RLR-V.3-2017

# RLR-V.3-2017

- Source: Amategeko - Section: Rwanda law reports - Date: 2017-07-03 - Collection: Supreme Court

## Text

## Page 1

REPUBLIC OF RWANDA SUPREME COURT P.o. Box. 2197 KIGALI www.judiciary.gov.rw

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO Icyegeranyo V. 3 - 2017 Nyakanga, 2017 Law Report, V. 3 - 2017 July, 2017 RWANDA LAW REPORTS

## Page 2

REPUBLIC OF RWANDA SUPREME COURT Po. Box. 2197 KIGALI www.judiciary.gov.rw

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO Icyegeranyo V. 3 - 2017 Nyakanga, 2017 Law Report , V. 3 - 2017 July, 2017 RWANDA LAW REPORTS

## Page 4

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO IKINYARWANDA

## Page 6

ISHAKIRO

ABAGIZE KOMITE Y‟UBWANDITSI ...................................iii IRIBURIRO .............................................................................. vii IBIKUBIYE MURI IKI CYEGERANYO...............................viii INYITO ....................................................................................viii AMATEGEKO YASHINGIWEHO .......................................... ix IMANZA ZIFASHISHIJWE ..................................................... xi AMAGAMBO MPINE ............................................................xiii MUKARUSHAKIRO N‟ABANDI v. GAHIRE ........................ 1 MULINDAHABI v. ENERGY, WATER AND SANITATION AUTHORITY (EWSA) Ltd ...................................................... 17 NSHUNGUYINKA v. RWANDA SOCIAL SECURITY BOARD (RSSB) ....................................................................... 43 KANYANJA N‟ABANDI v. MUKANTABANA N‟ABANDI ................................................................................................... 57 MUJAWIMANA N‟ABANDI v. BANKI YA KIGALI Ltd (BK) .......................................................................................... 85 RUBARE v. IKIGO CY‟IMISORO N‟AMAHORO (RRA) . 105 UBUSHINJACYAHA v. GATARE ....................................... 119

i

## Page 8

ABAGIZE KOMITE Y’UBWANDITSI

ITSINDA RY’ABANYAMATEGEKO BATEGUYE IMANZA

KAGABO U. Stephanie

MUJABI K. Naphtal

MWIHOREZE Claudine

NTIHEMUKA Emmanuel

UWIMANA Gisèle

iii

## Page 9

KOMITE YEMEZA IMANZA

MUGENZI Louis Marie : Perezida wa Komite Umucamanza mu Rukiko rw‟Ikirenga

Dr. MUHIRE G. Yves : Visi Perezida wa Komite Umwalimu muri Kaminuza y‟u Rwanda

RUTAZANA Angeline : Umwanditsi wa Komite Umugenzuzi w‟Inkiko

BAGABO Faustin : Avoka mu Rugaga rw’Abavoka

BWIZA N. Blanche : Umugenzuzi w’Inkiko

DUSHIMINAMA Claudine : Umushinjacyaha ku rwego Rw’Igihugu

GIRANEZA Clémentine : Umucamanza mu Rukiko rw’Ibanze

HABARUREMA Jean Pierre : Umushinjacyaha ku Rwego rw’Igihugu

KALIWABO Charles : Perezida w’Urukiko Rukuru iv

## Page 10

Me KAYIHURA Didas : Avoka mu Rugaga rw’Abavoka

KIBUKA Jean Luc : Umucamanza mu Rukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi

MUREREREHE Saouda : Umucamanza mu Rukiko Rukuru

Prof. Dr. NGAGI M. Alphonse : Umucamanza mu Rukiko rw‟Ikirenga

RUBANGO K. Epimaque : Intumwa ya Leta

RUKUNDAKUVUGA F. Regis : Umugenzuzi Mukuru w’Inkiko UWANTEGE Yvette : Umucamanza mu Rukiko Rwisumbuye

v KOMITE YEMEZA IMANZA

## Page 12

IRIBURIRO Basomyi bacu, Tunejejwe no kubagezaho Icyegeranyo cy‟Ibyemezo by‟Inkiko V.III [2017] gisohoka buri gihembwe. Abanyamategeko mu nzego zitandukanye bakenera ibyemezo by‟Inkiko kugira ngo babyifashishe mu kazi kabo ka buri munsi. Ku bw‟ibyo, Icyegeranyo cy‟Ibyemezo by‟Inkiko gikoze mu buryo bworohereza abagikoresha kubona ibyo bashakamo. Icyakora, igitekerezo icyo aricyo cyose kigamije kurushaho kunoza imyandikire yacyo cyadushimisha kandi cyakwitabwaho. Muri iyi nomero murasangamo imanza zirindwi (7) zikubiyemo: ebyiri (2) z‟imbonezamubano, ebyiri (2) z‟ubutegetsi, ebyiri (2) z‟ubucuruzi, n‟urubanza rumwe (1) nshinjabyaha. Tuboneyeho no kubibutsa ko imanza ziri muri iki cyegeranyo ziboneka no ku rubuga rwa murandasi rw‟Urukiko rw‟Ikirenga ruborohereza kubona urubanza mukeneye mu buryo bwihuse, kuri http://decisia.lexum.com/rlr/kn/nav.do. Prof. Sam RUGEGE Perezida w‟Urukiko rw‟Ikirenga Perezida w‟Inama Nkuru y‟Ubucamanza

vii

## Page 13

IBIKUBIYE MURI IKI CYEGERANYO Iki cyegeranyo gikubiyemo imanza zaciwe n‟Urukiko rw‟Ikirenga zikoreshwa hakurikijwe inyito ivugwa hasi.

INYITO Imanza ziri muri iyi volime zikoreshwa muri ubu buryo: [2017] 3 RLR

viii

## Page 14

AMATEGEKO YASHINGIWEHO Itegeko Nshinga rya Repubulika y’u Rwanda ryo kuwa 04/06/2003 nk’uko ryavuguruwe kugeza ubu, ingingo ya 1 n’iya 33...............................................................................................46 Itegeko Ngenga No03/2012/OL ryo ku wa 13/06/2012 rigena imiterere, imikorere n’ububasha by’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga, ingingo ya 28 agace ka 2.............................................................5 Itegeko Ngenga N°01/2012/OL ryo kuwa 02/05/2012 rishyiraho igitabo cy’amategeko ahana, ingingo ya 71 iya 82 iya 140 n’iya 145...........................................................................................124 Itegeko Ngenga N°51/2008 ryo ku wa 09/09/2008 rigena imiterere, imikorere n’ububasha by’Inkiko nk’uko ryahinduwe kandi ryujujwe kugeza ubu, ingingo ya 171...............................................................20 ingingo ya 93.................................................................46 Itegeko Nº37/2012 ryo kuwa 09/11/2012 rishyiraho umusoro ku nyongeragaciro, ingingo ya 10...............................................106 Itegeko No21/2012 ryo ku wa 14/06/2012 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi, ingingo ya 154, igika cya 2 n’icya 3...............................5 ingingo ya 148 n’iya 186...............................................20 ingingo ya 9(2) n’iya 168..............................................60 Itegeko Nº45/2011 ryo kuwa 25/11/2011 rigenga amasezerano, ingingo ya 64 n’iya 65...............................................................88 Itegeko Nº12/2007 ryo kuwa 27/03/2007 rigenga amasoko ya Leta, ingingo ya 20, iya 86(2) n’iya 89...................................106 ix

## Page 15

Itegeko N°15/2004 ryerekeye ibimenyetso mu manza n’itangwa ryabyo, ingingo ya 119............................................................124 Itegeko ryo kuwa 30/07/1888 rigenga amasezerano cyangwa imirimo nshinganwa, ingingo ya 258...............................................................60 ingingo ya 33, iya 34 n’iya 258.....................................88 Itegeko Ngenga N°08/2005 ryo kuwa 14/07/2005 rigena imikoreshereze n’imicungire y’ubutaka mu Rwanda, ingingo ya 35 n’iya 38.................................................................................87 Itegeko Nº22/2002 ryo kuwa 09/07/2002 rishyiraho Sitati Rusange igenga Abakozi ba Leta n’Inzego z’Imirimo ya Leta, ingingo ya 29.............................................................................46 Itegeko Nº06/2001 ryo kuwa 20/01/2001 rishyiraho umusoro ku nyongeragaciro, ingingo ya 20...............................................106 Itegeko N°22/99 ryo kuwa 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 46 iya 56 n’iya 91........................................60 ingingo ya 21 n’iya 35...................................................88 Itegeko-Teka N°21/77 ryo kuwa 18 Kanama 1977 rishyiraho igitabo cy’amategeko ahana ibyaha, ingingo ya 312..............124

x ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO

## Page 16

IMANZA ZIFASHISHIJWE Rwigema v. ECOBANK, RCOM0001/07/CS rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga kuwa 24/07/2008...................................................88 RRA v. Misigaro, RCOMA0074/11/CS rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga kuwa 11/04/2014…………………………………...107

xi

## Page 18

AMAGAMBO MPINE Amategeko agena ububasha bw’Inkiko – Ububasha bw‟Urukiko rw‟Ikirenga – Ububasha mu rwego rw‟ubujurire – Impamvu z‟ubujurire – Itegeko ritariho – Kwibeshya mu myandikire ku nyito y‟Itegeko ntibyafatwa nko gukoresha itegeko ritigeze ribaho cyangwa se ryabayeho nyuma rikavanwaho mu gihe bigaragara ko ibirikubiyemo bihura n‟ibiteganyijwe mu Itegeko ryagombaga gukoreshwa. MUKARUSHAKIRO N’ABANDI v. GAHIRE............1 Ububasha bw‟Urukiko rw‟Ikirenga – Inzitizi y‟iburabubasha – Mu gihe urugero rw‟indishyi zagenwe mu rubanza zirenze umubare w‟izigenwa n‟itegeko kugirango ubujurire bwa kabiri bwakirwe, ubujurire burakirwa – Itegeko Ngenga No03/2012/OL ryo ku wa 13/06/2012 rigena imiterere, imikorere n‟ububasha by‟Urukiko rw‟Ikirenga, ingingo ya 28 agace ka 2. MUKARUSHAKIRO N’ABANDI v. GAHIRE............1 Amategeko agenga ibimenyetso – Inshingano yo gutanga ibimenyetso – Uvuga ko icyo yategekwaga gukora cyagaragajwe n‟ibimenyetso atagitegetswe kugikora, agomba kugaragaza impamvu zakimukuyeho – Itegeko Nº21/2012 ryo kuwa 14/06/2012 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y‟imanza z‟imbonezamubano, iz‟ubucuruzi, iz‟umurimo n‟iz‟ubutegetsi, ingingo ya 9(2). KANYANJA N’ABANDI v. MUKANTABANA N’ABANDI......................................................................57 Amategeko agenga imanza z’ubutegetsi – Kurahira ku mukozi ugengwa na sitati rusange y‟abakozi ba Leta – Mu xiii

## Page 19

gihe umukozi yirukanywe bitewe no kwanga kurahira, ntibifatwa nk‟ikosa ry‟akazi ku buryo mbere yo kumusezerera umukoresha yagomba kubanza kugisha inama Komisiyo y‟Abakozi ba Leta, kuko indahiro ariyo igomba gushingirwaho kugirango afatwe mu buryo bwuzuye nk‟umukozi wa Leta ugengwa na Sitati –Itegeko Nº22/2002 ryo kuwa 09/07/2002 rishyiraho Sitati Rusange igenga Abakozi ba Leta n‟Inzego z‟Imirimo ya Leta, ingingo ya 29. NSHUNGUYINKA v. RWANDA SOCIAL SECURITY BOARD (RSSB)........................................43 Imyemerere– Nta wakwitaza uburenganzira bwo guhitamo imyemerere imunogeye ngo abangamire amategeko n‟amabwiriza y‟Igihugu – Itegeko Nshinga rya Repubulika y‟u Rwanda ryo kuwa 04/06/2003 nkuko ryavuguruwe kugeza ubu,ingingo ya 33. NSHUNGUYINKA v. RWANDA SOCIAL SECURITY BOARD (RSSB)........................................43 Amategeko agenga imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano – Gukosoza urubanza – Ubujurire – Ibihe by‟ubujurire – Kuba Itegeko ryarateganyije ko ubujurire ku rubanza rusobanura cyangwa rukosora urundi bukorerwa rimwe n‟urubanza rwasabiwe gukosorwa, ntibyumvikana nk‟uburenganzira bwahabwa uwabuze kujuririra igihe urubanza rw‟ibanze, ngo bumubere icyuho cyo kurujuririra nyuma y‟ibihe biteganywa n‟itegeko – Itegeko No21/2012 ryo ku wa 14/06/2012 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y‟imanza z‟imbonezamubano, iz‟ubucuruzi, iz‟umurimo n‟iz‟ubutegetsi, ingingo ya 154, igika cya 2 n‟icya 3. MUKARUSHAKIRO N’ABANDI v. GAHIRE............1 xiv ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO

## Page 20

Ubujurire – Ikirego gishya – Ikirego gishya nticyakirwa ku rwego rw‟ubujurire – Itegeko Nº21/2012 ryo kuwa 14/06/2012 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y‟imanza z‟imbonezamubano, iz‟ubucuruzi, iz‟umurimo n‟iz‟ubutegetsi, ingingo ya 168. KANYANJA N’ABANDI v. MUKANTABANA N’ABANDI......................................................................57 Amategeko agenga imiburanishirije y’imanza z’ubutegetsi – Gusubirishamo urubanza ingingo nshya – Ikimenyetso gishya cya kamarampaka – Ikimenyetso umuburanyi yari asanzwe afite cyangwa azi kuva urubanza rutaracibwa mu rwego rwa mbere kugeza ruciwe ku rwego rw‟ubujurire nticyafatwa nk‟ikimenyetso gishya cya kamarampaka cyabonetse nyuma y‟icibwa ry‟urubanza ku buryo cyashingirwaho mu gusubirishamo urubanza ingingo nshya – Itegeko N°21/2012 ryo kuwa 14/06/2012 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y‟imanza z‟imbonezamubano, iz‟ubucuruzi, iz‟umurimo n‟iz‟ubutegetsi, ingingo ya 186. MULINDAHABI v. ENERGY, WATER AND SANITATION AUTHORITY (EWSA) Ltd................17 Gusubirishamo urubanza ingingo nshya – Isomwa ry‟urubanza – Uburiganya – Kuba mu isomwa ry‟urubanza hari abacamanza mu baruciye batabonetse ntibyafatwa nk‟uburiganya – Itegeko N°21/2012 ryo kuwa 14/06/2012 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y‟imanza z‟imbonezamubano, iz‟ubucuruzi, iz‟umurimo n‟iz‟ubutegetsi, ingingo ya 148. MULINDAHABI v. ENERGY, WATER AND SANITATION AUTHORITY (EWSA) Ltd................17 Guhindura ikirego ku rwego rw‟ubujurire – Ihinduka ry‟ikigo mu gihe cy‟urubanza – Ntibifatwa nko guhindura xv AMAGAMBO MPINE

## Page 21

ikirego, iyo ikigo cyarezwe ku rwego rwa mbere gihindutse ku rwego rw‟ubujurire hagahamagazwa icya gisimbuye. NSHUNGUYINKA v. RWANDA SOCIAL SECURITY BOARD (RSSB)........................................43 Amategeko agenga umuryango – Irage – Isangiramutungo – Gusohoka mu isangiramutungo – Uwarazwe umutungo agomba kugira uburenganzira busesuye bwo gusohoka mu isangiramutungo – Itegeko N°22/99 ryo kuwa 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 46 iya 56 n‟iya 91. KANYANJA N’ABANDI v. MUKANTABANA N’ABANDI......................................................................57 Amategeko agenga umusoro – Umusoro ku nyongeragaciro – Imenyekanisha ry‟umusoro ku nyongeragaciro – Amafaranga ahabwa uwatsindiye isoko rya Leta mu buryo bwo kumufasha gutangira imirimo ntiyafatwa nk‟ubwishyu cyangwa ngo igihe yatangiwe abe aricyo giherwaho nk‟igihe umusoro wagombaga kumenyekanishirizwa – Itegeko Nº37/2012 ryo kuwa 09/11/2012 rishyiraho umusoro ku nyongeragaciro, ingingo ya 10 – Itegeko Nº12/2007 ryo kuwa 27/03/2007 rigenga amasoko ya Leta, ingingo ya 20, iya 86 igika cya kabiri n‟iya 8 – Itegeko Nº06/2001 ryo kuwa 20/01/2001 rishyiraho umusoro ku nyongeragaciro, ingingo ya 20. RUBARE v. IKIGO CY’IMISORO N’AMAHORO (RRA)............................................................................105 Amategeko Mpanabyaha – Ubwicanyi – Ibimenyetso bicukumbuye – Mu manza nshinjabyaha, ibimenyetso xvi ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO

## Page 22

bishingira ku mpamvu zose z‟ibyabaye – Uregwa ashobora guhamwa n‟icyaha hashingiwe ku bimenyetso byasesenguwe mu bushishozi bw‟urukiko – Itegeko N°15/2004 ryerekeye ibimenyetso mu manza n‟itangwa ryabyo, ingingo ya 119. UBUSHINJACYAHA v. GATARE............................119 Indishyi – Igenwa ry‟indishyi mbonezamusaruro – Indishyi mbonezamusaruro ntizigenwa mu bushishozi bw‟Urukiko igihe zigizwe n‟umubare ushobora kubarwa. KANYANJA N’ABANDI v. MUKANTABANA N’ABANDI......................................................................57 Ingwate – Umutungo utimukanwa – Agaciro k‟amasezerano y‟ingwate – Kwandikisha ingwate –Amasezerano y‟ingwate agira agaciro hagati y‟abayagiranye iyo yubahirije amategeko, n‟iyo ingwate zatanzwe zitandikishijwe mu bitabo byabugenewe – Itegeko ryo kuwa 30/07/1888 ryerekeye amasezerano cyangwa imirimo nshinganwa, ingingo ya 33 n‟iya 34. MUJAWIMANA N’ABANDI v. BANKI YA KIGALI Ltd (BK)..........................................................................85 Gusesa amasezerano y‟ingwate – Kuba mu masezerano y‟umwenda utangwa hatanzwe ingwate hakaba nta na hamwe abafite uburenganzira kuruwo mutungo bemeye ko izo ngwate zitangwa, byerekana ko izo ngwate zatanzwe mu buryo bunyuranyije n‟amategeko – Itegeko Ngenga N°08/2005 14/07/2005 rigena imikoreshereze n‟imicungire y‟ubutaka mu Rwanda, ingingo ya 35 – Itegeko Nº22/99 ryo kuwa 12/11/1999 ryuzuza igitabo cya mbere cy‟urwunge rw‟amategeko mbonezamubano kandi rishyiraho igice cya gatanu cyerekeye imicungire xvii AMAGAMBO MPINE

## Page 23

y‟umutungo w‟abashyingiranwe, impano n‟izungura, ingingo ya 21 n‟iya 35. MUJAWIMANA N’ABANDI v. BANKI YA KIGALI Ltd (BK)..........................................................................85

xviii ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO

## Page 24

IMANZA ZEREKEYE IMIBURANISHIRIZE Y’IMANZA

## Page 26

IMANZA ZEREKEYE IMIBURANISHIRIZE Y’IMANZA Z’IMBONEZAMUBANO, IZ’UBUCURUZI, IZ’UMURIMO N’IZ’UBUTEGETSI

## Page 28

MUKARUSHAKIRO N’ABANDI v. GAHIRE [Rwanda URUKIKO RW‟IKIRENGA – RCAA0002/15/CS (Mugenzi, P.J., Gatete na Munyangeri, J.) 20 Mutarama 2017] Amategeko agena ububasha bw’Inkiko – Ububasha bw’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga – Ububasha mu rwego rw’ubujurire – Impamvu z’ubujurire – Itegeko ritariho – Kwibeshya mu myandikire ku nyito y’Itegeko ntibyafatwa nko gukoresha itegeko ritigeze ribaho cyangwa se ryabayeho nyuma rikavanwaho mu gihe bigaragara ko ibirikubiyemo bihura n’ibiteganyijwe mu Itegeko ryagombaga gukoreshwa. Amategeko agena ububasha bw’Inkiko – Ububasha bw’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga – Inzitizi y’iburabubasha – Mu gihe urugero rw’indishyi zagenwe mu rubanza zirenze umubare w’izigenwa n’itegeko kugirango ubujurire bwa kabiri bwakirwe, ubujurire burakirwa – Itegeko Ngenga No03/2012/OL ryo ku wa 13/06/2012 rigena imiterere, imikorere n’ububasha by’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga, ingingo ya 28 agace ka 2. Amategeko agenga imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano – Gukosoza urubanza – Ubujurire – Ibihe by’ubujurire – Kuba Itegeko ryarateganyije ko ubujurire ku rubanza rusobanura cyangwa rukosora urundi bukorerwa rimwe n’urubanza rwasabiwe gukosorwa, ntibyumvikana nk’uburenganzira bwahabwa uwabuze kujuririra igihe urubanza rw’ibanze, ngo bumubere icyuho cyo kurujuririra nyuma y’ibihe biteganywa n’itegeko – Itegeko No21/2012 ryo ku wa 14/06/2012 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza 1

## Page 29

z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi, ingingo ya 154, igika cya 2 n’icya 3. Incamake y’ikibazo: Abazungura ba Bagenzi Jean, aribo Bagenzi Théogène, Mukarushakiro Gloriose na Mukangenzi Céline bareze Gahire kuba yarabahuguje inzu basigiwe na se. Gahire we avuga ko yayiguze n‟umwe mu bazungura nawe witwa Bagenzi agejeje ku myaka y‟ubukure ndetse na nyina Mukarushakiro akaba yarabaye umutangabuhamya muri ayo masezerano. Urukiko Rwisumbuye rwa Nyarugenge rwatesheje agaciro amasezerano y‟ubugure yo ku wa 5/11/1996 n‟ayo ku wa 4/11/1997, hagati ya Bagenzi na Gahire kubera ko igihe yakorewe, Bagenzi atari yakagize ubushobozi bwo gukora amasezerano, maze rutegeka abazungura ba Bagenzi Jean kwishyura Gahire 191.713.088Frw, akayahabwa mbere y‟uko atanga inzu kubera ko yaguze nta buryarya kuko Bagenzi agurisha ku wa 05/11/1996, yari kumwe n‟abavandimwe be, naho amasezerano yo ku wa 4/11/1997 akaba yarakozwe Bagenzi amaze kugira imyaka y‟ubukure. Mukarushakiro, Bagenzi na Mukangenzi bajuririye Urukiko Rukuru, bavuga ko urukiko rwategetse Bagenzi kwishyura ibyakozwe kandi ko Gahire yaguze nta buryarya nyamara rwaremeje ko yakoze amasezerano y‟ubugure ari umwana, anakagurisha ibitari ibye. Bavuga kandi ko Urukiko rwashingiye ku buhamya bw‟umuhanga “expertise” hadakozwe inyandiko y‟undi muhanga ngo zigereranywe mu rwego rw‟ivuguruzanya “contre expertise”. Gahire nawe yajuriye avuga ko Urukiko Rwisumbuye rwatesheje agaciro amasezerano y‟ubugure kandi atari cyo cyaregewe, ko rwirengagije ko Bagenzi yagurishije afite imyaka ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 2

## Page 30

y‟ubukure, kandi ko urwo Rukiko ntacyo rwavuze ku nzitizi zari zatanzwe. Urukiko Rukuru rwemeje ko ubujurire bwa Mukarushakiro, Bagenzi na Mukangenzi nta shingiro bufite, ariko ko ubwatanzwe na Gahire bufite ishingiro, bityo ko amasezerano y‟ubugure agumyeho. Mukarushakiro na Bagenzi bajuririye iki cyemezo mu Rukiko rw‟Ikirenga ku mpamvu zimwe n‟izo bashingiyeho ubujurire bwabo mu Rukiko Rwisumbuye, icyakora Mukarushakiro we yongeraho ko mu guca urubanza rujuririrwa, Urukiko rwashingiye ku itegeko ritariho. Nyuma y‟aho ibirego by‟ubujurire bitangiwe, Mukangenzi yatanze ikirego cyo gukosoza urubanza mu Rukiko Rukuru, avuga ko atagaragajwe mu baburanyi nk‟uwajuriye. Mu rubanza RCA0039/2016/HC/KIG rwo ku wa 09/11/2016 rukosora urundi, hemejwe ko ikirego cye nta shingiro gifite kuko nta kosa ryakozwe rihari rikwiye gukosorwa. Nyuma y‟icyo cyemezo ku kirego gikosoza urubanza rw‟Urukiko Rukuru, Mukangenzi nawe yajuririye Urukiko rw‟Ikirenga, avuga ko Urukiko Rukuru rwivuguruje rukanitiranya ibintu kandi ko rwashingiye ku manza zo mu mahanga zivuguruza amategeko y‟u Rwanda ku byerekeranye n‟uwakoze amasezerano ataragira imyaka y‟ubukure. Avuga kandi ko rwakoresheje nabi ingingo ya 159 y‟Itegeko rigenga amasezerano ku byerekeranye n‟igihe ntarengwa cyo gukurikirana no gufata amasezerano yakozwe n‟umuntu udafite imyaka y‟ubukure nk‟aho yemewe, rubiheraho rutwerera Gahire ukutagira uburyarya. Gahire yatanze inzitizi y‟iburabubasha ry‟Urukiko rw‟Ikirenga avuga ko ubujurire bwa Mukarushakiro n‟ubwa Bagenzi mu MUKARUSHAKIRO N’ABANDI v. GAHIRE 3

## Page 31

Rukiko rw‟Ikirenga ari ubwo ku rwego rwa kabiri, nyamara bakaba batagaragaza ko ubwo bujurire bwujuje ibisabwa n‟itegeko, kugira ngo bube mu bubasha bw‟Urukiko rw‟Ikirenga. Yanatanze kandi inzitizi yo kutakira ubujurire bwa Mukangenzi avuga ko yifashishije inzira yo gukosoza urubanza nk‟amayeri kugirango abone uko ajurira mu gihe nyamara igihe cy‟ubujurire gisanzwe cyari cyamaze kurenga. Incamake y’icyemezo: 1. Kwibeshya mu myandikire ku nyito y‟Itegeko ntibyafatwa nko gukoresha itegeko ritigeze ribaho cyangwa se ryabayeho nyuma rikavanwaho mu gihe bigaragara ko ibirikubiyemo bihura n‟ibiteganyijwe mu Itegeko ryagombaga gukoreshwa, bityo ingingo y‟ubujurire ijyanye no kuba umucamanza ataravuze inyito y‟Itegeko, n‟itariki yavuze ikaba idahuye n‟Itegeko nyaryo, nyamara bigaragara ko ibikubiye mu ngingo ya 431 yavuze ari ibihura n‟ibikubiye mu ngingo ya 431 y‟Itegeko nyaryo No42/88 ryo ku wa 27/10/1988, ryariho kandi bihuye n‟ikiburanwa kijyanye n‟imyaka y‟ubukure, nta shingiro ifite. 2. Urugero rw‟indishyi zagenwe mu rubanza rwajuririwe zihwanye na 191.713.088Frw zirenze 50.000.000Frw zigenwa n‟itegeko kugirango ubujurire bwa kabiri bwemerwe mu Rukiko rw‟Ikirenga, bityo inzitizi yo kutakira ikirego nta shingiro ifite. 3. Kuba Itegeko ryarateganyije ko ubujurire ku rubanza rusobanura cyangwa rukosora urundi bukorerwa rimwe n‟urubanza rwasabiwe gukosorwa, ntibyumvikana nk‟uburenganzira bwahabwa uwabuze kujuririra igihe urubanza rw‟ibanze, ngo bumubere icyuho cyo kurujuririra nyuma y‟ibihe biteganywa n‟itegeko, abinyujije mu kubanza kurusabira gusobanurwa cyangwa gukosorwa. ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 4

## Page 32

4. Hashingiwe ku ihame rivuga ko uburiganya butuma ibyakozwe byose bita agaciro, n‟inyandiko z‟abahanga mu mategeko zisobanura ko inzira yo gusobanuza cyangwa gukosoza urubanza idashobora gukoreshwa hagamijwe guca iruhande inshingano yo kujurira, inzira yo kubanza gukosoza urubanza hagamijwe kujurira ntiyakwemerwa mu gihe igihe cyo kujurira gisanzwe cyarenze. Inzitizi y’iburabubasha nta shingiro ifite. Inzitizi yo kutakira ubujurire ifite ishingiro. Igice kimwe cy’amagarama giherereye ku wajuriye ubujurire bwe butakiriwe. Igice gisigaye cy’amagarama kirasubitswe. Iburanisha mu mizi rizakomeza. Amategeko yashingiweho: Itegeko Ngenga No03/2012/OL ryo ku wa 13/06/2012 rigena imiterere, imikorere n‟ububasha by‟Urukiko rw‟Ikirenga, ingingo ya 28 agace ka 2. Itegeko No21/2012 ryo ku wa 14/06/2012 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y‟imanza z‟imbonezamubano, iz‟ubucuruzi, iz‟umurimo n‟iz‟ubutegetsi, ingingo ya 154, igika cya 2 n‟icya 3. Nta manza zifashishijwe.

MUKARUSHAKIRO N’ABANDI v. GAHIRE 5

## Page 33

Urubanza I. IMITERERE Y’URUBANZA [1] Mu Rukiko Rwisumbuye rwa Nyarugenge, abazungura ba Bagenzi, aribo Bagenzi Théogène, Mukarushakiro Gloriose na Mukangenzi Céline, bahagarariwe na Mukarushakiro Gloriose, bareze Gahire Athanase kuba yarabahuguje inzu basigiwe na se, Gahire we akavuga ko yayiguze na Bagenzi agejeje ku myaka y‟ubukure, hari nyina Mukarushakiro, nk‟umutangabuhamya. [2] Mu rubanza No RC0774/11/TGI/NYGE rwo ku wa 20/03/2013, Urukiko Rwisumbuye rwa Nyarugenge, rwemeje ko ikirego cy‟abazungura ba Bagenzi gifite ishingiro, rwemeza ko amasezerano y‟ubugure yo ku wa 5/11/1996 n‟ayo ku wa 4/11/1997, hagati ya Bagenzi na Gahire ateshejwe agaciro, rutegeka abazungura ba Bagenzi Jean kwishyura Gahire 191.713.088Frw, akayahabwa mbere y‟uko atanga inzu. [3] Urwo Rukiko rwasobanuye ko ayo masezerano yakozwe na Bagenzi adafite ubushobozi, ariko ko Gahire yaguze nta buryarya, kuko Bagenzi agurisha ku wa 05/11/1996, yari kumwe n‟abavandimwe be, naho amasezerano yo ku wa 4/11/1997 akaba yarakozwe Bagenzi amaze kugira imyaka y‟ubukure, kandi hari na Uwimana Monique, nyina wa Mukarushakiro, nk‟umutangabuhamya. [4] Mukarushakiro, Bagenzi na Mukangenzi bajuririye Urukiko Rukuru, bavuga ko umucamanza yategetse Bagenzi kwishyura ibyakozwe kandi rwaremeje ko yakoze amasezerano y‟ubugure ari umwana, agurisha ibitari ibye, hakaba kandi ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 6

## Page 34

harashingiwe kuri “expertise” hadakozwe “contre expertise”, Urukiko kandi rukaba rwarivuguruje rwemeza ko Gahire yaguze nta buryarya, rukanavuga ko amasezerano y‟ubugure nta gaciro afite. [5] Gahire nawe yajuriye avuga ko Urukiko Rwisumbuye rwatesheje agaciro amasezerano y‟ubugure kandi atari cyo cyaregewe, ko rwirengagije ko Bagenzi yagurishije afite imyaka y‟ubukure, kuko yavutse ku wa 1/01/1976 nk‟uko biboneka ku irangamuntu ye no ku cyemezo cy‟amavuko, kandi ko urwo Rukiko ntacyo rwavuze ku nzitizi zari zatanzwe. [6] Mu rubanza RCA0229- RCA0231/13/HC/KIG rwo ku wa 27/06/2014, Urukiko Rukuru rwemeje ko ubujurire bwa Mukarushakiro, Bagenzi na Mukangenzi, nta shingiro bufite, ko ubwatanzwe na Gahire bufite ishingiro, rwemeza ko urubanza RC0774/11/TGI/NYGE ruhindutse kuri byose, ko Gahire atahuguje umutungo uburanwa, ayo masezerano akaba agumyeho. [7] Ku wa 27/07/2014, Mukarushakiro na Bagenzi bajuririye Urukiko rw‟Ikirenga, bavuga ko umucamanza mu Rukiko Rukuru yirengagije ko Bagenzi yagurishije ibitari ibye, aha agaciro “expertise” y‟ibyakozwe ku nzu nta “contre expertise” ikozwe, kandi yemeza ko amasezerano y‟ubugure ya mbere yuzuza aya kabiri, runemeza ko Uwimana Monique yari ahari, ataribyo, hanyuma yemeza ko Gahire yaguze nta buryarya. [8] Ku wa 11/10/2016, Mukangenzi yatanze ikirego cyo gukosoza urubanza mu Rukiko Rukuru, avuga ko atagaragajwe mu baburanyi nk‟uwajuriye. Mu rubanza RCA0039/2016/HC/KIG rwo ku wa 09/11/2016 rukosora urundi, hemejwe ko ikirego cye nta shingiro gifite, ko nta kosa MUKARUSHAKIRO N’ABANDI v. GAHIRE 7

## Page 35

ryakozwe, kuko, n‟ubwo izina rye ritanditswe mu ntangiriro y‟urubanza ahagaragazwa ababuranyi, yagaragajwe nk‟umuburanyi mu gice cy‟imiterere y‟urubanza no mu kirusobanura, ndetse no mu cyemezo cyarwo. [9] Nyuma y‟icyo cyemezo ku kirego gikosoza urubanza rw‟Urukiko Rukuru, Mukangenzi nawe yajuririye Urukiko rw‟Ikirenga, avuga ko Urukiko Rukuru rwivuguruje rukitiranya ibintu, kuko rwemeje ko bakererewe gukurikirana umutungo wabo, kandi nta gihe ntarengwa cyo kuwukurikirana giteganywa, runakoresha nabi ingingo ya 339 y‟Igitabo cya Mbere cy‟Urwunge rw‟amategeko Mbonezamubano (CCL I), ruvuga ko Mukangenzi wagizwe umwana na Gahire adakwiye kuzungura kandi ahubwo yaremewe nk‟umwana (reconnaissance). [10] Avuga ko Urukiko Rukuru rwashingiye ku manza zo mu mahanga, zivuguruza amategeko y‟u Rwanda ku byerekeranye n‟uwakoze amasezerano ataragira imyaka y‟ubukure, runakoresha nabi ingingo ya 159 y‟Itegeko rigenga amasezerano, ku byerekeranye n‟igihe ntarengwa cyo gukurikirana no gufata amasezerano yakozwe n‟umuntu udafite imyaka y‟ubukure nk‟aho yemewe, rubiheraho rutwerera Gahire ukutagira uburyarya. [11] Gahire yatanze inzitizi y‟iburabubasha ry‟Urukiko rw‟Ikirenga ku bijyanye n‟ubujurire bwa Mukarushakiro n‟ubwa ba Bagenzi, anatanga inzitizi yo kutakira ubujurire bwa Mukangenzi kuko yajuriye akererewe. [12] Urubanza rwaburanishijwe mu ruhame ku wa 06/12/2016, Mukarushakiro ahagarariwe na Me Sebineza Evariste, Bagenzi Théogène yunganiwe na Me Sebineza ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 8

## Page 36

Evariste na Me Semuhunga N. Silas, Mukagenzi Céline ahagarariwe na Me Buhuru P. Célestin, naho Gahire Athanase yunganiwe na Me Butare Godefroid na Me Mbaga Tuzinde Mbonyimbuga, habanza gusuzumwa inzitizi zavuzwe haruguru zatanzwe na Gahire. II. IBIBAZO BIGIZE URUBANZA N’ISESENGURWA RYABYO A. Kumenya niba ubujurire bwa Mukarushakiro n’ubwa Bagenzi buri mu bubasha bw’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga. [13] Me Butare na Me Mbaga, bunganira Gahire, bavuga ko ubujurire bwa Mukarushakiro n‟ubwa Bagenzi mu Rukiko rw‟Ikirenga ari ubwo ku rwego rwa kabiri, nyamara akaba atagaragaza ko ubwo bujurire bwujuje ibisabwa n‟itegeko, kugira ngo bube mu bubasha bw‟Urukiko rw‟Ikirenga, nk‟uko biteganywa mu ngingo ya 28 agace ka 2 y‟Itegeko Ngenga No03/2012/OL ryo ku wa 13/06/2012 rigena imiterere, imikorere n‟ububasha by‟Urukiko rw‟Ikirenga. [14] Basobanura ko impamvu Mukarushakiro yagaragaje muri ubwo bujurire, yo kuba umucamanza yarashingiye ku Itegeko ritariho, nta shingiro ifite, kuko hashingiwe ku ngingo ya 159 y‟Itegeko No45/11 ryo ku wa 25/11/2011 rigenga amasezerano, kandi iryo Tegeko ririho, iyo mpamvu ikaba rero idahuye n‟ibiteganywa mu ngingo ya 28 yavuzwe haruguru, kuko n‟iyo umucamanza yaba yarasobanuye (interprétation) nabi ingingo y‟Itegeko, bitakwitwa ko ritariho. [15] Me Buhuru, uburanira Mukangenzi avuga ko, nk‟uko biboneka mu gace ka 20 k‟urubanza rujuririrwa, umucamanza MUKARUSHAKIRO N’ABANDI v. GAHIRE 9

## Page 37

yashingiye ku Itegeko ritariho kubera ko yashingiye ku Itegeko ryo mu 1963, ryasimbuwe n‟Itegeko No42/1988 ryo ku wa 27/10/1988. [16] Me Sebineza na Me Semuhunga, baburanira Mukarushakiro na Bagenzi, bavuga ko, nk‟uko biboneka mu gace ka 20 k‟urubanza rujuririrwa, Urukiko Rukuru rwashingiye ku Itegeko ry‟imbonezamubano (Code civil) ryo ku wa 28/09/1963 ritariho, kandi ko iyo itegeko rigaragajwe mu buryo butari bwo (référence), bifatwa ko hashingiwe ku itegeko ritariho. Bongeraho ko n‟iyo iyo mpamvu y‟ububasha bw‟Urukiko itakwemerwa, ububasha bwarwo bwashingirwa ku rugero rw‟indishyi zagenwe mu rubanza, zirengeje 50.000.000Frw. UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [17] Nk‟uko biboneka mu gace ka 20 k‟urubanza RCA0229- 0231/13/HC rwajuririwe, umucamanza yavuze ko hashingiwe ku ngingo ya 431 y‟Itegeko ryo ku wa 28/09/1963 iteganya ko: “ubukure bushyizwe ku myaka makumyabiri n’umwe yuzuye, kuri iyo myaka umuntu ashobora gukora ibintu byose bimuhuza n’abandi uretse ibiteganywa ukundi n’amategeko”, ibi bivugwa muri iyo ngingo ariko bikaba ari ibiboneka mu ngingo 431 y‟Itegeko No42/88 ryo ku wa 27/10/1988, rishyiraho Interuro y‟Ibanze n‟Igitabo cy‟amategeko mbonezamubano. [18] Urukiko rusanga, n‟ubwo umucamanza atavuze inyito y‟Itegeko, n‟itariki yavuze ikaba idahuye n‟Itegeko nyaryo, bigaragara ko ibikubiye mu ngingo ya 431 yavuze ari ibihura n‟ibikubiye mu ngingo ya 431 y‟Itegeko nyaryo ryariho, No42/88 ryo ku wa 27/10/1988 rivuzwe haruguru, kandi bihuye ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 10

## Page 38

n‟ikiburanwa, kijyanye n‟imyaka y‟ubukure, uko kwibeshya mu myandikire kukaba kutafatwa nko kuba harakoreshejwe itegeko ritigeze ribaho cyangwa se ryabayeho nyuma rikavanwaho1. [19] Urukiko rurasanga ariko, n‟ubwo impamvu y‟iburabubasha ry‟Urukiko rw‟Ikirenga ritewe no kuba Urukiko Rukuru rwaraciye urubanza rushingiye ku itegeko ritariho nta shingiro ifite, hagaragara indi mpamvu ituma uru Rukiko rugira ububasha ku kirego cy‟ubujurire bwa Mukarushakiro n‟ubwa Bagenzi ku rwego rwa kabiri, iyo mpamvu ikaba ari ijyanye n‟urugero rw‟indishyi zagenwe mu rubanza rwajuririwe, zihwanye na 191.713.088 Frw, zikaba zirenze 50.000.000 Frw, ateganywa mu ngingo ya 28, igika cya 2 agace ka 7, y‟Itegeko Ngenga No03/2012/OL ryavuzwe haruguru2. B. Kumenya niba ubujurire bwa Mukangenzi bwaratanzwe mu bihe byubahirije amategeko. [20] Ababuranira Gahire bavuga ko ubujurire bwa Mukangenzi budakwiye kwakirwa, kuko yajuriye nyuma y‟igihe cy‟iminsi 30 giteganywa n‟amategeko, akaba ari amayeri yakoresheje yo kubanza gukosoza urubanza, nyuma y‟imyaka ibiri ruciwe, kugira ngo abone uko yinjira mu rubanza ruburanwa. Anavuga ko kuba Urukiko Rukuru rwaremeje ko

1 Ingingo ya 28, igika cya 2, agace ka 2 y‟Itegeko Ngenga No03/2012/OL ryo ku wa 13/06/2012 rigena imiterere, imikorere n‟ububasha by‟Urukiko rw‟Ikirenga. Iyo ngingo iteganya ko Urukiko rw‟ikirenga rufite ububasha bwo kuburanisha mu rwego rw‟ubujurire imanza zaciwe ku rwego rwa kabiri n‟Urukiko Rukuru, Urukiko Rukuru rw‟ubucuruzi cyangwa Urukiko Rukuru rwa Gisirikari, iyo izo manza zashingiye ku itegeko ritariho cyangwa ingingo z‟amategeko zitakiriho. 2 Urukiko rw‟Ikirenga rufite ububasha bwo kuburanisha mu rwego rw‟ubujurire urubanza rwaciwe ku rwego rwa kabiri n‟Urukiko Rukuru, iyo rwagenwemo n‟urukiko indishyi zingana nibura na 50.000Frw. MUKARUSHAKIRO N’ABANDI v. GAHIRE 11

## Page 39

urubanza rugumanye agaciro karwo bigaragaza ko urubanza rwasabiwe gukosorwa nta kibazo rwari rufite. [21] Basobanura ko, nk‟uko biboneka mu mwanzuro wa Me Buhuru usaba gukosoza, yavuze ko yabonye atagaragara mu bajuriye mu Rukiko rw‟Ikirenga, akosoza urubanza kugira ngo abone uko atanga ubujurire, hakaba rero hakwiye kwibazwa aho byagarukira, mu gihe uwakererewe kujurira wese yajya akosoza kugira ngo abone uko yinjira mu rubanza, yitwaje ingingo ya 153 y‟Itegeko No21/2012 ryo ku wa 14/06/2012 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y‟imanza z‟imbonezamubano, iz‟ubucuruzi, iz‟umurimo n‟iz‟ubutegetsi, iteganya ko urubanza rwasabiwe gusobanurwa rudashobora kujuririrwa rwonyine bidakorewe rimwe n‟urubanza rw‟iremezo. [22] Me Buhuru avuga ko nta mayeri yakoresheje mu gukosoza urubanza, ko ahubwo yakoresheje inzira iteganywa n‟amategeko kugira ngo amakosa yari mu rubanza akosorwe, yongeraho ko n‟uwakoresha amayeri atabujijwe n‟itegeko nta kosa yaba akoze. UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [23] Ingingo ya 154, igika cya 2 n‟icya 3 y‟Itegeko No21/2012 ryo ku wa 14/06/2012 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y‟imanza z‟imbonezamubano, iz‟ubucuruzi, iz‟umurimo n‟iz‟ubutegetsi, iteganya ko urubanza rusobanura cyangwa rukosora urundi rwuzuza urubanza rwasabiwe gusobanurwa cyangwa gukosorwa, rudashobora kujuririrwa rwonyine bidakorewe rimwe n‟urubanza rw‟iremezo, kandi ko igihe cy‟ubujurire kuri izo manza zombi gitangira kubarwa uhereye ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 12

## Page 40

ku munsi w‟isomwa ry‟urubanza rusobanura cyangwa rukosora urundi. [24] Urukiko rurasanga, kuba Itegeko ryarateganyije ko ubujurire ku rubanza rusobanura cyangwa rukosora urundi bukorerwa rimwe n‟urubanza rwasabiwe gukosorwa, bitakumvikana nk‟uburenganzira bwahabwa uwabuze kujuririra igihe urubanza rw‟ibanze, ngo bumubere icyuho cyo kurujuririra nyuma y‟ibihe biteganywa n‟itegeko, abinyujije mu kubanza kurusabira gusobanurwa cyangwa gukosorwa. Ibi byanemejwe n‟Urukiko Rusesa imanza mu Bubiligi, rusobanura ko inzira yo gusobanuza ibikubiye mu rubanza rwaciwe, itaviramo uwakererewe gusaba iseswa ry‟urubanza, ngo bimuviremo guhabwa ibindi bihe bishya byo kuba yasaba iseswa ry‟urubanza yasabiye gusobanurwa3. [25] Ku kibazo cyo kuba hatabujijwe amayeri yo kuba umuburanyi yagera ku nzira y‟ubujurire nyuma y‟ubukererwe nk‟uko Me Buhuru abiburanisha, Urukiko rurasanga, iyo nzira y‟amayeri itakwemerwa, kuko hari ihame rikomeye mu mategeko ry‟uko uburiganya butuma ibyakozwe byose bita agaciro4, n‟abahanga mu mategeko bakaryungamo basobanura ko inzira yo gusobanuza cyangwa gukosoza urubanza idashobora gukoreshwa hagamijwe guca iruhande inshingano yo kujurira5.

3 La procédure en interprétation d’une décision judiciaire n’a pas pour effet d’ouvrir un nouveau délai pour se pourvoir en cassation contre la décision interprétée”: Cass. 26 Avril 2001. 4 “Fraus Omnia corrumpit”; “ La fraude corrompt tout.” 5 “La voie d’interprétation ou de rectification ne peut donc être utilisée pour contourner la nécessité d’exercer une voie de recours”: Georges DE LEVAL et autres, Droit judiciaire, Tome 2, Manuel de procédure civile, Editions Larcier, Bruxelles, 2015, p.670. MUKARUSHAKIRO N’ABANDI v. GAHIRE 13

## Page 41

[26] Ku byerekeye Mukangenzi wasabye ikosorwa ry‟urubanza nyuma y‟imyaka ibiri ruciwe, akarujuririra hashize igihe kirenga imyaka ibiri, nyuma y‟urubanza rwo ku wa 09/11/2016, Urukiko rurasanga ikosorwa ryasabwe ryari rigamije gusa gushakisha inzira y‟ubujurire ku rubanza rw‟ibanze rutari rwarajuririwe igihe, kuko, usibye ko nta n‟icyakosozwaga kigaragara, nk‟uko Urukiko Rukuru rwabigaragaje, n‟ubujurire mu Rukiko rw‟Ikirenga, bwakurikiye icyo cyemezo cy‟Urukiko Rukuru, ntacyo bwigeze bugaragaza ko bujuririra mu byemejwe n‟Urukiko Rukuru ku bijyanye n‟ikosozwa ry‟urubanza, ahubwo bwaboneyeho impamvu yo kugaruka ku byemejwe mu mizi y‟urubanza rw‟ibanze Mukangenzi atari yarajuririye mu gihe, bikaba rero bigaragara nta shiti ko ubujurire bwa Mukangenzi ku rubanza RCA0229- RCA0231/13/HC/KIG rwo ku wa 27/06/2014, bwatanzwe bukererewe, kubera iyo mpamvu, bukaba rero budakwiye kwakirwa. III. ICYEMEZO CY’URUKIKO [27] Rwemeje ko inzitizi y‟iburabubasha ry‟Urukiko rw‟Ikirenga yatanzwe na Gahire Anastase, ku bujurire bwa Mukarushakiro Gloriose, n‟ubwa Bagenzi Théogène, nta shingiro ifite; [28] Rwemeje ko inzitizi yatanzwe na Gahire Anastase, yo kutakira ubujurire bwa Mukangenzi Céline ifite ishingiro, ubujurire bwe bukaba butakiriwe; [29] Rutegetse ko iburanisha ry‟urubanza rizakomeza mu mizi ku wa 14/03/2017 hasuzumwa ubujurire bwa Mukarushakiro Gloriose n‟ubwa Bagenzi Théogène; ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 14

## Page 42

[30] Rutegetse ko icya 1/3 cy‟amagarama gihereye kuri Mukangenzi Céline, naho 2/3 byayo bikaba bisubitswe.

MUKARUSHAKIRO N’ABANDI v. GAHIRE 15

## Page 44

MULINDAHABI v. ENERGY, WATER AND SANITATION AUTHORITY (EWSA) Ltd [Rwanda URUKIKO RW‟IKIRENGA – RS/REV/AD0003/15/CS (Nyirinkwaya, P.J., Ngagi na Nyirandabaruta, J.) 27 Mutarama 2017] Amategeko agenga imiburanishirije y’imanza z’ubutegetsi – Gusubirishamo urubanza ingingo nshya – Ikimenyetso gishya cya kamarampaka – Ikimenyetso umuburanyi yari asanzwe afite cyangwa azi kuva urubanza rutaracibwa mu rwego rwa mbere kugeza ruciwe ku rwego rw’ubujurire nticyafatwa nk’ikimenyetso gishya cya kamarampaka cyabonetse nyuma y’icibwa ry’urubanza ku buryo cyashingirwaho mu gusubirishamo urubanza ingingo nshya – Itegeko N°21/2012 ryo kuwa 14/06/2012 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi, ingingo ya 186. Amategeko agenga imiburanishirije y’imanza z’ubutegetsi – Gusubirishamo urubanza ingingo nshya – Isomwa ry’urubanza – Uburiganya – Kuba mu isomwa ry’urubanza hari abacamanza mu baruciye batabonetse ntibyafatwa nk’uburiganya – Itegeko N°21/2012 ryo kuwa 14/06/2012 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi, ingingo ya 148. Incamake y’ikibazo: Mulindahabi yagiranye amasezerano y‟akazi na RECO RWASCO (yahindutse EWSA) hakaba hari 17

## Page 45

hakubiyemo amezi atandatu (6) y‟igeragezwa ari nacyo gihe yaje kwirukanwamo. Yareze EWSA mu Rukiko Rukuru avuga ko yirukanywe mu buryo bunyuranyije n‟amategeko anabisabira indishyi zinyuranye. Uru Rukiko rwemeje ko yirukanywe bidakurikije amategeko kuko atamenyeshejwe amakosa yaba yarakoze kugira ngo ayisobanureho nk‟uko biteganywa n‟itegeko rishyiraho sitati rusange igenga abakozi ba Leta. Rwemeje kandi ko n‟ubwo yasinye amasezerano y‟igerageza bitahabwa agaciro kuko EWSA ari ikigo cya Leta nk‟uko bigaragara mu masezerano akaba agegwa na sitati aho kugegwa n‟amategeko y‟umurimo, maze runemeza ko agomba guhabwa indishyi z‟akababaro z‟uko yavukijwe akazi. Ababuranyi bombi bajuririye icyo cyemezo mu Rukiko rw‟Ikirenga, EWSA ivuga ko Urukiko Rukuru rwirengagije ibyo impade zombi zari zumvikanyeho rukavuga ko agengwa na Sitati rusange igenga abakozi ba Leta kandi agengwa n‟amasezerano ari byo byatumye EWSA igaragara nk‟aho yakoze amakosa, naho Mulindahabi akavuga ko habayeho kwivuguruza mu mikirize y‟urubanza ko kandi n‟indishyi yahawe ari nke kandi ntacyo Urukiko rubanza rwazishingiyeho. Urukiko rwemeje ko ubujurire bwa EWSA bufite ishingiro kuri bimwe naho ubujurire bwa Mulindahabi nta shingiro bufite, rumugenera indishyi z‟uko yirukanywe adahawe umwanya wo kwisobanura n‟ubwo yari akiri mu igeragezwa Mulindahabi yasubirishijemo urubanza ingingo nshya avuga ko nyuma y‟icibwa ry‟urubanza habonetse ibimenyetso bishya bya kamarampaka bigizwe n‟ibaruwa Nº708 /ed &cr/10 yo ku wa 09/06/2010, ibaruwa Nº2064/19.23 yo ku wa 11/08/2011, ibaruwa Nº2520/19.23 yo ku wa 04/10/2011 n‟ibaruwa ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 18

## Page 46

Nº10/Min/TV/10/11 yo ku wa 19/10/2011, zigaragaza akarengane yatewe n‟urwo rubanza, kandi ko habaye uburiganya no kwitiranya ibintu kubera ko urubanza rwe rutoherejwe mu rundi Rukiko n‟uko hari abacamanza bari bafitanye ibibazo ariko ntibivane mu rubanza. Ubwo buriganya abushingira ku kuba mu bacamanza basinye ku rubanza asubirishamo ingingo nshya harimo utarabonetse mu barusomye, kandi ko hirengagijwe urubanza yatanzeho ikimenyetso rufite kamere imwe n‟urwe. Avuga na none ko kuba Urukiko rwaremeje ko rimwe mu makosa yakoze yagombaga kurimenyeshwa hakaba n‟irindi rwemeje ko atagombaga kumenyeshwa abibonamo uburiganya. Ikindi abonamo uburiganya n‟uko atagenewe indishyi zo kumusebya. WASAC na REG bavuga ko ayo mabaruwa yose nta n‟imwe igaragaza ko yari umukozi wa Leta kuko agaragaza gusa ko yanditse avuga ko yirukanywe arenganyijwe agasubizwa ko atarenganyijwe, naho ku mpamvu z‟uburiganya bakavuga ko nta shingiro zifite kuko umuburanyi aburana uko ashaka bitewe n‟uko abona urubanza rwe rumeze, kandi ko mu gihe yabonaga ko hari umucamanza afiteho impungenge nta cyamubuzaga kumwihana. Ikomeza ivuga ko urubanza rwasomwe hakurikijwe amategeko, kandi ko ibjyanye no kuba ataramenyeshejwe ikosa yabiherewe indishyi z‟amezi atatu. Incamake y’icyemezo: 1. Ikimenyetso umuburanyi yari asanzwe afite cyangwa azi kuva urubanza rutaracibwa mu rwego rwa mbere kugeza ruciriwe ku rwego rw‟ubujurire nticyafatwa nk‟ikimenyetso gishya cya kamarampaka cyabonetse nyuma y‟icibwa ry‟urubanza ku buryo cyashingirwaho mu gusubirishamo urubanza ingingo nshya. Bityo amabaruwa ari muri dosiye y‟Urukiko Rukuru ntiyafatwa MULINDAHABI v. ENERGY, WATER AND SANITATION AUTHORITY (EWSA) Ltd 19

## Page 47

nk‟ikimenyetso gishya cya kamarampaka cyabonetse nyuma y‟icibwa ry‟urubanza cyashingirwaho ngo urubanza rusubirishwemo ingingo nshya. 2. Kuba urega yumva ko urubanza rwaciwe n‟Urukiko rutabifitiye ububasha ntibyakwitiranywa n‟uburiganya, ahubwo yabiregera yifashishije izindi nzira ziteganywa n‟amategeko. Bityo ntaburiganya bwakorewe uregwa bwashingirwaho ngo urubanza rusubirishwemo ingingo nshya. 3. Urubanza rushobora gusomwa n‟abacamanza babiri cyangwa umwe mu baruciye mu gihe umwe cyangwa bamwe batabonetse, bityo uburiganya urega avuga bwakozwe n‟abo bacamanza bukaba butariho. 4. Urubanza urega yatanzeho ikimenyetso ntabwo rwirengagijwe kuko ibijyanye narwo byasubijwe mu rubanza rusubirishwamo ingingo nshya. 5. Uregwa yahawe indishyi zikomoka ku kuba ataramenyeshejwe ikosa yakoze ngo aryisobanureho kandi kuba atarahawe indishyi zo kumusebya si impamvu yo gusubirishamo urubanza ingingo nshya iteganyijwe n‟itegeko. Ikirego cyo gusubirishamo urubanza ingingo nshya nticyakiriwe; Amagarama y’urubanza aherereye ku urega. Amategeko yashingiweho: Itegeko Ngenga N°51/2008 ryo ku wa 09/09/2008 rigena imiterere, imikorere n‟ububasha by‟Inkiko, ingingo ya 171. Itegeko N°21/2012 ryo kuwa 14/06/2012 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y‟imanza z‟imbonezamubano, ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 20

## Page 48

iz‟ubucuruzi, iz‟umurimo n‟iz‟ubutegetsi, ingingo ya 148 n‟iya 186. Nta manza zifashishijwe. Urubanza I. IMITERERE Y’URUBANZA [1] Ku wa 17/11/2009, Mulindahabi Fidèle yagiranye amasezeranyo y‟akazi na RECO-RWASCO, nyuma ku wa 13/04/2010 yirukanwa akiri mu gihe cy‟igeragezwa, azira kuba yaradindizaga akazi bigahesha isura mbi ikigo no kuba imyitwarire ye yararanzwe n‟amakimbirane hagati ye n‟inzego zitandukanye. Mulindahabi Fidèle yaregeye Urukiko Rukuru, asaba gusubizwa mu kazi kuko yirukanwe mu buryo bunyuranyije n‟amategeko, kuko atari umukozi ugengwa n‟amasezerano ahubwo ko yagengwaga na sitati rusange y‟abakozi ba Leta, kandi n‟igihe cy‟igeragezwa yari yarakirangije, asaba ko yasubizwa mu kazi agahabwa indishyi zinyuranye. [2] Mu rubanza RAD0157/10/HC/Kig rwaciwe ku wa 25/01/2013 n‟Urukiko Rukuru, urwo Rukiko rwemeje ko ikirego cya Mulindahabi gifite ishingiro, rutegeka EWSA Ltd kumwishyura 6.000.000Frw z‟igihombo yatejwe no kwirukanwa akabura icyo yinjiza, 2.000.000Frw y‟indishyi z‟akababaro z‟uko yasebye na 200.000Frw y‟ikurikiranarubanza. MULINDAHABI v. ENERGY, WATER AND SANITATION AUTHORITY (EWSA) Ltd 21

## Page 49

[3] EWSA na Mulindahabi Fidèle bajuririye Urukiko rw‟Ikirenga, ruca urubanza RADA0015/13/CS ku wa 18/11/2013, rwemeza ko ubujurire bwa EWSA bufite ishingiro kuri bimwe, ko ubujurire bwa Mulindahabi Fidèle nta shingiro bufite, ariko rutegeka EWSA kumuha 1.350.000Frw y‟indishyi (z‟uko yirukanywe atahawe umwanya wo kwisobanura n‟ubwo yari akiri mu igeragezwa), yiyongera kuri 200.000Frw y‟ikurikiranarubanza yagenewe ku rwego rwa mbere. [4] Mulindahabi ntiyabyishimiye, atanga ikirego ku wa 07/01/2014, asububirishamo urwo rubanza ingigo nshya, ashingiye ku ngingo ya 186, 1º, 3º na 6º z‟Itegeko N°21/2012 ryo ku wa 14/06/2012 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y‟imanza z‟imbonezamubano, iz‟ubucuruzi, iz‟umurimo n‟iz‟ubutegetsi, avuga ko nyuma y‟icibwa ry‟urubanza habonetse ibimenyetso bishya bya kamarampaka, bigaragaza akarengane yatewe n‟urwo rubanza, kandi ko habaye uburiganya no kwitiranya ibintu, asaba indishyi. [5] Urubanza rwaburanishijwe mu ruhame ku wa 20/09/2016, Mulindahabi Fidèle yunganiwe na Me Nyamunanage Aticus, REG ihagarariwe na Me Iyamuremye Maurice naho WASAC ihagarariwe na Me Rusanganwa Jean Bosco, kuri uwo munsi iburanisha rigeze hagati Urukiko rufata icyemezo cyo kurisubika ryimurirwa ku wa 22/11/2016, kugira ngo Mulindahabi Fidèle n‟umwunganira bongere bandike neza kandi bahuze imyanzuro yabo bakore umwanzuro umwe, bagaragaze neza buri impamvu bashingiraho basaba gusubirishamo urubanza ingingo nshya, bayihuza n‟ibiteganywa mu ngingo ya 186 y‟Itegeko N°21/2012 ryo ku wa 14/06/2012 yavuzwe haruguru, kugira ngo ibyo Urukiko rugomba gusuzuma byumvikane neza. Iburanisha mu ruhame ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 22

## Page 50

ryasubukuwe ku wa 22/11/2016, Mulindahabi Fidèle yunganiwe na Me Cyiza Faustin, REG ihagarariwe na Me Iyamuremye Maurice naho WASAC ihagarariwe na Me Rusanganwa Jean Bosco. II. IBIBAZO BIRI MU RUBANZA N’ISESENGURA RYABYO Muri uru rubanza harasuzumwa niba impamvu Mulindahabi Fidèle ashingiraho asaba ko urubanza RADA0015/13/CS rusubirishwamo ingingo nshya ziri mu ziteganywa n’itegeko ku buryo ikirego cye cyakwakirwa. II.1. Kumenya niba hari ibimenyetso bishya bya kamarampaka byashingirwaho kugira ngo urubanza RADA0015/13/CS rusubirishwemo ingingo nshya. [6] Mulindahabi Fidèle avuga ko ibimenyetso bishya bya kamarampaka ashingiraho agaragaza akarengane ke ari ibi bikurikira: 1o ibaruwa Nº708 /ed&cr/10, Komisiyo y‟abakozi ba Leta yamwandikiye ku wa 9/6/2010 (kote 13 & 73 muri dosiye y‟Urukiko Rukuru), igaragaza ko komisiyo yakurikiranye ikibazo cye, akaba asanga itari kugikurikirana iyo ataba agengwa na sitati y‟abakozi ba Leta;

2o ibaruwa Nº2064/19.23, Minisitiri w‟Abakozi ba Leta n‟Umurimo yandikiye Minisiti muri Perezidansi ku wa 11/08/2011, asubiza ibaruwa Nº36/Min/TV/6/11 Mulindahabi Fidèle yandikiye Perezida wa Repubulika amugezaho ikibazo cye, kuko muri iyo baruwa Minisitiri w‟Abakozi ba Leta n‟umurimo yavuze ko yanyuranyije MULINDAHABI v. ENERGY, WATER AND SANITATION AUTHORITY (EWSA) Ltd 23

## Page 51

na sitati igenga abakozi ba Leta, akaba atari kuvuga atyo iyo ataba agengwa n‟amasezerano; 3o ibaruwa Nº2520/19.23, Minisitiri w‟Abakozi ba Leta n‟Umurimo yandikiye Mulindahabi Fidèle ku wa 4/10/2011 (cote ya 38), iri ku mugereka w‟imyanzuro yo kwiregura ku bujurire bwa EWSA bwo ku wa 01/03/2013, asubiza ibaruwa nawe yari yamwandikiye ku wa 22/08/2011, aho Minisitiri w‟Abakozi ba Leta yavuze ko yanyuranyije na sitati y‟abakozi ba Leta;

4o ibaruwa Nº10/Min/TV/10/11, Minisitiri muri Perezidansi ya Repubulika yandikiye Mulindahabi Fidèle ku itariki ya 19/10/2011, asubiza iyo yari yandikiye Perezida wa Repubulika, muri iyo baruwa Minisitiri muri Perezidansi akaba yarashingiye ku ibaruwa ya Minisitiri w‟Abakozi ba Leta n‟umurimo ivuga ko yanyuranyije na sitati igenga abakozi ba Leta, akaba ataragombaga kuvuga atyo iyo aza kuba ari umukozi ugengwa n‟amasezerano. [7] Me Cyiza Faustin, wunganira Mulindahabi, avuga ko Urukiko rwasuzuma niba ibimenyetso uwo yunganira atanga byatuma urubanza rusubirishwamo ingingo nshya kuko agaragaza ko yari afite “qualité” y‟umukozi wa Leta. [8] Me Rusanganwa na Me Iyamuremye Maurice bunganira WASAC na REG bavuga ko amabaruwa yose Mulindahabi Fidèle avuga nta nimwe igaragaza ko yari umukozi wa Leta, ko icyo agaragaza ari uko yanditse avuga ko yirukanywe arenganyijwe agasubizwa ko atarenganyijwe.

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 24

## Page 52

UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [9] Ingingo ya 186(3°) y‟Itegeko Nº21/2012 ryo ku wa 14/06/2012 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y‟imanza z‟imbonezamubano, iz‟ubucuruzi, iz‟umurimo n‟iz‟ubutegetsi, iteganya ko urubanza rushobora gusubirishwamo ingingo nshya, iyo kuva aho urubanza ruciriwe habonetse ibimenyetso bya kamarampaka bigaragaza neza akarengane katewe n‟urubanza rusabirwa gusubirwamo; icyo kimenyetso cyaba kiri mu nyandiko zatanzwe mu rubanza ariko urukiko ntirukibone cyangwa cyaragaragajwe nyuma. [10] Dosiye y‟urubanza igaragaza ko ku wa 17/05/2010, Mulindahabi Fidèle yandikiye Komisiyo ishinzwe Abakozi ba Leta ayisaba kurenganurwa agasubizwa mu kazi muri RECO/RWASCO, Komisiyo imusubiza mu ibaruwa No708/CD/ER/10 yo ku wa 09/06/2010, imumenyesha ko nyuma yo gukurikirana ikibazo cye yasanze ntacyo yashingiraho isaba ko asubizwa mu kazi muri RECO/RWASCO, ku mpamvu y‟amakosa Komisiyo yabonye yamugaragayeho atararangiza igihe cy‟igeragezwa, yo guteza amakimbirane hagati ye n‟abo bakorana, gutinza cyane amadosiye (kudindiza akazi) no kwandikira Umuyobozi Mukuru cyangwa abandi bayobozi ukuriye ishami akoramo ntacyo abiziho. [11] Dosiye igaragaza kandi ibaruwa No2520/19.23 yo ku wa 04/10/2011, Minisitiri w‟Abakozi ba Leta n‟Umurimo yandikiye Mulindahabi Fidèle, amubwira ko ashingiye ku Itegeko No22/202 ryo ku wa 09/07/2002, rishyiraho Sitati rusange igenga abakozi ba Leta cyane cyane ingingo ya 19, ku mabwiriza ya Minisitiri No 005//08/10/Min yo ku wa 01 Nzeli MULINDAHABI v. ENERGY, WATER AND SANITATION AUTHORITY (EWSA) Ltd 25

## Page 53

2008 agenga ibiciro ngenderwaho mu gutanga indemnite z‟abajya mu butumwa mu mahanga, no ku mabaruwa anyuranye avugwa muri iyo baruwa harimo ayo Mulindahabi Fidèle yandikiwe n‟abayobozi banyuranye n‟ayo inzego zitandukanye zandikiranye hagati yazo ku kibazo cye no ku ibaruwa yo muri Werurwe 2010, HASHI Energy yandikiye Umuyobozi Mukuru ya RECO/RWASCO itumira Director of Administration kujya mu mahugurwa i Nairobi, asanga Komisiyo ishinzwe Abakozi ba Leta n‟Umurimo yarasesenguye amakosa amuvugwaho igasanga yose amuhama (gutinza cyane amadosiye, gusimbuka inzego, no gusiba “ordre de mission” yasinywe na Minisitiri w‟Intebe yohereza umukozi mu mahugurwa), ikemeza ko igihano yahawe kimukwiye, kandi ko uwo mwanzuro wafatiwe ikibazo cye ufite agaciro kuko Komisiyo yawufashe imaze gusuzuma ibaruwa ya mulindahabi Fidèle yo ku wa 17/05/2010 n‟iy‟Umuyobozi Mukuru wa EWSA yo ku wa 13/04/2010, no kumva ibisobanuro mu magambo bya EWSA. [12] Dosiye igaragaza na none ibaruwa yo ku wa 17/08/2011, Minisitiri muri Perezidansi yandikiye Mulindahabi Fidèle asubiza iyo yanditse asaba kurenganurwa, amumenyesha ko ikibazo cye bagikurikiranye bagasanga yaragaragarijwe impamvu zumvikana zatumye asezererwa ku kazi, anamwoherereza ku mugereka, kopi y‟ibaruwa Minisitiri w‟Abakozi ba Leta yandikiye Minisitiri muri Perezidansi amubwira uko ikibazo cya Mulindahabi Fidèle giteye. [13] Urukiko rurasanga ibaruwa Nº708 /ed &cr/10 yo ku wa 09/06/2010, ibaruwa Nº2064/19.23 yo ku wa 11/08/2011, ibaruwa Nº2520/19.23 yo ku wa 04/10/2011 n‟ibaruwa Nº10/Min/TV/10/11 yo ku wa 19/10/2011, yose yavuzwe haruguru,Mulindahabi Fidèle ashingiraho asubirishamo ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 26

## Page 54

urubanza RADA0015/13/CS ingingo nshya, ari ayo Mulindahabi Fidèle yagiye yandikirwa n‟inzego zinyuranye zisubiza ayo yagiye azandikira agaragaza ko yasezerewe mu kazi mu buryo budakurikije amategeko n‟ayo izo nzego zagiye zandikirana hagati yazo ku kibazo cye, ayo mabaruwa akaba atafatwa nk‟ikimenyetso gishya cya kamarampaka cyabonetse nyuma y‟icibwa ry‟urubanza, giteganywa n‟ingingoya 186(3º) y‟Itegeko ryavuzwe haruguru, cyashingirwaho ngo urubanza RADA0015/13/CS rusubirishwemo ingingo nshya, kuko yari asanzwe ayafite cyangwa ayazi kuva na mbere urubanza rutaracibwa mu Rukiko Rukuru kugeza aho ruciriwe mu Rukiko rw‟Ikirenga. 2. Kumenya niba hari uburiganya no kwitiranya ibintu byagaragaye mu micire y’urubanza RADA0015/13/CS byatuma rusubirishwamo ingingo nshya. a. Kumenya niba kuba urubanza rutaroherejwe mu rundi Rukiko bigaragaza uburiganya. [14] Mulindahabi avuga ko mu rubanza RAD0124/07/HC/Kig rwaburanishijwe mu Rukiko Rukuru, Kabera Pierre Claver aburana na RECO/RWASCO, uwari uyihagarariye yatanze inzitizi y‟iburabubasha avuga ko urukiko rw‟umurimo arirwo rufite ububasha bwo kumuburanisha, nyamara ko mu rubanza rwe RECO&RWASCO itatanze iyo nzitizi, bivuze ko yemeraga ko ari umukozi ugengwa na sitati, ko kuba ikomeza kumwita umukozi ugengwa n‟amasezerano ari uburiganya, kandi ko Urukiko rw‟Ikirenga narwo rwamukoreye uburiganya, kuko mu gihe rwasanze ari umukozi ugengwa n‟amasezerano rwagombaga kwiyambura ububasha rukohereza urubanza mu rukiko rubifitiye ububasha, kuba rutarabikoze bikaba bigaragaza uburiganya. MULINDAHABI v. ENERGY, WATER AND SANITATION AUTHORITY (EWSA) Ltd 27

## Page 55

[15] Me Rusanganwa avuga ko iyi ngingo nta shingiro ifite kuko umuburanyi aburana uko ashaka bitewe n‟uko abona urubanza rwe rumeze, ko urega atariwe utegeka uko uregwa yiregura. UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [16] Ingingo ya 186(1o) y‟Itegeko Nº21/2012 ryo ku wa 14/06/2012 ryavuzwe haruguru iteganya ko urubanza rushobora gusubirishwamo ingingo nshya iyo …habayemo uburiganya bwagize ingaruka ku mikirize y’urubanza, kandi bukaba butarigeze bumenywa n’uwatsinzwe mu gihe cy’iburana…; [17] Dosiye igaragaza ko mu rubanza RAD0124/07/HC/Kig Mulindahabi Fidèle ashingiraho ashaka kwerekana uburiganya bwabaye mu rubanza rwe, Kabera Pierre Claver yaburanye na RECO/RWASCO (cote 123) mu Rukiko Rukuru asaba ivanwaho ry‟icyemezo kimwirukana cyo ku wa 02/07/2007, Me GAJU Ines wari uhagarariye RECO/RWASCO muri urwo rubanza yatanze inzitizi y‟iburabubasha ry‟Urukiko avuga ko mbere yo kuregera Kabera yakagombye kubanza kuregera Urukiko rw‟umurimo, urwo Rukiko rufata icyemezo ko iyo nzitizi nta shingiro ifite. Dosiye igaragaza na none ko mu rubanza RADA0015/13/CS rwa Mulindahabi na RECO/RWASCO rwaciwe n‟Urukiko rw‟Ikirenga ku wa 08/11/2003, RECO RWASCO yari ihagarariwe na Me Rusanganwa Jean Bosco, muri urwo rubanza akaba ari nta nzitizi y‟iburabubasha yigeze itangwa. [18] Dosiye igaragaza kandi ko mu rubanza RADA0015/13/CS, igika cya [14], Urukiko rw‟Ikirenga rwemeje ko Mulindahabi Fidèle yagengwaga n‟Itegeko ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 28

## Page 56

No13/2009 ryo ku wa 27/05/2009 rigenga umurimo, rubishingiye ku mpamvu y‟uko nyuma yo gutsinda ikizamini Mulindahabi Fidèle yasinyanye na RECO/RWASCO amasezerano y‟akazi ku wa 17/11/2009, arimo igihe cy‟igeragezwa, kandi usibye ayo masezerano akaba nta yindi nyandiko agaragaza yaba yaramwinjije muri EWSA (Acte de nomination) ku buryo yashingirwaho hemezwa ko agengwa na sitati igenga abakozi ba Leta. [19] Urukiko rurasanga niyo ruza kuba rwaraciye urubanza rutari mu bubasha bwarwo, ibyo bitari kwitiranywa n‟uburiganya, ahubwo Mulindahabi Fidèle yari kubiregera yifashishije izindi nzira ziteganywa n‟amategeko. b. Kumenya niba kuba hari abacamanza bari bafitanye ibibazo na Mulindahabi Fidèle ntibivane mu rubanza bigaragaza uburiganya. [20] Mulindahabi avuga ko mu nteko yamuburanishije harimo umucamanza witwa Mukandamage Marie Josée wari waramuburanishije urundi rubanza aburana na ATRACO, ndetse abacamanza baciye urwo rubanza akaba yarabaregeye Sena, ikibazo kikaba kitarakemuka, uwo mucamanza akaba yaragize uruhare mu gutsindwa kwe mu rwego rwo kwihimura. [21] Me Rusanganwa Jean Bosco na Me Iyamuremye Maurice baburanira WASAC na REG bavuga ko ibyo Mulindahabi avuga nta gaciro byahabwa, kuko mu gihe yabonaga hari umucamanza afiteho impungenge ntacyamubuzaga kumwihana, ariko ko adakwiye kubigira impamvu yo kuvuga ko yarenganyijwe.

MULINDAHABI v. ENERGY, WATER AND SANITATION AUTHORITY (EWSA) Ltd 29

## Page 57

UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [22] Ingingo ya 171 y‟Itegeko Ngenga N°51/2008 ryo ku wa 09/09/2008 rigena imiterere, imikorere n‟ububasha by‟Inkiko nk‟uko ryavuguruwe kandi ryujujwe kugeza ubu, iteganya impamvu zo kwihana umucamanza, agace ka 3º gateganya ko iyo umwe mu baburanyi agaragaje ishingiro ry‟urwango afitanye n‟umucamanza, afite uburenganzira bwo kumwihana. [23] Urukiko rurasanga Mulindahabi Fidèle avuga ko hari abacamanza bari bafitanye ibibazo, nyamara akaba atarakoresheje uburenganzira ahabwa n‟amategeko ngo abihane mu rubanza rwe, akaba atavuga rero ko bamukoreye uburiganya, bityo iyi ngingo aburanisha ikaba itashingirwaho ngo urubanza RADA0015/13/CS rusubirishwemo ingingo nshya. c. Kumenya niba kuba hari umucamanza utarasinye ku nyandiko mvugo y’isomwa bigaragaza uburiganya. [24] Mulindahabi Fidèle avuga ko mu bacamanza basinye ku rubanza asubirishamo harimo uwitwa Rugabirwa Ruben nyamara atarabonetse mu barusomye, ko ibyo byose asanga ari uburiganya buteganywa n‟ingingo ya 186(1º) y‟itegeko Nº21/2012 ryo ku wa 14/06/2012 ryavuzwe haruguru. [25] Uburanira WASAC avuga ko iyi ngingo nta shingiro ifite, kubera ko urubanza rwasomwe hakurikijwe amategeko, cyane cyane ingingo ya 148 y‟itegeko Nº21/2012 ryo ku wa 14/06/2012 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y‟imanza z‟imbonezamubano, iz‟ubucuruzi, iz‟umurimo n‟iz‟ubutegetsi. ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 30

## Page 58

UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [26] Ingingo ya 148 y‟Itegeko N°21/2012 ryo ku wa 14/06/2012 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y‟imanza z‟imbonezamubano, iz‟ubucuruzi, iz‟umurimo n‟iz‟ubutegetsi iteganya ko “Urubanza rwose rugomba gusomwa n‟umucamanza cyangwa abacamanza baruciye bahari kandi rwanditse mu ngingo zarwo zose. Icyakora, iyo umwe cyangwa bamwe mu bacamanza baciye urubanza kandi banashyize umukono ku mushinga w‟urubanza batabonetse ku munsi w‟isomwa ryarwo, ntibibuza ko rusomwa n‟umwe cyangwa abacamanza bahari baruburanishije…”. [27] Dosiye y‟urubanza RADA0015/13/CS rusubirishwamo ingingo nshya, igaragaza mu nyandikomvugo y‟isomwa ryarwo yo ku wa 08/11/2013, ko rwasomwe n‟abacamanza babiri, bafashijwe n‟umwanditsi w‟Urukiko, umucamanza wa gatatu adahari bitewe n‟indi mirimo y‟Urukiko kandi rukaba rwarasomwe Mulindahabi Fidèle ahari kuko yashyizeho umukono, naho matolewa y‟urubanza ikagaragaza ko rwaciwe n‟abo bacamanza uko ari batatu kuko bose barushyizeho umukono. [28] Urukiko rurasanga ku kibazo cy‟umucamanza utarabonetse mu isomwa ry‟urubanza ariko agashyira umukono kuri matolewa, nk‟uko ingingo ya 148 yavuzwe haruguru ibiteganya, byemewe ko urubanza rushobora gusomwa n‟abacamanza babiri cyangwa umwe mu baruciye mu gihe umwe cyangwa bamwe batabonetse, bityo uburiganya Mulindahabi Fidèle avuga bwakozwe n‟abo bacamanza bukaba nta buhari kuko ibyakozwe byemewe n‟amategeko, bityo iyi mpamvu ikaba itatuma urubanza rusubirishwamo ingingo nshya MULINDAHABI v. ENERGY, WATER AND SANITATION AUTHORITY (EWSA) Ltd 31

## Page 59

nk‟uko biteganywa n‟ingingo ya 186(1o) y‟Itegeko N°21/2012 ryo ku wa 14/06/2012 ryavuzwe haruguru. 3. Kumenya niba kuba Mulindahabi Fidèle yariswe umu “sous-contrat” aho kwitwa umu sous-statut hatarebwe ibyemejwe mu rubanza RAD0214/HC/KIG rwa Kabera Pierre Claver bigaragaza uburiganya no kwitiranya ibintu. [29] Mulindahabi Fidèle avuga ko mu gika cya 17 cy‟urubanza asubirishamo ingingo nshya, hagaragaramo “erreur judiciaire” kubera ko Urukiko rwavuze ko muri EWSA harimo abakozi bagengwa n‟amasezerano kandi atari byo, naho mu gika cya 16 rukaba rwarashingiye kuri “acte de nomination” ruvuga ko umwanya yari ariho nta “acte de nomination” yari afite kandi EWSA yaravuze ko abakozi bose binjiraga mu kazi basinye amasezerano, byumvikanisha ko nta “acte de nomination” bahabwaga. Avuga kandi ko Urukiko rwavuze ko ari umu sous-contrat nyamara muri dosiye harimo itangazo ryatanzwe na EWSA ishingiye ku Iteka rya Perezida Nº37/01 ryo ku wa 30/08/2004 risobanura uburyo abakozi ba Leta bashyirwa mu myanya, kubera ko Itegeko No44/2008 ryo ku wa 09/09/2008 rishyiraho RECO-RWASCO (ingingo ya 19) n‟Itegeko No43/2010 ryo ku wa 07/12/2010 rishyiraho EWSA, yombi avuga ko abakozi bose ari aba sous-statut, akaba yumva atariwe wenyine wagombaga kuba umukozi ugengwa n‟amasezerano mu gihe abandi bose ari abakozi bagengwa na sitati y‟abakozi ba Leta, ko bibaye bityo, byaba binyuranije n‟Itegeko Nshinga rivuga ko abantu bose bareshya imbere y‟amategeko. [30] Mulindahabi Fdèle akomeza avuga ko ashingiye ku ngingo ya 186(1º&6º) y‟Itegeko N°21/2012 ryo ku wa 14/06/2012 ryavuzwe haruguru, asanga harabayeho uburiganya ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 32

## Page 60

no kwitiranya ibintu kubera ko Urukiko rwirengagije imvugo ya EWSA yo ku wa 01/10/2013, aho yasobanuye ko Ndayisaba Ernest yari ku rutonde rw‟abakozi bagengwa na sitati y‟abakozi ba Leta, hakaba harirengagijwe urubanza RAD0214/HC/KIG rwa Kabera Pierre Claver aho yagenewe indishyi kandi agasubizwa mu kazi. Avuga kandi ko Urukiko rutavuze ku bimenyetso by‟urubanza, bigaragaza ko Ndayisaba Ernest ndetse n‟abandi bakozi bose kugeza ku bashoferi, abazamu n‟abaplanton, n‟ubwo basinye amasezerano, bagengwa na sitati ndetse ntirwagira n‟icyo ruvuga ku ibaruwa ye yo ku wa 29/10/2012, rukirengagiza ko nk‟uko byagenze kuri we, ntawinjiraga mu kazi ahawe “acte de nomination”, ko kandi imvugo ya EWSA yo mu iburanisha ryo ku wa 01/10/2013 ku rupapuro rwa 2 yavuze ko uwinjiragamo wese yasinyaga amasezerano hakurikijwe imiterere (structure) iriho bivuze ko nta “acte de nomination” yasabwaga, akaba asanga ibyo byose ari uburiganya no gufata ibintu uko bitari. [31] Mulindahabi Fidèle avuga kandi ko Urukiko rwavuze ko yagengwaga n‟amasezerano kandi atari byo, kubera ko inzira yanyuzemo ahabwa akazi zatangajwe na EWSA kuri Website yayo zigaragaza ko yagengwaga na Sitati, nk‟uko bigaragara ku rubuga http//www.ewsa.rw/recruitmentpolicy.html, ibi kandi ngo akaba yarabigarutseho mu iburanisha, aho yavuze ko ashingiye ku Iteka rya Perezida Nº37/01 ryo ku wa 30/08/2004 rigaragaza ibishingirwaho mu gushyira abakozi mu myanya y‟umurimo ya Leta, ko kuba yarabivuze mu rubanza RADA0015/13/CS Urukiko ntirugire icyo rubivugaho, asanga ari uburiganya, hakaba hashingirwa ku ngingo ya 186(3º) akemererwa gusubirishamo urubanza ingingo nshya. MULINDAHABI v. ENERGY, WATER AND SANITATION AUTHORITY (EWSA) Ltd 33

## Page 61

[32] Me Rusanganwa avuga ko mu mpamvu Mulindahabi Fidèle atanga harimo ko hirengagijwe ibyavuzwe mu iburanisha, hakirengagizwa inzitizi ndetse n‟urubanza rwa Kabera Pierre Claver, ariko akaba atagaragaza uburiganya bwabaye mu gihe cy‟iburanisha ngo abe yarabumenye nyuma, akaba yumva nta buriganya bwabayeho kandi ko niba avuga ko hari ibyo Urukiko rwaba rwarirengagije atahindukira ngo avuge ko yabimenye nyuma. UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [33] Ingingo ya 186(1o&6o) y‟itegeko Nº21/2012 ryo ku wa 14/06/2016 ryavuzwe haruguru, iteganya ko “Urubanza rushobora gusubirishwamo ingingo nshya (1o) iyo habayemo uburiganya bwagize ingaruka ku mikirize y‟urubanza, kandi bukaba butarigeze bumenywa n‟uwatsinzwe mu gihe cy‟iburana cyangwa (6o) iyo mu icibwa ry‟urubanza hakozwe amakosa akabije yo kwitiranya uko ibintu byagenze cyangwa hashingiwe ku itegeko ritariho”. [34] Dosiye igaragaraza ko mu rubanza RADA0015/13/CS (urupapuro rwa 3), Urukiko rwasuzumye ibijyanye no kumenya niba harabaye kwibeshya mu kwemeza ko Mulindahabi Fdèle yagengwaga na sitati y‟abakozi ba Leta, aho mu gika cya 14 ku rupapuro rwa 4 rwasobanuye ko Mulindahabi Fidèle yabaye umukozi wa RECO- RWASCO (yahindutse EWSA, ubungubu yagabanyijwemo WASAC na REG), nyuma yo gutsinda ikizamini nk‟unko bivugwa na Mulindahabi Fidèle ubwe. [35] Dosiye igaragaza ko kandi Urukiko rwasobanuye ko ku wa 17/11/2009 Mulindahabi Fidèle yagiranye amasezerano y‟akazi na RECO RWASCO arimo igihe cy‟igerageza cy‟amezi ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 34

## Page 62

atandatu, ko uretse ayo masezerano nta yindi nyandiko yagaragaje yaba yaramwinjije muri EWSA kugira ngo ibe yashingirwaho hemezwa ko agengwa na sitati igenga abakozi ba Leta, mu gika cya 15, Urukiko rwaravuze ko ibyo bigaragaraza ko Mulindahabi Fidèle yagengwaga n‟Itegeko Nº13/2009 ryo ku wa 27/5/2009 rigenga umurimo hashingiwe ku biteganywa n‟ingingo ya kabiri yaryo rigenga imikoranire y‟akazi hagati y‟abakozi n‟abakoresha (…) bishingiye ku masezerano. [36] Urukiko rurasanga kuba mu rubanza RADA0015/13/CS harasobanuwe impamvu Mulindahabi Fidèle agengwa n‟amasezerano y‟umurimo aho kuba sitati igenga abakozi ba Leta, atavuga ko habaye uburiganya kuko kuba atarishimiye icyemezo cy‟Urukiko ataricyo kigaragaza uburiganya no kwitiranya uko ibintu byagenze biteganywa mu ngingo ya 186, 1º na 6º y‟Itegeko Nº21/2012 ryo ku wa 14/06/2012, zituma urubanza rusubirishwamo ingingo nshya. [37] Ku bijyanye n‟urubanza RAD0214/HC/KIG rwa Kabera Pierre Claver na EWSA, Mulindahabi Fidèle avuga ko rufite kamere imwe n‟urwe nyamara Urukiko rukaba ntacyo rwaruvuzeho, Urukiko rurasanga ibijyanye n‟urwo rubanza byarasubijwe mu gika cya [29] cy‟urubanza rusubirishwamo ingingo nshya, aho Mulindahabi Fidèle yaruburanishije asaba Urukiko ko yasubizwa mu kazi, Urukiko rusubiza mu gika cya [31] aho rwasanze mu gihe rwamaze kugaragaza ko Mulindahabi Fidèle yirukanywe akiri mu igeragezwa ku mpamvu zirimo n‟iyerekeye imikorere, ntaho rwashingira rusuzuma ibyerekeye gusubizwa mu kazi. Rurasanga rero icyo kimenyetso kitarirengagijwe nk‟uko abivuga, bityo kikaba kitashingirwaho ngo urubanza RADA0015/13/CS MULINDAHABI v. ENERGY, WATER AND SANITATION AUTHORITY (EWSA) Ltd 35

## Page 63

rusubirishwemo ku mpamvu y‟uko hari ikimenyetso cyari mu rubanza urukiko ntirugire icyo rukivugaho. 4. Kumenya niba imvugo ya Mulindahabi y’uko ngo Urukiko rwavuze ko yagombaga kumenyeshwa ikosa yakoze ariko ntagenerwe indishyi zo kumusebya ari ukwitiranya uko ibintu byagenze n’uburiganya. [38] Mulindahabi avuga ko mu ibaruwa imwirukana harimo amakosa abiri, ko Urukiko rwavuze ko rimwe mu makosa yakoze yagombaga kurimenyeshwa (kopi y‟urubanza [igika cya 27], ko n‟ubwo Urukiko rutabivuze rweruye, hari irindi kosa rwemeje ko atagombaga kumenyeshwa [igika cya 26], kuvangura amakosa akaba abibonamo uburiganya. Ko kuba Urukiko rutaravanyeho icyemezo kimwirukana kandi rwari rwamaze kwemeza ko kinyuranije n‟Itegeko Nshinga rya Repubulika y‟uRwanda mu ngingo ya 18, igika cya 3, bigaragaza kwitiranya uko ibintu byagenze, kimwe no kuba atarahawe indishyi zo kumusebya ndetse n‟Urukiko ntirugire icyo rubivugaho kandi mu ibaruwa imwirukana harimo amagambo mabi atuma atabona akazi. [39] Me Rusanganwa avuga ko ibjyanye no kuba ataramenyeshejwe ikosa yabiherewe indishyi z‟amezi atatu, akaba asanga iyo mpamvu atari ingingo nshya, ko kandi kuba mu ibaruwa imwirukana haba harimo amagambo amusebya ku buryoatabona akazi ahandi asanga bitakwitwa uburiganya kuko Urukiko mu bushishozi rwemeza niba indishyi zikwiye cyangwa zidakwiye. [40] Me Iyamuremye avuga ko ingingo ya 186(6o) y‟Itegeko N°21/2012 ryo ku wa 14/06/2012 ijyanye no kwitiranya ibintu, ko Mulindahabi Fidèle ntaho agaragaza ko Urukiko rwaba ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 36

## Page 64

rwaritiranyije ibintu, ibyo yavuze bikaba bitagaragaza ingingo nshya, ahubwo akaba yasobanuye uburyo ababuranyi bitiranyije ibintu atari Urukiko rwabyitiranyije akaba asanga ikirego cye kidakwiye kwakirwa. UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [41] Ingingo ya 186(6°) y‟Itegeko Nº21/2012 ryo ku wa 14/06/2016 ryavuzwe haruguru iteganya ko Urubanza rushobora gusubirishwamo ingingo nshya, iyo mu icibwa ry‟urubanza hakozwe amakosa akabije yo kwitiranya uko ibintu byagenze cyangwa hashingiwe ku itegeko ritariho. [42] Dosiye igaragaza ko mu rubanza rusubirishwamo ingingo nshya [igika cya 23-28], Urukiko rwasanze Itegeko No13/2009 ryo ku wa 27/05/2009 rigenga umurimo ntacyo rivuga ku bijyanye n‟iseswa ry‟amasezerano mu gihe cy‟igerageza, usibye integuza, aho ngingo ya 27 y‟iryo Tegeko iteganya ko nta nteguza ishobora kubaho mu gihe cy‟igeragezwa, rushingira ku byavuzwe n‟abahanga ko igihe cy‟igeragezwa kiba kigamije gutuma umukoresha amenya niba umukozi afite ubushobozi n‟ubumenyi mu kazi , kigatuma n‟umukozi amenya ko akazi yahawe kamunogeye, rusobanura ko EWSA nayo yemera ko ikosa Mulindahabi Fidèle yakoze ryo kugonganisha inzego yagombaga kurimenyeshwa akaryisobanuraho n‟ubwo Itegeko rigenga umurimo ritabiteganya, nk‟uko ingingo ya 18, igika cya 3, y‟ Itegeko Nshinga rya Repubulika y‟u Rwanda ibiteganya, ko ntawe ushobora gufatirwa icyemezo atabanje kwisobanura kubyo aregwa, agenerwa indishyi. MULINDAHABI v. ENERGY, WATER AND SANITATION AUTHORITY (EWSA) Ltd 37

## Page 65

[43] Urukiko rurasanga Mulindahabi Fidèle yarahawe indishyi zavuzwe haruguru zikomoka kuba ataramenyeshejwe ikosa yakoze ngo aryisobanureho nubwo yari akiri mu gihe cy‟igeragezwa, iby‟uko atahawe indishyi zo kumusebya bikaba bitaba impamvu zo gusubirishamo urubanza ingingo nshya kubera ko bidateganyijwe n‟ingingo ya 186(6o) y‟Itegeko Nº21/2012 ryo ku wa 14/06/2016 ryavuzwe haruguru. Ibi byose rero bigaragaza ko nta buriganya no kwitiranya uko ibintu byagenze byabayeho. [44] Urukiko rurasanga nk‟ukobyagaragajwe haruguru, impamvu MulindahabiFidèle yatanze asubirishamo urubanza RADA0015/13/CS ingingo nshya zose ntan‟imwe ihura n‟iziteganywa n‟ingingo ya 186 y‟Itegeko Nº21/2012 ryo ku wa 14/6/2012 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y‟imanza z‟imbonezamubano, iz‟ubucuruzi, iz‟umurimo n‟iz‟ubutegetsi, bityo ikirego cye gisaba gusubirishamo ingingo nshya urwo rubanza kikaba kitagomba kwakirwa. III. ICYEMEZO CY’URUKIKO [45] Rwemeje ko ikirego cyatanzwe na Mulindahabi Fidèle cyo gusubirishamo ingingo nshya urubanza RADA0015/13/CS, rwaciwe n‟Urukiko rw‟Ikirenga ku wa 08/10/2013, kitakiriwe. [46] Rutegetse Mulindahabi Fidele kwishyura amagarama y‟urubanza angana na 100.000Frw.

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 38

## Page 66

IMANZA ZACIWE MU MIZI

## Page 68

URUBANZA RW’UBUTEGETSI

## Page 70

NSHUNGUYINKA v. RWANDA SOCIAL SECURITY BOARD (RSSB) [Rwanda URUKIKO RW‟IKIRENGA – RADA0066/12/CS (Mutashya, P.J., Gatete na Mukamulisa, J.) 22 Nyakanga 2014] Amategeko agenga imiburanishirize y’imanza z’ubutegetsi – Guhindura ikirego ku rwego rw’ubujurire – Ihinduka ry’ikigo mu gihe cy’urubanza – Ntibifatwa nko guhindura ikirego, iyo ikigo cyarezwe ku rwego rwa mbere gihindutse ku rwego rw’ubujurire hagahamagazwa icya gisimbuye. Amategeko agenga imanza z’ubutegetsi – Kurahira ku mukozi ugengwa na sitati rusange y’abakozi ba Leta – Mu gihe umukozi yirukanywe bitewe no kwanga kurahira,ntibifatwa nk’ikosa ry’akazi ku buryo mbere yo kumusezerera umukoresha yagomba kubanza kugisha inama Komisiyo y’Abakozi ba Leta, kuko indahiro ariyo igomba gushingirwaho kugirango afatwe mu buryo bwuzuye nk’umukozi wa Leta ugengwa na Sitati – Itegeko Nº22/2002 ryo kuwa 09/07/2002 rishyiraho Sitati Rusange igenga Abakozi ba Leta n’Inzego z’Imirimo ya Leta, ingingo ya 29 Amategeko agenga imanza z’ubutegetsi – Imyemerere – Nta wakwitaza uburenganzira bwo guhitamo imyemerere imunogeye ngo abangamire amategeko n’amabwiriza y’Igihugu – Itegeko Nshinga rya Repubulika y’u Rwanda ryo kuwa 04/06/2003 nkuko ryavuguruwe kugeza ubu, ingingo ya 33. Incamake y’ikibazo: Nshunguyinka yareze Caisse Sociale du Rwanda (CSR) yahindutse Rwanda Social Security Board (RSSB) mu Rukiko Rukuru asaba ko havanwaho icyemezo cyo 43

## Page 71

kumwirukana n‟indishyi zigishamikiyeho. Urukiko rwasanze n‟ubwo mbere yo kumwirukana CSR itabanje kugisha inama Komisiyo y‟Abakozi ba Leta yarirukanwe kubera impamvu yumvikana kuko yananiwe kubahiriza amabwiriza yo kurahirira ku ibendera ry‟Igihugu kandi yari umukozi wa Leta ugengwa na sitati rusange y‟abakozi ba Leta, bityo rwemeza ko icyemezo cyamufatiwe gifite ishingiro. Nshunguyinka yajuririye Urukiko rw‟Ikirenga avuga ko amabwiriza y‟irahira atamureba kuko atakozwe mbere yuko atangira akazi kandi akaba yari umukozi wa Leta ugengwa n‟amasezerano, bityo atari afite inshingano zo kurahira. agasanga rinyuranyije n‟uburenganzira bwa muntu n‟Itegeko Nshinga kuko atagombaga gukora ibinyuranye n‟imyemerere ye kuko guhitamo idini n‟imyemerere yaryo ari uburenganzira ntavogerwa. Akomeza avuga ko yashoboraga kurahirira kuri Bibiriya nkuko imyemerere ye ibiteganya, kandi ko umukoresha we yamwirukanye atabanje kugisha inama Komisiyo y‟abakozi ba Leta. Mu iburanisha, RSSB yatanze inzitizi yo kutakira ikirego kuko harezwe Caisse Sociale du Rwanda (CSR) itakibaho yasimbuwe na RSSB, bityo ikavuga ko niba hararezwe CSR, mu bujurire hakavugwa RSSB byaba ari uguhindura ikirego. Kuri iyo nzitizi, Nshunguyinka avuga ko ku rwego rwa mbere harezwe CSR, kandi kuba RSSB yarayisimbuye, bivuze ko yanayisimbuye mu nshingano zayo zose, kandi ko nta kirego cyahindutse. RSSB yabyukije indi nzintizi ivuga ko ikirego atari icy‟ubutegetsi ahubwo ari icy‟umurimo kuko cyerekeranye n‟amasezerano y‟umurimo. Nshunguyinka we avuga ko ikirego cyatanzwe ku rwego rwa mbere kigamije gutesha agaciro ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 44

## Page 72

icyemezo cy‟ubutegetsi, akaba ari nako kigomba kwakirwa ku rwego rw‟ubujurire. RSSB yatanze ubujurire bwuririye ku bundi isaba indishyi zo gusiragizwa mu manza nta mpamvu ku nzego zombi. Naho Nshunguyinka vuga ko ntayo yahabwa kuko uyiburanira ari umukozi wa Leta ubihemberwa buri kwezi, akaba asanga nta cyiyongera ku byo isanzwe imutangaho. Incamake y’icyemezo: 1. Ntibifatwa nko guhindura ikirego ku rwego rw‟ubujurire, iyo ikigo cyarezwe ku rwego rwa mbere ariko ku rwego rw‟ubujurire hagahamagazwa icyagisimbuye. Bityo rero kuba ku rwego rwa mbere hararezwe CSR nyuma ku rwego rw‟ubujurire hagahamagazwa RSSB yayisimbuye si uguhindura ikirego ku rwego rw‟ubujurire. 2. Icyemezo gisabirwa kuvaho muri uru rubanza ni icyo ubutegetsi kandi gishamikiyeho n‟indishyi zikomoka ku ngaruka zacyo. Bityo Urukiko ruburanya imanza z‟ubutegetsi nirwo rufite ububasha bwo kuruburanisha. 3. Mu gihe umukozi yirukanywe bitewe no kwanga kurahira,ntibifatwa nk‟ikosa ry‟akazi ku buryo mbere yo kumusezerera umukoresha yagomba kubanza kugisha inama Komisiyo y‟Abakozi ba Leta, kuko indahiro ariyo igomba gushingirwaho kugirango afatwe mu buryo bwuzuye nk‟umukozi wa Leta ugengwa na Sitati. 4. Nta wakwitwaza uburenganzira bwo guhitamo imyemerere imunogeye ngo abangamire amategeko n‟amabwiriza by‟Igihugu. Bityo uwajuriye yangombaga kubahiriza amabwiriza ajyanye no kurahira kw‟abakozi ba Leta. 5. N‟ubwo uburanira uregwa yakagize ibindi akora mu gihe aje kuburana bene izi manza, uwajuriye yari afite uburenganzira NSHUNGUYINKA v. RWANDA SOCIAL SECURITY BOARD (RSSB) 45

## Page 73

bwo kwiyambaza inzira zose zimurenganura yisunze ibyo amategeko ateganya, ubujurire bwe bukaba butari bugamije gusiragiza uregwa mu manza. Ubujurire nta shingiro bufite; Ubujurire bwuririye ku bundi nta shingiro bufite; Amagarama y’urubanza aherereye ku wajuriye. Amategeko yashingiweho: Itegeko Nshinga rya Repubulika y‟u Rwanda ryo kuwa 04/06/2003 nk‟uko ryavuguruwe kugeza ubu, ingingo ya 1 n‟iya 33. Itegeko Ngenga Nº51/2008 ryo kuwa 09/09/2008 rigena imiterere, imikorere n„ububasha bw‟inkiko nk‟uko ryahinduwe kandi ryujujwe kugeza ubu, ingingo ya 93. Itegeko Nº22/2002 ryo kuwa 09/07/2002 rishyiraho Sitati Rusange igenga Abakozi ba Leta n‟Inzego z‟Imirimo ya Leta, ingingo ya 29. Nta manza zifashishijwe. Urubanza I. IMITERERE Y’URUBANZA. [1] Uru rubanza rwatangiriye mu Rukiko Rukuru, Nshunguyinka arega RSSB asaba ko icyemezo cyo kumwirukana cyateshwa agaciro n‟indishyi zigishamikiyeho. Urwo rukiko rwemeje ko ikirego cye nta shingiro gifite, kuko Nshunguyinka yari umukozi wa Leta ugengwa na statut rusange ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 46

## Page 74

y‟abakozi ba Leta, kubera iyo mpamvu akaba yaragombaga kubahiriza amabwiriza yo kurahira. Urukiko rwasanze rero kuba atarabikoze byarabaye impamvu yo kumwirukana, rwemeza ko icyemezo cyamufatiwe gifite inshingiro. [2] Rwasanze kandi Nshunguyinka yaragombaga kubahiriza amabwiriza y‟umukoresha we nkuko biteganwa n‟ingingo ya 84 ya sitati rusange igenga abakozi ba Leta, akarahirira ku ibendera ry‟Igihugu nkuko biteganywa n‟ingingo ya 19 y‟itegeko N°34/2008 ryo kuwa 08/08/2008 rigena imiterere, ibisobanuro, imikoreshereze n‟iy‟ubahirizwa ry‟ibendera ry‟igihugu aho kurahirira kuri Bibiliya nkuko we yabyifuzaga. [3] Urwo Rukiko rwasanze na none, nubwo mbere yo kwirukana Nshunguyinka, RSSB itabanje kugisha inama (avis conforme) Komisiyo y‟Abakozi ba Leta nkuko biteganwa n‟ingingo ya 93 ya Sitati rusange igenga abakozi ba Leta, nyuma iyo komisiyo yaje kugenzura isanga yarirukanywe ku mpamvu zumvikana, hubahirijwe amategeko (ingingo za 28, 29 &120 za sitati igenga abakozi ba Leta). [4] Nshunguyinka yajuririye Urukiko rw‟Ikirenga, cyane cyane avuga ko amabwiriza y‟irahira atamureba kuko atakozwe mbere yuko atangira akazi, ko kandi umukoresha we yamwirukanye atabanje kugisha inamaKomisiyo y‟abakozi ba Leta. [5] Iburanisha mu ruhame ryabaye kuwa 17/06/2014, Nshunguyinka aburanirwa na Me Nkurunziza François-Xavier, naho RSSB yahoze ari CSR ihagarariwe na Me Kamonyo Rugaba Serge. NSHUNGUYINKA v. RWANDA SOCIAL SECURITY BOARD (RSSB) 47

## Page 75

II. ISESENGURA RY’IBIBAZO BIGIZE URUBANZA Inzitizi yo kutakira ikirego kubera ko harezwe Caisse Sociale du Rwanda (CSR) itakibaho. [6] Me Kamonyo uburanira RSSB yabyukije inzitizi yo kuba hararezwe CSR kandi hariho itegeko ryayivanyeho igasimburwa na RSSB. Asobanura kandi ko niba hararezwe CSR, mu bujurire hakavugwa RSSB byaba ari uguhindura ikirego, bikaba binyuranye n‟ibiteganywa n‟ingingo ya 4 y‟Itegeko Nº21/2012 ryo kuwa 14/06/2012 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y‟imanza z‟imbonezamubano, iz‟ubucuruzi, iz‟umurimo n‟iz„ubutegetsi. [7] Me Nkurunziza uhagarariye Nshunguyinka avuga ko iyo nzitizi nta shingiro ifite, kubera ko ku rwego rwa mbere harezwe CSR, kandi niba RSSB yarasimbuye CSR, bivuze ko yanayisimbuye mu nshingano zayo zose. Akomeza avuga ko nta kirego cyahindutse, ko niba RSSB yarasimbuye CSR, ubu hakwandikwa ko uregwa ari RSSB. UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [8] Urukiko rurasanga iyi nzitizi nta gaciro yahabwa kubera ko ku rwego rwa mbere harezwe CSR yagengwaga n‟Itegeko Nº60/2008 ryo kuwa 10/09/2008 ubu yasimbuwe na RSSB yashyizweho n‟Itegeko Nº45/2010 ryo kuwa 14/12/2010, bikaba byumvikana ko hatangwa ikirego mu bujurire handitswe ko haregwa CSR yari yarezwe no ku rwego rubanza, bitabujije ko niba hagati aho RSSB yarasimbuye CSR, ubu ariyo irebwa n‟uru rubanza. Ntabwo rero ikirego cyahinduwe ku rwego ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 48

## Page 76

rw‟ubujurire nkuko uhagarariye RSSB abivuga, kuko byumvikana ko niba hari hahamagajwe na none CSR ku rwego rw‟ubujurire, nta gushidikanya ko kuri uru rwego rw„ubujurire urubanza rureba RSSB yasimbuye CSR. Inzitizi yo kuba urubanza ari urw’ubutegetsi kandi nyamara ikiburanwa ari ugusesa amasezerano y’akazi. [9] Me Kamonyo asobanura ko ku rwego rwa mbere yagaragaje ko ikiregoatari icy‟ubutegetsi (administratif) ahubwo ari icy‟umurimo (social) kuko cyerekeranye n‟amasezerano y„umurimo ariko umucamanza akaba ntacyo yabivuzeho. [10] Me Nkurunziza we asobanura ko ikirego cyatanzwe ku rwego rwa mbere kigamije gutesha agaciro icyemezo cy‟ubutegetsi, akaba ari nako kigomba kwakirwa ku rwego rw‟ubujurire. UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [11] Urukiko rusanga iyi nzitizi nta gaciro yahabwa kubera ko icyemezo gisabirwa kuvaho cyafashwe ari icy‟ubutegetsi nkuko biteganywa n‟ingingo ya 93(2º) y‟Itegeko Ngenga Nº51/2008 ryo kuwa 09/09/2008 rigena imiterere, imikorere n„ububasha bw‟inkiko nkuko ryahinduwe kandi ryujujwe kugeza ubu, kikaba gishamikiyeho n‟indishyi zikomoka ku ngaruka z‟icyo cyemezo cyafashwe.

NSHUNGUYINKA v. RWANDA SOCIAL SECURITY BOARD (RSSB) 49

## Page 77

Ikibazo cyo kumenya niba Nshunguyinka Eric yarirukanywe muburyo bunyuranyije n’amategeko. [12] Me Nkurunziza avuga ko Nshunguyinka aburanira yari umukozi waLeta ugengwa n‟amasezerano (sous contrat), ko atari afite inshingano zo kurahira kubera ko atari umukozi wa Leta ugengwa na “statut”. [13] Akomeza asobanura ko Nshunguyinka yirukanywe hatabanje kugishwa inama Komisiyo y‟Abakozi ba Leta, anirukanwa mu buryo bunyuranyije n‟uburenganzira bwa muntu, kubera ko atarahiriye ku ibendera ry‟Igihugu, ku bwe akaba asanga ibyo binyuranyije n‟Itegeko Nshinga, kuko atagombaga gukora ibinyuranye n‟imyemerere ye. Avuga ko guhitamo idini n‟imyemerere yaryo ari uburenganzira ntavogerwa, kubw‟izo mpamvu akaba ataragombaga kwirukanwa kubera ko yanze kurahirira ku ibendera kuko yashoboraga kurahirira kuri Bibiriya nk‟uko yabyifuzaga kubera ko imyemerere ye aribyo iteganya. [14] Me Kamonyo uburanira RSSB avuga ko mu nyandiko Nshunguyinka yashyikirijwe ahabwa akazi, ntahagaragara ko yagengwaga n‟amasezerano y‟igihe runaka (sous contrat). Asobanura ko mu nyandiko zashyikirijwe Urukiko, yagaragaje ko hari amategeko ateganya ko abakozi ba Leta barahira mu gihe bagiye gutangira akazi. Akomeza asobanura ko hari n‟amabwiriza ya Minisitiri w‟Abakozi ba Leta n‟Umurimo agena uburyo irahira rikorwa, akaba ari byo Nshunguyinka yasabwe gukora akabyanga, ku bwe akaba asanga yarirukanywe mu buryo bukurikije amategeko.

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 50

## Page 78

UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [15] Urukiko rurasanga hari ibarwa Nº9.00/2022/RI/umc yo ku itariki ya 27/05/2010 CSR yandikiye Nshunguyinka Eric imumenyesha ko ahawe akazi (as professional officer) guhera kuwa 01/06/2010, bivuze ko urwo ari rumwe mu nzego z‟akazi gakorwa n‟abakozi ba Leta bagengwa na statut; iyo barwa ikaba kandi yri iherekejwe (attached) n‟amasezerano (Terms of Employment) yasinywe n‟impande zombi kuwa 01/06/2010, mu ngingo yayo ya 3 akaba ateganya gusa igihe cy‟igeragezwa (probation period) cy‟amezi 6 gishobora kwongerwa inshuro imwe gusa. Urukiko rusanga rero iby‟uko Nshunguyinka yari umukozi ‚sous contrat„ nta gaciro byahabwa. [16] Ingingo ya mbere, igika cya mbere cy‟Itegeko Nshinga rya Repubulika y‟u Rwanda ryo kuwa 04/06/2003 nkuko ryavuguruwe kugeza ubu, iteganya ko Leta y‟u Rwanda idashingiye ku idini. [17] Ingingo ya 29 y‟Itegeko Nº22/2002 ryo kuwa 09/07/2002 rishyiraho Sitati Rusange igenga Abakozi ba Leta n‟Inzego z‟Imirimo ya Leta ryakurikizwaga igihe Nshunguyinka yasezererwaga ku kazi, yateganyaga ko mbere yo gutangira akazi, umukozi wa Leta arahirira imbere y‟Umuyobozi ufite ububasha bwo kwakira indahiro. [18] Urukiko rurasanga hari ibarwa Nº2119.19.19/19 yo kuwa 16/08/2010 n‟indi Nº035/19.23 yo kuwa 05/04/2011 Minisitiri w‟Abakozi ba Leta n‟Umurimo yandikiye Abayobozi b‟Ibigo bya Leta byose atanga amabwiriza yo kurahiza Abakozi ba Leta, muri iyo barwa hakaba hateganyije ko harahizwa abakozi batarahiye ku mpamvu zitandukanye, abatabikoze NSHUNGUYINKA v. RWANDA SOCIAL SECURITY BOARD (RSSB) 51

## Page 79

bagafatirwa ibihano birimo ugusezererwa ku kazi bikozwe n‟Umuyobozi ubifitiye ububasha nyuma y‟integuza y‟iminsi cumi n‟itanu(15) mu gihe umukozi yanze kurahira. [19] Urukiko rurasanga kandi hari ibarwa Nº9.00/1661/RI/umc yo kuwa 27/04/2011 CSR yandikiye Nshunguyinka imusaba ibisobanuro ku mpamvu yo kutitabira irahira ryari riteganyijwe inamuha n‟integuza y‟iminsi 15 kugirango abe yubahirije uwo muhango, atabikora agasezererwa; Nshunguyinka ayisubiza kuwa 03/05/2011 avuga ko atanze kurahira ariko ntagire icyo akora, noneho kubera ko yabyanze, kuwa 04/05/2011 CSR imwandikira ibarwa Nº9.00/1721/R.I/umc imwirukana ku mirimo nkuko amabwiriza ya Minisitiri w‟Abakozi ba Leta n‟Umurimo abiteganya. [20] Urukiko rurasanga mu gihe Nshunguyinka yirukanywe bitewe no kwanga kurahira, bidakwiye gufatwa nk‟ikosa ry‟akazi ku buryo mbere yo kumusezerera CSR yagombaga kubanza kugisha inama Komisiyo y‟Abakozi ba Leta, kuko indahiro ye ariyo yagombaga ahubwo gushingirwaho kugirango afatwe mu buryo bwuzuye nk‟umukozi wa Leta ugengwa na Sitati hashingiwe ku biteganywa n‟ingingo ya 19 y‟itegeko N°34/2008 ryo ku wa 08/08/2008 ryavuzwe haruguru. Ntiyakwitwaza kandi ko yari asanzwe akorera CSR ngo bimuhe uburenganzira bwo kwanga kubahiriza amabwiriza ya Minisitiri w‟Abakozi ba Leta n‟Umurimo ateganya ko n‟abakozi bari basanzwe bakora batarahiye ku mpamvu zinyuranye bagomba kurahira, batabyubahiriza bagasezererwa ku kazi. [21] Urukiko rurasanga kandi Nshunguyinka atakwitwaza imyemerere ye ngo yange kurahirira ku ibendera ry‟igihugu avuga ko habayeho ukubangamira uburenganzira bwa muntu, mu gihe Leta y‟u Rwanda idashingiye ku idini nk‟uko ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 52

## Page 80

byagaragajwe, ku bw‟izo mpamvu akaba yaragombaga kurahira mu buryo buteganywa n„ingingo ya 13 y‟Itegeko Nº34/2008 ryo kuwa 08/08/2008 rigena imiterere, ibisobanuro, imikoreshereze n‟iyubahirizwa ry‟Ibendera ry‟Igihugu iteganya ko “abantu bari mu Butegetsi Nyubahirizategeko, abari mu Butegetsi Nshingamategeko n‟abari mu Butegetsi bw‟Ubucamanza bateganywa n‟amategeko n‟abandi bose babisabwa n‟amategeko yihariye abagenga barahirira imbere y‟Ibendera ry‟Igihugu”. [22] Hakurikijwe ibimaze kuvugwa nanone, uburenganzira umuntu afite bwo guhitamo imyemerere imunogeye bunashimangirwa mu Itegeko Nshinga rya Repubulika y‟u Rwanda mu ngingo ya 33, ntawe ukwiye kubwitwaza ngo abangamire amategeko n‟amabwiriza y‟Igihugu. Ku byerekeranye n’ubujurire bwa RSSB bwuririye ku bundi. [23] Uhagarariye RSSB avuga ko ku rwego rwa mbere yagenewe gusa 200.000Frw, akaba asanga ikomeje gusiragizwa mu manza nta mpamvu, ku bw‟izo mpamvu ikaba ikwiye kugenerwa 500.000Frw ku nzego zombi. [24] Uhagarariye Nshunguyinka asanga iyi mpamvu y‟ubujurire nta gaciro yahabwa, kubera ko uburanira RSSB ari umukozi wa Leta ubihemberwa buri kwezi, akaba asanga nta cyiyongera ku byo isanzwe imutangaho. [25] Urukiko rusanga nubwo uburanira RSSB yakagize ibindi akora mu gihe aje kuburana bene izi manza, Nshunguyinka wumvaga ko yarenganyijwe yari afite uburenganzira bwo kwiyambaza inzira zose zimurenganura yisunze ibyo amategeko NSHUNGUYINKA v. RWANDA SOCIAL SECURITY BOARD (RSSB) 53

## Page 81

ateganya, akaba yararegeye inkiko amaze gutakambira urwego rwamufatiye icyemezo cyo kumusezerera ku kazi, ubujurire bwe bukaba butari bugamije na gato gusiragiza uregwa mu manza, akaba ariyo mpamvu ubujurire bwuririye ku bwe nta gaciro bwahabwa. III. ICYEMEZO CY’URUKIKO. [26] Rwemeje ko ubujurire bwa Nshunguyinka Eric nta shingiro bufite; [27] Rwemeje ko ubujurire bwa Rwanda Social Security Board bwuririye ku bundi nabwo nta shingiro bufite; [28] Rutegetse Nshunguyinka Eric kwishyura amagarama y‟urubanza ahwanye na 50.300Frw; [29] Ruvuze ko imikirize y‟urubanza rwajuririwe RAD0092/11/HC/KIG idahindutse.

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 54

## Page 82

URUBANZA MBONEZAMUBANO

## Page 84

KANYANJA N’ABANDI v. MUKANTABANA N’ABANDI [Rwanda URUKIKO RW‟IKIRENGA – RCAA0002/13/CS (Rugege, P.J., Mugenzi na Kanyange, J.) 25 Nzeri 2005] Amategeko agenga umuryango – Irage – Isangiramutungo – Gusohoka mu isangiramutungo – Uwarazwe umutungo agomba kugira uburenganzira busesuye bwo gusohoka mu isangiramutungo – Itegeko N°22/99 ryo kuwa 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 46 iya 56 n’iya 91. Amategeko agenga ibimenyetso – Inshingano yo gutanga ibimenyetso – Uvuga ko icyo yategekwaga gukora cyagaragajwe n’ibimenyetso atagitegetswe kugikora, agomba kugaragaza impamvu zakimukuyeho – Itegeko Nº21/2012 ryo kuwa 14/06/2012 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi, ingingo ya 9(2). Indishyi – Igenwa ry’indishyi mbonezamusaruro – Indishyi mbonezamusaruro ntizigenwa mu bushishozi bw’Urukiko igihe zigizwe n’umubare ushobora kubarwa. Amategeko agenga imiburanishirize y’imanza mbonezamubano – Ubujurire – Ikirego gishya – Ikirego gishya nticyakirwa ku rwego rw’ubujurire – Itegeko Nº21/2012 ryo kuwa 14/06/2012 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi, ingingo ya 168. 57

## Page 85

Incamake y’ikibazo: Buhiga yakoze irage agena uburyo igabana ry‟umutungo rizakorwa hagati y‟abazungura be ariko avuga ko umutungo asize utazagurishwa umuntu utari uwo mu muryango we. Abazungura be baregeye Urukiko Rwisumbuye bavuga ko ibivugwa mu irage bitashyizwe mu bikorwa, banasaba gusohoka mu mutungo rusange ndetse no kugabana indi mitungo itavugwa mu irage. Urwo Rukiko rwemeje ko umutungo wose uvugwa mu irage ryakozwe na nyakwigendera ndetse nutavugwamo ugizwe n‟ishyamba, isambu biri i Cyarwa hamwe n‟inka ndwi nizazikomotseho, ugomba kugabanwa abantu bavugwa mu irage abapfuye bagahagararirwa n‟abana babo. Rukomeza ruvuga ko mu kurangiza urubanza habaho kugurisha, mu gihe umwe mu bazungura adatanze amafaranga bagenzi be bemera, nta mpamvu umutungo utagurwa n‟undi muntu wese. Urukiko rwategetse kandi ko mu mutungo uzungurwa havamo amafaranga y‟igihembo cy‟avoka ndetse n‟indishyi z‟akababaro. Mukantabana, Kanyanja na Nibarere bajuriye mu Rukiko Rukuru maze rwemeza ko ubujurire bwa Kanyanja na Nibarere nta shingiro bufite ariko ubwa Mukantabana bufite ishingiro kuri bimwe naho ubujurire bwuririye ku bundi bwa Kabanyana nabwo bufite ishingiro kuri bimwe. Urukiko rwagennye mu bushishozi bwarwo ko Kanyanja na Nibarere baha abazungura ba Buhiga 200.000.000Frw yavuye mu bukode bw‟amazu bashinzwe gucunga ndetse bagafatanya gutanga amafaranga y‟igihembo cy‟avoka n‟indishyi z‟akababaro, ayo mafaranga akava mu mitungo yabo. Kanyanja na Nibarere bajuriye mu Rukiko rw‟Ikirenga bavuga ko ibyategetswe n‟inkiko zabanje binyuranyije n‟irage, ko kandi amafaranga Urukiko rwabategetse kwishyura ntaho ashingiye ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 58

## Page 86

kandi indishyi mbonezamusaruro zishingirwa ku bimenyetso bifatika. Bavuga kandi ko Urukiko rwirengagije ko mu mategeko y‟u Rwanda urega ariwe utanga ibimenyetso. Abaregwa bireguye bavuga ko batagomba guhatirwa kuguma mu mutungo rusange, ko bafite uburenganzira ku mutungo barazwe kandi ntakuntu bava mu mutungo rusange hatabaye kugurisha, bakaba basanga igihe nta muntu mu muryango ubonye amafaranga umutungo wagurwa n‟abandi. Ku bijyanye nuko uregwa ariwe utanga ibimenyetso, bavuga ko Urukiko rushobora guhatira ufite ibimenyetso kubigaragaza kugirango ukuri kumenyekane ariyo mpamvu Kanyanya na Nibarere bategetswe gutanga ibimenyetso by‟uko ibyo bari bategetswe gukora byubahirijwe. Abaregwa bakomeza bavuga ko abajuriye aribo batumye yinjira mu rubanza bakaba bagomba kubitangira indishyi zinyuranye. Incamake y’icyemezo: 1. Uwarazwe umutungo agomba kugira uburenganzira busesuye kuriwo ni muri urwo rwego rero hagomba kubaho gusohoka mu isangiramutungo kandi ntibyashoboka hatabayeho igurishwa ryawo. Bityo kugirango hubahirizwe icyifuzo cya Buhiga, amahirwe yo kugura agomba guhabwa abo mu muryango we ariko batabona ubushobozi bwo kugura umutungo ukaba wagurwa n‟abatari abanyamuryango we; ibi rero bikaba bitanyuranyije n‟irage ahubwo ari ugushyira mu bikorwa ibyo ryategetse. 2. Uvuga ko icyo yategekwaga gukora cyagaragajwe n‟ibimenyetso atagitegetswe kugikora, agomba kugaragaza impamvu zakimukuyeho. Iyo abiburiye ibimenyetso, uwo baburana aramutsinda. Kubw‟ibyo Kanyanja na Nibarere bagomba kugaragaza uburyo bacunze umutungo. KANYANJA N’ABANDI v. MUKANTABANA N’ABANDI 59

## Page 87

3. Indishyi mbonezamusaruro ntizigenwa mu bushishozi bw‟Urukiko igihe zigizwe n‟umusaruro ushobora kubarwa. Bityo amafaranga yavuye mu bukode bw‟inzu ashobora kubarwa mu buryo bw‟imibare harebwa ayinjiye n‟ayakoreshejwe. 4. Kuba abasabwa gutanga indishyi ataribo bafashe iyambere ngo barege, ntibyababuza kuzicibwa igihe abaziregera barinze kwiyambaza inkiko kugira ngo barenganurwe. 5. Ikirego gishya nticyakirwa ku rwego rw‟ubujurire. Bityo kuba ikirego ku inyungu zikomoka ku inka Buhiga yasize kitarigeze gitangwa mu nkiko zabanje bituma kitakwakirwa muri uru Rukiko. Ubujurire bufite ishingiro kuri bimwe; Ubujurire bwuririye ku bundi bufite ishingiro kuri bimwe; Abajuriye bategetswe gufatanya gutanga amagarama y’urubanza. Amategeko yashingiweho: Itegeko N°22/99 ryo kuwa 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 46 iya 56 n‟iya 91. Itegeko Nº21/2012 ryo kuwa 14/06/2012 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y‟imanza z‟imbonezamubano, iz`ubucuruzi, iz‟umurimo n‟iz‟ubutegetsi, ingingo ya 9(2) n‟iya 168. Itegeko ryo kuwa 30/07/1888 rigenga amasezerano cyangwa imirimo nshinganwa, ingingo ya 258. ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 60

## Page 88

Nta manza zifashishijwe. Urubanza I. IMITERERE Y’URUBANZA [1] Buhiga Arcade yitabye Imana asiga akoze irage, bamwe mu bazungura be baregera urukiko bavuga ko ibivugwa muri iryo rage bitashyizwe mu bikorwa, banasaba gusohoka mu mutungo rusange no kugabana indi mitungo itavugwa mu irage. [2] Urukiko Rwisumbuye rwa Huye rwaciye urubanza RC0173/010/TGI/HYE kuwa 29/02/2012 rwemeza ko imitungo yasizwe na Buhiga Arcade igomba kugabanywa, ko mu irangiza ry‟urubanza hagabanywa imitungo yose ivugwa mu irage ryakozwe na Buhiga kuwa 07/08/2000 hamwe n‟itagaragaramo igizwe n‟ishyamba ry‟inturusi riri i Cyarwa Sumo, isambu iri i Cyarwa Sumo, inka indwi n‟izazikomotseho, ikagabanwa n‟abantu barindwi nk‟uko bavuzwe mu irage, abapfuye bagahagararirwa n‟abana babo, ko kandi mu kurangiza urubanza habaho kugurisha, mu gihe umwe mu bazungura adatanze amafaranga bagenzi be bemera, nta mpamvu umutungo utagurwa n‟undi muntu wese. Rwategetse ko no ku birebana n‟umutungo wavuzwe haruguru utagaragara mu irage, nawo ugabanwa n‟abazungura ba Buhiga habaho kugurisha bikozwe mu buryo bumwe n‟ibyavuzwe ku birebana n‟umutungo uvugwa mu irage. [3] Urukiko rwategetse kandi ko mu mutungo wasizwe na Buhiga havamo 2.000.000Frw agahabwa Uwineza Claire na Muhimpundu Clarisse y‟igihembo cya avoka na 3.000.000Frw KANYANJA N’ABANDI v. MUKANTABANA N’ABANDI 61

## Page 89

y‟indishyi z‟akababaro kubera ko abazungura ba Buhiga bakomeje kubananiza banga kuva mu isangiramutungo bituma babashora mu manza. [4] Ku birebana n‟amafaranga yavuye mu mutungo uzungurwa, rwasanze abarega batarayagaragarije ibimenyetso mu gihe abaregwa bavuga ko ayo mafaranga yakoreshejwe mu rwego rwo gusana no gufata neza umutungo. [5] Mukantabana Josepha, Kanyanja Emilienne na Nibarere Costasie bajuririye urwo rubanza mu Rukiko Rukuru, urugereko rwa Nyanza, ruca urubanza RCA0094/12/HC/NYA kuwa 18/12/2012 rwemeza ko ubujurire bwa Kanyanja n‟ubwa Nibarere nta shingiro bufite, ko ubujurire bwa Mukantabana bufite ishingiro kuri bimwe, ko n‟ubujurire bwuririye ku bundi bwa Kabanyana bufite ishingiro kuri bimwe. [6] Rwemeje ko Kanyanja na Nibarere baha abazungura ba Buhiga 200.000.000Frw agenwe mu bushishozi bw‟urukiko, akomoka ku bukode bw‟amazu bashinzwe gucunga mu gihe cy‟imyaka 12, buri wese agatanga 100.000.000Frw, bagafatanya kandi guha Uwineza Claire na Muhimpundu Clarisse 2.000.000Frw y‟igihembo cya avoka na 3.000.000Frw y‟indishyi z‟akababaro, buri wese agatanga 2.500.000Frw avuye mu mitungo yihariye yabo. [7] Kanyanja Emilienne na Nibarere Costasie bajuririye Urukiko rw‟Ikirenga bavuga ko ibyategetswe n‟inkiko zabanje binyuranyije n‟irage, ko kandi urukiko rwabategetse kwishyura 200.000.000Frw ntaho rubishingiye. Bavuga kandi ko Urukiko rwavuze ko abajuriye baheje abandi mu mutungo kandi ataribo bonyine bashinzwe kuwukurikirana, bacibwa n‟indishyi zo gushora abandi mu manza kandi ataribo batanze ikirego. ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 62

## Page 90

[8] Urubanza rwaburanishijwe bwa mbere kuwa 18/03/2014 Kanyanja na Nibarere bahagarariwe na Me Niyomugabo Christophe hamwe na Me Munyaneza G.Pascal, Kabanyana Charlotte ahagarariwe na Me Habinshuti Yves, Rugomwa Fidèle yunganiwe na Me Ndagijimana Augustin anahagarariye abandi bazungura ba Kanyumba Margueritte, abazungura ba Hategekimana Thacien na Mbarushimana François bahamagajwe ahatazwi batitabye, urubanza ruburanishwa badahari. [9] Habanje gusuzumwa inzitizi yatanzwe na Me Habinshuti hamwe na Me Ndagijimana ishingiye ku biteganywa n‟ingingo ya 28 y‟Itegeko Ngenga Nº03/2012/OL ryo kuwa 13/06/2012 rigena imiterere, imikorere n‟ububasha by‟Urukiko rw‟Ikirenga kuko basanga mu nkiko zabanje abajuriye baratsinzwe ku mpamvu zimwe, Urukiko rwemeza ko iyo nzitizi nta shingiro ifite, urubanza rukomeza mu maburanisha yakurikiye hasuzumwa ingingo z‟ubujurire z‟abajuriye. II. IBIBAZO BIRI MU RUBANZA N’ISESENGURWA RYABYO 1. Kumenya niba inkiko zabanje zarategetse ibinyuranye n’irage. [10] Ababuranira Kanyanja na Nibarere bavuga ko ibyategetswe n‟inkiko zabanje binyuranye n‟irage bikananyuranya n‟ikirego abarega bari batanze. Basobanura ko Buhiga Arcade yateganyije uko igabana hagati y‟abazungura be rizakorwa, ko yavuze ko umutungo asize utazagurishwa umuntu utari uwo mu muryango we, nyamara Urukiko Rukuru rwemeza umwanzuro w‟Urukiko Rwisumbuye urebana n‟uko mu rwego KANYANJA N’ABANDI v. MUKANTABANA N’ABANDI 63

## Page 91

rwo kugabana umutungo, hazabaho igurisha ko kandi mu gihe umwe mu bazungura adatanze amafaranga bagenzi be bemera, nta mpamvu utagurwa n‟undi wese, bisobanuye ko ibyemejwe mu irage byateshejwe agaciro kandi nta muburanyi wabiregeye ahubwo bose bemeranya ku irage, icyaregewe akaba ari ukudakora ibyo ryateganyije. [11] Bavuga ko mu gihe hagira ushaka gusohoka mu irage, byakorwa habanje kubaho ibarura ry‟umutungo uzungurwa hakamenyekana uruhare rwa buri wese, uvuyemo akagurisha umugabane we ku bandi bo mu muryango nk‟uko irage ryabigennye. [12] Me Habinshuti uburanira Kabanyana (nawe uhagarariye abana be), avuga ko batagomba guhatirwa kuguma mu mutungo rusange nk‟uko biteganywa n‟ingingo ya 33 y‟Igitabo cya gatatu cy‟urwunge rw‟amategeko mbonezamubano, ko kandi hashingiwe ku ngingo ya 46 y‟Itegeko ryerekeye imicungire y‟umutungo w‟abashakanye, impano n‟izungura, abo aburanira bafite uburenganzira ku mutungo barazwe, wagabanywa hashingiwe ku biteganywa n‟ingingo ya 91 y‟Itegeko rimaze kuvugwa hakurikijwe “expertise” yakozwe, mu gihe uwo mu muryango atabonye amafaranga abandi bemera umutungo ukaba wagurwa n‟abandi bo hanze. Akomeza avuga ko Kabanyana yahabwa 1/7 cy‟umutungo wagaragajwe na “expertise”, akanahabwa umugabane we ku mafaranga 909.480.000Frw yavuye mu bukode bw‟amazu Buhiga yasize abazwe mu gihe cy‟imyaka 13. [13] Me ndagijimana uburanira Mukantabana Josepha n‟abazungura ba Kanyumba avuga ko kuba umucamanza yaravuze ko igihe cy‟igabana ry‟umutungo abantu bo hanze ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 64

## Page 92

bashobora kugura, byatewe n‟uko yari yabisabwe kuko abo aburanira basanga ikigomba gushyirwa imbere ari uko umutungo wegukanwa n‟uwo mu muryango uzatanga amafaranga menshi, ariko mu gihe atabonetse abo hanze bakaba bakwemererwa kugura. [14] Asobanura ko abo aburanira bemera ko irage ryakurikizwa ku byemewe n‟amategeko, hakubahirizwa ibiteganywa n‟ingingo ya 29 y‟Itegeko nshinga, naho ku bijyanye n‟imitungo idashobora kugabanywa, ikagurishwa, umusaruro uvuyemo ukagabanywa. Avuga kandi ko ku birebana na Mbarushimana, urukiko rwategeka ko azungura Se gusa kuko adasangiye ababyeyi bombi n‟abandi bazungura. [15] Rugomwa nawe avuga ko mu rwego rwo gusohoka mu irage, asanga abazungura bajya hamwe bakagena agaciro k‟umutungo uzungurwa, uwo mu muryango ushatse kuvamo agatanga igiciro cyumvikanyweho ariko bitazitiye abo hanze bashobora gutanga amafaranga menshi kuko muri icyo gihe abazungura bose babivanamo inyungu. UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [16] Ikibazo kigomba gukemurwa muri uru rubanza ni icyo kumenya niba mu gusohoka mu mutungo rusange uvugwa mu irage rya Buhiga, habaho kuwugurisha kandi ugashobora no kugurwa n‟abatari abo mu muryango wa Buhiga. [17] Mu irage Buhiga yakoze mbere yo kwitaba Imana, yagaragaje icyifuzo cy‟uko umutungo asigiye umuryango we utagurishwa, keretse bamwe mu bazungura bemeye kugurisha, imigabane yabo ikagurwa n‟abandi bo mu muryango. Urukiko KANYANJA N’ABANDI v. MUKANTABANA N’ABANDI 65

## Page 93

rurasanga ariko, bamwe mu bavugwa mu irage basaba gusohoka mu mutungo rusange nk‟uko bisobanuwe mu kirego cyatanzwe, bakagira uburenganzira busesuye ku ruhare rwabo, ibyo basaba kandi bikaba byubahirije ibiteganywa n‟ingingo ya 46 y‟Itegeko No22/99 ryo kuwa 12/11/1999 ryuzuza Igitabo cya mbere cy‟urwunge rw‟amategeko mbonezamubano kandi rishyiraho igice cya gatanu cyerekeye imicungire y‟umutungo w‟abashyingiranwe, impano n‟izungura, iteganya ko umurage ari ikintu cyangwa ibintu bitanzwe na nyirabyo akiriho, ubihawe akabyegukana uwabimuhaye atakiriho. [18] Ababuranyi bose bemeranya ku isohoka mu mutungo rusange, icyo batemeranyaho akaba ari uburyo byakorwamo. N‟ubwo uru rukiko rwemera ko icyifuzo cy‟uwaraze kigomba kubahirizwa hakurikijwe ibiteganywa n‟ingingo ya 56 y‟Itegeko No22/99 ryo kuwa 12/11/1999 ryavuzwe haruguru, iteganya ko irage ari igikorwa umuntu akora agena amerekezo y‟umutungo we mu gihe azaba atakiriho, akagaragaza ibyifuzo bye bya nyuma, rurasanga na none hatabura kwitabwa ku byifuzo bya bamwe mu barazwe mu gihe bagaragaje impungenge zishingiye ku ishyirwa mu bikorwa ry‟icyifuzo cy‟uwaraze. [19] Urukiko rurasanga mu rwego rwo gusohoka mu mutungo rusange wasizwe na Buhiga, ari ngombwa ko uwo mutungo ugurishwa nkuko byemejwe mu manza zabanje bikaba kandi binahura n‟ibiteganywa n‟ingingo ya 91 y‟Itegeko Nº22/99 ryo kuwa 12/11/1999 ryavuzwe haruguru, ivuga ko “isambu itarengeje hegitari imwe n‟icyaricyo cyose kidashobora kugabanywa bidashobora gucibwamo imirwi, ahubwo ba nyirabyo bumvikana uburyo bwo kubigurisha cyangwa bwo kubibyaza umusaruro ibivuyemo akaba aribyo bagabana”, ibi ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 66

## Page 94

bikaba byakorwa habanje kubaho igenagaciro ry‟uwo mutungo ryemeranyijweho n‟abazungura bose. [20] Urukiko rurasanga kandi mu rwego rwo kubahiriza icyifuzo cya Buhiga, amahirwe yo kugura (priorité) agomba guhabwa abo mu muryango we, ariko bitewe n‟impungenge zagaragajwe na bamwe mu bazungura z‟uko hari abatabona ubushobozi bwo kugura, muri icyo gihe umutungo wagurwa n‟abatari abo mu muryango wa Buhiga kuko bitabaye ibyo gusohoka mu mutungo rusange bitaba bigishobotse kandi nyamara uwarazwe umutungo agomba kugira uburenganzira busesuye kuri wo. [21] Urukiko rurasanga kwemeza ibimaze kuvugwa, ari nabyo byemejwe mu manza zabanje, atari ukunyuranya n‟irage nk‟uko abajuriye babivuga ahubwo ari ugushaka uburyo bwo gushyira mu bikorwa ibyo ryategetse kandi binahuye n‟ibyo itegeko riteganya, nta n‟ubwo ari ugucira urubanza ku kitararegewe kuko abareze basabye kuva mu mutungo rusange, bityo impamvu y‟ubujurire ya mbere ikaba nta shingiro ifite. 2. Ku birebana n’amafaranga 200.000.000Frw abajuriye bategetswe kwishyura. [22] Ababuranira Kanyanja na Nibarere bavuga ko Urukiko Rukuru rwabategetse kwishyura 200.000.000Frw mu buryo bunyuranyije n‟amategeko kuko nk‟indishyi mbonezamusaruro, zagombye gushingira ku bimenyetso bifatika. Bavuga kandi ko Urukiko rwashingiye ku nyandiko z‟abahanga zinyuranye n‟itegeko kuko zivuga ko uregwa ariwe utanga ibimenyetso mu gihe ingingo ya 9 y‟Itegeko ryerekeye imiburanishirize y‟imanza z‟imbonezamubano, iz‟ubucuruzi, iz‟umurimo n‟iz‟ubutegetsi, iteganya ko ibimenyetso bitangwa n‟urega, ko KANYANJA N’ABANDI v. MUKANTABANA N’ABANDI 67

## Page 95

rero Urukiko rwanyuranyije n‟ibiteganywa n‟ingingo ya 6 y‟itegeko rimaze kuvugwa ivuga ko inyandiko z‟abahanga zitashingirwaho iyo zinyuranye n‟amategeko y‟u Rwanda. [23] Bavuga kandi ko Urukiko Rukuru rwemeje ko baheje abandi mu mutungo uzungurwa kandi nyamara ataribo bonyine bashinzwe gukurikirana ibyawo kuko mu irage hateganyijwe inama y‟umuryango irimo na Mukantabana Josepha, ko no mu Rukiko Rukuru Rugomwa yemeye ko bahamagawe n‟Umukuru w‟Umuryango hagamijwe kureba uburyo bacungira hamwe umutungo basangiye ariko yanga kwitaba. [24] Uburanira Kabanyana avuga ko n‟ubwo ingingo ya 9 yavuzwe haruguru itegeka urega gutanga ibimenyetso by‟ibyo aregera, ku birebana n‟uru rubanza Nibarere ari we wakoranaga amasezerano y‟ubukode n‟abakodesha, amakuru babashije kubona akaba ari uko abakodesha bishyura hagati ya 300.000Frw na 200.000Frw buri kwezi, ko ariko urukiko rushobora guhatira ufite ibimenyetso kubigaragaza kugira ngo ukuri kumenyekane. Avuga ko hashingiwe ku makuru bafite, amafaranga yavuye mu bukode yagombye kuba angana na 909.480.000Frw hamaze kuvamo amafaranga yakoreshejwe (charges). [25] Uburanira Mukantabana n‟abazungura ba Kanyumba avuga ko ku birebana n‟amafaranga yavuye mu bukode, basanga yagombye kuba 699.600.000Frw ariko umucamanza agena 200.000.000Frw, ko mu bimenyetso abo baburana batanze nta masezerano y‟ubukode bigeze bagaragaza cyangwa ngo bagaragaze amafaranga yinjiye ahubwo bavuze gusa amafaranga yasohotse. Akomeza avuga ko abajuriye birengagiza ibiteganywa n‟igika cya kabiri cy‟ingingo ya 9 yavuzwe haruguru kibategeka gutanga ibimenyetso by‟uko ibyo ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 68

## Page 96

bari bategetswe gukora babyubahirije, ko inyandiko z‟abahanga zashingiweho zahuzwa n‟ibivugwa muri icyo gika. [26] Rugomwa Fidèle nawe avuga ko Kanyanja na Nibarere bikubiye umutungo, ko kandi nta sanwa ry‟amazu ryabayeho nk‟uko babivuga ndetse amwe akaba yarafunzwe kubera kononekara, ko rero amafaranga yose yavuye mu bukode bayabazwa uretse ayakoreshejwe bafitiye ibimenyetso. [27] Nyuma yo kubona ko ababuranyi batemeranywa ku mafaranga yavuye mu mutungo uzungurwa, Urukiko rwashyizeho umuhanga bumvikanyeho ariwe Kigali Consult and Supply Ltd ihagarariwe na Nsanzimana Anastase, ahabwa inshingano zo gusuzuma imicungire y‟umutungo wasizwe na Buhiga no kugaragaza amafaranga yinjiye kuva yitabye Imana n‟amafaranga yasohotse mu rwego rwo gucunga uwo mutungo. [28] Iyo raporo igaragaza ko amafaranga yavuye mu bukode bw‟amazu kuva mu mwaka wa 2002 kugeza 2014 angana na 305.610.000Frw, ko amafaranga yakoreshejwe (dépenses) angana na 212.145.561Frw, hakaba andi 2.599.755Frw nayo yasohotse ariko atagaragarijwe ibimenyetso by‟umwimerere. Igaragaza kandi ko hari 45.196.754Frw ari kuri konti, ko rero amafaranga agomba kugaragazwa n‟abacunze umutungo angana na 50.867.440Frw. [29] Me Ndagijimana Augustin avuga ko raporo y‟umuhanga ihabanye n‟ukuri, ko ahubwo hakwitabwa kuyo yari yakoze mbere yagaragazaga ko amafaranga abacunze umutungo bagomba kugaragaza angana na 243.139.457Frw. Mu byo anenga, hari umubare w‟abakodesha avuga ko wagiye ugabanyuka ku buryo umwaka umwe urusha undi abakodesha 12 kandi nta nzu yavuyemo, hakaba kandi abakodesha bishyuye KANYANJA N’ABANDI v. MUKANTABANA N’ABANDI 69

## Page 97

47.600.000Frw muri Banki (muri 2013 na 2014) ariko bakaba batagaragara kuri liste y‟abakodesha. Na none kandi ngo raporo igaragaza ko MTN yishyura 100.000Frw na 200.000Frw kandi bizwi ko ari 500.000Frw. [30] Ku mafaranga yasohotse, avuga ko hari aho raporo igaragaza ko aruta ayinjiye, ikaba kandi igaragaza amafaranga agera kuri 52.572.388Frw nk‟amafaranga yasanishijwe inzu nyamara aho yasohokeye hatagaragajwe, ko ayo mafaranga yazamutse akagera kuri 84.399.228Frw. Asanga ikimenyetso cyakozwe muri 2005 cyatanzwe na Ingénieur Byemayire Lambert kitashingirwaho kuko nta masezerano y‟igihe kirekire ku mafaranga 52.572.388Frw yagaragajwe cyangwa ngo hagaragazwe aho yakiriye ayo mafaranga ahubwo ibimenyetso bihari bigaragaza ko yahembwe 2.140.000Frw yonyine. [31] Me Ndagijimana avuga kandi ko hari amafaranga yagaragajwe ko yasohotse kandi atari mu nyungu z`umuryango ahubwo ari mu nyungu z`abajuriye, ko amafaranga abo aburanira bemera ko yasohotse angana na 83.436.749Frw agizwe na 6.085.7000Frw yakoreshejwe mu gushyingura, 31.995.773Frw y‟imisoro, 11.680.000Frw yakiriwe n‟abazungura, 7.494.580Frw y‟amashuli y‟abana ba Kanyanja, 5.272.540Frw y‟ubwishingizi, 4.902.156Frw y‟amazi n‟umuriro, 9.535.000Frw y‟abazamu, 6.000.000Frw y‟umuhanga na 471.000Frw yo gusana ibikoresho. [32] Rugomwa Fidèle nawe avuga ko raporo igaragaza ko hari amafaranga menshi yatanzwe hishyurwa amazi ariko ntihagaragazwe abakodesha bakoresheje ayo mazi, ko n`igihembo cya Nibarere kidasobanutse kuko atagaragaza icyo yakoze, akaba kandi yarashyizweho na Kanyanja abandi batabigizemo uruhare. ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 70

## Page 98

[33] Me Habinshuti Yves mu mwanya wa Kabanyana Charlotte nawe avuga ko raporo y‟umuhanga itagaragaza ukuri ahubwo yagenekereje, ko hari amezi y`ubukode atagiye abarurwa mu mafaranga yinjiye, atanga ingero kuri OKAPI CAR, Gahenda Jean Baptiste, RAMA, Uwimana Jeanne. Avuga kandi ko hari amafaranga angana na 8.860.000Frw agizwe n`ibihembo bya ba avoka yashyizwe kuri succession Buhiga kandi atarakoreshejwe mu nyungu zayo kuko itarezwe cyangwa ngo irege, ko yagombye kwishyurwa na Kanyanja na Nibarere nk`uko uruhande baburana rwiyishyurira ba avoka rukoresha. [34] Na none kandi ngo hari amafaranga yashyizwe mu yasohotse mu mwaka runaka kandi atarishyuwe muri uwo mwaka, bivuze ko yagiye abarwa kabiri, atanga ingero z`amafaranga 36.572.388 yagaragajwe ko yasanishijwe inzu muri 2003 kandi mu myaka yakurikiyeho yongera abarwa mu mafaranga yasohotse, hakaba kandi 16.000.000Frw yafashwe nk`ayakoreshejwe muri 2003 kandi atarasohotse akongera kubarwa gutyo ku munsi yasohokeyeho. [35] Akomeza avuga ko hari n‟amafaranga yafashwe nk`ayakoreshejwe (depenses) nta kimenyetso cyayo, atanga ingero za Tax paid on rent and property 2004-2007, 2009, 2011, régime éducationnel 2006-2014, ko no mu myaka ya 2008-2010 amafaranga yose yasohotse adafite ibisobanuro, na 9.509.405Frw y‟amazi mu myaka ya 2005-2011 nta bisobanuro bifatika yatangiwe, nta n‟ikimenyetso cy‟uko yishyuwe, akavuga kandi ko ku birebana na 16.632.182Frw y‟amazi n‟umuriro, umuhanga ayashyira kuri succession Buhiga kandi mu bisobanuro yatanze avuga ko abakodesha aribo bishyura amazi n‟umuriro. Na none kandi ngo umuhanga yafashe ko abana ba Nkurikiyimana bahawe régime alimentaire amezi yose KANYANJA N’ABANDI v. MUKANTABANA N’ABANDI 71

## Page 99

kandi hari igihe Kanyanja yanze kuyitanga hakiyambazwa inkiko, asoza avuga ko raporo yakozwe mu buryo bubogamiye kuri Nibarere na Kanyanja kuko umuhanga yatubije umubare w‟amafaranga binjije atubura uw‟amafaranga bavuga ko yasohotse nyamara ibimenyetso byashingiweho bidafatika. [36] Me Munyemana mu mwanya wa Kanyanja na Nibarere avuga ko ku birebana n‟amafaranga yinjiye, yemeranya n‟ibyo raporo y‟umuhanga yagaragaje kuko yitaye ku nenge zari zagaragajwe ku birebana na raporo ya mbere. Avuga ariko ko ku birebana n‟amafaranga yakoreshejwe, atemeranya na raporo y‟umuhanga ku birebana n‟amafaranga yishyuwe amazi n‟umuriro kuko ari 23.184.346Frw aho kuba 16.632.182Frw yagaragajwe, ko ayasanishijwe amazu ari 87.977.671Frw aho kuba 84.399.288Frw, naho amafaranga yishyuwe ku bana ba Nkurikiyimana akaba ari 8.140.200Frw aho kuba 7.494.580Frw. Akomeza avuga ko imisoro yishyuwe itangana na 32.765.331Frw nk‟uko raporo ibigaragaza ahubwo ingana na 33.395.773Frw, ko kandi umuhanga atahaye agaciro 8.500.000Frw yasanishijwe amatongo y‟i Cyarwa. [37] Na none kandi ngo umuhanga ntiyagombaga kwanga inyandiko zigaragaza amafaranga yasohotse angana na 2.599.755Frw abishingiye ko atari “documents comptables”, kandi nyamara abacunze umutungo batari bazi ko hazavuka impaka zatuma hakoreshwa “audit”, ko rero yagombaga kwita ku miterere n‟imimerere y‟ibyo yabaruraga, hakanitabwa ko hari inyandiko zitabashije kuboneka kubera igihe gishize, hakaba n‟ibikorwa byakozwe ariko ntihakorwe inyandiko bitewe n‟imiterere yabyo. [38] Akomeza avuga ko abajuriye batagombye gushinjwa kuba barikubiye umutungo uzungurwa mu gihe Kabanyana ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 72

## Page 100

kuva yasenyerwa muri 1994 atuye muri imwe mu mazu ya Buhiga nta bukode yishyura, akaba afite n‟imiryango acururizamo indi akayikodesha, ko rero ibi byose urukiko ryabyitaho. Asaba kandi kuzashingira ku rubanza RCAA0069/12/CS rwo kuwa 04/04/2014 rwaciwe n‟uru rukiko n‟urubanza RA109/13.03/82 rwo kuwa 16/11/1982 rwaciwe n‟Urukiko Rusesa Imanza, rukanashingira ku byanditswe n‟abahanga F.Terre na Lequette, les Successions. UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [39] Urukiko rurasanga amafaranga 200.000.000 Urukiko Rukuru rwategetse Kanyanja na Nibarere guha abazungura ba Buhiga, yaragenwe mu bushishozi bwarwo mu gihe agizwe n‟umusaruro ukomoka ku bukode bw‟amazu azwi, ushobora kubarwa mu buryo bw‟imibare harebwa ayinjiye n‟ayakoreshejwe mu gusana cyangwa gufata neza ayo mazu. [40] Ku kibazo cy‟ugomba kubitangira ibimenyetso, ingingo ya 9 y‟Itegeko Nº21/2012 ryo kuwa 14/06/2012 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y‟imanza z`imbonezamubano, iz‟ubucuruzi, iz`umurimo n‟iz‟ubutegetsi ivuga ko urega agomba kugaragaza ibimenyetso by‟ibyo aregera, yabibura uwarezwe agatsinda. Mu gika cya kabiri, iyo ngingo ivuga ko “uvuga ko icyo yategekwaga gukora cyagaragajwe n‟ibimenyetso atagitegetswe kugikora, agomba kugaragaza impamvu zakimukuyeho. Iyo abiburiye ibimenyetso, uwo baburana aramutsinda”. [41] Kanyanja na Nibarere ntibahakana ko aribo bacunze umutungo Buhiga asize bashingiye ku bivugwa mu irage yakoze aho Kanyanja yagizwe umukuru w‟umuryango, Nibarere na Mukantabana bakamwungiziza n‟ubwo nta gikorwa KANYANJA N’ABANDI v. MUKANTABANA N’ABANDI 73

## Page 101

cyagaragajwe Mukantabana yaba yarakoze mu rwego rwo gucunga uwo mutungo, mu gihe nyamara bigaragara ko Nibarere ariwe ukorana n‟abakodesha amasezerano y‟ubukode, bikanagaragara ko we na Kanyanja aribo bakoresha konti ijyaho amafaranga y‟ubukode. Urukiko rurasanga rero hashingiwe ku gika cya kabiri cy‟ingingo ya 9 yavuzwe haruguru, Kanyanja na Nibarere aribo bagomba kugaragaza uburyo bacunze uwo mutungo. [42] Raporo y‟umuhanga washyizweho n‟Urukiko nyuma yo kwemeranywaho n‟ababuranyi, yagaragaje amafaranga yinjiye n‟ayakoreshejwe nk‟uko byavuzwe mu gika cya 28 cy‟uru rubanza, ariko ababuranyi bakaba batemeranya nayo nk‟uko byavuzwe haruguru, usibye uburanira Kanyanja na Nibarere uvuga ko ayemera ku birebana n‟amafaranga yinjiye. [43] Ku birebana n‟agaciro gahabwa raporo y‟umuhanga, ingingo ya 98 y‟Itegeko Nº15/2004 ryo kuwa 12/06/2004 ryerekeye ibimenyetso mu manza n‟itangwa ryabyo, iteganya ko Urukiko rudakurikiza byanze bikunze ibitekerezo by‟abahanga mu gihe binyuranye n‟imyumvire y‟abacamanza. [44] Umuhanga washyizweho yasobanuye ko nyuma yo kwita ku nenge ababuranyi bagaragaje kuri raporo yari yatanze mbere, byatumye imibare ihinduka, amafaranga yavuye mu bukode ava kuri 432.840.000Frw agera kuri 305.610.000Frw, ayakoreshejwe (dépenses) ava kuri 208.175.932Frw agera kuri 212.145.561Frw, ibi bikaba byaratumye amafaranga agomba gusobanurwa n‟abacunze umutungo (net à justifier) ava kuri 243.139.457Frw agera kuri 50.867.440Frw. [45] Urukiko rurasanga ariko ku birebana n‟amafaranga yakoreshejwe, ibisobanuro umuhanga yatanze bitararunyuze ku ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 74

## Page 102

byerekeye amafaranga 52.572.388 avuga ko yishyuwe Ingénieur Lambert Byemayire, kuko icyemezo ashingiraho cyo kuwa 12/01/2015 atari ikimenyetso cy‟uko ayo mafaranga yasohotse koko kuko nubwo yaba yarishyuwe mu byiciro hagombye inyandiko zibigaragaza, bityo amafaranga agomba kwemerwa ko ariyo yishyuwe akaba ari afitiwe ibimenyetso angana na 2.140.000Frw, bivuze ko asigaye angana na 50.432.388Frw agomba gukomeza kubarirwa mu mafaranga yinjiye. [46] Na none kandi, hari amafaranga 8.500.000 agaragara muri raporo ya mbere ko ari mu yinjiye ariko muri raporo ya kabiri hakavugwa ko ari mu yasohotse ko kandi yishyuwe mu myaka yakurikiye ariko akaba ari nta bimenyetso byagaragajwe, bityo nayo akaba agomba kuguma mu mafaranga yinjiye. [47] Ku bijyanye n‟amafaranga y‟amazi n‟umuriro, Urukiko rurasanga umuhanga yaragiye atanga ibisobanuro bitandukanye aho muri raporo ya mbere yagaragazaga ko amazi yonyine ariyo agomba kwishyurwa na Succession Buhiga, abishingiye ku makuru yabwiwe n‟umwe mu bakodesha y‟uko aribo biyishyurira umuriro, muri raporo ya kabiri ashyira amafaranga yose kuri Succession (amazi n‟umuriro). [48] Mu gusobanura iby‟ayo mafaranga y‟amazi n‟umuriro, uburanira Kanyanja na Nibarere we avuga ko ari ayishyuwe mbere y‟ishyirwaho rya cash power, ibi ariko bikaba bitavanaho ibivugwa mu ngingo ya 3 y‟amasezerano y‟ubukode iteganya ko abakodesha biyishyurira amazi n‟umuriro, bityo amafaranga 16.632.182 yabazwe nk‟ayakoreshejwe ku mazi n‟umuriro akaba agomba kuvanwamo. [49] Andi mafaranga atagaragarijwe impamvu yabarwa kuri Succession Buhiga ni agaragara muri raporo ko yishyuwe avoka KANYANJA N’ABANDI v. MUKANTABANA N’ABANDI 75

## Page 103

kuva muri 2009 kugeza muri 2014 angana na 8.860.000Frw, akaba ataragaragarijwe ibimenyetso by‟aho yishyuriwe n‟impamvu yayo, akaba kandi atarishyuwe kubera uru rubanza kuko rwatangiye muri 2012. [50] Ku birebana n‟umushahara wagenewe Nibarere, Urukiko rurasanga mu gihe bigaragara ko hari imirimo yakoze irebana n‟imicungire y‟umutungo uzungurwa, nko gusinya amasezerano y‟ubukode binajyana no kwishyuza abakodesha n‟indi mirimo ikenerwa kubera ubwo bukode, byumvikana ko umushahara yagenewe ufite impamvu yawo, ukaba rero wabarwa mu mafaranga yakoreshejwe. Ibimaze kuvugwa binareba amafaranga yagenewe abana ba Nkurikiyimana yo kubatunga no kubarihira amashuri nk‟uko byateganyijwe mu irage, abanenga ingano yayo bakaba bataragaragaje ayagombaga gutangwa n‟uburyo bayabara. [51] Ku byerekeye izindi nenge ababuranyi bagaragaje, Urukiko rurasanga zitahabwa agaciro kuko nta bimenyetso bifatika batanga bivuguruza ibyashingiweho n‟umuhanga kuko nko ku birebana n‟amafaranga yinjiye, abaregwa nabo badahuriza ku mubare umwe ahubwo bagenekereza gusa mu gihe umuhanga yasobanuye ko yashingiye ku masezerano aho yashoboye kuboneka, ku misoro yishyurwaga no ku nyandiko za Banki. Byongeye kandi, kugaragaza umubare nyakuri w‟amafaranga yavuye mu bukode ntibyoroshye harebwe igihe Buhiga yitabiye Imana n‟igihe abavuga ko bahejwe mu mutungo baregeye, icyo gihe ubu kigeze ku myaka 13 kikaba cyaragize ingaruka zo kutabona ibimenyetso byose byashoboraga kugaragaza ukuri ku buryo umutungo wacunzwe. [52] Hashigiwe ku byasobanuwe haruguru, Urukiko rurasanga amafaranga yavuye mu bukode hamwe n‟ayasohotse, ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 76

## Page 104

agomba kubarwa mu buryo bukurikira : 305.610.000Frw (raporo yagaragaje ko ariyo yavuye mu bukode) + 50.432.388Frw (avugwa mu gika cya 45) + 8.500.000Frw (avugwa mu gika cya 46) - 212.145.561Frw (raporo yagaragaje ko ariyo yasohotse) – ( 16.632.182Frw (avugwa mu gika cya 48) + 8.860.000 Frw (avugwa mu gika cya 49) = ni ukuvuga 364.542.388Frw - 186.653.379Frw = 177.889.009Frw, ayo mafaranga akavanwamo 42.898.140Frw ari kuri konti ya Succession Buhiga, bivuze ko Kanyanja na Nibarere bagomba kugaragaza angana na 177.889.009 – 42.898.140Frw = 134.990.869Frw, bakaba bagomba kuyagarura akajya mu mutungo rusange ugomba kugabanywa, akajya hamwe n‟amafaranga ari kuri konti, kuva kandi uru rubanza ruciwe, Kanyanja na Nibarere bakaba batemerewe gukoresha amafaranga ava mu bukode batabanje kubyemeranywaho n‟abandi bazungura. [53] Ku birebana n‟indi mitungo ya Buhiga itaravuzwe mu irage, Urukiko rurasanga ibyategetswe mu manza zabanje ari byo bigomba kugumaho, ikagabanwa uko ingana. 3. Ku birebana n’indishyi zaciwe Kanyanja na Nibarere zo gushora abandi mu manza, n’indishyi zisabwa mu bujurire bwuririye ku bundi. [54] Ababuranira Kanyanja na Nibarere bavuga ko baciwe indishyi z‟uko bashoye abareze mu manza kandi bo bararezwe, abareze bakaba kandi bararegeye ibinyuranye n‟irage ryagombye kubahirizwa na bose. [55] Uburarira Kabanyana avuga ko Kanyanja na Nibarere aribo batumye yinjira mu rubanza, bakaba bagomba kubitangira indishyi, ko mu bujurire bwuririye ku bundi bategekwa gutanga KANYANJA N’ABANDI v. MUKANTABANA N’ABANDI 77

## Page 105

10.000.000Frw yo gushora abo aburanira mu manza yiyongera kuri 3.000.000Frw bagenewe mbere, bakanatanga 3.000.0000Frw y‟ikurikiranarubanza n‟igihembo cya avoka. [56] Uburanira Mukantabana n‟abazungura ba Kanyumba avuga ko indishyi zaciwe abajuriye zifite ishingiro kuko baheje abandi mu mutungo uzungurwa bituma hiyambazwa inkiko, nawe mu bujurire bwuririye ku bundi asaba ko buri wese mubo aburanira yagenerwa 1.000.000Frw y‟ikurikiranarubanza, abajuriye bakanatanga 10.000.000Frw y‟abavoka babiri. Avuga kandi ko abajuriye bacunze umutungo kumara myaka 13 bawubyaje inyungu, bakaba bategekwa guha muri wese mubo aburanira 20.000.000Frw, bakanishyura 24.500.000Frw arebana n‟inka 7 abajuriye basigaranye, mu myaka 12 izo nka zikaba zagombye kuba zingana na 49 (7x6=42+7), buri nka ikabarirwa 500.000Frw. [57] Ku bisabwa mu bujurire bwuririye ku bundi, uburanira abajuriye avuga ko 20.000.000Frw basabwa nta shingiro afite kuko anyuranye n‟umubare w‟amafaranga abayasaba bavuga ko yavuye mu bukode, ko n‟izindi ndishyi zisabwa nta shingiro zifite kuko abajuriye barezwe kugira ngo bagaragaze uko bacunze umutungo kandi bakaba barabikoze, ko rero atari bo bazanye abandi mu rubanza. Ku birebana n`amafaranga arebana n`inka, avuga ko hategekwa ko izihari zagabanywa abazungura, naho ku ndishyi Me Habinshuti asabira abo aburanira, avuga ko nta shingiro zazo kuko abajuriye batabikoze bagamije gutinza urubanza ahubwo bajuriye bashaka kubona ubutabera.

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 78

## Page 106

UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [58] Imikirize y‟urubanza rw‟Urukiko Rwisumbuye rwa Huye igaragaza ko ishingiro ry‟indishyi zagenewe abana ba Kabanyana Charlotte ari uko abazungura ba Buhiga bakomeje kubananiza banga kuva mu isangiramutungo bituma babashora mu manza kandi icyifuzo cyabo cyari gifite ishingiro, rubagenera 2.000.000Frw y‟igihembo cya avoka na 3.000.000Frw y‟indishyi z‟akababaro agomba kuva mu mutungo wa Buhiga, Urukiko Rukuru ruyagumishaho ariko rwemeza ko azava mu mutungo bwite wa Kanyanja na Nibarere. [59] Urukiko rurasanga kuba Kanyanja na Nibarere ataribo bafashe iya mbere ngo barege, bitabuza ko bacibwa indishyi mu gihe abazibarega barinze kwiyambaza inkiko kugira ngo bagire uburenganzira ku mutungo barazwe, bityo indishyi zagenwe zikaba zikwiye kuko zishingiye ku biteganywa n‟ingingo ya 258 y‟Igitabo cya gatatu cy‟urwunge rw‟amategeko mbonezamubano iteganya ko “Igikorwa cyose cy‟umuntu cyangirije undi gitegeka nyirugukora ikosa rigikomokaho kuriha ibyangiritse”, bityo iyi mpamvu y‟ubujurire ikaba nta shingiro ifite. [60] Ku nyungu za 20.000.000Frw Me Ndagijimana asabira abo aburanira na 24.500.000Frw akomoka ku nka Buhiga yasize, Urukiko rurasanga batayagenerwa kuko atigeze asabwa mu nkiko zabanje, akaba rero atasabirwa mu bujurire hashingiwe ku biteganywa n‟ingingo ya 168 y‟Itegeko ryerekeye imiburanishirize y‟imanza z‟imbonezamubano, iz‟ubucuruzi, iz‟umurimo n‟iz‟ubutegetsi ivuga ko mu bujurire hadashobora kuregerwa ikirego gishya keretse iyo ari KANYANJA N’ABANDI v. MUKANTABANA N’ABANDI 79

## Page 107

uguhwanya imyenda cyangwa ikirego cyo kwiregura ku kirego cy‟ibanze cyatanzwe mu bujurire, cyangwa nk‟uko bivugwa mu gika cya kabiri cy‟iyo ngingo, kwaka inyungu, ibyishyuwe ku bukode n‟ibindi bintu by‟inyongera byabonetse kuva urubanza ruciwe…, Urukiko rukaba rusanga inyungu zisabwa na Me Ndagijimana zitandukanye n‟izivugwa muri icyo gika. [61] Ku byerekeye 1.000.000Frw y‟ikurikiranarubanza na 10.000.000Frw y‟igihembo cy‟abavoka asabwa n‟uburanira Mukantabana n‟abazungura ba Kanyumba, urukiko rurasanga afite ishingiro hashingiwe ku biteganywa n‟ingingo ya 258 yavuzwe haruguru, ariko kuba Kanyanja na Nibarere bagize ibyo batsindira ku birebana n‟ingano y‟amafaranga yavuye mu bukode, bakaba batanga 250.000Frw y‟ikurikiranarubanza na 500.000Frw y‟igihembo cya avoka kuri uru rwego, buri wese agatanga 375.000Frw. [62] Ku byerekeye indishyi zo gushorwa mu manza, ikurikiranarubanza n'igihembo cya avoka zisabwa n‟uburanira Kabanyana Charlotte, Urukiko rusanga ku mpamvu zimwe n‟izavuzwe mu gika kibanziriza iki, bagenerwa 500.000Frw y‟igihembo cya avoka na 250.000Frw y‟ikurikiranarubanza, yiyongera kuri 5.000.000Frw yagenwe n‟Urukiko Rukuru, ni ukuvuga 5.750.000Frw, buri wese mu bajuriye agatanga 2.875.000Frw. III. ICYEMEZO CY’URUKIKO [63] Rwemeje ko ubujurire bwa Kanyanja Emilienne na Nibarere Costasie bufite ishingiro kuri bimwe; ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 80

## Page 108

[64] Rwemeje ko ubujurire bwuririye ku bundi bwa Kabanyana Charlotte, Mukantabana Josepha n‟abazungura ba Kanyumba bufite ishingiro kuri bimwe; [65] Rwemeje ko mu rwego rwo kuva mu mutungo rusange, hazabaho kugurisha umutungo wasizwe na Buhiga Arcade, ari uvugwa mu irage n‟utavugwamo, hakabanza kugenwa agaciro kawo abazungura bemeranyijweho kandi amahirwe yo kugura agahabwa abo mu muryango wa Buhiga, bitashoboka uwo mutungo ukaba wagurwa n‟abatari abo mu muryango; [66] Rwemeje ko amafaranga yavuye mu bukode bw‟amazu yasizwe na Buhiga ari 177.889.009Frw harimo 42.898.140Frw ari kuri konti ya Succession Buhiga, Kanyanja na Nibarere bakaba bagomba kugarura ikinyuranyo kingana na 134.990.869Frw, ayo mafaranga hamwe n‟ari kuri konti akajya mu mutungo rusange ugomba kugabanywa; [67] Rutegetse ko kuva uru rubanza ruciwe, Kanyanja na Nibarere batemerewe gukoresha amafaranga ava mu bukode batabanje kubyemeranywaho n‟abandi bazungura; [68] Rutegetse Kanyanja na Nibarere guha Kabanyana Charlotte uhagarariye abana be Uwineza Claire na Muhimpundu Clarisse, 5.750.000Frw nk‟uko yasobanuwe, buri wese agatanga 2.875.000Frw; [69] Rutegetse kandi Kanyanja na Nibarere guha Mukantabana n‟abazungura ba Kanyumba, 750.000Frw nkuko yasobanuwe, buri wese agatanga 375.000Frw; [70] Rutegetse Kanyanja na Nibarere gufatanya gutanga amagarama y‟urubanza angana na 100.000Frw. KANYANJA N’ABANDI v. MUKANTABANA N’ABANDI 81

## Page 110

IMANZA Z’UBUCURUZI

## Page 112

MUJAWIMANA N’ABANDI v. BANKI YA KIGALI Ltd (BK) [Rwanda URUKIKO RW‟IKIRENGA – RCOMAA0008/14/CS (Kayitesi Z., P.J., Kayitesi R. na Nyirandabaruta, J.) 22 Nyakanga 2016] Ingwate – Umutungo utimukanwa – Agaciro k’amasezerano y’ingwate – Kwandikisha ingwate – Amasezerano y’ingwate agira agaciro hagati y’abayagiranye iyo yubahirije amategeko, n’iyo ingwate zatanzwe zitandikishijwe mu bitabo byabugenewe – Itegeko ryo kuwa 30/07/1888 ryerekeye amasezerano cyangwa imirimo nshinganwa, ingingo ya 33 n’iya 34. Ingwate – Gusesa amasezerano y’ingwate – Kuba mu masezerano y’umwenda utangwa hatanzwe ingwate hakaba nta na hamwe abafite uburenganzira kuruwo mutungo bemeye ko izo ngwate zitangwa, byerekana ko izo ngwate zatanzwe mu buryo bunyuranyije n’amategeko – Itegeko Ngenga N°08/2005 14/07/2005 rigena imikoreshereze n’imicungire y’ubutaka mu Rwanda, ingingo ya 35 – Itegeko Nº22/99 ryo kuwa 12/11/1999 ryuzuza igitabo cya mbere cy’urwunge rw’amategeko mbonezamubano kandi rishyiraho igice cya gatanu cyerekeye imicungire y’umutungo w’abashyingiranwe, impano n’izungura, ingingo ya 21 n’iya 35. Incamake y’ikibazo: Nyakwigendera Nyagatare Théogene yari yarahawe na Banki ya Kigali Ltd inguzanyo zitandukanye agatanga n‟ingwate y‟umitungo utimukanwa ariko aza gupfa atarangije kwishyura uwo myenda bituma banki ya Kigali irega abazungura be mu Rukiko Rukuru rw‟Ubucuruzi isaba kwishyurwa, urukiko rubategeka kwishyura. 85

## Page 113

Abazungura ba nyakwigendera harimo n‟umugore we nabo bahise batanga ikirego mu Rukiko rw‟Ubucuruzi rwa Nyarugenge basaba ko amasezerano y‟inguzanyo yatangiweho izo ngwate yaseswa kuko batigeze bayamenya kandi ko atigeze ashyirwaho umukono n‟umugore wa nyakwigendera. Urukiko rwemeza ko nta seswa ry‟amasezerano y‟ingwate ryabaho kuko atabayeho bitewe nuko izo ngwate zatanzwe zidafite agaciro kuko zitigeze zandikishwa mu bitabo by‟umwanditsi Mukuru byagenewe kwandikwamo umutingo utimukanwa, bityo ko bagomba kwishyura Banki indishyi n‟igihembo cy‟avoka. Bajuriye mu Rukiko Rukuru rw‟Ubucuruzi bavuga ko urukiko rwirengagije ibyemezo byagiye bifatwa mu bibazo bisa nibi baregeye (jurisprudences). Urukiko rwemeza na none ko nta masezerano y‟ingwate yabaye hagati ya nyakwigendera na banki, bityo ko bagomba kuyiha izindi ndishyi ziyongera kuzo baciwe mu rwego rwa mbere, Abazungura ba Nyagatare bajuriye mu Rukiko rw‟Ikirenga bavuga ko Urukiko rwavuze ko nta masezerano y‟ingwate yabayeho kuko atanditse mu gitabo cy‟Umwanditsi Mukuru, nyamara yarabayeho Umwanditsi Mukuru atarabaho ndetse n‟Itegeko ryo kwandikisha ingwate ritarajyaho. Bavuga kandi ko amategeko yateganyaga ko umutungo utangwaho ingwate ari uko abagize umuryango bose bawufiteho uburenganzira babyemeye ariko akaba atariko byagenze kuko Nyagatare Théogène yatanze ingwate zose yahaye Banki ya Kigali Ltd, umugore we n‟abana be batabyemeye. Uhagarariye banki we avuga ko nta masezerano y‟ingwate yabaye hagati yayo na nyakwigendera kuko atayitanze, avuga ko umutungo ariwo wagombaga kuzaba ingwate. ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 86

## Page 114

Abazungura ba nyakwigendera kandi bavuze kobakwiye kugenerwa indishyi zo gushorwa mu manza. Uhagarariye Banki ya Kigali avuga ko nta ndishyi bakwiye guhabwa kuko ikirego cyabo nta shingiro gifite. Incamake y’icyemezo: 1. Amasezerano y‟ingwate agira agaciro hagati y‟abayagiranye iyo yubahirije amategeko n‟iyo ingwate zatanzwe zitandikishijwe mu bitabo byabugenewe. Bityo amasezerano y‟ingwate yabaye hagati ya Nyagatare na Banki ya Kigali ntawushobora kuyahakana kandi inyandiko zayo zihari. 2. Kuba mu masezerano y‟umwenda utangwa hatanzwe ingwate nta na hamwe abafite uburenganzira kuri uwo mutungo bemeye ko izo ngwate zitangwa, byerekana ko izo ngwate zatanzwe mu buryo bunyuranyije n‟amategeko. Bityo ayo masezerano y‟ingwate yabaye hagati ya Banki ya Kigali na Nyagatare akaba agomba guseswa, kuko ntahagaragara umukono w‟uwo bashakanye. 3. Kuba Tuyisenge Rachel na Ishimwe Leah Aliah baratakaje byinshi muri izi manza bishyura ba Avoka bakazikurikirana, ni ngombwa ko bahabwa indishyi, ariko kuko izo basaba ari nyinshi, bagomba bakazigenerwa mu bushishozi bw‟Urukiko. Ubujurire bufite ishingiro. Amagarama y’urubanza aherereye ku warezwe. Amategeko yashingiweho: Itegeko Ngenga N°08/2005 ryo kuwa 14/07/2005 rigena imikoreshereze n‟imicungire y‟ubutaka mu Rwanda, ingingo ya 35 n‟iya 38. MUJAWIMANA N’ABANDI v. BANKI YA KIGALI Ltd (BK) 87

## Page 115

Itegeko Nº45/2011 ryo kuwa 25/11/2011 rigenga amasezerano, ingingo ya 64 n‟iya 65. Itegeko Nº22/99 ryo kuwa 12/11/1999 ryuzuza igitabo cya mbere cy‟urwunge rw‟amategeko mbonezamubano kandi rishyiraho igice cya gatanu cyerekeye imicungire y‟umutungo w‟abashyingiranwe, impano n‟izungura, ingingo ya 21 n‟iya 35. Itegeko ryo kuwa 30/07/1888 ryerekeye amasezerano cyangwa imirimo nshinganwa, ingingo ya 33, iya 34 n‟iya 258. Imanza zifashishijwe: Rwigema v. ECOBANK, RCOM0001/07/CS rwaciwe n‟Urukiko rw‟Ikirenga kuwa 24/07/2008. Ibitekerezo by’abahanga: Gael Piette, Droit de sûreté, 9ème éd. Université momentos Ltd. Mouleno cedex. 2015., pp.142;147. Francois T‟S Kint, Sûretés et principes généraux du droit de poursuite des créanciers, Larcier, 2000, p.312. Alain Bénabent, Droit des obligations, 14ème. éd. LGDJ, 2014, p.176. Urubanza I. IMITERERE Y’URUBANZA [1] Nyakwigendera Nyagatare Théogène akiriho yafashe umwenda muri Banki ya Kigali, atanga ingwate y‟imitungo itimukanwa (inzu) apfa atarangije kwishyura umwenda wose, mu rubanza RCOM0295/11/HCC rwaciwe kuwa 14 Nzeli 2012 n‟Urukiko Rukuru rw‟Ubucuruzi, abazungura be bategekwa ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 88

## Page 116

kuwishyura. Umugore we Mujawimana Rose, Tuyisenge Rachel na Ishimwe Léah Aliah, abana be, bavuga ko ajya gufata umwenda batabimenye cyangwa ngo babyemere, bakaba batabazwa iby‟uwo mwenda. Aho niho bahereye batanga ikirego kigamije gusaba ko amasezerano yatangiweho izo ngwate yaseswa. [2] Urukiko rw‟Ubucuruzi rwa Nyarugenge rwaciye urubanza RCOM0722/13/TC/NYGE ku wa 17/01/2014, rwemeza ko ubugwate bw‟imitungo itimukanwa ivugwa n‟abarega nta gaciro bufite kuko butigeze bwandikwa mu gitabo cyandikwamo ingwate ku mutungo utimukanwa mu bitabo by‟Umwanditsi Mukuru, ruvuga ko nta seswa ry‟amasezerano y‟ingwate atarabayeho ryashoboka, rutegeka abaregwa kwishyura Banki ya Kigali Ltd indishyi n‟igihembo cya Avoka zingana na 600.000Frw. [3] Mujawimana Rose, Tuyisenge Rachel na Ishimwe Leah Aliah bajuririye Urukiko Rukuru rw‟Ubucuruzi bavuga ko Urukiko rwitiranyije ikorwa ry‟amasezerano n‟iyandikishwa ryayo, ndetse no mu bisobanuro by‟Urukiko hakaba harabayeho ukwivuguruza gukomeye no kwirengagiza ibyemezo byagiye bifatwa mu bibazo bisa n‟icyo baregeye (jurisprudences). [4] Urukiko Rukuru rw‟ubucuruzi rwaciye urubanza RCOMA0552/13/HCC kuwa 17/1/2014, rwemeza ko nta masezerano y‟ubugwate yabaye hagati ya Banki ya Kigali Ltd na Nyagatare Théogène, rutegeka abarega guha Banki ya Kigali Ltd 400.000Frw y‟igihembo cya Avoka yiyongera kuri 600.000Frw bari baciwe mu rwego rwa mbere n‟indishyi zingana na 1.000.000Frw. MUJAWIMANA N’ABANDI v. BANKI YA KIGALI Ltd (BK) 89

## Page 117

[5] Mujawimana Rose, Tuyisenge Rachel na Ishimwe Leah Aliah ntibishimiye imikirize y‟urubanza bajurira mu Rukiko rw‟Ikirenga, bavuga ko hirengagijwe ibimenyetso, amategeko, ndetse n‟izindi manza zaciwe, ntirubahe n‟indishyi basabye. [6] Iburanisha mu ruhame ryabaye kuwa 07 Kamena 2016, Mujawimana Rose, Tuyishime Rachel na Ishimwe Lea Aliah bahagarariwe na Me Mutabazi Abayo Jean Claude, Banki ya Kigali Ltd ihagarariwe na Me Rusanganwa Jean Bosco. II. IBIBAZO BIGOMBA GUSUZUMWA MU RUBANZA N’ISESENGURWA RYABYO Muri uru rubanza harasuzumwa niba hari amasezerano y’ingwate yabaye hagati ya Nyagatare Théogène na Banki ya Kigaki, nibigaragara ko yabayeho, hasuzumwe niba akwiriye guseswa, hanasuzumwe ibijyanye n’indishyi zasabwe. 1) Kumenya niba hari amasezerano y’ingwate yabaye hagati ya Banki ya Kigali Ltd na Nyagatare Théogène. [7] Me Mutabazi Abayo Jean Claude avuga ko Urukiko rwavuze ko nta masezerano y‟ingwate yabayeho kuko atanditse mu gitabo cy‟Umwanditsi Mukuru, nyamara yarabayeho kuko n‟uwo baburana ari we Banki ya Kigali Ltd ayemera uretse kuba iyanenga ko atanditse, ayo masezerano akaba yarabayeho Umwanditsi Mukuru atarabaho ndetse n‟Itegeko ryo kwandikisha ingwate ritarajyaho. Avuga ko ingwate zatanzwe zigaragara n‟aho ziherereye hazwi, n‟uko zatanzwe, ko amasezerano y‟ingwate aba hagati y‟impande ebyiri, akaba atagira agaciro kuko hagiyemo Umwanditsi Mukuru. Avuga ko ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 90

## Page 118

ikigaragaza ko ayo masezerano yabayeho ari uko ibyangombwa by‟inzu y‟i Remera mu kibanza No2685 n‟iby‟iyo mu Karere ka Rwamagana byose bifitwe na Banki ya Kigali kimwe n‟undi mutungo Nyagatare yatanzeho ingwate, uri Kabare - Muhazi n‟inzu iri mu kibanza No1647, giherereye Kigabiro- Rwamagana, Banki ya Kigali ikaba ibifite kuko ari ingwate yayo, kandi ko imihango yashyizweho n‟itegeko ijyanye no kwandikisha ingwate ikorwa iyo impande zombi zimaze kumvikana ku ngwate. [8] Me Mutabazi Abayo Jean Claude akomeza avuga ko ku bw‟itegeko ryagiyeho mu mwaka wa 2009 rikavugururwa mu mwaka wa 2010, inshingano yo kwandikisha ingwate ifitwe na Banki ya Kigali kuko ari nayo ifite ibyangombwa by‟imitungo yatanzweho ingwate kugeza uyu munsi, ko niba itarandikishije ingwate kandi biri mu nshingano zayo itahindukira ngo ivuge ko amasezerano adafite gaciro. [9] Me Mutabazi Abayo Jean Claude asobanura ingaruka zo kutandikisha ingwate avuga ko iyo uwahawe umwenda yatanze ingwate ntiyandikishwe atawishyuye, Banki ibanza kujya mu Rukiko, ingwate ikagurishwa mu buryo busanzwe binyuze ku Muhesha w‟inkiko, mu gihe iyo atishyuye ariko ingwate yarandikishijwe Banki yandikira gusa RDB, igaha uburenganzira abo bita “receivers” bakagurisha ingwate Banki ikishyurwa itiriwe ibanza kuregera Inkiko. Avuga ko mbere y‟uko Umwanditsi Mukuru ashyirwaho, iyo Banki yabaga ifite ingwate, hashingirwaga ku ngingo ya 53 y‟Itegeko ryerekeye imiburanishirize y‟imanza z‟imbonezamubano, ingwate ikagurishwa muri “vente par voie parrée”, ko ku byerekeye amasezerano yabaye hagati ya Banki ya Kigali na Nyagatare Théogène, uwari ufite ishingano zo kwandikisha ingwate ari MUJAWIMANA N’ABANDI v. BANKI YA KIGALI Ltd (BK) 91

## Page 119

Banki kuko mu masezerano bagiranye handitsemo ngo “le client autorise expressement la Banque à requérir au près de Monsieur le conservateur des Titres Fonciers l’inscription hypothécaire de 1er rang sur les biens décrits ci-avant….”, bikaba bigaragara ko uburenganzira bwo kwandikisha ingwate Nyagatare Théogène yabutanze, kuba Banki itarandikishije iyo ngwate bikagira ingaruka y‟uko idashobora kugurisha ngo yiyishyure, ahubwo igomba kuregera urukiko igategereza ko urubanza rurangira, kandi ko Banki itaza imbere y‟Urukiko ngo ivuge ko hari ingwate ifite itarayandikishije. [10] Me Rusanganwa avuga ko abarega batavuguruza ibyo umucamanza yashingiyeho bijyanye n‟ingingo ya 4 y‟Itegeko No10/2009 ryo kuwa 14/05/2009 ryerekeye ubugwate ku mutungo utimukanwa nk‟uko ryahinduwe kugeza ubu, iteganya ko “byitwa ko ubugwate bufite agaciro iyo bwanditse mu gitabo cyandikwamo ingwate ku mutungo utimukanwa mu biro by’Umwanditsi Mukuru”, ko ntawasaba gutesha agaciro ikitagafite. Avuga ko nta bimenyetso abarega bagaragaza byirengagijwe, ko ashingiye ku masezerano yitwa “ouverture de crédit avec constitution d‟hypothèque” bagaragaza bashaka gusaba ko amasezerano y‟ingwate ateshwa agaciro, no ku mabaruwa menshi agaragaza amazu yatanzweho ingwate avugwa muri ayo masezerano, abona ntaho abazungura ba Nyagatare bahera bavuga ko ibyo yakoze batabyemera, cyane cyane ko Banki ya Kigali ivuga ko nta ingwate Nyagatare yatanze, ko icyabaye ari amasezerano y‟umwenda n‟ingwate yagombaga gutangwa (avec hypothèque à constituer), umutungo ukaba ariwo wagombaga kuzaba ingwate, kuko muri ayo masezerano ku rupapuro rwa 2 hagaragaramo icyo bise “inscription de l’hypothèque”, aribyo kwandikisha ingwate, berekana uburyo bizagenda. Avuga ko atabona uburyo ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 92

## Page 120

abazungura ba Nyagatare basaba ko aya masezerano ateshwa agaciro ndetse bakongeraho ko ari amasezerano y‟ubugwate, nyamara Nyagatare yarasinyiye gusa ko ingwate izatangwa. [11] Me Rusanganwa Jean Bosco yabajijwe uburyo Banki ya Kigali Ltd itunzemo ibyangobwa by‟inzu zavuzwe muri uru rubanza nyamara avuga ko nta masezerano y‟ingwate (constitution d‟hypothèque) yabayeho, asubiza ko Banki ya Kigali ifite ibyo byangombwa koko, kuko abazungura ba Nyagatare Théogène batigeze babyaka Banki ngo ibibime. Anavuga ko kuba Banki ibifite byerekana ko iby‟itangwa ry‟ingwate byatangiye ariko bikaba bitararangiye, ko Banki ya Kigali yahawe izo nyandiko na Nyagatare kugira ngo ingwate zitangwe kuko hari ibyo bari bumvikanyeho, ko ariko ibyakozwe ari intangiriro (processus) kuko mu masezerano bari bumvikanye ko ingwate izandikishwa ku Mubitsi w‟Impapurompamo z‟ubutaka. UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [12] Ingingo ya 33 y‟Itegeko ryo kuwa 30/07/1888 rishyiraho Igitabo cya gatatu cy‟Urwunge rw‟amategeko y'imbonezamubano yakoreshwaga igihe Nyagatare Théogène na Banki ya Kigali Ltd bashyiraga umukono ku masezerano ya “ouverture de crédit avec constitution d‟hypothèque” bagiranye kuwa 19/07/2005 n‟ayakurikiyeho, iteganya ko amasezerano akozwe ku buryo bukurikije amategeko aba itegeko ku bayagiranye. Naho ingingo ya 34 y‟iryo Tegeko ryavuzwe haruguru iteganya ko amasezerano adategeka icyemejwe ahubwo akubitiraho n'ingaruka ubutabera, imigenzereze MUJAWIMANA N’ABANDI v. BANKI YA KIGALI Ltd (BK) 93

## Page 121

cyangwa amategeko byageneye inshingano bikurikije kamere yayo1. [13] Dosiye igaragaza ko Nyagatare Théogène yasabye gukomerezwa umwenda kuwa 2 Gashyantare 2009, maze Banki ya Kigali Ltd imusubiza kuwa 5 Werurwe 2009 imumenyesha ko umwenda we ugeze kuri 124.000.000Frw, abarirwamo 24.000.000Frw agomba kuba yarangije kwishyura kuwa 31Gicurasi 2009 kandi agakomeza kwishyura umwenda ungana 15.472.369Frw yahawe agura inzu yo mu kibanza No2685 iri Remera-Kimironko. Yibutswa kugura ubwishingizi bw‟ingwate (garantie) Banki yari ifite arizo: “hypthèque” ifite agaciro ka 50.000.000Frw yagombaga kwandikwa ku rwego rwa mbere ku kibanza Nº2685 kiri i Remera-Gasabo, mu Mujyi wa Kigali, Hypothéque ifite agaciro ka 21.000.000Frw yagombaga kwandikwa ku rwego rwa 1 ku kibanza Nº1647 kiri i Kigabiro- Rwamagana, ikaba yari yahawe n‟ibyemezo by‟umutungo utimukanwa birimo icyemezo cy‟umutungo w‟inzu iri Kabare- Muhazi ho mu Burasirazuba n‟ibyemezo by‟imitungo itimukanwa iherereye Kigabiro-Rwamagana (izindi nzu 2) akaba ataragombaga kuwugurisha, kuwutangira ubuntu cyangwa kuwutangaho ingwate Banki itabanje kubimwemerera, Banki ikaba yaranahaweho ingwate ku rwego rwa mbere, umutungo wimukanwa ufite agaciro ka 50.000.000Frw. [14] Dosiye igaragaza na none ko kuwa 17 Kamena 2009 Nyagatare yongeye kwaka inguzanyo y‟igihe gito, maze kuwa 27 Nyakanga 2009, Banki ya Kigali Ltd imwandikira imumenyesha ko umwennda we ugeze kuri 148.000.000Frw, na none yibutswa ko ingwate (garanties) Banki ifite ari imitungo

1 Ibivugwa muri izo ngingo zombi tubisanga no mu ngingo za 64 na 65 z‟Itegeko No45/2011 ryo kuwa 25/11/2011 rigenga amasezerano. ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 94

## Page 122

yose yavuzwe mu gika kibanziriza iki. Izo ngwate Banki ya Kigali Ltd ikaba ariyo yagombaga kuzandikisha nk‟uko biteganyijwe mu masezerano y‟umwenda utangwa hatanzwe ingwate (ouverture de crédit avec constitution d‟hypothèque) yo kuwa 19 Nyakanga 2005 yavuzwe haruguru (ku rupapuro rwa kabiri/deuxième Feuillet) nk‟uko kandi byagiye byibutswa mu nyandiko yose imwemerera inguzanyo inagaragaza ingwate Banki ihawe. [15] Urukiko rw‟Ikirenga rurasanga bigaragara ko Banki ya Kigali na Nyagatare Théogène bagiranye amasezerano atandukanye y‟umwenda, yose akaba yaragiye ahabwa umwenda ari uko atanze ingwate, Banki ya Kigali Ltd ikaba ariyo ifite ishingano yo kwandikisha izo ngwate. Muri ayo masezerano harimo ayo kuwa 19 Nyakanga 2005, yabayeho hakorwa ivugururwa rya mbere ry‟amasezerano (avenant Nº001) ku masezerano y‟umwenda utangwa hatanzwe ingwate (ouverture de crédit avec constitution d‟hypothèque), yashyiriweho umukono imbere ya noteri wa Leta Norbert Kamugisha. Muri ayo masezerano Nyagatare Théogène yahaye Banki ya Kigali Ltd ingwate ho inzu zubatse n‟izizubakwa mu kibanza No1647 kiri Kigabiro-Rwamagana, ayiha n‟amasezerano No L139/rwa/2005 y‟ubukode bw‟icyo kibanza. Hari kandi inyandiko yo kuwa 27/07/2009, Banki ya Kigali Ltd yandikiye Nyagatare Théogène imumenyesha ingano y‟umwenda ayifitiye, inamwibutsa ko ingwate Banki ifite z‟iyo myenda yose ari inzu iri mu kibanza No2685 i Remera- Kimironko, inzu iri mu kibanza No1647 Kigabiro-Rwamagana (izo ngwate zombi zagombaga kwandikishwa kuri “hypotheque de 1er rang”), inzu 2 ziri Kigabiro-Rwamagana, n‟ingwate y‟imitungo yimukanwa (gaje de fonds de commerce) ifite agaciro ka 50.000.000Frw, ibyangombwa by‟iyo mitungo yose MUJAWIMANA N’ABANDI v. BANKI YA KIGALI Ltd (BK) 95

## Page 123

itimukanwa Nyagatare Théogène akaba yarabihaye Banki ya Kigali Ltd, ayiha n‟uburenganzira bwo kwandikisha ingwate. [16] Ku bijyanye no kwandikisha ingwate, abahanga mu mategeko babivuga ko bikorwa mu rwego rwo kugira ngo uwahawe ingwate agire icyizere cyo kwishyurwa mbere y‟abandi bantu umubereyemo umwenda yaba afitiye indi myenda, bigakorwa kugira ngo abo bandi bamenye ko uwo mwenda uriho kandi nyirawo afite uburenganzira bwo kwishyurwa mbere, kuko mu gihe ingwate itandikishijwe nta burenganzira uwayihawe aba arusha abandi bafitiwe imyenda, ariko kutayandikisha bikaba bitavanaho ko amasezerano yabayeho kuko iryo yandikishwa riba rigamije gusa kumenyesha abandi ko uwo mutungo utimukanwa watanzweho ingwate2. [17] Urukiko rurasanga rero nk‟uko rumaze kubigaragaza, amasezerano y‟ingwate hagati ya Nyagatare Théogène na Banki ya Kigali Ltd yarabayeho, akaba afite agaciro hagati y‟abayagiranye kuko yubahirije ingingo ya 33 yavuzwe

2 1. Gael Piette, Droit de sûreté, 9ème éd. Université momentos Ltd. Mouleno cedex.2015.p.142;147. (Les conditions de fond de l’hypothèque concernent le constituant, la créance garantie et l’assiètte de la sûreté. le respect d’une condition de forme est généralement nécéssaire : la rédaction d’un acte notarié… l’inscription va permettre d’assurer la publicité d’hypothèque, donc de rendre la sûreté opposable aux tiers. A défaut de publicité, l’hypothèque est inopposable aux tiers, qu’ils soient de bonne ou de mauvaise foi. L’inscription est donc une condition d’opposabilité et non une condition de validité. Une hypothèque non publiée est valable entre les partes). 2. Francois T’S kint, Sûretés et principes généraux du droit de poursuite des créanciers, Larcier, 200.p.312. (L’inscription de l’hypothèque en assure la publicité. Elle ne crée aucun droit. L’inscription ne fait que réveller, aux yeux des tiers, le droit d’hypothèque). ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 96

## Page 124

haruguru, akaba nk‟uko byasobanuwe, adashobora kuvanwaho cyangwa ngo ateshwe agaciro n‟uko ingwate zatanzwe zitandikishijwe, akaba nta n‟ushobora kuyahakana kandi inyandiko zayo zihari. 2) Kumenya niba amasezerano y’ingwate Banki ya Kigali yagiranye na Nyagatare Théogène agomba guseswa. [18] Me Mutabazi Abayo Jean Claude avuga ko itegeko ry‟ubutaka ryo mu mwaka wa 2005 ryateganyaga mu ngingo yaryo ya 35 ko kugira ngo uhagarariye umuryango ashobore gutanga uburenganzira ku mutungo utimukanwa, bigomba kubanza kwemerwa n‟abagize umuryango bose bawufiteho uburenganzira (umugore, abana bafite imyaka y‟ubukure, abatayifite bagahagararirwa n‟ababyeyi babo), ko umutungo utangwaho ingwate ari uko bose babyemeye ariko akaba atariko byagenze Nyagatare Théogène atanga ingwate zose yahaye Banki ya Kigali Ltd, ko yatanze imitungo ho ingwate umugore we n‟abana be batabyemeye. Avuga kandi ko mu gutanga no kwakira izo ngwate na none hirengagijwe ingingo ya 21 y‟Itegeko No22/99 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‟abashyigiranywe, iteganya ko, “uko imicungire y‟umutungo n‟uburyo bawucunga byaba biri kose, ubwumvikane bw‟abashyingiranywe ari ngombwa mu gutanga ikitimukanwa bwite n‟umutungo bahuriyeho no kubitangaho ubundi burenganzira bwose”. [19] Me Mutabazi Abayo Jean Claude asoza avuga ko mu mitungo Nyagatare Théogène yatanzeho ingwate harimo igice cy‟umutungo Mujawimana Rose afiteho uburenganzira, ko Urukiko ruramutse rwemeje ko amasezerano yabayeho, MUJAWIMANA N’ABANDI v. BANKI YA KIGALI Ltd (BK) 97

## Page 125

ingaruka zaba ko igice cya Nyagatare ari cyo yaba yaratanzeho ingwate gusa, amasezerano yaramuka asheshwe Mujawimana Rose akagira uburenganzira ku mutungo wose. [20] Me Rusanganwa avuga ko amasezerano abo baburana basaba ko ateshwa agaciro ari amasezerano y‟inguzanyo kuko nta masezerano y‟ingwate yabayeho, ko icyabayeho ari amasezerano y‟umwenda, kandi ko Banki ya Kigali Ltd itazagurisha ishingiye kuri ayo masezerano ahubwo izashingira ku rubanza kuko amasezerano yabaye mbere ya 2009, ku rupapuro rwayo rwa 4 bumvikanye ko mu kugurisha ingwate hakorwa, “vente par voie parreé”, ariko ko bitashoboka kuko iyo ngwate itanditse, ko kandi ingaruka y‟ingwate ari uko iyo umwenda utishyuwe ingwate igurishwa, hakaba amahirwe yo kwishyurwa mbere aribyo byitwa “rang privilégié”, ariko ko byose bitashoboka ingwate itanditse, avuga ko urukiko ruramutse rwemeje ko amasezerano y‟ingwate avuyeho byaba bivuze ko n‟ay‟umwenda yaba akuweho kuko ari mu nyandiko imwe. Avuga ko igihe cyose Banki idafite “titre” itavuga ko ifite ingwate, ko rero abazungura ba Nyagatare batavuga ko Banki ifite uburenganzira ku mutungo wa Nyagatare. UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [21] Ingingo ya 35 y‟Itegeko Ngenga N°08/2005 14/07/2005 rigena imikoreshereze n‟imicungire y‟ubutaka mu Rwanda iteganya ko gutanga burundu uburenganzira ku butaka, nko kubugurisha, kubutangira ubuntu cyangwa kubugurana, bikozwe n‟uhagarariye umuryango bigomba kubanza kwemerwa n‟abagize umuryango bose basangiye ubwo burenganzira naho ingingo ya 38 igateganya ko kwemerwa kuvugwa mu ngingo ya 35 y‟iri Tegeko Ngenga ari ngombwa ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 98

## Page 126

no mu gihe hagomba gutangwa ingwate ku butaka, ubukode ku butaka, ukwatisha kw‟igihe kirekire cyangwa se mu gihe habayeho ubwumvikane ku burenganzira bwo gukoresha ubutaka bw‟undi bitewe n‟imiterere yabwo. [22] Ingingo ya 21 y‟Itegeko Nº22/99 ryo kuwa 12/11/1999 ryuzuza igitabo cya mbere cy‟urwunge rw‟amategeko mbonezamubano kandi rishyiraho igice cya gatanu cyerekeye imicungire y‟umutungo w‟abashyingiranwe, impano n‟izungura iteganya ko imicungire y‟umutungo n‟uburyo bawucunga byaba biri kose, ubwumvikanwe bw‟abashyingiranywe ari ngombwa mu gutanga ikitimukanwa bwite n‟umutungo bahuriyeho no kubitangaho ubundi burenganzira. [23] Urukiko rurasanga mu masezerano y‟umwenda utangwa hatanzwe ingwate (contrat d‟ouverture de crédit avec constitution d‟hypothèque) Nyagatare Théogène yagiranye na Banki ya Kigali Ltd kuwa 19 Nyakanga 2005 no mu yandi masezerano yose yakurikiyeho kugeza kuyo kuwa 27 Nyakanga 2009, aho Banki ya Kigali Ltd yamwemereye inguzanyo nawe akayiha ho ingwate inzu iri mu kibanza No2685 kiri I Remera- Kimironko akayiha n‟icyangombwa cyayo (titre de propriété), n‟inzu iri mu kibanza No1647 Kigabiro–Rwamagana n‟icyangombwa cyayo, nta na hamwe bigaragara ko umugore we Mujawimana Rose yemeye ko izo ngwate zitangwa kuko ari nta na hamwe hagaragara umukono we, byerekana ko izo ngwate Nyagatare Théogène yahaye Banki ya Kigali Ltd ikaba itunze ibyangombwa byazo nk‟uko n‟uyihagarariye yabyemereye Urukiko ndetse akavuga ko impamvu Banki ikibitunze ari uko abazungura ba Nyagatare batabisabye, zatanzwe mu buryo bunyuranyije n‟amategeko kuko zitubahirijwe ibiteganywa mu ngingo ya 35 n‟iya 21 zavuzwe MUJAWIMANA N’ABANDI v. BANKI YA KIGALI Ltd (BK) 99

## Page 127

haruguru, bityo ayo masezerano y‟ingwate akaba agomba guseswa, ibyangombwa by‟iyo mitungo itimukanwa yavuzwe haruguru bifitwe na Banki ya Kigali Ltd ikabisubiza Mujawimana Rose,umugore wa Nyagatare Théogène. [24] Urukiko rurasanga ariko kubera ko nta masezerano yihariye y‟ingwate Nyagatare Théogène yagiranye na Banki ya Kigali ahubwo ibyerekeye ingwate bivugwa mu masezerano y‟umwenda utangwa hatanzwe ingwate (ouverture de crédit avec constitution d‟hypothèque) yo kuwa 19 Nyakanga 2005, ayo kuwa 05 Werurwe 2009 n‟ayo kuwa 27 Nyakanga 2009, bigomba kumvikana neza ko, iseswa ry‟aya masezerano y‟ingwate ritareba amasezerano yose y‟umwenda yavuzwe haruguru, ahubwo rireba gusa ingingo zayo zivuga ibirebana n‟ingwate yatanzwe ku nzu iri mu kibanza No2685 kiri i Remera-Kimironko n‟iyatanzwe ku nzu iri mu kibanza No1647 Kigabiro-Rwamagana, cyane cyane ko abajuriye muri uru rubanza bari mu bazungura ba Nyagatare Théogène batsindiwe umwenda yagombaga kwishyura Banki ya Kigali Ltd, mu rubanza RCOMA0154/12/CS rwaciwe n‟uru Rukiko kuwa 05 Gashyantare 2016, rukaba rwarabaye itegeko. Ibi bihuye n‟ibyo bamwe mu bahanga mu mategeko bavuga ko amasezerano ashobora guseswa igice kimwe ikindi kikagumaho nk‟igihe umucamanza asanga ibyo bice byombi bishobora gutandukanywa, nko mu masezerano “synallagmatiques” cyangwa “a titre gratuity”3. Iby‟uko ingwate yatanzwe binyuranyije n‟amategeko igomba guseswa bihuye kandi n‟ibyemejwe n‟uru Rukiko mu rubanza RCOM0001/07/CS rwaciwe kuwa 24/07/2008 haburana Rwigema Chantal na ECOBANK, aho rwemeje ko Mme Rwigema Chantal nta ruhare

3 Alain Bénabent, Droit des obligations, 14ème .éd. LGDJ, 2014, p.176. ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 100

## Page 128

yagize mu masezerano yabaye hagati ya Mazimpaka na BCDI yatanzwemo ingwate inzu y‟umuryango, kuko atigeze ayamenyeshwa ngo ayemere”. 3. Ibyerekeye indishyi zasabwe muri uru rubanza [25] Me Mutabazi Abayo Jean Claude avuga ko Urukiko Rukuru rw‟Ubucuruzi rwanze kugenera indishyi abo ahagarariye rushingiye ku mpamvu y‟uko ikirego cyabo kidafite ishingiro bitewe n‟uko batashoboye kugaragaza ko amasezerano y‟ingwate yabayeho, ko rero nyuma yo kubigaragaza muri uru Rukiko, rwabikosora, abo ahagarariye bakagenerwa indishyi hitawe ku kuba bararuhijwe bikomeye bagashorwa mu manza guhera mu Rukiko rw‟Ubucuruzi kugeza mu Rukiko rw‟Ikirenga, bagahabwa indishyi z‟amafaranga y‟ikurikiranarubanza angana na 1.000.000Frw na 6.000.000Frw y‟igihembo cya Avoka. [26] Me Rusanganwa avuga ko asanga nta ndishyi zikwiye gutangwa kuko ikirego cy‟abo baburana nta shingiro gifite, ko abazungura ba Nyagatare bari mu rubanza mu mwanya we, nta kindi cyatuma bataza mu rubanza kuko badashobora kwanga ibyo Nyagatare Théogène yakoze, ko ahubwo uwo ahagarariye yahabwa indishyi z‟ikurikiranarubanza zingana na 2.000.000Frw na 2.000.000Frw y‟igihembo cya Avoka. Me Mutabazi Abayo Jean Claude yasabye Urukiko kuzasuzuma iby‟uhagarariye Banki ya Kigali Ltd yaka mu bushishozi bwarwo.

MUJAWIMANA N’ABANDI v. BANKI YA KIGALI Ltd (BK) 101

## Page 129

UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [27] Urukiko rusanga Mujawamariya Rose, Tuyisenge Rachel na Ishimwe Leah Aliah baratakaje byinshi muri izi manza bishyura ba Avoka bakazikurikirana, akaba ari ngombwa ko bahabwa indishyi hashingiwe ku biteganywa n‟ingingo ya 258 CCL.III, ariko kuko indishyi basaba ari nyinshi, mu bushishozi bw‟Urukiko Banki ya Kigali Ltd ikaba igomba kubaha 1.800.000Frw akubiyemo ay‟ikurikiranarubanza n‟ay‟igihembo cya Avoka. [28] Urukiko rurasanga indishyi Banki ya Kigali, Ltd isaba itazihabwa kuko itsindwa n‟urubanza. III. ICYEMEZO CY’URUKIKO [29] Rwemeje ko ubujurire bwa Mujawimana Rose, Tuyisenge Rachel na Ishimwe Leah Aliah bufite ishingiro. [30] Rwemeje ko urubanza RCOMA0552/13/HCC rwaciwe n‟Urukiko Rukuru rw‟Ubucuruzi ruhindutse kuri byose. [31] Rutegetse ko amasezerano y‟ingwate Nyagatare Théogène yahaye Banki ya Kigali Ltd ku mitungo itimukanwa ikurikira: inzu iri mu kibanza No2685 i Remera-Kimironko, n‟inzu iri mu kibanza No1647 Kigabiro-Rwamagana yose asheshwe. [32] Rutegetse Banki ya Kigali Ltd guha Mujawimana Rose ibyangombwa byose by‟iyo mitungo itimukanwa ivuzwe haruguru. ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 102

## Page 130

[33] Ruyitegetse guha Mujawimana Rose, Tuyisenge Rachel na Ishimwe Leah bose hamwe indishyi z‟ikurikiranarubanza n‟‟igihembo cya Avoka bingana na 1.800.000Frw. [34] Rutegetse Banki ya Kigali Ltd kwishyura amagarama y‟urubanza.

MUJAWIMANA N’ABANDI v. BANKI YA KIGALI Ltd (BK) 103

## Page 132

RUBARE v. IKIGO CY’IMISORO N’AMAHORO (RRA) [Rwanda URUKIKO RW‟IKIRENGA – RCOMA0149/12/CS (Kayitesi, P.J., Mukandamage na Kanyange, J.) 11 Werurwe 2016] Amategeko agenga umusoro – Umusoro ku nyongeragaciro – Imenyekanisha ry’umusoro ku nyongeragaciro – Amafaranga ahabwa uwatsindiye isoko rya Leta mu buryo bwo kumufasha gutangira imirimo ntiyafatwa nk’ubwishyu cyangwa ngo igihe yatangiwe abe aricyo giherwaho nk’igihe umusoro wagombaga kumenyekanishirizwa – Itegeko Nº37/2012 ryo kuwa 09/11/2012 rishyiraho umusoro ku nyongeragaciro, ingingo ya 10 – Itegeko Nº12/2007 ryo kuwa 27/03/2007 rigenga amasoko ya Leta, ingingo ya 20, iya 86 igika cya kabiri n’iya 8 – Itegeko Nº06/2001 ryo kuwa 20/01/2001 rishyiraho umusoro ku nyongeragaciro, ingingo ya 20. Incamake y’ikibazo: RRA yaciye Rubare Josias ibihano n‟inyungu z‟ubukererwe angana na 21.380.684Frw y‟ibihano n‟inyungu ivuga ko zikomoka ku imenyekanisha ry‟umusoro ku nyongeragaciro (TVA) yakoze atinze ujyanye n‟ubwishyu bwa avansi yo gutangira imirimo. Rubare yajuriye kwa Komiseri Mukuru avuga ko yarenganyijwe kubera ko iyo avansi atari ubwishyu, ahubwo ari amafaranga yo gutangiza imirimo uwatsindiye isoko rya Leta agurizwa ariko ubujurire bwe ntibwahabwa agaciro maze atanga ikirego mu Rukiko Rukuru rw‟Ubucuruzi asaba kuyavanirwaho avuga ko yabiciwe mu buryo bunyuranyije n‟amategeko. Urukiko rwemeje ko ikirego 105

## Page 133

cye nta shingiro gifite, rumutegeka kwishyura RRA izo nyungu z‟ubukererwe. Rubare yajuriye mu Rukiko rw‟Ikirenga avuga ko Urukiko rwirengagije ko avansi yo gutangira imirimo atari ubwishyu bugomba gucibwa umusoro ku nyongeragaciro. Uhagarariye RRA avuga ko ikibazo kigomba gusuzumwa muri uru rubanza ari ikirebana n‟igihe TVA igomba kwishyurirwa. Incamake y’icyemezo: 1. Amafaranga ahabwa uwatsindiye isoko rya Leta mu buryo bwo kumufasha gutangira imirimo ntiyafatwa nk‟ubwishyu cyangwa ngo igihe yatangiwe abe aricyo giherwaho nk‟igihe umusoro wagombaga kumenyekanishirizwa. Bityo Rubare ntiyagombaga gucibwa ibihano n‟inyungu z‟ubukererwe ku musoro ku nyongeragaciro kuko yagombaga gusora igihe yari kuba akoze inyemezabwishyu cyangwa yishyuwe imirimo. 2. Uwajuriye agomba kugenerwa amafaranga y‟ikurikiranarubanza n‟igihembo cy‟Avoka atangwa mu bushishozi bw‟urukiko igihe ayo asabya ari umurengera. Ubujurire bufite ishingiro. Amagarama y’urubanza aherereye ku warezwe. Amategeko yashingiweho: Itegeko Nº37/2012 ryo kuwa 09/11/2012 rishyiraho umusoro ku nyongeragaciro, ingingo ya 10. Itegeko Nº12/2007 ryo kuwa 27/03/2007 rigenga amasoko ya Leta, ingingo ya 20, iya 86(2) n‟iya 89. Itegeko Nº06/2001 ryo kuwa 20/01/2001 rishyiraho umusoro ku nyongeragaciro, ingingo ya 20. ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 106

## Page 134

Imanza zifashishijwe: RRA v. Misigaro, RCOMA0074/11/CS rwaciwe n‟Urukiko rw‟Ikirenga kuwa 11/04/2014. Urubanza I. IMITERERE Y’URUBANZA [1] Rubare Josias yaciwe ibihano n‟inyungu z‟ubukererwe bikomoka ku musoro ku nyongeragaciro yamenyekanishije atinze, nyuma yo kujuririra kwa Komiseri Mukuru avuga ko yarenganye ariko ubujurire bwe ntibuhabwe ishingiro, atanga ikirego mu Rukiko Rukuru rw‟Ubucuruzi asaba kuvanirwaho 21.380.684Frw y‟ibihano n‟inyungu z‟ubukererwe kuko yabiciwe mu buryo bunyuranyije n‟amategeko, asobanura ko ayo mafaranga yayaciwe kuri avansi yo gutangira imirimo yahawe (avance de démarrage) kandi atari ubwishyu ahubwo ari inguzanyo ihabwa uwatsindiye isoko kandi yishyurwa nk‟uko biteganywa n‟ingingo ya 89 y‟Itegeko rigenga amasoko ya Leta, mu gihe RRA yo yavugaga ko amafaranga ya avansi yo gutangira imirimo atari inguzanyo ahubwo ari igice cy‟agaciro k‟isoko ryose kiba cyishyuwe mbere, ko kandi iyo avansi igomba gucibwa TVA hashingiwe ku biteganywa n‟ingingo ya 20 (c) y‟Itegeko Nº06/2001 ryo kuwa 20/01/2001 rishyiraho umusoro ku nyongeragaciro nkuko ryahinduwe kugeza ubu, kuko ivuga ko iyo habaye ubwishyu mbere y‟ibiteganywa mu duce (a) na (b) ubwo bwishyu bufatwa ko bujyanye n‟itangwa ry‟ibintu cyangwa irya serivisi kandi bucibwa TVA. [2] Urukiko rwemeje ko ikirego cya Rubare nta shingiro gifite, rumutegeka kwishyura RRA 21.380.684Frw y‟ibihano RUBARE v. IKIGO CY’IMISORO N’AMAHORO (RRA) 107

## Page 135

n‟inyungu z‟ubukererwe, icyo cyemezo rukaba rwaragishingiye ku ngingo ya 86 y‟Itegeko rigenga amasoko ya Leta, rusanga avansi Rubare yahawe atari inguzanyo ahubwo ari avansi yahawe ku bwishyu yagombaga kubona, ikaba agomba gusoreshwa hashingiwe ku ngingo ya 20(c) y‟Itegeko rishyiraho umusoro ku nyongeragaciro. [3] Rubare Josias yajuririye urwo rubanza mu Rukiko rw‟Ikirenga avuga ko Urukiko rwirengagije ko avansi yo gutangira imirimo atari ubwishyu bugomba gucibwa umusoro ku nyongeragaciro, mu gihe RRA yo ikomeza ivuga ko uwo musoro ugomba gucibwa hashingiwe ku biteganywa n‟ingingo ya 20(c) y‟Itegeko rishyiraho umusoro ku nyongeragaciro. [4] Iburanisha ryabereye mu ruhame kuwa 02 Gashyantare 2016, Rubare ahagarariwe na Me Nsengiyumva Abel naho RRA ihagarariwe na Me Kabibi Spéciose. II. IBIBAZO BIRI MU RUBANZA N’ISESENGURWA RYABYO 1. Kumenya niba Rubare ataragombaga gucibwa ibihano n’inyungu z’ubukererwe bikomoka ku musoro ku nyongeragaciro RRA ivuga ko yamenyekanishije atinze. [5] Uburanira Rubare avuga ko yajurijwe n‟uko Urukiko rwa mbere rwagumishijeho ibihano n‟inyungu z‟ubukererwe yaciwe na RRA ivuga ko yatinze kumenyekanisha umusoro ku nyongeragaciro kuri avansi yo gutangira imirimo kandi nyamara iyo avansi atari ubwishyu, ko ahubwo ari amafaranga yo gutangiza imirimo ukora isoko rya Leta agurizwa kandi abanje gushaka umwishingira, ko mu gihe atarikoze uwamwishingiye ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 108

## Page 136

amwishyurira, yakora iryo soko ayo mafaranga akagenda yishyurwa kuri buri nyemezabwishyu (facture); ko ku birebana na Rubare wahawe na Caisse Sociale du Rwanda avansi yo gutangira imirimo akishingirwa na SORAS, yagiye yishyura iyo avansi uko yakoraga “facture” kugeza arangije, bivuze ko ari inguzanyo yari yahawe kuko ubwishyu budasubizwa, ko n‟urubanza RCOM0074/12/CS rwaciwe n‟uru rukiko kuwa 11 Mata 2014 rwakemuye icyo kibazo aho rwerekanye ko avansi atari ubwishyu. [6] Akomeza avuga ko RRA itavuga ko habaye gutinda kumenyekanisha TVA ibishingiye ko yishyurwa umunsi uwabonye isoko aboneyeho avansi kandi nyamara atari ubwishyu, byongeye kandi uwo musoro waciwe ku gaciro kose k‟isoko, kandi n‟ubwo RRA iyita ubwishyu, hagomba kwibazwa icyo buba bukorewe cyane cyane ko mu masoko ya Leta hishyurwa akazi kamaze gukorwa nkuko biteganywa n‟ingingo ya 86 y‟Itegeko rigenga amasoko ya Leta, ko rero niba hishyurwa akazi kamaze gukorwa, byumvikana ko avansi atari ubwishyu. Na none kandi ngo niba TVA itangwa ku isoko ryose ikongera igatangwa kuri avansi yo gutangira imirimo, bivuze ko yaba yishyuwe inshuro ebyiri. [7] Avuga kandi ko agace ka (c) k‟ingingo ya 20 y‟Itegeko rishyiraho umusoro ku nyongeragaciro RRA iburanisha, nako ubwako kavuga ko hagomba kuba hakozwe inyemezabuguzi cyangwa ubwishyu, bishimangira ko avansi idafite igice cy‟umurimo bijyanye kandi TVA ntiyacibwa mu gihe nta murimo wakozwe. Avuga ko kubera impaka zahoragaho zirebana na avansi yo gutangira imirimo, byabaye ngombwa ko hatangwa igisobanuro cyayo mu ngingo ya 10 y‟Itegeko rishya rishyiraho umusoro ku nyongeragaciro (Itegeko Nº37/2012 ryo RUBARE v. IKIGO CY’IMISORO N’AMAHORO (RRA) 109

## Page 137

kuwa 09/11/2012), mu gusoza asaba ko imikirize y‟urubanza rwajuririwe yahinduka. [8] Uburanira RRA avuga ko ikibazo kigomba gusesengurwa ari icyo kumenya igihe TVA igomba kwishyurirwa kuko ku birebana na Rubare, iyo TVA yayishyuye ariko abikora akererewe, ko kandi ibyo umuburanira avuga abishingira gusa ku ngingo ya 20 (b) ivuga igihe habaye inyemezabuguzi (facturation) cyangwa habaye kwishyurwa umurimo wakozwe, akirengagiza agace kayo ka (c) kavuga ko iyo hishyuwe imirimo itarakorwa, TVA yishyurwa mu gihe kibanziriza ikindi muri ibyo byose, bivuze ko avansi yo gukora imirimo ari ubwishyu buba bubaye mbere y‟uko imirimo ikorwa na mbere y‟uko inyemezabwishyu ikorwa. Asanga kandi urubanza uburanira Rubare avuga ko rwakemuye ikibazo atari ko bimeze kuko rwibanze ku duce twa (a) na (b) tw‟ingingo ya 20 y‟Itegeko rishyiraho umusoro ku nyongeragaciro. [9] Akomeza avuga ko n‟ubwo byumvikana ko ubwishyu bubaho iyo imirimo yakozwe, ariko na none hagomba kwibazwa icyo amafaranga ya avansi aba yatangiwe, ko asanga atangwa kugira ngo uwatsindiye isoko abashe kurikora, bivuze ko ari amafaranga aba yishyuwe mbere yo gukora imirimo kandi atangwa mu rwego rw‟amasezerano y‟uwo murimo kuko ayo masezerano atabayeho n‟ayo mafaranga atatangwa. [10] Ku birebana n‟Itegeko rishya rishyiraho umusoro ku nyongeragaciro, uburanira RRA avuga ko ritaje gusobanura ingingo ya 20 yo mu Itegeko rya mbere ahubwo hahinduwe uburyo bwo kwishyura, mu gusoza avuga ko hagumaho imikirize y‟urubanza rwajuririwe. ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 110

## Page 138

UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [11] Ku birebana n‟igihe umusoro ku nyongeragaciro wishyurirwa, ingingo ya 20 y‟Itegeko Nº06/2001 ryo kuwa 20/01/2001 rishyiraho umusoro ku nyongeragaciro ryakoreshwaga ku birebana n‟umusoro Rubare yaciweho ibihano n‟inyungu z‟ubukererwe, iteganya ko: Umusoro wakwa iyo ibintu cyangwa imirimo byaguzwe. Igihe giteganijwe umusoro wakirwa ni ikibanziriza ibindi mu bihe bikurikira: a) Ku birebana n‟ibintu byacurujwe: i) ni igihe ibyo bintu byakuriwe mu bubiko bw‟ubicuruza; ii) iyo ibyo bintu bitarahakurwa, ni igihe cyose byashyikirijwe uwo bigenewe. b) Ku birebana n‟imirimo ikorwa, kuyitumiza bifatwa ko byabaye mu gihe koko iyo mirimo yakozwe. Iyo mirimo (servisi) ihora ikorwa mu gihe hakurikijwe iteka cyangwa amasezerano ateganya ko kwishyura bikorwa mu byiciro, iyo imirimo ifatwa nk‟aho yakozwe mu bice bikurikirana by‟icyo gihe nk‟uko byagenwe n‟iteka cyangwa amasezerano kandi buri korwa ry‟umurimo (servisi) rifatwa nk‟aho ryabereye mu gihe kibanziriza ikindi muri ibi bikurikira: i) igihe usoreshwa wiyandikishije yakoreye inyemezabuguzi cyangwa inyemezamusoro ku nyongeragaciro y‟uwo murimo wakozwe; ii) igihe usoreshwa wiyandikishije yishyuriwe umurimo yakoze. RUBARE v. IKIGO CY’IMISORO N’AMAHORO (RRA) 111

## Page 139

c) iyo uzana ibintu cyangwa ukora imirimo akoze inyemezabuguzi cyangwa arishywe agaciro k‟ibintu cyangwa imirimo mbere y‟ibihe byavuzwe mu gika a) na b) by‟iyi ngingo, igihe cyo gutanga ibyo bintu cyangwa gukora iyo mirimo ku birebana n‟igice cyakorewe inyemezabuguzi cyangwa icyishyuwe, gifatwa nk‟aho cyabaye igihe inyemezabuguzi yakorewe cyangwa igihe kurihwa byabereye”. [12] Ku birebana na avansi yo gutangira imirimo, ingingo ya 86, igika cya kabiri, y‟Itegeko Nº12/2007 ryo kuwa 27/03/2007 rigenga amasoko ya Leta, iteganya ko “Cyakora Igitabo cy‟amabwiriza agenga ipiganwa gishobora guteganya avansi ku mirimo. Iyo avansi ntishobora gutangwa amasezerano atarashyirwaho umukono”. Ingingo ya 89 y‟iryo Tegeko, iteganya ko “avansi yahawe uwatsindiye isoko isubizwa hakoreshejwe ikatwa ry‟umubare runaka w‟amafaranga ku nyemezabuguzi zatanzwe kandi zemejwe. Igitabo cy‟amabwiriza agenga ipiganwa giteganya ijanisha ry‟amafaranga azagenda akatwa kugeza avansi yose yishyuwe”. [13] Ku byerekeye Rubare, amasezerano yakoranye na Caisse Sociale du Rwanda,yateganyije mu ngingo yayo ya 29.1 ko ashobora guhabwa avansi ya 20% y‟agaciro kose k‟isoko1, inateganya ko ayo mafaranga azajya yishyurwa kuri buri nyemezabuguzi ikozwe, Rubare akaba kandi avuga ko iyo

1 The contractor shall get, on his demand an advance payment equivalent as a maximum to twenty percent (20%) of the total contract sum. This advance should be guaranteed with a guarantee of 100% repayment stocked in a confirmed bank in Rwanda. Advance payment shall be reimbursed portionally on each certificate submitted to full amount before the final certificate”. ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 112

## Page 140

avansi yayihawe ingana na 328.099.434Frw ihwanye na 20% y‟isoko ryose. [14] Hasesenguwe ibiteganywa n‟ingingo ya 20 y‟Itegeko Nº06/2001 ryo kuwa 20/01/2001 ryavuzwe haruguru, umusoro ku birebana n‟imirimo ikorwa wakwa iyo hakozwe inyemezabuguzi cyangwa inyemezamusoro ku nyongeragaciro cyangwa igihe usora yishyuwe umurimo wakozwe, cyangwa nkuko bivugwa mu gace ka c) k‟iyo ngingo ari nako RRA ishingiraho, iyo,hakozwe inyemezabuguzi cyangwa hishyuwe agaciro k‟imirimo mbere y‟ibihe byavuzwe bivugwa mu duce twa a) na b), ko muri icyo gihe harebwa igice cyakorewe inyemezabuguzi cyangwa icyishyuwe bigafatwa nkaho aricyo gihe inyemezabuguzi yakorewe cyangwa kurihwa bwabereye. [15] Urukiko rurasanga n‟ubwo RRA ishingira kuri ako gace ka (c) ikavuga ko avansi Rubare yahawe ari ubwishyu, iyo miburanire yayo ntiyahabwa ishingiro kuko itagaragaza igice cy‟imirimo cyakorewe inyemezabuguzi cyangwa icyishyuwe nk‟uko ingingo y‟Itegeko ibiteganya, ahubwo bigomba gufatwa ko ayo mafaranga ya avansi ari ahabwa uwatsindiye isoko mu rwego rwo kumufasha kuritangira ariko nta gice cy‟umurimo runaka aba yishyuriwe. [16] Byongeye kandi, avansi uwatsindiye isoko rya Leta ahabwa agenda ayishyura nk‟uko ingingo ya 89 y‟Itegeko rigenga amasoko ya Leta yavuzwe haruguru ibiteganya, bikanashimangirwa n‟amasezerano Rubare yakoranye na CSR nkuko ingingo ya 29.1 yavuzwe haruguru ibiteganya, kandi akaba ari nako byagenze harebwe inyemezabuguzi Rubare yatanze nk‟urugero ifite Nº1/Novembre-2008, igaragaza ko ku mafaranga 148.248.763 yishyuzaga, havanywemo 10% afatirwa (retenue) n‟andi yo kwishyura angana na 26.684.777Frw RUBARE v. IKIGO CY’IMISORO N’AMAHORO (RRA) 113

## Page 141

(remboursement 20%), Rubare avuga ko ari avansi yishyuraga kandi koko ahura n‟ateganywa mu ngingo ya 89 imaze kuvugwa hamwe no mu ngingo ya 29.1 y‟amasezerano y‟isoko, bityo kuri iyo nyemezabuguzi hagasigara 106.739.109Frw Rubare yagombaga kwishyurwa. [17] Ibimaze kuvugwa byumvikanisha rero ko amafaranga Rubare yahawe nk‟uwatsindiye isoko rya Leta yo kumufasha kurikora, atari ubwishyu nk‟uko RRA ibivuga, kuyihabwa rero bikaba bitaragombaga gufatwa nk‟igihe umusoro wagombaga kwishyurirwa, bityo rero akaba ataragombaga gucibwa ibihano n‟inyungu z‟ubukererwe kuko yagombaga gusora igihe yari kuba akoze inyemezabwishyu cyangwa yishyuwe imirimo. [18] Kuba itangwa rya avansi ridafatwa nk‟igihe cyo kwishyura umusoro, ni nabyo byemejwe mu Itegeko rishya Nº37/2012 ryo kuwa 09/11/2012 rishyiraho umusoro ku nyongeragaciro, mu ngingo ya 10 irebana n‟igihe cyo kwishyura umusoro, aho mu gace ka kabiri ivuga “ku itariki igicuruzwa cyangwa serivisi byishyuriweho harimo n‟ubwishyu bw‟igice. Cyakora aka gace ntikareba avansi ihabwa abubaka nyuma bakazayisubiza bayikura mu nyemezabuguzi bakorera umukiriya”. Nubwo iryo tegeko atari ryo ryagengaga umusoro Rubare yaciriwe ibihano n‟inyungu z‟ubukererwe, ariko igitekerezo kirimo cy‟uko avansi isubizwa n‟uwayihawe nk‟uko na Rubare yabikoze, ni impamvu ishimangira ibyemejwe haruguru binahura n‟ibyemejwe mu rundi rubanza rwaciwe n‟uru rukiko ku wa 11/04/2014 rufite NºRCOMA0074/11/CS haburana RRA na Misigaro Louis, narwo rwagaragaje ko avansi atari ubwishyu. [19] Hashingiwe ku byasobanuwe byose, Urukiko rurasanga Rubare ataragombaga gucibwa ibihano n‟inyungu ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 114

## Page 142

z‟ubukererwe, bityo urubanza rwajuririwe rukaba ruhindutse mu ngingo zarwo zose. 2. Kumenya niba Rubare yahabwa amafaranga y’ikurikiranarubanza n’igihembo cy’Avoka. [20] Rubare asaba ko RRA yategekwa kumwishyura 2.000.000Frw y‟ikurikiranarubanza n‟igihembo cy‟Avoka, naho RRA ikavuga ko yakwirengera amafaranga yakoresheje mu rubanza. UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [21] Urukiko rurasanga mu gihe ubujurire bwa Rubare buhawe ishingiro, agomba kugenerwa amafaranga y‟ikurikiranarubanza n‟igihembo cy‟Avoka, hashingiwe ku biteganywa n‟ingingo ya 258 CCL.III iteganya ko “Igikorwa cyose cy‟umuntu cyangirije undi gitegeka nyirugukora ikosa rigikomokaho kuriha ibyangiritse”, ariko rusanga 2.000.000Frw asaba ari ikirenga ahubwo yagenerwa mu bushishozi bwarwo 1.000.000Frw. III. ICYEMEZO CY’URUKIKO [22] Rwemeje ko ubujurire bwa Rubare Josias bufite ishingiro; [23] Rwemeje ko avaniweho ibihano n‟inyungu z‟ubukererwe bingana na 21.380.684Frw yaciwe na RRA; [24] Rutegetse RRA guha Rubare Josias 1.000.000Frw y‟ikurikiranarubanza n‟igihembo cy‟Avoka; RUBARE v. IKIGO CY’IMISORO N’AMAHORO (RRA) 115

## Page 143

[25] Rutegetse RRA kwishyura amagarama y‟urubanza angana na 100.000Frw.

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 116

## Page 144

URUBANZA RW’INSHINJACYAHA

## Page 146

UBUSHINJACYAHA v. GATARE [Rwanda URUKIKO RW‟IKIRENGA – RPA0317/08/CS (Nyirinkwaya, P.J., Hatangimbabazi na Munyangeli, J.) 24 Ukwakira 2014] Amategeko Mpanabyaha – Ubwicanyi – Ibimenyetso bicukumbuye – Mu manza nshinjabyaha, ibimenyetso bishingira ku mpamvu zose z’ibyabaye – Uregwa ashobora guhamwa n’icyaha hashingiwe ku bimenyetso byasesenguwe mu bushishozi bw’urukiko – Itegeko N°15/2004 ryerekeye ibimenyetso mu manza n’itangwa ryabyo, ingingo ya 119. Incamake y’ikibazo: Uregwa yakurikiranyweho icyaha cy‟ubuhotozi cyakorewe umugore we n‟umwana we mu Rukiko Rukuru rwa Repubulika, bakaba barishwe batwikiwe mu modoka ahitwa Nieuwerkerken mu gihugu cy‟u Bubiligi. Ubushinjacyaha bwagaragaje ibimenyetso bimushinja icyaha birimo ibi bikurikira: kuba ikoti ry‟uregwa ryaratoraguwe aho ba nyakwigendera batwikiwe ritahiye uwari uryambaye akaba yaravuye aho icyaha cyakorewe yerekeza ku muhanda nk‟uko byagaragajwe n‟imbwa ya polisi, kuba imfunguzo zifungura inzu babagamo zatoraguwe aho icyaha cyakorewe, kuba bukeye bw‟umunsi ba nyakwigendera bicwa yaragaragayeho ibikomere by‟ubushye byatewe n‟ikibatsi cy‟umuriro, kuba amasaha make mbere y‟uko bicwa yaratelefonnye akoresheje umunara wa Nieuwerkerken no kuba yarafatanywe ibyangombwa bya ba nyakwigendera nyuma y‟amezi atatu bishwe, kuba uregwa yaragiye gusaba ubutane no kwiyandukuzaho abana akigera mu Rwanda ntagire umuntu n‟umwe abwira ko ba nyakwigendera 119

## Page 147

babuze ahubwo abo bavuganye akagenda ababwira aho baba bari hagiye hatandukanye, n‟ibindi. Uregwa yaburanye muri urwo rukiko ahakana icyaha aregwa, akavuga ko ikoti ryatoraguwe ahabereye icyaha ryari ryambawe na nyakwigendera, naho ibikomere by‟ubushye byamugaragayeho bikaba byaratewe na “echappemenent” y‟imodoka yamutwitse arimo kuyisana. Ku birebana n‟imfunguzo z‟inzu yabo zari mu ikoti ryatoraguwe aho icyaha cyabereye, avuga ko zari iza nyakwigendera kuko we yari afite ize ari nazo yakoresheje afungura. Ibijyanye no kuba yarakoresheje umunara w‟aho icyaha cyabereye ku munsi ba nyakwigendera biciweho, yavuze ko yaba yarawukoresheje ahanyuze agenda. Ku birebana no kuba atarumvikanaga na nyakwigendera, yavuze ko mu rugo rwabo hataburaga utubazo nko muzindi ngo naho kuba yarafatanywe ibyangombwa byabo, yavuze ko byose byari bibitse hamwe ubwo biteguraga kuzana mu Rwanda, ntibibuka kubikuramo. Ku birebana no kuba yaragiye gusaba ubutane no kwiyandukuzaho abana akigera mu Rwanda kandi abo bavuganye mu Bubiligi no mu Rwanda, akababwira aho ba nyakwigendera bari hagiye hatandukanye, yasobanuye ko yasabye ubutane bitewe n‟umujinya ko banze kujyana nawe ku munota wa nyuma bikamutera igihombo. Urukiko rushingiye ku bimenyetso byatanzwe rwamuhamije icyaha, rumuhanisha igifungo cya burundu y‟umwihariko, runamutegeka guha indishyi uwaziregeye.Yajuririye Urukiko rw‟Ikirenga avuga ko yahamijwe icyaha hashingiwe ku bimenyetso bitagaragaza nta gushidikanya ko ariwe wakoze icyaha kandi ko urukiko rwamuhanishije igihano kirenze icyasabwe n„ubushinjacyaha. Uhagarariye Ubushinjacyaha we avuga ko ibimenyetso bihari bihagije kumuhamya icyaha. Naho ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 120

## Page 148

kubijyanye n‟ibihano, avuga ko kuba yarahanishijwe igihano kirenze icyo ubushinjacyaha bwamusabiye bitaba impamvu y‟ubujurire cyane ko yahaniwe icyaha yakoze. Murumuna wa nyakwigendera wisunze ubushinjacyaha akaregera indishyi nawe yarajuriye, avuga ko indishyi yagenewe zidahagije. Uregwa we avuga ko nta ndishyi akwiye gutanga kuko ari umwere. Incamake y’icyemezo: 1. Kuba ikoti ry‟uregwa ryaratoraguwe hanze y‟imodoka ba nyakwigendera batwikiwemo ni ikimenyetso kimushinja. 2. Kuba uregwa yaragaragayeho ubushye amasaha make cyane nyuma y‟uko ba nyakwigendera batwikirwa mu modoka ni ikimenyetso nacyo kimushinja kiyongera ku kimenyetso cy‟ikoti rye ryatoraguwe aho icyaha cyakorewe. 3. Nyakwigendera ntiyari guhira mu modoka ngo imfunguzo yarafite zigaragare mu ikote ryatoraguwe hanze y‟imodoka. Bityo kuba imfunguzo zifungura inzu babagamo zaratoraguwe aho icyaha cyakorewe nacyo ni ikimenyetso gishinja uregwa cyiyongera ku bindi. 4. Akuma kamanura kakanazamura ibirahure kakuwe mu modoka n‟uwatwitse ba nyakwigendera agamije kubabuza gusohoka mu modoka. 5. Kuba uregwa yaratelefonnye binyuze ku munara uri aho ba nyakwigendera batwikiwe amasaha make mbere y‟uko bicwa bigomba kureberwa hamwe n‟ibindi bimenyetso. 6. Kuba uregwa ntawe yamenyesheje ko ba nyakwigendera babuze ahubwo abo yasize mu Bubiligi akabumvisha ko bagiye UBUSHINJACYAHA v. GATARE 121

## Page 149

mu Rwanda, naho abo yasanze ino akabumvisha ko basigaye mu Bubiligi ni ikimenyetso kimushinja. 7. Kuba hari umutangabuhamya utarahamagajwe mu rukiko ngo aze asubiremo ibyo yavugiye mu bushinjacyaha ko uregwa yamubwiye ko umugore amaze kumunanira, ko aho bigeze n‟ubwo yapfa ntacyo byamubwira atari byo byatesha agaciro imvugo ye kuko urukiko rudategetswe guhamagara ababajijwe bose igihe cy‟iperereza, cyane ko igisuzumwa mu mvugo ye ari imibanire ye n‟umugore we, hakaba hari ibimenyetso bihagije bikubiyemo n‟imvugo ze bigaragaza ko iyo mibanire yari mibi. 8. Kuba uregwa yaraguriye ba nyakwigendera amatike yo kugenda gusa byerekana impamvu banze kuzana nawe mu Rwanda kuko bari yamenye ko afite gahunda yo kuhabasiga. 9. Gusaba ubutane bishobora kumvikana nk‟uburyo uregwa yakoresheje bwo gusibanganya ibimenyetso. Bityo kuba uregwa yarasabye ubutane akigera mu Rwanda akaniyandukuzaho abana ba nyakwigendera batari abe bigomba kureberwa hamwe n‟ibindi bimenyetso. 10. Kuba uregwa yarazanye mu Rwanda ibyangombwa bya banyakwigendera agafatwa nyuma y‟amezi 3 akibifite ntibyafatwa ko ari ukwibagirwa cyangwa kwibeshya, ahubwo bishimangira ko yari azi ko batavuye mu rugo bajya gufata iyabo nzu kuko batari kubura gutwara nibura ibyangombwa bikunze gukenerwa mu buzima bwa buri munsi. 11. Kuba uregwa yarahinduranyije imvugo ku bijyanye n‟uburyo yakoresheje amasaha y‟umunsi ba nyakwigendera biciweho kugeza ubwo avuze ko yiriranywe n‟umwana kugeza atashye ninjoro, bituma imvugo ze zitafatwaho ukuri. 12. Kuba uwaguze n‟uwagurishije imodoka batarandikiranye no kuba imodoka yarambitswe “plaques” zasibwe bigaragaza ko ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 122

## Page 150

uwayiguze yari yateguye uburyo azasibanganya ibimenyetso bishobora gutuma amenyekana. Kuba rero iperereza ritarashoboye kugaragaza umwirondoro w‟uwaguze imodoka ntibyatesha agaciro ibindi bimenyetso byatanzwe. 13. N‟ubwo ari ubwa mbere uregwa akoze icyaha bizwi ntiyahabwa inyoroshyacyaha nk‟uko bisabwa n‟abamwunganira harebwe uburyo yishe ba nyakwigendera yabiteguye neza n‟ubugome bukabije yabicanye, harebwe n‟uburyo yakoze uko ashoboye kugira ngo asibanganye ibimenyetso by‟icyaha, abana ba nyakwigendera bakaba barabuze umubyeyi bari basigaranye, ndetse na mukuru wabo bitewe n‟uwari wariyemeje kubabera umubyeyi ubwo yabiyandikagaho. 14. Uregera indishyi ntagaragaza icyo anenga indishyi z„akababaro yagenewe mu rwego rwa mbere, bityo zikaba zigomba kugumaho. 15. Indishyi zijyanye n‟igikorwa giteganywa gukorwa ntizigenwa. Bityoamafaranga yo kuzana imirambo iva mu Bubiligi no kuyishyingura mu Rwanda uregera indishyi asaba akaba atayahabwa. Ubujurire nta shingiro bufite. Ubujurire bwuririye ku bundi nta shingiro bufite. Uregwa ahamwa n’icyaha aregwa, ahanishijwe igifungo cya burundu. Uregwa ategetswe kwishyura indishyi zitandukanye. Amagarama aherereye ku isanduku ya Leta.

UBUSHINJACYAHA v. GATARE 123

## Page 151

Amategeko yashingiweho: Itegeko Ngenga N°01/2012/OL ryo kuwa 02/05/2012 rishyiraho igitabo cy‟amategeko ahana, ingingo ya 71 iya 82 iya 140 n‟iya 145. Itegeko N°15/2004 ryerekeye ibimenyetso mu manza n‟itangwa ryabyo, ingingo ya 119. Itegeko-Teka N°21/77 ryo kuwa 18 Kanama 1977 rishyiraho igitabo cy‟amategeko ahana ibyaha, ingingo ya 312. Nta manza zifashishijwe. Urubanza I. IMITERERE Y’URUBANZA [1] Ku cyumweru tariki ya 02/07/2006 ahitwa Nieuwerkerken (Limbourg) 23h45 abashinzwe kuzimya imiriro (pompiers) bahurujwe n‟umuntu wari ubonye ahantu hari umuriro ugurumana, basanga imodoka irimo gushya mu gashyamba kari nko mu bilometero 300 y‟umuhanda N716, muri iyo modoka harimo imirambo y‟abantu babiri bahiye bikabije ku buryo itashoboraga kumenyekana. [2] Abakoze iperereza basanze imodoka yahiye ari MAZDA 121 ifite plaque N°CFI 204, basangamo “portefeuille” yahiye irimo udupapuro natwo twahiye, mu metero 4 inyuma y‟aho yahiriye bahasanga akuma gafunga kandi kakanafungura ikirahure cy‟imodoka (manivelle), igitambaro cy‟umukara cyahiye kirimo ibimene by‟ikirahure “briquet”, impapuro z‟imodoka zirimo n‟iy‟ubugure bwayo mu isoko ry‟imodoka rya Bierset, muri metero 6 naho bahasanga ikoti ry‟umukara ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 124

## Page 152

ryahiye ririmo imfunguzo (trousseau de clés), ibahasha ry‟umweru yanditseho n‟intoki nomero ya telefone y‟igaraji riri ahitwa Lambermont. [3] Ikoti barihumurije imbwa ikurikira impumuro y‟uwari uryambaye kugeza kuri metero 100 nyuma y‟imodoka kugeza aho agahanda k‟igitaka karangirira. [4] Iperereza ryakurikiye naryo ryagaragaje ibi bikurikira: Impapuro zahiriye mu modoka ni ikarita y‟itora yo mu Rwanda, n‟ikarita ya Centre Public d'Action Sociale (CPAS) ya Liège; Abatwikiwe mu modoka ni Uwimana Libératha n‟umukobwa we Ingabire Cléscence, bakaba baratwitswe bakiri bazima kuko ibihaha byabo byarimo umwotsi; Libératha yari afite abana 4 aribo Umulisa Clémence, Uwase Clémentine, Ingabire Cléscence na Urwibutso Emmanuella yasigiwe n‟umugabo we wa mbere witabye Imana muri 1994 azize jenoside yakorewe Abatutsi, n‟undi umwe Pierre Alexandre yabyaranye na Gatare Edouard, uyu bakaba barashakaniye mu Rwanda kuwa 23/11/2002 yiyandikaho abana b‟umugabo wa mbere; Gatare mbere yo gushakana na Uwimana yari afite umugore w‟umubiligi Jacquet Fabienne batandukanye babyaranye abana 2 Charlie na Estelle, akaba nawe yari yarabonye ubwenegihugu bw‟ububiligi; Muri 2004 Libératha yasanze Gatare mu Bubiligi ari kumwe na Ingabire Cléscence, Urwibutso Emmanuella na Pierre Alexandre; UBUSHINJACYAHA v. GATARE 125

## Page 153

Imfunguzo zari mu mufuka w‟ikoti ryatoraguwe aho imodoka yatwikiwe zifungura inzu yabo aho bari batuye i Liège 4020, rue Lairesse 134; Gatare yasabye nyiri inzu izindi mfuguzo (double) amubwira ko yataye izo yari afite; Imodoka Libératha na Cléscence bahiriyemo yagurishijwe umwirabura ku cyumweru tariki ya 25/06/2006 mu isoko ry‟imodoka rya Bierset (Liège); Amasaha make mbere y‟uko Libératha na Cléscence bicwa, Gatare yari yakoresheje umunara (pylônetéléphonique) wa Nieuwerkerken kandi bukeye bw‟uwo munsi yagaragayeho ibikomere by‟ubushye; Gatare yavuye mu Bubiligi yerekeza mu Rwanda kuwa 18/07/2006 ari hamwe n‟umwana we muto Pierre Alexandre, naho mbere yaho kuwa 11/07/2006 akaba yari yarohereje Emmanuella. Libératha na Cléscence nabo bari barafatiwe amatike yo kujya mu Rwanda ariko atabasubiza mu Bubiligi; Umukozi wakoranaga na Gatare Edouad avuga ko yari yaramubwiye ko azasiga Libératha n‟abana b‟umugabo wa mbere mu Rwanda kuko batacyumvikana. [5] Gatare yafatiwe mu Rwanda kuwa 17/10/2006 ahamaze amezi 3 Iperereza ryarakomeje hanyuma ubushinjacyaha bwohereza dosiye mu Rukiko Rukuru rwa Repubulika bumurega ubuhotozi bwakorewe Uwimana Libératha na Ingabire Cléscence. [6] Gatare yaburanye muri urwo rukiko ahakana icyaha aregwa, ruca urubanza RP0303/06/HC/KIG kuwa 12/11/2008, ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 126

## Page 154

rwemeza ko icyaha kimuhama, rumuhanisha igifungo cya burundu y‟umwihariko, runamutegeka guha uwaregeye indishyi Uwanyirigira Sylvie 8.000.000Frw y‟indishyi z‟akababaro na 300.000Frw y‟igihembo cy‟avoka. [7] Ingingo z‟ingenzi urukiko rwashingiyeho ruhamya Gatare icyaha ni izi zikurikira: Kuba hafi y‟aho imodoka yatwikiwe haratoraguwe ikoti rye n‟imfunguzo ze zifungura inzu babagamo; Kuba imbwa ya polisi yarakurikiranye impumuro y‟uwari wambaye iryo koti kuva aho imodoka yatwikiwe kugeza ku muhanda, bivuze ko uwari uryambawe yavuye aho icyaha cyakorewe akerekeza ku muhanda; Kuba bukeye bw‟umunsi Libératha na Cléscence batwikirwaga mu modoka, yaragaragayeho ibikomere by‟ubushye; Kuba amasaha make mbere y‟uko icyaha gikorwa yarakoresheje umunara wa Nieuwerkerken; Kuba kuva kuwa 02/07/2006 kugeza kuwa 18/07/2006 yaramaze ibyumweru bibiri n‟igice akiri mu Bibiligi ntabwire polisi yaho ko atazi aho Libératha na Cléscence bari ngo ibashakishe naho agereye mu Rwanda akaba yaramaze amezi atatu nta muyobozi abimenyesheje; Kuba yari afite imibanire mibi na Libératha akaba yarashakaga kumusiga mu Rwanda baje mu biruhuko ariko umugore we akabimenya akanga ko bazana; UBUSHINJACYAHA v. GATARE 127

## Page 155

Kuba akigera mu Rwanda yarihutiye kujya gusaba ubutane no kwiyandukuzaho abana yari yariyanditseho ba Libératha; kuba mu rubanza rw‟ubutane yarahamagaje Libératha kuri adresi y‟aho bari batuye i Liège kandi avuga ko yavuye mu Bubiligi umugore we amaze ibyumweru bibiri yaragiye gushaka irindi cumbi; Kuba igihe yafatwaga baramusanganye ibyangombwa birimo pasiporo n‟indangamuntu bya Libératha na Cléscence, ndetse n‟impeta y‟isezerano ya Libératha, bikaba bitumvikana ukuntu yari abitse ibyo byangombwa byabo kandi nawe ubwe yemera ko bari baramuhakaniye ko batagitashye mu Rwanda. [8] Gatare yajuririye Urukiko rw‟Ikirenga kuwa 08/12/2008 avuga ko Urukiko Rukuru rwa Repubulika rwamuhamije icyaha rushingiye ku bimenyetso bitagaragaza nta gushidikanya ko ariwe wishe Libératha na Clescence abatwikiye mu modoka. [9] Urubanza rwaburanishijwe mu ruhame kuwa 25/01/2010 no kuwa 15/03/2010, Gatare Edouard yitabye yunganiwe na Me Hakundanabahari Théotime, ubushinjacyaha buhagarariwe na Ruberwa Bonaventure, naho Uwanyirigira Sylvie uregera indishyi ahagarariwe na Me Nsengiyumva Viateur. [10] Nyuma y‟iburanisha ryo kuwa 15/03/2010 urubanza rwarasubitswe bisabwe na Gatare kugira ngo zimwe mu nyandiko z‟iperereza zakorewe mu Bubiligi mu rurimi rw‟igifarama zihindurwe muri rumwe mu ndimi zikoreshwa mu Rwanda, hanahamagazwe Urwibutso Emmanuella na Uwase Clémentine kugira ngo bagire ibyo basobanura ku mibanire ye n‟umubyeyi wabo. ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 128

## Page 156

[11] Urubanza rwongeye kuburanishwa mu ruhame kuwa 16/06/2014 ari nawo munsi iburanisha ryashojwe, Gatare Edouard yitabye yunganiwe na Me Gashema Félicien, ubushinjacyaha buhagarariwe na Mutayoba Alphonse, Uwanyirigira Sylvie uregera indishyi ahagarariwe na Me Habineza Gasore Gilbert. Uwo munsi urukiko rwumvise Urwibutso Emmanuella na Uwase Clémentine nk‟uko byari byasabwe na Gatare Edouard. II. IBIBAZO BIGIZE URUBANZA N’ISESENGURA RYABYO A. Kumenya niba ibimenyetso Urukiko Rukuru rwa Repubulika rwashingiyeho bitagaragaza ko Gatare ariwe wishe Liberatha na Clescence abatwikiye mu modoka. a) Kuba ikoti rye ryaratoraguwe hafi y’aho imodoka yatwikiwe no kuba imbwa yararyihumurije igakurikirana impumuro y’uwari uryambaye kugera ku muhanda aho yabuze irengero rye. [12] Gatare avuga ko yasobanuriye urukiko ko nubwo ikotiryatoraguwe hafi y‟aho imodoka yatwikiwe ryari irye ari Libératha wari uryambaye ku itariki 2/07/2006 nk‟uko bari basanzwe bambarana n‟indi myenda itandukanye. [13] Avuga ko impamvu abyemeza ari uko uwo munsi baherukanaga mu gitondo agiye gukata urugo rw‟umukecuru uturanye na Fabienne Jacquet umugore we wa mbere batandukanye, Libératha nawe akaba yari yamubwiye ko aza kujya kuzana Cléscence aho yari yaraye ariko atahamubwiye ngo ahamenye, bakaba batarongeye kubonana kuko yatashye saa mbiri z‟ijoro mu gihe abakoze iperereza berekanye ko we UBUSHINJACYAHA v. GATARE 129

## Page 157

n‟umukobwa we bahiriye mu modoka 23h45 mu birometero birenga 40 cyangwa 50 uvuye i Liege aho bari batuye. [14] Avuga ko ikindi kigaragaza ko ari Libératha wari wambaye iryo koti ari uko yahamagaye murumuna we Uwanyiligira Sylvie mu Rwanda 13h00, bivuze ko atari mu rugo kuko aho babaga i Liège nta telefone bagiraga usibye iyo yagendanaga, Uwanyiligira akaba ariwe wagaragaza aho mukuru we yari ari niba yarahamubwiye. [15] Ku bijyanye n‟uko ikoti ryatoraguwe hanze y‟imodoka Libératha na Cléscence batwikiwemo, avuga ko Libératha ashobora kuba yari arifite mu ntoki, akarita hanze nk‟aho yavugije induru. [16] Ku bijyanye n‟uko imbwa yinukirije ikoti igakurikirana impumuro y‟uwari uryambaye kuva aho icyaha cyakorewe kugera ku muhanda, avuga ko ataribyo byashingirwaho hemezwa ko ari we wari uryambaye nta kindi kimenyetso kigaragajwe kuko iyo mbwa itigeze ivuga ko ikurikiranyemo impumuro ye. [17] Uhagarariye ubushinjacyaha avuga ko iyo ikoti ryatoraguwe hafi y‟aho imodoka yatwikiweriza kuba ryambawe na Libératha naryo riba ryarahiriye mu modoka nk‟uko umucamanza wa mbere yabigaragaje. [18] Avuga kandi ko imbwa ihereye ku ikoti yakurikiye impumuro y‟uwari uryambaye kugeza aho agahanda karangirira, bivuze ko uwari uryambaye yavuye mu modoka, ibyo Gatare avuga ko imbwa itavuze ko yakurikiye impumuro ye akaba ari ukurushya urukiko. ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 130

## Page 158

UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [19] Imiburanire ya Gatare igamije kugaragaza ko ikoti rye ryari rifitwe na Libératha igihe atwikirwa mu modoka kuko we yari mu rugo ku isaha bivugwa ko biciweho, abishwe bakaba bataririwe mu rugo kuko Cléscence atari yaharaye umunsi ubanziriza uwo biciweho, naho Libératha akaba yari yamubwiye mu gitondo mbere y‟uko ajya gukata urugo rw‟umuturanyi wa Fabienne ko afite gahunda yo kujya kuzana Cléscence aho yari yaraye atamubwiye aho ariho ngo ahamenye. [20] Urukiko rusanga ariko nta kimenyetso na kimwe kigaragaza ko Gatare yari mu rugo koko ku isaha Libératha na Cléscence biciweho nka telefone yaba yarafatiwe ku munara w‟aho atuye cyangwa umuturanyi waba waramubonye ataha. [21] Urukiko rusanga kandi ntaho rwahera rwemeza ukuri kw„ibyo avuga bijyanye n‟igihe yabonye bwa nyuma Libératha na Cléscence kuko atagaragaza aho hantu bombi bagiye umwe ku munsi ubanziriza uwo biciweho, undi mu gitondo cy‟umunsi biciweho ngo bibe byakorerwaho iperereza, bikaba bitumvikana impamvu Libératha yafata umwanya wo kumubwira ko aza kujya kuzana Cléscence aho yaraye ariko ntamubwire aho hantu aho ariho. [22] Urukiko rusanga nanone ibyo avuga ko kuba Libératha yarahamagaye mu Rwanda saa saba z‟amanywa byerekana ko atiriwe mu rugo umunsi yiciweho kuko nta telefone bagiraga mu rugo ataribyo kuko umuntu ashobora kuva mu rugo ajyanywe n‟igikorwa runaka yakirangiza agataha. UBUSHINJACYAHA v. GATARE 131

## Page 159

[23] Urukiko rusanga kandi Libératha atari kuba afite ikoti rya Gatare igihe yicwaga ngo ritoragurwe hanze y‟imodoka kandi yaratwikiwe mu modoka maze imbwa yabitojwe igakurikira impumuro y‟uwari uryambaye kuri metero 100 kugeza ubwo ibuze irengero rye, bivuze ko uwari uryambaye yavuye aho icyaha cyakorewe akagenda. [24] Urukiko rusanga rero kuba ikoti rya Gatare ryaratoraguwe hanze y‟imodoka Libératha na Cléscence batwikiwemo ari ikimenyetso kimushinja nk‟uko byemejwe n‟Urukiko Rukuru rwa Repubulika. b) Kuba bukeye bw’umunsi Libératha na Cléscence batwikirwa mu modoka yaragaragaweho ibikomere by’ubushye. [25] Gatare avuga ko ubushye yagaragaweho bukeye bw‟umunsi Libératha na Cléscence batwikirwa mu modoka ntaho buhuriye n‟ibyabaye kuri Libératha na Cléscence. [26] Gatare avuga ko yagaragaje ko yahiye kuwa mbere taliki ya 03/07/2006 hagati ya 11h na 13h yokejwe na “échappement” y‟imodoka ishyushye arimo ayikora ubwo yari avuye gutwara imizigo yabo muri “consigne” y‟ikibuga cy‟indege cya Zaventem, mu gihe ba nyakwigendera bivugwa ko batwikiwe mu modoka 23h 45 mu ijoro ryo kuwa 02/07 rishyira kuwa 03/07/2006. [27] Avuga kandi ko urukiko rwagaragaje ukubogama gukabije rwemeza ko yokejwe n‟ikibatsi cy‟umuriro rugendeye ku mvugo z‟abatangabuhamya batigeze bagaragara mu rukiko, bavuga ibyo batazi ndetse batabwiwe, buri wese avuga ibye, maze rubiheraho rwemeza ko atatwitswe na “echappement” ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 132

## Page 160

y‟imodoka ishyushye ngo kuko iyo atwikwa nayo yari gushya mu biganza, ariko ntiyari gushya ku nda no ku gatuza, nyamara nawe atarigeze avuga ko yahiye ku nda no mu gatuza, ndetse na Emmanuella wamubonye umunsi ashya akaba atarigeze avuga ko yamubonye yahiye ku nda no ku gatuza. [28] Yongeraho ko mu kwezi kwa 02/2007 yari yatumijwe n‟ubushinjacyaha, yerekana uburyo yokejwe na “echappement” y‟imodoka ye, abanyamakuru baranamufotora, akaba yemeza ko batigeze bamubonana ubushye ku nda no ku gatuza nk‟uko bivugwa. [29] Ku bijyanye na raporo ya muganga Urukiko rwashingiyeho, avuga ko nayo yakoranywe amarangamutima kuko yivugira ko kumenya icyateye ubwo bushye bigoye kubera ibimenyetso byabwo byasibanganye, ariko nyuma akemeza ko yatwitswe n‟ikibatsi cy‟umuriro, akaba yibaza aho ibimenyetso yashingiyeho byavuye mu gihe avuga ko ibimenyetso by‟ubwo bushye byasibanganye, akaba atari afite impapuro za muganga wamuvuye mu Bubiligi. [30] Urwibutso Emmanuella nawe ubwo yabazwaga mu rukiko yavuze ko yabonye Gatare afite ibikomere ku maboko, ku biganza no ku munwa, ko yamubajije icyo yabaye, amubwira ko yatwitswe na “echappement” y‟imodoka. [31] Uhagarariye ubushinjacyaha avuga ko ibyo Gatare avuga ko yatwitswe na „„echapement” y‟imodoka bivuguruzwa n‟uburyo yari yahiye mu maso, mu ijosi, mu gatuza, ku nda nk‟uko byatangiweho ubuhamya n‟abantu benshi bamubonye bose badashobora kuba ababeshyi cyangwa ngo bagire icyo bapfa, bikanavuguruzwa na raporo ya muganga igaragaza ko yatwitswe n‟ikibatsi cy‟umuriro. UBUSHINJACYAHA v. GATARE 133

## Page 161

UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [32] Imiburanire ya Gatare igamije kugaragaza ko ubushye yagaragayeho bukeye bw‟umunsi Libératha na Cléscence batwikirwa mu modoka butatewe n‟ikibatsi cy‟umuriro nk‟uko raporo ya muganga ibyemeza, ahubwo bwatewe na “echappement” y‟imodoka. [33] Urukiko rusanga ariko rutagendera ku mvugo ye ko yokejwe na “echappement” y‟imodoka mu gihe nta bindi bimenyetso abitangira. [34] Urukiko rusanga kandi nubwo Gatare avuga ko raporo ya Muganga wamusuzumye ishingiye ku marangamutima, ntaho rwahera rubyemeza kuko kuba yaravuze ko ibimenyetso byinshi byasibanganye ntibibuza ko yamubonyeho inkovu z‟ubushye n‟amabara ku maboko, ku gahanga, ku ijosi no ku gutwi, agasanga izo nkovu n‟ayo mabara bidashobora kuba byaratewe n‟ikintu gifatika (un objet solide) cyangwa kimeneka (un liquide), ahubwo ubushye bugomba kuba bwaratewe n‟ikibatsi cy‟umuriro cyamuturutse imbere umutwe ureba iburyo (les flammes sont venues de face tête tournée vers la droite). [35] Urukiko rusanga rero kuba Gatare yaragaragayeho ubushye amasaha make cyane nyuma y‟uko Libératha na Cléscence batwikirwa mu modoka ari ikimenyetso nacyo kimushinja kiyongera ku kimenyetso cy‟ikoti rye ryatoraguwe aho icyaha cyakorewe nk‟uko byemejwe n‟Urukiko Rukuru rwa Repubulika.

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 134

## Page 162

c) Kuba mu ikoti rye ryatoraguwe hafi y’aho imodoka yatwikiwe harimo imfunguzo zifungura inzu Gatare n’umuryango we babagamo, akaba yarasabye nyiri inzu izindi mfunguzo. [36] Gatare avuga ko urukiko rwagaragaje ukubogama gukabije rwemeza ko imfunguzo zabonetse aho Libératha na Cléscence bahiriye zari ize ngo kuko nta wundi wagiraga imfunguzo mu rugo kandi yaragaragaje ko Libératha yari asanzwe afite imfunguzo ze nawe akagira ize. [37] Asobanura ko bitari gushoboka ko bagira urufunguzo rumwe bitewe n‟uko yagendaga ku kazi 06h00 za mu gitondo akagaruka 18h00 za nimugoroba, umugore akajyana abana kw‟ishuri na Cléscence akajya kwiga, bityo bakaba batari gusiga inzu idakinze bose basohotse. [38] Avuga kandi koikindi cyerekana kubogama gukabije k‟umucamanza ari uko yagaragaje ko kuwa mbere tariki ya 03/07/2006 nyuma ya 14h00 yagiye kuzana Emmanuella na Alexandre kwa Fabienne akinguza imfunguzo ze, ndetse ko na Emmanuella yemeza ko yafunguye mu rugo avuye kubazana kandi ko nta muntu basanze mu rugo. [39] Ku bijyanye n‟impamvu yasabye izindi mfunguzo nyiri inzu bari batuyemo Jacques Lebrun nk‟uko uyu yabyemeje ubwo yabazwaga n‟abakoze iperereza mu Bubiligi, avuga ko ari ukugira ngo Cléscence abone urwe kuko hari hashize iminsi babibye igare agatekereza ko uwabibye yakoresheje imfunguzo aho bazisigaga, ndetse ko nyiri inzu yazimuzaniye mbere y‟itariki Libératha na Clescence biciweho na mbere y‟uko “echapement” y‟imodoka imutwika. UBUSHINJACYAHA v. GATARE 135

## Page 163

[40] Ku kibazo cyo kumenya impamvu abazwa mu bushinjacyaha yavuze ko yasabye imfunguzo afite ibikomere by‟ubushye (j‟ai demandé les clés alors que j‟avais les brulures), yabanje kuvuga ko kwari ukwibeshya (reba inyandiko mvugo y‟iburanisha yo kuwa 15/03/2010), ariko nyuma avuga ko yazatse nyiri inzu mbere y‟uko akomereka agira ngo bazihe Cléscence kuko hari igihe yazaga badahari, ariko azimuzanira nyuma yarakomeretse (reba inyandiko-mvugo yo kuwa 16/06/2014 ).Yongeyeho ko n‟ubwo nyiri inzu yazimuzaniye yarakomeretse yasanze urujyi rw‟inzu ari ruzima kandi rukinguye kuko we yari agifite ize. [41] Urwibutso Emmanuella nawe ubwo yabazwaga kuri icyo kibazo muri uru rukiko, yavuze konta wundi wagiraga imfunguzo zo mu rugo usibye Gatare, ibi akaba ari nabyo yari yaravuze ubwo yabazwaga mu bushinjacyaha. [42] Uhagarariye ubushinjacyaha avuga ko imfunguzo zabonetse mu ikoti rya Gatare ari ize kuko Emmanuella yasobanuye ko mu rugo bagiraga rumwe gusa kandi ko nyina nta mfunguzo yagiraga. [43] Avuga ko ikindi kigaragaza ko izo mfunguzo zari ize ari uko zari kuri “porte clé” yari yarahawe n‟umukobwa we Estelle nk‟uko nawe yabyiyemereye ubwo yabazwaga mu bushinjacyaha. [44] Avuga kandi ko Liberatha atari kuba ashya ngo ahindukire kandi ajugunye imfunguzo hamwe n‟ikoti hanze y‟imodoka. ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 136

## Page 164

[45] Yongeraho ko kuba Emmanuella yarabonye Gatare afungura inzu babagamo ari ibisanzwe kuko nyiri inzu yari yamuhaye izindi mfunguzo. UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [46] Imiburanire ya Gatare igamije kugaragaza ko imfunguzo zatoraguwe aho icyaha cyakorewe zari iza Libératha kuko bombi bagiraga imfunguzo, we akaba yari afite ize bukeye bw‟umunsi bivugwa ko batwikiwe mu modoka kuko yazikinguje avuye kuzana Emmanuella na Pierre Alexandre kwa Fabienne umugore we wa mbere batandukanye. [47] Urukiko rusanga ariko imvugo ya Gatare ko hari hashize iminsi babibye igare, agatekereza ko uwabibye yakoresheje imfunguzo zabo azisanze aho bazisigaga yumvikanisha ko mu rugo bakoreshaga urufunguzo rumwe basigaga ahantu baziranyeho, ibi bikaba bihura n‟imvugo ya Emmanuella ko mu rugo bagiraga urufunguzo rumwe gusa. [48] Urukiko rusanga kandi kuba Gatare yiyemerera n‟ubwo yabanje kubihakana ko nyiri inzu yamuhaye “double” y‟imfunguzo afite ibikomere by‟ubushye, nyiri inzu nawe mu mvugo ye imbere y‟inzego z‟iperereza zo mu Bubiligi akaba yaremeje ko Gatare yamutelefonnye amusaba izindi mfunguzo ngo kuko yataye ize, byumvikanisha ko iyo “double” ariyo yafunguje ubwo yari avuye kuzana Emmanuella na Pierre Alexandre kwa Fabienne. [49] Urukiko rusanga nanone Libératha atari guhira mu modoka ngo imfunguzo yari afite zigaragare hanze y‟imodoka UBUSHINJACYAHA v. GATARE 137

## Page 165

mu ikoti byagaragajwe haruguru ko ryari ryambawe n‟umuntu wavuye aho icyaha cyakorewe akerekeza ahandi. [50] Hashingiwe kuri ibyo bisobanuro, Urukiko rusanga kuba imfunguzo zifungura inzu babagamo zaratoraguwe aho icyaha cyakorewe ari ikimenyetso nacyo gishinja Gatare kiyongera ku bindi bimenyetso byagaragajwe haruguru. d) Kuba hafi y’aho imodoka yatwikiwe haratoraguwe akuma kamanura ikirahure cy’imodoka (manivelle) katahiye. [51] Gatare avuga ko umucamanza ashingiye ku marangamutima yakomeje gukoreshwa mu guca uru rubanza kugira ngo icyaha gikunde kimufate yemeje ko akuma kazamura kakanamanura ikirahuri cy‟imodoka kavanywemo kugira ngo Libératha na Cléscence batabona uko basohokamo, nyamara ako kuma katari kubabuza kuva mu modoka kuko ntaho gahuriye no gukingura inzugi. [52] Gatare avuga kandi ko kuba ako kuma katarahiye bishoboka ko ba nyakwigendera bagataye hanze mu gushaka gufungura bamanura ikirahure kandi katari gafashe. [53] Avuga nanone ko nta bimenyetso ubushinjacyaha bwatanze bigaragaza ko ikirahure cy‟imodoka cyari gifunze, ndetse ko ntaho bigaragarira mu mpapuro zavuye mu Bubiligi. [54] Uhagarariye ubushinjacyaha avuga ko kuba akuma kazamura kakanamanura ikirahure cy‟imodoka karabonetse hafi y‟aho imodoka yatwikiwe katahiye bivuga ko kakuwemo mbere y‟uko imodoka itwikwa kugira ngo abarimo babure uko ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 138

## Page 166

basohoka, dore ko nta n‟imiryango iyo modoka yagiraga inyuma. UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [55] Urukiko rusanga igitekerezo cya Gatare ko akuma kazamura kakanamanura ikirahure cy‟imodoka katoraguwe hafi y‟aho icyaha cyakorewe katahiye kaba karatawe hanze na ba nyakwigendera mu gushaka gufungura bamanura ikirahure kandi katari gafashe kitafatwaho ukuri kuko abakoze iperereza mu Bubiligi bagaragaje ko bagasanze iruhande rw‟igitambaro cy‟umukara cyahiye kirimo ibimene by‟ikirahure na “briquet”, bivuze ko n‟ako kuma kakuwemo n‟uwabatwikiye mu modoka kuko katari kuba kajugunywe n‟abahiriye mu modoka ngo kisange uruhande rw‟ibikoresho birimo„„briquet” byakoreshejwe n‟uwabatwikiye mu modoka. [56] Urukiko rusanga kandi uwatwikiye Libératha na Cléscence mu modoka atarakuyemo ako kuma ntacyo agamije, ahubwo yagakuyemo kugira ngo agere ku mugambi we wo kubabuza gusohoka mu modoka, bikaba bitumvikana impamvu Gatare ahakana ko babaye „„bloqué” mu modoka n‟uwabatwikiyemo abyita amarangamutima y‟umucamanza kuko nta mpamvu uwabikoze yari kuba afite yo gukuramo akuma kamanura ikirahure niba inzugi z‟imodoka zo zarashoboraga gufungukira imbere.

UBUSHINJACYAHA v. GATARE 139

## Page 167

e) Kuba yarahamagaye kuri telefone 16h47 na 16h48 akoresheje umunara ya Nieuwerkerken umunsi Uwimana Libératha na Ingabire Cléscence batwikirwa mu modoka. [57] Gatare avuga ko kuwa gatandatu mu gitondo tariki ya 01/07/2006 yagiye gukata urugo rw‟umuturanyi wa Fabienne, bukeye ku cyumweru tariki ya 02/07/2006 asubirayo, arurangiza hagati ya 14h00 na 15h00 afashwa n‟abana Emmanuella na Estelle batundaga ibyatsi, aruhukira akanya gato kwa Fabienne, nyuma ajya St Trond mu bilometero 40 cyangwa 50 agiye gushaka imodoka yo kugura yagombaga kuzana mu Rwanda ariko abura iyo yashima, ahava nka 17h, asubira i Liège aho atuye, ahageze asanga urugo rukinze, arinda ajya kuryama Libératha na Cléscence bataraza. [58] Avuga kandi ko kuba yaratelefonye 16h47 na 16h48 akoresheje umunara wa Nieuwerkerken atari ikimenyetso urukiko rwari gushingiraho rumuhamya icyaha kuko uvuye aho yari atuye i Liège ukajya St Trond nta hantu hitwa Niewerkerken unyura, umucamanza akaba yarabihimbye ko yahageze kugira ngo amuhamye icyaha gusa kuko aho hantu atahazi, atigeze ahagera, nta n‟uwahamubonye. [59] Yongeraho ko saa mbiri zibura iminota 8 yari iwe mu rugo kandi ko Libératha batigeze birirwana ku cyumweru, ko nta kuntu yari kumubwira saa mbiri ngo bagende ngo abyemere, ko n‟iyo ufite uwo uzasura ubibwira umugore mbere kugira ngo yitegure. [60] Uhagarariye ubushinjacyaha avuga ko kuba Gatare yarakoresheje umunara w‟aho icyaha cyakorewe 16h47 na 16h48 bigaragaza ko yari yabanje kuhagera ategura umugambi we (reconnaissance des lieux), cyane ko nawe ubwe yiyemereye ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 140

## Page 168

mu Rukiko Rukuru ko ashobora kuba yarahanyuze nyuma ya saa sita agiye St-Trond kugura imodoka. [61] Avuga kandi ko ibyo Gatare avuga ko yagiye St-Trond ku itariki ya 02/07/2006 nyuma ya saa sita gushaka imodoka yo kohereza mu Rwanda bitumvikana kuko bwacyaga ku itariki ya 04/07/2006 afata indege aza mu Rwanda, akaba atari kuba yakoze “formalités” zose zo kwohereza imodoka, bivuze ko hari ikindi cyari kimujyanyeyo. UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [62] Imiburanire ya Gatare igamije kugaragaza ko atigeze agera Niewerkerken umunsi Libératha na Cléscence batwikirwa mu modoka. [63] Urukiko rusanga ariko kuba muri dosiye yakorewe mu Bubiligi hari imvugo z‟abantu batandukanye bagaragaza ko Gatare yajyaga St-Trond buri mwaka agiye mu kazi ko gusoroma imbuto no kuba aho hantu ari mu bilometero bitarenze 20 ya Niewerkerken bitera ugushidikanya ku mvugo ye ko atazi Niewerkerken. [64] Ku bijyanye n‟ibyo yaba yari agiye gukora St-Trond umunsi Libératha na Cléscence bicwa, Urukiko rusanga nta kimenyetso na kimwe Gatare atanga kigaragaza ko yari agiye kureba umukoresha we Milants nk‟uko yabivuze ubwo yabazwaga mu bushinjacyaha cyangwa ko yari agiye kugura imodoka yo kujyana mu Rwanda nk‟uko yabivugiye mu bushinjacyaha no mu rukiko, hakaba rero hagomba kwemezwa ko yari afite ikindi kimujyanye. UBUSHINJACYAHA v. GATARE 141

## Page 169

[65] Urukiko rusanga rero kuba Gatare yaratelefonye akoresheje umunara wa Niewerkerken amasaha make mbere y‟uko Libératha na Cléscence bicwa bigomba kureberwa hamwe n‟ibindi bimenyetso byagaragajwe birimo ikoti n‟imfunguzo byatoraguwe aho icyaha cyakorewe n‟ ubushye bwamugaragayeho bukeye bw‟umunsi icyaha gikorwa. f) Ku bijyanye n’uko ntawe yabwiye ko atazi aho Libératha na Clescence bari ngo bashakishwe. [66] Gatare avuga ko nta mpamvu yari afite yo kumenyesha ubuyobozi ko atazi aho Libératha na Cléscence bari kuko atari azi ko bahuye n‟ibyago, akaba yaribajije ubwo yabonaga batagarutse mu rugo guhera kuwa 02/07/2006 ko umugore we yashyize mu bikorwa igitekerezo yigeze kuvuga cyo kwishakira icumbi rye. [67] Ku bijyanye n‟impamvu yaba yaratekereje ko Libératha yagiye gushaka irindi cumbi, asobanura ko yamushakiye mu Rwanda we aba mu Bubiligi, amuzana mu Bubiligi hamwe n‟abana bato batatu barimo umutoya babyaranye, hasigara abakuru babiri nabo bateganyaga kuzatwara bamaze kubona ubushobozi, ko nyuma y‟imyaka ibiri Libératha yari amaze kumenyera igihugu, atangira kujya atumva icyo amubwiye, ahubwo akamwumvisha ko ashobora kuzibana akishakira iye nzu. [68] Uhagarariye ubushinjacyaha avuga ko ibyo Gatare avuga ko yamaze ibyumweru bibiri n‟igice mu Bubiligi n‟amezi atatu mu Rwanda nta makuru ya Libératha na Cléscence agerageje gushaka ngo kuko yari azi ko bafashe iyabo nzu bitumvikana kuko Libératha nk‟umubyeyi atari kumara igihe kingana gutyo ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 142

## Page 170

atabajije amakuru y‟abana be barimo n‟uwari ufite imyaka 4 gusa y‟amavuko. UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [69] Urukiko rusanga ibyo Gatare avuga ko guhera tariki ya 02/07/2006 atongeye kumenya amakuru ya Libératha na Cléscence ariko ko yibajije ko bagiye kwishakira icumbi ahandi ataribyo kuko nta muntu n‟umwe mu babajijwe igihe cy‟iperereza wavuze ko yababwiye ko umugore we yataye urugo, ahubwo mu Bubiligi yabwiye nyiri inzu ko Libératha na Clescence bamaze kugenda nk„uko bigaragara mu nyandiko mvugo ye, naho mu Rwanda yabwiye abavandimwe be Muhirwa Frédérik na Munigantama Cyriaque ko banze ko bazana ku munota wa nyuma nk‟uko bigaragara mu nyandiko mvugo zabo zakorewe imbere y‟ubushinjacyaha. [70] Urukiko rusanga no mu rubanza rw‟ubutane ubwo yatangaga ibimenyetso bigaragaza ko imibanire ye n‟umugore itagishobotse, Gatare yaravuze ko umugore yanze ku munota wa nyuma ko bazana mu Rwanda bikaba byaramuhombeje amafaranga menshi, ndetse ko amuhoza ku nkeke amutuka ibitutsi bikomeye imbere y‟abana, ariko nta na hamwe yigeze avuga ko yataye urugo amutanye abana 2 barimo n‟uw‟imyaka 4 akaba atazi aho bari kandi nabyo byarashoboraga kumubera ikimenyetso gikomeye cy‟imyitwarire ye mibi yasabaga urukiko gushingiraho rumuha ubutane. [71] Urukiko rusanga nanone ibyo Gatare avuga ko yatekereje ko Libératha yafashe iye nzu bitashoboka kuko nawe azi ko atari kugenda adatwaye ibyangombwa bye n‟ibya Cléscence birimo n‟indangamuntu (carte d‟identité pour UBUSHINJACYAHA v. GATARE 143

## Page 171

étranger) zabo, imyenda n‟ibindi bikoresho by‟ibanze umuntu akenera mu buzima bwa buri munsi, bikaba bivuguruzwa n‟ibyo yivugiye mu bushinjacyaha ubwo yabazwaga niba yari akibana na Uwimana Libératha nk‟umugabo n‟umugore agasubiza ko batigeze batandukana usibye ko bari bafite ubwunvikane buke. [72] Urukiko rusanga rero ukurikije imvugo ze mu bihe bitandukanye nta mpamvu Gatare yari afite zo gutekereza ko Libératha na Cléscence bagiye gushaka iyabo nzu, kuba ntawe yamenyesheje ko Libératha na Clescence babuze ahubwo abo yasize mu Bubiligi akabumvisha ko bagiye mu Rwanda, naho abo yasanze ino akabumvisha ko basigaye mu Bubiligi akaba ari ikimenyetso kimushinja kigomba kwitabwaho kiyongera ku bindi bimenyetso byagaragajwe haruguru kuko iyo mvugo ye yashoboraga gutuma abantu babazi bamara igihe batibajije ku ibura ryabo ngo bashakishwe. g) Ku bijyanye n’uko urukiko rwemeje ko atumvikanaga na Libératha. [73] Gatare avuga ko ibyo urukiko rwashingiyeho rwemeza ko atumvikanaga n‟umufasha we nta shingiro bifite kuko iyo aza kuba atumvikana nawe ataba yaramujyanye we n‟abana be mu Bubiligi ngo babeho kuri konti ye, yarahaye inka uwitwa Tegibanze Joseph amushimira ko yamuhishe muri Jenoside, ndetse yarakoreye iwabo no kwa musaza we “installation” z‟umuriro ku buryo byamutwaye amafaranga ari hagati ya 700.000Frw na 1.000.000Frw. [74] Avuga kandi ko mu rugo rwabo hataburaga utubazo nko mu zindi ngo ariko ko batwikemuriraga ubwabo bitagombye guteza impagarara, ibyo bikaba byarashimangiwe na Uwanyirigira Sylvie bajyaga bavuganira kuri telefoni, uretse ko ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 144

## Page 172

imvugo ze ubu yazihinduye kubera impamvu ze adashobora gusobanura. [75] Avuga nanone ko urukiko rwasesenguye nabi amagambo akubiye mu mabaruwa ye, ko ibaruwa imwe yayandikiye Libératha ataraza mu Bubiligi amubwira ibintu baziranyeho, ko iyo haza kubamo ubugome atari kwemera kumusanga mu Bubiligi, ko indi yayandikiye nyirabukwe hashize imyaka ibiri Libératha aba mu Bubiligi amumenyesha ko umukobwa we yahindutse akaba atakimwumva kubera ko yamaze kumenyera igihugu kugira ngo bamuhwiture kuko hari igihe yabibabwiraga bakamuhana kuri telefoni akabona hari igihindutse. [76] Yongeraho ko niyo yari kuba afite icyo apfa gikomeye na Libératha bitari kuba impamvu yo kumuvutsa ubuzima bwe akanagerekaho n‟ubw‟uriya mwana Ingabire Cléscence. [77] Ku bijyanye n‟imvugo ya Murangwa Anthère ko bahuriye mu Bubiligi mu kwezi kwa 10/2005 akamubwira ko Libératha amaze kumunanira, ndetse ko aho bigeze n‟ubwo yapfa ntacyo byamubwira amaze kumuhaga, avuga ko ari ibinyoma n‟ibihimbano akaba asanga urukiko rwarishe amategeko rwanga kumutumiza ngo aze imbere yarwo kubisobanura ahibereye, usibye ko afitanye isano na nyakwigendera kuko nyina we yari yaramubyaye muri Batisimu. [78] Ku bijyanye n‟imvugo ye mu rubanza rw‟ubutane ko umugore we yamutukaga akamuhoza ku nkeke, avuga ko yabivuze ashaka impamvu z‟ubutane, naho ku bijyanye n‟imvugo ya Emmanuella muri urwo rubanza rw‟ubutane yari yamuzanyemo gutanga ubuhamya ko yajyaga atuka nyina ko ari igicucu, injiji, nyina nawe akamusubiza ko ari igicucu, amabyi, UBUSHINJACYAHA v. GATARE 145

## Page 173

avuga ko kubwira umuntu ngo wa gicucu we atari ibintu bikomeye. [79] Uwanyirigira Sylvie uregera indishyi akaba namurumuna wa Libératha avuga ko mukuru we yajyaga amubwira ko umugabo we amumerera nabi ku buryo atari akinamuhamagara ari mu rugo akaba yaragombaga kumuhamagara ari hanze. [80] Avuga nanone ko ikintu bapfaga ari uko nta mafaranga Gatare yagiraga, akaba yarayakuraga kuri Fabienne umugore we wa mbere batandukanye. [81] Uhagarariye ubushinjacyaha avuga ko kuba Gatare yaba yarafashije umuryango wa Libératha bitakuraho ko yategura umugambi wo kumwica kandi ko imibanire mibi yari afitanye n‟umugore we igaragazwa n‟ibaruwa yandikiye nyirabukwe amubwira ko umukobwa wabo yamunaniye, ikanemezwa n‟abatangabuhamya batandukanye, akaba asanga bidahagije kuvuga gusa ko uwitwa Murangwa Anthère abeshya mu gihe atari we wenyine ubivuga. UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [82] Urukiko rusanga n‟ubwo Gatare avuga ko urukiko rwa mbere rwemeje ko yari afitanye imibanire mibi n‟umugore we rushingiye ku mabaruwa rwasesenguye nabi no ku buhamya bwa Murangwa Anthère bwuzuyemo ibinyoma kandi butatangiwe mu rukiko, ibyo bimenyetso atari byo byonyine bigaragaza imibanire mibi bari bafitanye kuko nawe ubwe ubwo yabazwaga mu bushinjacyaha yivugiye ko bari bafite ubwumvikane buke, ndetse n‟imbere y‟uru rukiko yavuze ko ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 146

## Page 174

nyuma y‟imyaka ibiri umugore we aba mu Bubiligi yatangiye kujya atumva icyo amubwiye ahubwo akamwumvisha ko ashobora kuzibana akishakira iye nzu, akaba yari yaranamusubije impeta y‟isezerano ari nayo mpamvu bayimusanganye ubwo yafatwaga. [83] Urukiko rusanga ubwo bwumvikane buke bunagaragazwa na Muhirwa Frédérick murumuna we wo kwa Se wabo nawe wemeje mu bushinjacyaha ko mu kwezi kwa 05/2005 ubwo yari mu Bubiligi muri stage y‟akazi, Gatare yamubwiye ko afitanye ibibazo bikomeye n‟umugore we, ko asigaye amusuzugura cyane akanamuteza abana yari yariyanditseho batari be, ko yoshywa cyane na bene wabo bari mu Bubiligi, ko umugore we amucyurira cyane ko atunzwe n‟amafaranga avana ku mugore n„abana, ndetse ko Gatare yamutelefonye bucya aza mu Rwanda akamubwira ko bazaza ariko ko Libératha yatangiye gushyiramo umutima mubi abana ko afite gahunda yo kubasiga mu Rwanda. [84] Urukiko rusanga kandi kuba Murangwa Anthère atarahamagajwe mu rukiko ngo aze asubiremo ibyo yavugiye mu bushinjacyaha ko yamubwiye ko Libératha amaze kumunanira, ko aho bigeze nubwo yapfa ntacyo byamubwira atari byo byatesha agaciro imvugo ye kuko urukiko rudategetswe guhamagara ababajijwe bose igihe cy„iperereza, cyane ko igisuzumwa mu mvugo ye ari imibanire ye n‟umugore we, hakaba hari ibimenyetso bihagije bikubiyemo n‟imvugo ze bigaragaza ko iyo mibanire yari mibi.

UBUSHINJACYAHA v. GATARE 147

## Page 175

h) Ku bijyanye n’uko yashakaga kuzasiga Libératha n’abana be mu Rwanda baje mu biruhuko, umugore we akabimenya akanga kobazana mu Rwanda. [85] Gatare avuga ko ibyo urukiko rwemeje ko Libératha yanze ko bazana mu Rwanda kubera ko yari yaramenye ko ashaka kuhamusiga ataribyo kuko bivuguruzwa na „„réservation” yari yarakoresheje yerekana neza ko bagombaga kuva mu Bubiligi tariki ya 4/7/2006 bagasubirayo kuwa 29/08/2006, usibye Estelle wagombaga kugaruka mbere kubera gahunda zamurebaga ubwe, ndetse binavuguruzwa n‟inyandiko yo muri Ambassade y‟Ububiligi mu Rwanda yerekana ko bari bafite gahunda yo kuzazana n‟abandi bana bari barasigaye mu Rwanda kugira ngo be gukomeza kuba intatane. [86] Avuga kandi ko Libératha yabujijwe kuza n‟impamvu ze bwite atashatse kumubwira cyangwa se ngo anazisobanurire murumuna we n‟umukobwa we mu gihe bavuganiraga kuri telefone kuwa 02/07/2007 kuko iyo aza kuba afite ikibazo aba yarabivuze. [87] Yongeraho ko kuba Libératha yarahinduye gahunda akanga ko bazana mu Rwanda bitafatwa nk„impamvu yo kuvuga ko yashakaga kuzahamusiga, cyangwa yo kumwica. [88] Ku bijyanye n‟imvugo ya Nsa Emoli bakoranaga kwa Milants mu kazi ko gusoroma imbuto ko yamubwiye ko umugore we atari “gentille” kandi ko azamusiga mu Rwanda, Gatare avuga ko ari ibinyoma, ko batari inshuti ku buryo yamubwira amabanga, akaba nta n‟ububasha na buke yari afite bwo kubuza abantu kugaruka mu Bubiligi. ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 148

## Page 176

[89] Ku byerekeye impamvu Libératha, Cléscence na Emmanuella yabaguriye tike zo kugenda gusa, avuga ko ari uko yari yababoneye “réduction” ya 25% anyuze muri Organisation Internationale de Migration (OIM), yishyura, 75% ayashyira kuri konti yayo. [90] Ku byerekeye impamvu we na Pierre Alexandre batakoresheje ubwo buryo ngo nabo bagabanyirizwe igiciro, avuga ko OIM irihira gusa abanyamahanga kandi ko bo ari ababirigi. [91] Ku byerekeranye n‟imvugo ya Anne Christine Ghysens ukora muri OIM yasemuwe mu gifaransa igaragaza ko yamubwiye ko Libératha yananiwe n‟ubuzima bw‟Iburayi akaba ashaka gutaha mu Rwanda burundu, yasubije ko yamubeshye ko batazagaruka abyumvikanyeho na Libératha kugira ngo bishyure amafaranga make. [92] Uhagarariye ubushinjacyaha avuga ko kuba Gatare yari afite umugambi wo kuzasiga Liberatha n‟abana yabyaranye n‟umugabo we wa mbere mu Rwanda bigaragazwa n‟uko yari yarabaguriye amatike yo kugenda gusa yifashishije OIM ifasha abimukira (immigrants) gusubira mu bihugu byabo abeshya ko Liberatha yananiwe n‟ubuzima bw‟Iburayi, bikanemezwa n‟abantu bakoranaga kwa Milants mu kazi ko gusoroma imbuto St-Trond. [93] Avuga kandi ko ibyo Gatare avuga ko we na Libératha bari bumvikanye kubeshya OIM ko batazagaruka kuko Libératha yananiwe n‟ubuzima bw‟Iburayi ataribyo kuko aho Libératha abimenyeye ko Gatare yaguze amatike yo kugenda gusa yahise abibwira abana ko we atakigiye kuko yamenye ko azamusiga mu Rwanda. UBUSHINJACYAHA v. GATARE 149

## Page 177

UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [94] Urukiko rusanga “réservation” ubwayo atari ikimenyetso ko Gatare yari kuzagura amatike yo kugaruka ageze mu Rwanda. [95] Urukiko rusanga imvugo ya Kassi Bilé wakoranaga na Gatare ko uyu yamubwiye ko umugore we atari “gentille” kandi ko azamusiga mu Rwanda hamwe n‟abana yabyaranye n‟umugabo we wa mbere batari abe yuzuzanya n‟iya N‟sa Emoli nawe bakoranaga igaragaza ko yamenye ko Gatare afite umugambi wo gusiga umugore we n‟abana be babiri mu Rwanda abibwiwe na Kassi Bilé, zikaba zigomba gufatwaho ukuri kuko nta mpamvu n‟imwe bari bafite yo kubeshyera Gatare [96] Urukiko rusanga kandi no kuba Gatare yaranyuze kuri OIM kugira ngo agure amatike ya Libératha n‟abakobwa be babiri bigaragaza ko nta mugambi yari afite wo kubagarura mu Bubiligi kuko nk‟uko abyivugira OIM ntabwo ijya ifasha abimukira kujya mu biruhuko, ahubwo ibafasha gutaha burundu, ibyo avuga ko bari bumvikanye kubeshya OIM akaba ataribyo kuko aho Libératha amenyeye ko yaguze amatike yo kugenda gusa yahise abwira abana ko atakigiye, ibi bikaba byemezwa na Emmanuella mu mvugo ye mu bushinjacyaha, bikashimangirwa na Muhirwa Frédérick wemeje nk‟uko byagaragajwe haruguru ko Gatare yamutelefonye bucya aza mu Rwanda amubwira ko Libératha yatangiye gushyiramo umutima mubi abana ko afite gahunda yo kubasiga mu Rwanda. [97] Urukiko rusanga rero ntacyo urukiko rwa mbere rwibeshyeho rwemeza ko Libératha yanze ko bazana mu ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 150

## Page 178

Rwanda kuko yari yamenye ko Gatare afite gahunda yo kuhabasiga. i) Ku bijyanye n’uko yageze mu Rwanda agasaba ubutane. [98] Gatare avuga ko gusaba ubutane ageze mu Rwanda atari umugambi yaje afite, ahubwo ari icyemezo yafashe ahageze kubera ko yari yababajwe n‟ukuntu batuzuzanya nk‟abashakanye, ukuntu bateguye urugendo rwo kuza mu biruhuko mu Rwanda bazanye n‟umuryango wose n‟abana babiri b‟umugore we w‟umubiligikazi batandukanye, nyuma yo guhihibikana ashakisha amafaranga azabazana kandi akabasubizayo, amatike yaramaze kwishyurwa, hasigaye iminsi 3 gusa ngo bafate indege akamubwira ko atazagenda nta mpamvu amugaragarije, akanga n‟uko Cléscence wabishakaga nawe aza, ku buryo yari yamuhombeje 2.716Euro ahwanye na 2.700.000Frw arenga, akaba ndetse yari yataye urugo yagiye atamubwiye iyo agiye. [99] Akomeza asobanura ko yafashe icyemezo cyo kwaka ubutane bitewe nuko Libératha yari yaramurakaje cyane, ariko ko iyo aza gusiga amwishe atari kwirirwa yaka ubutane, naho kuba yarabikoze vuba akaba ari uko yari afite igihe gito yagombaga kumara mu Rwanda. [100] Ku bijyanye n‟impamvu yasabiye ubutane mu Rwanda kandi we n‟umugore we barabaga mu Bubiligi, avuga ko mu Rwanda ariho basezeraniye, kandi ko ariho bihendutse kurusha mu Bubiligi, ko rero bwari uburyo bwo kubyihutisha kuko yashakaga ko bimutwara amikoro make. [101] Uhagarariye ubushinjacyaha avuga ko Gatare yagiye kwaka ubutane akigera mu Rwanda mu rwego rwo guhisha UBUSHINJACYAHA v. GATARE 151

## Page 179

ibimenyetso kuko atari kubona uburyo avuga ko Libératha yapfuye. UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [102] Gatare yageze mu Rwanda kuwa 18/07/2006, ahita ajya gusaba ubutane mu Rukiko rw‟Ibanze rwa Busasamana nk‟uko bigaragazwa n‟imyanzuro ya Me Nkurunziza Jean Chrysotome yo kuwa 26/07/2006, ndetse ahita anasaba ko Libératha yatumizwa mu gihe gito, urukiko rurabimwemerera, igihe cyo kuburana kigeze arubwira ko yoherereje Libératha ihamagara binyujijwe ku iposita ariko yanga kujya kurifata, kuwa 29/09/2006 umucamanza yemeza ko ahawe ubutane ku makosa ya Libératha ngo kuko ahoza umugabo we ku nkeke bigatera intugunda mu muryango wabo, ndetse ko Gatare agomba gusigarana umwana Pierre Alexandre, naho abandi bagasigara barerwa na nyina. [103] Nyuma y‟urwo rubanza Gatare yatanze ikindi kirego mu Rukiko rw‟Ibanze rwa Busasamana cyo kwiyandukuzaho abana Libératha yabyaranye n‟umugabo we wa mbere nk‟uko bigaragazwa nanone n‟imyanzuro iri muri dosiye yakozwe na Me Niyomugabo Christophe ariko umucamanza yemeza ko inyandiko z‟amavuko z‟abo bana zitagomba gukosorwa kuko nta makosa yakozwe mu myandikire yazo, ndetse zikaba zarakozwe mu nzira no mu buryo bukurikije amategeko. [104] Urukiko rusanga gusaba ubutane bishobora kumvikana nk‟uburyo bwo gusibanganya ibimenyetso kugira ngo hatagira utangazwa n‟uko atakibana n‟umugore we cyangwa n‟uko atazi amakuru yabo, ndetse no kwiyandukuzaho abana ba Libératha batari abe bikaba nabyo bishobora kumvikana muri ubwo buryo, ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 152

## Page 180

bityo kuba Gatare yarasabye ubutane akigera mu Rwanda no kwiyandukuzaho abana ba Libératha batari abe nabyo bikaba bigomba kureberwa hamwe n‟ibindi bimenyetso byagaragajwe muri uru rubanza. j) Ku bijyanye n’ibyangombwa bya Libératha na Cléscence byasanganywe Gatare ubwo yafatwaga nyuma y’amezi atatu bishwe. [105] Gatare avuga ko ibyo urukiko rwavuze ko yambuye Libératha na Cléscence ibyangombwa byabo kugira ngo batazamenyekana atariko biri kuko bateguye urugendo ari benshi ibyangombwa byabo biri mu isakoshi imwe bari barateguye, kandi ko Libératha yahakanye hasigaye iminsi 3 gusa ngo bafate indege, ntiyibuka kumwaka ibyangombwa yari abitse, nawe akomeza gahunda ze ku buryo atigeze abikomaho agatima. [106] Avuga kandi ko iyo aza kuba yarabishe aba yaratwitse ibyo byangombwa kugira ngo bitagaragara ariko ko we yamaze amezi 3 abigendana, akaba yari agiye no kubisubiranayo igihe yafatwa n‟inzego z‟umutekano bucya agenda. [107] Akomeza avuga ko kuba baramusanganye ibyangombwa byabo bombi n‟impeta y‟isezerano ya Libératha ataribyo byerekana ko yabishe, ko atari kuba yabishe ngo akomeze abike ibintu byabo kandi aribyo byari kumufatisha, ibyo bikaba byerekana ahubwo ko atazi imipfire y‟abo kuko iyo ashaka gusibanganya ibimenyetso yari kubambura n‟ikarita y‟itora ndetse n‟ikarita ya Centre Public d'Action Sociale (C.P.A.S) basanze mu modoka noneho umugambi akawugereraho rimwe. UBUSHINJACYAHA v. GATARE 153

## Page 181

[108] Uhagarariye ubushinjacyaha avuga ko ibyo Gatare avuga ko yazanye ibyo byangombwa yibeshye bitafatwaho ukuri kuko iyo aza gusanga yabizanye yibeshye yari guhita abyohereza ariko akaba atarabyohereje kuko yari azi ko ntawe abyoherereza kuko bapfuye. UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [109] Mu byangombwa Gatare yafatanywe harimo indangamuntu za Libératha na Cléscence zihabwa abanyamahanga baba mu Bubiligi (carte d’identité pour étranger) na pasiporo zabo zo mu Rwanda. [110] Urukiko rusanga ibyo Gatare avuga ko iyo aza kuba ariwe wishe Libératha na Clescence agashaka gusibanganya ibimenyetso yari kubambura ikarita y‟itora yo mu Rwanda n‟ikarita ya C.P.A.S ari ukwirengagiza ko izo nyandiko zari zahiye bikabije, bityo kuba abashinzwe iperereza bifashishije “laboratoire” barashoboye guhuza umuyonga wazo bakamenya inkomoko yazo akaba atari ikintu cyari cyateganyijwe n‟uwabatwikiye mu modoka. [111] Urukiko rusanga kandi kuba Gatare yarazanye mu Rwanda ibyangombwa byabo agafatwa nyuma y‟amezi 3 akibifite bitafatwa ko ari ukwibagirwa cyangwa kwibeshya, ahubwo bishimangira ko Gatare yari azi ko batavuye mu rugo bajya gufata iyabo nzu kuko batari kubura gutwara nibura indangamuntu zikunze gukenerwa mu buzima bwa buri munsi nko kubikuza amafaranga muri banki, gushaka akazi no guhabwa servisi zinyuranye, bityo kuba yari abifite bikaba bigomba kureberwa hamwe n‟ibimenyetso bindi byatanzwe muri uru rubanza. ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 154

## Page 182

k) Kuba urukiko rwaramuhamije icyaha rwirengagije ikimenyetso kimushinjura ko yari kumwe na Pierre Alexandre w’imyaka ine, akaba atari gutwikira Libératha na Cléscence mu modoka bari kumwe. [112] Gatare avuga ko urukiko rwirengagije ko yari kumwe na Pierre Alexandre kuko atari kuvana abantu babiri mu rugo ngo uwo mwana amusige mu rugo wenyine, akaba atari kubatwikira mu modoka ari kumwe nawe. [113] Ku bijyanye n‟impamvu mu Rukiko Rukuru rwa Repubulika yavuze ko Pierre Alexandre yari yajyanye na Emmanuella kwa Fabienne umugore we wa mbere, asubiza ko kwari ukwibeshya, ko imvugo ya Emmanuella mu bushinjacyaha ko yaje gutema ibyatsi ari kumwe na Pierre Alexandre ariyo yatumye yibuka neza ko uwo mwana bari kumwe mu ijoro ryo kuwa 02/07 rishyira kuwa 03/07/2006, ndetse ko bajyanye St-Trond arangije gutema ibyatsi. [114] Uhagarariye ubushinjacyaha avuga ko ibyo Gatare avuga ko yari kumwe na Pierre Alexandre ariwe wabitangira ibimenyetso kuko yashoboraga no kureba aho amusiga. UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [115] Gatare ubwo yabazwaga mu bushinjacyaha yavuze ko ku cyumweru tariki ya 02/07/2006 yagiye St Trond gushaka imodoka yo kugura, ndetse ko abana bombi Emmanuella na Pierre Alexandre yari yabasize kwa Fabienne aho yagiye kubafata kuwa mbere tariki ya 03/07/2006. UBUSHINJACYAHA v. GATARE 155

## Page 183

[116] Mu mwanzuro we wanditse mu Rukiko Rukuru rwa Repubulika naho yavuze ko kuwa gatandatu tariki ya 01/07/2006 yajyanye abana gusura Fabienne kugira ngo bamusezereho noneho bazahave bazana n‟abana be kugira ngo bajyane mu Rwanda, ndetse yabisubiyemo igihe cy‟iburanisha imbere y‟urwo rukiko n‟imbere y‟uru rukiko mbere y‟uko yisubiraho agahindura imvugo. [117] Urukiko rusanga n‟aho yabajijwe hose gusobanura uko yakoresheje igihe cye ku itariki ya 02/07/2006 nta na hamwe yigeze avuga ko yagiye St Trond gushaka imodoka yo kugura ari kumwe n‟uwo mwana Pierre Alexandre, cyangwa ko bari kumwe ubwo yatahaga agasanga urugo rukinze, bityo imvugo ye ko biriranywe umunsi wose bakanatahana mu rugo ihindura ibyo yavuze mbere ikaba itafatwaho ukuri. l) Kuba urukiko rwaramuhamije icyaha hatagaragajwe uburyo yaba yarabonye imodoka MAZDA 123 Libératha na Cléscence bahiriyemo. [118] Gatare avuga ko imodoka Mazda Libératha na Cléscence bahiriyemo yagurishirijwe i Liège mu isoko rya Bierset, ko bitashoboka ko imodoka yagurishwa nta nyandiko ikozwe igaragaza uwaguze imodoka, akaba asanga, uretse gusa amarangamutima yakomeje kugaragara muri uru rubanza, ataragombaga guhamwa n‟icyaha hatabanje byibura kugaragara uwagurishije imodoka ya MAZDA123 ngo asobanure uburyo yayimugurishije cyangwa yayimutije kugira ngo ajye kuyikoresha amarorerwa. [119] Avuga kandi ko yasabye ko nyiri imodoka bivugwa ko yayigurishije kuwa 25/06/2006 mu isoko rya Bierset yatumizwa muri uru rubanza kuko ari we pfundo ryarwo ariko urukiko ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 156

## Page 184

rubyima amatwi rwirengagije ingingo ya 46(2) y‟Itegeko ryerekeye imiburanishirize y‟imanza z‟inshinjabyaha ivuga ko urukiko rutegetswe guca urubanza rwishakira ibimenyetso bitagezweho n‟ubuhinjacyaha. [120] Avuga nanone ko ibyo uwitwa Rauschen ukora muri iryo soko ry‟imodoka yasobanuye bigaragaza itandukaniro hagati ye n‟uwaguze imodoka kuko yavuze ko uwayiguze yari afite imyaka 35, ko yari yambaye agakufi, ko yari mu modoka ya Mitsubishi, iyo myaka we akaba atariyo afite, akaba nta gakufi yigeze yambara, ndetse akaba atarigeze atunga imodoka ya Mitsubishi. [121] Uwunganira Gatare avuga ko hari byinshi bishidikanywaho muri uru rubanza, nko kumenya aho uwo yunganira ahuriye n‟imodoka Libératha na Cléscence batwikiwemo cyangwa uko yaba yaravuye aho batwikiwe, bityo akaba asaba ko yagirwa umwere hashingiwe ku ngingo ya 71 y‟Itegeko N°15/04 ryo kuwa 12/06/2004 ryerekeye ibimenyetso mu manza n‟itangwa ryabyo ivuga ko gushidikanya birengera uregwa. [122] Uhagarariye ubushinjacyaha avuga ko bitari ngombwa ko urukiko rutegeka irindi perereza ku modoka Libératha na Cléscence bahiriyemo kuko iryakorewe mu Bubiligi ryari ryagaragaje ko “plaques” zabonetse aho imodoka yahiriye zari zarasibwe (radiés), uwagurishije imodoka akaba yarasobanuye ko imodoka yaguzwe n‟umwirabura kandi ko batandikiranye, bityo urukiko rukaba rwarasanze ibimenyetso rwashyikirijwe bihagije.

UBUSHINJACYAHA v. GATARE 157

## Page 185

UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [123] Iperereza ryakorewe mu Bubiligi ryagaragaje ko uwatunze bwa nyuma imodoka MAZDA123 Libératha na Cléscence bahiriyemo ari umudagekazi witwa Schwarzer Tamara, akaba yarayigurishije mu kwezi kwa 06/2006 umucuruzi witwa Behrwanger, uyu nawe akayigurisha ku isoko ry‟imodoka rya Bierset ku cyumweru tariki ya 25/06/2006, uwo munsi igurwa n‟umwirabura ariko nta nyandiko z‟ubugure zakozwe. [124] Ku bijyanye na “plaques” CFI 204 zari kuri iyo modoka, iperereza ryagaragaje ko zari iz‟imodoka Peugeot 206 kandi ko zari zarabaye “radiés” kuwa 28/08/2002. [125] Urukiko rusanga kuba uwaguze n‟uwagurishije imodoka batarandikiranye no kuba imodoka yarambitswe “plaques” zasibwe bigaragaza ko uwayiguze yari yateguye uburyo azasibanganya ibimenyetso bishobora gutuma amenyekana, kuba rero iperereza ritarashoboye kugaragaza umwirondoro w‟uwaguze imodoka bikaba bitatesha agaciro ibindi bimenyetso byatanzwe muri uru rubanza. m) Umwanzuro. [126] Ingingo ya 119 y‟Itegeko ryerekeye ibimenyetso mu manza n‟itangwa ryabyo ivuga mu gace k‟ayo ka mbere ko “mu manza z‟inshinjabyaha, ibimenyetso bishingira ku mpamvu zose z‟ibyabaye n‟ibyemejwe n‟amategeko, ababuranyi bapfa kuba barahawe uburyo bwo kuhaba ngo banyomozanye” naho mu gace ka kabiri ikavuga ko “urukiko ruhamya ku buryo butavuguruzwa ko ibimenyetso byose birega cyangwa biregura ari byo kandi ko bishobora kwemerwa”. ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 158

## Page 186

[127] Urukiko rukurikije ibimenyetso byose byagaragajwe haruguru, kuba ikoti rya Gatare ryaratoraguwe aho Libératha na Cléscence batwikiwe ritahiye uwari uryambaye akaba yaravuye aho icyaha cyakorewe yerekeza ku muhanda, kuba imfunguzo ze zifungura inzu babagamo nazo zatoraguwe aho icyaha cyakorewe, kuba bukeye bw‟umunsi Libératha na Cléscence bicwa yaragaragayeho ibikomere by‟ubushye byatewe n‟ikibatsi cy‟umuriro, kuba amasaha make mbere y‟uko bicwa yaratelefonnye akoresheje umunara wa Nieuwerkerken no kuba yarafatanywe ibyangombwa bya Libératha na Cléscence nyuma y‟amezi atatu bishwe, rukanareba uburyo Gatare yagiye gusaba ubutane no kwiyandukuzaho abana akigera mu Rwanda ntagire umuntu n‟umwe abwira ko Libératha na Cléscence bababuze ahubwo abo bavuganye mu Bubiligi akabumvisha ko bari mu Rwanda, abandi b‟inaha akabumvisha ko basigaye mu Bubiligi, rusanga nta gushidikanya ko ariwe wishe Liberatha na Clescence abatwikiye mu modoka hanyuma akagerageza gusibanganya ibimenyetso nk‟uko byemejwe n‟Urukiko Rukuru rwa Repubulika, impamvu yabishe zikaba zishingiye ku mujinya yagize Libératha yanze ko bazana mu Rwanda amaze gutahura umugambi we wo kuhabasiga baje mu biruhuko no ku bwumvikane buke bari bafitanye. B. Ku byerekeye ibihano. [128] Abunganira Gatare bavuga ko umucamanza yagennye igihano kitubahirije amategeko kuko yahanishijwe igihano cya burundu y‟umwihariko, nyamara ubushinjacyaha bwari bwamusabiye igihano cya burundu, icyo yahawe kikaba kirenze icyo bwari bwamusabiye. UBUSHINJACYAHA v. GATARE 159

## Page 187

[129] Bavuga kandi ko urukiko rusanze Gatare ahamwa n‟icyaha rwamuhanisha igihano kitarenze imyaka 10 kuko ari ubwa mbere akora icyaha. [130] Uhagarariye ubushinjacyaha avuga ko kuba Gatare yarahanishijwe igihano kirenze icyo bwari bwamusabiye bitaba impamvu y‟ubujurire kuko nta tegeko ryishwe cyane ko icyaha yarezwe aricyo yahaniwe. UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [131] Ingingo ya 312 y‟Itegeko-Teka N°21/77 ryo kuwa 18 Kanama 1977 rishyiraho igitabo cy‟amategeko ahana ibyaha yakurikizwaga mu Rwanda igihe icyaha cyakorwaga yateganyaga igihano cyo kwicwa ku muntu wishe umuntu yabigambiriye ariko icyo gihano cyavanyweho n‟Itegeko Ngenga N°31/2007 ryo kuwa 25/07/2007, gisimbuzwa igihano cy‟igifungo cya burundu hamwe n‟igihano cya burundu y‟umwihariko (réclusion criminelle à perpétuité). Iri tegeko naryo ariko ryavanyweho n‟Itegeko Ngenga N°01/2012/OL ryo kuwa 02/05/2012 ryatangajwe mu Igazeti ya Leta kuwa 14/06/2012 riteganya mu ngingo yaryo ya 140 igihano cyo gufungwa burundu ku muntu wahamwe n‟icyaha cy‟ubwicanyi, naho mu ngingo yayo ya 145 igateganya igihano cya burundu y‟umwihariko ku wishe umuntu yabanje kumushinyagurira (homicide en recourant à des actes dégradants) cyangwa kumukorera ikindi cyaha cy‟ubugome (homicide précédé d‟un autre crime). [132] Urukiko rusanga rero Gatare agomba guhanishwa ingingo ya 140 iteganya igihano cya burundu ku muntu wahamwe n‟icyaha cy‟ubwicanyi. ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 160

## Page 188

[133] Ku bijyanye n‟ibigomba gushingirwaho mu kugena igihano, ingingo ya 71 y‟igitabo gishya cy‟amategeko ahana ivuga ko “ umucamanza atanga igihano akurikije uko uhanwa yakoze icyaha, ashingiye ku mpamvu zabimuteye, uko uwakoze icyaha yari asanzwe yitwara, uburyo icyaha cyakozwemo n‟imibereho ye bwite”, naho ingingo ya 82 y‟icyo gitabo ikavuga ko “igihe hari impurirane z‟impamvu nkomezacyaha iz‟igabanyagihano, iz‟isubiracyaha n‟izinyoroshyacyaha, inkiko zigena igihano zikurikije uko izo mpamvu zikurikirana muri iyi ngingo”. [134] Urukiko rusanga n‟ubwo Gatare ari ubwa mbere akoze icyaha bizwi atahabwa inyoroshyacyaha nk‟uko bisabwa n‟abamwunganira harebwe uburyo yishe Libératha na Cléscence yabiteguye neza n‟ubugome bukabije yabicanye, harebwe n‟uburyo yakoze uko ashoboye kugira ngo asibanganye ibimenyetso by‟icyaha, abana ba Libératha bakaba barabuze umubyeyi bari basigaranye, ndetse na mukuru wabo bitewe n‟uwari wariyemeje kubabera umubyeyi ubwo yabiyandikagaho. C. Kumenya niba Uwanyirigira Sylvie yaragenewe indishyi zidahagije. [135] Uwanyirigira Sylvie avuga ko yuririye ku bujurire bwa Gatare Edouard asaba ko Urukiko rw‟Ikirenga rwamugenera indishyi mbonezamusaruro yari yasabye mu Rukiko Rukuru rwa Repubulika zingana za 32.560.000Frw akubiyemo amafaranga yo gutunga abana basizwe na Uwimana Libératha, ay‟ishuri n‟ayo kuzana imirambo no kuyishyingura mu Rwanda, rukamugenera n‟indishyi mpozamarira yari yasabye zingana na 10.000.000Frw, ndetse n‟amafaranga yo gukurikirana urubanza UBUSHINJACYAHA v. GATARE 161

## Page 189

n‟igihembo cy‟avoka angana na 4.256.000Frw, yose hamwe akaba 46.816.000Frw. [136] Gatare avuga ko nta ndishyi yasabwa izo arizo zose kubera ko ari umwere. UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [137] Urukiko rusanga Uwanyirigira Sylvie nta kimenyetso atanga kigaragaza ko ariwe urera abana basizwe na Libératha akaba ari nawe ubishyurira amashuri n‟ibindi byose bigenerwa umwana mu muryango, bityo akaba atagomba guhabwa indishyi mbonezamusaruro asaba nk‟uko Urukiko Rukuru rwa Repubulika rwabyemeje. [138] Ku bijyanye n‟indishyi z‟akababaro asaba, Urukiko rusanga atagaragaza icyo anenga izo yagenewe mu rwego rwa mbere zingana na 8.000.000Frw, bityo zikaba zigomba kugumaho. [139] Ku bijyanye n‟amafaranga yo kuzana imirambo iva mu Bubiligi no kuyishyingura mu Rwanda angana na 10.000.000Frw asaba, Urukiko rusanga nk‟uko byasobanuwe n‟urukiko rwa mbere rutagena indishyi zijyanye n‟igikorwa giteganywa gukorwa. [140] Ku byerekeye igihembo cy‟avoka, Urukiko rusanga 300.000Frw Uwanyirigira yagenewe ku rwego rwa mbere akwiye rukurikije amafaranga asanzwe agenwa mu manza, hakiyongeraho 500.000Frw y‟igihembo cy‟avoka ku rwego rwa kabiri imbere y‟uru rukiko. ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 162

## Page 190

III. ICYEMEZO CY’URUKIKO [141] Rwemeje ko ubujurire bwa Gatare Edouard nta shingiro bufite. [142] Rwemeje ko ubujurire bwuririye ku bundi bwa Uwanyirigira Sylvie nabwo nta shingiro bufite. [143] Rwemeje ko Gatare Edouard ahamwa n‟icyaha cy‟ubwicanyi bwakorewe Uwimana Liberata na Ingabire Clescence. [144] Rumuhanishije igifungo cya burundu. [145] Rumutegetse kwishyura Uwanyirigira Sylvie 8.000.000Frw y‟indishyi z‟akababaro, 300.000Frw y‟igihembo cy‟avoka ku rwego rwa mbere na 500.000Frw ku rwego rwa kabiri imbere y‟uru rukiko, yose hamwe akaba 8.800.000Frw. [146] Ruvuze ko amagarama y‟urubanza aherera ku Isanduku ya Leta kuko uwajuriye afunze.

UBUSHINJACYAHA v. GATARE 163

## Page 192

RWANDA LAW REPORTS ENGLISH VERSION

## Page 194

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TEAM OF EDITORS ................................................................ iii PREFACE ................................................................................. vi SCOPE OF THE REPORTS .................................................... vii CITATION ............................................................................... vii LIST OF STATUTES AND STATUTORY INSTRUMENTS CONSIDERED ........................................................................ viii LIST OF CASES CONSIDERED .............................................. x SUBJECT INDEX ..................................................................... xi MUKARUSHAKIRO ET AL v. GAHIRE ................................ 1 MULINDAHABI v. ENERGY, WATER AND SANITATION AUTHORITY (EWSA) Ltd ..................................................... 15 NSHUNGUYINKA v. RWANDA SOCIAL SECURITY BOARD (RSSB) ....................................................................... 41 KANYANJA ET AL v. MUKANTABANA ET AL ............... 55 MUJAWIMANA ET AL v. BANK OF KIGALI Ltd (B.K) .... 83 RUBARE v. RWANDA REVENUE AUTHORITY (RRA) . 101 PROSECUTION v. GATARE ............................................... 115

i

## Page 196

TEAM OF EDITORS

LAW REPORTING TEAM

KAGABO U. Stephanie

MUJABI K. Naphtal

MWIHOREZE Claudine

NTIHEMUKA Emmanuel

UWIMANA Gisèle

iii

## Page 197

MULTI-INSTITUTIONAL COMMITTEE

MUGENZI Louis Marie : President of the Committee Supreme Court Judge

Dr. MUHIRE G. Yves : Vice President of the Committee Lecturer in the School of Law/UR

RUTAZANA Angeline : Secretary of the Committee Inspector of Courts

Me BAGABO Faustin : Advocate at Rwanda Bar Association

BWIZA N. Blanche : Inspector of Courts DUSHIMINAMA Claudine : Prosecutor at National Level

GIRANEZA Clémentine : President of Primary Court

HABARUREMA Jean Pierre : Prosecutor at National Level

KALIWABO Charles : President of High Court

iv

## Page 198

Me KAYIHURA Didas : Advocate at Rwanda Bar Association

KIBUKA Jean Luc : Judge at Commercial High Court

MUREREREHE Saouda : Judge at High Court

Prof. Dr. NGAGI M. Alphonse : Supreme Court Judge RUBANGO K. Epimaque : State Attorney RUKUNDAKUVUGA F. Regis : Inspector General of Courts

UWANTEGE Yvette : Juge at Intermediate Court

v MULTI-INSTITUTIONAL COMMITTEE

## Page 199

PREFACE Dear readers, We are pleased to present to you volume III [2017] of the Rwanda Law Reports, which is published quarterly. Lawyers in different sectors need precedents to refer to in their daily activities. Therefore, the Rwanda Law Reports is compiled in a way that facilitates the users to easily access what they search for. However, suggestions for the improvement of this publication are warmly welcome. This volume of Rwanda Law Reports contains seven (7) cases: two (2) civil cases, two (2) administrative cases, two (2) commercial cases and one (1) criminal case. We take this opportunity to remind you that published cases can easily be accessed on the website of the judiciary: http://decisia.lexum.com/rlr/en/nav.do. Prof. Sam RUGEGE President of the Supreme Court President of the High Council of Judiciary

vi

## Page 200

SCOPE OF THE REPORTS These reports cover cases decided by the Supreme Court listed under the “Citation” below.

CITATION The Reports in this volume are cited thus: [2017] 3 RLR

vii

## Page 201

LIST OF STATUTES AND STATUTORY INSTRUMENTS CONSIDERED The Constitution of the Republic of Rwanda of 04 June 2003 as amended up to date, article 33……………………………………44 Organic Law No03/2012/OL of 13/06/2012 determining the organisation, functioning and jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, article 28 litera 2……………………………………………………..5 Organic Law N°01/2012/OL of 02/05/2012 instituting the penal code, articles 71, 82, 140 and 145………………………………120 Organic Law N°51/2008 of 09/09/2008 determining the organisation, functioning and jurisdiction of Courts, article 171…………………………………………………….18 article 93……………………………………………………...44 Law Nº37/2012 of 09/11/2012 establishing the value added tax, article 10……………………………………………………………102 Law N°21/2012 of 14/06/2012 relating to the civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure, articles 148 and 186…………………………………………18 article 154(2&3)……………..………………………………..5 articles 9(2) and 168………………………………………...58 Law N°45/2011 of 25/11/2011 governing contract, articles 64 and 65………………………………………………………………...85 Law N°12/2007 of 27/03/2007 on public procurement, articles 20, 86(2) and 89………………………………………………...…102 Law N°15/2004 of 12/6/2004 relating to evidence and its production, article 119……………………………………………120 viii

## Page 202

Law Nº06/2001 of 20/01/2001 establishing the value added tax, article 20……………………………………………………………102 Law Nº42/1888 of 27/10/1988 relating to contracts or obligations, article 258…………………………………………………….58 articles 33, 34 and 258……………………………………...85 Organic Law N°08/2005 of 14/07/2005 determining the use and management of land in Rwanda, articles 35 and 38…………...85 Law N°22/2002 of 09/07/2002 on general statutes for Rwanda public service, article 29…………………………………………..44 Law N°22/99 of 12/11/1999 to supplement book I of the civil code and to institute part five regarding matrimonial regimes, liberalities and successions, articles 21 and 35……………………………………………85 articles 46, 56 and 91……………………………………….58 Decree - Law N°21/77 of 18 August 1977 instituting the penal code, article 312………………………………………………..…120

ix LIST OF STATUTES

## Page 203

LIST OF CASES CONSIDERED Rwigema v. ECOBANK, RCOM0001/07/CS, rendered by the Supreme Court on July 24, 2008...............................................86 RRA v. MISIGARO, RCOMA0074/11/CS decided by the Supreme Court on 11 April 2014............................................102

x

## Page 204

SUBJECT INDEX Administrative law – Civil service – Dismissal – The taking of the oath by a public servant – The dismissal of an employee due to refusal of taking the oath cannot be considered as a dismissal for employment misconduct obliging the employer to seek the opinion of the public service commission prior to dismissal because it is the oath which bestows him the status of a civil servant – Law N°22/2002 of 09/07/2002 on general statutes for Rwanda public service, article 29. NSHUNGUYINKA v. RWANDA SOCIAL SECURITY BOARD (RSSB)…………………………41 Freedom of belief – No one should rely on the freedom of belief to derogate from the laws and regulations of the state, therefore the appellant should have complied with the directive of taking oath for civil servants – The Constitution of the Republic of Rwanda of 04 June 2003 as amended up to date, article 33. NSHUNGUYINKA v. RWANDA SOCIAL SECURITY BOARD (RSSB)……………………………………………..41 Administrative procedure – Application for review – Admissibility of the application – Conclusive new evidence – An element of evidence which the applicant possessed or was aware of before the case was adjudicated at the first instance until the case was disposed on the appellate level cannot be considered as new conclusive evidence revealed after the rendering of the judgment for it to be a ground for the review – Law Nº21/2012 of 14/06/2012 relating to civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure, article 186. MULINDAHABI v. ENERGY, WATER AND SANITATION AUTORITY (EWSA) Ltd……………........15 xi

## Page 205

Application for review – Admissibility of the application – Pronouncement of the judgment – Fraud – The absence of some of the judges during the pronouncement of the judgment but who deliberated it do not constitute fraud – Law Nº21/2012 of 14/06/2012 relating to civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure, article 148. MULINDAHABI v. ENERGY, WATER AND SANITATION AUTHORITY (EWSA) Ltd…............15 Admissibility of the claim – Alteration of the claim on the appellate level – Replacement of the institution in the course of the lawsuit – It is not considered as alteration of the claim on the appellate level, when an institution which replaced the one sued on the first instance is summoned on the appellate level. NSHUNGUYINKA v. RWANDA SOCIAL SECURITY BOARD (RSSB)…………………………41 Civil procedure – Rectification of judgment – Appeal – Statute of limitation – The fact for the law to have provided that the appeal regarding the interpreting or rectifying judgment is done at the same time with the main suit, should not be perceived as the right given to the party who did not lodge his/her appeal within the time limit against the main suit and therefore to constitute a loophole in his/her favour to lodge an appeal beyond the time limit through application for interpretation or correction – Law No21/2012 of 14/06/2012 relating to civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure, article 154, paragraphs 2 and 3. MUKARUSHAKIRO ET AL v. GAHIRE……………1 xii RWANDA LAW REPORTS

## Page 206

Appeal – New claim – At appeal level a new claim is inadmissible – Law N°21/2012 of 14/06/2012 relating to the civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure, article 168. KANYANJA ET AL v. MUKANTABANA ET AL…55 Criminal Law – Murder – Circumstantial evidence – In criminal cases, evidence is based on all grounds – The accused can be convicted based on facts assessed in the discretion of the court – Law N°15/2004 of 12/6/2004 relating to evidence and its production, article 119. PROSECUTION v. GATARE.….…………………..115 Damages – Pecuniary damages – The pecuniary damages are not awarded in Court’s discretion when they are composed of the amounts which can be calculated. KANYANJA ET AL v. MUKANTABANA ET AL…55 Evidence law – Burden of proof – A party alleging to be discharged from an obligation that has been accomplished must prove that the obligation no longer exists – Law N°21/2012 of 14/06/2012 relating to the civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure, article 9(2). KANYANJA ET AL v. MUKANTABANA ET AL.……...55 Family law – Testament – Joint ownership – Termination of joint ownership – An heir must enjoy the full right of getting out of the joint ownership – Law N°22/99 of 12/11/1999 supplement book one of the civil code and to institute part five regarding matrimonial regimes, liberalities and successions, articles 46, 56 and 91. KANYANJA ET AL v. MUKANTABANA ET AL…55 Law determining the jurisdiction of courts – Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court – Appellate jurisdiction – Grounds of appeal – Inexistent law – An error in the form about the xiii SUBJECT INDEX

## Page 207

title of the law referred to should not be considered as relying on inexistent law or repealed law as long as its content is the same as that of the law which was supposed to be referred to. MUKARUSHAKIRO ET AL v. GAHIRE……………1 Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court – Objection of lack of jurisdiction – In case the amount of damages awarded by the court exceeds the amount fixed by the law for the admissibility of the appeal in second instance appellate jurisdiction, the appeal is admitted – Organic Law No03/2012/OL of 13/06/2012 determining the organisation, functioning and jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, article 28 litera 2. MUKARUSHAKIRO ET AL v. GAHIRE……………1 Mortgage – Immovable properties – The value of the mortgage contract – Registration of mortgage – A legally concluded mortgage contract binds the parties even when the mortgage was not registered – Decree Law of 30/07/1888 relating to the contracts or obligations, articles 33 and 34. MUJAWIMANA ET AL v. BANK OF KIGALI Ltd (BK)…………………………………………………….83 Annulation of mortgage contract – The fact that rights holders on the property which was attached as a mortgage in the mortgage loan contract did not consent to it, implies that mortgages were illegally furnished – Organic Law N°08/2005 of 14/07/2005 determining the use and management of land in Rwanda, articles 35 and 38 – Law N°22/99 of 12/11/1999 to supplement book I of the civil xiv RWANDA LAW REPORTS

## Page 208

code and to institute part five regarding matrimonial regimes, liberalities and successions, articles 21 and 35. MUJAWIMANA ET AL v. BANK OF KIGALI Ltd (BK)…………………………………………………….83 Tax laws – Value added tax – Declaration of value added tax – Advance payment which is paid to the successful bidder for the commencement of works cannot be considered as the payment nor the time on which they have been paid, be considered as the period of tax declaration – Law Nº37/2012 of 09/11/2012 establishing the value added tax, article 10 – Law N°12/2007 of 27/03/2007 on public procurement, articles 20, 86(2) and 89 – Law Nº06/2001 of 20/01/2001 establishing the value added tax, article 20. RUBARE v. RWANDA REVENUE AUTHORITY (RRA)…………………………………………………101

xv SUBJECT INDEX

## Page 210

PROCEDURAL CASES

## Page 212

CASES RELATING TO CIVIL, COMMERCIAL, LABOUR AND ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE

## Page 214

MUKARUSHAKIRO ET AL v. GAHIRE [Rwanda SUPREME COURT – RCAA0002/15/CS (Mugenzi, P.J., Gatete and Munyangeri, J.) January 20, 2017] Law determining the jurisdiction of courts – Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court – Appellate jurisdiction – Grounds of appeal – Inexistent law – An error in the form about the title of the law referred to should not be considered as relying on inexistent law or repealed law as long as its content is the same as that of the law which was supposed to be referred to. Law determining the jurisdiction of courts – Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court – Objection of lack of jurisdiction – In case the amount of damages awarded by the court exceeds the amount fixed by the law for the admissibility of the appeal in second instance appellate jurisdiction, the appeal is admitted – Organic Law No03/2012/OL of 13/06/2012 determining the organisation, functioning and jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, article 28, litera 2. Civil procedure – Rectification of judgment – Appeal – Statute of limitation – The fact for the law to have provided that the appeal regarding the interpreting or rectifying judgment is done at the same time with the main suit, should not be perceived as the right given to the party who did not lodge his/her appeal within the time limit against the main suit and therefore to constitute a loophole in his/her favour to lodge an appeal beyond the time limit through application for interpretation or correction – Law No21/2012 of 14/06/2012 relating to civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure, article 154(2 &3). 1

## Page 215

Facts: The heirs of Bagenzi Jean, namely Bagenzi Théogène, Mukarushakiro Gloriose and Mukangenzi Céline sued Gahire for having appropriated the house left by their father. Gahire argues that he bought it from one of the heirs known as Bagenzi at his majority age and that his mother Mukarushakiro witnessed the conclusion of the contract. The Intermediate Court of Nyarugenge nullified the sale contract of 5 November 1996 and of 4 November 1997 between Bagenzi and Gahire due to the fact that when it was concluded, Bagenzi lacked the capacity to enter into the contract, therefore it ordered the heirs of Bagenzi Jean to compensate Gahire of 191,713,088Frw before the release of the house because his purchase was devoid of bad faith especially that at the time of the sale by Bagenzi on 5 November 1996, he was with his relatives, while the contract of 4 November 1997 was concluded when Bagenzi already reached the majority age. Mukarushakiro, Bagenzi and Mukangenzi lodged an appeal to the High Court alleging that the Court ordered Bagenzi to be held liable and that Gahire purchased without bad faith while it subsequently held that Bagenzi concluded the contract while he was still a minor and the sold property did not belong to him. They allege in addition that the court relied on the valuation report without a cons-expertise. Gahire appealed as well alleging that the Intermediate Court invalidated the sale contract whereas this was not a subject matter of the claim, that it disregarded the fact that when Bagenzi sold the house he was legally capable and that it did not decide on the objections which were raised. The High Court found without merit the appeal of Mukarushakiro, Bagenzi and Mukangenzi but with merit that of Gahire, therefore that the sale contract remains valid. RWANDA LAW REPORTS 2

## Page 216

Mukarushakiro and Bagenzi appealed against this judgment to the Supreme Court on the same grounds they relied on before the Intermediate Court. However, Mukarushakiro alleged in addition that the court relied on an inexistent law. After the appeals were lodged, Mukangenzi applied for rectification before the High Court, alleging that he was not included among the appellants. In the rectification judgment RCA0039/2016/HC/KIG rendered on 09/11/2016, it was held that his claim lacks merit given that no mistake likely to be corrected was made. After the decision on this rectification application in respect to the judgment of the High Court, Mukangenzi lodged also an appeal to the Supreme Court alleging that the High Court was mistaken on facts and that it relied on foreign case laws which contradict Rwandan laws concerning the conclusion of the contract by a minor. She states in addition that it misapplied article 159 of the Law governing contracts in relation to the time limit for validation of the contract concluded by a minor and it relied on this to confirm that Gahire was not of bad faith. Gahire raised an objection of lack of jurisdiction by the Supreme Court alleging that the appeal of Mukarushakiro and Bagenzi is at the second instance of appeal, whereas they do not indicate that their appeal fulfils the requirements of the law to fall within the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. In addition, he raised an objection of inadmissibility of the appeal of Mukangenzi advancing that she applied for rectification of the judgment in order to fraudulently reach the appeal remedy while the time limit for appeal had already elapsed. Held: 1. An error in the form about the title of the law referred to should not be considered as relying on inexistent law or MUKARUSHAKIRO ET AL v. GAHIRE 3

## Page 217

repealed law as long as its content is the same as that of the law which was supposed to be referred to, therefore the ground of appeal relating to the fact that the court did not state the title of the law, and that the date it mentioned was different from the law which should have been applied, while it is evident that the provision of article 431 correlates with the provision of the same article of the then current Law No42/88 of 27/10/1988 and that it corresponds to the subject matter of the claim which implies that it lacks merit. 2. Damages awarded in the appealed judgment amounts to 191,713,088Frw which exceed 50,000,000Frw provided for by the Law for the admissibility of the second instance appeal under the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court; therefore the objection of inadmissibility of the claim is overruled. 3. The fact for the law to have provided that the appeal regarding the interpreting or rectifying judgment is done at the same time with the main suit, should not be perceived as the right given to the party who did not lodge his/her appeal within the time limit against the main suit and therefore to constitute a loophole in favour of him/her to lodge an appeal beyond the time limit through application for interpretation or correction. 4. Pursuant to the general principle of the law which states that the fraud corrupts everything as well as law scholar opinions that the application for rectification and interpretation of the judgment should not serve to bypass the obligation to lodge an appeal within the time limit, therefore the procedure for the correction with the intention to lodge a subsequent appeal should not be admitted in case the time limit of appeal elapsed. Objection of lack of jurisdiction overruled. Objection of inadmissibility of appeal sustained. RWANDA LAW REPORTS 4

## Page 218

Part of court fees to the appellant whose claim is rejected. The remaining court fees suspended. Hearing in merit shall resume. Statutes and statutory instruments referred to: Organic Law No03/2012/OL of 13/06/2012 determining the organisation, functioning and jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, article 28 litera 2. Law No21/2012 of 14/06/2012 relating to civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure, article 154(2&3). No case referred to. Judgment I. BRIEF BACKGROUND OF THE CASE [1] The heirs of Bagenzi namely Bagenzi Théogène, Mukarushakiro Gloriose and Mukangenzi Céline, represented by Mukarushakiro Gloriose sued Gahire Athanase to the Intermediate Court of Nyarugenge for having appropriated himself the house left as estate by their father, while Gahire alleges that he bought it from Bagenzi when he reached his majority age in presence of his mother Mukarushakiro as a witness. [2] In the judgment RC0774/11/TGI/NYGE of 20 March 2013, the Intermediate Court of Nyarugenge found with merit the claim of Bagenzi’s heirs whereby it nullified the sale contracts of 5 November 1996 and of 4 November 1997 MUKARUSHAKIRO ET AL v. GAHIRE 5

## Page 219

between Gahire and Bagenzi and ordered the heirs of Bagenzi Jean to pay 19,713,088Frw to Gahire before the handover of the house. [3] This Court explained that the said contract was concluded by Bagenzi before his majority age, but that Gahire purchased in good faith because when Bagenzi sold the house on 5 November 1996, his siblings were present, while the contract of 4 November 1997 was concluded when Bagenzi reached the majority age, and in the presence of Uwimana Monique, the mother of Mukarushakiro as a witness. [4] Mukarushakiro, Bagenzi and Mukangenzi appealed to the High Court alleging that the judge ordered Bagenzi to pay the value added on the house whereas it decided that he concluded the contract without capacity and sold the property which does not belong to him. They allege in addition that it was relied on the valuation report without cons-expertise and that the Court contradicted itself whereby it decided that Gahire purchased without bad faith and at the same time that the contract is void. [5] Gahire also lodged an appeal alleging that the Intermediate Court nullified the sale contract while this was not the subject matter of the claim, that it disregarded the fact that Bagenzi was of majority age because he was born on 1 January 1976 as evidenced by his Identity Card and birth certificate, and that this court did not examine the objections raised. [6] In the judgment RCA0229 - RCA0231/13/HC/KIG rendered on 27 June 2014, the High Court found without merit the appeal lodged by Mukarushakiro, Bagenzi and Mukangenzi, and that the appeal lodged by Gahire has merit, therefore it RWANDA LAW REPORTS 6

## Page 220

overruled the judgment RC0774/11/TGI/NYGE given that Gahire did not appropriated himself the property in dispute, therefore the said contract remains valid. [7] On 27 July 2014, Mukarushakiro and Bagenzi lodged an appeal to the Supreme Court, stating that the judge in the High Court disregarded the fact that Bagenzi sold a third-party’s property, considered the property valuation report without the cons-expertise being carried out, and that he/she decided that the first sale contract complements the second. They alleged also that the court decided that Uwimana Monique was present while not true and finally that Gahire purchased the property without bad faith. [8] On 11 October 2016, Mukangenzi applied for rectification of the judgment in the High Court whereby he stated that he was not mentioned among the appellants. In the judgment RCA0039/2016/HC/KIG rendered on 09 November 2016 for rectification, it was decided that his application lacks merit because no mistake was made given that though his name was not mentioned on the exordium of the judgment, but he was mentioned as a party in the brief background of the case, in the motivation and decision parts of the judgment. [9] After this decision on the application for rectification of the judgment rendered by the High Court, Mukangenzi also lodged an appeal to the Supreme Court stating that the High Court was mistaken on facts, since it decided that they did not follow the statute of limitation to claim for their property whereas no time limitation applies, and that it misinterpreted article 339 of the civil code book I(CCB.I), whereby it decided that Mukangezi who had been adopted by Gahire is not qualified to inherit while he had been recognized as a child. MUKARUSHAKIRO ET AL v. GAHIRE 7

## Page 221

[10] He states that the High Court relied on foreign case laws which contradict Rwandan laws concerning the party to the contract without majority age, and that it misinterpreted the provision of article 159 of the Law governing contract in relation to the statute of limitation for the validation of the contract concluded by a minor, and it relied on this to confirm that Gahire was not of bad faith. [11] Gahire raised an objection of lack of jurisdiction of the Supreme Court with regard to the appeal of Mukarushakiro and Bagenzi and he raised an objection of inadmissibility of the appeal of Mukangenzi because he lodged it beyond the prescribed time limit. [12] The hearing of the case was held in public on 06 December 2016, whereby Mukarushakiro was represented by Counsel Sebineza Evariste, Bagenzi Théogène represented by Counsel Sebineza Evariste and Semuhunga N. Silas, Mukagenzi Céline by Counsel Buhuru P. Célestin, while Gahire Athanase was represented by Butare Godefroid and Mbaga Tuzinde Mbonyimbuga. It was firstly examined the objections raised by Gahire. II. ANALYSIS OF LEGAL ISSUES A. Whether the appeal of Mukarushakiro and Bagenzi falls within the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. [13] Counsel Butare and Mbaga, for Gahire, state that the appeal lodged by Mukarushakiro and Bagenzi before the Supreme Court constitute the appellate jurisdiction while he does not indicate that it fulfills the requirements of the law to fall within the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court as provided for RWANDA LAW REPORTS 8

## Page 222

by article 28, litera 2 of the Organic Law No03/2012/OL of 13/06/2012 determining the organization, functioning and jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. [14] They explain that the appeal grounds alleged by Mukarushakiro concerning the fact that the judge relied on the inexistent law because it was relied on article 159 of the Law No45/11 of 25/11/2011 governing contracts which is into force, therefore this ground does not correlate with the provision of article 28 stated above, especially that even in case the judge erred in interpretation of the provision of the law, it would not imply the inexistence of the law. [15] Counsel Buhuru, for Mukangenzi states that according to paragraph 20 of the appealed judgment, the judge relied on an inexistent law given that he/she relied on the law enacted in 1963, which was repealed by the Law No42/1988 of 27/10/1988. [16] Counsel Sebineza and Semuhunga for Mukarushakiro and Bagenzi, state that as indicated in paragraph 20 of the appealed judgment, the High Court relied on the law of persons of 28/09/1963 which is inexistent and that in case the reference of the law is mistakenly indicated, it is considered that it was relied on inexistent law. They add that even though this ground relating to the jurisdiction of court is rejected, its jurisdiction would be relied on the amount of damages awarded in the judgment, which exceeds 50,000,000Frw. OPINION OF THE COURT [17] As indicated in the 20th paragraph of the appealed judgment RCA0229-0231/13/HC, the judge mentioned that it MUKARUSHAKIRO ET AL v. GAHIRE 9

## Page 223

was relied on article 431 of the Law of 28/09/1963 which provides that: “the age of majority is fixed to twenty one year old. A person having attained that age, is fully qualified for all acts involving civil life unless provided otherwise by other laws”. The content of this provision is however found in article 431 of the Law No42/88 of 27/10/1988 instituting the preliminary title and civil code book I. [18] The court found that even though the judge did not state the title of the Law, and the date mentioned being different from the real law, it is evident that the statements of the aforementioned article 431 are similar to those of article 431 of the then existing law No42/88 of 27/10/1988 mentioned above which was current and correlate with the subject matter of the case which is the age of majority; therefore the mistake in the form would not be considered as if it was relied on inexistent law or existent law which was repealed later1. [19] The Court finds however that though the objection of lack of jurisdiction by the Supreme Court based on the fact that the High Court relied on an inexistent law lacks merit, there is another ground which allows this court to have second instance appellate jurisdiction over the appeal lodged by Mukarushakiro and Bagenzi, and this ground being the value of damages awarded by the appealed judgment, amounting to

1 Article 28, paragraph 2, litera 2 of the Organic Law No03/2012/OL of 13/06/2012 determining the organisation, functioning and jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. This article provides that the Supreme Court shall also have appellate jurisdiction over cases heard and decided in the second instance by the High Court, the Commercial High Court or by the Military High Court if such cases are based on non-existing law or repealed legal provisions. RWANDA LAW REPORTS 10

## Page 224

191,713,088Frw which exceeds 50,000,000Frw provided for by article 28 paragraph 2, litera 7 of the aforementioned Organic Law No03/2012/OL2. B. Whether the appeal of Mukangenzi was lodged within the time limit. [20] Counsel for Gahire states that the appeal lodged by Mukangenzi should not be admitted because she lodged it beyond 30 days provided by the law. They allege that she defrauded through the application for correction of the judgment 2 years later in order to take part in the hearing of the case. They state in addition that the fact that the High Court upheld the ruling of the judgment implies that the judgment for which application for rectification was filed contained no mistake. [21] They explain that as mentioned in the court submission presented by Counsel Buhuru in which he applied for correction of the judgment, he stated that after realizing that his client was not mentioned among the appellants before the Supreme Court, he applied for rectification of the judgment in order to lodge the appeal, therefore its fate would be questionable if, in order to participate in the judgment, the party who delayed to lodge his/her appeal would apply for correction of the judgment in accordance with article 153 of the Law No21/2012 of 14/06/2012 relating to civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure which provides that the judgment

2 The Supreme Court shall have appellate jurisdiction over cases heard and decided in the second instance by the High Court if such cases involve judgment in respect of which there was an award of damages of at least fifty million Rwandan francs (50,000,000Frw). MUKARUSHAKIRO ET AL v. GAHIRE 11

## Page 225

rectifying the previous judgment cannot be appealed against separately from the main suit. [22] Counsel Buhuru states that no fraud was done while applying for correction, rather he used the prescribed remedy in order to rectify the mistakes in the judgment and he added that there is no fraud to use a prescribed remedy. OPINION OF THE COURT [23] Article 154, paragraph 2, litera 3 of the Law No21/2012 of 14/06/2012 relating to civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure provides that the judgment interpreting or rectifying a previous judgement complementing the interpreted judgement shall not be subject to appeal unless it is done at the same time with the main suit and that the period for appeal on both cases runs from the day of delivering the judgement interpreting another one. [24] The Court finds that the fact that the Law provided that the appeal regarding the interpreting or rectifying judgment is done at the same time with the main suit, should not be perceived as the right given to the party who did not lodge his/her appeal within the time limit against the main suit and constitute a loophole for him/her to lodge an appeal beyond the time limit through application for interpretation or correction. This position was even taken by the Court of Cassation in Belgium which held that the application for rectification and interpretation of the judgment should not result into the application of the cassation of the judgment by the party who exercised this remedy with delay, since the procedure for the interpretation of a judicial decision does not have the effect of RWANDA LAW REPORTS 12

## Page 226

opening a new time limit for appeal in cassation against the interpreted decision3. [25] Concerning the issue that the fraud to reach the appeal remedy by a party to the case is not prohibited as advanced by Counsel Buhuru, the court finds that this fraudulent procedure should not be allowed considered the existence of the solid general principle of the Law which states that fraud corrupts everything4, and law scholars support it whereby they explain that the application for interpretation or rectification cannot be used to circumvent the need for exercising legal remedy5. [26] Concerning Mukangenzi who applied for the rectification of the judgment two (2 years) after it was delivered, and appealed two years later after the delivery of the judgment on 09 November 2016, the Court finds that the application for rectification made intended to reach the appeal remedy of the main suit which was not appealed against within the statute of limitation because there was nothing to be rectified as held by the High Court, and it was not even indicated in the appeal lodged to the Supreme Court the ground of appeal against the holdings of the judgment by the High Court with regard to the rectification of the judgment, rather, it seized the occasion to address the merit of the main judgment against which Mukangenzi had not lodged an appeal within the time limit. It is

3 La procédure en interprétation d’une décision judiciaire n’a pas pour effet d’ouvrir un nouveau délai pour se pourvoir en cassation contre la décision interprétée”: Cass. 26 Avril 2001. 4 “Fraus Omnia corrumpit”; “La fraude corrompt tout.” 5 “La voie d’interprétation ou de rectification ne peut donc être utilisée pour contourner la nécessité d’exercer une voie de recours”: Georges DE LEVAL et autres, Droit judiciaire, Tome 2, Manuel de procédure civile, Editions Larcier, Bruxelles, 2015, p.670. MUKARUSHAKIRO ET AL v. GAHIRE 13

## Page 227

therefore undoubtedly clear that the appeal claim of Mukangenzi against the judgment RCA0229 - RCA0231/13/HC/KIG delivered on 27 June 2014 was lodged beyond the time limit and consequently it should not be admitted. III. DECISION OF THE COURT [27] Overrules the objection of lack of jurisdiction by the Supreme Court raised by Gahire Anastase concerning the appeal lodged by Mukarushakiro Gloriose and Bagenzi Théogène; [28] Sustains the objection of inadmissibility of the appeal of Mukangenzi Céline raised by Gahire Anastase, therefore her appeal is rejected; [29] Orders the resume of the hearing in the merit of the appeal lodged by Mukarushakiro Gloriose and Bagenzi Théogène on 14 March 2017; [30] Orders Mukangenzi Céline to pay 1/3 of court fees and suspends the payment of the remaining 2/3.

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 14

## Page 228

MULINDAHABI v. ENERGY, WATER AND SANITATION AUTHORITY (EWSA) Ltd [Rwanda SUPREME COURT – RS/REV/AD0003/15/CS (Nyirinkwaya, P.J., Ngagi and Nyirandabaruta, J.) January 27, 2017] Administrative procedure – Application for review – Admissibility of the application – Conclusive new evidence – An element of evidence which the applicant possessed or was aware of before the case was adjudicated at the first instance until the case was disposed on the appellate level cannot be considered as new conclusive evidence revealed after the rendering of the judgment for it to be a ground for review – Law Nº21/2012 of 14/06/2012 relating to civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure, article 186. Administrative procedure – Application for review – Admissibility of the application – Pronouncement of the judgment – Fraud – The absence of some of the judges during the pronouncement of the judgment but who deliberated it does not constitute fraud – Law Nº21/2012 of 14/06/2012 relating to civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure, article 148. Fact: Mulindahabi entered into an employment contract which included a clause of six (6) month probation period with RECO RWASCO (which became EWSA), during which he was dismissed. 15

## Page 229

He sued EWSA in the High Court arguing that he was unfairly dismissed and he requested for various damages. The Court ruled that he was unfairly dismissed since he was not notified of the faults he committed in order for him to defend himself as provided for by the general statutes for public service. It also held that even though he concluded a probation contract, he is governed by the general statute rather than Labour Law because EWSA is a public institution as specified in the contract, thus it decided that he be awarded damages for the unfair dismissal. Both parties appealed to the Supreme Court, EWSA adducing that the Court disregarded the agreement between the two parties when it held that Mulindahabi was governed by the General Statutes for public service whereas he was governed by the employment contract, which led to the perception that EWSA faulted. Mulindahabi argues that there was a contradiction in the rulings of the case and also the damages he was awarded were insufficient and moreover the previous Court did not provide any motivation for it. The Court found the appeal of EWSA with merit in part and that of Mulindahabi without merit, nonetheless it awarded him damages for being dismissed without defending himself even though he was under probation. Mulindahabi applied for the review on the grounds that since the rendering of the judgment there are new conclusive elements of evidence revealed which consist of: the letter Nº708 /ed &cr/10 of 09/06/2010, the letter Nº2064/19.23 dated 11/08/2011, the letter Nº 2520/19.23 dated 04/10/2011 and the letter Nº 10/Min/TV/10/11 of 19/10/2011, demonstrating injustice contained in that judgment, there was also fraud and confusion of the facts because his case was not referred to the competent court and also the judges who had conflicts with him RWANDA LAW REPORTS 16

## Page 230

but did not withdraw from his case. He further argued that fraud is demonstrated by the fact that among the quorum who signed on the minute of judgment, one was absent during its pronouncement and also a case which is of the same nature like his which he submitted as an element of evidence was disregarded by the Court . He goes on to argue that the fraud is further demonstrated by the fact that the Court held that he should have been notified of one of the misconducts he committed and regarding the other one it held that he was not supposed to be notified of it. In addition to that he finds not being awarded damages for libel as fraud. In their defence, WASAC and REG argue that none of those letters demonstrate that he was a civil servant, instead they demonstrates that he wrote claiming that he was unfairly dismissed, and the response he got was that he was dismissed for just causes. Regarding the ground of fraud they argue that it has no basis because a party to the case pleads as s/he deems depending on the nature of the case and if there was a judge he was suspicious about, nothing barred him from recusing her/him. They continue to argue that the judgment was legally pronounced and those relating to have not been notified of the fault, he was awarded damages for it which is equivalent to his salary for three month. Held: 1. An element of evidence which the applicant possessed or was aware of before the case was adjudicated at the first instance until it was disposed off on the appellate level cannot be considered as new conclusive evidence revealed after the rendering of the judgment for it to be a ground for the review. Therefore the letters contained in the case file at the High Court cannot be considered as conclusive element of evidence MULINDAHABI v. ENERGY, WATER AND SANITATION AUTHORITY (EWSA) Ltd 17

## Page 231

revealed after the rendering of the judgment to be a ground for the case review. 2. The inference of the applicant that the judgment was rendered by a court without jurisdiction cannot be considered as fraud while he should have used remedies provided for by the law. Therefore no fraud committed against the applicant so that it can be a ground for review. 3. The judgment can be pronounced by one or two judges who were in the deliberation in case one or some of the judges are not available. Therefore there is no fraud committed by those judges as alleged by the applicant. 4. The judgment which the applicant submitted as an element of evidence was not disregarded by the Court because the issues relating to it were addressed in paragraph 29 of the judgment against which the review was requested. 5. The applicant was awarded damages resulting from not being notified of the misconduct he committed so that he defends himself and also not being awarded damages for libel is not a ground for review provided for by the law. The application for review is rejected; Court fees borne by the applicant. Statutes and statutory instruments referred to: Organic Law N°51/2008 of 09/09/2008 determining the organisation, functioning and jurisdiction of Courts, article 171. Law N°21/2012 of 14/06/2012 relating to the civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure, articles 148 and 186. RWANDA LAW REPORTS 18

## Page 232

No case referred to. Judgment I. BACKGROUND OF THE CASE [1] On 17/11/2009 Mulindahabi concluded an employment contract with RECO-RWASCO and on 13/04/2010 he was dismissed before the end of the probation period, on the grounds of poor performance which tarnishes the reputation of the institution and being characterised by feud with various departments. Murindahabi seized the High Court requesting for employment reinstatement and related damages on the ground that he was unfairly dismissed because he was governed by General Statutes for Rwanda Public Service not by the employment contract and also that he had completed the probation period. [2] In the judgment RAD0157/10/HC/Kig rendered on 25/01/2010, the High Court found the claim of Mulindahabi with merit, and ordered EWSA to pay him 6,000,000Frw for the lost wage due to dismissal, 2,000,000Frw in moral damages for libel and 2,000,000Frw for procedural costs. [3] Both parties appealed to the Supreme Court, and in the judgment RADA 0015/13/CS rendered on 18/11/2013, that Court found the appeal of EWSA with merit in parts and that of Mulindahabi Fidèle without merit, nonetheless, it ordered EWSA to pay him 1,350,000Frw in damages (for dismissal without defending himself even though he was under MULINDAHABI v. ENERGY, WATER AND SANITATION AUTHORITY (EWSA) Ltd 19

## Page 233

probation), in addition to the 200.000Frw for procedural costs awarded at first instance. [4] Mulindahabi was not contented with the outcome of the appeal, therefore basing on article 186, litera 1º, 3º and 6º of the Law N°21/2012 of 14/06/2012 relating to the civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure, he applied for the case review on the grounds that since the rendering of the judgment, new conclusive evidences which demonstrate the injustice contained in that judgment were revealed, there was commission of fraud and confusion of the facts during the case, additionally he requested for damages thereto. [5] The case was heard in public on 20/09/2016, Mulindahabi Fidèle assisted by Counsel Nyamunanage Aticus, REG represented by Counsel Iyamuremye Maurice while WASAC was represented by Counsel Rusanganwa Jean Bosco. During the hearing the Court decided to postpone the hearing until November 22, 2016 to necessitate Mulindahabi Fidèle and his counsel to merge their submissions and to clearly demonstrate each ground for their application for review and to corroborate it with the provisions of article 186 of the aforementioned Law N°21/2012 of 14/06/2012, so that the legal issues to be analysed by the Court be clearly indicated. The hearing in public resumed on November 22, 2016, Mulindahabi Fidèle assisted by Advocate Cyiza Faustin, REG represented by Advocate Iyamuremye Maurice while WASAC represented by Advocate Rusanganwa Jean Bosco. II. ANALYSIS OF LEGAL ISSUES In this case the issues to be analysed is whether the grounds relied upon by Mulindahabi Fidèle for application for RWANDA LAW REPORTS 20

## Page 234

review of the judgment RADA0015/13/CS are among those provided for by the law, for the application to be admitted. II.1. Whether there are new conclusive elements of evidence upon which to base the review of the Judgment RADA0015/13/CS. [6] Mulindahabi Fidèle submits that the new conclusive elements of evidence to prove the injustice are the following: 1o The letter Nº708 /ed &cr/10, dated June 9, 2010 which the Public Service Commission wrote to him (see page 13 & 73 in the case file at the High Court), indicating that the Commission handled and followed up his issue and he finds that it wouldn’t have done so if he were not governed by the General Statutes for Public service;

2o The letter Nº2064/19.23, dated August 08, 2011, which the Minister of public service and labour wrote to the Minister to the Office of the President in response to the letter Nº 36/Min/TV/6/11 which Mulindahabi Fidèle wrote to the President, addressing to him his problem, whereby in that letter the Minister of public service and labour stated that he violated the general statutes for public service, and he wouldn’t have stated so, if he were governed by employment contract; 3o The letter Nº2520/19.23, dated October 04, 2011 which the Minister of public service and labour wrote to Mulindahabi Fidèle, in response to the one he had wrote to him dated March 01, 2011 (see page 38), annexed on his defence submission against the appeal of EWSA, the MULINDAHABI v. ENERGY, WATER AND SANITATION AUTHORITY (EWSA) Ltd 21

## Page 235

Minister stated that he violated the general statutes for the public service;

4o The letter Nº10/Min/TV/10/11 dated 19/10/2011, which the Minister to the Office of the President wrote to Mulindahabi Fidèle, in response to the one he wrote to the President, whereby the Minister to the Office of the President based on the letter wrote by the Minister of public service and labour which stated that he violated the general statutes for the public service, he finds that the Minister wouldn’t have mentioned that while he was governed by the employment contract. [7] The counsel for Mulindahabi, Cyiza Faustin prays that the Court assesses whether the elements of evidence produced by his client constitutes a cause for the case review, because he demonstrates that he was a public servant. [8] Rusanganwa and Iyamuremye Maurice, the counsel for WASAC and REG adduce that none of the letters produced by Mulindahabi Fidèle demonstrates that he was a civil servant, rather they only demonstrate that he wrote to claim that he was unfairly dismissed, of which he got the response that he wasn’t. THE OPINION OF THE COURT [9] Article 186(3°) of the Law N°21/2012 of 14/06/2012 relating to the civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure, provides for the application for review if, since the time of rendering the judgment, it was evident that there was injustice due to the judgment for which the review is sought, RWANDA LAW REPORTS 22

## Page 236

whether an element of evidence was in the file but was not noticed by the court or was revealed later. [10] The documents in the case file indicate that on May 17, 2010, Mulindahabi Fidèle wrote to the Public Service Commission seeking for redress, for him to be reinstated in the RECO/RWASCO and as a result, the commission replied in the letter No708/CD/ER/10 dated 09/06/2010 that after analysing his issue, it has no ground to request for his reinstatement in RECO/RWASCO, because of his misconduct during the period of probation which includes among others, instigating conflicts between him and his workmates, delaying the files and writing to the Chief Executive Officer or other superiors without the knowledge of the head of the department to which he is assigned . [11] The case file also contains the letter No2520/19.23 dated 04/10/2011, which the Minister of public service and labour wrote to Mulindahabi Fidèle, notifying him that pursuant to the Law N°22/2002 of 09/07/2002 on General Statutes for Rwanda Public Service particularly article 19, the Ministerial order No005//08/10/Min of 01/01/ 2008 determining allowances and other fringe benefits to be allocated to civil servants in official missions outside the Country together with various letters which were cited in that letter, including those addressed to Mulindahabi Fidèle from various institutions and which those organs addressed each other in regard to his issue along with the letter of March 2010, which HASHI Energy wrote to the Chief Executive Officer of RECO/RWASCO inviting the Director of Administration for the training in Nairobi; the Minister finds that the Public Service Commission analysed the misconducts he is accused of and found him liable (of delaying files, MULINDAHABI v. ENERGY, WATER AND SANITATION AUTHORITY (EWSA) Ltd 23

## Page 237

disrespect of the administrative hierarchy and erasing the mission order signed by the Prime Minister allowing an employee to participate in training) and consequently held that he deserved the sanction taken against him. In that letter the Minister further stated that the decision taken in regard to his issue is valid because the commission took it after thoroughly scrutinizing the letter of Mulindahabi Fidèle and that of the Chief Executive Officer of EWSA dated April 04, 2010 as well as paying attention to the oral submissions of EWSA. [12] The case file also contains a letter dated August 17,2011 which the Minister to the Office of the President wrote to Mulindahabi Fidèle in response to the one he wrote seeking redress, whereby the Minister informed him that after scrutinising his issue, finds that reasonable grounds for his dismissal were clearly demonstrated to him, she even attached a letter the Minister of public service and labour wrote to the Minister to the Office of the President informing her the reality of Mulindahabi Fidèle’s issue. [13] The Court finds that the letters Nº708 /ed &cr/10 dated 09/06/2010, Nº2064/19.23 dated 11/08/2011, Nº2520/19.23 dated 04/10/2011 and Nº10/Min/TV/10/11 dated 19/10/2011 all mentioned above, upon which Mulindahabi Fidèle relies his application for the review of the Judgment RADA0015/13/CS, are those which various institutions wrote to Mulindahabi Fidèle in response to those he wrote demonstrating to them that he was unfairly dismissed and the one they addressed among themselves in regard to his issue. Those letters cannot be considered as conclusive new elements of evidence revealed after the rendering of the judgment which is provided for by article 186(3º) of the aforementioned Law, for them to be relied RWANDA LAW REPORTS 24

## Page 238

upon for the review of the judgment RADA0015/13/CS, because they were in his possession or he was aware of them since before the case was adjudicated in the High Court until it was disposed in the Supreme Court. 2. Whether there was fraud and confusion of the facts in the rulings of the judgment RADA0015/13/CS, which subject it to review. a. Whether not referring a case to another court indicates fraud. [14] Mulindahabi claims that in the case RAD0124/07/HC/Kig of Kabera Pierre Claver vs RECO/RWASCO, tried by the High Court, the counsel for RECO/RWASCO raised an objection of lack of jurisdiction, whereby he indicated the labour court is the competent court to hear that case, per contra RECO&RWASCO did not raise that objection during the trial of the case he was a party to, that implies that it acknowledged that he was civil servant, thus to continue referring to him as a contractual staff constitutes a fraud. He further states that the Supreme Court also acted fraudulently against him because when it found that he was governed by the employment contract, it should have declared itself incompetent to hear that case and thus refer the case to the competent one, therefore its failure to do so demonstrates fraud. [15] Advocate Rusanganwa argues that this ground lacks merit because a party pleads his or her case as s/he deems necessary according to the nature of his/her case; it is not the plaintiff who dictates how s/he should plead his/her case.

MULINDAHABI v. ENERGY, WATER AND SANITATION AUTHORITY (EWSA) Ltd 25

## Page 239

THE OPIONION OF THE COURT [16] Article 186(1o) of the Law Nº21/2012 of 14/06/2012 mentioned above provides that an application for review can be made due to..… if there was fraud that had effects on the judgment and it was unknown to the losing party during the course of the proceedings…. [17] Documents in the case file indicate that the case RAD0124/07/HC/Kig between Kabera Pierre Claver and RECO/RWASCO (see page 123) before the High Court whereby the former was requesting for the annulment of the dismissal decision of July 02, 2007, of which Mulindahabi Fidèle relies on to prove fraud in the case he was a party to, Gaju Ines the advocate for RECO/RWASCO in that case, raised a preliminary objection of lack of jurisdiction on the ground that Kabera should have first seized the Labour chamber, of which the Court overruled. The documents in the case file also indicate that in the judgment RADA0015/13/CS between Mulindahabi and RECO/RWASCO rendered by the Supreme Court on 08/11/2003, RECO RWASCO was represented by Advocate Rusanganwa Jean Bosco and the objection of lack of jurisdiction was never raised. [18] Furthermore the case file also contains the judgment RADA0015/13/CS, whereby in its paragraph fourteen [14], the Supreme Court held that Mulindahabi Fidèle was governed by the Law No13/2009 of 27/05/2009 governing labour, by holding as such, the Court motivated that after Mulindahabi Fidèle passed the job examination, he concluded an employment contract with RECO/RWASCO on 27/11/2009,which included a probation period and apart from that contract he does not RWANDA LAW REPORTS 26

## Page 240

produce other appointment letter to EWSA, so that it can be relied upon to confirm that he was governed by the general statutes for the public service. [19] The Court opines that even if the court had ruled on the case of which it lacks jurisdiction, it should not be considered as fraud; instead Mulindahabi Fidèle should have contested it through other remedies provided for by the law. b. Determining the fact that some judges did not withdraw from the case in spite of the conflict they had with Mulindahabi constitutes fraud. [20] Mulindahabi alleges that the quorum of the judges which heard the case included a judge called Mukandamage Marie Josée who was among the judges who made up a quorum which heard another case he had with ATRACO, which quorum he reported to the Senate and that issue is still pending, thus that judge had a hand in his loss of the case as a way of revenge against him. [21] Advocate Rusanganwa Jean Bosco and Advocate Iyamuremye Maurice representing WASAC and REG respectively state that the statements of Mulindahabi lack merit, because if there was a judge he was suspicious of, he should have recused her, but he should not use it as a ground for injustice. THE VIEW OF THE COURT [22] Article 171 of the Organic Law N°51/2008 of 09/09/2008 determining the organisation, functioning and jurisdiction of Courts as amended to date provides for the MULINDAHABI v. ENERGY, WATER AND SANITATION AUTHORITY (EWSA) Ltd 27

## Page 241

grounds of recusal of the judge, litera 3 provides that where one of the party demonstrates that there exists hatred between the judge and one of the parties to the proceedings, has the right to recuse him/her. [23] The Court finds that Mulindahabi Fidèle alleges that there were judges he had conflicts with, and yet he did not invoke the right of recusing them from the case, which right he is entitled to by law, therefore he cannot claim that it was fraud, thus it cannot be a ground for the review of the Judgment RADA0015/13/CS. c. Whether the fact that one of the judges who took part in the adjudication of the case do not sign on the pronouncement copy constitutes fraud. [24] Mulindahabi Fidèle claims that among the judges who signed on the copy of the judgment of which he is applying for review, there is one called Rugabirwa Ruben who was absent during its pronouncement, he finds all those constituting fraud provided for by article 186(1º) of the Law Nº21/2012 of 14/06/2012 mentioned above. [25] The counsel for WASAC argues that this ground lacks merit, because the judgment was pronounced in accordance with the provisions of the laws: article 148 of the Law Nº21/2012 of 14/06/2012 relating to the civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure, in particular. THE OPINION OF THE COURT [26] Article 148 of the Law Nº21/2012 of 14/06/2012 relating to the civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure, RWANDA LAW REPORTS 28

## Page 242

provides that “Every judgment shall be pronounced in the presence of the judge or judges who rendered it and should be written thoroughly. However, if one or some of the judges who took part in the deliberations and signed on the draft judgment are absent on the date of pronouncement, it shall not hinder its pronouncement.by one judge or those available who tried it…”. [27] The case file of the Judgment RADA0015/13/CS for which review is being requested, contains a pronouncement copy of November 08, 2013 which indicates that it was pronounced by two judges assisted by the Court registrar, in the absence of one judge due to other court duties and it was pronounced in the presence of Mulindahabi Fidèle as he also signed on it, whereas the draft judgement, indicates that it was deliberated by those three judges as they all signed on it. [28] Regarding the issue of the judge who put his signature on the draft judgment but was absent during its pronouncement, the Court finds that it is permitted that the pronouncement is carried out by one or two judges who took part in the deliberations in case one or some of the judges are absent as provided for by the aforementioned article 148. Therefore there is no fraud committed by those judges as alleged by Mulindahabi Fidèle, because what was done is legally allowed. Therefore this does not constitute a ground for review which are provided for in the aforementioned article 186(1o) of the Law N°21/2012 of 14/06/2012. 3. Whether the fact that Mulindahabi Fidèle was considered as a contractual staff instead of a public servant without considering the rulings of the judgment RAD0214/HC/KIG of Kabera Pierre Claver vs RECO-RWASCO constitutes fraud and confusion of the facts. MULINDAHABI v. ENERGY, WATER AND SANITATION AUTHORITY (EWSA) Ltd 29

## Page 243

[29] Mulindahabi Fidèle argues that paragraph 17 of the judgment he seeks to be reviewed contains a miscarriage of justice, because the Court held that there are contractual staff in EWSA which is not true, well as in paragraph 16 the Court based on the appointment letter, whereby it held that he did not have an appointment letter for the post he was holding, while EWSA had stated that all employees who were recruited had to sign an employment contract, which means that they were not given appointment letters. He further argues that the Court held that he was a contractual staff moreover the case file contains a job advertisement published by EWSA pursuant to the Presidential Order No37/01 of 30/8/2004 on terms of recruitment into the public service, because both Laws; Law no 44/2008 of 09/09/2008 instituting RECO-RWASCO (article 19) and Law no 43/2010 of 07/12/2010 instituting EWSA, provide that all employees are governed by the statute for the public service. Therefore he finds that he would not be the only one to be governed by the employment contract while others were governed by the statutes for the public service, and if it at all was the case, it would be a violation of the Constitution which provides for the equality before the law. [30] Mulindahabi Fidèle furthermore argues that pursuant to article 186, litera 1 and 6 of the Law N°21/2012 of 14/06/2012 mentioned above, there was fraud and confusion of the facts because the court disregarded the statements of EWSA of January 01, 2013 in which it explained that Ndayisaba Ernest was on the list of the employees governed by the statutes for public service, it also disregarded the Judgment RAD0214/HC/KIG in which Kabera Pierre Claver was awarded damages and reinstated in service. He additionally states that the Court was silent on the judgment which was submitted as an RWANDA LAW REPORTS 30

## Page 244

element of evidence demonstrating that Ndayisaba Ernest and even all the employees including the drivers, security guards and cleaners were governed by the statutes for public service even though they signed the contracts; it was also silent on his letter of October 29, 2012. It also disregarded the fact that as was his case, no employee got the appointment letter, in addition to that the statement of EWSA in the course of the hearing of October 29, 2012 (on page 2) whereby it stated that every new employee had to sign a contract depending on the structure in place, that means the appointment letter was not necessary, therefore he finds all those constituting fraud and confusion of the facts. [31] Furthermore, Mulindahabi Fidèle argues that the Court held that he was a contractual staff which is not true because the procedures used during his recruitment which were advertised by EWSA on its website demonstrate that he was governed by the statutes for public service as its indicated on the website http//www.ewasa.rw/recruitmentpolicy.html, he also raised it during the hearing, whereby he submitted that he bases on Presidential Order No37/01 of 30/8/2004 on terms of recruitment into the public service. The fact that he raised it during the hearing of the case RADA0015/13/CS and the Court disregarded it constitutes fraud; therefore he finds that the court should base on article 186, litera 3 and admit his application for review. [32] Counsel Rusanganwa argues that among the grounds advanced by Mulindahabi Fidèle includes the one for disregarding the statements made during the hearing, disregarding the objection raised and also the one relating to the judgment of Kabera Pierre Claver, but he does not demonstrate MULINDAHABI v. ENERGY, WATER AND SANITATION AUTHORITY (EWSA) Ltd 31

## Page 245

the fraud committed during the hearing which he became aware of after the rendering of that judgment. The Counsel finds that there was no fraud committed and if he is arguing that there were some issues which were disregarded by the Court he should not alter to allege that he became aware of them after the rendering of the judgment. THE OPINION OF THE COURT [33] Article 186, litera 1o and 6o of the Law Nº21/2012 of 14/06/2016 mentioned above, provides that an application for review can be made due (1o) there was fraud that had effects on the judgment and it was unknown to the losing party during the course of the proceedings or (6o) if, during the hearing, there were errors committed based on confusion about facts or basing on a inexistent law. [34] The documents in the case file also demonstrate that in judgment RADA0015/13/CS (see page 3), the court examined whether it was a miscarriage of justice in holding that Mulindahabi Fidèle was governed by the statutes for the public service, and in paragraph 14 (on page 4) it motivated that Mulindahabi Fidèle became an employee of RECO-RWASCO (which became EWSA and recently divided into WASAC and REG), after passing the examination as stated also by Mulindahabi Fidèle himself. [35] The documents in the case file also demonstrate that the court motivated that on November 17, 2009, Mulindahabi Fidèle concluded an employment contract with RECO RWASCO which included a six month probation period, and apart from that contract he presented no other instrument RWANDA LAW REPORTS 32

## Page 246

appointing him to EWSA, so that it can be relied upon to confirm that he was governed by the statutes for public service, in paragraph 15, the Court concluded that it implies that Mulindahabi Fidèle was governed by the Law Nº13/2009 of 27/5/2009 regulating labour in Rwanda in accordance with the provisions of the second article of that Law which governs labour relations between workers and employers (…) as per contract. [36] The Court finds that Mulindahabi Fidèle should not allege that it was fraud committed in the Judgment RADA0015/13/CS, when the Court motivated why he was governed by the employment contract instead of the general statutes for the public service, because not being contented with the Court’s decision is not an indication of fraud committed or confusion of the fact which are provided for as grounds of application for review by article 186, litera 1º and 6º of the Law Nº21/2012 of 14/06/2012. [37] Regarding the case RAD0214/HC/KIG between Kabera Pierre Claver and EWSA which Mulindahabi Fidèle alleges that it was not considered by the Court despite being of the same nature with his, the Court finds the issues relating to that case were addressed in paragraph [29] of the judgment for which the review was requested , whereby Mulindahabi Fidèle relied on it during the hearing in which he requested the Court to be reinstated, and in paragraph [31], the Court responded by holding that since it has already held that Mulindahabi Fidèle was dismissed during the probation period on the grounds including the one relating to his performance, it has no basis on which to rely the examination of the issue regarding the employment reinstatement. Therefore, that element of evidence MULINDAHABI v. ENERGY, WATER AND SANITATION AUTHORITY (EWSA) Ltd 33

## Page 247

was not disregarded as he alleges, thus it cannot be a basis for the review of the Judgment RADA0015/13/CS, on the ground that there was evidence in the case file which the Court did not notice. 4. Whether the statement of Mulindahabi that the Court ruled that he should have been notified of the fault he committed without awarding him damages for libel, constitutes confusion about facts and fraud. [38] Mulindahabi alleges that the dismissal letter contains two committed misconducts, but the Court held that he should have been notified of one of the misconducts (see the minute of the judgment [paragraph 27]). He further states that although the Court did not hold it directly, there is another misconduct it held that he was not supposed to be notified of [paragraph 26], thus in his view, the different treatment of those misconducts, constitutes fraud. The fact that the Court did not annul the dismissal decision whereas it ruled that it violates article 18 paragraph 3 of the Constitution of Rwanda, demonstrates confusion about the facts, which also is the same case for not having been awarded damages for libel and even the fact that the court was silent on that issue despite the dismissal letter containing libellous statements which impede him from getting employed. [39] Advocate Rusanganwa argues that he was awarded damages equivalent to three months’ salary for not being notified of the fault he committed, thus he finds that it does not constitute a new ground. He further submits that for the dismissal letter containing libellous statements which impedes him from getting employed elsewhere, it does not constitute RWANDA LAW REPORTS 34

## Page 248

fraud because it is upon the discretion of the court to decide whether awarding damages is necessary or not. [40] Advocate Iyamuremye argues that article 186(6o) of the Law N°21/2012 of 14/06/2012 relates to confusion of the facts but Mulindahabi Fidèle does not prove that the Court confused the facts and his statements does not reveal a new ground, instead he explained how the parties but not the Court confused the fact, therefore he prays that his claim be rejected. THE OPINION OF THE COURT. [41] Article 186(6°) of the Law Nº21/2012 of 14/06/2016 mentioned above provides that an application for review can be made if during the hearing, there were errors committed based on confusion about facts or basing on inexistent law. [42] The documents in the case file of the judgment for which the review is being sought [par.23-28], the Court found that the Law No13/2009 of 27/05/2009 regulating labour in Rwanda is silent on the issues relating to the termination of the employment contract during the probation period, except the dismissal notice provided for in article 27, whereby it states that no dismissal notice in case the termination is done during the probation period, the Court relied on the legal doctrine which states that the period of probation is intended for the employer to evaluate the ability and capacity of the employee and the enable the latter to find out if the employment is appropriate for him/her, therefore the court motivated that even EWSA acknowledges that the fault committed by Mulindahabi of instigating feud among the departments should have been notified to him, so that he defends himself even though the law MULINDAHABI v. ENERGY, WATER AND SANITATION AUTHORITY (EWSA) Ltd 35

## Page 249

regulating labour does not provide for it because article 18 of the Constitution of Rwanda provides that no decision can be made against someone without him/her defending her/him against the causes of the charges and basing on that the Court consequently awarded him damages. [43] The Court finds that Mulindahabi Fidèle was awarded the aforementioned damages originating from not being notified of the fault he committed so that he defends himself against it, albeit he was still on probation. Regarding the issue of not being awarded damages for libel the Court finds that it is not a ground for review because it is not provided for by article 186(6o) of the Law Nº21/2012 of 14/06/2016 mentioned above. Therefore all those motivations indicate that there was neither fraud nor confusion of the facts. [44] As motivated above, the Court finds none of the grounds submitted by Mulindahabi Fidèle for the review of the Judgment RADA0015/13/CS corresponds with those provided for by article 186 of the Law Nº21/2012 of 14/06/2012 relating to the civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure, therefore his application for review of that judgment is hereby rejected. III. THE DECISION OF THE COURT [45] Decides that the application for the review of the Judgment RADA0015/13/CS rendered on 08/10/2013 by the Supreme Court applied by Mulindahabi Fidèle is rejected. [46] Orders Mulindahabi Fidèle to pay the court fees equivalent to 100,000Frw. RWANDA LAW REPORTS 36

## Page 250

CASES IN MERITS

## Page 252

ADMINISTRATIVE CASE

## Page 254

NSHUNGUYINKA v. RWANDA SOCIAL SECURITY BOARD (RSSB) [Rwanda SUPREME COURT – RADA0066/12/CS (Mutashya, P.J., Gatete and Mukamulisa, J.) July 22, 2014] Administrative procedure – Admissibility of the claim – Alteration of the claim on the appellate level – Replacement of the institution in the course of the lawsuit – It is not considered as alteration of the claim on the appellate level, when an institution which replaced the one sued on the first instance is summoned on the appellate level. Administrative law – Civil service – Dismissal – The taking of the oath by the public servant – The dismissal of an employee due to refusal of taking the oath cannot be considered as a dismissal for employment misconduct obliging the employer to seek the opinion of the public service commission prior to dismissal because it is the oath which bestows him the status of civil servant – Law N°22/2002 of 09/07/2002 on general statutes for Rwanda public service, article 29. Administrative law – Freedom of belief – No one should rely on the freedom of belief to derogate from the laws and regulations of the state, therefore the appellant should have complied with the directive of taking oath for civil servants – The Constitution of the Republic of Rwanda of 04 June 2003 as amended up to date, article 33. Facts: Nshunguyinka sued Caisse Sociale du Rwanda (CSR) which became Rwanda Social Security Board (RSSB) in the High Court requesting for the annulment of the dismissal 41

## Page 255

decision taken against him and claiming for related damages. The Court found that although CSR dismissed him without first seeking the opinion of the Public Service Commission, he was dismissed for an appropriate ground because he failed to comply with the directive of taking oath by holding the National Flag while he was a civil servant governed by the general statutes for the public service, thus it confirmed the decision taken against him. Nshunguyinka appealed to the Supreme Court claiming that he is not pertained to the directive of taking the oath because it was not in place prior to his appointment and moreover he was a contractual staff, therefore he had no obligation to do so. He finds that dismissal contrary to the Constitution because he could not do something contrary to his belief, given that the right to freedom of religion and belief is inviolable. He adds that he should have taken the oath holding the Bible as required by his religion and he was dismissed without first consulting the Public Service Commission. In the course of the hearing, RSSB raised a preliminary objection for inadmissibility of the claim on the ground that the plaintiff sued Caisse Sociale du Rwanda (CSR) which is no longer in existence because it was replaced by RSSB, thus it argues that in case CSR was sued and on the appeal RSSB was mentioned, then it would be tantamount to alteration of the claim on the appeal level. In regard to that objection, Nshunguyinka rebuts that CSR was sued on the first instance and the fact that it was replaced by RSSB, implies that it also took over the obligations of CSR, thus there was no change of claim. RWANDA LAW REPORTS 42

## Page 256

RSSB raised another objection arguing that the claim lodged is not an administrative one rather a labour one because it relates to the termination of employment contract. Nshunguyinka argues that the claim filed on the first instance was aimed at the annulment of the administrative decision, and that is how it should be regarded on the appellate level. RSSB also filed a cross appeal claiming for damages for vexatious litigation on both levels. In his defence, Nshunguyinka argues that those damages should not be awarded because its counsel is a public servant who is paid every month for pleading on its behalf, and it did not incur any additional cost. Held: 1. It is not considered as alteration of the claim on the appellate level, when an institution which replaced the one sued on the first instance is summoned on the appellate level. Therefore the fact that on the first instance CSR was sued and on the appellate level RSSB which replaced it was summoned is not changing the claim on the appellate level. 2. The decision requested to be annulled was taken as an administrative one with damages thereto. Therefore the administrative court is the one with jurisdiction. 3. The dismissal of the employee due to refusal of taking the oath cannot be considered as a dismissal for the employment misconduct to oblige the employer to prior seek the opinion of the public service commission because it is the oath which bestows him the status civil servant. 4. No one should rely on the freedom of belief to derogate from the laws and regulations of the state, therefore the appellant NSHUNGUYINKA v. RWANDA SOCIAL SECURITY BOARD (RSSB) 43

## Page 257

should have complied with the directive of taking oath for civil servants. 5. Even though counsel for the respondent forewent other activities for these lawsuits, the appellant had a right to seek redress through all the legally provided remedies at his disposal, thus his appeal was not a vexatious action. Appeal lacks merit; Cross appeal lacks merit; Court fees to the appellant. Statutes and statutory instruments referred to: The Constitution of the Republic of Rwanda of 04 June 2003 as amended up to date, article 33. Organic Law No51/2008 of 09/09/2008 determining the organisation, functioning and jurisdiction of Courts as amended to date, article 93. Law N°22/2002 of 09/07/2002 on general statutes for Rwanda public service, article 29. No cases referred to. Judgment I. BRIEF BACKGROUND OF THE CASE [1] This case begun in the High Court, whereby Nshunguyinka sued RSSB claiming for the annulment of the dismissal decision taken against him and requesting for the RWANDA LAW REPORTS 44

## Page 258

related damages. The Court found his claim without merit on the ground that Nshunguyinka as an employee governed by the general statute for public service had to comply with the directives of taking the oath. Thus the Court held that his non- compliance constituted a ground for his dismissal, therefore it found the decision taken against him fair. [2] It further found that Nshunguyinka had to comply with the directives of his employer as provided for by article 84 of the general statutes for public service and take the oath holding the National Flag as provided for by article 19 of the Law N°34/2008 of 08/08/2008 on characteristics, description, ceremonial and respect of the National Flag instead of holding the Bible as he desired. [3] That Court also found that even though RSSB dismissed Nshunguyinka without first seeking the opinion of the Public Service Commission as provided by article 93 of the general statutes for the public service but the commission later verified and found that he was dismissed on appropriate grounds and in compliance with the laws (article 28, 29 and 120 of the General Statute for Public Service). [4] Nshunguyinka appealed to the Supreme Court, substantially claiming that he was not pertained to the directives of taking oath because it was not in place prior to his appointment and also his employer dismissed him without first consulting with the Public Service Commission. [5] The hearing was held in public on June 17, 2014, Nshunguyinka assisted by Counsel Nkurunziza François- Xavier, while RSSB, the former CSR represented by Counsel Kamonyo Rugaba Serge. NSHUNGUYINKA v. RWANDA SOCIAL SECURITY BOARD (RSSB) 45

## Page 259

II. ANALYSIS OF LEGAL ISSUES The preliminary objection for inadmissibility of the claim on the ground that the Caisse Sociale du Rwanda (CSR) which was sued is no longer in existence. [6] Kamonyo, the counsel for RSSB raised an objection on the ground that CSR was sued despite the existence of the law which terminated and replaced it with RSSB. He explains that since it was CSR which was sued while on the appeal level it is RSSB which is mentioned, this is tantamount to alteration of the claim in violation of the provisions of article 4 of the Law N°21/2012 of 14/06/2012 relating to the civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure. [7] Nkurunziza, the counsel for Nshunguyinka adduces that the raised objection lacks merit because if CRS which was sued on the first instance, was replaced by RSSB, it implies that it also took over all of its obligations. He goes further to state that there was no alteration of the claim, and if RSSB replaced CSR, then RSSB should be recorded as the defendant. THE VIEW OF THE COURT [8] The Court overrules the raised objection on the ground that the defendant on the first instance was CSR which was by then governed by the Law Nº60/2008 of 10/09/2008 which was replaced by RSSB instituted by the Law Nº45/2010 of 14/12/2010, that being the case, it is obvious that at the time of lodging the appeal, CSR was recorded as the defendant which was sued on the first instance, therefore if within that period, CSR was replaced by RSSB, the latter is supposed to take over RWANDA LAW REPORTS 46

## Page 260

this case. Thus the claim was not altered on the appellate level as alleged by counsel for RSSB, and it’s also understandable that since CSR was summoned on the appellate level, then this case concerns RSSB which replaced it. Regarding the objection of this case being classified as an administrative case while the gist of action being the termination of an employment contract. [9] Counsel Kamonyo explains that on the first instance he demonstrated that this was not an administrative claim rather a labour one because it relates to the employment contract, but the Judge did not rule on it. [10] Counsel Nkurunziza explains that the claim filed on the first instance was aimed at the annulment of the administrative decision, and that is how it should be admitted on the appellate level. THE VIEW OF THE COURT [11] The Court overrules the objection raised on the ground that the decision requested to be annulled was taken as an administrative one as provided for by article 93(2o) of the Organic Law N°51/2008 of 09/09/2008 determining the organisation, functioning and jurisdiction of Courts as amended to date, with damages resulting from its effect attached to it. Whether the dismissal of Nshunguyinka Eric was unfair. [12] Nkurunziza, counsel for Nshunguyinka argues that his client was not governed by the general statutes for public NSHUNGUYINKA v. RWANDA SOCIAL SECURITY BOARD (RSSB) 47

## Page 261

service because he was a contractual staff, thus he was under no obligation to take the oath. [13] He goes on to explain that Nshunguyinka was dismissed without first seeking the opinion of the Public Service Commission, his dismissal was in violation of human rights because it was premised on his failure to take the oath by holding the National Flag, which according to him violates the Constitution, because he could not carry out something contrary to his beliefs. He further argues that the freedom to religion and it’s belief is an inviolable right, for those grounds he should not have been dismissed for not taking the oath holding the National Flag because he could have taken the oath holding the Bible as he had wished because that is what his beliefs dictate. [14] Kamonyo, the counsel for RSSB argues that the appointment letter issued to Nshunguyinka does not indicate that he was a contractual staff. He explains that in the documents submitted to the Court, he demonstrated that there are laws which require the civil servants to take the oath on their appointment. He adds on that there is also the directive of the Minister of Public Service and labour which regulates the procedure of taking the oath and which Nshunguyinka was requested to comply with and he refused, thus he finds that he was justly dismissed. THE VIEW OF THE COURT [15] The Court finds that there is a letter Nº9.00/2022/RI/umc dated May 27, 2010, which CSR wrote to Nshunguyinka Eric informing him that he has been offered a job as professional officer beginning from June 01, 2010, which implies that it is RWANDA LAW REPORTS 48

## Page 262

one of the posts occupied by public servant governed by the general statutes for public service and the attached terms of employment which was signed by both parties on June 01, 2010, providing in its article 3 for a probation period of 6 months which could only be extended once. The Court finds therefore the allegation that Nshunguyinka was a contractual staff with no ground. [16] The first paragraph of article one of the Constitution of the Republic of Rwanda of 04/06/2003 as amended up to date provides that Rwanda is a secular state. [17] Article 29 of the Law Nº22/2002 of 09/07/2002 on general statutes for Rwanda public service which was in place at the time of Nshunguyinka’s dismissal provided that before taking office, every Government employee takes the oath before the competent authority. [18] The Court finds that there are also letters Nº2119.19.19/19 dated August 16, 2010 and Nº035/19.23 dated April 05, 2011, which the Minister of public service and labour wrote to the administrators of all public institutions directing the public servants to take the oath. It also instructed those who did not prior take it for various reasons to do so, and sanctions including dismissal by the competent authority after being given a notice of fifteen days be taken against those who fail to comply. [19] The Court also finds that there is another letter Nº9.00/1661/RI/umc dated April 27, 2011, which CSR wrote to Nshunguyinka demanding for explanations why he did not take the oath and was given 15 days of notice to have performed that ceremony, on May 03, 2011 Nshunguyinka replied that he did NSHUNGUYINKA v. RWANDA SOCIAL SECURITY BOARD (RSSB) 49

## Page 263

not refuse to take the oath but he was reluctant to comply, consequently pursuant to the directive of the Minister of public service and labour, CSR issued to him a dismissal letter Nº9.00/1721/R.I/umc on May 04, 2011 for his refusal to comply with the ministerial directive. [20] The Court finds that since Nshunguyinka was dismissed for the refusal to take the oath should not be considered as an employment misconduct for the CSR to first seek the opinion of the Public Service Commission prior to dismissing him, because his oath was the one supposed to bestow to him the status of being governed by the general statutes for public service as provided for by article 19 of the Law N°34/2008 of 08/08/2008 mentioned above. And he cannot use the pretext that he was an existing employee of CSR for him not to comply with the directive of the Minister of public service and labour which provided that even the employees already in service who did not take the oath should do so, and they should be dismissed in case they fail to comply. [21] The Court also finds that Nshunguyinka cannot hide himself behind the pretext of beliefs to refuse to take the oath holding the National Flag alleging that there was violation of human right since Rwanda is a secular state as demonstrated above, for those reasons he had to take the oath as provided by article 13 of the Law Nº34/2008 of 08/08/2008 on characteristics, description, ceremonial and respect of the National Flag which provides that those in the executive, legislative and judiciary who are provided by the law and others which the law compels take the oath holding the National Flag. [22] Pursuant to the above motivations, the freedom to belief which is also ingrained by article 33 of the Constitution of RWANDA LAW REPORTS 50

## Page 264

Rwanda should not be used as pretext to not comply with the laws and regulations of the state. Regarding the cross appeal of RSSB [23] The counsel for RSSB adduces that on the first instance it was only awarded 200,000Frw, but he finds that his client is still being dragged into unnecessary lawsuits, for that it should be awarded 500,000Frw on both instances. [24] The counsel for Nshunguyinka argues that this ground of cross appeal has no merit, because counsel for RSSB is a public servant for which he is paid every month, he finds that he did not cost RSSB any additional expenses. [25] The Court finds that even though the counsel for RSSB had to forego other activities for these lawsuits, Nshunguyinka who thought that he was prejudiced had a right to seek redress through all the legally provided remedies at his disposal, henceforth he seized the Courts of law after lodging an administrative appeal to the authority which took the decision to dismiss him, therefore his appeal was not a vexatious action, in accordance to that the cross appeal has no merit. III. THE DECISION OF THE COURT [26] Holds that the appeal of Nshunguyinka Eric lacks merit; [27] Holds that the cross appeal of Rwanda Social Security Board also lacks merit; [28] Orders Nshunguyinka Eric to pay court fees equivalent to 50,300Frw; NSHUNGUYINKA v. RWANDA SOCIAL SECURITY BOARD (RSSB) 51

## Page 265

[29] Sustains the rulings of the judgment RAD0092/11/HC/KIG.

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 52

## Page 266

CIVIL CASES

## Page 268

KANYANJA ET AL v. MUKANTABANA ET AL [Rwanda SUPREME COURT – RCAA0002/13/CS (Rugege, P.J., Mugenzi and Kanyange, J.) September 25, 2005] Family law – Testament – Joint ownership – Termination of joint ownership – An heir must enjoy the full right of getting out of the joint ownership – Law N°22/99 of 12/11/1999 supplement book one of the civil code and to institute part five regarding matrimonial regimes, liberalities and successions, articles 46, 56 and 91. Evidence law – Burden of proof – A party alleging to be discharged from an obligation that has been accomplished must prove that the obligation no longer exists – Law N°21/2012 of 14/06/2012 relating to the civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure, article 9(2). Damages – Pecuniary damages – The pecuniary damages are not awarded in Court’s discretion when they are composed of the amounts which can be calculated. Civil procedure – Appeal – New claim – At appeal level a new claim is inadmissible – Law N°21/2012 of 14/06/2012 relating to the civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure, article 168. Facts: Buhiga made a testament whereby he determined how his estate will be apportioned among his successors. However, he declared that it should not be sold outside his successors. The latter filed a claim at Intermediate Court stating that the 55

## Page 269

testament was not followed, and requested for the termination of indivision of estate as well as the sharing of other estates which are not mentioned in the testament. The Court held that the whole estate mentioned in the testament made by the de cujus as well as the one unmentioned in it comprised of eucalyptus woodland, the piece of land both located at Cyarwa Sumo and seven cows and their offspring should be apportioned among persons mentioned in the testament, those who passed away being represented by their children. It further declared that there should be a sale of the estate for execution of the judgment, because in case no one of the successors is able to offer a convened price, this is not likely to prevent its acquisition by a third party. It decided in addition that the counsel fees and moral damages should be deducted from the estate. Mukantabana, Kanyanja and Nibarere appealed to the High Court which ruled that the appeal of Kanyanja and Nibarere lacks merit while that of Mukantabana and the cross appeal of Kabanyana has merit in part. The Court ordered Kanyanja and Nibarere pay 200,000,000Frw determined in its discretion from the lease of the houses to the successors of Buhiga which they had to administer as well as to jointly pay counsel fees and moral damages from their own assets. Kanyanja and Nibarere appealed to the Supreme Court alleging that the rulings of the previous Courts are contrary to the testament, that the Court ordered them to pay the amount of money without basis given that the pecuniary damages rely on relevant evidence. They also state that the Court disregarded that under Rwandan law the burden of proof lies on the plaintiff. RWANDA LAW REPORTS 56

## Page 270

The respondents argued that they should not be forced to stay into the indivision of assets, since they have the right on estate and therefore it is impossible to terminate the indivision without selling, the reason why in case none of the family members has got sufficient money, the estate should be purchased by third parties. Concerning the fact that burden of proof lies on the plaintiff, they argue that the Court has the discretion to force the party who holds evidence to produce it in order for the truth to be known, the reason why Kanyanja and Nibarere are ordered to produce the evidence of the fulfilment of their obligation. The respondents continue arguing that the appellants dragged them into lawsuits; therefore they must be held liable for various damages. Held: 1. The heir must enjoy the full right, consequently there must be the termination of the indivision and this will not be possible without selling. Therefore in order to comply with the will of Buhiga, the pre-emption right to the sale must be given to the family members, but in case they would not be able to purchase, it should be done by the non-family members of Buhiga; thus, this is not in contradiction of the testament rather, its enforcement. 2. A party alleging to be discharged from an obligation that has been established must prove that the obligation no longer exists. Failure to do so, the other party wins the case. Therefore Kanyanja and Nibarere must prove the way they administered the estate. 3. The pecuniary damages should not be awarded in the Court discretion when they are composed of the revenue which should KANYANJA ET AL v. MUKANTABANA ET AL 57

## Page 271

be calculated. Therefore revenues accrued from rent of the known houses can be calculated by assessing the income and expenses. 4. The fact that those who were ordered to pay the damages are not the ones who filed a claim, do not prevent them to be charged it in case the claimants resorted to the Courts of law in order to get the justice. 5. At appeal level the new claim is inadmissible. Therefore the fact that the claim for the interests generated from the cattle left by Buhiga was not filed to the previous court, it cannot be admitted in this court. Appeal has merit in part; Cross appeal has merit in part; Appellants are ordered to jointly pay the court fees. Statutes and statutory instruments referred to: Law N°22/99 of 12/11/1999 supplement book one of the civil code and to institute part five regarding matrimonial regimes, liberalities and successions, articles 46, 56 and 91. Law N°21/2012 of 14/06/2012 relating to the civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure, articles 9(2) and 168. Law Nº42/1888 of 27/10/1988 relating to contracts or obligations, article 258. No case referred to.

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 58

## Page 272

Judgment I. BRIEF BACKGROUND OF THE CASE [1] Buhiga Arcade left a testament, thereafter some of the heirs filed the claim to the Court stating that contents of that testament was not enforced, praying for the exit from the co ownership and sharing of assets which are not included in the testament. [2] On 29 February 2012, the Intermediate Court of Huye rendered the judgment RC0173/010/TGI/HYE whereby it held that the whole estate left by Buhiga Arcade should be shared, therefore that in the course of execution of the judgment the estate mentioned in the testament made on 07 August 2000 by Buhiga as well as those not mentioned in the will including eucalyptus forest located at Cyarwa Sumo, the land located at Cyarwa Sumo, seven cows and their offspring should be apportioned among seven persons as they are mentioned in the testament, and those who passed away shall be represented by their children. It held in addition that in case one of the successors fails to pay the agreed price there will be a sale of the estate to a third party. Concerning aforementioned estate which is not indicated in the testament, the Court ordered that it should be apportioned among the successors of Buhiga through the sale in the same procedure as of bequeath. [3] Furthermore, the Court ordered that Uwineza Claire and Muhimpundu Clarisse must be given 2,000,000Frw of counsel fees and 3,000,000Frw in moral damages and that amount must be deducted from the estate left by Buhiga because the KANYANJA ET AL v. MUKANTABANA ET AL 59

## Page 273

successors of Buhiga continues to complicate the situation by refusing the termination of the indivision of the assets which led them to be dragged into the lawsuits. [4] Concerning the income generated by the estate, it found that plaintiffs failed to produce its evidence while defendants argue that the money was used in term of renovating and managing the estate. [5] Mukantabana Josepha, Kanyanja Emilienne and Nibarere Costasie appealed against that judgment to the High Court, Nyanza chamber, which on 18 December 2012 rendered the judgment RCA0094/12/HC/NYA in which it ruled that the appeal lodged by Kanyanja and Nibarere has no merit; the appeal of Mukantabana and the cross appeal of Kabanyana have merit in part. [6] It ordered Kanyanja and Nibarere to give 200,000,000Frw generated from the rent of houses they had to manage within 12 years to the successors of Buhiga which are awarded in the discretion of the Court, each one having to pay 100,000,000Frw. It ordered them to jointly pay 2,000,000Frw of the counsel fees and 3,000,000Frw in moral damages to Uwineza Claire and Muhimpundu Clarisse, implying that everyone should pay 2,500,000Frw deducted from their own assets. [7] Kanyanja Emilienne and Nibarere Costasie appealed to the Supreme Court stating that the rulings of the previous Courts are contrary to the testament and that the Court ordered them to pay 200,000,000Frw without basis. Furthermore, they argue that the Court declared that appellants deprived others of the estate while they are not the only ones in charge of its RWANDA LAW REPORTS 60

## Page 274

administration, and they were ordered to pay damages for dragging them into lawsuits while they are not the ones who initiated the claim. [8] The case was heard for the first time on 18 March 2014, Kanyanja and Nibarere were represented by Counsel Niyomugabo Christophe and Munyaneza G. Pascal, Kabanyana Charlotte by Counsel Habinshuti Yves, Rugomwa Fidèle, succession Kanyumba Margueritte by Counsel Ndagijimana Augustin, succession Hategekimana Thacien and Mbarushimana François were summoned to unknown address and the case was heard by default. [9] It was examined in limine litis the objection raised by counsel Habinshuti and Ndagijimana which relies on the provision of article 28 of the Organic Law Nº03/2012/OL of 13/06/2012 determining the organization, functioning and jurisdiction of the Supreme Court because they find that the appellants lost the case on the similar grounds before the previous Courts. The Court held that the objection lacks merit, therefore, the hearing continued by examining the grounds of appeal. II. ANALYSIS OF LEGAL ISSUES 1. Whether the decisions of the previous Courts were contrary to the testament. [10] The Counsel for Kanyanja and Nibarere states that the rulings of the previous Courts are contrary to the testament and also to the claim they submitted. The Counsel explains that Buhiga Arcade planed how the sharing will be conducted among his successors whereby he declared that the bequeath KANYANJA ET AL v. MUKANTABANA ET AL 61

## Page 275

will not be sold to the third person, however the High Court sustained the ruling of the Intermediate Court which ruled that in term of sharing of the estate there will be the sale and in case one of the successors fails to pay the agreed amount, there will be no obstruction against the third person to buy it, this implying that the testament was invalidated while no party prayed for it, rather, they all agreed upon the testament therefore the subject matter concerning the noncompliance of its provisions. [11] The counsel argues that in case anyone wishes to withdraw from the co-ownership of estate, it would be done after carrying out an inventory of the estate in order to determine everyone’s share, the one who withdraws from it, being obliged to sale his/her share to the family members as provided by the testament. [12] Habinshuti, the counsel for Kabanyana (the latter represents her children) states that they should not be forced to stay in the co-ownership of the estate as it is provided for by article 33 of the civil code book III, and that basing on article 46 of Law regarding matrimonial regimes, liberalities and successions, his clients have the right on the bequeath, which could be divided basing on the provision of article 91 of the aforementioned Law according to the conducted valuation. He adds that in case none of the family members raises the agreed amount, the estate must be sold to a third person. He continues arguing that Kabanyana should be given a share of 1/7 of the estate indicated by the valuation, as well as on 909,480,000Frw of rent of the houses left by Buhiga within in the period of 13 years. RWANDA LAW REPORTS 62

## Page 276

[13] Ndagijimana, the Counsel for Mukantabana Josepha and successors of Kanyumba states that the fact that the judge declared that during the sharing of the estate, the third persons may purchase, was because he/she was requested it, given that his clients find that the priority should be given to the best bidder in the family, but if it is otherwise, another person shall be allowed to acquire it. [14] He explains that his clients agree that the testament must be enforced in respect of its clauses which comply with the Law especially the provision of article 29 of Constitution, whereas concerning indivisible estate, it should be sold and the proceeds apportioned among them. Concerning Mbarushimana, the Court should order that he inherits only his father because he is a half- brother to other successors. [15] Rugomwa also argues that for purpose of withdrawing from the co-ownership of assets, he finds that the successors should jointly determine the value of the estate and the family member who wants to withdraw from it should pay the agreed price, without preventing the non-family members who could pay more because all successors benefit from it. THE VIEW OF THE COURT [16] The legal issue of this case is whether there should be a sale in order to withdraw from the joint ownership of bequeath mentioned in the will of Buhiga, and whether it could be bought by the non-members of family of Buhiga. [17] In the testament left by Buhiga, his last wish was that the property left to his family should not be sold, unless some of KANYANJA ET AL v. MUKANTABANA ET AL 63

## Page 277

successors are willing to sale their shares which should be bought by the family members. The Court finds that there are some mentioned in the testament who pray to withdraw from the joint ownership as indicated in the submitted claim, so that they enjoy the full right on their shares, their requests meet the requirements of the provisions of article 46 of Law No22/99 of 12/11/1999 to supplement book one of the civil code and to institute part five regarding matrimonial regimes, liberalities and successions which stipulates that legacy is a patrimony devolved as a donation by the owner while alive and for which the legatee acquires full ownership only after the death of the donor. [18] Parties agree upon the termination of the indivision of assets, but they disagree upon the procedure. Even if this Court admits that the will of the testator shall be executed according to the provision of article 56 of Law No22/99 of 12/11/1999 mentioned above, which provides that a testament is an act by which a person decides on the destination of his/her patrimony after his/her death and fixes provisions of his/her last will, it finds in addition that it should also be considered the wishes of some of the heirs who are worried about the execution of the last will. [19] The Court finds that in order to terminate the indivision of assets left by Buhiga, it is necessary that the estate be sold as it was ruled by the previous judgments especially that this is in conformity with the provision of article 91 of Law No22/99 of 12/11/1999 mentioned above which stipulates that “a property which does not exceed an area of one hectare and any other undivided thing cannot be partitioned. The owners have rather, to agree on the modalities of their sale or exploitation and share RWANDA LAW REPORTS 64

## Page 278

the fruits there from”, this being carried out after the valuation of estate agreed on by all successors. [20] Furthermore, the Court finds that in order to comply with the will of Buhiga, the priority to the sale must be given to members of his family, but due to the concern raised by some of successors that some of them who would not be able to buy, therefore the estate should be bought by the non-family members of Buhiga, otherwise, the termination of indivision of assets would be impossible while the heir must enjoy the full right. [21] The court finds that sustaining the previous holdings which are similar to the rulings of the previous Courts, does not contradict the testament as the appellants allege, rather, it consists of the enforcement of the will, which is also in conformity with the provisions of the law. It is neither ruling ultra petita because the plaintiff claimed for withdrawal from the joint ownership of assets; therefore the ground of appeal lacks merit. 2. Concerning the amount of 200,000,000Frw which the appellants were ordered to pay. [22] The counsel of Kanyanja and Nibarere states that the High Court unlawfully ordered them to pay 200,000,000Frw because the pecuniary damages have to be based on the material evidence. The Counsel alleges in addition that the Court relied on the legal opinions which are contrary to the law because they state that the defendant has the burden of proof whilst article 9 of Law relating to the civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure, provides that the evidence is produced by the plaintiff, therefore the court ruled contrary to the KANYANJA ET AL v. MUKANTABANA ET AL 65

## Page 279

provision of article 6 of the mentioned law which stipulates that legal doctrines shall not be referred to in case they are contrary to the Rwandan law. [23] The counsel alleges further that the High Court held that they deprived others of the estate, however, they were not the only ones who had the responsibility of its administration because the testament provides the family council which includes Mukantabana Josepha; that even in the High Court Rugomwa acknowledged that they were called by the head of family with the purpose of assessing how they should jointly manage the co-owned property but he refused to attend. [24] The Counsel of Kabanyana states that even if article 9 mentioned above requires the defendant to produce evidence of the facts s/he alleges; but in this case, Nibarere was the one who always concluded the rent contracts with the tenant, and according to the information they got the tenants pay between 300,000Frw and 200,000Frw monthly, however the Court would force the one who holds the evidence to produce it in order to establish the truth. The counsel states that basing on information they have, the rent should be amounting to 909,480,000Frw deducted of expenses. [25] The Counsel of Mukantabana and successors of Kanyumba argues that the income generated from rent should be equal to 699,600,000Frw but the judge awarded 200,000,000Frw and that among the evidence produced by their opponents there is neither rent contract nor its income, rather, they only declared the expenses. The Counsel continues to allege that the appellants disregard the provision paragraph two of article 9 mentioned above which compels them to produce RWANDA LAW REPORTS 66

## Page 280

evidence they fulfilled their obligations, and also the doctrines relied on should be linked to the provision of that paragraph. [26] Rugomwa Fidèle also adduces that Kanyanja and Nibarere withheld the estate, furthermore, there was no renovation of the houses as they allege, and some were even closed because of being damaged, therefore, they must be liable for all amount generated from the rent except the expenses for which they possess their evidence. [27] After realising that the litigants do not agree upon the income which was accumulated from the estate, the Court appointed an expert whom they agreed on namely Kigali Consult and Supply Ltd represented by Nsanzimana Anastase and he was tasked with the evaluation of management of the estate left by Buhiga and to establish its income as well as the expenses for managing it since his death. [28] That report indicates that the income accrued from the rent since 2002 till 2004 amounts to 305,610,000Frw that expenses are equal to 212,145,561Frw, as well as other expenses amounting to 2,599,755Frw for which original elements of evidence were not produced. It indicates also that 45,196,754Frw of deposits on the account; therefore the amount which must be handed over by the administrators of the estate is 50,867,440Frw. [29] Counsel Ndagijimana Augustin states that the report of an expert is not true, rather, it should be considered the previous report which demonstrated that the amount the administrators of the estate have to hand over equals 243,139,457Frw. He challenges among others the fact that the number of the tenants reduced over time to the extent that there is a surplus of 12 KANYANJA ET AL v. MUKANTABANA ET AL 67

## Page 281

tenants between two different years while none of the house was excluded; there are also the tenants who paid 47,600,000Frw to the bank account (in 2013 to 2014) while not being on the list of the tenants. In addition to this the report indicates that MTN pays 100,000Frw and 200,000Frw while it is known that it pays 500,000Frw. [30] Concerning the expenses, he states that the report demonstrates that they exceeds the income, and that 52,572,388Frw were spent for renovation of the house, while there are no supporting evidence, and that amount increased to 84,399,228Frw. He finds that the evidence made in 2005 produced by Engineer Byemayire Lambert should not be relied on because no long term contract concerning 52,572,388Frw was demonstrated nor it was not proven the acknowledgement of payment, rather, the available evidence demonstrates that he was remunerated 2,140,000Frw only. [31] Counsel Ndagijimana states in addition that there are the expenses which were not in interest of the family, rather, in the appellants’ interests; that the expenses which his clients recognises amount to 83,436,749Frw comprised of 6,085,700Frw for funeral cost, 31,995,773Frw for taxes, 11,680,000Frw received by successors, 7,494,580Frw for kanyanja’s children school fees, 5,272,540Frw for insurance, 4,902,156Frw for water and electricity, 9,535,000Frw for watchmen, 6,000,000Frw for an expert and 471,000Frw for renovation. [32] Rugomwa Fidèle also argues that the report indicates that there is a lot of money paid for water without demonstrating the tenants who consumed it, that the remuneration of Nibarere RWANDA LAW REPORTS 68

## Page 282

is not clear because she does not prove what she did, and she was appointed by Kanyanja without the consent of others. [33] Counsel Habinshuti Yves representing Kabanyana Charlotte also states that the report of an expert does not establish the truth, rather, estimation; that there are the monthly rents which were not included in the income, whereby he cites the examples of OKAPI CAR, Gahenda Jean Baptiste, RAMA and Uwimana Jeanne. He states in addition that there is 8,860,000Frw of counsel fees which was charged on Succession of Buhiga while they were not spent in its interest because it was not sued nor filed a claim, therefore it should be paid by Kanyanja and Nibarere as their opponents pay themselves the advocates they hire. [34] Furthermore, there is some amount of money which was included among the expenses of a certain year while it was not paid in that year, which implies that it was calculated twice. He cites examples of 36,572,388Frw pretended to have been spent for house renovation in 2003 and was computed again in expenses in the following years, there is also 16,000,000Frw which is considered as expenses in 2003 while it was not spent, and it was computed as such on the day it was released. [35] He continues arguing that there also other amount considered as expenses without providing the evidence, he gives examples of tax paid on rent and property 2004 - 2007, 2009, 2011, school fees for 2006 - 2014, and also there is no explanation for money spent during the years 2008 – 2010 and 9,509,405Frw for water bills of the years 2005 - 2011 does not have relevant explanations, and there is no proof that it was paid. Regarding the 16,632,182Frw for water and electricity bills the expert computed them on the side of succession of KANYANJA ET AL v. MUKANTABANA ET AL 69

## Page 283

Buhiga whilst he explained that the tenants were the ones paying the water and electricity bills. In addition to this, the expert declared that the children of Nkurikiyimana were given child support throughout all months while there is a time when Kanyanja refused to allocate it and they resorted to courts of law. He concludes by stating that the report was made in favour of Nibarere and Kanyanja because the expert reduced the income and increased the expenses, relying on irrelevant evidences. [36] Counsel Munyemana representing Kanyanja and Nibarere states that concerning the income, he agrees with the declaration of the valuation report because he considered the defects which are demonstrated vis a vis to the first report. However, concerning the expenses he argues that he does not agree with the report on the royalties paid for water and electricity bills because it is 23,184,346Frw instead of 16,632,182Frw as demonstrated; that the expenses for renovation of the houses are 87,977,671Frw instead of 84,399,288Frw, whereas the school fees of the children of Nkurikiyimana are 8,140,200Frw instead of 7,494,580Frw. He continues stating that the paid taxes are not equal to 32,765,331Frw as it has been demonstrated by the report rather 33,395,773Frw, and also the expert did not consider the value of 8,500,000Frw used for renovating the ruins located at Cyarwa. [37] Furthermore, he states that the expert should not have rejected the documents of expenses of 2,599,755Frw on the basis that they are not accounting statements while the administrators did not expect the arise of disputes which would lead to an audit, therefore he should have considered the nature and the status of the subject of the audit, as well as the existence RWANDA LAW REPORTS 70

## Page 284

of the documents which were not availed due to the long time elapsed, and there are activities carried out but not supported by written document because of their nature. [38] He states further that the appellants should not be accused of withholding the estate while since the household for Kabanyana was destroyed in 1994, she resides in one of the houses of Buhiga for free, and she has shopping rooms where she carries out her commercial activities and others for rent, thus the Court may consider all of these grounds. He prays to rely on the judgment RCAA0069/12/CS rendered by this Court on 04 April 2014, the judgment RA109/13.03/82 rendered by the Court of cassation on16 November 1982 and on the doctrine of the law scholars F.Terre and Lequette, les Successions. THE VIEW OF THE COURT [39] The Court finds that 200,000,000Frw which the High Court ordered Kanyanja and Nibarere to give to the successors of Buhiga was awarded in its discretion while it is composed of the revenue accrued from the rent of the known houses, which should be calculated by assessing the income and expenses used in renovation or administration of those houses. [40] Regarding the burden of proof, article 9 of the Law Nº21/2012 of 14/06/2012 relating to the civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure, stipulates that every plaintiff must prove a claim. Failure to obtain proof, the defendant wins the case. Paragraph two stipulates that a party who alleges that he/she has been discharged from an obligation that has been established must prove that the obligation no longer exists. Failure to do so, the other party wins the case. KANYANJA ET AL v. MUKANTABANA ET AL 71

## Page 285

[41] Kanyanja and Nibarere do not deny that they administered the estate left by Buhiga in accordance with the testament whereby Kanyanja was appointed as the head of the family, deputized by Nibarere and Mukantabana, even though nothing was demonstrated to prove that Mukantabana carried out any activity to administer that estate, however, it is obvious that Nibarere is the one who always concludes the rent contracts with the tenants, and it is clear that she and Kanyanja are the users of the rent account. Therefore the Court finds that basing on paragraph two of article 9 mentioned above, Kanyanja and Nibarere are the ones to prove how they administered the estate. [42] The report of the expert appointed by the Court upon the agreement of the parties, demonstrated the income and expenses as it is stated in paragraph 28 of this judgment, but the parties do not agree with it, as mentioned above, apart from the Counsel for Kanyanja and Nibarere who states that he accepts it only in regards to the income. [43] Concerning the value of the report, article 98 of the Law Nº15/2004 of 12/06/2004 relating to evidence and its production, provides that a court is not bound to follow the opinion of experts if it is contrary to their conviction. [44] The appointed expert explains that after considering the defect which parties demonstrated in the report submitted before, the calculation changed, the income from rents changing from 432,840,000Frw to 305,610,000Frw, and expenses from 208,175,932Frw to 212,145,561Frw, therefore the amount to be justified by the administrators changed from 243,139,457Frw to 50,867,440Frw. RWANDA LAW REPORTS 72

## Page 286

[45] Concerning the expenses, the Court finds that the explanations provided by the expert was not satisfactory with regard the amount of 52,572,388Frw which he declared that it was paid to Engineer Lambert Byemayire, because the certificate of 12 January 2015 he relies on does not constitute an element of evidence to prove that it was really spent, because even if it was paid installment there must be the supporting documents, therefore the money considered to have been paid with the corresponding evidence is 2,140,000Frw, implying that the balance of 50,432,388Frw must be considered as among the income. [46] In addition to that there is 8,500,000Frw which the previous report indicated as the income whereas the second report included it in the expenses and that it was paid in the following years without supporting evidence; therefore it must be considered as income. [47] Regarding water and electricity bills, the Court finds that the expert provided the contradictory explanations whereby he demonstrated in the first report that Succession Buhiga has to pay for water only by basing on the information he got from one of the tenants that they had to pay for electricity bills themselves; while in the second report, he debited all royalties for water and electricity on the liability of succession. [48] Concerning water and electricity fees explanation, the Counsel for Kanyanja and Nibarere states that it was paid before installation of cash power, and this is not likely to contradict the provision of article 3 of the rent contract which states that the tenants pay themselves the fees of water and electricity. Therefore 16,632,182Frw which was computed as the expenses of water and electricity should be not be considered as such. KANYANJA ET AL v. MUKANTABANA ET AL 73

## Page 287

[49] Another amount of money for which there is no supporting evidence of the reason it should be borne by Succession Buhiga, is 8,860,000Frw indicated in the report alleged to have been paid to the counsel since 2009 to 2014 while no supporting evidence was produced nor the reason of payment explained, especially that it was not even paid in respect to this case given that the latter began in 2012. [50] Concerning the remuneration awarded to Nibarere, the Court finds that since it is obvious that there are duties she carried out relating to the management of the estate, such as the conclusion of the lease contract, to seek for payment from the tenants as well as other necessary related duties, this implies that the remuneration she was paid has merit, thus it must be computed among the expenses. The aforementioned statements also concerns alimony and school fees which was given to the children of Nkurikiyimana as provided by the testament, those who challenges its amount did not demonstrate what should have been allocated and how it should be calculated. [51] Regarding other irregularities alleged by the parties, the Court finds that their statement lack merit because they do not produce relevant evidence which contradict what was based on by the expert because concerning the income, even the respondents do not agree with each other on the same amount rather they only provide estimates; while the expert explained that he relied on some available contracts, paid taxes and the written documents of Banks. Furthermore, it is difficult to establish the exact amount of income from rent given the time Buhiga passed away and the time the plaintiffs filed a claim, which is 13 years now and this time led to the lack of evidence RWANDA LAW REPORTS 74

## Page 288

which could demonstrate the truth on the administration of the estate. [52] Basing on motivations provided above, the Court finds that the income from rent and the expenses should be computed as follows : 305,610,000Frw (which the report indicated as income from lease) + 50,432,388Frw (mentioned in paragraph 45) + 8,500,000Frw (mentioned in paragraph 46) – 212,145,561Frw (which the report indicated as expenses) – 16,632,182Frw (mentioned in paragraph 48) + 8,860,000Frw (mentioned in paragraph 49) = which implies 364,542,388Frw – 186,653,379Frw = 177,889,009Frw, that amount deducted of 42,898,140Frw of deposit on Succession Buhiga bank account, which means that Kanyanja and Nibarere should avail 177,889,009 – 42,898,140Frw = 134,990,869Frw. Therefore they should reimburse it to the estate and be deposited on bank account. In addition, Kanyanja and Nibarere are not allowed to use the rent without the consent of other successors, from the pronouncement of this judgment. [53] Concerning the estates which have not been declared in the testament, the Court finds that the rulings of the previous judgments should be sustained, therefore they should be shared entirely. 3. Concerning the damages charged to Kanyanja and Nibarere for dragging others into unnecessary lawsuits and damages requested in cross appeal. [54] Counsel for Kanyanja and Nibarere alleges that they were charged the damages for dragging the plaintiffs into unnecessary lawsuits while they are the ones who were sued, KANYANJA ET AL v. MUKANTABANA ET AL 75

## Page 289

especially that the plaintiffs contested the testament which should have been complied with by all of them. [55] The Counsel for Kabanyana states that Kanyanja and Nibarere led her to be in this litigation; therefore they must bear damages for it, consequently through cross appeal they should be ordered to pay 10,000,000Frw for dragging his clients into the lawsuits in addition to 3,000,000Frw which they were awarded before as well as 3,000,000Frw for the counsel and procedural fees. [56] The counsel for Mukantabana and successors of Kanyumba argues that the damages charged to the appellants have merit because they excluded others from the estate which led them to resort to courts of law. He in addition raised a cross appeal requesting that everyone from his clients be awarded 1,000,000Frw of the procedural fees, and the appellant pay 10,000,000Frw of the two advocates. He further states that the appellants managed the estate during 13 years and they earned interests from it; thus they should be ordered to pay 20,000,000Frwto each of his clients, and pay also 24,500,000Frw of 7 cows which remained in their possession equaling to 49(7x6=42+7) during 12 years, considering that each cow has the value of 500,000Frw. [57] Concerning the request in cross appeal, the counsel for the appellant argues that 20,000,000Frw which they request from them is groundless because it is contrary to the rent alleged by the claimants, that even other requested damages are groundless because the appellants were sued by then so that they may demonstrated the way they administered the estate and they did so, therefore they are not the ones who dragged them into lawsuits. Regarding the money got from the cattle, he states RWANDA LAW REPORTS 76

## Page 290

that the available ones should be apportioned among successors, whereas the damages which counsel Habinshuti prays for his clients, is groundless because it was not the intention of the appellant to delay the case rather, they sought for justice. THE VIEW OF THE COURT [58] The ruling of the judgment of the intermediate Court of Huye indicates that the basis of the damages awarded to children of Kabanyana Charlotte, is that the successors of Buhiga continued to make it hard for them to withdraw from joint ownership which led them into lawsuits while their request had merit, they were awarded 2,000,000Frw of the counsel fees and 3,000,000Frw in moral damages which must be deducted from the estate of Buhiga, and the High Court sustained it but held that it will be deducted from Kanyanja and Nibarere's assets. [59] The Court finds the fact that Kanyanja and Nibarere did not file a claim cannot prevent them to be charged the damages in case its claimants resorted to courts of law in order to get right on estate inherited to them, therefore the awarded damages are in range because they are based on the provision of article 258 of the Civil Code Book III which provides that “any act of man, which causes damage to another obliges the person by whose fault it happened to repair it” consequently this ground of appeal lacks merit. [60] Concerning the interest of 20,000,000Frw requested by the Counsel Ndagijimana and 24,500,000Frw originated from the Cattles left by Buhiga, the Court finds that they should not be awarded to them because they were not requested in the KANYANJA ET AL v. MUKANTABANA ET AL 77

## Page 291

previous Courts, therefore it cannot be requested at the appeal level with respect to article 168 of the Law relating to the civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure which stipulates that no new claim may be lodged at the appeal level, unless it concerns compensation or the new claim constitutes a defence to the principal action before the appeal court, or as it is stipulated in paragraph of that article, claims interests, rents and other accessories which were realized since the pronouncement of the judgment, the Court finds that the interest requested by Counsel Ndagijimana are contrary to those provided for by that paragraph. [61] Regarding 1,000,000Frw of procedural fees and 10,000,000Frw of counsel fees requested by the counsel for Mukantabana and successors of Kanyumba, the Court finds that it has merit basing on the provisions of article 258 mentioned above, but the fact that Kanyanja and Nibarere won the ground relating to the amount of money accumulated from the rent, they have to pay 250,000Frw of the procedural fees and 500,000Frw of the counsel fees at this instance, for each to pay 375,000Frw. [62] Concerning damages for being dragged into lawsuits, procedural and counsel fees requested by Counsel for Kabanyana Charlotte, the Court finds that on similar ground mentioned in the previous paragraph, they should be awarded 500,000Frw of the counsel fees and 250,000Frw of the procedure fees, in addition to 5,000,000Frw awarded by the High Court, that is 5,750,000Frw, each of the appellants pays 2,875,000Frw.

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 78

## Page 292

III. DECISION OF THE COURT [63] Holds that the appeal of Kanyanja Emilienne and Nibarere Costasie has merit in parts; [64] Holds that the cross appeal of Kabanyana Charlotte, Mukantabana Josepha and successors of Kanyumba has merit in parts; [65] Holds that in term of getting out of the indivision of assets, there should be a sale of the estate left by Buhiga Arcade, mentioned in the testament or not, after establishing its valuation agreed upon by all the successors and the priority to buy be given to the family of Buhiga, in case it is not possible the estate be bought by non-family members; [66] Holds that the income accrued from the rent of the houses left by Buhiga is 177,889,009Frw including 42,898,140Frw deposited on the bank account of Succession Buhiga, Kanyanja and Nibarere should reimburse the balance of 134,990,869Frw, that money and the one deposited on the bank accounts be included among the joint property to be shared; [67] Orders that from the pronouncement of this judgment, Kanyanja and Nibarere are not allowed to use the income from rent without the consent of the successors; [68] Orders Kanyanja and Nibarere to pay 5,750,000Frw to Kabanyana Charlotte representing her children Uwineza Claire and Muhimpundu Clarisse, as explained above, each one pays 2,875,000Frw; KANYANJA ET AL v. MUKANTABANA ET AL 79

## Page 293

[69] Orders Kanyanja and Nibarere to pay 750,000Frw to Mukantabana and successors of Kanyumba as explained above; each one pays 375,000Frw; [70] Orders Kanyanja and Nibarere to jointly pay the court fees amounting to 100,000Frw.

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 80

## Page 294

COMMERCIAL CASES

## Page 296

MUJAWIMANA ET AL v. BANK OF KIGALI Ltd (BK) [Rwanda SUPREME COURT – RCOMAA0008/14/CS (Kayitesi Z., P.J., Kayitesi R. and Nyirandabaruta, J.) July 22, 2016] Mortgage – Immovable properties – The value of the mortgage contract – Registration of mortgage – A legally concluded mortgage contract binds the parties even when the mortgage was not registered – Decree Law of 30/07/1888 relating to the contracts or obligations, articles 33 and 34. Mortgage – Annulation of mortgage contract – The fact that rights holders on the property which was attached as a mortgage in the mortgage loan contract did not consent to it, implies that mortgages were illegally furnished – Organic Law N°08/2005 of 14/07/2005 determining the use and management of land in Rwanda, articles 35 and 38 – Law N°22/99 of 12/11/1999 to supplement book I of the civil code and to institute part five regarding matrimonial regimes, liberalities and successions, articles 21 and 35. Facts: Late Nyagatare Théogène got various loans from Bank of Kigali Ltd whereby he mortgaged his house and he died before the entire reimbursement of the credit. This led the Bank of Kigali suing his heirs before the Commercial High Court requesting for reimbursement of those loans, consequently, the Court ordered them to reimburse them. The heirs of the deceased and his wife initiated a lawsuit to the Commercial Court of Nyarugenge requesting for the annulation 83

## Page 297

of the mortgage contract on the ground that they were not informed of it nor did the wife signed it. The Court ruled that there cannot be annulment of mortgage contract on the ground that it has never existed because they were not registered in the mortgage registry held by the Registrar General, thus it ordered them to pay damages and counsel fees to the Bank of Kigali Ltd. They appealed to the Commercial High Court claiming that the previous Court disregarded the precedents set in the similar cases. This Court also held that there was no mortgage contract concluded between the deceased and the Bank, thus it ordered them to pay the bank damages in addition to those awarded by the previous Court. Furthermore, the heirs of Nyagatare lodged an appeal to the Supreme Court alleging that the Court has declared the mortgages inexistent as long as they have not been recorded in the registry held by the Registrar General, yet the mortgage contract was concluded before the establishment of the office of Registrar General as well as the enactment of the Law on mortgages. They further stated that provisions of law providing for the requirement of prior consent of family members to the constitution of mortgage were not respected since Nyagatare Théogène furnished the properties in mortgage in favor of the Bank of Kigali Ltd without the consent of his wife and children. The Bank states that there had been no constitution of mortgages by the deceased because what happened was the conclusion of a mortgage loan contract. The heirs of the deceased prayed again for damages for being dragged into unnecessary lawsuits while the Bank of Kigali Ltd states that they should not be paid since their claim lacks merit. RWANDA LAW REPORTS 84

## Page 298

Held: 1. The legally concluded mortgage contract binds the parties even when the mortgage was not registered. Therefore none could deny the existence of the mortgage contract between Nyagatare Théogène and the Bank of Kigali Ltd while it is evidenced by documents. 2. The fact that rights holders on the property which was attached as a mortgage in the mortgage loan contract did not consent to it, implies that the mortgages were illegally furnished. Therefore, the mortgage contract between the Bank of Kigali Ltd and Nyagatare Théogène must be quashed, because his spouse did not sign on it. 3. The fact that Mujawimana Rose, Tuyisenge Rachel and Ishimwe Leah Aliah incurred expenses for follow-up of these proceedings by hiring lawyers, they should be awarded damages. However as what they claiming for are inordinate, they should be awarded in the discretion of the Court. Appeal has merit. Court fees to the defendant. Statutes and statutory instruments referred to: Organic Law N°08/2005 of 14/07/2005 determining the use and management of land in Rwanda, articles 35 and 38. Law N°45/2011 of 25/11/2011 governing contract, articles 64 and 65. Law N°22/99 of 12/11/1999 to supplement book I of the civil code and to institute part five regarding matrimonial regimes, liberalities and successions, articles 21 and 35. Decree Law of 30/07/1888 relating to the contracts or obligations, articles 33, 34 and 258. MUJAWIMANA ET AL v. BANK OF KIGALI Ltd (B.K) 85

## Page 299

Cases referred to: Rwigema v. ECOBANK, RCOM0001/07/CS, rendered by the Supreme Court on July 24, 2008. Authors Cited: Gael Piette, Droit de sûreté, 9ème éd. Université momentos Ltd. Mouleno cedex, 2015, p.142;147. Francois T’S kint, Sûretés et principes généraux du droit de poursuite des créanciers, Larcier, 2000, p.312. Alain Bénabent, Droit des obligations, 14ème éd., LGDJ, 2014, p.176. Judgment I. BRIEF BACKGROUND OF THE CASE [1] Before his death Nyagatare Théogène got a loan from the Bank of Kigali Ltd whereby he mortgaged his house and died before the entire reimbursement of the credit. In the judgment RCOMA0295/11/HCC delivered on 14 July 2012 by the Commercial High Court, his heirs were ordered to reimburse the money. His wife Mujawimana Rose, as well as his children Tuyisenge Rachel and Ishimwe Leah contested the loan, stating that they were not informed nor assented to it, consequently they cannot be held responsible. This is the reason for which they initiated a claim to the Court requesting the invalidation of the mortgage contract. [2] On 13 November 2013, the Commercial Court of Nyarugenge rendered the judgment RWANDA LAW REPORTS 86

## Page 300

RCOMA0722/13/TC/NYGE whereby it decided that the mortgage stated by the applicants is invalid because it was not registered in the mortgage registry held by the Registrar General, therefore, it held that the termination of an inexistent contract is impossible, and ordered the defendants to pay the bank of Kigali damages and counsel fees amounting to 600,000Frw. [3] Mujawimana Rose, Tuyisenge Rachel and Ishimwe Leah appealed to the Commercial High Court arguing that the Court confused the conclusion of the contract with its registration, and in addition, there had been serious contradictions in the arguments of the court as well as the disregard of the precedents. [4] The Commercial High Court rendered the judgment RCOMA0552/13/HCC on 12 December 2013, whereby it decided that there was no mortgage contract between the Bank of Kigali Ltd and Nyagatare Théogène, and ordered the appellants to give the Bank of Kigali Ltd 400,000Frw of counsel fees in addition to 600,000Frw incurred at the first instance court as well as damages amounting to 1,000,000Frw. [5] Unsatisfied with the decision of the court, Mujawimana Rose, Tuyisenge Rachel and Ishimwe Leah lodged an appeal to the Supreme Court arguing that there was disregard of evidence, laws and precedents, thus not awarding them damages. [6] The hearing was held in public on 07 August 2016, whereby Mujawimana Rose, Tuyishime Rachel and Ishimwe Leah Aliah were represented by Counsel Mutabazi Abayo Jean Claude, and the Bank of Kigali Ltd was represented by Counsel Rusanganwa Jean Bosco. MUJAWIMANA ET AL v. BANK OF KIGALI Ltd (B.K) 87

## Page 301

II. ANALYSIS OF THE LEGAL ISSUE The issue to be analysed in this judgment is whether there had been the mortgage contract between Théogène Nyagatare and Bank of Kigali Ltd, if it is so, it deserves to be invalidated, as well as requested damages. 1) Whether there had been a mortgage contract between the Bank of Kigali Ltd and Nyagatare Théogène. [7] Mutabazi Abayo Jean Claude, the Counsel, states that the Court held that there had been no mortgage contract because it was not registered in the registry of the Registrar General, while this contract took place because even the opponent which is the Bank of Kigali Ltd admits it, apart from that it alleges that it was not registered. He adds that this contract took place before the existence of the office of the registrar General as well as the law on mortgages. He states that the mortgaged properties are known, as well as their location and the followed procedure. He proceeds that the mortgage contract exists between two parties, and its validity does not depend on the intervention of the Registrar General. He states that the existence of the contract is proved by the fact that the documents of the House located at Remera in the plot No2685, those of the house located in Rwamagana District, other property furnished in mortgage by Nyagatare situated at Kabare-Muhazi, the house located on plot No1647 in Kigabiro-Rwamagana, are held by the Bank of Kigali because they constitute a mortgage. Furthermore, he alleges that the registration requirements provided for by the law are carried out after the consent of the parties to the mortgage. [8] Counsel Mutabazi Abayo Jean Claude pursues that according to the law enacted in 2009 and amended in 2010, the RWANDA LAW REPORTS 88

## Page 302

obligation of mortgage registration lies to the Bank of Kigali, given that it is the one holding the titles of the mortgaged properties, therefore, it should not rely on its failure to do so and allege the contract to be invalid. [9] Counsel Mutabazi Abayo Jean Claude, explains the consequences of defaulting on registering the mortgages by stating that if the debtor furnished the mortgage but without being registered, when he defaults to pay, the Bank resorts to the court whereby the mortgage is auctioned by the bailiff, while in case the mortgage is registered, the execution is done without recourse to judicial proceedings. He argues that before the establishment of the office of the Registrar General, whenever a bank was furnished with a mortgage, article 53 of the Law relating to the civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure, had to be relied on for the auction without recourse to judicial proceedings, therefore, concerning the contract between the Bank of Kigali and Nyagatare Théogène, the duty to register the mortgage lied to the bank given that it is mentioned in their contract that “le client autorise expressement la Banque à requérir au près de Monsieur le conservateur des Titres Fonciers l’inscription hypothécaire de 1er rang sur les biens décrits ci-avant….”. This indicates that it is obvious that Nyagatare mandated the bank to register the mortgage. Therefore, the failure for the bank to do so implies that it cannot auction it for its reimbursement, instead, it has to resort to the courts of law and wait for the ruling, and the bank cannot allege before the court to be in possession of mortgage which it did not register. [10] Counsel Rusanganwa, states that the appellants do not challenge the grounds relied on by the court provided by article MUJAWIMANA ET AL v. BANK OF KIGALI Ltd (B.K) 89

## Page 303

4 of the Law No10/2009 of 14/05/2009 on mortgages which states that “the mortgage is considered to be valid when recorded in the mortgage register in the office of the Registrar General”, therefore, none should request for the invalidation of the void contract. He states that the appellants do not demonstrate evidence which were disregarded, that basing on the contract titled mortgage loan contract, they present requesting for the invalidation of the mortgage contract as well as written correspondences indicating the mortgaged houses in the contract, he finds that the heirs of Nyagatare cannot deny the concluded contract, especially that the Bank of Kigali alleges that Nyagatare did not furnish the mortgage, instead, it was concluded a mortgage loan contract, those properties being meant to constitute the mortgage, because on page 2 of that contract, it is indicated the mortgage registration whereby they indicated the procedure to be followed. He further states that there is no way the heirs of Nyagatare could request for the invalidation of that contract alleging that it is a mortgage contract whereas Nyagatare consented only to the encumbrance of the mortgage. [11] Counsel Rusanganwa Jean Bosco was asked in which way the Bank of Kigali Ltd possesses the titles of the houses indicated in this case while he denies that there was no mortgage contract, he replied that indeed the bank has those titles because the heirs of Nyagatare Théogène never requested for them. He goes further to state that the possession of those titles by the bank indicates that the encumbrance of the mortgage had commenced but were not yet concluded, and that the Bank of Kigali was given those documents by Nyagatare so that the mortgages can be furnished as they had agreed, however, what was done was just the initial process because RWANDA LAW REPORTS 90

## Page 304

they had agreed in the contract that the mortgage will be registered to the land Registry. THE VIEW OF THE COURT [12] Article 33 of the Decree Law of 30/07/1888 establishing Civil code book III which was into force when Nyagatare Théogène and Bank of Kigali Ltd concluded the mortgage loan contract on 19/07/2005 as well as the subsequent contracts, states that contracts made in accordance with the law shall be binding between parties while article 34 of this same law states that a contract shall not only cover the subject matter but also the effects that equity, practices or law impute to the obligations according to the nature of the contract1. [13] It is indicated in the case file that Nyagatare Théogène requested for the extension of the date of payment up to 2 February 2009, and the Bank of Kigali Ltd informed him on 5 March 2009 that the loan amounts to 124,000,000Frw, including 24,000,000Frw that had to be paid not later than 31 August 2009 and that he should continue to pay back 15,472,369Frw which he had been given to buy the house on plot No2685 located at Remera-Kimironko. He was reminded to subscribe for insurance of the mortgage furnished in favor of the bank namely the mortgage with the value of 50,000,000Frw which should have been registered on the first rank on Plot No2685 located Remera-Gasabo, in Kigali City, the mortgage with the value of 21,000,000Frw which should have been registered on the first rank on Plot No1647 located at Kigabiro-Rwamagana,

1 The statements in both provisions are also found in articles 64 and 65 of the Law No45/2011 of 25/11/2011 governing contracts. MUJAWIMANA ET AL v. BANK OF KIGALI Ltd (B.K) 91

## Page 305

given that the bank was furnished with the titles of the immovable properties including the title of the House located at Kabare-Muhazi in Eastern province as well as the titles of immovable properties located at Kigabiro-Rwamagana (other two houses) thus he could not sale, donate or mortgage them without the consent of the bank. In addition, the bank was furnished as pledge over properties amounting to 50,000,000Frw on the first rank. [14] The documents in the case file reveal that on 17 June 2009 Nyagatare applied for an overdraft, and on 27 July 2009, the Bank of Kigali notified him that his loan amounted to 148,000,000Frw, and he was reminded that the mortgage furnished to the bank consist of all properties mentioned in the previous paragraph, the Bank of Kigali having the obligation to apply for their registration as laid down in the mortgage loan contract of 19 July 2005 mentioned above (on the second page) as it was always reminded in every document granting him the loan and corresponding mortgages. [15] The Supreme Court finds that the Bank of Kigali and Nyagatare Théogène concluded various mortgage loan contracts, and it was the duty of the Bank of Kigali Ltd to apply for registration of these mortgages. Among these contracts, including that of 19 July 2005, as the first addendum (No001) to the mortgage loan contract concluded in the presence of the public notary Norbert Kamugisha. In this contract, Nyagatare Théogène furnished to the Bank of Kigali Ltd as mortgage the houses on and those which will be constructed on plot No1647 located at Kigabiro - Rwamagana, and handed it the emphyteutic lease of that plot NoL139/RWA/2005. There is also a correspondence document of 27 July 2009 which the Bank of RWANDA LAW REPORTS 92

## Page 306

Kigali Ltd served to Nyagatare notifying him of the loan amount, It also reminded him that the mortgage it possesses for all the loans includes the house located on plot No2685 located at Remera – Kimironko, the house on plot No1647 Kigabiro - Rwamagana (these two mortgages should have been registered on the first rank), two houses situated at Kigabiro-Rwamagana, as well as pledge on goodwill with the value of 50,000,000Frw, the titles of all those immovable properties handed to the Bank of Kigali Ltd by Nyagatare Théogène, who even gave it the right to apply for their registration. [16] Regarding the registration of the mortgage, the law scholars state that it is done in order to create the preferential right over other creditors, as well as to inform the latter the existence of the loan and the preferential right of the creditor but failure to register does not invalidate the contract since the registration aims only at informing the public that the immovable property was furnished in mortgage.2

2 (1) Gael Piette, Droit de sûreté, 9ème éd. Université momentos Ltd. Mouleno cedex.2015, p.142; 147. (Les conditions de fond de l’hypothèque concernent le constituant, la créance garantie et l’assiètte de la sûreté. le respect d’une condition de forme est généralement nécéssaire : la rédaction d’un acte notarié… l’inscription va permettre d’assurer la publicité d’hypothèque, donc de rendre la sûreté opposable aux tiers. A défaut de publicité, l’hypothèque est inopposable aux tiers, qu’ils soient de bonne ou de mauvaise foi. L’inscription est donc une condition d’opposabilité et non une condition de validité. Une hypothèque non publiée est valable entre les partes). (2) François T’S Kint, Sûretés et principes généraux du droit de poursuite des créanciers, Larcier, 200, p.312. (L’inscription de l’hypothèque en assure la publicité. Elle ne crée aucun droit. L’inscription ne fait que révéler, aux yeux des tiers, le droit d’hypothèque). MUJAWIMANA ET AL v. BANK OF KIGALI Ltd (B.K) 93

## Page 307

[17] Therefore, the Court finds that as previously mentioned the mortgage contract between Nyagatare Théogène and the Bank of Kigali Ltd existed and binds the parties as provided for by article 33 the law mentioned above, and as explained it cannot be cancelled nor invalidated by the default of mortgages registration and none could deny its existence while they were evidenced by documents. 2) Whether the mortgage contract between the Bank of Kigali and Nyagatare Théogène should be terminated. [18] Mutabazi Abayo Jean Claude, the counsel states that article 35 of the Organic Law determining the use and management of the land of the year 2005 provided that final transfer of rights on land by a representative of the family requires the prior consent of all other members of the family who are joint owners of such rights (spouse, the children with majority age, minors represented by their parents), therefore the property is furnished as mortgage with the prior consent of all family members, which was not respected when Nyagatare Théogène furnished all mortgages to the Bank of Kigali Ltd, because he did it without the consent of his wife and children. He further states that in furnishing these mortgages article 21 of the Law No22/99 of 12/11/1999 supplementing book I of the civil code and instituting part five regarding matrimonial regime, liberalities and succession, provides that whatever be the matrimonial regime chosen and the management modalities of the patrimony of spouses the agreement of both spouses shall be required for the donation of an immovable property and any other property in the community, as well as for the acknowledgement of any right attached to those properties. RWANDA LAW REPORTS 94

## Page 308

[19] In conclusion, Mutabazi Abayo Jean Claude, the counsel states that among the assets that Nyagatare Théogène furnished in mortgage includes the part of the property over which Mujawimana Rose has the right, therefore if the Court decides that the contract was concluded, it implies that the mortgage would be furnished over the part belonging to Nyagatare only and therefore if the contact is invalidated Mujawimana Rose would have the right over the entire property. [20] Counsel Rusanganwa states that the contract that the opponents requested for invalidation consist of the loan contract because no mortgage contract was concluded and that the Bank of Kigali Ltd would not auction on the basis of this contract, rather on the judgment because the contract was concluded before the year 2009, whereby on its page 4 they agreed on the sale without recourse to judicial proceedings, but this is impossible as longer as this mortgage was not registered, and that the mortgage contract implies that when the loan is not paid the auction occurs whereby the creditor enjoys the preferential right, but that this is impossible whenever the mortgage is not registered. He argues that in case the Court decides the cancellation of the mortgage contract, it will imply the cancellation of the loan contract given that both contracts were concluded in a single document. He alleges that as longer as the bank does not hold the title, it cannot claim the mortgage right, therefore the heirs of Nyagatare cannot allege that the bank has the right on the property of Nyagatare. THE VIEW OF THE COURT [21] Article 35 of Organic Law No08/2005 of 14/07/2005 determining the use and management of land in Rwanda MUJAWIMANA ET AL v. BANK OF KIGALI Ltd (B.K) 95

## Page 309

provides that final transfer of right on land like sale, donation or exchange by the representative of the family requires the prior consent of all other members of the family who are joint owners of such right while article 38 provides that the consent mentioned in article 35 of this Organic Law is also necessary in land mortgaging, lease, long term renting or in case there is mutual consent on the right of servitude. [22] Article 21 of the Law No22/99 of 12/11/1999 supplementing book I of the civil code and instituting part five regarding matrimonial regime, liberalities and succession, provides that whatever be the matrimonial regime chosen and the management modalities of the patrimony of spouses the agreement of both spouses shall be required for the donation of an immovable property and any other property in the community, as well as for the acknowledgement of any right attached to those properties. [23] The Court finds that in the mortgage loan contract concluded between Nyagatare Théogène and the Bank of Kigali Ltd on 19 July 2005 as well as in subsequent contracts till that of 27 July 2009, whereby the Bank of Kigali Ltd promised him a loan who in return furnished a house on plot No2685 located at Remera-Kimironko by handing its title deed to it as well as the house on plot No1647 located in Kigabiro-Rwamagana with its title in mortgage, it is nowhere indicated that his wife Mujawimana Rose consented to these mortgages because her signature is not apposed anywhere. These findings prove that the mortgages furnished by Nyagatare Théogène to the Bank of Kigali Ltd which holds their titles as its counsel admitted to the court whereby he even argued that the reason the bank still hold them was due to the fact that the heirs of Nyagatare Théogène RWANDA LAW REPORTS 96

## Page 310

did not request them; were furnished in contradiction with the law because they did not comply with the requirements of the aforementioned articles 35 and 21. Therefore, the said mortgage contract should be invalidated and the titles of the aforementioned immovable properties be handed back to Mujawimana Rose, the spouse of Nyagatare Théogène. [24] However, the Court finds that because there is no particular mortgage contract that Nyagatare concluded with the Bank of Kigali Ltd, rather the clauses about the collateral are stated in the mortgage loan contract of 19 July 2005 and that of 5 March 2009 as well as that of 27 July 2009, it should be perceived that the invalidation of this mortgage contract must not impact the entire aforementioned loan contract. In contrast, it only concerns its clauses regarding the mortgage over the house on plot No2685 located at Remera-Kimironko as well as that over the house on plot No1647 located in Kigabiro- Rwamagana especially that the appellants in this case who are among the heirs of Nyagatare Théogène lost the case RCOMA0154/12/CS rendered by this court on 5 February 2016 about the loan their de cujus owed to the Bank of Kigali Ltd which became final. This position is supported by some law scholars who state that the contract may be invalidated in part, the rest remaining intact in case the judge finds that both parts may be separated like in synallagmatic or donation contracts.3. The position to invalidate the unlawful mortgage is also supported by the precedents of this court in the judgment RCOM0001/07/CS of 24 July 2008 between Ms. Rwigema Chantal and ECOBANK whereby it held that Ms. Rwigema Chantal did not participate in the conclusion of the mortgage

3 Alain Bénabent, Droit des obligations, 14ème éd. LGDJ, 2014, p.176. MUJAWIMANA ET AL v. BANK OF KIGALI Ltd (B.K) 97

## Page 311

over the family house furnished to BCDI by Mazimpaka because she was not notified to give her consent. 3) With regard to damages requested for in this case. [25] Counsel Mutabazi Abayo Jean Claude, states that the Commercial High Court denied damages to his clients on the basis that their claim lacks merit given that they failed to demonstrate the existence of mortgage contract, therefore having been demonstrated in this court, it should be rectified in order for them to be awarded damages considering the fact that they have been dragged into lawsuits from the Commercial Court to the Supreme court, whereby they be awarded 1,000,000Frw of procedural fees and 6,000,000Frw of counsel fees. [26] Rusanganwa, the Counsel, argues that no damages should be awarded because their claim lacks merit given that the heirs of Nyagatare pursued the case in his lieu since they had no choice as they cannot disown Nyagatare Théogène deeds, rather his client should be awarded 2,000,000Frw of procedural fees and 2,000,000Frw of counsel. Counsel Mutabazi Abayo Jean Claude requests Court to examine the claims of the counsel for Bank of Kigali Ltd in its discretion. OPINION OF THE COURT [27] The Court finds that Mujawimana Rose, Tuyisenge Rachel and Ishimwe Leah Aliah incurred expenses for follow- up of these proceedings by hiring the lawyers, therefore it is necessary for them to be awarded damages basing on article 258 of CCB.III, but since damages requested are excessive, the Bank of Kigali Ltd should pay the 1,800,000Frw including RWANDA LAW REPORTS 98

## Page 312

procedural and counsel fees awarded in the discretion of the court. [28] The Court finds that damages requested by the Bank of Kigali Ltd should not be awarded because it loses the case. III. THE DECISION OF THE COURT [29] Finds with merit the appeal of Mujawimana Rose, Tuyisenge Rachel and Ishimwe Leah Aliah. [30] Overturns the judgment RCOMA0552/13/HCC delivered by Commercial High Court. [31] Invalidates the mortgage contract between Nyagatare Théogène and Bank of Kigali Ltd over the house at the plot No2685 located in Remera-Kimironko and the house on plot No1647 located in Kigabiro-Rwamagana. [32] Orders the Bank of Kigali Ltd to hand back to Mujawimana Rose all documents relating to those immovable properties mentioned above. [33] Orders it to pay Mujawimana Rose, Tuyisenge Rachel and Ishimwe Leah 1,800,000Frw of procedural and counsel fees. [34] Instructs the Bank of Kigali Ltd to pay the court fees.

MUJAWIMANA ET AL v. BANK OF KIGALI Ltd (B.K) 99

## Page 314

RUBARE v. RWANDA REVENUE AUTHORITY (RRA) [Rwanda SUPREME COURT – RCOMA0149/12/CS (Kayitesi, P.J., Mukandamage and Kanyange, J.) March 11, 2016] Tax law – Value added tax – Declaration of value added tax – Advance payment which is paid to the successful bidder for the commencement of works cannot be considered as the payment nor the time on which they have been paid, be considered as the period of tax declaration – Law Nº37/2012 of 09/11/2012 establishing the value added tax, article 10 – Law N°12/2007 of 27/03/2007 on public procurement, articles 20, 86(2) and 89 – Law Nº06/2001 of 20/01/2001 establishing the value added tax, article 20. Facts: RRA imposed to Rubare the fines and late payment penalties amounting to 21,380,684Frw arguing that they result from the tax declaration of value added tax he made in delay on the advance payment. Rubare appealed to the Commissioner General claiming to be innocent since the advance payment does not consist of payment, rather, they are funds intended to finance the commencement of works that are lent to the successful bidder of the public tender and his appeal was not considered therefore he filed the claim to the Commercial High Court requesting to annul the decision thereto arguing that they had been illegally imposed to him. The Court decided that his claim was baseless, and maintained the decision of RRA. Rubare appealed to the Supreme Court arguing that the previous Court disregarded the fact that the advance payment for 101

## Page 315

commencement of works does not constitute a payment on which value added tax is levied. RRA argues that the issue to be examined in this case was that regarding the period of VAT taxation. Held: 1. The funds for advance payment which are paid to the successful bidder for the commencement of works cannot be considered as payment nor the time on which they have been paid, be considered as the period of tax declaration. Therefore, neither fines nor late payment penalties on the value added tax should have been imposed to Rubare since he had to pay at time of the issuance of the invoice or payment of completed works. 2. The appellant is awarded procedural and counsel fees in the discretion of the Court in case the requested amount is excessive. Appeal has merit. Court fees to the defendant. Statutes and Statutory instruments referred to: Law Nº37/2012 of 09/11/2012 establishing the value added tax, article 10. Law N°12/2007 of 27/03/2007 on public procurement, articles 20, 86(2) and 89. Law Nº06/2001 of 20/01/2001 establishing the value added tax, article 20. Cases referred to: RRA v. MISIGARO, RCOMA0074/11/CS decided by the Supreme Court on 11th April 2014 RWANDA LAW REPORTS 102

## Page 316

Judgment I. BRIEF BACKGROUND OF THE CASE [1] Rubare Josias was charged fines and interests for late declaration of the value added tax, after applying the administrative appeal to the Commissioner General claiming to be innocent but his appeal was not considered and he filed the claim before the Commercial High Court requesting to be discharged of 21,380,684Frw of the fines and late payment penalty since they had been illegally imposed. He explains that tax was imposed to the advance payment while it is not a payment, rather, the loan given to the successful bidder which is paid in accordance to article 89 of the Law on Public Procurement, while RRA argued that the advance payment for commencement of works is not the loan but a portion of the whole value tender which is paid in advance, and that it must be taxed with VAT basing on the provisions of article 20(c) of the Law Nº06/2001 of 20/01/2001 establishing the value added tax as amended to date, which states that if before the time applicable under (a) and (b) there has been payment, it is regarded as related to goods and services supplied therefore the VAT is imposed on the payment. [2] The Court found without merit the claim of Rubare, and ordered him to pay 21,380,684Frw in fines and late payment penalty to RRA. It relied its decision on article 86 of the Law on Public Procurement, whereby it realized that the payment made to Rubare was not a loan, rather, an advance payment, which RUBARE v. RWANDA REVENUE AUTHORITY (RRA) 103

## Page 317

must be taxed basing on the provisions of article 20 (c) of the Law establishing value added tax. [3] Rubare Josias appealed against this judgment to the Supreme Court arguing that the Court disregarded the fact that advance payment does not constitute the payment on which the value added tax is likely to be imposed, while RRA keeps alleging that the tax has to be imposed basing on the provision of article 20 (c) of the Law establishing value added tax. [4] The hearing was held in public on 2 February 2016, Rubare being represented by Counsel Nsengiyumva Abel while RRA was represented by the State Attorney Kabibi Speciosa. II. ANALYSIS OF LEGAL ISSUES Whether Rubare should not be held liable for late payment penalty resulting from the value added tax which RRA alleges he delayed to declare. [5] The Counsel for Rubare argues that he appealed because the previous Court sustained the fines and late payment penalty imposed to him by RRA which argued that he delayed to declare the value added tax on the advance payment while it was not payment, rather, the advance payment for the commencement of works given to the successful bidder after providing the personal guarantor who, in case he fails to perform the tender shall pay on his behalf, otherwise those funds are deducted from each invoice. He adds that Rubare imputed the advance payment got from Caisse Sociale du Rwanda and guaranteed by SORAS on every issued invoice, until he finished, which implies that it was a loan since the payment is not refunded, and that even the judgment RWANDA LAW REPORTS 104

## Page 318

RCOM0074/12/CS rendered by this Court on 11 April 2014, resolved that problem where it demonstrated that the advance payment does not consist in payment. [6] He further argues that RRA cannot claim that there was a delay in declaring VAT basing on the fact that it has to be paid on the date of issuance of advance payment because it does not consist of a payment, and in addition that tax was levied on the total value of the tender. Even if RRA considers it as payment, one could wonder its purpose especially that in the public tenders, payment covers the completed works as provided for by article 86 of the Law on the Public Procurement, therefore, it implies that advance payment should not be considered as a payment. Furthermore, it would constitute double payment if VAT is paid on the total value of the tender and again on the advance payment. [7] He further alleges that even paragraph (c) of article 20 of the Law on the value added tax that RRA relies on, provides that there should be the issuance of invoice or reception of payment, which implies that an advance payment does not cover a certain part of works and that VAT cannot be imposed in case no work was executed. He goes on to state that due to the persistent disputes relating to the advance payment, it has been necessary to provide a definition in article 10 of the new Law establishing value added tax (the Law Nº37/2012 of 09/11/2012), therefore he concludes by requesting to quash the appealed judgment. [8] The Counsel for RRA argues that the issue to be examined is to determine the time of payment of VAT since with regard to Rubare, he paid VAT but in delay, and the arguments of his advocate, are based only on article 20(b) which RUBARE v. RWANDA REVENUE AUTHORITY (RRA) 105

## Page 319

provides for the time of the issuance of the invoice or the time of payment of the executed work, but disregards its litera (c) which provides that if the payment is made before the execution of works, the VAT shall immediately paid , which means that the advance payment consists of the payment made before the execution of works and before the issuance of the invoice. He argues also that the judgment raised by Rubare’s advocate to have resolved the issue lack merit since it only focused on litera (a) and (b) of the article 20 of the Law on value added tax. [9] She goes on stating that even if it is understandable that the payment covers the completed works, the purpose of advance payment should be questioned, since for her, it is paid to the successful bidder to enable him/her to perform the tender, which means it consists of funds paid before execution of works and they are paid in relation to the contract of the concerned works since if that contract is inexistent even the money could not be paid. [10] With regard to the new Law on the value added tax, the counsel for RRA states that its purpose is not the interpretation of article 20 of the previous Law, rather, it amended the means of payment. In conclusion, she requested that the appealed judgment to be sustained. THE VIEW OF THE COURT [11] With regard to the period of payment of the value added tax article 20 of the Law Nº06/2001 of 20/01/2001 on the code of value added tax which was into force at the time fines and late payment penalty were imposed to Rubare, provides that RWANDA LAW REPORTS 106

## Page 320

“The tax is due and payable at the time when goods or services are regarded as supplied. The time for imposition shall be whichever is the earliest of the following: a) in the case of a supply of goods i) the time when goods are removed from the premises of the supplier; ii) if the goods are not to be removed, at the time when they are made available to the person to whom they are supplied. b) in the case of services a supply shall be treated as taking place at the time when the services are performed; Where services are supplied for a continuous period under any enactment or agreement which provides for periodic payments, the services are treated as successively supplied for successive parts of the period as determined by the enactment or agreement and each successive supply shall be deemed to take place: i) at the time an invoice or a VAT invoice in respect of that supply is issued by the supplier; or ii) at the time payment for the supply is received by the supplier, whichever is the earlier. c) if, before the time applicable under (a) and (b) above the person making the supply issues a tax invoice or receives a payment in respect of it, the supply, to the extent covered by the invoice or payment, shall be treated as taking place at the time the invoice is issued or payment is received”. RUBARE v. RWANDA REVENUE AUTHORITY (RRA) 107

## Page 321

[12] With regard to the advance payment, article 86 paragraph 2 of the Law Nº12/2007 of 27/03/2007 on Public Procurement, provides that “However, the bidding document may provide for an advance payment. Such an advance payment shall not be paid before the contract is signed”. The article 89 of the mentioned law provides that “The advance received by the successful bidder shall be refunded by deducting a certain amount from submitted and approved invoices. The bidding document shall determine the percentage to be deducted until the whole amount of the advance is refunded”. [13] Concerning Rubare, article 29(1) of the contract he concluded with Caisse Sociale du Rwanda, provides that he shall get an advance payment of 20% of the total value of the tender1 and that money will be paid on each invoice issued, and Rubare also states that he got an advance payment amounting to 328,099,434Frw equivalent to 20% of the whole tender. [14] Analyzing the provisions of article 20 Nº06/2001 of 20/01/2001 mentioned above, the tax on services is levied at the time of issuance of the invoice or VAT invoice or when the tax payer has been paid for the executed work, as mentioned in litera (c) of that article which also RRA relies on. When an invoice is issued or there has been payment of the value of the works before the time provided in litera (a) and (b) mentioned above, in that case it is considered the portion for which the

1 The contractor shall get, on his demand an advance payment equivalent as a maximum to twenty percent (20%) of the total contract sum. This advance should be guaranteed with a guarantee of 100% repayment stocked in a confirmed bank in Rwanda. Advance payment shall be reimbursed proportionally on each certificate submitted to full amount before the final certificate”. RWANDA LAW REPORTS 108

## Page 322

invoice was issued or the one paid and considered as the time when the invoice was issued or when the payment was made. [15] The court finds that, even though RRA relies on litera (c) to argue that the advance payment received by Rubare constitutes payment, its arguments lack merit because it does not demonstrate the portion of the work for which the invoice was issued or for which the payment was made as provided for by provisions of law, rather, it must be considered as advance payment paid to the successful bidder to enable him/her to commence the tender but not as a payment for a certain work. [16] In addition to that, the advance payment paid to the successful bidder, is progressively paid back in accordance with the provision of article 89 of the Law on Public Procurement mentioned above, and this is supported by clause 29.1 of the contract between Rubare and CSR mentioned above, and that was what happened, considering invoice Nº1/Novembre-2008 that Rubare produced as an example demonstrating that on the amount of 147,248,763Frw which he had to be paid, 10% was withheld and another amount of 26,684,777Frw (for the reimbursement of 20%) was deducted, which Rubare alleges it constitutes the reimbursement on advance payment and indeed it corresponds to the amount provided for by article 89 mentioned above as well as clause 29.1 of the tender contract, hence the balance on that invoice owed to Rubare being 106,739,109Frw. [17] The above statements demonstrate that the advance payment that Rubare received as the successful bidder, was not payment as RRA alleges, therefore it could not have been considered as the occurrence of the taxation period, thus neither fines nor late payment penalties should have been imposed to RUBARE v. RWANDA REVENUE AUTHORITY (RRA) 109

## Page 323

him since he had to pay tax at the time he issued the invoice or at the time of the payment of the works. [18] The opinion that the issuance of the advance payment is not considered as the taxation period was the same opinion mentioned in the new Law Nº37/2012 of 09/11/2012 establishing the value added tax, in its article 10 relating to the time of payment of tax, where paragraph 2 states that “the date on which the payment of the goods or service including the partial payment is made. However this paragraph does not concern the advance payment made to the constructors who later reimburse it by deducting it from the invoices presented to their client”. Even if this Law was not the one which was into force at the time the fines and late payment penalty was imposed to Rubare, but the opinion that the advance payment is reimbursed by the successful bidder as Rubare did, it is the ground which emphasizes the motivation highlighted above which also concurs with the rulings of another judgment RCOMA0074/11/CS rendered on 11 April 2014 by this Court between RRA and Misigaro Louis which also held that advance payment does not constitute a payment. [19] Considering the motivations above, the Court finds that neither fines nor late payment penalties should have been imposed to Rubare, therefore the appealed judgment is overruled. 2. Whether Rubare should be awarded the procedural and counsel fees. [20] Rubare requests that RRA be ordered to pay him 2,000,000Frw for procedural and counsel fees, while RRA argues that he should bear his expenses. RWANDA LAW REPORTS 110

## Page 324

THE VIEW OF THE COURT [21] The Court deems that given that Rubare’s appeal was found with merit he should be awarded procedural and counsel fees basing on the provisions of article 258 of CCB III which provides that “any act of a person that causes prejudice to another, obliges the one whose fault to repair the damage”, however, since 2,000,000Frw he requests for is inordinate he should rather be awarded 1,000,000Frw in the discretion of the Court. III. THE DECISION OF THE COURT [22] Finds with merit the appeal lodged by Rubare Josias; [23] Overrules the fines and late payment penalties amounting to 21,380,684Frw imposed to him by RRA; [24] Orders RRA to pay Rubare Josias 1,000,000Frw of procedural and counsel fees; [25] Orders RRA to pay 100,000Frw for the Court fees.

RUBARE v. RWANDA REVENUE AUTHORITY (RRA) 111

## Page 326

CRIMINAL CASES

## Page 328

PROSECUTION v. GATARE [Rwanda SUPREME COURT – RPA0317/08/CS (Nyirinkwaya, P.J., Hatangimbabazi and Munyangeli, J.) October 24, 2014] Criminal Law – Murder – Circumstantial evidence – In criminal cases, evidence is based on all grounds – The accused can be convicted based on facts assessed in the discretion of the court – Law N°15/2004 of 12/6/2004 relating to evidence and its production, article 119. Facts: The accused was tried for murder committed against his wife and child before the High Court of the Republic, who were set on fire in the car at Nieuwerkerken in Belgium. The Prosecution produced evidence against him including the fact that his jacket was picked close to the place where the vehicle was set on fire without being burnt and that the police sniffer dog detected the smell of the wearer to the road where it lost his trace, the keys of their house having been picked at the crime scene, the following day the deceased were murdered, the burns caused by the flame were noticed on him, the fact that few hours before they were killed, the accused made a call which was traced by the use of the call data center via Nieuwerkerken’s telecommunication antenna and that three months later after they were killed, he was arrested and found in possession of identification documents of the deceased, the fact that once he arrived in Rwanda, he filed for divorce and revocation of adoption of the children of Liberatha while he did not declare their whereabouts, rather he told people different versions of their whereabouts. 115

## Page 329

The accused pleaded not guilty, stating that the jacket picked at the crime scene was wore by the deceased, that the burns noticed on him were due to the exhaust pipe of the car that burnt him while repairing it. With regard to the keys of their house found in the jacket picked at the crime scene, he states that they belonged to the deceased as he had his own which he even used to open the door. With regard to the fact that he made a call via the antenna of the crime scene at the day the deceased were killed, he argued that it may be possible that he used it while passing through that area. With regard to the fact that he was in a bad relationship with the deceased, he stated that like in any other household, they also had some disagreements. Concerning the fact that he was found in possession of the deceased identification documents, he stated that they were all kept in the same bag when they were preparing to travel to Rwanda and they forgot to remove them. As to the fact that he filed for divorce and revocation of the children once he arrived in Rwanda and told people in Belgium that the deceased are in Rwanda while he told those in Rwanda that they were in Belgium, he explained that he filed for divorce out of anger due to the fact that they refused to travel with him at the last minute, something that caused him to incur a lot of expenses. The court relying on the evidence produced, convicted the accused and sentenced him to life imprisonment with special provisions and ordered him to pay damages to the civil party. He lodged an appeal before the Supreme Court, alleging that he was convicted of the offence basing on the evidence which does not prove beyond reasonable doubt that he committed the offence and the court sentenced him to the lengthy penalty than the one requested by prosecution. As for the prosecutor, he RWANDA LAW REPORTS 116

## Page 330

contends that there exists sufficient incriminating evidence against the accused. With regard to the penalty, he states that the fact that the accused was sentenced to the lengthy penalty than the one requested by Prosecution cannot be a ground for appeal especially that he was sentenced for the offence he committed. The deceased’s young sister who filed a civil action within criminal proceedings lodged an appeal, stating that she was granted minimal damages. The accused argues that he cannot pay damages while he is innocent. Held: 1. The fact that the accused’s jacket was picked outside the car in which the deceased were burnt is evidence against him. 2. The fact that the burns were noticed on the accused few hours after the deceased were burnt in the car is an incriminating evidence in addition to the jacket picked at the crime scene. 3. The deceased could not have been burnt in the car and her keys be found in the jacket picked outside the car. Therefore, the fact that the keys for their residential house were picked at the crime scene is another incriminating evidence. 4. The window crank was ejected from the car by the person who burnt the deceased purposely to prevent them from evacuation. 5. The fact that the accused made a call via the antenna located to the area where the deceased were burnt few hours before their murder must be analysed along with other evidence. 6. The fact that the accused informed no one that the deceased were missing, rather he told people in Belgium that they were in PROSECUTION v. GATARE 117

## Page 331

Rwanda while he told those in Rwanda that they were in Belgium is also an incriminating evidence. 7. The fact that there is a witness not summoned to appear before the court to repeat the statements he made before the Prosecution, confirming that the accused told him that his wife had intolerably changed to the extent that he preferred her death cannot be considered as a ground to annul his statements because the court is not obliged to summon all the witnesses interrogated in course of investigation more particularly that the subject of the examination in his statements was the relationship with his wife and that there are sufficient evidence to support it, including his own statements proving that his relationship was unpleasant. 8. The fact that the accused purchased one way air tickets for the deceased proves the reason why they refused to come with him to Rwanda, as they had discovered that he had plotted to abandon them there. 9. The divorce proceedings would be perceived as means of concealing the evidence. Therefore, the fact that the accused initiated an action for divorce as soon as he arrived in Rwanda and the action for revocation of the adoption must be taken into consideration as further evidence. 10. The fact that the accused bought to Rwanda identification documents of the deceased which were got on his arrest three months later they were still in his possession, should not be considered as forgetting or a mistake, but it emphasizes that he was aware that they did not shift from his household to their own accommodation because in that case, they would at least take with them some personal belongings needed in daily life. RWANDA LAW REPORTS 118

## Page 332

11. The fact that the accused made contradictory statements regarding his schedule of the day the deceased were killed, till he declared that he spent the day with the kid till night renders his statements doubtful. 12. The fact that the buyer and the seller of the vehicle did not enter into a written contract and its number plate having been deregistered demonstrate that the buyer had planned to distort the evidence that might incriminate him. Thus, the fact that the investigation did not reveal the identification of the buyer of the vehicle should not invalidate other evidence produced in this case. 13. Although the accused is a first offender, he should not benefit from mitigating circumstances as requested by his counsel, taking into account the manner in which he plotted and killed the deceased with cruelty, and in consideration of all he has done to conceal the evidence of the crime, the orphans have lost the only surviving parent and their eldest sister, killed by their adoptive parent. 14. The civil party does not prove in what she criticizes moral damages granted previously. Therefore, they must be sustained. 15. Damages relating to an eventual act cannot be awarded. Therefore, the transportation of the bodies from Belgium to Rwanda and the funeral expenses requested by the civil party are not granted. Appeal lacks merit. Cross appeal without merit. The accused found guilty and sentenced to life imprisonment. Accused ordered to pay different damages. PROSECUTION v. GATARE 119

## Page 333

Court fees to the public treasury. Statutes and statutory instruments referred to: Organic Law N°01/2012/OL of 02/05/2012 instituting the penal code, articles 71, 82, 140 and 145. Law N°15/2004 of 12/6/2004 relating to evidence and its production, article 119. Decree - Law N°21/77 of 18 August 1977 instituting the penal code, article 312. No case referred to. Judgment I. BRIEF BACKGROUND OF THE CASE [1] On Sunday 02 July 2006 at 11:45p.m, in Nieuwerkerken (Limburg), the firemen were alerted by an individual who saw the flame of fire in a small forest located in 300 kilometers from the N716 road. On arrival, they found that it was a burning vehicle in which there were two human bodies severely consumed by the fire to the extent that they could not be identified. [2] Investigators realized that the burnt vehicle was a MAZDA 121 with NoCFI 204 number plate, in which they found the burnt wallet containing burnt pieces of paper and in four meters away, the crank, the burnt black scarf containing pieces of broken lighter as well as the vehicle identification documents, including that relating to its acquisition from the RWANDA LAW REPORTS 120

## Page 334

Bierset automobile company. Within 6 meters, they also found the black burnt jacket in which was the bunch of keys and the white envelope on which was handwritten the telephone number of the garage located in Lambermont. [3] The jacket was subjected to the olfaction of the police dog and this one followed the smell of the one who wore it up to 100 meters behind the vehicle until the end of the trail. [4] The subsequent investigation revealed the following information: The documents burnt in the vehicle and the voter's card issued in Rwanda as well as the card of the Centre Public d'Action Sociale (CPAS) de Liège; Those burnt individuals were identified as Uwimana Liberatha and her daughter Ingabire Cléscence who were burnt alive because their lungs contained smoke; Liberatha had four children namely Umulisa Clémence, Uwase Clementine, Ingabire Cléscence and Urwibutso Emmanuella, whom she had with her first husband murdered in the genocide perpetrated against the Tutsi in 1994 and another called Pierre Alexandre that she had with Gatare Edouard with whom she got married in Rwanda on 23 November 2002 and who adopted all these children from the first husband; Before getting married to Uwimana, Gatare was in cohabitation with the Belgian Jacquet Fabienne, with whom he had two children, namely Charlie and Estelle before separating. He was also naturalized Belgian; PROSECUTION v. GATARE 121

## Page 335

In 2004, Liberatha and her children Ingabire Cléscence Urwibutso Emmanuella and Pierre Alexandre joined Gatare in Belgium; The keys found in the pocket of the jacket picked up at the place where the vehicle was burnt are compatible to open their house located in Liège 4020, Lairesse 134 Street; Gatare requested the spare keys from the landlord, advancing that he had lost the original; The vehicle in which Liberatha and Cléscence were burnt had been sold to a black individual in the car dealer company of Bierset (Liège) on Sunday 25 June 2006; A few hours before the murder of Liberatha and Cléscence, Gatare used the telephone antenna of Nieuwerkerken and the following day he was seen with burns; On 18 July 2006, Gatare left Belgium towards Rwanda with his youngest child Pierre Alexandre, while he had already sent Emmanuella on 11 July 2006. One way tickets from Belgium to Rwanda were booked for Libératha and Cléscence. The co-worker of Gatare Edouard testified that he had told him that he will abandon Liberatha and the children she had with her first husband in Rwanda because they were in conflict. [5] Gatare was arrested in Rwanda on 17 October 2006 after 3 months of stay. The investigation continued until the RWANDA LAW REPORTS 122

## Page 336

prosecution filed the case to the High Court of the Republic, accusing him of the murder of Uwimana Liberatha and Ingabire Cléscence. [6] Gatare pleaded not guilty before that court, which rendered the verdict RP0303/06/HC/KIG on 12 November 2008, whereby it convicted and sentenced him to life imprisonment. The court also ordered him to pay 8,000,000Frw in moral damages, 300,000Frw of counsel fees to the civil party called Uwanyirigira Sylvie. [7] The main grounds on which the court relied to convict Gatare are as follows: The fact that his own jacket and keys of the house in which they lived were found near the site where the vehicle was set on fire; The fact that the police dog detected and followed the smell of the person wearing the jacket from the place where the vehicle was burnt down to the road, which implies that its wearer had moved from the crime scene towards the road; The fact that the day after Liberatha and Cléscence were burnt in the vehicle, burns were found on him; The fact that few hours before the commission of the crime, he used the telephone antenna of Nieuwerkerken; The fact that from 02 July 2006 to 18 July 2006, two weeks and a half, he remained in Belgium without informing the police about the disappearance of Liberatha and Cléscence to search for them and the fact PROSECUTION v. GATARE 123

## Page 337

that since he arrived in Rwanda, he spent three months without informing any administrative authority; The fact that he was in conflict with Liberatha to the extent that he intended to abandon her in Rwanda during the holidays and the latter discovered the plot and therefore refused to accompany him; The fact that on his arrival in Rwanda he rushed to initiate an action for divorce and the revocation of the adoption of the children of Liberatha; The fact that in the divorce trial he summoned Liberatha to their residence in Liège while he declares that he left Belgium two weeks after his wife went to find an accommodation elsewhere; The fact that at the time of his arrest, he was found in possession of identification documents of Liberatha and Cléscence including passports and identity cards as well as Liberatha's wedding ring; therefore, it is incomprehensible how he held these documents while he admitted himself that they had refused to travel with him to Rwanda. [8] Gatare appealed to the Supreme Court on 08 December 2008 alleging that the High Court of the Republic convicted him on the basis of evidence which did not prove that he is the one who burnt Liberatha and Cléscence to death in the vehicle. [9] The public hearing was held on 25 January 2010 and 15 March 2010, in the presence of Gatare Edouard assisted by Counsel Hakundanabahari Théotime, the Public Prosecution being represented by Ruberwa Bonaventure, while Uwanyirigira RWANDA LAW REPORTS 124

## Page 338

Sylvie, the civil party was represented by Counsel Nsengiyumva Viator. [10] After the hearing of 15 March 2010, the hearing was postponed on request of Gatare so that some documents of the investigation carried out in Belgium in french language be translated into one of other languages used in Rwanda and Urwibutso Emmanuella and Uwase Clémentine be summoned to testify about the relationship between Gatare and their mother. [11] The hearing in public resumed on 16 June 2014 and was closed on the same day. Gatare Edouard was present and assisted by Counsel Gashema Felicien, the Public Prosecution represented by Mutayoba Alphonse and Uwanyirigira Sylvie, the civil party was represented by Counsel Habineza Gasore Gilbert. During the same hearing, Urwibutso Emmanuella and Uwase Clementine were heard as it had been requested by Gatare Edouard. II. ANALYSIS OF LEGAL ISSUES A. Whether the evidence on which the High Court of the Republic relied does not incriminate Gatare for having burnt Liberatha and Cléscence to death in the vehicle. (a) Concerning the fact that his jacket was picked near the place where the vehicle was burnt and that the police dog sniffed the smell of the person who wore it and tracked him up to the road where it lost his trace. [12] Gatare states that he explained to the Court that even though the jacket that was picked near the place where the PROSECUTION v. GATARE 125

## Page 339

vehicle was set on fire belonged to him, but it was worn by Liberatha on 2 July 2006 as they used to exchange clothes. [13] He states that the evidence in support of his statements is that they last met the morning of the same day when he was going to trim the tree fence of the elderly woman who lived close to her ex-wife Fabienne Jacquet. At that moment Liberatha told him that she was going to pick Cléscence from the place where she had spent the night, without disclosing it and that they did not meet again because he returned home at 8:00PM while the investigators had demonstrated that she and her daughter were burnt in the vehicle at 11:45PM far from 40 or 50 kilometers from Liège to their residence. [14] He states that another element proving that the jacket was worn by Liberatha is that she called her young sister Uwanyirigira Sylvie who resides in Rwanda at 1:00PM and this implies that she was not at home since they did not own the telephone at their residence in Liège except for the cellphone she had with her; therefore, it is up to Uwanyirigira to report the place where her elder sister was, if she communicated to her. [15] Concerning the fact that the jacket was picked outside the vehicle on which Liberatha and Cléscence were burnt, he declares that Liberatha would have held it in hand and threw it out as a manifestation of crying for help. [16] With regard to the examination of the jacket by the sniffing police dog which followed the smell of the person who wore it from the crime scene to the road, he declares that this is not a sufficient evidence to indicate him as the one who wore it since the sniffing police dog could not link the smell to him. RWANDA LAW REPORTS 126

## Page 340

[17] The Public Prosecutor replied that if the jacket picked near the place where the vehicle was burnt were worn by Liberatha, it would also have been altered by the fire inside the vehicle as supported by the judge of the first instance court. [18] He further states that from the smell of the jacket, the sniffing police dog was able to follow the smell of the person who wore it until the end of the trail, implying that its wearer had come out of the vehicle, hence the statements of Gatare that the pursuit by the sniffing police dog does not link the smell to him constitutes dilatory tactics. OPINION OF THE COURT [19] The defence of Gatare aims at demonstrating that his jacket was worn by Liberatha when she was set on fire in the vehicle since he was at home at the time of their assassination. He claims in addition that the victims did not spend the day at the residence because Cléscence did not pass the night at home the day before their assassination, whereas Liberatha had informed him in the morning before he went to help Fabienne's neighbor to trim her tree fence, that she was about to pick up Clésence from the place where she had spent the night without disclosing it to him. [20] However, the court finds that there is no evidence that Gatare was at his residence at the time when Liberatha and Cléscence were murdered, such as the phone call made through the telecommunication antenna of his residence or the neighbor who would have seen him coming back home. PROSECUTION v. GATARE 127

## Page 341

[21] Furthermore, the Court rejects his arguments concerning the last time he saw Liberatha and Cléscence because he does not indicate the place they went, one the previous day and another, the morning of the day they were murdered, in order to carry out the investigation. Thus, it is inconceivable for Liberatha to have taken the initiative to inform him that she would pick Cléscence from the place where she had spent the night without informing him about the location. [22] In addition, the Court finds groundless the statements that Liberatha made a phone call to Rwanda around 1h00PM, which implies that she spent the day out of home on the day of her assassination, especially that they did not have the landline telephone at their residence; because it is possible for a person to leave home for a certain act and come back after its completion. [23] The court finds also that Liberatha could not have held Gatare’s jacket at the time of her assassination and be picked outside the vehicle while she was burnt inside. In addition, the sniffing police dog followed the smell of its wearer up to 100 meters where it lost the trace, which implies he was at the scene of the crime until he left. [24] The court therefore considers that the jacket belonging to Gatare being picked outside the vehicle in which Liberatha and Cléscence were burnt is a proof against him as it was held by the High Court of the Republic. [25] Concerning the fact that the next day after Liberatha and Cléscence were burnt in the vehicle, he was found with burns Gatare declares that the burns observed on him the day after RWANDA LAW REPORTS 128

## Page 342

Liberatha and Cléscence were set on fire in the vehicle have nothing to do with the tragedy. [26] Gatare alleges that he explained that he was burnt on Monday, 03 July 2006 between 11:00 and 1:00 PM when he was repairing the heated exhaust pipe of the vehicle when he was coming from checking in their luggage at Zaventem airport, while it is stated that the deceased were burnt in the vehicle at 11:45PM of the night of 2 July 2006 dawning to 3 July 2006. [27] He further alleges that the court was very biased in declaring that he was burnt by the flame of fire on the basis of the witnesses declarations who did not appear in the court, who affirm the facts which they are unaware of, and each having his/her own version of the facts; but the court considered them and held that he was not burnt by the heated exhaust pipe of the vehicle because if it was the case, he should have been burnt on the hand palms instead of the abdomen and the chest, whereas he himself had never stated that he was burnt on his abdomen and chest, and it was not even declared by Emmanuella who saw him on the day he was burnt. [28] He adds that he demonstrated how he was burnt by the heated exhaust pipe of his vehicle during his interrogation by the Public Prosecutor in February 2007 and that the journalists photographed him, but none of them noticed wounds on his belly and chest as it is pretended. [29] With regard to the medical report on which the court relied, he states that it was also established with bias given that it states that the cause of the burns is difficult to be established as the scars have disappeared, but later the doctor stated that he was burnt by the flame of fire which leads him to wonder the PROSECUTION v. GATARE 129

## Page 343

evidence on which the doctor relied especially that he was not in possession of medical records of the doctor who treated him in Belgium. [30] During her interrogation by the Court, Urwibutso Emmanuella testified that she saw Gatare with wounds on his arm, hand palms and mouth, and when she asked him what happened, he replied that he was burnt by the vehicle exhaust pipe. [31] The Prosecutor submits that Gatare's assertion that he was burnt by the vehicle's exhaust pipe is contradicted by the way he was burnt on the face, the neck, the belly and the chest as testified by several persons who saw him, and who do not have any reason to lie and who have no conflict with him, and moreover there exists a medical report which proves that he was burnt by the flames of fire. OPINION OF THE COURT [32] Gatare's arguments intend to show that the burns found on him the day after Liberatha and Cléscence were set on fire in the vehicle were not caused by the flames of fire as stated in the medical report but by the vehicle exhaust pipe. [33] However, the Court finds that it cannot rely on his statements that he was burnt by the vehicle exhaust pipe because he does not produce supporting evidence. [34] The court finds furthermore that even though Gatare states that the medical report is biased, it cannot take it into consideration because the fact that he stated that most of traces RWANDA LAW REPORTS 130

## Page 344

have disappeared, does not exclude the fact that the scars of burns on the arms, forehead, neck and ear noticed on him could not have been caused by a solid object or liquid, rather from the flame of fire coming from the right side of the front. [35] The court finds therefore the fact that Gatare manifested the burns soon after Liberatha and Clésence were burnt in the car, constitutes incriminating evidence in addition to his jacket which was picked at the scene of the crime as held by the High Court of the Republic. The fact that in his jacket picked near the place where the vehicle was burnt were the keys of the house where Gatare and his family resided, and that he had requested the landlord for the spare keys. [36] Gatare asserts that the court was so biased in confirming that the keys that were found at the place where Liberatha and Clésence were burnt belonged to him on the basis that none else kept them, while he had proved that both Liberatha and him had their own keys. [37] He explains that it would not be possible for them to have a single key because he used to go to work at 6:00am and return at 6:00PM, while his wife took the children to school and Cléscence went to study, therefore, they could not all leave the house unlocked. [38] He further submits that another proof that the judge was so biased is that he declared that on Monday 03 July 2006 around 2:00PM, he went to pick Emmanuella and Alexander from Fabienne's and back home, he opened the house with his PROSECUTION v. GATARE 131

## Page 345

own keys, which was also confirmed by Emmanuella and no one was at home. [39] Concerning the reasons why he requested for the spare keys from the landlord, Jacques Lebrun, as the latter confirmed it during his interrogation by the investigators in Belgium, he said that it was for Clésence to have her own key as in few days ago, their bicycle was stolen and he thought that the thief found the keys where they used to keep them and that the landlord gave them to him before the date Liberatha and Clésence were killed and before being burnt by the exhaust pipe. [40] Regarding the reason why during his interrogation before the prosecution he stated that he had the burns at the time he requested for the spare keys with, he first responded that it was an error (see the minute of the hearing of 15 March 2010), but later he stated that he requested for them from the landlord before he being burnt so that they could be given to Clésence, who sometimes used to return home during their absence, but the landlord brought them after he was injured (see the minutes of 16 June 2004). He added that even if the landlord brought him the keys when he was already injured, he found the door of the house in good condition and unlocked because he still had his own. [41] When Urwibutso Emmanuella was also interrogated about this case in this court, she asserted that no one else held the keys except Gatare, statements she also made in the course of her interrogation by the prosecution. [42] The prosecutor alleges that the keys found in the Gatare’s jacket belonged to him because Emmanuella stated that there was only one key and that her mother had none. RWANDA LAW REPORTS 132

## Page 346

[43] He states that another supporting evidence that these keys belonged to him is that they were on a key holder offered to him by his daughter Estelle, as he also testified when interrogated by the prosecution. [44] He further states that Liberatha could not have been burning and subsequently throws the keys and jacket out of the vehicle. [45] He further adds that the fact that Emmanuella saw Gatare opening their house was something normal because the landlord had given him the spare keys. OPINION OF THE COURT [46] Gatare's arguments intend to explain that the keys that were picked at the crime scene belonged to Liberatha because each of them had his/her own, and he was in possession of his the day after they were burnt in the vehicle because he used them to open the door after bringing Emanuella and Pierre Alexandre from Fabienne's, his ex-wife. [47] The court finds however that since Gatare stated that his bicycle was stolen some time ago and that he thought the thief found their keys at the place where they used to keep them, persuading that they were using a single key they kept to an agreed place; corroborates with the statements made by Emmanuella declaring that they had a single key. [48] The court notices in addition that the fact that Gatare confesses, though he first denied that when the landlord gave him the spare keys he had the burns, the landlord also in his PROSECUTION v. GATARE 133

## Page 347

statement to the investigation services of Belgium admitted that Gatare made a phone call asking for other keys because he had lost his, which implies that the spare was used to open the door when he came from Fabienne's to take Emmanuella and Pierre Alexandre. [49] The court notices in addition that Liberatha could not have been burnt in the car and the keys be found outside the vehicle in the jacket worn by a person who came from the place of the crime towards elsewhere as previously explained. [50] Considering these grounds, the court finds the fact that the keys of their house were picked at the crime scene constitutes another incriminating evidence against Gatare. d) The fact that an unburnt crank was picked near the place where the car was burnt. [51] Gatare asserts that because the judge was biased, held that the crank was removed from the vehicle so that Liberatha and Cléscence could not get out while this object could not prevent them from getting off the vehicle because it is not meant to unlock the doors. [52] In addition, Gatare argues that the fact that this crank was not burnt may imply that the victims threw it out looking for the way out by lowering the window while it was not securely fastened. [53] He further submits that the prosecution did not provide any evidence that the window of the vehicle was locked and it is not even mentioned in the correspondence from Belgium. RWANDA LAW REPORTS 134

## Page 348

[54] The Prosecutor submits that the fact that the crank of the vehicle was found intact near the burnt vehicle implies that it was removed before the car was set on fire to prevent those who were inside to escape, especially that the vehicle in question did not have rear doors. OPINION OF THE COURT [55] The court finds that Gatare's arguments that the crank which was picked near the crime scene unburnt, could have been thrown out by the victim trying to unlock doors, as it was not fastened, should not be considered accurate because the investigations in Belgium indicated that the crank was found near a burnt black scarf containing pieces of the broken lighter, which implies that the crank was removed by the one who burnt them in the vehicle because if it was thrown by the victims who were being burnt, it could have been found next to tools including the lighter used by the perpetrator. [56] The court also finds that the one who burnt Liberatha and Cléscence in the vehicle had a nasty intention in removing the crank, as he did so in order to achieve his goal of preventing them from getting out the vehicle. Therefore, it is not understandable why Gatare does not admit that they were blocked in the vehicle by the person who burnt them by alleging that the judge was biased because he believes the author would have no reason to do so given that the doors of the vehicle could be unlocked from inside. (e) The fact that he made a phone call at 4:47 and 4:48 pm through the antena of Nieuwerkerken on the day when PROSECUTION v. GATARE 135

## Page 349

Uwimana Liberatha and Ingabire Cléscence were burnt in the vehicle. [57] Gatare asserts that on Saturday morning of 01 July 2006, he went to trim the tree fence of the elder woman who lived close to Fabienne's, and returned there the following day Sunday of 02 July 2006 and finished between 2h00PM and 3h00 PM with the help of his children Emmanuella and Estelle who removed the weeds. He rested a little at Fabienne's, before he went to St Trond at 40 or 50 kilometers to look for a car to buy that he had to bring to Rwanda, but he did not find any of his choice. At around 5:00 pm he went back to Liege where he resides, and arriving there, he found the house closed and he went to sleep before Liberatha and Cléscence were back. [58] He states furthermore that the fact that he made a phone call at 4:47PM and 4:48PM through the Nieuwerkerken antena does not constitute evidence on which the court could rely to convict him because between Liège where he resides and St Trond, there is no place called Niewerkerken, so the judge fabricated it in order to convict him because not only he does not know this place, but also he never went there, and no one saw him there. [59] He states in addition that at around 8 to 8:00AM he was at home and that he did not spend Sunday with Liberatha. He went on stating that she would not accept to be improvised and leave home at 8:00AM, because normally when you have to make a visit, you would inform your wife for her to prepare in advance. [60] The Prosecution submits that the fact that Gatare used the antenna of the crime scene at around 4:47PM and 4:48PM RWANDA LAW REPORTS 136

## Page 350

demonstrates that he had already visited the place for the execution of his plot, especially that he admitted before the High Court that he has perhaps passed through that place to get to St Trond in the afternoon to buy the car. [61] He goes on to state that the statements of Gatare that the purpose of the journey he made on 2 July 2006 in the afternoon was to buy the car he wanted to send to Rwanda are inaccurate because he had already planned to fly to Rwanda the next day, on 4 July 2006 which would not be possible for him to complete all the formalities to ship the car. This implies that he went there for a different purpose. OPINION OF THE COURT [62] The arguments advanced by Gatera are meant to prove that he did not go to Nieuwerkerken the day Liberatha and Cléscence were set on fire in the car. [63] However, the Court notes that the fact that the file initiated in Belgium include the statements made by various persons testifying that Gatare used to travel annually to St Trond to collect fruits and the fact that this place is located at no more than 20km from Niewerkerken, this casts doubt with regard to his statements according to which he does not know Nieuwerkerken. [64] Regarding the purpose of his trip to St. Trond on the day Liberatha and Cléscence were murdered, the Court finds that Gatare provided no evidence to support his statements that he was going to meet Milants, his employer, or that he was going for the purchase of the car to be sent to Rwanda as he declared PROSECUTION v. GATARE 137

## Page 351

both to the Public Prosecutor and the Court. Therefore, it must be confirmed that it was for another purpose [65] The Court finds therefore that the fact that Gatare made a phone call through the Niewerkerken antenna shortly before Liberatha and Cléscence were murdered must be examined together with other evidence which have been demonstrated including the jacket and keys that were picked at the crime scene as well as the burns that were noticed on him the day after the commission of the crime. Regarding the fact that he did not declare the missing of Liberatha and Cléscence in order to search for them. [66] Gatare argues that he had no reason to declare the missing of Liberatha and Cléscence to the administrative authorities because he was not aware of what had happened to them, instead, after realizing that they did not come back home since 2 July 2006, he wondered his wife had executed her idea of seeking her own accommodation. [67] Regarding the reason why he thought that Liberatha would have gone to seek for her own accommodation, he explains that he married her while he resided in Belgium and her in Rwanda, that he took her to Belgium with three children including the one they had together and other two remained in Rwanda while they were still arranging for their travel to join them after becoming financially stable. He added that two years later Liberatha had already became familiar and consequently began to disobey him and told him she could look for her own accommodation. RWANDA LAW REPORTS 138

## Page 352

[68] The Prosecutor contends that Gatera's arguments that he spent two and a half weeks in Belgium and three months in Rwanda without seeking to know the whereabouts of Liberatha and Cléscence pretending that he thought they had moved to their own accommodation should not be taken into consideration since Liberatha, as a mother, could not spend such a long time without asking about her children, including the one who was only four years old. OPINION OF THE COURT [69] The Court finds wrong Gatare's defense that since 2 July 2006 he no longer had any news from Libératha and Cléscence but that he thought they had moved to their own accommodation, because none of the persons interviewed in course of investigations declared to have been informed by him that his wife had abandoned the marital home. Rather, he informed the owner of the house in Belgium that Liberatha and Cléscence had already gone as mentioned in the interrogation minutes, while he informed his brothers, Muhirwa Frédérik and Munigantama Cyriaque in Rwanda that they had refused to travel with him at the last minute as highlighted in their interrogation minutes before the Prosecution. [70] The court also finds that during the divorce proceedings when he presented evidence that their cohabitation was no longer possible, Gatare stated that his wife rejected his proposal to travel together in Rwanda at the very last minute and this resulted in loss of a lot of money. He added that she used to insult him in presence of children, but has never mentioned the issue of the abandonment of the marital home as well as of two children, including one with 4 years old, while it would serve PROSECUTION v. GATARE 139

## Page 353

him as evidence about his wife's misbehavior on which he prayed the court to rely for granting him divorce. [71] Furthermore, the Court finds that the arguments of Gatare that he thought Liberatha had left for her own accommodation, is impossible since he himself was convinced that this could not be possible especially that she could not leave without taking her administrative documents and those of Cléscence, including their foreign identity cards, clothes and personal belongings. This is refuted by his own statements to the Prosecutor when he was questioned whether he still lives with Uwimana Liberatha as spouses and replied that they had never separated despite their discontents. [72] Therefore, the Court finds that considering all his statements made in the different periods, Gatare had no reason to believe that Liberatha and Cléscence had shifted to their own accommodation, hence, the fact that he did not notify anyone of their disappearance, rather, he told people in Belgium that they had left for Rwanda and told those in Rwanda that they were in Belgium, constitute an incriminating evidence against him in addition to other previously detailed, because his statements were meant to mislead acquaintances who would spend a long time without realizing their disappearance to avoid their search. (f) Concerning the Court's decision that he was in discontentment with Liberatha. [73] Gatera argues that the basis on which the Court relied to decide that he had discontent with his wife should not be considered because if that was the case, he would not have taken her with her children to Belgium, take charge of them on his own account and would not have given a cow to Tegibanze RWANDA LAW REPORTS 140

## Page 354

Joseph in recognition of having hidden her during genocide, as well as paying for electricity installation of her parent’s and brother's houses, which cost him approximately 700,000Frw and 1,000,000Frw. [74] Moreover, he states that they experienced little problems in their relationship as it happens elsewhere but that they managed to solve them. He adds that this can be affirmed by Uwanyirigira Sylvie with whom they used to talk on phone although she changed her version for her personal and unknown reasons. [75] He further states that the court mistakenly analyzed the statements in his correspondence because one letter was addressed to Liberatha before she came to Belgium, whereby he was telling her confidential information between them, that if it contained wicked statements, she would not have accepted to join him in Belgium. He adds that another letter was addressed to his mother-in-law two years after Liberatha lived in Belgium, informing her that her daughter’s behavior had changed too much in such a way that she did no longer respect him after being accustomed to the country. He states that he wrote this letter so that they attempt to discipline her because he sometimes told them and they blamed her on the phone in such way that he noticed an improvement. [76] He adds that if there was a serious discontentment between him and Liberatha, it would not have been the motive to kill her and her child Ingabire Cléscence. [77] Regarding Murangwa Anthere statements that they met in Belgium in October 2005 and he told him that Liberatha's behavior had intolerably changed in such a way that he would PROSECUTION v. GATARE 141

## Page 355

prefer her death as he had enough with her, he explained that this is not true and that the court erred in law by rejecting his request to summon him to appear and testify before the court despite being relative to the deceased as her mother was her godmother. [78] Regarding his statement during the divorce proceedings that his wife subjected him to excessive abuse by insults, he replied that he stated it as a ground for divorce. As for the statements made by Emmanuella in the same proceeding, he stated that he had invited her to testify about the way he used to insult her mother "stupid, ignorant" and her mother replied that he was "stupid, shit" and that to call someone "stupid" is a normal thing. [79] Uwanyirigira Sylvie, the civil party and Liberatha's younger sister, testified that her sister told her that her husband used to harass her to the extent that she could no longer telephone her from inside the house. [80] She explained that another cause of discontentment between them was that he was poor and used to secure some money from his ex-wife, Fabienne. [81] The Prosecutor submits that the fact that Gatare might have assisted Liberatha's family does not exclude the possibility for him to plot her death and that the critical relationship between him and his wife are justified by his letter to his mother-in-law informing her that the behavior of her daughter had changed too much, which is also supported by the various witness statements. Therefore, it is not sufficient to merely allege that Murangwa Anthere falsely incriminated him whereashe is not the sole witness. RWANDA LAW REPORTS 142

## Page 356

OPINION OF THE COURT [82] The Court finds that, although Gatare alleges that the previous Court improperly analyzed his correspondences and relied on them to confirm that the relationship between him and his wife was critical as well as the false testimony given by Murangwa Anthère, which was not even given before the Court, they are not the sole evidence proving the bad relationship between them because himself also affirmed during his interrogation before the Prosecution that they lived in disharmony and furthermore he confessed before this Court that two years his wife living in Belgium, she started disobeying him and instead she told him that she was about to look for her own accommodation and handed over her wedding ring, the reason why he was found in possession of it at the time of his arrest. [83] The Court finds that this disagreement is also proved by his paternal cousin, Muhirwa Frédérick, who testified at the Public Prosecutor's Office that in May 2005, when he was on the professional training course in Belgium, Gatare told him that the relationship with his wife was bad, that she disrespect him even before the children he adopted, that she was influenced by her family members who lived in Belgium and that she constantly abused him by reminding him that he depends on money given by his ex-wife and her children. He also stated that Gatare telephoned him the day after he got back to Rwanda and told him that they intended to travel together but that Liberatha had started influencing the children telling them that he plotted to abandon them in Rwanda. [84] Furthermore, the Court finds the fact that Murangwa Anthère was not summoned to appear before the Court to repeat PROSECUTION v. GATARE 143

## Page 357

the statements he made before the Prosecution, confirming that he told him that Liberatha had intolerably changed at the extent he preferred her death cannot be considered as a ground to annul his statements because the Court is not obliged to summon all the witnesses interrogated in course of investigation more particularly that the subject of the examination in his statements was the relationship with his wife and there are sufficient evidence, including his own statements proving that it was unpleasant. h. Concerning the allegations that he wanted to abandon Liberatha and her children in Rwanda during the holidays and his wife discovered it and refused to travel with him to Rwanda. [85] Gatare argues that the Court's motivation that Liberatha rejected his proposal to travel with him to Rwanda because she had already known that he was going to abandon her is not true given that this is contradicted by the reservation he had already made demonstrating that they were supposed to take the flight from Belgium on 4 July 2006 and return on 29 August 2006, except for Estelle who was supposed to return before for personal reasons. He adds that it is also contradicted by the documents issued by the Belgian Embassy in Rwanda which show that they also planned to take along with them other children who had remained in Rwanda in order to avoid being scattered. [86] Furthermore, he states that Liberatha refused to travel for her personal reasons that she did not want to reveal neither to him, her sister-in-law nor to her daughter at the time they spoke on the phone on 2 July 2007 because if she had a problem, she would have told them about it. RWANDA LAW REPORTS 144

## Page 358

[87] He argues that the fact that Liberatha changed her mind and refused to travel with him to Rwanda should not be perceived as if he were planning to abandon or kill her. [88] Regarding the statements made by Nsa Emoli, his co- employee at Milants where they were harvesting fruits, that he revealed to him his wife is not kind and that he was going to abandon her in Rwanda, Gatare replied that it was a lie because they were not friends to the extent that he could reveal secrets to him and that he did not have the power to prevent people from returning to Belgium. [89] Regarding the reason why he booked the one-way tickets for Liberatha, Cléscence and Emmanuella, he replied that he wanted to take advantage of the 25% discount offered by the International Organization of Migration (IOM), therefore he only deposited 75% on its bank account. [90] Regarding the reasons why he and Pierre Alexandre did not take advantage of this price reduction, he replied that IOM applies it only to foreigners, whereas they are Belgians. [91] Regarding the testimony of Anne Christine Ghysens, an IOM employee, which was translated into french indicates that he told her that Liberatha could no longer support life in Europe and would like to return to Rwanda for good, he said that he lied to her with the concert of Liberatha, in order to benefit from the price reduction. [92] The Prosecutor submits that the evidence that Gatare intended to abandon Liberatha and the children she had with her first husband in Rwanda is that he bought them a one-way air ticket, with assistance of OIM which help immigrants to return PROSECUTION v. GATARE 145

## Page 359

to their mother countries after lying that Liberatha could no longer bear life in Europe, and this was confirmed by his co- workers at Milants, who were in charge of harvesting fruits in St-Trond. [93] He further declares that Gatare's statements that he and Liberatha had concerted to lie to IOM that they will not return, because Liberatha could no longer support life in Europe are not true because as soon as Liberatha knew that Gatare had bought a one-way air ticket, she immediately informed her children that she would not leave, on the grounds that Gatare plans to abandon her in Rwanda. OPINION OF THE COURT [94] The Court notes that the fact of booking the tickets itself is not sufficient evidence that Gatare would purchase return tickets once in Rwanda. [95] The Court finds that the statements made by Kassi Bilé, the co-worker of Gatare, that he told him that his wife is not kind and that he will abandon her in Rwanda with the children she had with her first husband corroborate with those of N'sa Emoli, his other co-worker, affirming that he learnt from Kassi Bilé that Gatare intended to abandon his wife and two children in Rwanda. Therefore, these statements must be taken into consideration because they could not have any reason to lie against Gatare. [96] The Court finds that the fact that Gatare bought the air tickets for Liberatha and her two daughters through IOM constitutes proof that he did not intend to return them to RWANDA LAW REPORTS 146

## Page 360

Belgium, because according to his own statements, IOM does not assist immigrants to go on vacation, rather to return permanently to their mother countries; the reason why his statement that they concerted to lie to IOM is not true, for as soon as Liberatha learnt that he had purchased one way tickets she informed the children that she will not travel. This was confirmed by Emmanuella in her statement to the public prosecution and also affirmed by Muhirwa Frédérick that Gatare telephoned him the day before his departure to Rwanda, telling him that Liberatha started to negatively influence the children that he intended to abandon them in Rwanda. [97] Therefore, the Court considers that the previous Court made no mistake in confirming that Liberatha refused to come with him to Rwanda after knowing that Gatare had planned to abandon them there. (i) Concerning the fact that once he arrived in Rwanda, he instituted a divorce action. [98] Gatare alleges that he came to Rwanda without a plan to file a divorce action, rather, he decided to do so because he was outraged by the lack of family complementarity, given that they had planned to go on vacation as a family in Rwanda, with his two children whom he had with his ex-Belgian wife, but despite all the effort he made to get means for their travel, after tickets were paid, she told him she would not leave just 3 days before the departure, without even advancing any reason, and forbidding Cléscence who wanted to go with him. He explains that this caused him to incur a loss of 2,716Euro, equivalent to more than 2,700,000Frw. He added that she had even abandoned their home without informing him about her destination. PROSECUTION v. GATARE 147

## Page 361

[99] He continues to explain that he decided to seek for divorce because Liberatha made him angry, but that if he left after killing her, he would not have filed for divorce while he hastened to do so due to the short time he had to stay in Rwanda. [100] Regarding the reasons that led him to file a divorce action in Rwanda while he and his wife were residing in Belgium, he argues that they solemnised their marriage in Rwanda and that the procedure is cheaper than in Belgium, therefore he wanted this to be brief and less costly. [101] The Prosecutor states that Gatare rushed to file a divorce action once in Rwanda, to conceal the death of Liberatha, as he could not find how to reveal her death. OPINION OF THE COURT [102] Gatare arrived in Rwanda on 18 July 2006 and he immediately filed for divorce in the Primary Court of Busasamana as demontrated by the written submissions of 26 July 2006 prepared by Counsel Nkurunziza Jean Chrysotome. He also rushed to request that Liberatha be summarily summoned, which was approved by the Court. On the date of the hearing, he informed the Court that he had sent the summons of Liberatha by post and she refused to acknowledge receipt. On 29 September 2006, the judge pronounced the divorce to the detriment of Liberatha, on the basis of excessive abuse towards her husband, which is at the origin of conjugal conflict. The Court also placed Pierre Alexandre to the custody of Gatare and other children to the custody of their mother. RWANDA LAW REPORTS 148

## Page 362

[103] After the adjudication of this case, Gatare filed another action to the Primary Court of Busasamana aiming at revoking the adoption of the children that Liberatha had with his first husband, as mentioned in the written submissions filed by Counsel Niyomugabo Christophe. However, the judge ruled that the birth certificates for these children should not be rectified because they do not contain any substantial irregularity and that they were duly issued. [104] The Court considers that the divorce action would be perceived as the way to conceal evidence so that no body be surprised by the fact that he is no longer cohabiting with his wife or is not aware of her whereabouts. This assertion is likely to apply on the action initiated for revocation of adoption with respect to the children of Liberatha, who were not biologically his, therefore, the fact that Gatare initiated an action for divorce as soon as he arrived in Rwanda and the action for revocation of the adoption must be taken into consideration as further evidence in this case. (J) With regard to Liberatha and Cléscence identity documents found in Gatare's possession at the time of his arrest, three months after their death. [105] Gatare argues that the Court's motivation that he took Liberatha and Cléscence's identity documents to cover up their identity is inaccurate because they had planned the trip together, their documents being collected in a bag they chose until Liberatha refused to travel three days before their departure, the reason why she forgot to take them off him, and he continued his activities without even noticing them. PROSECUTION v. GATARE 149

## Page 363

[106] He further submits that if he had killed them, he would have burnt these documents to distort the facts, instead, he kept them for three months and he was about to return with them if he were not arrested by the security services the day before his departure. [107] He further alleges that the fact that he was found with the documents of both the deceased and Liberatha's wedding ring does not constitute sufficient proof that he killed them; otherwise he would have concealed them in order to avoid his arrest. He adds that it rather proves that he was unaware of their death, because if he wanted to conceal evidence, he would have taken the voter's card as well as the card for “Centre Public d'Action Sociale (CPAS)” found in the car to better achieve his goals. [108] The Prosecutor submits that the statements of Gatare that he mistakenly brought the documents should not be taken into consideration, because if it was the case, he would have immediately sent them, something he did not do, as he knew that there was no body, since they were dead. OPINION OF THE COURT [109] Among the documents found with Gatare when he was arrested were among others, identity cards for foreigners living in Belgium belonging to Liberatha and Cléscence as well as their Rwandan passports. [110] The Court considers that the statement of Gatare that if he were the murderer of Liberatha and Clescence, he would have taken the Rwandan voter's card as well as CPAS’s card in RWANDA LAW REPORTS 150

## Page 364

order to conceal evidence, is disregarding that these documents were severely altered by fire, and therefore the fact that the investigators resorted to the laboratory to assemble the ashes for them to recognize their origin, was not foreseen by the person who burnt them in the car. [111] The Court also finds the fact that Gatare brought their identity cards to Rwanda and was arrested three months later still keeping them cannot be considered as a mistake from his part, rather it proves that Gatare was sure that they had not shifted from their home to reside elsewhere, because if this was the case they would have at least taken their identity cards, needed in the daily life such as the withdrawal of money, working, or any other service. For this reason, it corroborates with other evidence of the case. k. Regarding the fact that the court found him guilty without taking into account that there was discharging evidence, proving that he could not burn Liberatha and Cléscence in the car while he was with Pierre Alexandre of 4 years old. [112] Gatare argues that the court disregarded the fact that he was with Pierre Alexandre because he could not take out two persons and leave him alone at home; therefore he could not burn them in the vehicle in his presence. [113] Regarding the reason why he declared before the High Court of the Republic that Pierre Alexandre had gone with Emmanuella to his ex-wife Fabienne, he replied that it was a mistake, because due to the statements made by Emmanuella before the prosecution whereby she affirmed that he came to trim the tree fence along with Pierre Alexandre, he remembered that he was with him on the night of 02/07 dawning to PROSECUTION v. GATARE 151

## Page 365

03/07/2006, and that they left together to St-Trond after trimming the tree fence. [114] The Prosecutor submits that the burden to prove that he was accompanied by Pierre Alexandre lies to Gatare because he had also the option to leave him elsewhere. OPINION OF THE COURT [115] During his interrogation before the public prosecution, Gatare declared that on Sunday of 2 July 2006, he went to St Trond to buy a car, leaving two children, Emmanuella and Pierre Alexandre at Fabienne's where he found them on Monday of 3 July 2006. [116] In his submissions to the High Court of the Republic, he also stated that on Saturday, 1 July 2006, he took the children to Fabienne’s for a visit and farewell and after, takes her children with whom they had to travel to Rwanda. He also repeated it during the hearing before the previous court and before this court before he changed his version of facts. [117] The Court notices that each time he was questioned about his schedule on 2 July 2006 he never mentioned to have travelled to St Trond along with his child Pierre Alexandre to buy a car, neither the fact that they were together when he returned and found the house locked. Therefore, his statement that they spent the day and returned together, which reversed his previous version, cannot be taken into consideration. RWANDA LAW REPORTS 152

## Page 366

(l) With regard to his conviction by the Court without indicating how he got the MAZDA 123 in which Liberatha and Cléscence were burnt to death. [118] Gatare explains that the Mazda vehicle in which Liberatha and Cléscence were burnt to death was sold in Liège in the automotive firm of Bierset and that it is impossible for the vehicle to be sold without establishing a document indicating the buyer. He added that, apart from the bias in this case, he should not have been convicted without at least identifying the vendor of MAZDA123 in order for him to explain under what circumstances he would have sold or lent it to him to use it for the commission of the crime. [119] He adds that he requested that the owner of the vehicle who sold it on 25 July 2006 to the automobile firm of Bierset be heard in this case because it was very important, yet the court did not take it into consideration in disregard of the provisions of article 46, paragraph 2, of the Law relating to the Code of Criminal Procedure, which provides that the court is obliged to seek evidence which the Prosecution was unable to find. [120] He also submits that the testimony of Rauschen who works in that automobile firm demonstrates the difference between him and the buyer of the vehicle because he maintained that the buyer was 35 years old, wearing the bracelet, driving Mitsubishi car, while he is not of that age and never wears a bracelet, and in addition, he never owned a Mitsubishi vehicle. [121] The Counsel for Gatare states that there are doubtful facts in this judgment such as the link between him and the vehicle in which Liberatha and Cléscence were burnt or the way he left the scene of the crime, therefore he requests the Court to PROSECUTION v. GATARE 153

## Page 367

acquit him on the basis of article 71 of Law No15/2004 relating to evidence and its production, which states that doubt favors the accused. [122] The public prosecutor submits that it is not necessary for the Court to order further investigation on the vehicle in which Liberatha and Cléscence were burnt, because the one carried out in Belgium showed that the number plate which was found at the place where it was burnt was already deregistered and the seller of the vehicle explained that it was purchased by a black person and that no written contract was concluded. Therefore, the Court considered sufficient the evidence submitted. OPINION OF THE COURT [123] The investigation conducted in Belgium showed that the last owner of the MAZDA123 vehicle in which Liberatha and Cléscence were burnt was a German lady in the names of Schwarzer Tamara who sold it to Behrwanger in June 2006, the latter also sold it on Sunday June 25, 2006 in the automobile firm of Bierset. That same day he was bought by a black person but no document was established. [124] With regard to the plate number CFI 204 that was on this car, the investigation showed that it was for the Peugeot 206 vehicle and in addition it was deregistered on 28 August 2002. [125] The court considers that the fact that the buyer and the seller of the vehicle did not enter into a written contract and that the vehicle number plate was struck off demonstrates that the buyer had planned to alter the evidence that might facilitate his identification. Thus, the fact that the investigation did not RWANDA LAW REPORTS 154

## Page 368

demonstrate the identification of the buyer of the vehicle must not invalidate other evidence produced in this case. (m) Held [126] Article 119, litera 1 of the Law N°15/2004 relating to evidence and its production stipulates that “in criminal cases, evidence is based on all grounds, factual or legal provided that parties have been given a chance to be present for cross- examination” while in its litera 2 states that “the courts rule on the validity of the prosecution or defence evidence”. [127] On the basis of all evidence presented above, the Court finds that the fact that Gatare's jacket was picked unburnt at the place where Liberatha and Cléscence were burnt and the wearer moved from the crime scene to the road; the fact that the keys used to open the house in which they reside were also found at the crime scene, the fact that he had the burns caused by the flame of fire the day after the death of Liberatha and Cléscence, the fact that a few hours before their assassination he made a call through the telecommunication antenna of Nieuwerkerken and the fact that he was found in possession of identification documents of Liberatha and Cléscence three months after their death, given the way in which Gatare filed a divorce action and the revocation of the adoption of the children immediately after his arrival in Rwanda and the fact that he informed no body about their missing, instead, he told those in Belgium that they are in Rwanda and told those in Rwanda that they were in Belgium; thus the Court finds that there is no doubt with regard to his participation in the killing of Liberatha and Cléscence by burning them in the vehicle and subsequently attempting to conceal the evidence as it was held by the High Court of the Republic, the motive behind their assassination being the anger PROSECUTION v. GATARE 155

## Page 369

he experienced when Liberatha refused to come with him to Rwanda for holidays after realizing his plot to abandon them there as well as the disagreements that existed between them. B. With regard to the penalties [128] Counsel for Gatare contends that the judge sentenced him to a penalty which is in contradiction with the law because he was sentenced to life imprisonment with special provision, while the prosecution had requested for life imprisonment; implying that he was sentenced to a greater penalty than the one which was requested. [129] They further argue that in case the Court finds Gatare guilty, he should be sentenced to a term not exceeding 10 years, given that he is a first offender. [130] The Prosecution submits that the fact that Gatare was sentenced to a lengthy sentence than the one requested for should not be the ground of appeal because no provision of law was violated especially that he was convicted of the crime he was accused of. OPINION OF THE COURT [131] Article 312 of Decree-Law No21/77 of 18 August 1977 establishing the Criminal Code which was in force at the time the offense was committed provided for the death penalty for a person who commits voluntary homicide, but this penalty was abolished by Organic Law No31/2007 of 25/07/2007 and was replaced by life imprisonment and life imprisonment with special provisions; which was also repealed by Organic Law RWANDA LAW REPORTS 156

## Page 370

N°01/2012/OL of 02/05/2012 promulgated in the official gazette on 14 June 2012, which provides in its article 140 for the punishment of the life imprisonment for a person who is guilty of murder, and article 145 provides for life imprisonment with special provisions for a person who has killed another person by inflicting degrading acts or having committed a crime against him/her. [132] Accordingly, the Court considers that Gatare should be sentenced under article 140 which provides for life imprisonment for the person guilty of murder. [133] Regarding factors taken into consideration in sentencing, article 71 of the new Penal Code stipulates that “the judge shall determine a penalty according to the gravity of the offence taking into account offender’s motives, history and background, circumstances surrounding the commission of the offence and individual circumstances” while article 82 of the same law provides that in the event of combination of aggravating, excusable, recidivism and mitigating circumstances, courts shall apply the penalty taking into account these factors in the order set out under this article. [134] The Court finds that, although Gatare is a first offender, he cannot benefit from mitigating circumstances as requested by his counsel, taking into account the manner in which he plotted and killed Liberatha and Cléscence with cruelty and considering all he has done to conceal the evidence of the crime, and the children of Liberatha have lost the only surviving parent and their eldest sister, killed by their adoptive parent.

PROSECUTION v. GATARE 157

## Page 371

C. Whether Uwanyirigira Sylvie was awarded insufficient damages. [135] Uwanyirigira Sylvie states that she filed a cross - appeal against Gatare Edouard's appeal, requesting that the Supreme Court awards her the pecuniary damages she had requested at the High Court of the Republic equivalent to 32,560,000Frw, including alimony for the orphans of late Uwimana Liberatha, tuition fees, transporting the corpse and funeral expenses in Rwanda. She also claims moral damages worth 10,000,000Frw; the procedural expenses and counsel fees of 4,256,000Frw, the total being 46,816,000Frw. [136] Gatare argues that he should not be charged any damages because he is innocent. OPINION OF THE COURT [137] The Court considers that Uwanyirigira Sylvie does not produce proof that she is the guardian of the orphans of the late Liberatha and she is the one who pays their school fees and other necessities for the child. Thus, she should not be granted pecuniary damages she requests for as held by the High Court of the Republic. [138] As regards to the moral damages she claims for, the Court finds that she does not challenge 8,000,000Frw granted by the first instance, therefore, they should be maintained. [139] With regard to the transportation of the bodies from Belgium to Rwanda and the funeral expenses amounting to RWANDA LAW REPORTS 158

## Page 372

10,000,000Frw, the Court considers that as explained by the previous Court, it could not award damages for an eventual act. [140] With regard to counsel fees, the Court deems 300,000Frw awarded to Uwanyirigira by the first instance court in range, according to precedents set in this regard. This amount should be increased of 500,000Frw of the counsel fees at the appeal level. III. DECISION OF THE COURT [141] Finds the appeal lodged by Gatare without merit; [142] Finds the cross appeal filed by Uwanyirigira Sylvie without merit; [143] Declares Gatare Edouard guilty of murder committed against Uwimana Liberatha and Ingabire Clescence; [144] Sentences him to the life imprisonment; [145] Orders him to pay Uwanyirigira Sylvie 8,000,000Frw of moral damages, 300,000Frw of counsel fees allocated to the first instance and 500,000Frw granted before this court, the total being 8,800,000Frw; [146] Orders the court fees to be charged to the public treasury since the appellant is detained. PROSECUTION v. GATARE 159

## Page 373

Printed by PROGRAPH LTD P.o. Box 1882 Kigali - Rwanda Tel : (+250) 788303889