and they are registered under that property, does not serve as evidence that they were recognized as children of Kayitsinga Emmanuel, since they registered them on June 7, 2010, 10 years later the succession took place, and got the property in 2011. g. Regarding the witnesses questioned by the Court, testified that they saw Mukantaganzwa Léonille bringing the children to Iraguha Spéciose’s home. One of them was asked the first time s/he saw those children and replied that it was in 2001, after the succession had taken place (in 2000). This means that at the time the succession was conducted,
## Page 559
214 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
those children were not recognized as the children of Kayitsinga Emmanuel. h. The rights of the children born to Kayitsinga Emmanuel start from the time the court recognized him as their father, that is, from June 30, 2006. This means that any property to which they are entitled to is the one which is yet undivided (indivision) since the judgments recognizing them were rendered.
Regarding the statement of the informants, Counsel Nduwamungu Jean Vianney states that they all agreed the succession took place, and they all concur that the heirs did not share the property equally, as Munyagihe Eliabu took the largest portion; this proves that the succession deed is valid.
Counsel Murigande Jean Claude, assisting Mukamana Edisa, Mwisigye John, Mukakayumba Immaculée, Habimana Augustin, Kankindi Nina, Gasana Callixte, Sibomana Alphonse, Mukarugwiza Florentine, Kwizera Fabrice, and Biraro Christine, states that the disputed property, consisting of land, has been lawfully transferred and sold by the heirs. He also states that after reviewing the content of the complaint filed by Uwiduhaye Maurice and Uwineza Marie la Douce, he finds that their claims have no basis, since at the time when the succession took place, they were not yet recognized as children of Kayitsinga Emmanuel.
He states that among the land that has been transferred, Kwizera Fabrice and Biraro Christine own house on it; Mukamana Edisa, Sibomana Alphonse, Mukarugwiza Florentine, Habimana Augustin, and Kankindi Nina also own house there.
## Page 560
215 UWIDUHAYE ET.AL. v HAKIZIMANA ET. AL.
Regarding the statements of the informants, Counsel Murigande Jean Claude states that it clearly confirms the truth because they acknowledge that the succession took place and affirm that each party was represented.
Counsel Murigande Jean Claude also states that in case the Court finds that the succession had not taken place, although initially he believes it had, those who sold among themselves refund each other, or the buyers should be reimbursed the equivalent. He adds that they currently do not know the actual value of the plots at time and requests the Court to conduct valuation of each property if necessary. DETERMINATION OF THE COURT
In addressing the issue of whether the succession carried out on 17/12/2000 should be annulled so that Uwiduhaye Maurice and Uwineza Marie la Douce may inherit as the rightful heirs to the patrimony left by Kayitsinga Emmanuel, it must first examine whether that succession took place, as the plaintiffs claim it did not. In case it is found that it had occured, the next issue examined was whether, at the time of its occurrence, Uwiduhaye Maurice and Uwineza Marie la Douce were recognized as heirs of Kayitsinga Emmanuel in such a way that the individuals who inherited on 17/12/2000 should have done so intending to exclude them from their parent’s patrimony. Regarding whether the succession of 17/12/2000 actually took place
Among the documents containing the case file, there is one document titled “Council of succession between the family of Kayitsinga Emmanuel and that of Mukandekezi Emeriane of 17/12/2000”. This document indicates that a family council was held, attended by members from both
## Page 561
216 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
families, representatives from both sides, the local leader of Nyarugunga and the council’s secretary. The document indicates that land measuring 100 meters by 44 meters and another parcel measuring 38 meters by 28 meters was divided equally, with a half going to the successors of Kayitsinga Emmanuel and the other half to those of Mukandekezi Emeriane. It also states that the family meeting granted Hakizimana Vincent the power to administer the property of Munyagihe Eliabu.
The court summoned the individuals mentioned in this document who were not parties to the case, as indicated in paragraph 24 of the case. All of them confirmed that the meeting of succession of 17/12/2000 took place and they attended the meeting, and that the contents of the document accurately reflect what were discussed during the meeting.
Regarding the fact that Munyagihe Eliabu took a plot of land measuring 100 meters by 44 meters, which is larger than the one taken by Iraguha Spéçiose measuring 38 meters by 28 meters, despite the succession document stating that they should share equally, all the informants except Mukagahame Domithille confirmed that, at the time of the succession, the heirs had agreed that Munyagihe Eliabu would take the larger plot while Iraguha Spéçiose would take the smaller one, with the understanding that she would receive additional land from Kayitsinga Emmanuel’s property located in her birthplace in Huye. The court finds that the agreement between both parties was not prohibited by law and does not deny the fact that the succession meeting took place or invalidate it.
Based on the aforementioned, the Court finds that the succession of 17/12/2000 took place.
## Page 562
217 UWIDUHAYE ET.AL. v HAKIZIMANA ET. AL.
Whether, at the time of the succession, Uwiduhaye Maurice and Uwineza Marie la Douce were recognized as heirs of Kayitsinga Emmanuel in such a way that the individuals who inherited on 17/12/2000 should have done so intending to exclude them from their parent’s patrimony
Article 50 of Law n⸰ 22/99 of 12/11/1999, which supplements the first civil book one and instituting the part five regarding matrimonial regimes, liberalties and succession which was in force at the time of the succession on 17/12/2000 provided that all legitimate children of the de cujus, in accordance with civil laws, inherit in equal parts without any discrimination between male and female children.
Regarding the determination of children whom civil laws recognize them as the descendants of the decujus, Law n° 42/1988 of October 27, 1988, establishing the Preliminary Title and the Civil code Book One, categorises the evidence required to establish descent from legally married parents and that required to establish descent from children born out of wedlock.
With regard to individuals born of legally married parents, article 307 of Law n0 42/1988 of 27/10/1988 mentioned above, provides that in order for a person to be recognized as a child of married parents, this must be evidenced by a birth record in the civil status registers. Article 308 of the same law provides that, when a birth record is missing, the fact that a person is generally known as the child born of married parents is sufficient to declare the filiation.
Regarding children born out of wedlock, to establish their filiation, the child may be legitimized as if born of
## Page 563
218 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
married parents (legitimation), which requires the legal recognition of both the father and the mother either before marriage, during the marriage, or after (article 318 of Law n0 42/1988 of 27/10/1988 mentioned above). The child may also be recognized through an authentic deed (article 324 of the aforementioned law). Additionally, there may be a claim for paternity or maternity.
According to the provisions of article 329 of Law n⸰ 42/1988 of 27/10/1988 mentioned above, a claim for maternity is accepted when the child has a known status. Regarding a claim for paternity, article 328 of the same Law n⸰ 42/1988 of 27/10/1988 provides that such a claim is especially accepted in the following circumstances: a. When the child’s mother was abducted by force, when she was held in confinement or raped; b. When the child’s mother was raped under fraud, coercion, or by being falsely promising marriage or engagement; c. When the child’s mother lived with a man without being legally married to him; d. When there is a written document or an undisputed statement confirming that the man is raising the child; e. When the man agreed to take good care of the child, raised the child, and allocated to the child his personal belongings as if he was the father.
Among the grounds provided by the law for a claim for paternity being admissible, the fact that the child has a known status is not explicitly mentioned, which means it is not sufficient evidence, unlike in the case of a claim for maternity.
## Page 564
219 UWIDUHAYE ET.AL. v HAKIZIMANA ET. AL.
The articles of Law n0 42/1988 of 27/10/1988 mentioned in the previous paragraphs highlight the following key points: a. For a person to be recognized as descending from legally married parents, this must be evidenced by a record from the civil status registers. When such a record is missing, being generally known as a child born of legally married parents is sufficient to declare the filiation; b. Regarding the declaration of the child born out of wedlock: i. The law provides for three procedures: - The procedure for legitimizing a child as if born out of married parents, when the parents were not married at the time of the child’s birth but later got married. - The procedure for legal recognition of a child of a child through an authentic deed. - When both of those procedures were not used, the law provides for the option of a claim for paternity or maternity. ii. The fact that a child has a known status does not by itself, declare that the child descends from a particular parent when the parents were not married but instead, it serves as evidence in a claim for paternity or maternity. It is a sufficient evidence for the admissibility of a claim for maternity, but only supportive yet insufficient evidence for the admissibility of a claim for paternity.
## Page 565
220 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
The provisions of Law n0 42/1988 of 27/10/1988 regarding the recognition of a child born out of wedlock mentioned above is not unique to Rwanda. In Belgium, declaring a paternity for a child born out of wedlock is done through a procedure known as recognition. Unless, the matter is resolved through legal proceedings. In that country, the fact that a child born out of wedlock has a known status does not by itself, prove that s/he is a biological child of the father4.
In that regard, legal scholar Yves-Henri LELEU states that when a child has a known status, it serves as evidence in a claim for paternity; if such evidence is not available, other forms of evidence should be used5.
Legal scholar M.T. Meulders-Klein states that the only way to establish the paternity of a child born out of wedlock are through voluntary recognition of the child or by filing a claim for paternity6. He explains that regarding the
4 La filiation paternelle hors mariage peut être établie par une reconnaissance volontaire de l’enfant par son père naturel. A défaut, elle peut être établie par un jugement déclaratif, rendu par le tribunal de première instance. En revanche, en droit belge, la possession d’état d’enfant naturel n’est pas un mode autonome d’établissement de la paternité naturelle; Article publié par le CDPF -Centre de Droit Privé Fondamental, 2011, p.4, consulté le 12/ 06/ 2023. Lorsque le père naturel n’a pas reconnu l’enfant, une action peut être exercée contre lui devant le tribunal de première instance aux fins d’établir la filiation à son égard. Si la paternité est prouvée, elle est établie par un jugement déclaratif; la possession d’état de l’enfant peut servir de preuve de la paternité (art.324 du code civil); Ibidem, p. 5. 5 Action en recherche de paternité. La possession d'état de l’enfant à l’égard du père prétendu prouve la paternité (art. 324, al.1er). A défaut de possession d’état, la preuve de la paternité est rapportée par toutes voies de droit; Yves- Henri LELEU, Droit des personnes et des familles, Bruxelles, 4 ème édit., Larcier, 2020, p. 637, No 675. 6 Les seuls modes d'établissement de la paternité hors mariage restent, avant comme après la réforme: la reconnaissance volontaire, l'action en recherche de paternité, M. T. Meulders-Klein, L'établissement et les
## Page 566
221 UWIDUHAYE ET.AL. v HAKIZIMANA ET. AL.
fact that a child has a known status was included in the Civil Code under the part concerning claims for filiation, because it cannot be considered as evidence of filiation in the absence of legal proceedings, instead, it serves as evidence in a claim for maternity or paternity....7. He states that the fact that having a known status was removed from the category of evidence proving filiation without legal proceedings is explained by the fact that it is a type of evidence that requires time to exist and, therefore, is not considered conclusive 8.
What is understood from the above-mentioned legal provisions, together with the interpretations provided by legal scholars, is that: a. The children recognized by civil law as belong to the decujus are the ones who inherit from the decujus ; b. Declaring a paternity of a child born out of wedlock is done through voluntary recognition unless, a claim for paternity should be instituted. c. The fact that a child born out of wedlock has a known status, only serves as evidence in a claim
effets personnels de la filiation selon la loi belge du 31 mars 1987, annales de droit de Louvain, dans Revue Trimestrielle de Droit Belge, Tome XLVII 3-4/1987, p. 48, No 85. 7 La définition de la possession d'état et de ses éléments constitutifs se trouve reléguée à l'article 331nonies du Code civil, c'est-à-dire au chapitre consacré aux actions relatives à la filiation, parce que celle-ci a cessé d'être un mode de preuve extra-judiciaire de la filiation pour n'être qu'un élément de preuve judiciaire tant de la maternité (art. 314, al. 4, C. civ.) que de la paternité (art. 324, al. 1, C. civ.) …….; Ibidem, p.68, No 129. 8 L'éviction de la possession d'état comme mode de preuve extra- judiciaire de la filiation se justifiait sans doute par le caractère peu commode de cette preuve qui demande en outre du temps pour se constituer et demeure relativement incertaine; Ibidem, p. 24, No 38.
## Page 567
222 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
for paternity, but on its own, cannot be the basis for declaring the paternity without a court ruling.
Regarding this instant case, Uwiduhaye Maurice and Uwineza Marie la Douce were declared as the children of Kayitsinga Emmanuel in the case n⸰ RCA 0059/06/TGI/NYGE, decided by the Intermediate Court of Nyarugenge on 10/11/2006. However, they state that prior to the succession of 17/12/2000, they already had a known status as his children
Without the need to determine whether, at the time the succession took place on 17/12/2000, already had a known status as descendants of Kayitsinga Emmanuel, the Court finds that, based on the explanations provided above, having a known status could not by itself, prove that they were the children of Kayitsinga Emmanuel without a court ruling. The Court finds, rather, that it could only serve as evidence in the judgment which declared them the children of Kayitsinga Emmanuel.
The Court finds that since the case n⸰ RCA 0059/06/TGI/NYGE, mentioned above decided on 10/11/2006, Uwiduhaye Maurice and Uwineza Marie la Douce were officially declared as the children of Kayitsinga Emmanuel, which vested them with the right to succeed him. Therefore, at the time of the succession of 17/12/2000, they were not recognized as the heirs of Kayitsinga Emmanuel, and thus the Court has no basis to decide that those who inherited did so fraudulently to deprive them of their rightful share of their parent’s property.
In the following considerations, the Court examines when the inheritance rights of only what remained from the time they were declared by the Court, or whether they can also request that the portions shared should be returned to the property so that they can have a share of it.
## Page 568
223 UWIDUHAYE ET.AL. v HAKIZIMANA ET. AL.
Whether Uwiduhaye Maurice and Uwineza Marie la Douce have the right to inherit only the property that existed at the time they were recognized as descendants of Kayitsinga Emmanuel on 10/11/2006, or whether they can also request that the shares distributed on 17/12/2000 should be returned to their parent’s property so they can inherit them.
There is no provision of Law n⸰ 22/99 of 12/11/1999, which supplements the Civil Code book one and establishes the book five relating to matrimonial regimes, liberalties and succession that addresses this issue.
Article 9 of Law n0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 relating to the civil, commercial, labour, and administrative procedure provides that a judge adjudicates a case on the basis of relevant rules of law. In the absence of such rules, the judge adjudicates according to the rules that he/she would establish if he/she had to act as legislator, relying on precedents, customs, general principles of law and doctrine.
The Court of Cassation in France, in the case decided on 11/04/2018, decided that the fact that an heir has been recognised by the court after the execution of the succession cannot invalidate a succession that was completed among those who had inheritance rights before a claim for paternity being initiated9 (in that case, the deceased father died on 27/04/1996, the succession of his property was carried out
9 “Mais attendu qu'après avoir énoncé que l'article 887 ancien du code civil ne prévoit la rescision du partage que pour cause de violence et de dol ou lorsqu'un des héritiers établit à son préjudice une lésion de plus du quart, la cour d'appel a exactement retenu que l'erreur, par omission d'un héritier tardivement révélé, ne pouvait entraîner la nullité du partage, intervenu de façon définitive entre toutes les personnes ayant la qualité d'héritier avant l'introduction de l'action en recherche de paternité ; que le moyen n'est pas fondé”;
## Page 569
224 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
on 28/10/1996 among those recognized as heirs at that time, and later, on 10/11/2005, there has been a judgment declared that the deceased was the father of the claimant, who subsequently filed a claim on 10/08/2010 requesting to inherit the property of the deceased).
The Court finds that the matters examined in the previously mentioned case are consistent with those examined in this case at hand, in which Uwiduhaye Maurice and Uwineza Marie la Douce accuse the heirs of Kayitsinga Emmanuel prior to the Court’s recognition that they are his children, and the Court agrees with the decision taken thereon. Indeed, at the time the succession of the property left by Kayitsinga Emmanuel took place in 2000, Uwiduhaye Maurice and Uwineza Marie la Douce had not yet been recognized as his descendants, meaning that they were not recognized as his heirs.
The Court therefore finds that Uwiduhaye Maurice and Uwineza Marie la Douce should not request that the assets distributed on 17/12/2000 should be returned to the property of Kayitsinga Emmanuel for them to inherit it. Instead, they have the right to inherit only the property that existed from the time they were recognized as descendants of Kayitsinga Emmanuel on 10/11/2006.
The Court finds that the parties agree that no immovable property of Kayitsinga Emmanuel remained undistributed as of 17/12/2000. However, the Court finds that there is an amount of 500,000 Frw alleged by the claimants that it is the proceeds of the third plot they claimed which Hakizimana Vincent had sold to a person named Kayonga10. They explain that their parent caveated it at
10 In the Case no RC 0162/13/TGI/NYGE decided by the Intermediate Court of Nyarugenge on 25/10/2013, the claimants argued that the money originated from the plot of land that Hakizimana Vincent had
## Page 570
225 UWIDUHAYE ET.AL. v HAKIZIMANA ET. AL.
Nyarugunga Sector Office, where they are still kept; the defendants did not contest this.
The Court finds that amount of 500,000 or the plot from which it originates is not mentioned in the succession document of 17/12/2000, which means that it was never inherited and therefore should be given to Uwiduhaye Maurice and Uwineza Marie la Douce. General conclusion
Based on the legal provisions mentioned and all the explanations provided, the Court finds that the succession carried out on 17/12/2000 should not be invalidated so that Uwiduhaye Maurice and Uwineza Marie La Douce may inherit the property left by Kayitsinga Emmanuel. The Court finds that they are only entitled to 500,000 Frw, which was caveated from Nyarugunga Sector Office, as it does not appear among the inherited property. B. Regarding the damages claimed in this case at hand
Counsel NSABAYEZU Evariste and Counsel NSABIMANA Jean Baptiste, representing the claimants, state that if the Court finds that the claims of Uwiduhaye Maurice and Uwineza Marie la Douce are valid, it should order Iraguha Spéçiose and Hakizimana Vincent to repay the amount of 2,000,000 Frw paid for advocate fee, and 500,000 Frw for procedural fees. These amounts should be in addition to those already paid in case n⸰ RC 0162/13/TGI/NYGE, for which they claim to upheld its ruling.
disputed with Kayonga Jean Marie Vianney, who had previously encroached the plot of land of Kayitsinga (see paragraph 5).
## Page 571
226 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
Counsel Nduwamungu Jean Vianney, representing Iraguha Spéçiose and Hakizimana Vincent, state that the damages claimed by the claimants which include advocate fee and procedural fees, are not founded.
According to the records in IECMS, Gasana Callixte, who was forced to intervene in the case, filed a counterclaim alleging that because the claimants continue to involve the parties forced to intervene in unnecessary lawsuits, they request that each person should be awarded 2,000,000 Frw for the time lost and for being dragged into unnecessary lawsuits, in addition to 500,000 Frw for advocate fee to be refunded to each of them. DETERMINATION OF THE COURT
The Court finds that the procedural fees and the advocate fee claimed by Uwiduhaye Maurice and Uwineza Marie la Douce to be paid to them by Iraguha Spéçiose and Hakizimana Vincent, should not be awarded to them because each partially won in the case.
The Court finds that 2,000,000 Frw claimed by Gasana Callixte for waste of time and being dragged into unnecessary lawsuits, as part of his counterclaim, should not be awarded, because he was forced to intervene with no intention of wasting his time and dragging him into unnecessary lawsuits as he claims, but instead to protect his interests in the case.
The Court however, finds that 500,000 Frw claimed by Gasana Callixte as advocate fee should be awarded to him, because it was necessary to hire a lawyer to represent him in the case, and the amount claimed is reasonable. The Court finds that both parties to the case should share the responsibility of paying him since each partially lost the
## Page 572
227 UWIDUHAYE ET.AL. v HAKIZIMANA ET. AL.
case. This means that Uwiduhaye Maurice and Uwineza Marie la Douce will jointly pay him 250,000Frw, and Iraguha Spéçiose and Hakizimana Vincent will also jointly pay him 250,000Frw.
Regarding the other parties forced to intervene in the case in which Gasana Callixte claims the advocate fee, the Court finds that they are not entitled to such fees because he failed to prove that they had given him any mandate to file a claim on their behalf. III. DECISION OF THE COURT
Declares that the claim filed by Uwiduhaye Maurice and Uwineza Marie la Douce for review on grounds of injustice, of the judgment n⸰ RCA 0637/13/HC/KIG, rendered by the High Court on 13 May 2014, has some merit;
Declares that the judgment n⸰ RCA 0637/13/HC/KIG, rendered by the High Court on 13 May 2014, is hereby partially modified;
Declares that the succession carried out on 17 December 2000 remained valid.
Declares that Uwiduhaye Maurice and Uwineza Marie la Douce are not entitled to the property inherited on 17 December 2000;
Orders that 500,0000 Frw which was caveated from Nyarugunga Sector Office be distributed to Uwiduhaye Maurice and Uwineza Marie la Douce;
## Page 573
228 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
Orders that Uwiduhaye Maurice and Uwineza Marie la Douce jointly pay Gasana Callixte 250,000Frw as advocate fee;
Orders that Iraguha Spéçiose and Hakizimana Vincent jointly pay Gasana Callixte 250,000Frw as advocate fee.
## Page 574
229 SUBJECT INDEX
COMMERCIAL CASE
## Page 575
230 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
## Page 576
231 VINTAGES WINES & LIQUARS LTD v KARASIRA
VINTAGES WINES & LIQUARS LTD v KARASIRA [Rwanda COURT OF APPEAL – RCOMAA 00044/2023/CA (Rutazana, P.J) 05 July 2024] Laws relating to commercial cases – Mortgage – The rights of a mortgage lender – Lending a loan collateral does not mean that the lender has surrendered his/ her ownership rights Laws relating to commercial cases – Insolvency – Application for initiating insolvency proceedings – Application for initiating insolvency proceedings is not a ground for suspending the rights of secured creditors neither can it stay property retention rights; unless the application is thereby accompanied by the applicant’s proper plan for business recovery. Laws relating to commercial cases – Insolvency – Insolvency law – The rights on a secured debt remains suspended for a period of six months due to the debtor’s application for insolvency proceedings and the court’s approval of the applicant’s business reorganisation plan. Commercial procedure – intervening into a court case – the mortgage lender has a personal and direct interest to intervene into a court case. Facts: Vintage Wines & Liquors Company Ltd contracted a loan of 180,000,000 Rwf from Equity Bank Rwanda Plc, for which one Nzamukosha Sylvie lent them a house to serve as the loan security. The collateral was recorded in the books of RDB Registrar General, and it was meant to serve for the loan reimbursement, should Vintage Wines & Liquors Ltd fail to repay the loan. 231
## Page 577
232 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
The Company eventually failed to repay the loan, and Equity Bank Rwanda Plc petitioned RDB Registrar General and requested for a certificate to auction the mortgaged collateral and the certificate was issued. Meanwhile, Vintage Wines & Liquors Ltd filed a claim before the Commercial Court and prayed the Court to initiate the Company’s insolvency proceedings, authorise its business restructuring plans, and appoint the Company’s provisional administrator. And in addition, the Company petitioned RDB Registrar General, and requested him to suspend the mortgage auction, But the above court dismissed the application. Vintage Wines& Liquors Ltd appealed the above ruling before the Commercial High Court, but meanwhile, Equity Bank Rwanda Plc. re-wrote to RDB Registrar General and again sought a certificate to auction the mortgaged house; and the collateral was then auctioned at 320,000,000 Rwf and it was acquired by Club House La Palisse Ltd. Vintage Wines & Liquors Ltd lodged a claim with the Commercial Court and sued all the auctioneer, Counsel Karasira Colette Ratifa, Equity Bank Rwanda Plc, Club House La Palisse Ltd and RDB Registrar General, the plaintiff sought the invalidation of the auction, lamenting that the auction was illegally conducted. And the court annulled it. The respondents appealed the above ruling before the Commercial High Court, and they argued that the auction was not supposed to be revoked since it had been legally conducted. Club House La Palisse Ltd argued that the Commercial Court misinterpreted the legal provisions, while Equity Bank Rwanda Plc argued that they had all the inalienable rights on the mortgaged collateral and they had a right to have it auctioned. The Commercial High Court held that the appellants’ claim has justification and the auction was stayed.
## Page 578
233 VINTAGES WINES & LIQUARS LTD v KARASIRA
Vintage Wines & Liquors Ltd. appealed the above ruling before the Court of Appeal, they contended that the Commercial High Court disregarded the provisions of the insolvency law, and they prayed the Court of Appeal to assess whether the ruling on the appeal was or was not fair. Before the Court of Appeal, all respondents asserted that Nzamukosha Slyvie has no interest to defend in this case, and besides, all her complaints into this case are new claims and therefore they cannot be admitted for their very first time before the Court of Appeal, and they prayed the Court not to admit her claim. Nzamukosha argued that she has a legitimate, direct and personal interest to intervene into this case. She argued that this case originates from a claim made by Vintage Wines & Liquors Ltd by which the latter sought the annulment of a public auction effected on a property she lent them and which they mortgaged with Equity Bank Rwanda Plc, she therefore prayed the court to admit her claim. All respondents argued that Nzamukosha’s complaints for the auction annulment should not be considered since they came up as new claims and they cannot, at their very first time, be admitted before the Court of Appeal. Club House La Palisse who bought the disputed property, argued that Nzamukosha Sylivie’s complaints for annulment of the auction have not been presented before RDB’ Registrar General for a decision, yet it is a prior requirement before their submission to the court. Nzamukosha Sylvie argued that the respondents defence is still void since the law allows her to intervene into the case at any stage of the proceedings. She also added that her claim aligns well with the claim made by Vintage Wines & Liquors Ltd since they both seek the annulment of a public auction, arguing that her concerns should not be termed as new claims.
## Page 579
234 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
Vintage Wines & Liquors Ltd argued that the Insolvency Law provides that when the Court happens to decide on the debtor’s request for initiating insolvency proceeding within a period of six months, the creditor immediately loses the right to make an application for auctioning the loan collateral. But for the case at hand, the Commercial High Court disregarded the applicable law and stayed the conducted auction, they therefore prayed the Court of Appeal to invalidate a decision that stayed the auction. All respondents prayed this court to stay the appealed ruling. Club House La Palisse that acquired the auctioned property argued that should the Court find it otherwise, Equity Bank Rwanda Plc should refund them for the auction price, plus all related interests that are computed at a rate of 18% Held: 1. Lending a mortgage does not mean that the lender has surrendered his/ her property ownership rights. 2. The mortgage lender has a personal and direct interest to intervene into a court case. 3. Application for initiating insolvency proceedings is not a reason for suspending the rights of secured creditors neither can it stay property retention rights; unless the application is thereby accompanied by the applicant’s proper plan for business recovery 4. The rights on a secured debt remains suspended for a period of six months due to the debtor’s application for insolvency proceedings and the court’s approval of the applicant’s business reorganisation plan. The appeal lacks merit.
## Page 580
235 VINTAGES WINES & LIQUARS LTD v KARASIRA
Statutes referred to: Law N0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 relating to civil, commercial, labor and administrative procedure, articles 114 and 154. Law N0 075/2021 of 06/12/2021 relating to insolvency, article 12. No cases referred to. Judgment I. BACKGROUND OF THE CASE
On 15 May 2019, Vintage Wines & Liquors Ltd contracted for a loan of 180,000,000 Rwf from Equity Bank Rwanda Plc. For Vintage Wines & Liquors Ltd to receive the above loan facility, Nzamukosha Sylvie had to lend them her house registered under UPI 1/02/13/02/635 located in Kigabiro II Village, Nyarutarama Cell, in Remera Sector of Gasabo District in the City of Kigali. Her house was given for a loan collateral and it was recorded in the books of RDB Registrar General and was meant to serve for loan security, ready for sale and repay the loan just in case Vintage Wines & Liquors Ltd fails to reimburse.
Vintage Wines & Liquors Ltd eventually failed to repay the loan, and Equity Bank Rwanda Plc petitioned RDB Registrar General and sought a certificate for auctioning the above mentioned collateral. The certificate was issued and one Kayumba Godfrey was appointed as the property auctioneer, and the latter started the auction process from the 20/03/2022. Vintage Wines & Liquors Ltd seized the Commercial Court and prayed the court to initiate the Company’s insolvency proceedings, insolvency related disputes settlements, and the appointment of the company’s
## Page 581
236 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
provisional administrator. Besides, they also referred to their filed claim, and wrote to RDB Registrar General and prayed him to abort the auction processes. And on the 31 March 2022, RDB Registrar-General wrote a letter to the appointed auctioneer, and requested him to suspend the auction process.
For case RCOM 00438/2022/TC/ rendered by the Commercial Court on the 02 September 2022, the court held that the claim made by Vintage Wines & Liquors Ltd for initiating the Company’s insolvency proceedings, insolvency related disputes settlements and the appointment of a provisional administrator was not admitted due to the claimant’s failure of complying with the provisions of Law n0 075/2021 of 06 December 2021 relating to insolvency. Vintage Wines & Liquors Ltd appealed the above decision before the Commercial High Court, whereas Equity Bank Rwanda Plc rewrote to RDB Registrar General praying for a certificate to auction the above mentioned loan collateral. And, on the 26 April 2023, RDB Registrar General issued the auction certificate, and appointed Counsel Karasira Colette Ratifa as the auctioneer. The collateral was auctioned on the 15 June 2023 and it was bought by Club House La Palisse at a price of 320, 000,000 Rwf.
Meanwhile, the appeal case RCOMA 00617/2022/HC made by Vintage Wines & Liquors Ltd requesting initiation of insolvency proceedings was heard by the Commercial High Court on the 19 January 2024, and the Court held that their appeal has no justification.
On the 16 June 2023, Vintage Wines & Liquors Ltd petitioned RDB Registrar General and prayed him to invalidate the auction of 15 June 2023 that was conducted on a certain loan collateral they gave Equity Bank Rwanda Plc; lamenting that Counsel Karasira Colette Ratifa, the auctioneer, initiated the auction process yet Vintage Wines
## Page 582
237 VINTAGES WINES & LIQUARS LTD v KARASIRA
& Liquors Ltd had a pending court claim for initiating the Company’s insolvency proceedings, insolvency-related disputes settlement and the appointment of the Company’s provisional administrator, a claim that was not yet decided. But on the 06 July 2023, the Registrar General replied, and notified the claimant that they presented no evidence that can make him annul the auction.
On the 22 June 2023, Vintage Wines & Liquors Ltd. filed a claim before the Commercial Court and collectively sued Counsel Karasira Colette Ratifa, the auctioneer, and Equity Bank Rwanda Plc, Club House la Palisse Ltd and RDB Registrar-General, and the plaintiff sought the annulment of the above mentioned auction for the following reasons: - A fact that the auction was conducted regardless the existence of a case RCOMA 00617/2022/HCC relating to the plaintiff’s request for initiating the Company’s insolvency proceedings which was still pending, as it was scheduled to be heard on the 19 October 2023; - A fact that the auction was illegally conducted since it violated procedures of seizure, surety and the publication of the auction. - A fact that the collateral was auctioned at a derisory price.
Counsel Karasira Colette Ratifa, the auctioneer, argued that the auction was legally conducted since it was electronically published on Judgements Execution platform, and it was equally published under IGIHE Newspaper and Isango Star Radio. The Counsel has also added that all auction related notices were posted at the Office of Nyarutarama Cell, the exact location of the concerned property.
## Page 583
238 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
Equity Bank Rwanda Plc have equally argued that the auction was legally conducted; adding that all procedures relating to seizure and publication have been legally observed. They also added that Vintage Wines & Liquors Ltd have deliberately declined their right to insolvency proceedings time extension which is normally allocated to proceedings whose final decisions needed more than six months. They therefore argued that the mere existence of an insolvency related pending claim was not material enough to prevent Equity Bank Rwanda Plc from auctioning the collateral.
Club House la Palisse has also seconded that the auction has been legally conducted. They also added that the acquired property is already registered under their name, and they prayed the court to stay the auction. They however cautioned that should the court find it otherwise, Equity Bank Rwanda Plc must then be ordered to refund Club House la Palisse for the auction price, plus all related interests.
RDB Registrar General made no submissions since he did not appear despite a fact that he was legally summoned and aware of the hearing date.
For case RCOM 01117/2023/TC rendered on the 18 July 2023, the Commercial Court held that the public auction of 15 June 2023, conducted on a property registered under UPI 1/02/13/02/635 is invalidated since it was conducted in disregard of the existence of related pending claim made by Vintage Wines & Liquors Ltd who requested the court to initiate insolvency proceedings, and the appointment of the company’s provisional administrator. The Court ordered Equity Bank Rwanda Plc to refund Club House la Palisse for 320,000,000 Rwf of the auction price, and ordered them to liaise with Counsel Karasira Colette Ratifa and jointly give Vintage Wines & Liquors Ltd
## Page 584
239 VINTAGES WINES & LIQUARS LTD v KARASIRA
500,000 for courtroom representation fee, and 200,000 Rwf for the incurred case costs and 20,000 Rwf for the deposited case filing fee.
All respondents appealed the above ruling before the Commercial High Court and they lamented the annulment of the auction. Briefly, Counsel Karasira Colette Ratifa argued the auction was legally conducted, Club House la Palisse submitted that the Commercial Court misinterpreted legal provisions while Equity Bank Rwanda Plc argued that they had all the inalienable rights on the loan collateral, and they therefore had a right to have it auctioned.
Vintage Wines & Liquors Ltd argued that the Commercial Court’s decision of invalidating the auction constitutes no error, since the auction had been done in disregard of the plaintiff’s claim requesting for initiating insolvency proceedings and the appointment of the provisional administrator. While for the appeal made by Equity Bank Rwanda Plc, the representative of Vintage Wines & Liquors Ltd argued that such an appeal must be dismissed because it was filed late, and therefore time- barred.
For case RCOMA 00374/2023/HCC & CMB RCOMA 00376/2023/HCC rendered on the 1st September 2023, the Commercial High Court held that the appeal made by Club House la Palisse, and the one made by Counsel Karasira Collette Ratifa, and that of Equity Bank Rwanda Plc are all relevant, the Court stayed the auction of the 15 June 2023, conducted on Nzamukosha Sylvie’s property registered under UPI 1/02/13/02/635, which Vintage Wines & Liquors Ltd gave Equity Bank Rwanda Plc for a loan collateral; and it ordered Vintage Wines & Liquors Ltd to give Club House la Palisse, Counsel Karasira Colette Ratifa and Equity Bank Rwanda PLc., each 1,200,000 Rwf for
## Page 585
240 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
Counsel fee and proceedings costs, and 40,000 Rwf for the deposited court fee.
Vintage Wines & Liquors Ltd appealed the above ruling before the Court of Appeal, and lamented that the Commercial High Court disregarded the provisions of article 12(5) of the insolvency Law n0 075/2021 of 06 December 2021, and hence it did not examine the underlying issue of determining whether the Commercial Court ruling was or was not fair. They argued that the court has rather entertained the unrelated, nay newly presented issues, and it ended up making a wrong decision. And, they therefore prayed the court of Appeal to entirely overturn the appealed ruling.
All respondents argued that the appeal made by Vintage Wines & Liquors Ltd has no justification. Counsel Karasira Colette Ratifa and her attorney submitted that the appellant presents nothing that debunks the Commercial High Court; since they only kept interpreting a legal provision that has already been clarified by the previous court. They therefore concurred with the Commercial High Court’s ruling. For Equity Bank Rwanda Plc, its representatives argued that the provisions of article 12 (5) have already been discussed, and the court thereby found nothing that could prevent the auctioning of the collateral. For Club House la Palisse, its lawyers argued that the appellant failed to highlight the auction’s irregularities, neither could they blame Club House la Palisse for any wrong. They also argued that the plaintiff deliberately disregards provisions of paragraph 4 and 5 of the above mentioned article 12, coupled with a fact that the plaintiff’s pretext of a claim on insolvency proceedings has actually been dismissed. They however insisted that should the court find it otherwise, Club House la Palisse should be refunded for the auction price, plus a variety of related interests
## Page 586
241 VINTAGES WINES & LIQUARS LTD v KARASIRA
computed at a rate of 18% and the involved damage- compensations.
Meanwhile, one Nzamukosha Sylvie made a voluntary intervention into the case, and argued that she has an interest into the case since the disputed property is her own house that she had lent to Vintage Wines & Liquors Ltd, and she prayed for the auction annulment owing to facts that the formalities to do with payment of auction security fee, distribution of auction proceeds, and returning the price balance to the property owner; were all illegally conducted.
All respondents argued that Nzamukosha Sylvie has no interest into this case; and besides, her intervention consists into new claims that cannot, at their very first time, be admitted before the Court of Appeal, and they therefore requested that her intervention should be dismissed. The representatives of Club House la Palisse have also added that a fact that the plaintiff’s concerns have never been brought to the attention of RDB Registrar General for a prior decision is another fact that makes her claim inadmissible to the Court of Appeal.
The hearing was conducted in public on the 13 May 2024 with Vintage Wines & Liquors Ltd represented by Counsel Micomyiza Liliane together with Counsel Rugwizangoga Marcellin, and these are the same people who represented Nzamukosha Sylvie. Counsel Karasira Colette Ratifa was represented by Counsel Murekatete Henriette, Club House la Palisse was represented by Counsel Sebukonoke Innocent together with Counsel kayitare Jean Pierre, while Equity Bank Rwanda Plc was represented by Counsel Muhiganwa Damas. RDB Registrar General did not appear for the hearing yet he had been legally summoned. Parties argued the case, the hearing closed and the pronouncement was slated on the 29 May 2024. When the Court was deliberating the litigated issues,
## Page 587
242 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
the court deemed it so important to first reopen the hearing and let litigants give more clarifications on their later filed submissions. The court slated the reopening on 10 June 202. When the day came, all litigants appeared represented like before, except Equity Bank Rwanda Plc that was now represented by Counsel Murindabigwi Mariam, and Club House la Palisse that for this time, came represented by Counsel Sebukonoke alone.
With reference to the above highlighted parties’ contentions, the Court shall examine the following issues: - Whether Nzamukosha Sylvie has an interest into making a voluntary intervention into this case; - Whether Nzamukosha Sylvie’s complaints that seek the annulment of the auction are just new claims that cannot, at their very first time, be admitted before the Court of Appeal; - -Whether Nzamukosha’s admitted complaints have any justification; - Whether the Commercial High Court made any error when it stayed the contested auction by disregarding a fact that the auction was conducted in the violation of a prior six- month time period that is granted upon a court’s decision on the request for initiating insolvency proceedings as provided under article 12 (5) of the Insolvency Law n0 075/2021 of 06 December 2021. - Whether parties’ requests for the courtroom representation fees and the incurred case-related expenses are worthy-considering.
## Page 588
243 VINTAGES WINES & LIQUARS LTD v KARASIRA
II. ISSUES OF THE CASE AND THEIR ANALYSIS 1. Whether Nzamukosha Sylvie has an interest into making a voluntary intervention into this case.
In General, all respondents argued that Nzamukosha Sylvie has no interest to defend into this case, and requested that her voluntary intervention into the case must be dismissed. The attorney for Counsel Karasira Colette Ratifa, argued that Nzamukosha Sylvie has no direct interest to defend into this case; it is even more so, since by the time she consented to give her property out, and let it to in the hands of Vintage Wines & Liquors Ltd for them to use it as a loan collateral, she had already surrendered her ownership rights and consented to all related effects. Besides, she is not able to make a clear demarcation between herself and Vintage Wines & Liquors Ltd. The representative of Equity Bank Rwanda Plc has as well argued that Nzamukosha Sylvie lost her direct interest, when she decided to lend Vintage Wines & Liquor Ltd her property to serve as a loan collateral; while the representatives of Club House la Palisse argued that by the time Nzamukosha Sylvie learnt about the public auction against her property, she should have either opposed it , or thereby sought its’ lawful annulment.
Nzamukosha Sylvie’s attorneys argued that she has a legitimate, direct and personal interest into making a voluntary intervention into this case, since the case a hand relates to a claim made by Vintage Wines & Liquors seeking the annulment of the auction conducted on a property she lent them, and which they mortgaged with Equity Bank Rwanda Plc. for a loan collateral. She therefore argued that her claim must be admitted with reference to article 114 (2) of the Law n0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 relating to civil, commercial, labor and administrative procedure.
## Page 589
244 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
DETERMIANTION OF THE COURT
Article 114 of the Law n0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 relating to civil, commercial, labor and administrative procedure provides that: “anyone who needs to intervene into a case where he/she is neither a claimant nor a respondent, must file a claim to the court and makes court fee deposits. For the claim to be admitted, the intervening party must prove that he/she has a legitimate, direct and personal interest to defend.
With regard to the plaintiff’s interest into a case, the Supreme Court gave related explanation along a certain case RC 0002/16/CS rendered by the Supreme Court on the 27 January 2017, whereby in paragraph 19, the court made reference to legal doctrines, and explained that the party’s interest into a case must be direct and personal. The plaintiff can only be allowed to file a claim, when the claim is in his/her personal interest; that is, when the eventual court decision serves the plaintiff’s personal interests.
With regard to this case, the file indicates that it is related to a claim made by Vintage Wines & Liquor Ltd who sought annulment of the public auction conducted on 15 June 2023. The auction was effected on Nzamukosha Sylvie’s property registered under UPI 1/02/13/02/635, located in Kigabiro II Village, Nyarutarama Cell, of Remera Sector in Gasabo District, in the City of Kigali. The aforementioned property was given to Vintage Wines & Liquors Ltd to be used as a loan collateral.
The concerned property belonged to Nzamukosha Sylvie long before the auction as it is indicated by a long- term lease deed which shows that she is the rightful owner of the property with a lease contract that started on the 30 March 2017, and slated to end on 05 April 2037; it is also
## Page 590
245 VINTAGES WINES & LIQUARS LTD v KARASIRA
clear that the property was lent to Vintage Wines &Liquors Ltd for them to submit it as a collateral for a loan they contracted from Equity Bank Rwanda Plc; as it is corroborated by the loan agreement concluded between the borrower and the Bank. For the aforementioned agreement, nothing proves that Nzamukosha Sylvie no longer has the property ownership right, and nothing proves that she surrendered the ownership right on her property.
The court found that all respondents have no evidence to present before this appellate court so as to rebut the above highlighted argument. Therefore, they cannot argue that Nzamukosha Sylvie has surrendered her property ownership right by lending it to Vintage Wines & Liquors Ltd, since such an argument has no justification due to lack of supporting evidence.
The Court has also found that Nzamukosha Sylvie as a physical person, is legally speaking different from Vintage Wines & Liquors, the Business Company. Those are two separate individuals, and as it has been explained in the preceding paragraph, it is therefore clear that she has a personal and direct interest into intervening in the case since the dispute concerns a property she lent Vintage Wines & Liquors Ltd. As a third party, who moreover has never been a litigant at any instance of this case, it is quite clear that her interests might be at risk. Considering all the above provided clarifications, the respondents’ argument by which the plaintiff has no interest into the case is total void. 2. Determining whether Nzamukosha Sylvie’s objections on conducted auction are new claims that cannot, at their very first time, be admitted before the Court of Appeal.
The representatives of respondents concur on a fact that Nzamukosha Sylvie’s objections on the auction are new
## Page 591
246 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
claims which cannot, at their very first time, be admitted before the Court of Appeal. They argued that at the first instance of the case, the Commercial Court held for the annulment of the auction due to a simple fact that the auction was conducted regardless the existence of a pending claim made by Vintage Wines & Liquors Ltd seeking the court’s decision on initiating the insolvency proceedings; arguing that it is this very issue that was appealed before the Commercial High Court, and for which, the latter held that the auction was to stay. And, it the same issue that was brought before this honorable Court. They therefore argued that Nzamukosha Sylvie’s objections are actually new claims, which have never been debated before the previous courts, and which contain nothing that proves defects in the appealed judgment. They therefore argued that her complaints are new claims, and they cannot be admitted for any examination as per the provision of article 154 of the Law n0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 relating to civil, commercial, labor and administrative procedure which prevents the admission of new claims into the Court of Appeal; together with article 155 of the same Law which provides that the appellate court hears and decides the case in the exclusive limits of the appealed issues.
The representative of Club House la Palisse Ltd added that the plaintiff’ complaints have just landed in the Court, and they have never been presented to the office of RDB Registrar General for a prior assessment as it is so required by article 260 (6) of civil, commercial, labor and administrative procedure.
The representatives of Nzamukosha Sylvie argued that the respondents’ defense makes no sense, and reminded that the law allows parties to intervene into a case at stage of proceedings; and they added that the plaintiff’s concerns well align with the principal claim made by Vintage Wines
## Page 592
247 VINTAGES WINES & LIQUARS LTD v KARASIRA
& Liquors Ltd which sought the annulment of the contested auction, they therefore argued that their client’s complaints should not be considered as new claims. They also added that her claim supporting evidence were found late after she had already file her claims; and they in no way alter the principal claim as they rather emphasize it, since they all seek the annulment of the disputed auction. DETERMIANTION OF THE COURT
Article 154 (1) of the above mentioned Law n0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 provides the following: “No new claims may be lodged at the appeal level, unless it concerns the compensation of the disputed debts or when it consists into a counter-claim against the principal claim before the Court of Appeal; while article 156 of the same law provides that the appeal court hears and exclusively decides on the appealed issues.
With regard to the case at hand, the case file indicates that Vintage Wines & Liquors Ltd seized the Commercial Court seeking the annulment of a contested auction alleging the following reasons: the auction was conducted in disregard of an existing pending case on initiating the Company’s insolvency proceedings; the auction was conducted in blatant violation of procedures relating to seizure, surety and auction publication; the collateral was auctioned at a derisory price. While deciding the case, the Commercial Court held that the concerned auction is annulled due the plaintiff’s first complaint (that of conducting an auction regardless the existence of a pending request for initiating the company’s insolvency proceedings, whereas the rest of the complaints were found irrelevant. Vintage Wines & Liquors Ltd appreciated the ruling on the issue, and sole respondents appealed it, and it is the very issue that Vintage Wines & Liquors re-appealed before this
## Page 593
248 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
Honorable Court. Apparently, this is the only disagreement that remained between litigants (Vintage Wines & Liquors Ltd, and respondents) before the Court of Appeal. For Nzamukosha Sylvie, she intervened into the case at this level seeking a revocation of the conducted auction and she brought forth the following reasons: All procedures to do with payment of auction security fee, distribution of the auction proceeds, returning the price balance to the collateral owner, were illegally conducted.
The Court found that Nzamukosha’s complaints are squarely new and have nothing to do with a claim that Vintage Wines & Liquors Ltd made at the first instance of the case (though both of them sought the annulment of the disputed auction, still her complaints are different from an appeal that was filed before the Commercial High Court, the same appeal issue that Vintage Wines & Liquors Ltd brought to this Court. It is therefore held that Nzamukosha Sylvie’s argument by which her claim completes and emphases a claim made by Vintage Wines& Liquors Ltd, is null and void; and this Court cannot afford examining her claim as such an attempt would contradict the provisions of the above mentioned articles 154 and 156 which provides that the Court of Appeal cannot admit new claims, and that it must hear and decide the case in the exclusive limits of the appealed issues.
Considering all the above provided explanations, the court found no need of examining the issue of Nzamukosha’s failure to first present her complaints before RDB Registrar General for a prior assessment, neither should the court look into the relevance of her complaints since her claims are new and are not admissible before the appellate court.
## Page 594
249 VINTAGES WINES & LIQUARS LTD v KARASIRA
3. Whether the Commercial High Court made any error when it stayed the auction conducted on a collateral that Vintage Wines & liquors Ltd has pledged, an auction that violated the six-month time period provided for court-granted insolvency proceedings.
The representatives of Vintage Wines & Liquors Ltd argued that article 12(5) of the Law n0 075/2021 of 06/12/2021 on Insolvency provides that when the Court happens to decide on the debtor’s request for initiating insolvency proceedings within a period of six months, the creditor immediately loses the right to make an application for auctioning the loan collateral; adding that such was the stance of the Commercial Court for its ruling on case RCOM 01117/2023/TC whereby it held that the auction conducted on a loan collateral that Vintage Wines & Liquors Ltd pledged is revoked due to a fact that the auction was conducted before the elapsing of the time period provided under article 12 of the above mentioned Law for court- granted insolvency proceedings; lamenting that while in the appeal before the Commercial High Court, the latter stayed the auction without examining the provisions of the above mentioned article 12, and determining the relevance of the Commercial Court’s decision as expected .
They went on and explained that the court rather entertained some unrelated and undiscussed issues such as application for initiating the company’s business reorganization , whereby in paragraph 40 of the appealed judgment, the court took a stance that blatantly contradicts the provisions of the above mentioned article 12; by which the court held that the company’s business reorganization is not initiated by the party’s claim filing, adding that the company’s business reorganization is rather permitted by
## Page 595
250 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
the Judge’s decision that confirms the existence of a concrete business recovery plan.
Representatives of Vintage Wines & Liquors Ltd made reference to the above explanations, and requested the Court of Appeal to rectify an error that the Commercial High Court made while interpreting the provisions of the above mentioned article 12. They also requested the Court of Appeal to annul a judgement that stayed the auction.
All respondents’ representatives concurred to say that the appeal made by Vintage Wines & Liquors Ltd has no justification; they argued that the Commercial High Court has well analyzed the provisions of article 12, and looking at the content of the appealed judgement, the court’s decision staying the concerned auction contains no error; arguing that it is rather Vintage Wines & Liquors Ltd that misinterpreted the provisions of article 12 since they deliberately discarded a fact that when a period of six months elapses without any court decision that approves the existence of a concrete business plan that can assure the proper restricting of the business, such a situation gives the creditor a right to enforce the due payment. They therefore argued that the Commercial High Court did not have any single reason that could make it annul the auction. The representatives of Equity Bank Rwanda Plc. and those who stood for Club House la Palisse Ltd, added that another fact that rebuts the annulment of the auction is the current Commercial High Court’s decision that still dismissed Vintage Wines & Liquors Ltd ‘s request for initiating business reorganization.
All respondents prayed the Court to stay the appealed ruling, but the representatives of Club House la Palisse added that in case the court finds it otherwise, Equity Bank Rwanda Ltd should refund them for the auction price,
## Page 596
251 VINTAGES WINES & LIQUARS LTD v KARASIRA
together with all related interests that must be computed at a rate of 18% DETERMIANTION OF THE COURT
For the above issue, the parties’ underlying disagreement resides into determining whether the annulment of the public auction conducted on a certain loan collateral which Vintage Wines & Liquors Ltd had handed to Equity Bank Rwanda Plc, was supposed to be stayed due to a fact that the contested auction was hastily conducted yet the creditors’ rights, and the Bank’s inclusive, to force Vintage Wines & Liquors Ltd for the payment had been suspended owing to the latter’s court-granted request for initiating their business reorganization, thus violating the six-month period provided under article 12 (5) of the Law n0 075/2021 of 06/12/2021 relating to Company’s ‘ Insolvency .
Article 12 of the Law n0 075/2021 of 06/12/2021 relating to Insolvency that provides about the suspension of enforcing a payment on secured loan says the following: - “The secured creditors and holders of the right of retention are not stayed by the commencement of insolvency proceedings. - However, when the debtor shows an intention to submit a reorganization plan along with the application, all claims including the secured debts, and rights of retention are stayed effective from the date of application. - The debtor must submit to the court a reorganization plan within a period not exceeding three (3) months from the date of instituting the court case.
## Page 597
252 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
- The period of stay does not exceed six (6) months, including the three (3) months of submitting the reorganization plan. - If the period referred to in paragraph 4 of this article lapses without a court decision on the application, the secured creditor is automatically entitled to enforce the payment in accordance with relevant laws. - The creditor may petition the court to lift the suspension when there is a justifiable cause” - With regard to suspending secured debt repayment enforcement, the court found that the analysis of the above article brings out the following important details: - -that seizing a court for initiating the debtor’s insolvency proceedings does not necessarily suspend the secured creditors’ right and any other person with a right of retention to enforce the debt repayment. - The existence of an exception whereby the debtor’s intention of accompanying his/her application with the submission of a concrete business restructuring plan can suspend the above mentioned creditors’ right of repayment enforcement. - -That on one hand, the above mentioned suspension is meant to make the debtor wait as the court analyses his/her submitted business restructuring plan and determining whether it is promising enough to ensure repayment of the due debts without resorting to the auctioning of collaterals. - That on the other hand, the above mentioned article cannot keep the secured debtors’ right suspended till the final court decision on the debtor’s claim; the
## Page 598
253 VINTAGES WINES & LIQUARS LTD v KARASIRA
article rather provides for a maximum time period of six months, at the end of which and with no the court’s grant on the debtor’s application, the secured creditors stop waiting, and automatically resumes their right of repayment enforcement and collateral acquisition. - Considering a fact that suspending secured debt repayment enforcement is actually an exception justified by the debtor’s intention of initiating his/her business recovery and ensuring repayment of all the due debts without resorting to the auctioning of the attached collaterals, and the provision of a maximum time period at the end of which , the secured debtors resume their right of repayment enforcement and collateral acquisition, denotes the Legislator’s intention of delimiting the suspension of the secured debtors’ right, so as not to keep them wait for long just because the debtor has filed an insolvency related application , and especially when the application secured no court’s decision for initiating the debtor’s business recovery arrangement. In other words, the Legislator wanted that when a period of six months’ elapses with no court’s permission on initiating the company’s business recovery plans, then the secured creditors regain their right of collateral acquisition. - The above provided elucidations denote that the creditor’s right of repayment enforcement can only remain suspended if in the course of a six- month time period, effective from the debtor’s application, the court has honored the debtor’ application request, and hence approved and permitted the company’s business recovery plans; but when the court remained silent or when it dismissed the debtor’s application, the debt repayment
## Page 599
254 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
enforcement suspension is thereby lifted , and the secured creditors regain their right of repayment enforcement and collateral acquisition in the limits of the relevant laws.
With regard to this case, the Commercial High Court overturned the Commercial Court’s ruling on case RCOM 01117/2023/TC, and held that the public auction of 15 June 2023 conducted on a property Nzamukosha Sylvie lent Vintage Wines & Liquors Ltd for a loan collateral, stays. The Court held it so with reference the following reasoning:
The fact that the auctioned property never belonged to Vintage Wines & Liquors Ltd. It is a property the latter borrowed from Nzamukosha Sylvie, and it was not among the borrower’s listed assets that might help the borrower in the business recovery; more so that an applicant for the business restructuring normally intends to keep and utilize his assets for boosting the business and repay all the debts that led the company into insolvency; the aforementioned position contradicts the provisions of article 12 of the Law n0 075/2021 of 06/12/2021 relating to Insolvency. The Commercial High court moved that the debt repayment enforcement could only be suspended if the pledged property is listed among the debtor’s business recovery assets, and it must belong to the applicant, or else the latter must prove the property owner’s formal consent for its’ use in the business recovery plan.
Besides, even if the concerned property was listed among Vintage Wines & Liquors Ltd.’s assets for use in its business recovery, such a situation is still helpless since the Company’s business restructuring is not simply granted by depositing a claim into the court, it is rather permitted by a Judge’s decision that
## Page 600
255 VINTAGES WINES & LIQUARS LTD v KARASIRA
confirms the existence of a concrete business recovery plan; the court has therefore held that the mere filing of a claim cannot call for the annulment of the public auction .
The appeal made by Vintage Wines and Liquors intends to indicate that the Commercial High Court discarded the provisions of the above mentioned article 12, which provides that when the court happens to permit the company’s business reorganization before a period of six months’ elapses, the company creditors lose the right to auction the pledged collateral, and creditors must wait for a final ruling on the insolvency proceedings, just as the Commercial Court has found it. They therefore lamented that the Commercial High Court just entertained some undisputed, nay previously undebated issues.
Looking at the provisions of the above mentioned article 12, the court found that the secured debtor’s right on repayment enforcement can only be suspended if the debtor has at same time submitted the application for insolvency proceedings together with a concrete business recovery plan. However, the above article does not separate a debt that is secured by the debtor’s own property from a debt that might be secured by a borrowed property. Still, the above article does not provide that the suspension of creditors repayment enforcement right is exclusively limited to the sole debtor’s charged property when such assets are listed to help the debtor in the business financial recovery plans. Therefore, the Commercial High Court’s stance by which the auctioned collateral was not in the assets of Vintage Wines & Liquors Ltd, and neither was it listed among the assets meant for its business recovery plans, as a reason for which Equity Bank ‘s repayment enforcement right was not supposed to suspended makes no sense; as such a reasoning differs from the provisions of article 12 above mentioned.
## Page 601
256 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
The court has also found the above provided reason, together with the argument according to which the Company Business restructuring is not launched by filing a claim in the court, as it is rather permitted by a Judge’s decision that confirms the existence of a concrete and promising business recovery plan; since they both revolve around the application for initiating the Company’s insolvency proceedings. Therefore, considering all the above provided details, the Commercial High Court should not have based its decision of staying the contested auction on such grounds.
Nonetheless, though the court found that the above highlighted grounds were not supposed to justify the staying of the contested auction as above explained, the court has to examine the relevance of the appeal made by Vintage Wines & Liquors Ltd seeking the staying the Commercial Court’s ruling which annulled the contested auction.
As it has been above explained, the appeal made by Vintage Wines & Liquors Ltd consists into explaining that article 12 of Law n0 075/2021 of 06/12/2021 relating to insolvency provides that when seized court happens to permit the launch of the company’s business restructuring within a period of six months or less, the creditor automatically loses a right to apply for the auction certificate, and has to wait until the final ruling on the insolvency proceedings; the appellant has therefore prayed the Court to consider the above interpretation and annul the contested auction since it was conducted in disregard of the appellant’s pending Commercial Court-permitted launch of business reorganization scheme, and moreover, the auction was so conducted before the elapsing of a six- month time period. - Considering all the explanations provided under paragraph 43 of this case for the interpretation of the
## Page 602
257 VINTAGES WINES & LIQUARS LTD v KARASIRA
above mentioned article 12, the Court found the argument by Vintage Wines & Liquors Ltd null and void, since as it has been above explained, the secured debtor’s right of repayment enforcement can only remain suspended, if in the course of a six month time period, effective from the plaintiff’s application, the court happened to permit the launching of the Company’s business reorganization, but when the court dismisses the application, creditor’s repayment enforcement suspension is no more, and the secured creditor regains the right of repayment enforcement and mortgage acquisition in the limits of applicable laws .
With regard to the application made by Vintage Wines & Liquors Ltd for the court’s permission on initiating the business reorganization, this court found no court’s permission for initiating their business restructuring since the court’s decision for case RCOM 00438/2022/TC ( a decision which the appellant considered to make Equity Bank Rwanda Plc lose their right on mortgage acquisition) dismissed their request owing to lack of the important legally required application details, the above stance is emphasized by the Commercial High Court’s ruling on the appeal case RCOMA 00617/2022/HC of 19 January 2024; Therefore, as it has been explained, this court found no defects in the auction of 15 June 2024 that has been conducted on a collateral that has mortgaged to repay Equity Bank Rwanda Plc , the mortgagee; since nothing could prevent the latter from regaining the right of repayment enforcement and mortgage acquisition, it is therefore hereby held that the appeal made by Vintage Wines & Liquors Ltd has no justification .
## Page 603
258 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
4. Determining the relevance of the requested damage-compensations
The representatives of Counsel Karasira Colette Ratifa prayed the court to allow her 1,000,000 Rwf for courtroom representation and all case-related costs incurred at this appeal level. Club House la Palisse Ltd requested for 1,000,000 Rwf for Counsel fee and 500,000 Rwf compensation for being dragged into unnecessary court cases. Vintage Wines & Liquors Ltd never commented on the opponents’ requests.
Nzamukosha Sylvie’s attorneys have as well prayed the Court to order all respondents to jointly give her 20,000,000 Rwf for compensation over dragging her into unnecessary lawsuits, and refund for courtroom representation fee and case related expenses. DETERMIANTION OF THE COURT
Article 111 of the Law n0 22/2018 of 29/04/2018 relating to civil, commercial, labor and administrative procedure provides the following: “the claim for representation fees is incidental to the principal claim, and it aims at repaying expenses incurred during judicial proceedings; the claim for legal costs is adjudicated at the same time with the principal claim, and it can be admitted and adjudicated even when the principal has not been admitted”
The court found that it is Vintage Wines & Liquors Ltd has appealed the case, and such an appeal made all respondents to hire lawyers for the appeal, and make the necessary case follow-up; and as it has been above demonstrated, the appeal has been found irrelevant. Therefore, with reference to the above reminded article 111,
## Page 604
259 VINTAGES WINES & LIQUARS LTD v KARASIRA
Vintage Wines & Liquors Ltd must give Club House la Palisse, Counsel Karasira Colette Ratifa, and Equity Bank Rwanda Plc, each 700,000 Rwf for courtroom representation fee and 200,000 Rwf for the incurred case- related costs. The above compensation is determined in the sole discretion of the court, since the beneficiaries requested for an excessive amount, and moreover unaccounted for. While for Nzamukosha Sylvie, her compensation request was not honored since her claim was not admitted. III. DETERMINATION OF THE COURT
Holds that the appeal made by Vintage Wines & Liquors Ltd has no justification
Holds that the claim made by Nzamukosha Sylvie seeking a voluntary intervention into a case is not admitted for examination
Stays the ruling on case RCOMA 00374/2023/HCC & CMB RCOMA 00376/2023/HCC on the public auction of 15 June 2023 conducted on Nzamukosha Sylvie’s house property registered under UPI 1/02/13/02/635 that Vintage Wines & Liquors Ltd pledged as a Bank loan collateral.
Holds that Vintage Wines & Liquors Ltd should give Counsel Karasira Colette Ratifa, Equity Bank Rwanda Plc and Club House la Palisse, each 700,000 Rwf for appeal courtroom representation fee and 200,000 Rwf for the expenses incurred at this appeal proceeding.
Stays the public auction of 15 June 2023 conducted on a house property registered under UPI: 1/02/13/02/635 of Nzamukosha Sylvie which Vintage Wines & Liquors Ltd pledged for a Bank loan collateral.
## Page 605
260 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
Orders Vintage Wines & Liquors Ltd to give Counsel Karasira Colette Ratifa, Equity Bank Rwanda Plc and Club House la Palisse, each one million and two hundred thousand (1,200,000 Rwf) for courtroom representation fees and for the incurred case-related costs and some forty thousand (40,000 Rwf) as ordered in the appealed judgement, adding to seven hundred thousand (700,000 Rwf) for second appeal courtroom representation cost and two hundred thousand (200,000 Rw) incurred for case-related expenses this appeal level.
Rules that the deposited case filing fee covered the proceedings expenses.
## Page 606
261 SUBJECT INDEX
CRIMINAL CASE
## Page 607
262 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
## Page 608
263 PROSECUTION v. NZABONITEGEKA
PROSECUTION v. NZABONITEGEKA [Rwanda HIGH COURT- RP 00051/2023/HC/KIG (Uwamariya, P.J) March 13, 2024] Laws relating to criminal cases – Genocide – Rehabilitation – In determining whether an applicant who was convicted of the crime of genocide should be granted rehabilitation, the analysis does not only focus on whether the applicant has met the requirements, but also the gravity of the crime for which the applicant was convicted, is also considered. For this reason, a person convicted of the crime of genocide should not be granted rehabilitation, even if s/he should meet the requirements. Facts: On 06 June 2023, Nzabonitegeka Gabriel filed an application before the High Court seeking for rehabilitation for the crime of genocide for which he had been convicted by the Gacaca Court 29/08/2007, and sentenced him to nine years of imprisonment. He explains that he meets the requirements since he had been released for 16 years and had consistently demonstrated good conduct since his release. He requests for rehabilitation so that he could be eligible for employment and continues contributing alongside other rwandans to develop the country. The Prosecution argues that although he has demonstrated good conduct since his release, the rehabilitation he is requesting should not be granted due to the gravity of the crime of genocide for which he was convicted. Held: In determinig whether an applicant who was convicted of the crime of genocide should be granted rehabilitation, the analysis does not only focus on whether the applicant has met the requirements, but also the gravity 263
## Page 609
264 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
of the crime for which the applicant was convicted, is also considered. For this reason, a person convicted of the crime of genocide should not be granted rehabilitation, even if s/he should meet the requirements. Application lacks merit. Statutes and statutory referred to: Law nº 027/2019 of 19/09/2019 relating to the criminal procedure, article 245 and246. Organic Law nº 10/2007 of 01/03/2007 modifying and complementing Organic Law n°16/2004 of 19/6/2004 establishing the organisation, competence and functioning of Gacaca Courts, article 15. No case laws referred to. Judgment I. BACKGROUND OF THE CASE
On 29 August 2007, Gacaca Court of Kanza Sector, formerly Mutobo District in the Ruhengeri Province, currently Muko Sector, Musanze District, Northern Province, convicted Nzabonitegeka Gabriel of the crime of genocide and sentenced him to nine (9) years of imprisonment. Since he had already served a period exceeding the sentence imposed, the authorities of Gisenyi Prison, where he was detained, released him on 05 September 2007.
On 06 June 2023, Nzabonitegeka Gabriel filed an application before the High Court seeking for rehabilitation. His case was registered under n0 RP 00051/2023/HC/KIG.
## Page 610
265 PROSECUTION v. NZABONITEGEKA
The hearing was held in public on 21 February 2024, during which he pleaded himself, while the Prosecution was represented by HABIMANA Cabin, a Prosecutor at National Level.
Nzabonitegeka Gabriel explains that he meets the requirements to be granted rehabilitation, as he had been released for 16 years and had consistently demonstrated good conduct since his release. He requests for rehabilitation so that he could be eligible for employment and continues contributing alongside other Rwandans to develop the country.
The Prosecution argues that although Nzabonitegeka Gabriel had demonstrated good conduct since his release, the rehabilitation he was seeking should not be granted due to the gravity of the crime of genocide for which he was convicted. The issue to be analysed in this case is whether the fact that Nzabonitegeka Gabriel had been convicted of the crime of genocide should prevent him from being granted rehabilitation. II. ANALYSIS OF LEGAL ISSUE Wether the fact that Nzabonitegeka Gabriel had been convicted of the crime of genocide should prevent him from being granted rehabilitation.
Nzabonitegeka Gabriel and his counsel state that on 29 August 2007, Gacaca Court of Kanza Sector, formerly in Mutobo District in Ruhengeri Province currently Mburabuturo Cell, Muko Sector, Musanze District, Northern Province convicted Nzabonitegeka Gabriel of the crime of genocide and sentenced him to nine (9) years of
## Page 611
266 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
imprisonment. They explain that under this sentence, he was supposed to serve one year and six months in prison, and the punishment was suspended for three years, and served community service (TIG) for the remaining four years and six months. However, he was released on 05 September 2007 after having served ten (10) years in prison and was unconditionally released as someone who had served his full sentence, without consideration of the reductions granted to him as a person who confessed, pleaded guilty, and asked for forgiveness which had been accepted.
They state that on 12 March 2008, Nzabonitegeka Gabriel, based on the provisions of article 76, paragraph 4 of the Organic Law Governing Gacaca Courts of 01/03/2007, wrote to the Executive Secretary of Gacaca Courts in the country requesting for being granted the rights provided in that article mentioned above in order to benefit from the opportunity to apply for a teaching job, given that the article allowed him as a person who was convicted of the crime of genocide against the Tutsi classified in the second category, which states that he is allowed to engage in other work other than political activities.
He states that based on the provisions of that Organic Law governing the Gacaca Courts, Nzabonitegeka Gabriel, after completing University studies which he had started before imprisonment and then resumed from 2012 to 2014 at Kabare University, where he obtained Advanced Diploma (A1) in languages, continued his studies at Mount Kenya University Rwanda, where he earned a Bachelor’s degree (A0) in Education specializing in teaching English and Kiswahili. He is currently employed as a teacher in Ruhango District, at GS Rwinyana in Bweramana Sector, from March 2022 to date.
They state that, in order to further uphold his commitment while admitting the crime and sought
## Page 612
267 PROSECUTION v. NZABONITEGEKA
forgiveness to date, Nzabonitegeka Gabriel is now part of Rwandan society, where he, like other Rwandans, tries to contribute to nation-building, he requests for rehabilitation resulting from the crime for which he was convicted, as of now he has completed 16 years since his sentence served and has made efforts to live peacefully with other Rwandans he found in society after his release.
The Prosecution states that, based on Law n0 027/2019 of 19/09/2019 relating to the criminal procedure, as amended by Law n0 058/2023 of 04/12/2023, in its article 246, it is clear that Nzabonitegeka Gabriel served a sentence imposed on him by Gacaca Court and that the five-year period required before applying for rehabilitation had elapsed (from 29/08/2007 to 28/08/2012). Therefore, Nzabonitegeka Gabriel falls under article 246 paragraph one and two of the aforementioned law.
It further states that, based on an investigation conducted where Nzabonitegeka Gabriel resides, it was found that he is not known for any misconduct, he participates in government programs, and that he maintains good relationship with local authorities and residents, as indicated in the report of 08/01/2024 issued by Kamutora Cell, Rushaki Sector, as well as in the testimony provided by Nyirantashya Marie Gaudence on 07January 2024. The Prosecution concludes that Nzabonitegeka Gabriel has demonstrated good conduct since his conviction by the court.
However, it states that the Prosecution requests the Court not to grant Nzabonitegeka Gabriel the rehabilitation he is seeking for, based on the gravity of the crime of genocide for which he was convicted. The Prosecution considers it to be an extremely serious and heinous crime, such that a person convicted of it should not be granted rehabilitation.
## Page 613
268 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
It states that the seriousness of the crime for which the convicted person was found guilty is one of the factors to be considered in granting or denying rehabilitation, as upheld by the legal scholar Jean Pradel. In his book, he wrote : « …La loi ne donnant aucune indication sur la motivation de l’arrêt, la jurisprudence a été amenée à préciser que les juges du fond devraient s’attacher à la fois à la gravité objective des faits et à la conduite ultérieure du condamné ».
It states that one of the cases referred by Jean Pradel1 in the aforementioned book is the case Crim., 20 Février 1973, pourvoi n0 72-91.270, Bulletin criminel 1973 n0 84 (cassation), in which the French Court of Cassation upheld the decision of the Court of Appeal, which had based its refusal to grant rehabilitation on the seriousness of the crimes2.
It further states that in the case Crim., 12 February 1963, pourvoi n0 62-90.725, Bulletin criminel 1963, n0 72 (cassation), the French Court of Cassation held that, in examining a petition for rehabilitation, the Criminal Chamber of the Paris Court of Appeal could take into account the seriousness of the acts that led to the applicant’s conviction. However, the Court also emphasized that the
1 Jean PRADEL, Droit pénal général, 22eme Edition, Editions Cujas, Paris 2019, p.794. 2 “Attendu que la gravité des faits commits par X ainsi que leurs conséquences et le retentissement que ses agissements frauduleux avaient eu dans l'opinion publique en Gironde, département où il reside toujours, constituent des éléments de fait dont les juges de la chambre d'accusation avaient le droit de tenir compte, en même temps que des gages d'amendement que X... pouvait donner, dans l'examen de la demande dont ils étaient saisis; que cette appréciation est souveraine et échappe au contrôle de la Cour de cassation; d'où il suit que le moyen ne saurait être accueilli; et attendu que l'arrêt est regulier en la forme”.
## Page 614
269 PROSECUTION v. NZABONITEGEKA
Chamber should not consider only that aspect, but also assess the applicant’s conduct after being granted pardon3.
In the case Crim., 7 January 2020, pourvoi n0 19- 80.839, Bulletin criminel 2020, n0 1 (cassation), p. 1155, the French Court of Cassation also held that the Court of Appeal should not consider only the seriousness of the offenses for which the applicant was convicted in order to deny rehabilitation, but must also assess the applicant’s conduct after serving the sentence imposed. This means that the gravity of the offenses for which the applicant was convicted is indeed a factor to be taken into account in making the decision. This also has been upheld in other cases, such as Crim., 10 December 1975, pourvoi n0 74-91.203, Bulletin criminel 1975, n0 75 (cassation), and Crim., 16 October 1974, pourvoi n0 73-91.238, Bulletin criminel 1974, n0 295 (cassation).
It states that, therefore, while examining an application for rehabilitation, the seriousness of the crimes or crime for which the applicant was convicted are considered as one of the key factors in granting or denying rehabilitation, Nzabonitegeka Gabriel should not be granted the rehabilitation he is requesting due to the gravity of the crime of genocide for which he was convicted.
3Attendu, en effet, que la rehabilitation est une mesure de bienveillance instituée par la loi en faveur des individus qui, après avoir été condamnés et avoir subi leur peine ou avoir satisfait aux conditions du décrêt de grace qui les en a dispensés, se sont rendus dignes, par les gages d'amendement qu'ils ont donnés pendant le délai d'epreuve, d'être replacés dans l'integralité de leur état ancien; que si, pour apprécier ces gages d'amendement, la chambre d'accusation peut tenir compte des faits qui ont motivé la condemnation et de leur gravité, ladite chambre ne saurait, pour rejeter la demande en rehabilitation, se fonder uniquement sur ces faits et s'abstenir d'examiner la conduite du condamné pendant le délai prévu par les articles 786 et suivants du code de procédure pénale
## Page 615
270 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
The Counsel for Nzabonitegeka Gabriel argues that these foreign cases should not be used as a basis to deny his client’s rehabilitation, since article 245 of the law governing criminal procedure does not exclude any convicted person from eligibility, and the Law governing Gacaca under which he was convicted provided that he was entitled to the same rights as other Rwandan citizens. DETERMINATION OF THE COURT
Article 245 and 246 of Law n0 027/2019 of 19/09/2019 relating to the criminal procedure provide that any person sentenced to a penalty can be rehabilitated. Rehabilitation can be granted after five (5) years if during that time a convicted person has continuously and effectively demonstrated good behaviour. Such time runs from: 1° the date the conviction becomes final for a person sentenced to a fine or to community service; 2° from the date of final release or that of release on parole that has not been revoked for the one sentenced to imprisonment. For recidivists and convicted persons whose penalty is extinguished by prescription, such time is ten (10) years from the date of release or from the start of the limitation period for the enforcement of penalties. Article 252 provides that rehabilitation extinguishes a penalty and all its consequences.
The Court finds that although article 245 mentioned above provides that any convicted person may be granted rehabilitation, and Article 252 stipulates that rehabilitation extinguishes a penalty and all its consequences, the crime of genocide is imprescriptible, as provided under article 185 of Law n0 027/2019 of 19/09/2019 relating to criminal procedure.
## Page 616
271 PROSECUTION v. NZABONITEGEKA
Article 15, paragraph 1, subparagraphs (a) and (b), of Organic Law n0 10/2007 of 01/03/2007 modifying and complementing Organic Law n°16/2004 of 19/6/2004 establishing the organisation, competence and functioning of Gacaca Courts charged with prosecuting and trying the perpetrators of the crime of genocide and other crimes against humanity, committed between October 1, 1990 and December 31, 1994 as modified and complemented as follows:“Persons convicted of the crime of genocide or crimes against humanity are liable to deprivation of their civil rights in the following manner: 1° persons falling within the 1st and 2nd category are liable to deprivation of the right: a. to be elected ; b. to become leaders, to serve in the armed forces, to serve in the National Police and other security organs, to be a teacher, a medical staff, magistrates, public prosecutors and judicial counsels; subparagraph 4 of this article provides that persons in the second category items 1°, 2° and 3° whose confessions have been accepted and those in items 4°, 5° and 6° are deprived of those rights only for the duration of the sentence given by the competent Court.
It finds that under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, which was approved by Decree Law n0 8/75 of 6 February 1975, adopted by United Nations General Assembly Resolution 260 (III) A on 9 December 1948, and entered into force on 12 January 1951 as provided under article XIII, its first article states that the signatory countries agree that genocide, whether committed in times of peace or in times of war, is a crime under international law and commit themselves to prevent and punish it. Rwanda, as the Contracting Parties confirm that genocide, whether committed in time of peace or in time of war, is a crime under international law which they undertake to prevent and to punish.
## Page 617
272 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
It finds that the crime of genocide is imprescriptible, as provided under article 185 of Law n0 027/2019 of 19/09/2019 relating to criminal procedure, and that in the Preamble of the Constitution of the Republic of Rwanda of 2003, as revised in 2015, provides that Rwandans must remember the Genocide committed against Tutsi, which decimated the lives of over one million Rwandans.
It also finds that there are some positions that cannot be held by persons convicted of the crime of the Genocide committed against Tutsi, such as being a public servant, a teacher, a counsel, and others.
Being a public servant, article 9 of Law n0 017/2020 of 07/10/2020 establishing the general statute governing public servants sets out the requirements for entering in the public service. Paragraph 7 of that article provides that a person wishes to be integrated in public service not to have been definitively sentenced for the crime of genocide or genocide ideology and other related offences.
Regarding the teaching profession, article 97, paragraph 6º of Presidential Order n0 064/01 of 16/03/2020 establishing special statutes governing teachers in nursery, primary, secondary and technical and vocational schools provides that a teacher is sanctioned by dismissal if he or she is definitively sentenced by a court for the crime of genocide or genocide ideology.
Regarding the legal profession, article 6, subparagraph 6º of Law n0 83/2013 of 11/09/2013 establishing the Bar Association in Rwanda and determining its organization and functioning provides that nobody can practice the profession of Advocate nor other related duties without fulfilling some requirements, including not to have been convicted for the crime of genocide ideology and related offences.
## Page 618
273 PROSECUTION v. NZABONITEGEKA
All the above mentioned by the Court, demonstrate how the crime of genocide has been given gravity under Rwandan law as it is actually a heinous crime that is imprescriptible along with penalties, and it must never be forgotten in the history of the Rwandans. That is why the remembrance of the genocide is a legal obligation to prevent its recurrence. The court finds that if it must be remembered, the penalties imposed on convicted persons must not be removed by rehabilitation.
These provisions stipulate that a convicted person of the crime of genocide must not be integrated in public service, teaching profession, or practice as a liberal profession like legal Counsel. A legislator who enacted these laws, this Organic Law n0 10/2007 of 01/03/2007 modifying and complementing Organic Law n°16/2004 of 19/6/2004 establishing the organisation, competence and functioning of Gacaca Courts (…) existed. A Legislator was aware of the existence of a procedure for application for rehabilitation, which removes the penalty and its consequences. However, even if rehabilitation was granted in accordance with article 246 of the above-mentioned law relating to criminal procedure, and the person was appointed, once it is discovered, they are dismissed (whether in teaching or any other public service position). This emphasizes the gravity and seriousness of the crime of genocide, which lead to the penalties imposed for this crime not be removed.
The Court finds that the cases rendered by the Court of Cassation in France, which the Prosecution presented in its submission, indicate that in cases concerning application for rehabilitation, the seriousness of the crime committed must also be taken into account. Further more with the legal framework applied in Rwanda, rehabilitation is granted for all crimes, but when it comes to the crime of genocide, even
## Page 619
274 RWANDA LAW REPORTS
if rehabilitation is granted, it does nothing with the applicants to some types of employment. Therefore, nothing can prevent from the analysis of the seriousness of the crime for which the applicant was convicted.
The aforementioned, although Nzabonitegeka Gabriel demonstrated good conduct after his release, due to the gravity of the crime of genocide for which he was convicted, the rehabilitation he is requesting should not be granted. III. DECISION OF THE COURT
Declares Nzabonitegeka Gabriel’s claim unfounded.
Declares Nzabonitegeka Gabriel not rehabilitated for the crime of genocide for which he was convicted.
Orders that 40.000 frw Nzabonitegeka Gabriel deposited while filing the claim goes to Public Treasure.