RLR-V.3-2018

RLR-V.3-2018

- Source: Amategeko - Section: Rwanda law reports - Date: 2018-07-27 - 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 - 2018 Nyakanga, 2018 Law Report, V. 3 - 2018 July, 2018

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 - 2018 Nyakanga, 2018 Law Report , V. 3 - 2018 July, 2018

RWANDA LAW REPORTS

Page 4

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO

IKINYARWANDA

Page 6

ISHAKIRO

ABAGIZE KOMITE Y’UBWANDITSI ................................. iii KOMITE YEMEZA IMANZA ............................................... iv IRIBURIRO........................................................................... vii IBIKUBIYE MURI IKI CYEGERANYO ............................. viii INYITO ................................................................................ viii AMATEGEKO YASHINGIWEHO ........................................ ix IMANZA ZIFASHISHIJWE .................................................. xi AMAGAMBO MPINE ......................................................... xiii KCB BANK UGANDA LTD v. KIIZA & LOUISE (KL) LTD 1 NYAMASWA v. MUKAMUSONI ....................................... 13 MUKAMUSONI v. MUKAGASANA N’ABANDI ............... 31 EQUITY BANK RWANDA LTD v. SEBAHIZI ................... 49 RUHIMBAZA v. BANKI YA KIGALI LTD ......................... 75 NTIBAJYINAMA v. UBUSHINJACYAHA ....................... 101 UBUSHINJACYAHA v. HABYARIMANA ET.AL ........... 131

i

Page 8

ABAGIZE KOMITE Y’UBWANDITSI

ITSINDA RY’ABANYAMATEGEKO

BATEGUYE

IMANZA

KAGABO U. Stephanie

KAVUTSE M. Claude

KUBWIMANA Jean Claude

MUJABI K. Naphtal

MWIHOREZE Claudine

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

GIRANEZA Clémentine : Umucamanza mu Rukiko rw’Ibanze

HABARUREMA Jean Pierre : Umushinjacyaha ku Rwego rw’Igihugu

KALIWABO Charles : Perezida w’Urukiko Rukuru

Me KAYIHURA Didas : Avoka mu Rugaga iv

Page 10

rw’Abavoka

KIBUKA Jean Luc : Umucamanza mu Rukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi

Lt. col. MADUDU A. Charles : Umucamanza mu Rukiko Rukuru rwa Gisirikare

MUREREREHE Saouda : Umucamanza mu Rukiko Rukuru

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

KABIBI Specioza : Intumwa ya Leta

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

v ABAGIZE KOMITE Y’UBWANDITSI

Page 12

IRIBURIRO Basomyi bacu, Urwego rw’ Ubucamanza runejejwe no gutangaza nomero ya gatatu y’icyegeranyo cy’ibyemezo by’inkiko mu mwaka wa 2018. Dukomeje kubashimira, basomyi bacu, ko mudahwema kutugezaho ibitekerezo byanyu, munatwereka aho mwifuzako hanozwa kurushaho. Ibi bizatuma turushaho kubagezaho icyegeranyo gikozwe neza kandi gifitiye akamaro abantu b’ingeri zitandukanye bahura n’ibibazo by’amategeko mu mwuga wabo. Muri iyi nomero y’icyegeranyo cy’ibyemezo by’inkiko murasangamo, imanza zirindwi (7) zirimo ebyiri (2) zerekeranye n’imiburanyishirize, mu gihe izindi eshanu (5) ari izi izikurikira: urubanza rumwe (1) rw’imbonezamubano, urubanza (1) rw’ubucuruzi, urubanza rumwe (1) rw’umurimo, n’imanza ebyiri(2) nshinjabyaha. Tuboneyeho kubibutsa ko imaza ziri muri iki cyegeranyo ziboneka no kurubuga rwa murandasi rw’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga ruborohereza kubona urubanza mukeneye mu buryo bwihuse, munyuze kuri http://decisia.lexum.com/rlr/kn/nav.do. Dukomeje gushishikariza abantu bose bifashisha amategeko mu kazi kabo kwitabira gukoresha iki cyegeranyo. Prof. RUGEGE Sam 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 n’Urukiko Rukuru zikoreshwa hakurikijwe inyito ivugwa hasi.

INYITO Imanza ziri muri iyi volime zikoreshwa muri ubu buryo: [2018] 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 16 ................................................................33 ingingo ya 45...............................................................107 Itegeko Ngenga Nº01/2012/OL ryo kuwa 02/05/2012 rishyiraho Igitabo cy’amategeko ahana, ingingo ya 71, 76, 77 niya 78......................................108 ingingo ya 291, 280, 98, 99, 105, 106, 74, 140, 84, 76, 78 niya 45....................................................................134 Itegeko Nº30/2013 ryo kuwa 24/5/2013 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’inshinjabyaha, ingingo ya 39....108 Itegeko N°45/2011 ryo kuwa 25/11/2011 rigenga amasezerano, ingingo ya 64;137......................................................................52 Itegeko Nº13/2009 ryo kuwa 27/05/2009 rigenga umurimo, ngingo ya 29, 32, 33, 35 niya 57...............................................80 Itegeko Nº15/2004 ryo kuwa 12/06/2004 ryerekeye ibimenyetso mu manza n’itangwa ryabyo, ingingo yi 110............................52 Itegeko Ngenga Nº03/2012/OL rigenga imiterere, imikorere n’ububasha by’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga, ingingo ya 81, agace ka 2°............................................52 ingingo ya78 niya 81(2).................................................80 Itegeko Ngenga Nº51/2008 ryo kuwa 09/09/2008 rigena imitunganyirize, imikorere n’ububasha by’inkiko, ingingo ya 134(2)..........................................................................................3 ix

Page 15

Itegeko Nº21/2012 ryo kuwa 14/06/2012 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi, ingingo ya 171.................................................................4 ingingo yi 183 (3)...........................................................16 ingingo 6........................................................................33 ingingo 186 (6)..............................................................80 ingingo ya 118.............................................................134 Itegeko N°18/2004 ryo kuwa 20/06/2004 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, izumurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi, ingingo ya 6...................................33 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 49, 95...34 Itegeko - Teka ryo kuwa 30/7/1888 rigenga amasezerano cyangwa imirimo nshinganwa, ingingo ya 33...................................................................3 ingingo ya 258...............................................................16 ingingo ya 258...............................................................80 ingingo ya 258.............................................................134

x ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO

Page 16

IMANZA ZIFASHISHIJWE Beatrice Wambui Kariuki vs Republic [2005] e KLR,Court of appeal, Kenya..........................................................................108 Brasseries et Limonaderies du Rwanda (BRALIRWA) Ltd na Sindikubwabo Cyprien, RS/REV/COM0001/13/CS, rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga kuwa 26/02/2016..................................16 Mukamusoni na Buyitare, RA0967/13.03/84 rwaciwe n’Urukiko Rusesa imanza rw’u Rwanda kuwa 10 Mata 1985....................34 R. vs Lisa Gore (deceased) Court of appeal, England, 2007.........................................................................................108 RC28.691/98 rwaciwe n’Urukiko rwa Mbere rw’Iremezo rwa Kigali kuwa 22 Nzeri 1999........................................................34 RC28.846/98 rwaciwe n’Urukiko rwa Mbere rw’Iremezo rwa Kigali kuwa 2 Ugushyingo 1998...............................................34 RC31.549/99 rwaciwe n’urukiko rwa mbere rw’iremezo rwa Kigali kuwa 16 Gashyantare 2000............................................34 RC28.867/98 rwaciwe n’Urukiko rwa Mbere rw’iremezo rwa Kigali kuwa 15 Ukuboza 1998..................................................34 RC28691/98 rwaciwe n’Urukiko rwa Mbere rw’Iremezo rwa Kigali kuwa 22/09/1999............................................................34 RCA8689/132 rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ubujurire rwa Nyabisindu kuwa 29/10/1996...............................................................................34 S vs Muhungu HB11/2005, Zimbabwe....................................108 Ubushinjacyaha v. Batamuliza, RPA0207/12/CS, rwaciwe n’urukiko rw’Ikirenga kuwa 17/06/2016.................................108 xi

Page 17

Ubushinjacyaha vs Muhindakazi, RP00090/16/TGI/NGOMA, rwaciwe n’urukiko rwisumbuye rwa Ngoma...........................108 Ubushinjacyaha v. Sezikeye, RPAA038/15/CS rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga kuwa 15/09/2015................................134 Ubushinjacyaha v Uwamahoro rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga kuwa 11/03/20176, RPA0087/12/CS rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga kuwa 11/03/2016.................................................108

xii

Page 18

AMAGAMBO MPINE Amategeko agenga amabanki – Uburyozwe – Uburangare – Kuba banki ifite inshingano yo guhamagara umukiriya mbere yo gukura amafaranga kuri konti ye iyohereza ahandi nkuko biteganywa mu Mabwiriza Ngengamikorere yayo ariko ntibikore bituma iryozwa ingaruka y’iyo mikorere.

EQUITY

BANK

RWANDA LTD v. SEBAHIZI.......................................................................49 Amategeko agenga ububasha bw’inkiko – Ububasha bw’inkiko zo mu Rwanda – Amasezerano yakorewe mu mahanga – Inkiko zo mu Rwanda zishobora kugira ububasha bwo kwakira ibirego bitanzwe n’abanyamahanga bishingiye ku masezerano yakorewe mu mahanga iyo impande zombi zabyumvikanye gutyo ndetse niyo ububasha bw’inkiko bufite aho buhuriye nayo masezerano – Itegeko Ngenga Nº51/2008 ryo kuwa 09/09/2008 rigena imitunganyirize, imikorere n’ububasha by’inkiko, ingingo ya 134(2) – Itegeko - Teka ryo kuwa 30/7/1888 rigenga amasezerano cyangwa imirimo nshinganwa, ingingo ya 33. KCB BANK UGANDA LTD v. KIIZA & LOUISE (KL) LTD...........................................................................1 Ububasha bw’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga – Inama itangwa n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga – Inama Urukiko rw’Ikirenga rugira inzego za leta zibishinzwe kongera gusuzuma ingingo z’itegeko zijyanye n’icyaha cyo kwihekura – Itegeko-Ngenga Nº01/2012/OL ryo ku wa 02/05/2012 rishyiraho Igitabo cy’amategeko ahana ntiritandukanya icyaha cyo kwihekura n’ubwicanyi busanzwe kuko byose xiii

AMAGAMBO MPINE

Page 19

bihanishwa igifungo cya burundu kandi rikaba ritagaragaza ingano umwana wishwe agomba kuba atarengeje – Imiterere y’icyaha cyo kwihekura cyane cyane ku bakobwa n’abagore bamaze kubyara itandukanye n’ubwicanyi busanzwe kuko akenshi icyaha cyo kwihekura giterwa no kwiheba, guhangayikishwa no kutazashobora kurera uwo mwana ibi bikaba byamutera guhungabana, mu gihe icyaha cy’ubwicanyi gikoranwa ubugome bukabije, akenshi buba bugamije inyungu kubabukora, urwango, ivangura rikabije n’izindi mpamvu. Bityo icyaha cyo kwihekura kumubyeyi umaze igihe gito abyaye nticyafatwa nk’icyaha cy’ubugome bukabije gihanishwa igifungo cya burundu, ahubwo hakabayeho igihano kigereranije ushize mu gaciro n’ibihe icyo cyaha kiba cyakorewemo n’uwagikoze; Urukiko rurasaba inzego za leta zibishinzwe kongera gusuzuma ingingo z’itegeko zijyanye n’icyaha cyo kwihekura mu buryo gisobanurwa n’imihanire yacyo. NTIBAJYINAMA v. UBUSHINJACYAHA..............101 Amategeko agenga imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano – Gusubirishamo urubanza ingingo nshya – Ikimenyetso gishya – Mu gihe ikimenyetso cyaburanishijwe mu nzego zibanza ntigihabwe ishingiro nticyafatwa nk’ikimenyetso gishya – Iyo umuburanyi azi ko hari inyandiko cyangwa ikindi kimenyetso cyamufasha mu rubanza, agomba kwihutira kukigeza ku rukiko nta kuzuyaza, bitabaye ibyo urubanza rukagera aho rubaye itegeko, niwe wirengera amakosa ye ariko aramutse ashatse kugikoresha nk’ ikimenyetso gishya agomba kugaragaza ko icyo gihe bitashobokaga ku kibona – Itegeko N°21/2012 ryo ku wa 14/06/2012 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, xiv ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO

Page 20

iz’ubucuruzi iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi, ingingo yi 183(3). NYAMASWA v. MUKAMUSONI...............................13 Amategeko agenga imiburanishirize y’imanza nshinjabyaha – Uburenganzira bwo kunganirwa – kunganirwa kw’abaregwa ibyaha bihanishwa igihano cy’igifungo cya burundu badashobora kwiyishyurira ababunganira – Mu nyungu z’ubutabera no kubungabunga uburenganzira bwo kunganirwa imbere y’amategeko no ku butabera buboneye muri rusange, abaregwa ibyaha bihanishwa igihano kiremereye cy’igifungo cya burundu badashobora kwiyishyurira ababunganira, Leta izajye ibagenera ababunganira cyangwa ibashakire abafatanya bikorwa bashobora gutanga ababunganira mu mategeko. Igihe ibyo bitaragerwaho, abagenzacyaha n’abashinjacyaha bakwiye ku bisaba Urugaga rw’Abavoka. NTIBAJYINAMA v. UBUSHINJACYAHA..............101 Amategeko mpanabyaha – Impamvu nyoroshyacyaha – Kwemera icyaha mu bujurire no mu Rukiko rw’Ikirenga – Uregwa yemeye icyaha mu buryo budashidikanywaho mu Rukiko Rukuru no mu Rukiko rw’Ikirenga, akagisabira imbabazi, kandi n’imibereho yabayemo yo guhangayika no kwiheba yarabaye intandaro yo guhitamo kwihekura, bikwiye kumubera impamvu nyoroshyacyaha – Itegeko Ngenga Nº 01/2012/OL ryo kuwa 02/05/2012 rishyiraho Igitabo cy’amategeko ahana, ingingo ya 71, 76, 77, 78. NTIBAJYINAMA v. UBUSHINJACYAHA..............101 Impurirane y’ibyaha – Uburyozwe bw’ibyaha – Igihe icyaha kimwe cyabaye intandaro y’ibindi – Mu gihe Icyaha kimwe cyabaye intandaro y’ibindi bituma abaregwa baryozwa ibyo byaha byose kabone nubwo xv

AMAGAMBO MPINE

Page 21

umwe muribo atamenyesha abandi ko agiye kugikora – Itegeko Ngenga No01/2012/OL ryo kuwa 02/05/2012 rishyiraho Igitabo cy’amategeko ahana, Ingingo ya 98. UBUSHINJACYAHA v. HABYARIMANA ET.AL.131 Impurirane y’ibyaha – Ibihano – Mu gihe hakozwe ibyaha binyuranye bifitanye isano bigomba guhanwa mu buryo bw’impurirane mbonezamugambi maze abahamwa n’ibyaha bagahanishwa igihano giteganyirizwa icyaha kirushije ikindi uburemere – Itegeko Ngenga No01/2012/OL ryo kuwa 02/05/2012 rishyiraho Igitabo cy’amategeko ahana, Ingingo ya 84. UBUSHINJACYAHA v. HABYARIMANA ET.AL.131 Amategeko agenga umurimo – Gusesa amasezerano y’umurimo – Uburenganzira bw’umukozi iyo asezerewe mu kazi – Indishyi zikomoka ku kwirukanwa nta mpamvu – Indishyi zo kwirukanwa nta mpamvu zitandukanye n’amafaranga umukozi ahabwa nk’uburenganzira yemererwa n’amategeko iyo asezerewe mu kazi – Itegeko Nº13/2009 ryo kuwa 27/05/2009 rigenga umurimo, ngingo ya 32, 33 niya 57. RUHIMBAZA v. BANKI YA KIGALI LTD...............75 Umushahara – Amafaranga y’urwunguko na y’ ishimwe – Umukoresha atanga amafaranga y’urwunguko nay’ ishimwe abyibwirije kandi ku bushake, ariko iyo ayemeye iba ari itegeko kuri we kuko iba ari kimwe mu bigize umushahara w’umukozi. RUHIMBAZA v. BANKI YA KIGALI LTD...............75 Amategeko agenga umuryango – Izungura – Umuco – Uburenganzira bwo kuzungura cyangwa kuzungurwa ku gitsina gore – Kuba umuco nyarwanda utaremereraga xvi ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO

Page 22

umugore/umukobwa nabo mu muryango akomokamo kuzungura no kuzungurwa bifite ingaruka mbi kandi zikomeye ku ihame ry’uko abantu bareshya imbere y’amategeko. MUKAMUSONI v. MUKAGASANA N’ABANDI.....31 Izungura – Ibirego birebana n’izungura ryatangiye nta tegeko ribigenga rirajyaho – Mu gukemura ibibazo birebana n’izungura byatangiye mbere nta tegeko ribigenga ririho hakurikizwa ibyemezo by’inkiko biha umugore/umukobwa uburenganzira bwo kuzungura no kuzungurwa maze abagabo n’abagore bakagira uburenganzira bungana mu byerekeye izungura n’izungurwa. MUKAMUSONI v. MUKAGASANA N’ABANDI.....31 Itegeko Nshinga – Inshingano za Leta mu guteza imbere ubuzima bwiza – Ikigaragaza ko leta yakoze inshingano zayo z’ibanze mu kubahiriza uburenganzira ku buzima bwiza – Kuba Leta yarashyizeho amavuriro, abakozi n’ibikoresho ndetse ikorohereza abaturage kubona ubuvuzi buhendutse hakoreshejwe ubwisungane mu kwivuza (mutuelle de santé) bigaragaza ko Leta yujuje inshingano zayo z’ibanze – Itegeko Nshinga rya Repubulika y’u Rwanda ryo muri 2003 ryavuguruwe muri 2015, ingingo ya 45. NTIBAJYINAMA v. UBUSHINJACYAHA..............101

xvii

AMAGAMBO MPINE

Page 24

IMANZA ZEREKERANYE N’IMIBURANISHIRIZE Y’IMANZA

Page 26

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

Page 28

KCB BANK UGANDA LTD v. KIIZA & LOUISE (KL) LTD [Rwanda URUKIKO RW’IKIRENGA – RCOMAA0042/16/CS - RCOM 00021/2016/SC (Kayitesi R, P.J., Mukamulisa na Mukandamage, J.) 19 Mutarama 2018] Amategeko agenga ububasha bw’inkiko – Ububasha bw’inkiko zo mu Rwanda – Amasezerano yakorewe mu muhanga – Inkiko zo mu Rwanda zishobora kugira ububasha bwo kwakira ibirego bitanzwe n’abanyamahanga bishingiye ku masezerano yakorewe mu mahanga iyo impande zombi zabyumvikanye gutyo ndetse niyo ububasha bw’inkiko bufite aho buhuriye nayo masezerano – Itegeko Ngenga Nº51/2008 ryo kuwa 09/09/2008 rigena imitunganyirize, imikorere n’ububasha by’inkiko, ingingo ya 134(2) – Itegeko - Teka ryo kuwa 30/7/1888 rigenga amasezerano cyangwa imirimo nshinganwa, ingingo ya 33. Incamake y’ikibazo: KCB BANK Uganda Ltd yagiranye amasezerano y’inguzanyo na sosiyete Kiiza & Louise (KL)Ltd mu gihugu cya Uganda, Kiiza Mulindwa Innoncent na Ndayizeye Andrée Louise barayishingira banatanga ingwate iri mu Rwanda, ariko bemeranywa ko aya masezerano azagengwa n’amategeko y’igihugu cya Uganda, ariko bitabuza banki kurega ugurijwe mu rundi rukiko rwose rufite ububasha, iyi nzu yaje gutezwa cyamunara na KCB Rwanda Ltd. Kiiza & Louise (KL) Ltd ntiyubahirije amasezerano bituma KCB BANK Uganda Ltd iyirega hamwe n’abishingizi bayo mu Rukiko rw’Ubucuruzi rwa Nyarugenge isaba kwishyurwa umwenda bayirimo, amafaranga y’ikurikiranarubanza hamwe 1

Page 29

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 2 n’igihembo cya Avoka, inasaba kandi ko urubanza rwarangizwa byagateganyo kuko ingwate yatanzwe kuri iyo nguzanyo igizwe n’inzu iri mu Rwanda yagurishijwe na KCB Rwanda Ltd. Umwe mu bishingizi yahise atanga inzitizi y’iburabubasha bw’urukiko kuko ikirego cyagombaga gutangwa mu nkiko zo mu gihugu cya Uganda nkuko impande zombi zumvikanye mu masezerano y’inguzanyo bakoranye. Kuri iyi nzitizi, Urukiko rwaregewe rwemeje ko rufite ububasha bwo kuburanisha urubanza kuko abarezwe batuye mu Rwanda, naho mu mizi y’urubanza urukiko rwemeza ko ikirego cyatanzwe na KCB Uganda Ltd gifite ishingiro, rwemeza kandi ko sosiyete Kiiza & Louise Ltd hamwe n’abishingizi bayo bishyura KCB Uganda Ltd umwenda bayiberemo havanywemo amafaranga yakomotse ku igurisha ry’ingwate yagurishijwe mu cyamunara, ayo mafaranga akazatangwa n’ushinzwe kugurisha ingwate. Umwe mu bishingizi yajuririye mu Rukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi avuga ko urukiko rubanza rutitaye ku nzitizi y’iburabubasha yatanze kuko nta ruhare yagize mu ikorwa ry’amasezerano y’inguzanyo yaregewe na KCB Uganda Ltd. Urukiko rwemeje ko ikirego kitagombaga kwakirwa kuko kitari mu bubasha bw’inkiko zo mu Rwanda, ko ahubwo cyagombaga gutangwa mu nkiko za Uganda kuko mu masezerano bumvikanye ko azagengwa n’amategeko ya Uganda, rugenera umwishingizi indishyi zo gushorwa mu manza ku maherere. KCB Uganda Ltd yajuririye Urukiko rw’Ikirenga ivuga ko Urukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi rwavuze ko inkiko zo mu Rwanda nta bubasha zifite bwo kuburanisha ikirego cyayo rwirengagije ko ba nyiri sosiyete yarezwe ari abanyarwanda, batuye mu Rwanda ndetse ko n’ingwate batanze iri mu Rwanda,

Page 30

3 kandi ko hari ingingo mu masezerano ivuga ko batazitiwe kuregera mu zindi nkiko izarizo zose zifite ububasha. Mu kwiregura, umwishingizi avuga ko amasezerano yateganyaga ko azagengwa n’amategeko ya Uganda, uwahawe umwenda agakurikiranwa n’inkiko zibifitiye ububasha, avuga ko asanga inkiko zo mu Rwanda nta bubasha zagira kuko ababuranyi ubwabo bemeranyijwe gukoresha amategeko ya Uganda. Incamake y’icyemezo: Inkiko zo mu Rwanda zishobora kugira ububasha bwo kwakira ibirego bitanzwe n’abanyamahanga bishingiye ku masezerano yakorewe mu mahanga iyo impande zombi zabyumvikanye gutyo, ndetse niyo ububasha bw’inkiko bufite aho buhuriye nayo masezerano. Bityo rero, KCB BANK Uganda Ltd sosiyete y’inyamahanga yashoboraga gutanga ikirego mu nkiko z’u Rwanda irega sosiyete Kiiza & Louise (KL) Ltd hamwe n’abishingizi bayo ishingiye ku masezerano bakoranye mu mahanga kuko ingwate ishingiye kuri ayo masezerano iri mu Rwanda. Ubujurire bufite ishingiro. Iburanisha mu mizi rizakomeza. Amagarama y’urubanza arasubitswe. Amategeko yashingiweho: Itegeko Ngenga Nº51/2008 ryo kuwa 09/09/2008 rigena imitunganyirize, imikorere n’ububasha by’inkiko, ingingo ya 134(2). Itegeko- Teka ryo kuwa 30/7/1888 rigenga amasezerano cyangwa imirimo nshinganwa, ingingo ya 33. KCB BANK UGANDA LTD v. KIIZA & LOUISE (KL) LTD

Page 31

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 4 Itegeko Nº21/2012 ryo kuwa 14/06/2012 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi, ingingo ya 171. Nta manza zashingiweho. Urubanza I. IMITEREREY’URUBANZA [1] KCB BANK Uganda Ltd yareze Sosiyete Kiiza & Louise (KL) Ltd, Kiiza Mulindwa Innoncent n’umugore we Ndayizeye Andrée Louise mu Rukiko rw’Ubucuruzi rwa Nyarugenge, isaba ko bayishyura umwenda bayirimo, amafaranga y’ikurikiranarubanza n’igihembo cy’Avoka, ko n’urubanza rwarangizwa by‘agateganyo. Uburanira Ndayizeye Andrée Louise yatanze inzitizi y’iburabubasha by’urwo Rukiko, avuga ko mu masezerano bagiranye na KCB BANK Uganda Ltd bemeranyijwe ko ayo masezerano azagengwa n’amategeko y’igihugu cya Uganda. Kuri iyo nzitizi, rushingiye ku biteganywa n’ingingo ya 121 y’itegeko Nº51/2008 ryo kuwa 09/09/2008 rigena imiterere, imikorere, n’ububasha by’inkiko, Urukiko rwemeje ko rufite ububasha bwo kuburanisha urubanza, kubera ko Kiiza Mulindwa Innoncent na Ndayizeye Andrée Louise batuye mu Rwanda. [2] Mu mizi y’urubanza, Urukiko rw’Ubucuruzi rwa Nyarugenge rwaciye urubanza RCOM 1381/14/TC/NYGE kuwa 10/04/2015, rusanga ikirego cyatanzwe na KCB BANK Uganda Ltd gifite ishingiro, rutegeka Bimenyimana Eric, ushinzwe kugurisha ingwate (receiver) guhita ayiha

Page 32

5 110.112.570Frw akomoka kuri cyamunara y’inzu ya Kiiza Mulindwa Innoncent na Ndayizeye Andrée Louise, runategeka Sosiyete Kiiza & Louise (KL) Ltd, Kiiza Mulindwa Innoncent na Ndayizeye Andrée Louise kwishyura KCB BANK Uganda Ltd 160.945.741Frw y’umwenda bayibereyemo, havanywemo ayo ushinzwe kugurisha ingwate azayiha, 500.000Frw y’ikurikiranarubanza n’igihembo cy’Avoka, no gutanga amagarama y’urubanza. [3] Ndayizeye Andrée Louise yajuririye Urukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi, avuga ko Urukiko rwabanje rutitaye ku nzitizi y’iburabubasha bwarwo yatanze, ko nta bubasha yigeze agira mu ikorwa ry’amasezerano KCB BANK Uganda Ltd yaregeye, ko kandi rwemeje ko amafaranga yasigaye ku yagurishijwe inzu mu cyamunara ahabwa iyo banki rushingiye ku masezerano yo kugabana ingwate hagati ya KCB BANK Uganda Ltd na KCB Rwanda Ltd afite inenge. Urwo rukiko rwaciye urubanza RCOMA0241/15/HCC kuwa 29/04/2016, rwemeza ko mu ngingo ya 22 y’amasezerano yo kuwa 10/05/2011, impande zombi zumvikanye ko azagengwa n’amategeko ya Uganda, ko rero ikirego kitagombaga kwakirwa n’Urukiko rw’Ubucuruzi rwa Nyarugenge, kuko kitari mu bubasha bw’inkiko zo mu Rwanda, ahubwo cyagombaga gutangwa mu nkiko za Uganda, ruvuga ko urubanza rwajuririwe ruhindutse, ndetse n’ifatira ryari ryabaye ku mafaranga yavuye mu cyamunara cy’inzu ya Kiiza Mulindwa Innoncent na Ndayizeye Andrée Louise nta gaciro rifite, rutegeka KCB BANK Uganda Ltd guha Ndayizeye Andrée Louise 1.500.000Frw y’indishyi zo gushorwa mu manza n’igihembo cy’Avoka, kandi ikamusubiza 7.500Frw y’igarama yatanze ku rubanza ajurira. KCB BANK UGANDA LTD v. KIIZA & LOUISE (KL) LTD

Page 33

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 6 [4] KCB BANK Uganda Ltd yajuririye Urukiko rw’Ikirenga ivuga ko Urukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi rwavuze ko inkiko zo mu Rwanda zidafite ububasha bwo kuburanisha urubanza ku kirego cyayo, rwirengagije ko abaregwa batuye mu Rwanda, ndetse ko n’ingwate y’umwenda ariho iri, ko badahakana umwenda yabahaye, ko kandi rwasesenguye nabi ingingo ya 22 y’amasezerano kuko iyemerera kuregera aho ariho hose. [5] Urubanza rwaburanishijwe mu ruhame kuwa 19/12/2017, KCB BANK Uganda Ltd iburanirwa na Me Mwine Geoffrey, Kiiza & Louise Ltd na Kiiza Mulindwa Innoncent batitabye, ariko barahamagawe ahatazwi mu buryo bukurikije amategeko, naho Ndayizeye Andrée Louise ahagarariwe na Me Kabera Jean Claude. II. IBIBAZO BIGIZE URUBANZA N’ISESENGURA RYABYO Kumenya niba ikirego cya KCB BANK Uganda Ltd cyaragombaga kwakirwa n’inkiko zo mu Rwanda. [6] Me Mwine Geoffrey, uhagarariye KCB BANK Uganda Ltd, avuga ko ikirego KCB BANK Uganda Ltd yashyikirije urukiko kitajyanye n’umwenda abarezwe bayibereyemo, ko ahubwo cyari kigamije gukurikirana amafaranga yavuye mu cyamunara cy’ingwate banki yahawe na Kiiza Mulindwa Innoncent na Ndayizeye Andrée Louise, zagurishijwe na KCB Rwanda Ltd yasigaranywe n’ushinzwe kugurisha ingwate. [7] Akomeza avuga ko Urukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi rwemeje ko inkiko zo mu Rwanda zidafite ububasha bwo kuburanisha urubanza, rwirengagije ko ba nyiri sosiyete Kiiza &

Page 34

7 Louise (KL) Ltd ari abanyarwanda kandi batuye mu Rwanda, ko inzu batanzeho ingwate y’umwenda iri mu Rwanda, ndetse bakaba badahakana umwenda iyo Banki yabahaye. Avuga ko rero Urukiko rwirengagije ibiteganywa n’ingingo ya 134 agace ka 2, n’iya 135 z’Itegeko Nº51/2008 ryo kuwa 09/09/2008 rigena imiterere, imikorere, n’ububasha by’inkiko, hamwe n’ibivugwa mu ngingo ya 12 y’Itegeko Nº14/2010 ryo kuwa 07/05/2010 rihindura kandi ryuzuza Itegeko Nº07/2009 ryo ku wa 27/04/2009 ryerekeye amasosiyete y’ubucuruzi, iteganya ko amasosiyete yo mu bihugu bigize East African Community (EAC) afatwa kimwe n’ayo mu Rwanda, ibyo bikaba bivuze ko amategeko ya Uganda atabuza amahirwe KCB BANK Uganda Ltd gukurikirana umutungo wayo irimo kuvutswa mu Rwanda. [8] Me Mwine Geoffrey avuga na none ko kuba Urukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi rwarashingiye ku ngingo ya 22 igika cya 1, y’amasezerano y’umwenda yo kuwa 10/05/2011 yabaye hagati ya KCB BANK Uganda Ltd na Kiiza & Louise (KL) Ltd ataribyo, kubera ko iyo ngingo igenga iby’umwenda (banking facilities), ko ahubwo hagombaga gushingirwa ku ingingo ya 8, 9, 10 na 11 z’amasezerano ku byerekeye ingwate (security), aho mu ngingo ya 8, igika cya 2, iteganya ko iyo habaye kugongana kw’ingingo z’amasezerano, ay’ingwate ariyo ashyirwa imbere, ko rero ntaho ayo masezerano yambura ububasha inkiko z’u Rwanda. [9] Me Kabera Jean Claude, uhagarariye Ndayizeye Andrée Louise, avuga ko ingingo ya 22, agace ka 1, y’amasezerano iteganya ko ayo masezerano azagengwa n’amategeko ya Uganda, ko haramutse havutse ikibazo banki izakurikirana uwahawe umwenda mu inkiko zibifitiye ububasha yaba rumwe cyangwa nyinshi. KCB BANK UGANDA LTD v. KIIZA & LOUISE (KL) LTD

Page 35

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 8 [10] Akomeza avuga ko mu gusesengura aya masezerano, hagombye gusobanurwa icyari kigamijwe mu ikorwa ryayo, ko rero byumvikana ko amasosiyete abiri ya Uganda yagiranye amasezerano, amategeko agomba kubahirizwa ari ay’icyo gihugu, bikaba bitumvikana ukuntu KCB BANK Uganda Ltd yaregeye inkiko z’u Rwanda kandi yarazambuye ububasha, akaba asanga ibyemejwe n’Urukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi ko inkiko zo mu Rwanda zidafite ububasha bifite ishingiro kuko ababuranyi ubwabo bemeranyijwe gukoresha amategeko ya Uganda. [11] Ku byerekeye amasezerano yiswe “Security Agreement”, Me Kabera Jean Claude avuga ko nta tariki afite, ko kandi uwo ahagarariye nta ruhare yayagizemo, akaba atamureba, hashingiwe ku biteganywa n’ingingo ya 113 y’Itegeko Nº45/2011 rigenga amasezerano.

UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [12] Ingingo ya 33 y’Igitabo cya gatatu cy’urwunge rw’amategeko y’imbonezamubano yakurikizwaga ubwo amasezerano yakorwaga kuwa 10/05/2011 iteganya ko “amasezerano akozwe mu buryo bukurikije amategeko aba itegeko ku bayagiranye. Ashobora guseswa ari uko babyumvikanyeho cyangwa ku mpamvu zemewe n’amategeko. Agomba kubahirizwa nta buryarya”. [13] Ku byererekeye ububasha bw’inkiko ku birebana n’imanza z’abanyamahanga, ingingo ya 134 (2) y’Itegeko Ngenga Nº51/2008 ryo kuwa 09/09/2008 rigena imitunganyirize, imikorere n’ububasha by’inkiko, nk’uko ryahinduwe kugeza ubu, iteganya ko “abanyamahanga

Page 36

9 bashobora kuregwa mu nkiko z’u Rwanda, barezwe n’umunyarwanda cyangwa n’umunyamahanga mu bihe bikurikira: (...) mu manza zerekeye ibintu bitimukanwa biri mu Rwanda”, naho iya 135 yaryo igateganya ko “iyo impamvu zose zateganyijwe n’ingingo ya 134 y’iri Tegeko Ngenga zidahagije mu gusobanura igihe inkiko zo mu Rwanda zifite ububasha bwo guca imanza z’abanyamahanga, urega ashobora kuregera urukiko rwo mu Rwanda rw’aho atuye cyangwa aho aba cyangwa se aho icyo aregera kiri”. [14] Nk’uko bigaragara mu masezerano y’inguzanyo (Banking facility) yo kuwa 10/05/2011 yabaye hagati ya KCB BANK Uganda Ltd na Kiiza & Louise (KL) Ltd, zombi zibarizwa mu gihugu cya Uganda, mu ngingo ya 22 y’ayo masezerano impande zombi zumvikanye ko ayo masezerano agomba kugengwa n’amategeko ya Uganda, ko ariko ibyo bitabuza Banki uburenganzira bwayo bwo kurega ugurijwe mu rundi rukiko rwose rufite ububasha, cyangwa se kuba yatanga ibirego bitandukanye mu rukiko urwo ari rwo rwose rufite ububasha1. [15] Urukiko rurasanga, n’ubwo muri iyo ngingo abagiranye amasezerano bahisemo ko azagengwa n’amategeko ya Uganda, ariko kandi bumvikanye ko banki itazitiwe nabyo, ko ishobora no kuregera izindi nkiko zifite ububasha, bikaba rero

1 Ingingo ivuga ko “This Facility letter shall be governed by and construed in all respects in accordance with the laws of Uganda. Nothing in this paragraph shall limit the right of the Bank to take proceedings against the Borrower in any other court of competent jurisdiction, nor shall the taking or proceedings at one or more jurisdictions preclude the taking of proceedings in any other jurisdiction, whether concurrently or not”. KCB BANK UGANDA LTD v. KIIZA & LOUISE (KL) LTD

Page 37

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 10 byumvikana ko ishobora no kuregera inkiko zo mu Rwanda mu gihe zifite ububasha bwo kuburanisha ikirego yatanga. [16] Urukiko rurasanga na none, mu myanzuro itanga ikirego mu Rukiko rw’Ubucuruzi rwa Nyarugenge, KCB BANK Uganda Ltd yarasabye urwo Rukiko kwemeza ko abaregwa bayibereyemo umwenda ungana n’amashillingi 680.905.957 n’amadolari 112.000$ itishyuye, amafaranga y’ikurikiranarubanza n’irangizwa ry’agateganyo ry’urubanza, kandi nk’uko bigaragara mu rubanza RCOM 138/14/TC/Nyge mu gika cya 4, urupapuro rwa 3, uyihagarariye yasobanuye ko iyo banki yahaye umwenda sosiyete Kiiza & Louise (KL) Ltd, Kiiza Mulindwa Innoncent na Ndayizeye Andrée Louise barawishingira banatanga ingwate iri mu Rwanda, KCB Rwanda Ltd irayandikisha iza kuyigurisha, amafaranga yasigaye ikaba yarayaregeye kugirango iyabone habeho n’irangizarubanza ry’agateganyo, bikaba rero byumvikana ko, hashingiwe ku ngingo z’amategeko n’ingingo ya 22 y’amasezerano byavuzwe haruguru, KCB BANK Uganda Ltd yashoboraga kurega mu nkiko z’u Rwanda sosiyete Kiiza & Louise (KL) Ltd y’inyamahanga hamwe n’abishingizi bayo, cyane cyane ko mu byo ikurikiranye harimo inzu y‘ingwate yayo yagurishijwe na KCB Rwanda Ltd. [17] Hashingiwe ku ngingo z’amategeko n’iy’amasezerano zavuzwe haruguru no ku bisobanuro bimaze gutangwa, Urukiko rurasanga inkiko zo mu Rwanda zifite ububasha bwo kuburanisha ikirego zashyikirijwe na KCB BANK Uganda Ltd, ubujurire bwayo bukaba bufite ishingiro, bityo urubanza rukaba rugomba gukomeza mu mizi nk’uko biteganywa n’ingingo ya 171 y’Itegeko Nº21/2012 ryo kuwa 14/06/2012 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi,

Page 38

11 iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi, iteganya ko iyo Urukiko rwajuririwe ruhinduye icyemezo cyajuririwe, ruburanisha urwo rubanza mu mizi yarwo, keretse iyo ruruhinduye ku mpamvu y’uko rwaregewe mu buryo budakurikije amategeko cyangwa ku mpamvu y’iburabubasha. III. ICYEMEZO CY’URUKIKO [18] Rwemeje ko ubujurire bwa KCB Bank Uganda Ltd bufite ishingiro. [19] Rwemeje ko inkiko zo mu Rwanda zifite ububasha bwo kuburanisha ikirego cyatanzwe na KCB BANK Uganda Ltd irega sosiyete Kiiza & Louise (KL) Ltd, Kiiza Mulindwa Innoncent na Ndayizeye Andrée Louise. [20] Rutegetse ko iburanisha mu mizi ry’urubanza rizakomeza kuwa 27/03/2018. [21] Rutegetse ko amagarama y’urubanza asubitswe.

KCB BANK UGANDA LTD v. KIIZA & LOUISE (KL) LTD

Page 40

NYAMASWA v. MUKAMUSONI [Rwanda URUKIKO RW’IKIRENGA – RS/REV/CIV0001/15/CS (Hatangimbabazi, P.J., Gatete na Nyirandabaruta, J.) 21 Mata 2017] Amategeko agenga imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano – Gusubirishamo urubanza ingingo nshya – Ikimenyetso gishya – Mu gihe ikimenyetso cyaburanishijwe mu nzego zibanza ntigihabwe ishingiro nticyafatwa nk’ikimenyetso gishya – Iyo umuburanyi azi ko hari inyandiko cyangwa ikindi kimenyetso cyamufasha mu rubanza, agomba kwihutira kukigeza ku rukiko nta kuzuyaza, bitabaye ibyo urubanza rukagera aho rubaye itegeko, niwe wirengera amakosa ye ariko aramutse ashatse kugikoresha nk’ ikimenyetso gishya agomba kugaragaza ko icyo gihe bitashobokaga ku kibona – Itegeko N°21/2012 ryo ku wa 14/06/2012 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi, ingingo yi 183(3). Incamake y’ikibazo: Mukamusoni yareze Nyamaswa mu Rukiko Rwisumbuye rwa Gasabo avuga ko mu gihe yari afunze Nyamaswa yigabije imitungo ye akayisenya agashyiramo inyubako ze; muri urwo rubanza hanagobotsemo Rudasingwa na Mugorukeye bavuga ko mu mitungo iburanwa harimo iyabo. Urukiko Rwisumbuye rwasanze ukugoboka nta shingiro gufite kuko harezwe utagombaga kuregwa; rukomeza ruvuga ko Nyamaswa yavogereye umutungo wa Mukamusoni mu gihe yari afunze maze rumutegeka kumuha ingurane ihwanye n’amazu ye yasenywe. 13

Page 41

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 14 Nyamaswa yajuririye Urukiko Rukuru avuga ko iyo mitungo yayishyuye amafaranga maze akayaha Zaninka umukobwa wa Mukamusoni kandi nawe yarazi ibyakozwe, Urukiko rwemeza ko urubanza rwajuririwe ruhindutse mu ngingo zarwo zose, Mukamusoni akaba agomba gutanga amagarama y’urubanza. Mukamusoni yajuririye Urukiko rw’Ikirenga avuga ko Urukiko Rukuru rwashingiye ku bimenyetso bitariho, runavuga ko ibyo Zaninka yakoze aribyo maze rwemeza ko umutungo uburanwa ari uwa Nyamaswa. Urukiko rw’Ikirenga rwemeje ko umutungo umuryango wa Nyamaswa uburana na Mukamusoni wawubonye mu buryo bunyuranyije n’amategeko maze rutegeka Nyamaswa guha Mukamusoni ingurane y’umutungo we. Nyuma yaho Nyamaswa aboneye ibimenyetso bya kamparamaka bigaragaza neza akarengane yatewe n’urubanza bigizwe n’inyandiko y’iyimura n’ibaruwa yanditswe n’umujyi wa Kigali yatanze ikirego gisubirishamo ingingo nshya avuga ko iyo Urukiko rubona ibyo bimenyetso rutari kugera ku mwanzuro rwagezeho ko kandi inkiko zabanje zavugaga ko inyandiko azigaragariza atari umwimerere kuko nta mukono w’ubuyobozi wari uriho ariko ubu inyandiko yazanye yavuye mu Buyobozi, kubera ko yongerewe agaciro n’ibaruwa y’Umujyi wa Kigali kuko inyandikomvugo y’iyimurwa iherekejwe n’ibaruwa iriho kashe y’Umujyi wa Kigali . Mukamusoni yiregura avuga ko icyo kimenyetso kitahabwa ishingiro kuko inyandiko ibanziriza y’umwimerere hamwe niyo bita iy’umwimerere zose zakorewe umunsi umwe icyo zitandukaniyeho akaba ari imikono y’aba tekinisiye ko kandi iyo nyandiko y’umwimerere itakwitwa iyu buyobozi kuko nta mukono na kashe Umuyobozi w’Umujyi wa Kigali

Page 42

15 yayishyizeho, ndetse ko n’Umuyobozi w’Akarere ka Gasabo ushinzwe igenamigambi atayishyizeho umukono, ko rero nta kigaragaza ko iyo nyandiko yatanzwe n’Ubuyobozi bw’Umujyi wa Kigali; ibyo akaba ari byo ashingiraho avuga ko inyandiko yaburanishijwe ariyo bagaruye. Ababuranyi bose basoza basaba indishyi z’ikurikirana rubanza n’igihembo cy’Avoka. Incamake y’icyemezo: 1. Mu gihe ikimenyetso cyaburanishijwe mu nzego zibanza ntigihabwe ishingiro nticyafatwa nk’ikimenyetso gishya, bityo rero biragaragara ko ikimenyetso Nyamaswa avuga ko ari gishya yakiburanishije mbere nticyahabwa agaciro kuko iyo nyandiko itariho umukono w’umuyobozi; ikaba ariyo yongeye gukoreshwa muri uru rwego nk’ikimenyetso gishya.

2. Iyo umuburanyi azi ko hari inyandiko cyangwa ikindi kimenyetso cyamufasha mu rubanza, agomba kwihutira kukigeza ku rukiko nta kuzuyaza, bitabaye ibyo urubanza rukagera aho ruba itegeko, niwe wirengera amakosa ye ariko aramutse ashatse kugikoresha nk’ ikimenyetso gishya agomba kugaragaza ko igihe yaburanaga bitashobokaga ku kibona.

3. Amafaranga y’ikurikiranarubanza n’igihembo cy’avoka agenwa mu bushishozi bw’Urukiko mu gihe asabwe ari ikirenga. Ikirego kigamije gusubirishamo urubanza ingingo nshya nticyakiriwe. Amagarama y’urubanza ahwanye n’imirimo yakozwe mu rubanza. Amategeko yashingiweho: NYAMASWA v. MUKAMUSONI

Page 43

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 16 Itegeko - teka ryo kuwa 30 Nyakanga 1888 rigenga amasezerano cyangwa imirimo nshinganwa, ingingo ya 258. Itegeko N°21/2012 ryo kuwa 14/06/2012 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi, ingingo yi 183 (3). Urubanza rwifashishijwe: Brasseries et Limonaderies du Rwanda (BRALIRWA) Ltd na Sindikubwabo Cyprien, RS/REV/COM 0001/13/CS, rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga kuwa 26/02/2016. Ibitekerezo by’abahanga: Isabelle Desprès et Laurent Dargent, code de procédure civile, Dalloz, Paris, 2009, p.435. Serge Guinchard, Droit et pratique de la procedure civile, édition 1999, page 1270, Nº6224. Urubanza I. IMITERERE Y’URUBANZA [1] Urubanza rwatangiririye mu Rukiko Rwisumbuye rwa Gasabo, Mukamusoni Astérie arega Nyamaswa Ephron kuba mu gihe yari afunze, yarigabije imitungo ye akayisenya akubakamo, hagobokamo Rudasingwa Emmanuel na Mugorukeye Annociata bavuga ko mu mitungo iburanwa harimo n’iyabo.

Page 44

17 [2] Mu rubanza RC0049/07/YGI/GSBO rwaciwe kuwa 18/12/2009, Urukiko Rwisumbuye rwa Gasabo rwemeje ko mu kibanza cya Mugorukeye Annociata hatuwe n’uwitwa Musabye Sebera Vincent, naho kwa Rudasingwa Emmanuel hakaba hatuwe na Sentama Gasore, ikirego cyabo kikaba kidafite ishingiro, kuko bareze Nyamaswa Ephron atari we bakwiye kurega. Rwemeje kandi ko Nyamaswa Ephron yavogereye umutungo wa Mukamusoni Astérie ajya kuwuturamo igihe yari afunze, atahahawe na Leta nk’uko abivuga, ko uwo bavuga baguze ariwe Zaninka, umukobwa wa Mukamusoni Astérie, atigeze ahabwa uburenganzira bwo guhagararira nyina mu mitungo ye yagurishijwe, maze rumutegeka guha Mukamusoni Astérie 29.935.545Frw ahwanye n’ingurane y’amazu ye yasenywe. [3] Nyamaswa Ephron yajuririye mu Rukiko Rukuru, ruca urubanza RCA0058/10/HC/KIG ku wa 10/02/2012, rwemeza ko Nyamaswa Ephron yishyuye Zaninka amafaranga y’imitungo ya Nyina mu mwaka wa 2001, bikaba byarakozwe Mukamusoni abizi, rwemeza ko urubanza rwajuririwe ruhindutse mu ngingo zarwo zose, rutegeka Mukamusoni Astérie gutanga amagarama y’urubanza angana na 67.150Frw. [4] Mukamusoni Astérie ntiyishimiye imikirize y’urubanza maze arujuririra mu Rukiko rw’Ikirenga avuga ko umucamanza wo mu Rukiko Rukuru yashingiye ku bimenyetso bitariho yemeza ko umutungo uburanwa ari uwa Nyamaswa Ephron, anemeza ibyo Zaninka yakoze agurisha imitungo ye kandi ataribyo. [5] Mu rubanza RCAA0022/12/CS rwaciwe ku wa 09/01/2015, Urukiko rw’Ikirenga rwemeje ko umutungo umuryango wa Nyamaswa Ephron uburana na Mukamusoni NYAMASWA v. MUKAMUSONI

Page 45

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 18 Astérie wawubonye mu buryo bunyuranye n’amategeko, rwemeza ko urubanza RCA0058/10/HC/KIG rwaciwe n’Urukiko Rukuru ku wa 10/02/2012, ruhindutse mu ngingo zarwo zose, rutegeka Nyamaswa Ephron guha Mukamusoni Astérie 19.542.300Frw y’ingurane. [6] Nyamaswa Ephron yatanze ikirego gisubirishamo ingingo nshya urwo rubanza rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga, avuga ko kuva aho urubanza ruciriwe habonetse ibimenyetso bya kamarampaka bigaragaza neza akarengane yatewe n’urubanza, avuga ko ikirego cye gishingiye ku ngingo ya 186,3º y’Itegeko No21/2012 ryo ku wa 14/06/2012 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi, ibyo bimenyetso bikaba ari inyandiko mvugo y’iyimura (expropriation) n’ibaruwa yanditswe n’Umujyi wa Kigali. [7] Urubanza rwaburanishijwe mu ruhame ku wa 14/03/2017, Nyamaswa Ephron yunganiwe na Me Nsengiyumva Niyondora na Me Rwihandagaza Richard naho Mukamusoni Astérie ahagarariwe na Ntigurirwa François. II. IBIBAZO BIGOMBA GUSUZUMWA N’ISESENGURWA RYACYO Kumenya niba hari ibimenyetso bishya byatanzwe na Nyamaswa Ephron byatuma urubanza RCAA0022/12/CS rusubirishwamo ingingo nshya. [8] Nyamaswa Ephron avuga ko kuva aho urubanza ruciriwe habonetse ibimenyetso bya kamarampaka bigizwe n’inyandiko mvugo y’iyimura (expropriation) n’ibaruwa

Page 46

19 iyiherekeza yatanzwe n’Umujyi wa Kigali isubiza ibaruwa yo ku wa 12/03/2015, yanditswe n’umugore we Mukeshimana Georgette. [9] Me Nsengiyumva Niyondora avuga ko hari inyandiko- mvugo y’iyimurwa ifitanye isano n’ibaruwa y’umujyi wa Kigali. Avuga ko mu rubanza rusabirwa gusubirishwamo ingingo nshya, Urukiko rwemeje ko ubutaka Nyamaswa n’umuryango we batuyemo yabubonye mu buryo bunyuranije n’amategeko; ko nta yimurwa ryigeze ribaho mu gace ka Kimironko hagamijwe kwimura abantu bari bafite utuzu twubatse nabi ngo hubakwe inzu zijyanye n’Umujyi wa Kigali, ariko ko ku wa 12/3/2015, Umujyi wa Kigali wamwandikiye ibaruwa imwereka ibijyanye n’iyimurwa ryagombaga gukorwa ku wa 28/04/2001, ikanagaragaza uwishyuwe n’uwishyuye, ko aba “techniciens” b’Umujyi wa Kigali bakoze iyo nyandikomvugo y’iyimurwa (expropriation) banayishyiraho umukono n’ubwo Umuyobozi w’Umujyi wa Kigali atayisinyeho. Ibi ngo bivanaho imvugo z’abatangabuhamya bavuze ko nta yimurwa ryabaye mu gace ka Kimironko. [10] Me Nsengiyumva Niyondora avuga ko iyo Urukiko rw’Ikirenga rugira iki kimenyetso rutari kugera ku mwanzuro rwagezeho mu rubanza rusabirwa gusubirishwamo ingingo nshya, kuko no mu bika bya 14 na 15 by’urubanza rwaciwe n’Urukiko Rwisumbuye rwa Gasabo harimo fotokopi y’inyandikomvugo y’iyimurwa itariho umukono w’aba “techniciens”, urwo Rukiko rukaba rwaravuze ko nta mwimerere wayo uhari, ibi nabyo bikaba bikuraho imvugo y’uko ibimenyetso batanze byari byaraburanishijwe, kuko na nyuma yaho Nyamaswa Ephron yabonye Historique yishyuriyeho, iza yiyongera ku bimenyetso bishya bagaragaje. NYAMASWA v. MUKAMUSONI

Page 47

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 20 [11] Me Rwihandagaza Richard nawe wunganira Nyamaswa Ephron yasobanuye ko icyatumye mbere hose batarasabye icyo kimenyetso Umujyi wa Kigali kugeza aho urubanza ruciriwe mu Rukiko rw’Ikirenga, aruko baburana mu Rukiko Rwisumbuye bagaragaje ibibazo Nyamaswa Ephron yari afite byo kubona ikimenyetso, bikaba ngombwa ko basaba ko Umujyi wa Kigali ugobokeshwa bibwira ko nuza mu rubanza uzavuga ku bijyanye n’iyimurwa ryabaye nk’uko bigaragara mu gika cya 6, urupapuro rwa 2 rw’urubanza rwaciwe n’Urukiko Rwisumbuye rwa Gasabo, bigaragaza ko nubwo icyo kimenyetso cyabonetse ariko cyabonetse mu buryo bugoranye. [12] Avuga kandi ko inyandiko ya kabiri bazanye yavuye mu Buyobozi (administration), kubera ko yongerewe agaciro n’ibaruwa y’Umujyi wa Kigali kuko inyandikomvugo y’iyimurwa iherekejwe n’ibaruwa iriho kashe y’Umujyi wa Kigali. Akaba asanga iyo umucamanza aza kugira icyo kimenyetso gishya bazanye, yari gufata icyemezo gitandukanye n’icyo yafashe. [13] Me Ntigurirwa François, uhagarariye Mukamusoni, avuga ko ikimenyetso gishya cyatanzwe n’urega nta shingiro gifite, kubera ko inyandiko ibanziriza iy’umwimerere (draft) yaburanishijwe mu Rukiko Rwisumbuye rwa Gasabo (igika cya 14 cy’Urubanza), ko inyadiko ya fotokopi n’iyo bita iy’umwimerere zose zakozwe ku itariki imwe yo ku wa 28/01/2001, bivuze ko zose ari “draft”, akaba atari ingingo nshya kuko iyo “draft” yaburanishijwe mu nkiko zose, ko icyo izo nyandiko zombi zigaragaza ari uwishyuwe n’umubare w’amafaranga yishyuwe, aho zitandukaniye akaba aruko iyatanzwe mbere itagaragaza aho abahawe amafaranga basinye mu gihe ku yiswe iy’umwimerere igaragaraho imikono

Page 48

21 y’abahawe amafaranga ku wa 21/5/2001, naho ubundi nta cyahindutse, kikaba rero atari ingingo nshya kuko cyaburanywe. [14] Me Ntigurirwa asobanura kandi ko impamvu iyo nyandikomvugo isinye itafatwa nk’ikimenyetso gishya kandi uwareze agaragaza ko mbere Urukiko rwari rwanze kuyiha agaciro kuko itari isinye, ariko icyo bise “document final” ifite itariki imwe na “draft”; ko icyahindutse ari imikono y’aba “techniciens” ziyongereyeho, naho ubundi ko “draft”, na “document final” zakorewe umunsi umwe. Avuga kandi ko iyo nyandiko idakwiye kwitwa iy’ubutegetsi ( document administratif) kubera ko nta mukono na kashe Umuyobozi w’Umujyi wa Kigali yayishyizeho, ndetse ko n’Umuyobozi w’Akarere ka Gasabo ushinzwe igenamigambi (planning) atayishyizeho umukono, ko rero nta kigaragaza ko iyo nyandiko yatanzwe n’Ubuyobozi bw’Umujyi wa Kigali; ibyo akaba ari byo ashingiraho avuga ko inyandiko yaburanishijwe ariyo bagaruye, yongeraho ko hasuzumwa n’impamvu inyandiko imwe iriho imikono y’aba “techniciens” babiri, ku yindi ntibeho kandi byarakorewe umunsi umwe, asaba Urukiko kwemeza ko icyo kimenyetso atari gishya. [15] Ku byerekeye ikimenyetso abo baburana batanze cya “historique” yerekana ko hari amafaranga Nyamaswa Ephron yavanye kuri banki, avuga ko nta kigaragaza ko ayo mafaranga yari agenewe kwishyura abimuwe (expropriation), ko n’itariki y’iyimurwa idahura n’iyo amafaranga yavaniweho kuri Banki, ko kandi niyo yaba yarayatanze, ko Urukiko rwemeje ko yajya gusaba amafaranga uwo yayahaye, kuko abayakiriye batatumwe na Mukamusoni Astérie.

NYAMASWA v. MUKAMUSONI

Page 49

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 22

UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [16] Ingingo ya 186, 3º 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 mu mpamvu zituma urubanza rusubirishwamo ingingo nshya harimo “…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”. [17] Dosiye igaragaza ko hari ibaruwa Mukeshimana Georgette yandikiye Umujyi wa Kigali ku wa 16/02/2015, awusaba inyandikomvugo yo kwimura abantu yo ku wa 28/04/2001. Umujyi wamusubije mu ibaruwa yo kuwa 12/03/2015, ko, uhereye ku ibaruwa yanditse, yohererejwe inyandikomvugo y’iyimurwa rya Zaninka na Umubyeyi Marie Claire. [18] Dosiye igaragaza ko mu rubanza RCAA0022/12/CS, rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga ku wa 09/01/2015 (igika cya 9), Nyamaswa Ephron yavuze ko mu mwaka wa 2001, yaguze na Zaninka ikibanza yabonye nk’umugabane cyari gifite metero 18 kuri metero 35 ku mafaranga 350.000Frw, maze kugira ngo icyo kibanza cyuzure biba ngombwa ko afata metero 12 ku kibanza cya Mukamusoni Astérie cyarimo inzu ishaje ahatangira ingurane ihwanye na 418.000Frw. [19] Dosiye igaragaza na none ko mu rubanza RC0049/07/TGI/GSBO rwaciwe n’Urukiko Rwisumbuye rwa Gasabo ku wa 18/12/2009 (igika cya 12), Me Rwihandagaza

Page 50

23 Richard wari uhagarariye Nyamaswa Ephron yavuze ko uwo ahagarariye yahawe umutungo bizwi n’ubuyobozi, akaba yarahawe ibyangombwa nyuma yo kwimura (expropriation) byakozwe n’inzego zibishinzwe. Mu gika cya 13, avuga ko kwimura bidakorwa gusa mu nyungu rusange, ko habaho n’ubwumvikane bw’abantu, mu gika cya 15 akaba asobanura ko impamvu impapuro za “expropriation” zitagaragaza itariki yakoreweho nta n’ubuyobozi bwayisinyeho, babimuhaye kugira ngo barebe niba uwo baburana abyemera, ko umwimerere wasigaye mu buyobozi bw’Umujyi wa Kigali. [20] Ku bijyanye n’ikimenyetso gishya cy’inyandikomvugo y’iyimurwa (PV d’expropriation) Nyamaswa Ephron yatanze asubirishamo urubanza ingingo nshya, Urukiko rurasanga iyo nyandiko itafatwa nk’ikimenyetso gishya, kubera ko mu Rukiko Rwisumbuye rwa Gasabo iyo nyandiko ya “expropriation” yari yatanzwe itariho umukono w’umuyobozi w’Umujyi wa Kigali, akaba ariyo yongeye gukoresha muri uru rwego nk’ikimenyetso gishya, kandi bigaragara ko yari yayiburanishije mbere ntihabwe agaciro. [21] Urukiko rurasanga hagendewe ku bimaze kuvugwa, ikimenyetso cy’ibaruwa Mukeshimana Georgette umugore wa Nyamaswa, yandikiwe n’Umujyi wa Kigali kuwa 12/3/2015, hasubizwa iyo yari yawandikiye ku wa 16/02/2015, awusaba inyandikomvugo yo ku wa 28/04/2001, yo kwimura abantu, aho wamwoherereje iyo nyandikomvugo n’ubundi idasinyweho n’Umuyobozi ubishinzwe, itafatwa nk’ikimenyetso gishya hashingiwe ku biteganywa mu ngingo ya 186, 3o y’Itegeko No21/2012 ryo ku wa 14/06/2012 ryavuzwe haruguru, no ku bisobanuro byatanzwe, kuko iyo nyandikomvugo NYAMASWA v. MUKAMUSONI

Page 51

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 24 yaburanishijwe kandi iyo baruwa ubwayo yonyine ikaba ntacyo yamara itari kumwe n’iyo nyandikomvugo. [22] Urukiko rurasanga kandi niyo iyo nyandikomvugo yafatwa nk’aho atariyo yaburanishijwe ku mpamvu gusa yuko noneho iriho imikono y’abatekinisiye, nabwo ntiyafatwa nk’ikimenyetso gishya cyatuma urubanza RCAA0022/12/CS rusubirishwamo ingingo nshya, kuko Nyamaswa Ephron uyiburanisha yari asanzwe azi ko ihari nyamara ntiyayisaba ngo ayifashishe, kuva urubanza ruburanishwa mu Rukiko Rwisumbuye kugeza aho ruburanishijwe mu rwego rwa nyuma n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga ndetse rugahinduka itegeko. Akaba ataranagaragaza ko bitashobokaga kubona iyo nyandiko yita ikimenyetso gishya ngo agikoreshe mu rubanza yaburanaga mu gihe rwari rutaraba itegeko. [23] Iby’uko ikimenyetso cyashoboraga kwifashishwa urubanza rutaraba itegeko kitafatwa nk’ikimenyetso cyatuma urubanza rusubirishwamo ingingo nshya niko n’abahanga mu mategeko nka Serge GUINCHARD babibona, aho avuga ko iyo umuburanyi uzi ko hari inyandiko cyangwa ikindi kimenyetso cyamufasha mu rubanza, agomba kwihutira kukigeza ku rukiko nta kuzuyaza. Ko iyo atabyitayeho urubanza rukagera aho rusozwa, ariwe wirengera amakosa ye, kandi icyo gihe isubirishamo ry’urubanza ingingo nshya riba ritagishobotse. Akomeza asobanura ko n’iyo ikimenyetso kiri muri dosiye nshinjabyaha igikurikiranwa ku buryo kidashobora kuboneka ako kanya, umuburanyi ugikeneye agomba gusaba Urukiko kuba ruhagaritse urubanza. [24] Ibi bihura n’umurongo wafashwe n’uru Rukiko mu zindi manza rwaciye, nko mu rubanza RS/REV/COM0001/13/CS, aho rwavuze ko “…rubanza rwatangiriye mu Rukiko rwa Mbere

Page 52

25 rw’Iremezo rwa Kigali muri 2000, rugera mu Rukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi muri 2009, rucibwa bwa nyuma n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga muri 2010, muri iyo myaka icumi, BRALIRWA Ltd ikaba itagaragaza icyayibujije kugana inzira yatumye ibona ibimenyetso ishingiraho ikirego cyayo, cyangwa ngo igaragaze ko yabigerageje bikananirana…”. Kumenya niba indishyi Mukamusoni Asteri asaba muri uru rubanza yazihabwa. [25] Me Ntigurirwa uhagarariye Mukamusoni Astérie avuga ko Nyamaswa akwiye kugenera uwo ahagarariye indishyi zingana na 4.500.000Frw hashingiwe ku ngingo ya 258 y’Itegeko ryo kuwa 30 Nyakanga 1888 rishyiraho Igitabo cya gatatu cy’urwunge rw’amategeko mbonezamubano, zikubiyemo 2.000.000Frw z’igihembo cya Avoka, 2.000.000Frw z’indishyi z’akababaro kubera kumusiragiza mu nkiko, na 500.000Frw y’ikurikiranarubanza. [26] Abahagarariye Nyamaswa Ephron bavuga ko izo ndishyi zidakwiye ahubwo ariwe uzikwiye.

UKO URUKIKO RUBONA [27] Urukiko rusanga kuba Nyamaswa Ephron yarasubirishijemo urubanza ingingo nshya, byaratumye hari ibyo Mukamusoni Astérie atakaza kuko byabaye ngombwa gukurikirana urubanza no gushaka Avoka wo kumuburanira, bityo hashingiwe ku ngingo ya 258 yavuzwe haruguru, akaba agomba kumuha 700.000Frw y’ikurikiranarubanza n’igihembo cya Avoka, agenwe mu bushishozi bw’urukiko kuko ayo yatse ari ikirenga. NYAMASWA v. MUKAMUSONI

Page 53

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 26 III. ICYEMEZO CY’URUKIKO. [28] Rwemeje ko ikirego cya Nyamaswa Ephron kigamije gusubirishamo urubanza ingingo nshya kitakiriwe. [29] Rutegetse Nyamaswa Ephron guha Mukamusoni Astérie 700.000Frw y’ikurikiranarubanza n’igihembo cya Avoka. [30] Rutegetse ko 100.000Frw Nyamaswa Ephron yatanze arega ahwanye n’imirimo yakozwe muri uru rubanza.

Page 54

IMANZA ZACIWE MU MIZI

Page 56

URUBANZA MBONEZAMUBANO

Page 58

MUKAMUSONI v. MUKAGASANA N’ABANDI [Rwanda URUKIKO RUKURU – RCA0087/12/HC/KIG (Murekatete, P.J.) 10 Gicurasi 2013] Amategeko agenga umuryango – Izungura – Umuco – Uburenganzira bwo kuzungura cyangwa kuzungurwa ku gitsina gore – Kuba umuco nyarwanda utaremereraga umugore/umukobwa nabo mu muryango akomokamo kuzungura no kuzungurwa bifite ingaruka mbi kandi zikomeye ku ihame ry’uko abantu bareshya imbere y’amategeko. Amategeko agenga umuryango – Izungura – Ibirego birebana n’izungura ryatangiye nta tegeko ribigenga rirajyaho – Mu gukemura ibibazo birebana n’izungura byatangiye mbere nta tegeko ribigenga ririho hakurikizwa ibyemezo by’inkiko biha umugore/umukobwa uburenganzira bwo kuzungura no kuzungurwa maze abagabo na bagore bakagira uburenganzira bungana mu byerekeye izungura n’izungurwa. Incamake y’ikibazo: Mukagasana na Sarushi mu Rukiko Rukuru ku rwego rw’ubujurire baburanye ibijyanye no kuzungura umutungo wasizwe na Kabera n’umugore we Usabuwera bapfuye mu 1994 nta mwana basize; mu gihe urwo urubanza rwari rutaracibwa Sarushi yaje kwitaba Imana. Urwo Rukiko rwaciye urubanza rwemeza ko hashingiwe ku muco ab’iwabo w’umugabo aribo bemererwaga kuzungura gusa bityo Mukagasana aba ariwe uzungura uwo mutungo. Mukamusoni amaze kumenya ko Mukagasana agiye kugurisha amazu aburanwa yatambamiye urwo rubanza asaba ko 31

Page 59

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 32 ruhinduka kubera ko arufitemo inyungu kuko ari umukobwa wa Sarushi bityo akaba afite uburenganzira bwo kuzungura Usabuwera mu mwanya wa Se witabye Imana kandi ko rwaciwe abazungura ba Sarushi bataruhamagawemo. Mukamusoni avuga ko inenge ziri muri uru rubanza zibangamiye inyungu ze ari uko mu guca urubanza hashingiwe ku muco mu gihe wari unyuranyije n’Itegeko Nshinga ryariho kuva 1962 n’irigenderwaho muri iki gihe riteganya ko abantu bose bareshya imbere y’amategeko kimwe n’amasezerano mpuzamahanga u Rwanda rwashyizeho umukono aho ateganya ihame ry’uko abantu bose bangana imbere y’amategeko nta vangura iryo ari ryo ryose. Mukamusoni akomeza avuga ko umuco wifashishwa mu guca imanza gusa mu gihe utanyuranyije n’amahame ndemyagihugu n’imigenzereze myiza cyangwa utanyuranyije n’Itegeko Nshinga, kuvuga rero ko abakomoka mu muryango w’umugabo aribo bonyine bafite uburenganzira bwo kuzungura byaba binyuranyije nayo mahame kuko umugenzo mboneramuco usumbanisha abantu utemewe. Mukagasana yiregura avuga ko igihe yaregeraga kuzungura musaza we Kabera itegeko ryerekeye izungura ryo muri 1999 ryari ritarajyaho kandi n’urubanza batambamira rwemeje ko ariwe muzungura wenyine wemewe ko rero urwo rubanza arirwo rukwiye gukurikizwa kuko rwakurikije amategeko. Mukarurinda we avuga ko n’ubwo aza mu rubanza nk’uregwa ariko arufitemo inyungu kuko ariwe ubyara Usabuwera, akaba rero asanga Mukagasana yarahawe ibirenze ibyo yagombaga guhabwa bitewe n’ibisobanuro by’umucamanza byemeza ko nta tegeko ryariho kandi hariho amasezerano mpuzamahanga

Page 60

33 k’uburenganzira bw’umugabo n’umugore, ayo masezerano akaba ariyo akwiye gukurikizwa. Incamake y’icyemezo: 1. Kuba umuco nyarwanda utaremereraga umugore/umukobwa nabo mu muryango akomokamo kuzungura no kuzungurwa bifite ingaruka mbi kandi zikomeye ku ihame ry’uko abantu bareshya imbere y’amategeko.

2. Mu gukemura ibibazo birebana n’izungura byatangiye mbere yuko itegeko ribigenga ribaho hakurikizwa ibyemezo by’inkiko biha umugore/umukobwa uburenganzira bwo kuzungura no kuzungurwa maze abagabo n’ abagore bakagira uburenganzira bungana mu byerekeye izungura n’izungurwa.

3. Indishyi ntizigenwa gihe uzisaba atagaragaza icyo yangirijwe. Ikirego cyo gutambama gifite ishingiro; Amagarama y’urubanza aherereye kuri Mukagasana. Amategeko yashingiweho: Itegeko nshinga rya repubulika y’u Rwanda ryo kuwa 04/06/2003 nk’uko ryavuguruwe kugeza ubu, ingingo 16. Itegeko N°21/2012 ryo kuwa 14/06/2012 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi, ingingo 6. Itegeko N°18/2004 ryo kuwa 20/06/2004 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, izumurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi, ingingo ya 6. Itegeko N° 22/99 ryo kuwa 12/11/1999 ryuzuza igitabo cya mbere cy’urwunge rw’amategeko mbonezamubano MUKAMUSONI v. MUKAGASANA N’ABANDI

Page 61

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 34 kandi rishyiraho igice cya gatanu cyerekeye imicungire y’umutungo w’abashyingiranywe, impano n’izungura, ingingo ya 49, 95. Imanza zifashishijwe: Mukamusoni na Buyitare, RA0967/13.03/84 rwaciwe n’Urukiko Rusesa imanza rw’u Rwanda kuwa 10 Mata 1985. RC28.691/98 rwaciwe n’Urukiko rwa Mbere rw’Iremezo rwa Kigali kuwa 22 Nzeri 1999. RC28.846/98 rwaciwe n’Urukiko rwa Mbere rw’Iremezo rwa Kigali kuwa 2 Ugushyingo 1998. RC31.549/99 rwaciwe n’urukiko rwa mbere rw’iremezo rwa Kigali kuwa 16 Gashyantare 2000. RC28.867/98 rwaciwe n’Urukiko rwa Mbere rw’iremezo rwa Kigali kuwa 15 Ukuboza 1998. RC28691/98 rwaciwe n’Urukiko rwa Mbere rw’Iremezo rwa Kigali kuwa 22/09/1999. RCA8689/132 rwaciwe n’urukiko rw’Ubujurire rwa Nyabisindu kuwa 29/10/1996. Ibitekerezo by’abahanga: Sr Karomba F, Des Régimes matrimoniaux, libéralités et Succession, Notes de cours, UNR, Faculté de Droit, p.153. S. Murererehe, Analyse juridique de l’évolution des droits successoraux de la femme au Rwanda, mémoire, Faculté de Droit, UNR., Butare, 2003, p.25.

Page 62

35 Urubanza I.IMITERERE Y’URUBANZA [1] Mu izina rya Mukamusoni Cathérine, Me Nzirabatinyi Fidèle avuga ko ku itariki ya 24/04/2009 uru Rukiko rwakijije ku rwego rw’ubujurire urubanza RCA0162/06/HC/KIG rwaburanwagamo kugabana umutungo wasizwe na Kabera Charles n’umugore we Usabuwera Jeannette, bapfuye mu mwaka wa 1994 nta mwana basize. Mukagasana Domitilla akaba yarasabaga kuzungura ku ruhande rwa musaza we Kabera Charles naho Sarushi asaba kuzungura ku ruhande rw’umukobwa we Usabuwera. Ncogoza warugobotsemo ku bushake akaba yarasabaga amafaranga y’ubukode bushingiye ku masezerano yo gukodesha amazu aherereye Kicukiro ari mu mutungo uzungurwa. Mu gihe rero urubanza rwari rutaracibwa, Sarushi yaje gupfa, abazungura be barimo Mukamusoni Catherine ntibaruhamagarwamo; bakaba bararumenye Mukagasana agiye kugurisha amazu ariyo mpamvu yarutambamiye asaba ko ruhinduka kubera inyungu arufitemo. [2] Me Nzirabatinyi Fidele avuga ko uwo mutungo utagomba kwiharirwa na Mukagasana wenyine hagendewe ku muco mu gihe Itegeko Nshinga ryariho kuva mu mwaka wa 1962 n’ irigenderwaho muri iki gihe riteganya ko abantu bose bareshya imbere y’amategeko, n’itegeko ry’izungura rikaba rivuga ko abashyingiwe mbere batavuze amasezerano yo gucunga umutungo bafatwa nk’abashyingiranwe mu buryo bw’ivangamutungo risesuye; ko kandi umuco utari gukurikizwa mu gihe ubangamiranye n’Itegeko Nshinga kimwe n’amasezerano mpuzamahanga u Rwanda rwashyizeho umukono hose hakaba hateganya ihame ry’uko abantu bose MUKAMUSONI v. MUKAGASANA N’ABANDI

Page 63

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 36 bangana imbere y’amategeko nta vangura iryo ari ryo ryose; bityo ko abazungura ba Usabuwera nabo bafite uburenganzira kuri uwo mutungo. [3] Me Mudakemwa Apolline uburanira Mukarurinda avuga ko itegeko ry’izungura ryaje mu mwaka wa 1999 kandi ko ritagomba gusubira inyuma ku byabaye mu 1994 ngo kuko icyo gihe hakurikizwaga umuco ku birebana no kuzungura, aho ab’iwabo b’umugabo aribo bemererwaga kuzungura gusa. Ko kuba nta yandi masezerano abazungurwa basize yihariye Mukamusoni nta burengarizira afite bwo kuzungura mukuru we. Asaba ko hagumishwaho imikirize y’urubanza rutambamirwa. Urukiko rugategeka ko Mukamusoni yishyurwa 150.000Frw kubera gushorwa mu manza na 200.000Frw y’igihembo cya Avoka. [4] Me Nsengimana Elie avuga ko Ncogoza asaba ibyo yatsindiye mu rubanza RCA0162/06/HC/KIG. Naho Me Hamuri Dieudonnée avuga ko Mukarurinda ari nyina wa Usabuwera Jeanette ko nawe afite inyungu mu rubanza n’ubwo aregwa ngo kuko Mukagasana baregwa hamwe yihariye umutungo wenyine. Avuga ko nawe ashyigikiye ibivugwa na Me Nzirabatinyi Fidele. [5] lbibazo bisuzumwa ni ukumenya ishingiro ry’impamvu zo gutambamira urubanza RCA0162/06/HC/KIG n’ishingiro ry’indishyi zinyuranye zisabwa.

Page 64

37 Il. ISESENGURA RY’IBIBAZO BIRI MU

RUBANZA a. Ku byerekeranye n’ishingiro ryo gutambamira urubanza RCA0162/06/HC/KG. [6] Me Nzirabatinyi Fidele avuga ko Mukamusoni Catherine afite inyungu mu rubanza atambamira ngo kuko ari umukobwa wa Sarushi akaba afite uburenganzira bwo kuzungura Usabuwera mu mwanya wa Sarushi wapfuye. Avuga ko inenge ziri muri urwo rubanza zibangamiye inyungu ze, ari uko mu guca urwo rubanza hashingiwe ku muco kandi ltegeko Nshinga rya Repubulika y’uRwanda kuva rubonye ubwigenge kugeza ku rigenderwaho ubu, itangazo mpuzamahanga ry’uburenganzira bwa muntu ryo kuwa 10 ukuboza 1948 n’amasezerano mpuzamahanga yerekeye uburenganzira mu by’imbonezamubano na politiki yo kuwa 19 Ukuboza 1966 ndetse ngo n’amasezerano nyafurika yerekeye uburenganzira bwa muntu n’ubw’abaturage yo kuwa 27 Kamena 1981 bivuga uburinganire bw’umugabo n’umugore no kuba ivangura iryo ariryo ryose ritemewe. Ko nubwo umuco nawo wifashishwa mu guca imanza ko ushingirwaho mu gihe utanyuranyije na ordre public na bonne moeurs, cyangwa utanyuranyije n’Itegeko Nshinga (préambule Constitution de la Republique Rwandaise du 04/06/2003); ko kandi ayo masezerano afite uburemere bw’itegeko akaba ari hejuru y’umuco, u Rwanda rukaba rwaremeje kuyakurikiza. [7] Akomeza avuga ko mu Itegeko Nshinga kimwe no muri ayo masezerano mpuzamahanga hateganywa ko ivangura iryo ariryo ryose, harimo n’irishingiye ku gitsina ritemewe; ko haramutse hakurikijwe umuco wavugaga ko abantu b’igitsina gabo kimwe n’abakomoka mu muryango w’umugabo aribo MUKAMUSONI v. MUKAGASANA N’ABANDI

Page 65

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 38 bazungura bonyine byaba binyuranyije n’ayo mahame kuko umugenzo mboneramuco usumbanisha abantu utemewe. Akomeza avuga ko muri uru rubanza harebwa izungura kubantu babiri bari basangiye umutungo; ko kuba kuzungurwa ari uburenganzira uwabwamburwa yaba arenganyijwe. Asaba ko rubanza rwatambamiwe rwavaho Usabuwera akazungurwa kuburyo bumwe n’umugabo we KaberaVedaste. [8] Me Mudakemwa Apolline avuga ko mu 1995 Mukagasana yaregeye kuzungura musaza we Kabera Charles mu rubanza RC23.350/95/Rl ahabwa iyo mitungo, ko icyo gihe itegeko ryerekeye izungura ryo muri 1999 ryari ritarabaho. Ko kandi n’urubanza batambamira rwashimangiye icyo cyemezo ko Mukagasana ariwe muzungura wenyine wemewe. Avuga ko urwo rubanza arirwo rukwiye gukurikizwa kuko rwakurikije amategeko; ko abareze basobanura bihagije aho kuzungura bihuriye na bonnes moeurs na ordre public. Kuri Ncogoza avuga ko ntacyo yakagombye gusaba kuko yakoze amasezerano y’ubukode hakaba hari ibyo yagombaga gukora n’ibyo yarabujijwe; ko ibyo yakoze byahwaniyemo. [9] Me Hamuri Dieudonné avuga ko Mukarurinda aza mu rubanza nka nyina wa Usabuwera Jeanette kuko afitemo inyungu n’ubwo aregwa. Avuga ko Mukagasana Domitilla yahawe ibirenze ibyo yagombaga guhabwa ngo kuko ibisobanuro by’Umucamanza: (motivation) bivuga ko nta tegeko ryariho ngo kandi hariho amasezerano mpuzamahanga ku burenganzira bw’umugabo n’umugore (ingingo ya 3 y’ amasezerano mpuzamahanga yerekeye uburenganzira mu by’ubukungu, imibereho myiza n’umuco yo kuwa 19 Ukuboza 1966 n’iya 16 y’itangazo mpuzamahanga ry’ uburenganzira bwa muntu ryo kuwa 10 Ukuboza 1948) ko ariyo yari gukurikizwa.

Page 66

39 [10] Urukiko rusanga ingingo ya 49 y’Itegeko N°22/99 ivuga ko kuzungura ari uguhabwa ububasha n’inshingano ku mutungo n’imyenda bya nyakwigendera. Izungura ritangira iyo umuntu amaze gupfa, rikabera ahantu yari atuye cyangwa aho yabaga. Ingingo ya 95 y’iryo tegeko rivuzwe ritangira gukurikizwa umunsi ritangarijweho mu Igazeti ya Leta ya Repubulika y’u Rwanda. Izi ngingo zumvikanisha neza ko, iri tegeko ridashobora kwiyambazwa mu gukemura ibibazo birebana n’izungura ryatangiye mbere y’uko ritangazwa mu igazeti ya Leta mu kwezi k’ugushyingo 1999. Ibi bikaba bihuje n’uko byemejwe mu rubanza rutambamirwa nk’uko bigaragarira ku rupapuro rwa gatanu muri “Rusanze ya 6” muri ubwo buryo “Rusanze nta burenganzira Sarushi yarafite bwo kuzungura uruhande rw’umukobwa we Usabuwera Jeanette mbere y’itegeko N°22/99 rirebana n’izungura ryo kuwa 12/11/1999 kubera ko nta tegeko ryabumuhaga ryari ririho, ko icyo gihe hakurikizwaga umuco w’uko umutungo uzungurwa n’abiwabo w’umugabo ku buryo nta masezerano yihariye Kabera Charles n’umugore we Usabuwera Jeanette bagiranye muri iryo vangamutungo y’uko bizagenda baramutse bitabye Imana nta mwana basize”. [11] Muri uru rubanza, ikibazo cyo kumenya niba umuco ubuza umugore uburenganzira bwo kuzungura no kuzungurwa wariho mbere y’uko Itegeko N°22/99 rigenga izungura rijyaho unyuranyije n’Itegeko Nshinga cyagarutsweho mu iburanisha uru rukiko rusanga rutagomba kugisuzuma kuko bene ibyo birego bifite inzira bikurikiza; ikigomba kwitabwaho ni ukureba niba hari andi mategeko cyangwa amahame rusange, imanza zaciwe n’inkiko byashoboraga kwifashishwa mu gukemura ikibazo cy’izungura ku ruhande rwa Usabuwera hashingiwe ku busumbane bw’amategeko nk’uko ingingo ya 6 y’itegeko MUKAMUSONI v. MUKAGASANA N’ABANDI

Page 67

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 40 N°18/2004 ryo kuwa 20/06/2004 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi iyakurikizwaga mu gihe cyo guca urubanza rutambamirwa ryabiteganyaga aho ryavugaga ko mu guca imanza abacamanza bashingira ku ngingo z’ amategeko zirebana n’ ikirego baregewe cyangwa iyo nta tegeko rijyanye n’ikiburanwa, bagashingira ku mategeko basanga bashyiraho mu gihe baba bashinzwe kuyashyiraho, bifashishije ibyemezo byagiye bifatwa n’inkiko, umuco, amahame rusange agenga amategeko n’inyandiko z’ abahanga mu mategeko. Iyi ngingo ikaba yaragaragazaga ko umuco atariwo uza ku mwanya wa mbere mu gihe bigaragaye ko nta tegeko rirebana n’ikiburanwa rihari kuko imbere y’awo haza ibyemezo byafashwe n’inkiko. [12] Ingingo ya 16 y’Itegeko Nshinga rya Repubulika y’u Rwanda ryo kuwa 04/06/2003 nk’uko ryavuguruwe kugeza ubu iteganya ko “Abantu bose barangana imbere y’amategeko. Itegeko ribarengera ku buryo bumwe nta vangura iryo ariryo ryose”, Iryo hame riteganywa kandi mu itangazo mpuzamahanga ryerekeye uburenganzira bwa muntu ryo kuwa 10/12/1948, kimwe no mu masezerano mpuzamahanga anyuranye u Rwanda rwagiye rusinya nk’uko yavuzwe mu gika cya 6 cy’uru rubanza. Ingingo ya 190 y’Itegeko Nshinga ry’u Rwanda iteganya ko “Iyo amaze gutangazwa mu igazeti ya Leta amasezerano mpuzamahanga yemejwe burundu mu buryo buteganywa n’amategeko agira agaciro gasumba ak’amategeko Ngenga n’ak’amategeko asanzwe (...)”. N’ubwo koko iryo hame ryari ririho kandi riteganywa muri ayo mategeko nk’uko byagiye bisobanurwa mbere y’uko urubanza rutambamirwa rucibwa sibyo ubwabyo biha umugore/umukobwa uburenganzira bwo kuzungura kimwe no kuzungurwa mu gihe izungura ryatangiye nta tegeko ribigenga ririho, ahubwo uburyo

Page 68

41 iryo hame ryagiye risobanurwa n’inkiko mu manza zinyuranye nibyo byatumye habaho ukwivugurura k’umuco mu birebana n’izungura ku gitsina gore (evolution des droits successoraux de la femme) ari nayo mpamvu ibyemezo by’inkiko aribyo byagombaga gutanga icyerekezo ku burenganzira bwo kuzungurwa kwa Usabuwera kwasabwaga n’abo mu muryango yakomokagamo. [13] Abanditsi batandukanye b’abanyamategeko bavuze ku birebana n’izungura mu muco w’u Rwanda kugeza ubwo hariho itegeko ryanditswe bahuriza ku kwemeza ko umuco w’u Rwanda wabuzaga umugore cyangwa umukobwa n’abo mu muryango akomokamo kuzungura cyangwa kuzungurwa ufite ingaruka zikomeye ku ihame ry’uko abantu bareshya imbere y’ amategeko kandi ko ivangura iryo ariryo ryose, harimo n’irishingiye ku gitsina bitemewe kuko bibuzwa n’Itegeko Nshinga rya Repubulika y'u Rwanda kuva u Rwanda rwagira ubwigenge n’uko ryagiye rivugururwa; bikanabangamira itangazo mpuzamahanga ry’ubµrenganzira bwa muntu ryo kuwa 10 Ukuboza 1948 u Rwanda rwashyizeho umukono kimwe n’andi masezerano mpuzamahanga ashyigikira iryo hame naryo u Rwanda rukaba rwarayashyizeho umukono. [14] Muri bo twavuga umwarimu muri kaminuza Nkuru y’u Rwanda, mu isomo rye “Régimes Matrimoniaux, Libéralités et Successions”, ashyigikira ibyemezo by’inkiko byagiye bifatwa hagati y’imyaka ya 1990-1999 bigaha uburenganzira bwo kuzungura no kuzungurwa ku bantu b’igitsina gore hashingiwe kuri iryo hame “Pour les successions ouvertes avant la publication de la loi sur R.L.S., les cours et tribunaux ne devraient pas leur appliquer la Loi N°22/99, mais devraient s’inspirer de la jurisprudence à la quelle se referait les juges MUKAMUSONI v. MUKAGASANA N’ABANDI

Page 69

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 42 surtout entre les années 1990-1999 ou la majorité des juges saisis, sur base de l’égalité prônée par toutes les constitutions qu’à connu le Rwanda depuis 1962 et les conventions internationales aux quelles le Rwanda a adheré, accordaient des droits successoraux, de facon égales, aux filles comme aux garcons.”1 Bishatse kuvuga ko mu gukemura ibibazo birebana n’izungura ryatangiye mbere y’uko itegeko ry’izungura ryo muri 1999 ritangazwa hakwifashishwa ibyemezo by’inkiko byafashwe muri bene ibyo bibazo maze abagore n’abagabo bakagira uburenganzira bungana mu byerekeye izungura. [15] Mu gitabo gisoza amasomo y’icyiciro cya kaminuza ku rwego rwa Bachalor’s degree, Murererehe S. yashimangiye ko umuco ubuza igitsina gore kuzungura wagiye wivugurura kubera imanza zaciwe n’inkiko zagiye zisobanura amahame rusange ateganywa mu mategeko y’igihugu kimwe no mu masezerano mpuzamahanga u Rwanda rwasinye “(..) le droit des successions est resté longtemps soumis au regime du droit coutumier, lequel droit écartait la femme de la succession.Toutefois, le droit coutumier a évolué grâce à l'interpretation que les juridictions donnaient aux principes généraux posés par le droit interne et les conventions internationales que le Rwanda a ratifiées”2. Aha akaba yaratanze ingero z’izo manza zaciwe zishingiye kuri iryo hame nk’uko riteganywa mu Itegeko Nshinga ryariho nk’urubanza RCA2995/KIG rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ubujurire rwa Kigali kuwa 5/02/1971, aho yagize ati “On remarque qu’un effort s’est fait au niveau jurisprudentiel car les décisions des juges

1Sr Karomba F, Des Régimes matrimoniaux, libéralités et Succession, Notes de cours, UNR, Faculté de Droit, p.153, inédit. 2S. Murererehe, Analyse juridique de l’évolution des droits successoraux de la femme au Rwanda, mémoire, Faculté de Droit, UNR., Butare, 2003, p.25.

Page 70

43 tendaient à reconnaitre à la femme le droit de succèder. C’est ainsi que la Cour d’Appel de Kigali a décidé que la fille a droit à la succession des biens laissés par ses parents, et que sa part doit être égale à celle de son frère”. La Cour a motivé cette decision sur base de l'article 16 de la Constitution Rwandaise qui prône 1'égalité entre les enfants sans distinction de sexe3. [16] Ku birebana n’amasezerano mpuzamahanga ashimangira ihame ry’uburinganire imbere y’amategeko nta vangura iryo ariryo ryose yavuzwe mu bika bibanza akaba yarinjijwe mu mategeko y’u Rwanda, avuga ko nayo agomba gukurikizwa mu Rwanda kandi ko biha uburenganzira umugore bwo kuzungura no kuzungurwa ku rwego rumwe n’urw’umugabo, nk’uko uwo mwanditsi agaragaza imanza zinyuranye zabyemeje nka RC28691/98 rwaciwe n’Urukiko rwa Mbere rw’Iremezo rwa Kigali kuwa 22/09/1999, RCA8689/132 rwaciwe n’urukiko rw’Ubujurire rwa Nyabisindu kuwa 29/10/1996 (reba iyo memoire ku rupapuro rwa 27). [17] Ni muri ubwo buryo rero, Urukiko rushingiye ku ngingo ya 6 y’Itegeko N°21/2012 ryo kuwa 14/06/2012 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi ivuga ko ibyemezo by’inkiko byifashishwa ku mwanya wa mbere mu ica ry’urubanza igihe nta tegeko rihari rirebana n’ikiburanwa; rusanga mu guca uu rubanza hagomba gukurikizwa imanza zaciwe zihuje kamere n’uru rubanza RA0967/13.03/84 rwaciwe n’Urukiko Rusesa imanza rw’u Rwanda kuwa 10 Mata 1985 hagati ya Mukamusoni na Buyitare aho Mukamusoni yasabaga iseswa ry’urubanza yaciriwe avuga ko urukiko rwamurenganyije rukemeza ko adashobora kuzungura isambu ya se ngo kubera ko

3Reba mémoire ya S.Murererehe, p.27. MUKAMUSONI v. MUKAGASANA N’ABANDI

Page 71

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 44 ari umukobwa, urwo rukiko rukemeza ko impamvu atanga ifite ishingiro muri aya magambo “Rusanze kandi n’ingingo ya Mukamusoni nayo ifite ishingiro kuko urukiko nta mpamvu yemewe n’amategeko rwashingiyeho rwemeza ko umukobwa adashobora kuzungura ibya se cyane cyane igihe Itegeko Nshinga ririho, mu ngingo yaryo ya 16 ridashyigikiye ubusumbane bw’abantu bushingiye ku gitsina”4. Aha byumvikanisha ko uru rukiko rwari rukuriye izindi rwatanze icyerekezo cyo gukemura bene ibyo bibazo mu buryo butabangamira Itegeko Nshinga n’amahame mpuzamahanga. [18] lbyo bikaba byaranemejwe mu zindi manza zinyuranye zirimo RC28.691/98 rwaciwe n’Urukiko rwa Mbere rw’Iremezo rwa Kigali kuwa 22 Nzeri 1999, RC28.846/98 rwaciwe n’Urukiko rwa Mbere rw’Iremezo rwa Kigali kuwa 2 Ugushyingo 1998, RC31.549/99 rwaciwe n’urukiko rwa mbere rw’iremezo rwa Kigali kuwa 16 Gashyantare 2000 na RC28.867/98 rwaciwe n’Urukiko rwa Mbere rw’iremezo rwa Kigali kuwa 15 Ukuboza 1998 (izo manza zivuzwe ziboneka mu bubiko bw’Urukiko Rwisumbuye rwa Nyarugenge) kimwe n’imanza zivugwa mu gika cya 13 na 14 by’uru rubanza; aho hose inkiko zikaba zaremeje ko umukobwa/umugore afite uburenganzira bwo kuzungura ku rwego rumwe n’urw’umuhungu; icyo cyemezo kikaba cyaragiye gifatwa n’izo nkiko zishingiye ku ihame ribuza ubusumbane n’ivangura bishingiye ku gitsina. [19] Ibyo byemezo rero nibyo bigomba kwifashishwa mu ica ry’uru rubanza mu kwemeza ko Usabuwera afite uburenganzira bwo kuzungurwa n’abo mu muryango avukamo kuko nta

4 Reba Récueil des Arrêts de la Cour de Cassation, Années 1983 – 1986, p.266.

Page 72

45 mpamvu yari gutuma hiyambazwa umuco mu gihe hari imanza zihuje kamere n’uru zatanze icyerekezo. [20] Ababuranyi bemeranya ko Kabera Charles na Usabuwera bari barashyingiranywe mu buryo bukurikije amategeko, mu gihe Itegeko N°22/99 rigenga izungura ryari ritarajyaho, ku birebana n’amasezerano yo gucunga umutungo wabo bikaba byarafatwaga ko abashyingiwe mbere batagaragaza amasezerano yihariye batafatwa nk’abashyingiwe mu buryo bw’ivangamutungo rusange. Akaba ariyo mpamvu Usabuwera nawe agomba kuzungurwa n’abo mu muryango we ku rwego rumwe n’uwo bashyingiranywe azungurwa n’abo mu muryango we kuko nta mwana basize. [21] Bivuze rero ko abo mu muryango wa Kabera Charles bagomba kuzungura 50% n’abo mu muryango wa Usabuwera bakazungura 50% by’umutungo wose wa ba nyakwigendera Kabera Charles na Usabuwera bitabye lmana nta mwana basize na cyane ko Mukagasana Domitilla ushaka kuwiharira atagaragaje ko abazungurwa bari bafitanye amasezerano y’ivanguramutungo. b. Ku byerekeranye n’indishyi zasabwe. [22] Mu izina rya Mukagasana Domitilla, Me Ntamakemwa Apolline yasabye ko Mukamusoni ategekwa n’Urukiko kwishyura uwoaburanira 150.000Frw kubera gushorwa mu manza na 200.000Frw y’igihembo cya Avoka. [23] Abaregwa bavuga ko nta ndishyi bakwiye gutanga, ko basaba ko urubanza ruhinduka kuko Mukagasana adakwiye kwiharira uwo mutungo. MUKAMUSONI v. MUKAGASANA N’ABANDI

Page 73

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 46 [24] Urukiko rusanga indishyi zisabwa na Mukagasana Domitilla nta shingiro zifite kuko n’ubwo aregwa muri uru rubanza ntagaragaza icyo yangirizwa cyatuma agenerwa indishyi dore ko n’ikirego cya Mukamusoni gifite ishingiro ku mpamvu zatumye atambama. Hakaba rero nta mpamvu yumvikana yatuma uru rukiko rugenera Mukagasana Domitilla indishyi asaba. III. ICYEMEZO CY’URUKIKO [25] Rwemeje ko ikirego cyo gutambama cya Mukamusoni Cathérine gifite ishingiro. [26] Rwemeje ko Usabuwera Jeanette afite uburenganzira bwo kuzungurwa n’abo mu muryango akomokamo barimo Mukamusoni Cathérine ku ruhare rwa 50% n’abo ku ruhande rwa Kabera Charles barimo Mukagasana Domitilla bagatwara 50% by’umutungo wose wa Kabera Charles na Usabuwera Jeanette. [27] Rutegetse ko urubanza RCA0162/06/HC/KIG ruhindutse ku mpamvu zatumye habaho itambama gusa. [28] Rutegetse ko Mukagasana Domitilla, Ncogoza Gérard na Mukarurinda Antoinette bafatanya kwishyura amafaranga y’amagarama y’urubanza uko ari ibihumbi mirongo itatu na magana inani (30.800Frw) nibatayatanga, azavanwa mu mitungo yabo ku ngufu. [29] Rwibukije ko uru rubanza rutasomewe ku gihe ku mpamvu zasobanuwe mu cyemezo cy’isubikwa ry’isomwa cyo kuwa 19/04/2013.

Page 74

URUBANZA RW’UBUCURUZI

Page 76

EQUITY BANK RWANDA LTD v.

SEBAHIZI [Rwanda URUKIKO RW’IKIRENGA – RS/INJUST/RCOM00001/2017/SC (Mukanyundo, P.J; Kayitesi R. na Rugabirwa, J.) 26 Mutarama 2018] Amategeko agenga amabanki – Uburyozwe – Uburangare – Kuba banki ifite inshingano yo guhamagara umukiriya mbere yo gukura amafaranga kuri konti ye iyohereza ahandi nkuko biteganywa mu Mabwiriza Ngengamikorere ariko ntibikore bituma iryozwa ingaruka z’iyo mikorere. Incamake y’ikibazo: Nyuma yaho Sebahizi afungurije konti y’amadorari muri equity BANK RWANDA LTD yabikujweho 30.000USD akoherezwa muri Singapole atabitangiye uburenganzira yatanze ikirego mu rukiko rw’ubucuruzi rwa Nyarugenge asaba ko iyo banki yamusubiza amadorari ye n’indishyi z’inyuranye; urwo Rukiko rwemeje ko ikirego cye gifite ishingiro maze rutegeka iyo banki kumusubiza 30.000USD ikanamuha indishyi z’akababaro n’igihembo cy’avoka. EQUITY BANK RWANDA LTD yajuririye Urukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi maze rwemeza ko ubujurire bwayo bufite ishingiro kuri bimwe kuko Sebahizi nawe atarinze bihagije konti ye bituma ibikuzwaho 30.000USD n’abantu batazwi, rwemeza kandi ko ubujurire bwa Sebahizibwuririye ku bundi nta shingiro bufite, rutegeka iyo banki gusubiza Sebahizi 15.000USD ahwanye na kimwe cya kabiri (1/2) cya 30.000USD yabikujwe kuri konti ye nta burenganzira abitangiye. 49

Page 77

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 50 Sebahizi ntiyishimiye imikirize y’urukiko rukuru yandikira urwego rw’ umuvunyi asaba ko urubanza RCOMA0032/16/HCC rwasubirishwamo ku mpamvu z’akarengane kuko nta ruhare yagize mu ibikuzwa rya 30.000USD kuri konti ye, ko ahubwo byatewe n’uburangare bw’iyo banki. Urwego rw’umuvunyi rwandikiye Perezida w’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga rumusaba ko urwo rubanza rwasubirishwamo ku mpamvu z’akarengane kuko iyo banki itigeze ihamagara Sebahizi mbere yogukuraho ayo madorari kuri konti ye nkuko biteganyijwe mu mabwiriza ngengamikorere ya EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd. Perezida w’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga amaze gusuzuma raporo y’Ubugenzuzi Bukuru bw’Inkiko yasabye Ubwanditsi bw’uru Rukiko ko bwashyira dosiye y’uru rubanza kuri gahunda y’iburanisha. Mu rukiko rw’ikirenga, Sebahizi avuga ko urubanza rwaciwe n’urukiko rukuru rw’ubucuruzi rwemeje ko agabana uburyozwe niyo banki ngo kuko nawe atarinze bihagije konti ye kandi ntacyo rwagaragaje yagombaga gukora kugirango konti ye itinjirirwa. Akomeza avuga ko afunguza konti ya madorari muri iyo banki bumvikanye ko mbere yo kubikuza yagombaga kuzuza inyandiko zitwa e-mail indemnity na diaspora application for funds transfer akoresheje ikaramu kugira ngo zigaragare ko ari umwimerere (originaux) ndetse bakanamuhamagara kuri telefoni nkuko biteganyijwe mu mabwiriza Ngengamikorere ya banki bityo rero iyo banki ikaba igomba kumusubiza amadorari ye ikanabimuhera inyungu n’ indishyi zinyuranye.

Page 78

51 EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd yiregura ivuga ko itasubiza Sebahizi 30.000USD yabikujwe kuri konti ye n’abantu batazwi kuko nta ruhare iyo banki yabigizemo, kandi ko itagombaga kumuhamagara byanze bikunze mbere yo gutanga ayo madolari kuko nta masezerano bagiranye abiteganya, ndetse ko itajya ihamagara umukiliya wayo bitewe n’ubwinshi bw’amafaranga, ko ahubwo imuhamagara ari uko yashidikanyije kuri sheki yahawe, ariko iyo banki itabibonamo ikibazo, ihita itanga amafaranga nta yandi mananiza. Banki yanatanze ubujurire bwuririye ku bundi isaba ko icyemezo cyafashwe n’urukiko rukuru rw’ubucuruzi kiyitegeka kwishyura 15.000USD cyavanwaho kuko ibyo yakoze yabikoze muburyo buteganywa n’amasezerano bagiranye. Sebahizi yiregura avuga ko ubujurire bwayo nta shingiro bufite kuko itaregeye urwego rw’umuvunyi isaba kurenganurwa. Incamake y’icyemezo: 1. Kuba banki yari ifite inshingano yo guhamagara umukiriya mbere yo gukura amadorali kuri konti ye iyohereza ahandi nkuko biteganywa mu mabwiriza Ngengamikorere yayo ariko ntibikore bituma iryozwa ingaruka y’iyo mikorere. Bityo rero kuba banki yarabikuye amadorali kuri konti ya Sebahizi ikayohereza mu gihugu cya Singapore itabanje kumuhamagara kuri telephone kugirango imubaze bituma ariyo yonyine ibiryozwa.

2. Kuba Sebahizi yaravukijwe uburenganzira bwo gukoresha amadorali ye bitewe n’uburangare bwa Banki byateye umuryango we igihombo bityo banki igomba kubitangira indishyi.

3. Indishyi z’ikurikiranarubanza n’igihembo cy’avoka bigenwa mu bushishozi bw’urukiko igihe asabwe ari menshi. EQUITY BANK RWANDA LTD v. SEBAHIZI

Page 79

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 52 4. Nta wakwitwaza ko ubujurire bwuririye ku bundi butakwakirwa mu rubanza rusubirishwamo ku mpamvu z’akarengane avuga ko butaregewe urwego rw’umuvunyi kuko haregerwa Urukiko, hataregerwa umuvunyi. Ikirego cyo gusubirishamo urubanza ku mpamvu z’akarengane gifite shingiro. Imikirize y’urubanza rwaciwe n’Urukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi ihindutse kuri bimwe. Amategeko yasingiweho: Itegeko - Ngenga Nº03/2012/OL rigenga imiterere, imikorere n’ububasha by’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga, ingingo ya 81, agace ka 2°. Itegeko N°45/2011 ryo kuwa 25/11/2011 rigenga amasezerano, ingingo ya 64,137. Itegeko Nº15/2004 ryo kuwa 12/06/2004 ryerekeye ibimenyetso mu manza n’itangwa ryabyo, ingingo yi 110. Nta manza zifashishijwe. Urubanza I. IMITERERE Y’URUBANZA [1] Uru rubanza rwatangiriye mu Rukiko rw’Ubucuruzi rwa Nyarugenge, Sebahizi Jules arega EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd asaba ko yamusubiza 30.000USD yabikujwe kuri konti ye Nº04003211159434 atabitangiye uburenganzira, ikanamuha n’indishyi zinyuranye.

Page 80

53 [2] Urwo Rukiko rwaciye urubanza RCOM1408/15/TC/Nyge kuwa 30/11/2015, rwemeza ko ikirego cya Sebahizi Jules gifite ishingiro, rutegeka EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd kumusubiza 30.000USD yakuwe kuri konti ye atabizi, ikanamuha 2.000.000Frw y’indishyi z’akababaro n’igihembo cy’Avoka. [3] EQUITY BANK RWANDA LTD yajuririye urwo rubanza mu Rukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi, ruca urubanza RCOMA0032/16/HCC kuwa 19/02/2016, rwemeza ko ubujurire bwa EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd bufite ishingiro kuri bimwe bijyanye n’uko Sebahizi Jules nawe atarinze bihagije (protégé) konti ye yavuzwe haruguru bituma ibikuzwaho 30.000USD n’abantu batashoboye kumenyekana, rwemeza kandi ko ubujurire bwa Sebahizi Jules bwuririye ku bundi nta shingiro bufite, rutegeka EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd gusubiza Sebahizi Jules 15.000USD ahwanye na kimwe cya kabiri (1/2) cya 30.000USD yabikujwe kuri konti ye akoherezwa muri Singapore nta burenganzira abitangiye. [4] Sebahizi Jules yandikiye Umuvunyi Mukuru asaba ko urubanza RCOMA0032/16/HCC rwaciwe n’Urukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi kuwa 19/02/2016, rwasubirishwamo ku mpamvu z’akarengane kubera ko atagize uruhare mu ibikuzwa rya 30.000USD kuri konti ye, ko ahubwo byatewe n’uburangare bwa EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd kuko yohereje ayo madolari mu gihugu cya Singapore itabanje kumubaza niba ariwe wayihaye ubwo burenganzira. [5] Nyuma yo gusuzuma icyo kibazo, Umuvunyi Mukuru yasanze urubanza RCOMA0032/16/HCC rukwiye gusubirishwamo ku mpamvu z’akarengane kubera ko hashingiwe ku mabwiriza ngengamikorere ya EQUITY BANK EQUITY BANK RWANDA LTD v. SEBAHIZI

Page 81

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 54 RWANDA Ltd yitwa operations procedures manual, yagombaga guhamagara Sebahizi Jules mbere yo kuvana 30.000USD kuri konti ye no kuyohereza mu gihugu cya Singapore, bityo kuba EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd itaramuhamagaye mbere yo kohereza ayo madolari hanze y’Igihugu nk’uko yabyiyemereye imbere y’Urukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi, bikwiye kuyitsindisha nk’uko biteganywa n’ingingo ya 110 y’Itegeko Nº15/2004 ryo kuwa 12/06/2004 ryerekeye ibimenyetso mu manza n’itangwa ryabyo, iteganya ko amagambo umuburanyi avugiye mu Rukiko agira ibyo yemera amutsindisha, kuko uko kutamuhamagara, ari cyo cyatumye ayo mafaranga avanwa kuri konti ye atabizi bikamuteza igihombo. [6] Umuvunyi Mukuru yandikiye Perezida w'Urukiko rw’Ikirenga asaba ko urubanza RCOMA0032/16/HCC rwasubirishwamo ku mpamvu z’akarengane kasobanuwe haruguru. Perezida w’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga amaze gusuzuma raporo y’Ubugenzuzi Bukuru bw’Inkiko, yafashe icyemezo Nº013/2017 kuwa 14/03/2017, asaba Ubwanditsi bw’uru Rukiko ko bwashyira dosiye y’uru rubanza kuri gahunda y’iburanisha kugira ngo urwo rubanza rusubirishwemo ku mpamvu z’akarengane, maze ruhabwa RS/INJUST/RCOM00001/2017/SC. [7] Urubanza rwaburanishijwe mu ruhame kuwa 18/07/2017, Sebahizi Jules ahagarariwe na Me Bizimana Shoshi Jean Claude, naho EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd ihagarariwe na Me Karemera Frank. [8] Kuwa 06/10/2017, Urukiko rwaciye urubanza rubanziriza urundi, rwemeza ko iburanisha ry’uru rubanza rizongera gufungurwa kuwa 20/12/2017, kugirango ababuranyi

Page 82

55 b’impande zombi bagire icyo bavuga ku nyandiko y’Amabwiriza ngengamikorere ya EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd yitwa Equity Bank Rwanda Ltd, Branch Operations Procedures Manual, rutegeka ko amagarama y’urubanza asubitswe. [9] Iburanisha ry’urubanza ryasubukuwe kuwa 20/12/2017, EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd ihagarariwe nka mbere, naho Sebahizi Jules wari uhibereye yunganiwe na Me Bizimana shoshi Jean Claude. II. IBIBAZO BIRI MU RUBANZA N’ISESENGURA RYABYO 1. Kumenya niba Sebahizi Jules yaragize uruhare mu ibikuzwa rya 30.000USD kuri konti ye ku buryo nawe yakwirengera kimwe cya kabiri (½) cy’igihombo yagize. [10] Me Bizimana Shoshi Jean Claude, wunganira Sebahizi Jules, avuga ko hashingiwe ku ngingo ya 81, agace ka 2°, y’Itegeko - Ngenga Nº03/2012/OL ryo kuwa13/06/2012 rigenga imiterere, imikorere n’ububasha by’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga, iteganya ko “Urubanza rwaciwe ku rwego rwa nyuma rushobora gusubirwamo ku mpamvu z’akarengane, iyo mu icibwa ry’urubanza hirengagijwe amategeko n’ibimenyetso bigaragarira buri wese”, urubanza RCOM0032/16/HCC rwaciwe n’Urukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi kuwa 19/02/2016 rukwiye gusubirishwamo ku mpamvu z’akarengane, kubera ko urwo Rukiko rwemeje ko EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd igomba gusubiza Sebahizi Jules 15.000USD ngo kuko nawe atarinze bihagije e-mail address ye kugira ngo konti ye 04003211159434 itabikuzwaho 30.000USD, ariko ko urwo EQUITY BANK RWANDA LTD v. SEBAHIZI

Page 83

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 56 Rukiko rutagaragaje icyo yagombaga gukora kugira ngo konti ye itinjirirwa (itaba piraté/hacked). [11] Avuga kandi ko EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd igomba gusubiza Sebahizi Jules 30.000USD yabikujwe kuri konti ye atabitangiye uburenganzira, kuko Banki yohereje ayo madolari mu gihugu cya Singapore itabanje kumuhamagara kuri telefoni kugira ngo imubaze niba ariwe wayihaye ubwo burenganzira nk’uko biteganywa n’ingingo ya 14 y’amabwiriza ngengamikorere yayo yitwa operations procedures manual, ateganya ko EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd igomba kubanza guhamagara umukiliya wayo mbere yo kohereza amafaranga 100.000 ahandi hantu cyangwa amafaranga ari munsi yayo mu gihe ishidikanyije kuri sheki bayihaye, kandi ko amasezerano yihariye yitwa e-mail indemnity, impande zombi zagiranye, adakuraho ayo mabwiriza rusange cyangwa izindi ngamba zose zafashwe na EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd mu rwego rwo kubungabunga umutekano w’amafaranga y’abakiriya bayo kugira ngo atibwa. [12] Akomeza asobanura ko atumva impamvu yatumye EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd itamuhamagara mbere yo kohereza 30.000USD hanze y’Igihugu nk’uko uyiburanira yabyiyemereye ku rwego rwa mbere, mu bujurire no muri uru Rukiko, kandi mbere hose yarabikoze inshuro eshatu zose igihe yamubazaga niba ariwe wayihaye uburenganzira bwo guha Bikema Vanessa 1.700USD, ikindi gihe 1.500USD, n’ikindi gihe 1.800USD, kandi uyu yari imbere mu gihugu, nkanswe kohereza amadolari menshi cyane angana na 30.000USD hanze yacyo, kandi hashingiwe kuri e-mail indemnity na diaspora- application for funds transfer zandikishije imashini, kandi we ubusanzwe yarazuzurishaga intoki akoresheje ikaramu.

Page 84

57 [13] Sebahizi Jules avuga ko atari umucuruzi, ko ahubwo ari umukozi wakoreraga USAID mu Gihugu cya Liberia, ko kugira ngo ajye abona amadolari avuye mu Rwanda, byatumye afunguza konti muri EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd, ishami rya Remera, ariko ko batagiranye amasezerano avuga ko konti ye izaba “géré online”, ko ahubwo kuri buri opération yakoraga ashaka ko Banki imwoherereza amadolari, Banki yamusabaga ko yuzuza e-mail indemnity na Diaspora application for funds transfer akoresheje ikaramu kugira ngo zigaragare ko ari umwimerere (originaux), kandi ko yazimusinyishije inshuro eshatu zose ubwo yayisabaga amadolari yavuzwe haruguru, ndetse ko mbere yo kuyamwoherereza, EQUITY BANK RWANDA yabanzaga kumuhamagara kuri telefoni kugira ngo imenye neza niba ariwe wayisabye ayo madolari, yarangiza, ikayanyuza kuri Bikema Vanessa nk’uko Banki yari yarabimusabye igihe yafunguzaga konti kugira ngo ijye iyanyuza ayo madolari kuri konti y’umuntu yizeye, kandi ko uyu yagiye ahabwa ayo madolari akayamwohereza akoresheje uburyo bwa Western Union, kandi nta kibazo cyigeze kibaho icyo gihe. [14] Asobanura ko EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd, yabikuje 8.500USD kuwa mbere tariki ya 29/06/2015 na 21.500USD kuwa gatanu tariki ya 03/07/2015, yose hamwe aba 30.000USD, irangije kuyabikuza kuri konti ye, iyohereza mu gihugu cya Singapore kugira ngo akoreshwe mu kugura impapuro,kandi atari umucuruzi wazo, irangije kuyohereza, Umuyobozi wa EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd, ishami rya Remera amuhamagara kuri telefoni kuwa kabiri amubaza niba ariwe wabitangiye uburenganzira, arabihakana, noneho uwo muyobozi amubwira ko agiye gukora ibishoboka byose kugira ngo agaruze ayo madolari akiri hafi, ariko nyuma yaho, EQUITY BANK RWANDA LTD v. SEBAHIZI

Page 85

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 58 atangazwa no kuba yarafunze telefoni ye mu gihe cy’ibyumweru bibiri byose, kandi ko icyo gihe EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd ikaba itarahakanaga uburyozwe (responsabilité) bwayo. Asaba ko EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd yamusubiza 30.000USD yabikujwe kuri konti ye atabitangiye uburenganzira hiyongereyeho n’indishyi zinyuranye. [15] Me Karemera Frank, uburanira EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd, avuga ko itasubiza Sebahizi Jules 30.000USD yabikujwe kuri konti ye Nº04003211159434 n’abantu batazwi kuko nta ruhare iyo banki yabigizemo, kandi ko itagombaga kumuhamagara byanze bikunze mbere yo gutanga ayo madolari kuko nta masezerano bagiranye abiteganya, ndetse ko itajya ihamagara umukiliya wayo bitewe n’ubwinshi bw’amafaranga, ko ahubwo imuhamagara ari uko yashidikanyije kuri sheki yahawe, ariko iyo banki itabibonamo ikibazo, ihita itanga amafaranga nta yandi mananiza. [16] Avuga kandi ko ingingo ya 14 y’amabwiriza ngengamikorere yayo yitwa operations procedures manual, itegeka EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd guhamagara umukiliya wayo, Sebahizi Jules aburanisha, itakurikizwa muri uru rubanza kuko ari ingingo y’amategeko rusange areba abakiliya bayo bose, ko ahubwo hakwiye gukurikizwa amasezerano yihariye yiswe e-mail indemnity kuko ariyo arebana n’imicungire ya konti ye yavuzwe haruguru.Asobanura ko kuba EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd yarakoranye na Sebahizi Jules amasezerano yihariye, ari uko yabonaga ko amabwiriza ngengamikorere yayo adahagije mu gukumira ingaruka (risques) nyinshi zigaragarira mu bucuruzi bukorwa hakoreshejwe ikoranabuhanga (commerce électronique).

Page 86

59 [17] Avuga na none ko wenda EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd ishobora kuba yaryozwa ayo madolari mu gihe uru Rukiko rwasanga itarubahirije ingingo za 3, 4, 5 na 6, igika cya 6 z’amasezerano yihariye yavuzwe haruguru. Asobanura ko ingingo ya 3 y’ayo masezerano, iteganya ko iyo banki yakiriye e-mail itandukanye na adresse yahawe n’umukiliya, itayubahiriza, ariko ko muri uru rubanza nta na rimwe muri ziriya operations banki yigeze ikeka ko e-mail yabonye itari iya Sebahizi Jules, ko ahubwo yabonaga ko ari iye kuko yari yayoherereje inyemezabwishyu (facture) ivuye Hong Kong igaragaza ugomba guhabwa ayo madolari, igihugu aherereyemo, nimero ya konti ye n’icyo agomba kuyakoresha, bituma banki itanga ayo madolari, ariko ko nyuma yaho, byagaragaye ko konti ye yinjiriwe n’abajura nk’uko nawe ubwe abyiyemerera. [18] Akomeza asobanura ko ingingo ya 4 y’amasezerano yihariye yavuzwe haruguru, iteganya ko umukiliya yemeye ko e-mail instructions zose zizafatwa nk’aho ariwe wazitanze, kandi ko yemeye ingaruka zose zishingiye kuri iyo e-mail, bivuze ko umukiliya nawe yemeraga ko EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd idafite ubushobozi 100 % bwo kugenzura e-mail ye. Avuga ko ingingo ya 5 y’ayo masezerano, ivuga ko umukiliya ashobora guha banki indishyi igihe bibaye ngombwa, kandi ko Sebahizi Jules yayikuyeho uburyozwe kuko nawe yiyemereye ko ubwo bucuruzi burimo ingaruka (risques) nyinshi. Yongeraho ko ingingo ya 6, igika cya 6, y’ayo masezerano, igaragaza ko banki itaryozwa amakuru atariyo. Mu gusoza, avuga ko n’iyo EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd itaba yarahamagaye Sebahizi Jules, itaryozwa ayo madolari kuko yafashe ingamba (précautions) zose yagombaga gufata kugira ngo ayo madolari ye atibwa n’ubwo yaje kwibwa itabishaka. EQUITY BANK RWANDA LTD v. SEBAHIZI

Page 87

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 60

UKO URUKIKORUBIBONA [19] Ingingo ya 81, agace ka 2°, y’Itegeko - Ngenga Nº03/2012/OL ryo ku wa 13/06/201 rigenga imiterere, imikorere n’ububasha by’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga, iteganya ko “urubanza rwaciwe ku rwego rwa nyuma rushobora gusubirwamo ku mpamvu z’akarengane, iyo mu icibwa ry’urubanza hirengagijwe amategeko n’ibimenyetso bigaragarira buri wese”. [20] Naho ingingo ya 64 y’Itegeko N°45/2011 ryo kuwa 25/11/2011 rigenga amasezerano, igateganya ko “Amasezerano akozwe ku buryo bukurikije amategeko aba itegeko ku bayagiranye. Ashobora guseswa ari uko babyumvikanyeho cyangwa ku mpamvu zemewe n'amategeko”. [21] Ingingo ya 9 ya email–indemnity, EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd yagiranye na Sebahizi Jules kuwa 07/04/2015 iri muri dosiye, ivuga ko imikoranire yabo izagengwa n’amategeko, politiki ya banki n’imikorere yabo.1 Naho ingingo ya 14 y’Amabwiriza Ngengamikorere ya EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd (Equity Bank Limited, Branch Operations Procedures Manual) agenga uburyo bwo gukura amafaranga kuri konti y’umukiriya ajya kuri konti y’undi mukiriya, ateganya ko Operations Manager, mbere yo gukura kuri konti y’umukiriya amafaranga bayohereza kuri konti y’undi mukiriya bashingiye ku mabwiriza bohererejwe n’umukiriya aturutse kuri email, bafite inshingano zo kureba niba iyo e-mail ari iy’umukiriya yabahaye, bakanareba ndetse niba hariho email indemnity form. Iyo basanze ibyo byuzuye, bagomba

1 “The indemnity and all future transactions shall be governed by all applicable laws and the Banks policies and procedures”.

Page 88

61 guhamagara umukiriya wabahaye amabwiriza kugira ngo hemezwe ko amabwiriza yabahaye ari ukuri.2 [22] Dosiye y’urubanza igaragaza ko kuwa 05/06/2012, Sebahizi Jules wakoreraga USAID mu gihugu cya Liberia, yafunguje konti N°4003211159434 muri EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd, bumvikana ko kugira ngo iyi banki imwoherereze amafaranga, Sebahizi Jules yagombaga kubanza kuzuza e-mail indemnity n’inyandiko y’ababa mu mahanga isaba kohereza amafaranga yitwa Diaspora - application for funds transfer, yarangiza, akoherereza banki izo nyandiko azinyujije kuri e-mail ye yitwa makuzajules@gmail.com. [23] Dosiye y’urubanza igaragaza kandi ko kuwa 13/03/2015, Sebahizi Jules yujuje e-mail indemnity na diaspora-application for funds transfer n’intoki akoresheje ikaramu, arangije, yoherereza EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd izo nyandiko azinyujije kuri e-mail ye yitwa makuzajules@gmail.com yavuzwe haruguru, ayisaba ko yabikuza 1.700USD kuri konti N°4003211159434 yavuzwe haruguru, ikayashyira kuri konti N°4003211287114 ya Bikema Vanessa, ukorera muri iyo banki, akaba ariwe uyamwoherereza. Ibyo kandi Sebahizi Jules yabikoze kuwa 07/04/2015, ubwo yayisabaga kumwoherereza 1.500USD, no kuwa 27/05/2015, ubwo yayisabaga kumwoherereza 1.800USD, yose anyujijwe kuri konti ya Bikema Vanessa yavuzwe haruguru, kandi Sebahizi Jules yemera ko yabonye aya madolari nta kibazo kibayeho.

2 “If the instruction is received via email, confirm whether the email used to send the instructions is the one maintained in the customer’s cust ID. Also the instruction should be received together with email indemnity form. If sender email is the same as the email maintained in system, make a call back to the remitter to confirm authenticity of the said instruction (…)”. EQUITY BANK RWANDA LTD v. SEBAHIZI

Page 89

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 62 [24] Nk’uko bivugwa n’ababuranyi b’impande zombi, muri dosiye, hari e-mail indemnity na diaspora - application for funds transfer zo kuwa 29/06/2015, zujujwe hakoreshejwe imashini n’umuntu utazwi kandi izo nyandiko ziriho signature ya Sebahizi Jules iri scanée zohererejwe EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd zinyujijwe kuri e-mail ya Sebahizi Jules (makuzajules@gmail.com) yavuzwe haruguru, asaba ko Banki yabikuza kuri konti ye N°4003211159434 yavuzwe haruguru 8.500USD, ikayohereza kuri adresse ikurikira: Beneficiary’s name: Chong Tze Min, Beneficiary’s Account N°245660375, Beneficiary’s Bank: DBS Bank Limited, Country: Marina Bay, Singapore, Swift Code/IBAN/Fed wire N°DBSSSGSG. Ibyo kandi byakozwe kuwa 03/07/2015, ubwo uwo muntu utazwi yasabaga ko EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd yabikuza kuri konti ya Sebahizi Jules yavuzwe haruguru 21.500USD ikamwoherereza kuri iyo adresse, maze EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd imwoherereza 30.000USD (8.500USD + 21.500USD) muri ibyo byiciro bibiri. [25] Urukiko rurasanga imvugo y’uburanira EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd y’uko muri uru rubanza hatakurikizwa Amabwiriza Ngengamikorere (Equity Bank Limited, Branch Operations Procedures Manual) yayo kubera ko areba abakiliya bayo muri rusange, aho kureba Sebahizi Jules ku giti cye nta shingiro ifite, kuko ayo mabwiriza yuzuzanya na e-mail indemnity bagiranye ku wa 07/04/2015 yavuzwe haruguru, kandi ko yabaye amategeko hagati y’impande zombi nk’uko biteganywa n’ingingo ya 64 y’Itegeko ryavuzwe haruguru. [26] Hashingiwe ku mategeko no ku bisobanuro bimaze kuvugwa haruguru, Urukiko rurasanga EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd igomba kuryozwa 30.000USD ya Sebahizi Jules

Page 90

63 yabikujwe kuri konti ye N°4003211159434 atabitangiye uburenganzira kubera impamvu zikurikira :  Kuba

EQUITY

BANK

RWANDA Ltd yarabikuje 30.000USD kuri konti ya Sebahizi Jules N°4003211159434 inshuro ebyiri zose no mu bihe bitandukanye kuko kuwa 30/06/2015, habikujwe 8.500USD, naho kuwa 03/07/2015, habikuzwa 21.500USD, igahita iyohereza mu gihugu cya Singapore itabanje kumuhamagara kugira ngo yemeze ko ariwe wayihaye uburenganzira bwo kuyohereza muri icyo gihugu, kandi EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd yari ifite inshingano zishingiye ku masezerano bagiranye ateganya ko izamuhamagara mbere yo gutanga ayo madolari nk’uko biteganywa n’ingingo ya 14 y’Amabwiriza Ngengamikorere ya EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd yiswe Equity Bank Limited, Branch Operations Procedures Manual, agenga uburyo bwo gukura amafaranga kuri konti y’umukiriya ajya ku konti y’undi mukiriya.  Kuba

EQUITY

BANK

RWANDA Ltd itarahamagaye Sebahizi Jules mbere yo kohereza ayo madolari mu gihugu cya Singapore kandi yari ifite amakuru ahagije yagombaga gutuma igira amakenga ikamuhamagara mbere yo kohereza ayo madolari muri icyo gihugu kuko yabonaga ko imikoranire yabo yahindutse bitewe n’uko yabonaga yasabwe kohereza amadolari menshi cyane yo kugura impapuro muri Hong EQUITY BANK RWANDA LTD v. SEBAHIZI

Page 91

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 64 Kong, kandi Sebahizi Jules atari umucuruzi kuko yari umukozi wa USAID.  Kuba

EQUITY

BANK

RWANDA Ltd itarahamagaye Sebahizi Jules mbere yo kohereza umubare munini w’amadolari ungana na 30.000USD mu gihugu cya Singapore, kandi mbere yarabanzaga kumuhamagara kuri telefoni ubwo yayisabaga koherereza amadolari make cyane angana na 1.700USD, ikindi gihe 1.500USD, n’ikindi gihe 1.800USD, ibikora yabanje gucisha ayo madolari kuri konti N°4003211287114 ya Bikema Vanessa wari mu Rwanda kuko yakoreraga muri iyo banki nk’uko byasobanuwe haruguru.  Kuba

EQUITY

BANK

RWANDA Ltd yarohereje 30.000USD mu gihugu cya Singapore itabanje guhamagara Sebahizi Jules kugira ngo yemeze ko ariwe wayihaye ayo mabwiriza kandi imikorere y’amabanki (pratique) yo mu Rwanda ayategeka kubanza guhamagara abakiliya bayo batanze amasheki mbere yokuyishyura. Ibyo kandi biteganyijwe mu mabwiriza ngengamikorere ya EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd yavuzwe haruguru (p. 82), aho ategeka ko ba cash officer bagomba kubanza guhamagara abakiliya bayo mbere yo guhemba sheki y’ibihumbi magana atanu (500.000Frw) bahawe n’utari nyiri konti.3

3 A call back must be made for all third party cheques before payment for amounts exceeding 500,000Frw.

Page 92

65  Kuba mu nkiko zose

EQUITY

BANK RWANDA Ltd yaburaniyemo yaremeye ko itahamagaye Sebahizi Jules mbere yo kohereza 30.000USD ye mu gihugu cya Singapore bikwiye kuyitsindisha nk’uko biteganywa n’ingingo ya 110 y’Itegeko Nº15/2004 ryo kuwa 12/06/2004 ryerekeye ibimenyetso mu manza n’itangwa ryabyo, iteganya ko“ukwiyemerera mu rubanza ari amagambo umuburanyi cyangwa umuhagarariye avugira mu rukiko agira ibyo yemera. Ayo magambo aramutsindishaˮ. [27] Hashingiwe ku mategeko no ku bisobanuro bimaze kuvugwa haruguru, Urukiko rurasanga, kuba nta ruhare Sebahizi Jules yagize mu ibikuzwa rya 30.000USD kuri konti ye N°4003211159434 n’iyoherezwa ryayo mu gihugu cya Singapore, bigaragaza ko EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd yabikoze kubera uburangare bwayo bwasobanuwe haruguru, ikwiye kuyamusubiza uko yakabaye kubera impamvu zasobanuwe haruguru.

2. Kumenya niba Sebahizi Jules agomba guhabwa indishyi asaba muri uru rubanza. [28] Me Bizimana Shoshi avuga ko Sebahizi Jules n’umuryango we bavukijwe uburengenzira bwo gukoresha 30.000USD yabo mu gihe cy’imyaka ibiri yose, ni ukuvuga kuva ku wa 29/06/2015 kugeza kuri 03/07/2015, igihe ayo madolari yabikuzwaga kuri konti ye kugeza ubu bitewe n’amakosa ya EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd yavuzwe haruguru, byatumye bagira imibereho mibi, kandi baribariteganyirije, asaba ko EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd yabakoreye ayo makosa, yabibahera inyungu z’igihombo EQUITY BANK RWANDA LTD v. SEBAHIZI

Page 93

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 66 yabateje zibazwe mu buryo bukurikira: 30.000USD × 18 % × imyaka 2 = 10.800USD. [29] Avuga kandi ko EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd igomba gusubiza Sebahizi Jules 16.560USD y’igihombo yagize ubwo yataga akazi yakoraga i Monrovia akaza kwikurikiranira uru rubanza nk’uko bigaragazwa na pièces ziri muri dosiye. [30] Akomeza avuga ko hashingiwe ku ngingo ya 258 y’Igitabo cya gatatu cy’urwunge rw’amategeko y’imbonezamubano, EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd ikwiye guha Sebahizi Jules n’umuryango we 10.000.000Frw y’indishyi z’akababaro bagize, 2.000.000Frw y’ikurikiranarubanza, 1.000.000Frw y’igihembo cy’Avoka cyo ku rwego rwa mbere, 1.000.000Frw y’igihembo cy’Avoka cyo ku rwego rwa kabiri na 1.000.000Frw y’igihembo cy’Avoka cyo muri uru Rukiko. [31] Me Karemera Frank, uhagarariye EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd, avuga ko Sebahizi Jules atahabwa indishyi asaba kubera ko yishoye mu rubanza ku maherere kuko nta makosa banki yamukoreye nk’uko byasobanuwe haruguru.

UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [32] Ku byerekeranye n’inyungu z’igihombo Sebahizi Jules asaba, ingingo ya 137 y’Itegeko N°45/2011 ryo kuwa 25/11/2011 rigenga amasezerano, iteganya ko “uruhande rwarenganyijwe rufite uburenganzira bwo kubona indishyi zitanzwe n’urundi ruhande rutubahirije ibisabwa mu masezerano, keretse iyo ikirego kigamije kubona indishyi cyahagaritswe cyangwa cyaravuyeho”.

Page 94

67 [33] Urukiko rurasanga koko Sebahizi Jules n’umuryango we baragize igihombo cyo kudakoresha 30.000USD bitewe n’uko EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd yayohereje mu gihugu cya Singapore nta burenganzira abitangiye nk’uko byasobanuwe haruguru, akaba atarashoboye kuyakoresha mu buryo ubwo aribwo bwose, haba kuyatungisha umuryango, haba ndetse no kuyarekera muri banki akabyara inyungu. [34] Hashingiwe kuri iyo ngingo, Urukiko rurasanga rero EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd yateje Sebahizi Jules n’umuryango we igihombo igomba kubibahera n’inyungu z’igihombo yabateje zibariwe ku gipimo cy’inyungu kingana na 6.576% nk’uko cyemejwe na BNR mu kwezi kwa 12/2017 (taux moyen d’intérêt débiteur) kuko aricyo kibarirwaho inyungu z’amafaranga abakiliya babitsa mu ma banki kugira ngo abungukire, aho kuba gipimo cy’inyungu kingana na 18% ku mwaka kuko Sebahizi Jules atari umucuruzi nk’uko yabyiyemereye imbere y’uru Rukiko, bityo kuba Sebahizi Jules yaramaze iminsi 926 adakoresha ayo madolari ye bitewe n’uburangare bwa EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd nk’uko byasobanuwe haruguru, ni ukuvuga kuva ku wa 30/06/2015, umunsi wa mbere ayo madolari yabikuzwaga kuri konti ye kugeza ku wa 26/01/2018, umunsi w’isomwa ry’urubanza, igomba kubitangira inyungu zibazwe mu buryo bukurikira: 30.000ܷܵܦ ܺ 6.576 ܺ ݅݉݅݊ݏ݅ 926 360 ܺ100 = 5.074ܷܵܦ [35] Ku bijyanye n’ibyo Sebahizi Jules yatanze akurikirana urubanza (dépenses), Urukiko rurasanga ibimenyetso biri muri dosiye bigaragaza ko yakoresheje amafaranga akurikirana uru rubanza mu buryo bukurikira: ama tickets y’indege yishyuye yo kuva muri Liberiya aza mu Rwanda yo kuza no gusubirayo: EQUITY BANK RWANDA LTD v. SEBAHIZI

Page 95

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 68 182USD, 780USD na 592.500Frw nk’uko bigaragazwa n’inyemezabuguzi (reçus) zo kuwa 24/08/2015 no kuwa 31/03/2017, 180USD y’icumbi na visa yishyuye ubwo yari mu gihugu cya Ghana - Accra nk’uko bigaragazwa n’inyemezabuguzi (reçus) yo kuwa 23/08/2015, 50USD yishyuriye muri Gasutamo y’icyo gihugu, na 20USD yahaye umushoferi wamukuye ku kibuga cy’indege akamujyana muri hoteli yarayemo muri icyo gihugu nk’uko bigaragazwa n’inyemezabuguzi zo kuwa 22/08/2015, hiyongereyeho n’ibyamutunze n’ingendo yakoreye mu Rwanda, aho yazaga gukurikirana urubanza rwe, akaba yagenewe 500.000Frw mu bushishozi bw’Urukiko, yose hamwe akaba 1.212USD na 1.092.500Frw y’ikurikiranarubanza. [36] Ku byerekeranye n’igihembo cy’Avoka, Urukiko rurasanga mu nkiko yagiye aburaniramo, Sebahizi Jules yaragombye kwifashisha abamwunganira kuva ku rwego rwa mbere kugera muri uru Rukiko, bityo EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd ikaba igomba kumuha 500.000Frw y’igihembo cy’Avoka yo ku rwego rwa mbere, 500.000Frw yo mu Rukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi na 1.000.000Frw yo kuri uru rwego agenwe n’Urukiko mu bushishozi bwarwo kuko ayo asaba ari menshi, yose hamwe akaba 2.000.000Frw y’igihembo cy’Avoka. [37] Ku bijyanye n’indishyi z’akababaro, 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”. Hashingiwe kuri iyi ngingo, Urukiko rurasanga, kuba Sebahizi Jules n’umuryango we baravukijwe 30.000USD mu gihe kirenze imyaka ibiri bitewe n’igikorwa cya EQUITY

Page 96

69 BANK RWANDA Ltd cyo kuyohereza hanze y’Igihugu Sebahizi Jules atabitangiye uburenganzira nk’uko byasobanuwe haruguru, bigaragara ko icyo gikorwa cyabateye akababaro kinabahungabanya mu mitekerereze yabo, bityo EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd igomba kubibahera indishyi z’akababaro zingana na 800.000Frw agenewe n’Urukiko mu bushishozi bwarwo kuko ayo asaba ari menshi.

3. Kumenya niba ubujurire bwuririye ku bundi bwa EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd bufite ishingiro. [38] Me Karemera Frank, uhagarariye EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd, avuga ko itanze ubujurire bwuririye ku bundi isaba Urukiko rw’Ikirenga ko rwavanaho icyemezo cyafashwe n’Urukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi kiyitegeka kwishyura Sebahizi Jules kimwe cya kabiri (1/2) cya 30.000USD kingana na 15.000USD kubera ko nta ruhare iyo banki yagize mu kwibwa kwa e-mail ye, kandi ko ibyo iyo banki yakoze, yabikoze mu buryo buteganywa n’amasezerano bagiranye, isaba ahubwo ko Sebahizi Jules akwiye kuyiha 2.000.000Frw y’igihembo cy’Avoka. [39] Me Bizimana Shoshi wunganira Sebahizi Jules avuga ko ubujurire bwuririye ku bundi bwatanzwe na EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd nta shingiro bufite kubera ko yagize uburangare bwo kohereza amafaranga ye hanze y’igihugu atayihaye uburenganzira. Ikindi n’uko kuba EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd itararegeye Urwego rw’Umuvunyi isaba kurenganurwa, asanga itatanga ubujurire bwuririye ku bundi isaba ko 15.000USD Sebahizi Jules yagenewe yavanwaho kubera ko kuregera urwo rwego ari inzira yihariye (procédure spéciale), ko ahubwo yaregera amafaranga y’ikurikiranarubanza n’igihembo cy’Avoka gusa. EQUITY BANK RWANDA LTD v. SEBAHIZI

Page 97

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 70

UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [40] Urukiko rurasanga ubujurire bwuririye ku bundi bwatanzwe na EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd nta shingiro bufite kubera impamvu zasobanuwe haruguru, bityo ikaba itagomba guhabwa amafaranga y’ikurikiranarubanza n’igihembo cy’Avoka isaba kuko itsinzwe. [41] Urukiko rurasanga ibyo Me Bizimana Shoshi aburanisha by’uko EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd idafite uburenganzira bwo gutanga ubujurire bwuririye ku bundi nta shingiro bifite kuko haregerwa Urukiko, hataregerwa Umuvunyi. III.ICYEMEZO CY’URUKIKO [42] Rwemeje ko ikirego cyatanzwe na Sebahizi Jules gisaba gusubirishamo ku mpamvu z’akarengane urubanza RCOMA0032/16/HCC rwaciwe n’Urukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi ku wa 19/02/2016 gifite shingiro. [43] Rwemeje ko ubujurire bwuririye ku bundi bwatanzwe na EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd nta shingiro bufite. [44] Rutegetse EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd guha Sebahizi Jules 1.212USD na 1.092.500Frw y’ikurikiranarubanza. [45] Rutegetse EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd guha Sebahizi Jules 30.000USD yabikujwe kuri konti ye atabitangiye uburenganzira na 5.074USD y’inyungu z’igihombo yamuteje n’umuryango we, yose hamwe akaba 35.074USD.

Page 98

71 [46] Rutegetse EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd guha Sebahizi Jules 800.000Frw y’indishyi z’akababaro na 2.000.000Frw y’igihembo cy’Avoka. [47] Ruvuze ko imikirize y’urubanza RCOMA0032/16/HCC rwaciwe n’UrukikoRukuru rw’Ubucuruzi ku wa 19/02/2016 ihindutse kuri bimwe. [48] Rutegetse EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd gutanga amagarama y’urubanza angana na 100.000Frw.

EQUITY BANK RWANDA LTD v. SEBAHIZI

Page 100

URUBANZA RW’UMURIMO

Page 102

RUHIMBAZA v. BANKI YA KIGALI LTD [Rwanda URUKIKO RW’IKIRENGA – RS/INJUST/RSOC 00001/2017/SC (Kayitesi Z., P.J., Mugenzi, Kanyange, Nyirandabaruta na Ngagi, J.) 24 Ugushingo 2017] Amategeko agenga umurimo – Gusesa amasezerano y’umurimo – Uburenganzira bw’umukozi iyo asezerewe mu kazi – Indishyi zikomoka ku kwirukanwa nta mpamvu – Indishyi zo kwirukanwa nta mpamvu zitandukanye n’amafaranga umukozi ahabwa nk’uburenganzira yemererwa n’amategeko iyo asezerewe mu kazi – Itegeko Nº13/2009 ryo kuwa 27/05/2009 rigenga umurimo, ngingo ya 32, 33 niya 57. Amategeko agenga umurimo – Umushahara – Amafaranga y’urwunguko na y’ ishimwe – Umukoresha atanga amafaranga y’urwunguko nay’ ishimwe abyibwirije kandi ku bushake, ariko iyo ayemeye aba ari itegeko kuri we kuko biba ari kimwe mu bigize umushahara w’umukozi. Incamake y’ikibazo: Ruhimbaza yasezerewe ku kazi ku mpamvu yuko Umukoresha we Banki ya Kigali yavugaga ko atari yujuje ibisabwa n’imbonerahamwe y’imyanya y’imirimo nshya yemejwe n’Inama y’Ubutegetsi ya Banki. Yaregeye Urukiko Rwisumbuye rwa Nyarugenge asaba indishyi zinyuranye kubera kwirukanwa mu buryo bunyuranije n’amategeko. Urwo Rukiko rwemeje ko yirukanywe mu buryo bunyuranyije n’amategeko, rumugenera indishyi zikubiyemo izo kwirukanwa mu buryo bunyuranye n’amategeko, amafaranga y’integuza, ay’ikiruhuko atabonye, ay’imperekeza, 75

Page 103

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 76 indishyi zo kudahabwa icyemezo cy’umukoresha cyuzuye, amafaranga y’ishimwe, ay’urwunguko, ay’ikiruhuko atafashe hamwe nay’ ikurikiranarubanza n’igihembo cy’Avoka. Umukoresha yajuririye icyo cyemezo mu Rukiko Rukuru, narwo rwemeza ko urubanza rwajuririwe ruhindutse gusa ku bijyanye n’indishyi zigomba guhabwa uregwa. Yarongeye ajuririra Urukiko rw’Ikirenga arushyikiriza impamvu zari zatumye ajuririra Urukiko Rukuru, narwo rumaze kuzisuzuma, rwemeza ko uregwa yirukanwe mu buryo bunyuranye n’amategeko, maze rumugenera indishyi zihwanye n’umushahara we w’amezi icyenda, ariko rutegeka ko zikurwamo amafaranga yari yarahawe n’umukoresha we igihe cyo kumusezerera, akubiyemo ay’integuza, ay’imperekeza, n’ay’ikiruhuko atari yarafashe, runategeka umukoresha kumuha indishyi zo kuba yarahawe icyemezo cy’umukoresha we wa nyuma kituzuye, n’amafaranga y’ikurikiranarubanza n’igihembo cy’Avoka. Uregwa ntiyishimiye imikirize y’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga, bityo yiyambaza Urwego rw’Umuvunyi asaba ko urwo rubanza rwasubirwamo ku mpamvu z’akarengane, kuko rwategetse ko mu ndishyi rwamugeneye zo kwirukanwa mu buryo budakurikije amategeko, hakurwamo amafaranga y’integuza, ay’imperekeza n’ayikiruhuko yahawe asezererwa kandi ntaho ahuriye nazo kandi rutamugeneye amafaranga y’urwunguko n’aya amashimwe umukoresha yamwimye kandi yari asanzwe ayahabwa. Urwo rwego narwo rwasabye ko urwo rubanza rwasubirwamo, nyuma yo kubisuzuma, Perezida w’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga yemeje ko rwongera kuburanishwa. Mu iburanisha habanje gusuzumwa inzitizi yo kutakira ikirego, aho Umukoresha yavugaga ko kitubahirije ibiteganywa n’amategeko kuko icyabayeho mu

Page 104

77 icibwa ry’urubanza atari akarengane ahubwo ari ukwitiranya indishyi zo kwirukanwa binyuranyije n’amategeko n’amafaranga yahawe ahagarikwa ku kazi, icyo kibazo rero, kikaba cyaramuhaga uburenganzira bwo gusubirishamo urubanza ingingo nshya, bityo kikaba kitagomba gushingira ku nzira yo gusubirishamo urubanza ku mpamvu z’akarengane, nk’uko biteganywa n’ingigo ya 81 y’Itegeko N°03/2012/OL ryo ku wa 13/06/2012 rigena imiterere, imikorere n’ububasha by’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga. Kubyerekeye iyo nzitizi, uwasabye gusubirishamo urubanza avuga ko ingingo ya 186 y’Itegeko No21/2012 ryo ku wa 14/06/2012 yerecyeye ugusubirishamo urubanza ingingo nshya ikoreshwa iyo mu ica ry’urubanza habaye amakosa akomeye yo kwitiranya uko ibintu byagenze bigatuma Urukiko rufata icyemezo kitari cyo, akaba atari ko bimeze muri uru rubanza, kuko Urukiko rutigeze rwitiranya uko ibintu byagenze, ahubwo ko rumaze gusobanura no gusesengura uko ibintu byagenze rwasanze yarirukanwe mu buryo budakurikije amategeko rumugenera indishyi, ikibazo kivuka ari uko rutegetse ko izo ndishyi zivanwamo amafaranga yari yarahawe yirukanwa ku kazi, ari naho hagaragarira akarengane yagiriwe. Mu iburanisha mu mizi, uwasabye gusubirishamo urubanza avuga ko urubanza rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga harimo akarengane kubera ko rwemeje ko indishyi rwamugeneye zo kwirukanwa nta mpamvu zikurwamo amafaranga y’ibyo yemererwa n’amategeko; akomeza avuga ko ayo mafaranga atari kwitiranywa n’indishyi zo kwirukanwa nta mpamvu. Yongeraho ko Urukiko rwavuze ko adafite uburenganzira ku mafaranga y’amashimwe rushingiye ku kuba atarakorewe isuzumabushobozi, runamwima n’amafaranga y’urwunguko rushingiye ku kuba yarahagaritswe “bilan” itarakorwa ngo RUHIMBAZA v. BANKI YA KIGALI LTD

Page 105

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 78 hagaragare umusaruro umukoresha we yabonye, akaba asanga iyo atirukanwa yari gukorerwa iryo suzuma kandi ko mu mezi icumi yari amaze gukora yagize uruhare ku nyungu umukoresha yabonye. Asoza asaba ko yahabwa amafaranga y’igihembo cy’Avoka na y’ikurikiranarubanza. Uregwa yiregura avuga ko nta karengane kari mu rubanza kuko Urukiko rutegeka ko ahabwa indishyi zo kwirukanwa mu buryo bunyuranye n’amategeko hakuwemo amafaranga yari yarahawe ahagarikwa mu kazi, ari uko rwabyumvise, kandi ko kutishimira imikirize y’urubanza bitafatwa nk’akarengane. Kubirebana na amafaranga y’ishimwe na y’urwunguko yisobanura avuga ko itegeko rigenga banki ya Kigali Ltd, riteganya ko amafaranga y’ishimwe atangwa nyuma y’umwaka kandi ko umukoresha adategetswe kuyitanga, naho kubirebana n’amafaranga y’urwunguko rigateganya ko itangwa mu kwezi kwa gatatu hashingiwe ku musaruro Banki yabonye, bimaze kwemezwa n’inama y’ubuyobozi, ari nayo igena ingano yayo, kandi ko kuyitanga nayo atari itegeko. Kubirebana n’amafaranga y’igihembo cy’Avoka na y’ikurikiranarubanza avuga ko niwe ufite kuyagenerwa kuko indishyi yatsindiye yazihawe mu manza zabanje ariko akomeza kumushora mu manza zitari ngombwa. Incamake y’icyemezo: 1. Kuba Urukiko rwarategetse ko indishyi zagenwe kubera kwirukanwa binyuranyije n’amategeko zigomba kuvanwamo amafaranga yahawe asezererwa ku kazi, ntibyakwitwa ko ari ukwitiranya uko ibintu byagenze, kuko byasobanuwe n’Urukiko runabishingiraho rufata icyemezo cy’uko yirukanwe mu buryo bunyuranyije n’amategeko.

2. Indishyi zigenwa mu gihe habayeho ikosa ryo kwirukana umukozi nta mpamvu ni izishingira ku kababaro katewe n’iryo

Page 106

79 sezererwa zitandukanye n’andi mafaranga umukozi ahabwa nk’uburenganzira yemererwa n’amategeko iyo asezerewe mu kazi. Bityo amafaranga y’integuza, ay’imperekeza zo gusezererwa ku kazi n’ay’ikiruhuko yari yari yarahawe ntabwo agomba gukurwa mu mafaranga y’indishyi zo kwirukanwa binyuranyije n’amategeko.

3. Umukoresha ntashobora kwanga guha umukozi amafaranga y’ ishimwe n’ay’urwunguko yitwaje ko umukozi nta suzumabushobozi yakorewe cyangwa umusaruro w’umukoresha wari utaragaragazwa, mu gihe yirukanwe ku mpamvu itumvikana igihe cyo kubikora kitaragera, kuko iryo ikosa ry’umukoresha ryo kumwirukana nta mpamvu ari ryo ryatumye adakomeza akazi ngo arangize umwaka akorerwe isuzumwa, n’umusaruro w’umukoresha we ugaragazwe. Bityo izi mpamvu zikomoka ku ngaruka zo kwirukanwa nta mpamvu, ntizashingirwaho yimwa amafaranga y’ishimwe nay’urwunguko yari kubona iyo aguma mu kazi.

4. Amafaranga y’ishimwe nay’urwunguko atangwa n’umukoresha abyibwirije kandi ku bushake, ariko iyo ayemeye biba ari itegeko kuri we kuko iba ari kimwe mu bigize umushahara w’umukozi.

5. Igikorwa cyose cy’umuntu cyangirije undi gitegeka nyir’ugukora ikosa rigikomokaho kuriha ibyangiritse. Bityo urega agenewe amafaranga y’igihembo cy’Avoka na y’ikurikiranarubanza mu bushishozi bw’urukiko kuko ayo asaba ari menshi. Inzitizi yo kutakira ikirego cyo gusubirishamo urubanza ku mpamvu z’akarengane nta shingiro ifite; ikirego cyo gusubirishamo urubanza ku mpamvu z’akarengane gifite ishingiro;

RUHIMBAZA v. BANKI YA KIGALI LTD

Page 107

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 80 Amagarama y’urubanza aherereye k’ uregwa. Amategeko yashingiweho: Itegeko Ngenga N°03/2012/OL ryo kuwa 13/06/2012 rigena imiterere, imikorere n’ububasha by’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga, ingingo ya78 niya 81(2). Itegeko Nº13/2009 ryo kuwa 27/05/2009 rigenga umurimo, ngingo ya 29, 32, 33, 35 niya 57. Itegeko – teka ryo kuwa 30/07/1888 ryerekeye imirimo nshinganwa cyangwa amasezerano, ingingo ya 258. Itegeko N°21/2012 ryo kuwa 14/06/2012 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi, ingingo 186 (6). Nta manza zifashishijwe. Ibitekerezo by’abahanga byifashishijwe: A. Cœuret, B. Gauriau et M. Miné, Droit du travail, Edition Dalloz, 2006, pp. 386-389. Urubanza I. IMITERERE Y’URUBANZA [1] Ruhimbaza Modeste yabaye umukozi wa Banki ya Kigali kuva tariki ya 20/03/1995 kugeza asezerewe tariki ya 23/10/2009 ku mpamvu yuko umukoresha we yavugaga ko atari yujuje ibisabwa n’imbonerahamwe y’imyanya y’imirimo nshya

Page 108

81 yemejwe n’Inama y’Ubutegetsi nyuma y’ivugururwa ry’imiterere n’imikorere bya Banki ya Kigali. [2] Ruhimbaza Modeste amaze kubona ibaruwa ya Banki ya Kigali imusezerera, yaregeye Urukiko Rwisumbuye rwa Nyarugenge, mu rubanza RSOC0243/10/TGI/NYGE rwaciwe kuwa 21/10/2011, Urukiko rwemeza ko Ruhimbaza yirukanwe mu buryo bunyuranyije n’amategeko, rutegeka Banki ya Kigali kumuha amafaranga angana na 8.252.102Frw akubiyemo indishyi zo kwirukanwa mu buryo bunyuranye n’amategeko, amafaranga y’integuza, ay’ikiruhuko atabonye, ay’imperekeza, indishyi zo kudahabwa icyemezo cy’umukoresha cyuzuye, amafaranga ya gratification na prime de bilan, aya pécule de congé, ay’ikurikiranarubanza n’igihembo cy’Avoka. [3] Banki ya Kigali yajuririye Urukiko Rukuru icyo cyemezo, mu rubanza RSOCA0112/11/HC/KIG rwaciwe kuwa 18/04/2012, Urukiko rwemeza ko ubujurire bwa Banki ya Kigali nta shingiro bufite, ko urubanza rwaciwe n’Urukiko Rwisumbuye ruhindutse gusa ku bijyanye n’indishyi zigomba guhabwa Ruhimbaza Modeste. [4] Banki ya Kigali yajuririye Urukiko rw’Ikirenga, mu rubanza RSOCAA0011/11/CS rwaciwe ku wa 22/02/2013 rwemeza ko Ruhimbaza Modeste yirukanwe mu buryo bunyuranye n’amategeko, rushingiye ku ngingo ya 33, igika cya gatatu y’Itegeko No13/2009 ryo kuwa 27/05/2009 rigenga umurimo mu Rwanda, rumugenera indishyi zingana na 3.934.134Frw ahwanye n’umushahara we w’amezi icyenda, ariko rutegeka ko zikurwamo amafaranga angana na 3.139.359Frw yari yarahawe na Banki ya Kigali igihe cyo kumusezerera, akubiyemo ay’integuza, ay’imperekeza, n’ay’ikiruhuko atari yarafashe, runayitegeka guha Ruhimbaza RUHIMBAZA v. BANKI YA KIGALI LTD

Page 109

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 82 Modeste indishyi zingana na 1.311.378Frw zo kuba yarahawe icyemezo cy’umukoresha we wa nyuma kituzuye, n’amafaranga y’ikurikiranarubanza n’igihembo cy’Avoka angana na 1.400.000Frw. [5] Ruhimbaza Modeste ntiyishimiye imikirize y’urwo rubanza RSOCAA0011/11/CS rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga, yandikira Urwego rw’Umuvunyi asaba ko rusubirwamo ku mpamvu z’akarengane, avuga ko Urukiko rw’Ikirenga rwamurenganyije, kuko rwategetse ko mu ndishyi rwamugeneye zo kwirukanwa ku kazi ku mpamvu zidakurikije amategeko, hakurwamo amafaranga y’integuza, ay’imperekeza n’ayikiruhuko yahawe asezererwa kandi ntaho ahuriye nazo, ko kandi rutamugeneye amafaranga ya prime de bilan n’aya gratification Banki ya Kigali yamwimye kandi yari asanzwe ayahabwa. [6] Urwego rw’Umuvunyi rumaze gusuzuma ikibazo cye no kugisesengura rwasanze gifite ishingiro, rwandikira Nyakubahwa Perezida w’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga rusaba ko urubanza RSOCAA0011/11/CS rwasubirwamo, nyuma yo kubisuzuma, Perezida w’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga mu cyemezo No010/2017 cyo kuwa 23/01/2017, yemeza ko rwongera kuburanishwa. [7] Urubanza rwaburanishijwe tariki ya 17/10/2017, Ruhimbaza Modeste aburanirwa na Me Munyeshema Napoléon, naho Banki ya Kigali Ltd iburanirwa na Me Rutembesa Phocas.

Page 110

83 II. IBIBAZO BIRI MU RUBANZA N’ISESENGURA RYABYO [8] Mbere yo gusuzuma ingingo Ruhimbaza Modeste ashingiraho asaba ko urubanza RSOCAA0011/11/CS rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga ku wa 22/02/2013 rusubirwamo ku mpamvu z’akarengane, Urukiko rurabanza gusuzuma ikibazo cyatanzwe na Banki ya Kigali Ltd cyo kutakira ikirego cya Ruhimbaza Modeste kubera ko kitubahirije ibiteganywa n’amategeko. Kumenya niba ikirego cya Ruhimbaza Modeste kitakwakirwa ngo gisuzumwe. [9] Me Rutembesa Phocas uhagariye Banki ya Kigali Ltd avuga ko asanga ikirego cyo gusubirishamo urubanza RSOCAA0011/11/CS ku mpamvu z’akarengane cyatanzwe na Ruhimbaza Modeste kidakwiye kwakirwa kubera ko yagitanze mu buryo bunyuranyije n’amategeko. Avuga ko icyabayeho mu icibwa ry’urubanza RSOCAA0011/11/CS atari akarengane, ko ahubwo ari ukwitiranya indishyi zo kwirukanwa binyuranyije n’amategeko n’amafaranga Ruhimbaza Modeste yahawe ahagarikwa ku kazi, icyo kibazo kikaba cyaramuhaga uburenganzira bwo gusubirishamo urubanza ingingo nshya, ashingiye ku ngingo ya 186, agace ka 6, 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 rushobora gusubirishwamo ingingo nshya iyo mu icibwa ryarwo hakozwe amakosa akabije yo kwitiranya uko ibintu byagenze cyangwa iyo hashingiwe ku itegeko ritariho; ko kitagomba gushingira ku nzira yo gusubirishamo urubanza ku mpamvu z’akarengane iteganywa n’ingingo ya 78 RUHIMBAZA v. BANKI YA KIGALI LTD

Page 111

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 84 y’ Itegeko Ngenga N°03/2012/OL ryo kuwa 13/06/2012 rigena imiterere, imikorere n’ububasha by’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga. [10] Avuga kandi ko inzira Ruhimbaza Modeste, yitabaje inyuranye n’ibiteganywa n’ingingo ya 81, igika cya kabiri, y’Itegeko Ngenga N°03/2012/OL ryo kuwa 13/06/2012 rigena imiterere, imikorere n’ububasha by’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga iteganya ko umuburanyi wari ufite uburenganzira bwo kwiyambaza izindi nzira z’ubujurire zisanzwe n’izidasanzwe ariko ntabikore mu gihe giteganyijwe n’amategeko, atemerewe gusaba ko urubanza yatsinzwe rusubirwamo ku mpamvu z’akarengane; bityo ikirego cye kikaba kidakwiye kwakirwa ngo gisuzumwe. [11] Me Munyeshema Napoléon uhagarariye Ruhimbaza Modeste avuga ko ingingo ya 186, agace ka 6 y’Itegeko N°21/2012 ryo kuwa 14/06/2012 ryavuzwe haruguru, isobanutse kandi ikoreshwa iyo mu ica ry’urubanza habaye amakosa akomeye yo kwitiranya uko ibintu byagenze bigatuma Urukiko rufata icyemezo kitari cyo, akaba atari ko bimeze mu rubanza RSOCAA0011/11/CS, kuko Urukiko rutigeze rwitiranya uko ibintu byagenze, ahubwo ko rumaze gusobanura no gusesengura uko ibintu byagenze kugira ngo Ruhimbaza Modeste yirukanwe ku kazi, rwasanze yarirukanwe mu buryo budakurikije amategeko rumugenera indishyi, ikibazo kivuka ari uko rutegetse ko izo ndishyi zivanwamo amafaranga yari yarahawe yirukanwa ku kazi, ari naho hagaragarira akarengane yagiriwe. Asobanura ko ibivugwa na Me Rutembesa byari kugira ishingiro iyo kwitiranya ibintu bigaragarira mu bikorwa (faits), ariko ko mu rubanza RSOCAA0011/11/CS bigaragarira mu cyemezo rwafashe, bityo ikirego cya Ruhimbaza Modeste kikaba gikwiye kwakirwa.

Page 112

85

UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [12] Ingingo ya 81(2) y’Itegeko Ngenga N°03/2012 ryo kuwa 13/6/2012 rigena imiterere, imikorere n’ububasha by’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga iteganya ko “Urubanza rwaciwe ku rwego rwa nyuma rushobora gusubirwamo ku mpamvu z’akarengane kubera impamvu zikurikira, … iyo mu icibwa ry’urubanza hirengagijwe amategeko n’ibimenyetso bigaragarira buri wese….]”. [13] Urukiko rurasanga mu rubanza RSOCAA0011/11/CS cyane cyane mu bika bya 15, 16 na 17, Urukiko rwarasesenguye bihagije uburyo Ruhimbaza Modeste yirukanwe n’umukoresha we Banki ya Kigali Ltd, rushingiye ku ngingo ya 29 y’Itegeko N°13/2009 ryo ku wa 27/05/2009 ryerekeye Umurimo mu Rwanda1, rwanzura ko yirukanwe mu buryo bunyuranyije n’amategeko, kuko yirukanywe nta mpamvu zumvikana (motif légitime), aha akaba ari naho rwahereye rumugenera indishyi zijyanye nabyo zingana na 3.934.134Frw. [14] Urukiko rurasanga kuba Urukiko rwarategetse ko indishyi zagenewe Ruhimbaza Modeste kubera kwirukanwa binyuranyije n’amategeko zigomba kuvanwamo amafaranga y’integuza, ay’imperekeza zo gusezererwa ku kazi n’ay’ikiruhuko yari yarafashe, bitakwitwa ko ari ukwitiranya uko ibintu byagenze nk’uko biteganywa n’ingingo ya 186, agace ka 6, y’Itegeko N°21/2012 ryo ku wa 14/06/2012 ryavuzwe haruguru, kuko uko ibintu byagenze byasobanuwe

1 Ingingo ya 29 N°13/2009 y’Itegeko ryo kuwa 27/05/2009 rigenga umurimo mu Rwanda iteganya ko “Amasezerano y’akazi y’igihe kitazwi ashobora guseswa igihe cyose iyo umwe mu bayagiranye abishatse ariko ku mpamvu zumvikana. Iryo seswa ribanzirizwa n’integuza itangwa n’urishaka” RUHIMBAZA v. BANKI YA KIGALI LTD

Page 113

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 86 n’Urukiko runabishingiraho rufata icyemezo cy’uko yirukanwe mu buryo bunyuranyije n’amategeko, ahubwo habayeho gukura mu ndishyi zijyanye no kwirukanywa mu buryo bunyuranyije n’amategeko, amafaranga asimbura integuza n’ikiruhuko umukozi atari yarafashe, n’ay’imperekeza zo gusezererwa ku kazi, ajyanye n’ubundi burenganzira Ruhimbaza Modeste yemererwa n’Itegeko ry’umurimo, cyane cyane mu ngingo zaryo za 32, igika cya kabiri, 35, igika cya mbere2 na 57, igika cya mbere3. [15] Urukiko rurasanga rero mu rubanza RSOCAA0011/11/CS, ntakwitiranya uko ibintu byagenze bishingiye ku ngingo ya 186 (6) y’itegeko N°21/2012 ryo kuwa 14/06/2012 yavuzwe haruguru, nk’uko uhagarariye Banki ya Kigali Ltd abivuga, ahubwo, nk’uko byasobanuwe mu gika kibanza, harabayeho ukudakurikiza ingingo zimwe z’itegeko ry’umurimo, ku bw’izo mpamvu hakaba nta cyari kubuza Ruhimbaza Modeste gushingira ku ngingo ya 78 y’ Itegeko Ngenga N°03/2012/OL ryo kuwa 13/06/2012 rigena imiterere, imikorere n’ububasha by’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga, asaba ko urubanza rwe rusubirwamo ku mpamvu z’akarengane. [16] Urukiko rurasanga rero hashingiwe ku bisobanuro byatanzwe haruguru, no ku ngingo ya 81(2) y’Itegeko Ngenga N°03/2012 ryo kuwa 13/6/2012 rigena imiterere, imikorere

2 Ingingo ya 35, igika cya mbere, ivuga ko: umukoresha agomba guha impererekeza zo gusezererwa ku kazi cyangwa gusesa amasezerano umukozi umaze nibura amezi cumi n’abiri (12) akora nta guhagarika”. 3 Ingingo ya 57, igika cya mbere iteganya amafaranga y’insimburakiruhuko mu gihe umukozi ahagaritswe ku kazi atarafata ikiruhuko yemererwa n’amategeko

Page 114

87 n’ububasha by’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga, ikirego cya Ruhimbaza Modeste kigomba kwakirwa kigasuzumwa. Kumenya umubare w’amafaranga Ruhimbaza Modeste agomba guhabwa akomoka ku kwirukanwa mu buryo bunyuranye n’amategeko. Ku byerekeye indishyi zikomoka ku iyirukanywa rinyuranije n’amategeko. [17] Me Munyeshema Napoléon uburanira Ruhimbaza Modeste avuga ko Urukiko rw’Ikirenga mu rubanza RSOCAA0011/11/CS rwarenganyije uwo aburanira, kubera ko rwemeje ko indishyi zingana na 3.934.134Frw rwamugeneye zo kwirukanwa nta mpamvu zikurwamo amafaranga y’integuza, ay’imperekeza n’ay’ikiruhuko angana na 3.139.359Frw yahawe igihe cyo kwirukanwa nka décompte finale y’ibyo yemererwa n’amategeko kandi ko mu kuyakuramo, Urukiko rwirengagije ibiteganywa n’ingingo ya 33 y’Itegeko rigenga umurimo mu Rwanda, n’ikimenyetso kigizwe n’inyandiko y’iyo décompte finale yagaragarije Urukiko. Yongeraho ko ayo mafaranga atari kwitiranywa n’indishyi zo kwirukanwa nta mpamvu, kuko mu gihe Banki ya Kigali Ltd yamusezereraga ndetse no mu maburanisha yose yabayeho itemeraga ko yirukanwe mu buryo bunyuranyije n’amategeko, ari nacyo kigaragaza ko ibisobanuro byatanzwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga mu rubanza RSOCAA0011/11/CS rusabirwa gusubirwamo ku mpamvu z’akarengane binyuranye n’ukuri. [18] Asoza asaba ko amakosa yakozwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga mu rubanza RSOCAA0011/11/CS yakosorwa uwo aburanira agahabwa amafaranga yose y’indishyi zo kwirukanwa mu buryo bunyuranyije n’amategeko uko yagenwe, kandi ko ari nako byagenze mu manza za bagenzi be birukaniwe rimwe, RUHIMBAZA v. BANKI YA KIGALI LTD

Page 115

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 88 zirimo urubanza RSOCAA0013/12/CS Mukamusonera Venantie v Banki ya Kigali rwaciwe ku wa 31/12/2013, urubanza RSOCAA0017/12/CS Cyuma Yvonne v Banki ya Kigali rwaciwe kuwa 14/06/2013, n’urubanza RSOCAA0021/12/CS Nyirinkindi Jean Marie Vianney v Banki ya Kigali rwaciwe kuwa 06/12/2013. [19] Me Rutembesa Phocas uburanira Banki ya Kigali Ltd avuga ko nta karengane kagaragara mu icibwa ry’urubanza RSOCAA0011/11/CS, kuko Urukiko rutegeka ko Ruhimbaza Modeste ahabwa indishyi zo kwirukanwa mu buryo bunyuranye n’amategeko hakuwemo amafaranga yari yarahawe ahagarikwa mu kazi, ari uko rwabyumvise, kandi ko kutishimira imikirize y’urubanza bitafatwa nk’akarengane.

UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [20] Ingingo ya 33 y’Itegeko N°13/2009 ryo kuwa 27/05/2009 rigenga umurimo mu Rwanda iteganya ko “Iseswa ryose ry’amasezerano y’akazi rinyuranyije n’amategeko rishobora gutuma hatangwa indishyi z'akababaro. Indishyi z’akababaro zihabwa umukozi wirukanwe binyuranyije n’amategeko ntizishobora kujya munsi y’umushahara w’amezi atatu (3), ariko kandi ntizishobora kurenza amezi atandatu (6). Ibi ntibibuza itangwa ry’imperekeza umukozi yari asanzwe afiteho uburenganzira. Iyo umukozi afite uburambe ku kazi burenze imyaka icumi (10) ku mukoresha umwe, indishyi z’akababaro ntizishobora kurenga umushahara w’amezi icyenda (9)”. [21] Urukiko rurasanga mu rubanza RSOCAA0011/11/CS rusabirwa gusubirwamo mu gika cyarwo cya 15,16 n’icya 17

Page 116

89 rugaragaza ko nyuma yo gusesengura uburyo Ruhimbaza Modeste yirukanwemo, Urukiko rw’Ikirenga rwasanze yarirukanwe ku mpamvu itumvikana (motif non légitime), maze rushingiye ku ngingo ya 33, igika cya gatatu (3), y’Itegeko N°13/2009 ryo kuwa 27/05/2009 ryavuzwe haruguru, rumugenera indishyi zingana n’umushahara mpuzandengo we ukubwe inshuro icyenda kubera ko yari afite uburambe mu kazi burenga imyaka cumi (10), izo ndishyi zikaba zingana na 3.934.134Frw nk‘uko yari yemejwe n’Urukiko Rwisumbuye rwa Nyarugenge ndetse n’ Urukiko Rukuru rushimangira icyo cyemezo. [22] Urukiko rurasanga kandi mu bika bya 33 na 37 by’urubanza RSOCAA0011/11/CS, kimwe n’inyandiko yiswe indémnité de départ yakiriwe na Ruhimbaza Modeste kuwa 25/11/2009 iri muri dosiye, bigaragaza ko Ruhimbaza Modeste yirukanwa yahawe amafaranga y’integuza (indémnité compansatrice de préavis) angana na 337.126Frw ateganywa n’ingingo ya 32, igika cya mbere y’Itegeko ryavuzwe haruguru, amafaranga y’ikiruhuko atafashe (indémnité compansatrice de congé) angana na 79.477Frw ateganywa n’ingingo ya 57, igika cya kabiri, ry’iryo tegeko, n’amafaranga y’imperekeza angana n’umushahara we w’amezi atandatu angana na 2.622.755Frw ateganywa n’igika cya mbere cy’ingingo ya 35 yaryo, yose hamwe akaba angana na 3.139.359Frw. [23] Urukiko rurasanga indishyi zigenwa mu gihe habayeho ikosa ryo kwirukana umukozi ku mpamvu zitumvikana, zigenwa hashingiwe ku ngingo ya 33 y’itegeko N°13/2009 ryo kuwa 27/05/2009 ryavuzwe haruguru, ari indishyi zishingira ku kababaro katewe n’iryo sezererwa, zikaba zigomba gutandukanywa n’andi mafaranga umukozi ahabwa RUHIMBAZA v. BANKI YA KIGALI LTD

Page 117

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 90 nk’uburenganzira yemererwa n’amategeko iyo asezerewe mu kazi. Ugutandukanya amafaranga ahabwa umukozi igihe asezerewe ku kazi mu gihe gisanzwe n’indishyi ahabwa igihe habayeho ikosa ryo kumwirukana nta mpamvu, bigarukwaho n’abahanga mu mategeko aho bavuga ko « iyo integuza yarangiye buri wese agumana uburenganzira bwe, buri wese akubahiriza ibyo agomba….n’ubwo umukoresha ashobora kubisonera umukozi. Muri icyo gihe umukozi afite uburenganzira ku ndishyi zititiranywa n’indishyi zo kwirukanwa ku kazi...ndetse n’iz’akababaro4. Ko igihe umukozi yirukanwe mbere yuko ahabwa ikiruhuko cye cy’umwaka cyose yari afitiye uburenganzira, agomba kubona amafaranga ayisimbura, akaba atandukanye n’indishyi zo kwirukanwa, kuko afatwa nk’umushahara5.» [24] Urukiko rurasanga amafaranga 3.139.359Frw, Banki ya Kigali Ltd yahaye Ruhimbaza Modeste imusezerera ku kazi nka “décompte final”, yari ayafiteho uburenganzira hashingiwe ku ngingo ya 32, igika cya 2, iya 35 igika cya mbere, n’iya 57, igika cya 2, z’itegeko N°13/2009 ryo kuwa 27/05/2009 ryavuzwe haruguru, ndetse n‘ingingo ya 33, igika cya kabiri,

4 Alain Cœuret, Bernard Gauriau, Michel Miné, Droit du travail, Edition Dalloz, 2006, p. 386-387: […. Lorsque le préavis est exécuté, chacun conserve la maîtrise de ses droits ou pouvoir, chacun demeure tenu d’exécuter ses obligations…..Mais le salarié peut aussi en être dispensé par l’employeur. Dans cette hypothèse, il a droit à une indemnité compensatrice ne se confondant pas ni avec l’indemnité de licenciement….. ni avec la réparation…. ] 5 Idem, p. 388-389 : ……Lorsque le contrat de travail est résilié avant que le salarié ait pu bénéficier de la totalité du congé auquel il avait droit, il doit recevoir pour la fraction de congé dont il n’a pas bénéficié, une indemnité compensatrice……à la différence de l’indemnité de licenciement, cette indemnité a une nature salariale…]

Page 118

91 y’iryo tegeko ivuga ko itangwa ry’indishyi z’akababaro ritabuza ko umukozi ahabwa imperekeza yari asanzwe afiteho uburenganzira, ku bw’izo mpamvu akaba ataragombaga gukurwa mu ndishyi zituruka ku ikosa ryo kwirukanwa ku buryo bunyuranye n’amategeko. [25] Urukiko rurasanga rero, rushingiye kuri ibyo bisobanuro n’ingingo z’amategeko zavuzwe haruguru, indishyi zingana na 3.934.134Frw zituruka ku ikosa ryo kwirukanwa mu buryo bunyuranye n’amategeko Ruhimbaza Modeste yagenewe n’Urukiko mu rubanza RSOCAA0011/11/CS, zitaragombaga kuvanwamo amafaranga angana na 3.139.359Frw yahawe asezererwa ku kazi, kuko yayahawe nk’uburenganzira bwe yemererwa n’amategeko, bityo akaba agomba kuyahabwa yose uko ari 3.934.134Frw. Kubyerekeye amafaranga ya “prime de bilan” n’aya “gratification ”. [26] Me Munyeshema Napoléon avuga ko mu rubanza RSOCAA0011/11/CS Urukiko rw’Ikirenga rwemeje ko Ruhimbaza Modeste adafite uburenganzira ku mafaranga ya gratification rushingiye ku kuba atarakorewe isuzuma (évaluation), runamwima amafaranga ya prime de bilan rushingiye ku kuba yarahagaritswe bilan itarakorwa ngo hagaragare umusaruro Banki ya Kigali Ltd yabonye, akaba asanga iyo atirukanwa yari gukorerwa iryo suzuma kandi ko mu mezi icumi yari amaze gukora yagize uruhare ku nyungu Banki ya Kigali Ltd yabonye, bityo akaba nta mpamvu uwo aburanira yavutswa uburenganzira kuri ayo mafaranga ahwanye n’igihe cy’amezi icumi yari amaze gukora. RUHIMBAZA v. BANKI YA KIGALI LTD

Page 119

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 92 [27] Asoza asaba ko yahabwa prime de bilan ingana na 437.126Frw x 10/12= 364.272Frw na gratification ingana na 437.126Frw x 10/12= 364.272Frw, kandi ko hari n’imanza za bagenzi be bari bahuje ikibazo zaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga nyuma y’urubanza rwe, zirimo urubanza RSOCAA0013/12/CS Mukamusonera Venantie v Banki ya Kigali rwaciwe kuwa 31/12/2013, urubanza RSOCAA0017/12/CS Cyuma Yvonne v Banki ya Kigali rwaciwe kuwa 14/06/2013 zavuzwe haruguru, zemeje ko bayahabwa hashingiwe ku gihe bari bamaze gukora, kuba we atarayahawe akaba ari akarengane kagaragara mu rubanza RSOCAA0011/11/CS ariyo mpamvu asaba ko rusubirwamo akarenganurwa. [28] Me Rutembesa Phocas, uhagarariye Banki ya Kigali Ltd, avuga ko urubanza RSOCAA0011/11/CS rusabirwa gusubirwamo mu bika byarwo bya 45,46 na 47, Urukiko rwagaragaje impamvu Ruhimbaza Modeste atagenewe ayo mafaranga, rusobanura ko izo mpamvu zishingiye ku ngingo ya 76 y’amategeko agenga Banki ya Kigali Ltd, iteganya ko gratification itangwa nyuma y’umwaka kandi ko Umukoresha adategetswe kuyitanga6, no ku ngingo ya 77 y’ayo mategeko iteganya ko prime de bilan itangwa mu kwezi kwa gatatu hashingiwe ku musaruro Banki yabonye, bimaze kwemezwa n’Inama y’Ubuyobozi, ari nayo igena ingano yayo, kandi ko kuyitanga atari itegeko7.

6 A bonus may be given to the Worker at the end of the Year. Nevertheless, the Employer is under no obligation to give bonus. The bonus is calculated on the net salary at 31st December and evaluation points obtained by the Worker. 7 The giving of this allowance comes from the decision of the Board of Directors on the proposition of the Management Committee which fixes the amount and the date of payment. The Employer is under non legal obligation to give this appraisal allowance

Page 120

93 [29] Avuga ko ku bijyanye n’imanza zaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga zatanze prime de bilan na gratification ko izo manza zitafatwaho icyitegererezo kuko zaciwe nyuma y’urubanza rwa Ruhimbaza Modeste, kandi ko buri nteko ica urubanza ikurikije uko irwumva, ari nayo mpamvu hari n’izindi manza zo muri urwo rwego nazo zaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga arizo urubanza RSOCAA0010/12/CS, Mitimituje Gaëtan v Banki ya Kigali, rwaciwe kuwa 13/06/2014, n’urubanza RSOCAA0003/13/CS, Kanyandekwe Segatabazi Cisco v Banki ya Kigali rwaciwe kuwa 30/10/2015 zitatanze prime de bilan na gratification, bityo ko ibyo Me Munyeshema Napoléon avuga ko Urukiko rwashingira ku zindi manza zaciwe nta shingiro bikwiye guhabwa, kuko zose zitabivuzeho rumwe.

UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [30] Urukiko rurasanga mu rubanza RSOCAA0011/11/CS rusabirwa gusubirwamo mu bika byarwo bya 45 - 47 rugaragaza ko Ruhimbaza Modeste atahawe gratification bitewe n’uko atakorewe isuzumwa riteganywa n’ingingo ya 76 y’amategeko agenga Banki ya Kigali Ltd, ivuga ko gratification/bonus itangwa n’Umukoresha hashingiwe ku manota umukozi yabonye nyuma y’iryo suzumwa ari nayo agaragaza ingano ya gratification ahabwa. Rugaragaza kandi ko atahawe prime de bilan hashigiwe ku ngingo ya 77 y’ayo mategeko iteganya ko itangwa hashingiwe ku musaruro wabonetse mu mwaka, Ruhimbaza Modeste akaba atari kuyihabwa uwo musaruro utaragaragara kuko yirukanwe umwaka utararangira. [31] Urukiko rurasanga isuzumabushobozi ry’umukozi rishingira ku musaruro w’ibikorwa umukozi yagezeho n’imyitwarire uwo umukozi yagaragaje mu gihe cy’umwaka aba RUHIMBAZA v. BANKI YA KIGALI LTD

Page 121

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 94 arangije mu kazi ashinzwe, kandi Urukiko mu rubanza RSOCAA0011/11/CS, rugaragaza ko Ruhimbaza Modeste yirukanwe ku mpamvu itumvikana uwo mwaka utararangira, byumvikanisha ko atashoboye kurangiza umwaka ari mu kazi, kubera ikosa ry’umukoresha we ryo kumwirukana nta mpamvu, kuko iyo atirukanwa yari gukomeza gukora akazakorerwa isuzumwa umwaka urangiye nk’uko abandi bakozi basigaye mu kazi barikorewe. [32] Urukiko rurasanga kandi kuba yarirukanwe umwaka utararangira bidatesha agaciro ibikorwa yari yarakoze mu gihe cy’amezi icumi yari amaze gukora muri uwo mwaka, cyane cyane ko na Banki ya Kigali Ltd nta kimenyetso yagaragarije Urukiko cyari gutuma atabona amanota amuhesha gratification, usibye kuvuga gusa ko atari yujuje ibisabwa kuri uwo mwanya. [33] Ku bijyanye na prime de bilan, Urukiko rurasanga koko itangwa nyuma y’umwaka hagendewe ku musaruro wabonetse, ariko Banki ya Kigali Ltd mu bisobanuro itanga ikaba itagaragaza ko nyuma yo kwirukana Ruhimbaza Modeste umwaka utararangira, nta musaruro ushimishije yabonye, bivuze ko umusaruro yabonye muri uwo mwaka Ruhimbaza Modeste nawe yawugizemo uruhare rungana n’igihe cy’amezi icumi yari amaze gukora. [34] Urukiko rurasanga kandi kuvuga ko hashingiwe ku ngingo ya 76 n’iya 77 z’amategeko agenga Banki ya Kigali Ltd, ayo mafaranga atangwa ku bushake bw’umukoresha, na byo bitagenderwaho, kuko byari kugira agaciro iyo Banki ya Kigali Ltd ku mpamvu runaka igaragaza ko n’abandi bakozi basigaye mu kazi nabo batayahawe, mu gihe rero yiyemeje kuyatanga, bigomba gukorerwa abakozi bose bagize uruhare ku musaruro w’ikigo. Ibi bikaba byaranagarutsweho mu rubanza rwaciwe

Page 122

95 n’Urukiko rusesa imanza rw’Igihugu cy’Ubufaransa ku bijyanye na prime de productivité aho rwemeje ko itangwa n’umukoresha abyibwirije kandi ku bushake, ariko ko iyo ayemeye iba ari itegeko kuri we kuko iba ari kimwe mu bigize umushahara w’umukozi8. [35] Urukiko rurasanga rero, mu gihe Urukiko rwemeje ko Ruhimabaza Modeste yirukamwe mu buryo budakurikije amategeko, iri kosa akaba ari naryo ryatumye adakomeza akazi ngo arangize umwaka akorerwe isuzumwa, n’umusaruro wa Banki ugaragazwe, izi mpamvu zikomoka ku ngaruka zo kwirukanywa nta mpamvu, ntizashingirwaho yimwa gratification na prime de bilan yari kubona iyo aguma mu kazi, bityo akaba agomba kubihabwa nkuko biteganywa n’ingingo ya 76 n’iya 77 z’amategeko agenga Banki ya Kigali Ltd. Hashingiwe ku kigereranyo cy’amezi icumi yari amaze gukora no ku mushahara we mpuzandengo w’ukwezi ungana na 437.126Frw wagaragajwe n’urubanza RSOCAA0011/11/CS rusabirwa gusubirwamo, agomba guhabwa prime de bilan ingana na 437.126Frw x 10/12= 364.272Frw na gratification ingana na 437.126 Frw x 10/12 = 364.272Frw, yose hamwe akaba 728.544Frw. Kumenya niba hari indishyi zatangwa muri uru rubanza. [36] Me Munyeshema Napoléon, ashingiye ku ngingo ya 258 cy’Igitabo cya gatatu cy’urwunge rw’amategeko mbonezamubano (CCLIII) asaba Urukiko ko Ruhimbaza

8 Cour de Cassation, Chambre Sociale, 5 Juin 1996: [….prime de productivité…lorsqu’elle est payée en exécution d’un engagement unilatéral de l’Employeur, une prime constitue un élément du salaire et est obligatoire pour l’employeur, dans les conditions fixées par cet engagement, peu importe son caractère variable]. RUHIMBAZA v. BANKI YA KIGALI LTD

Page 123

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 96 Modeste yagenerwa indishyi z’igihembo cy’Avoka zingana na 1.000.000Frw n’iz’ikurikiranarubanza zingana na 500.000Frw bitewe n’uko yiyambaje Umunyamategeko wo kumuburanira kugira ngo ashobore kurenganurwa. [37] Me Rutembesa Phocas, uburanira Banki ya Kigali Ltd, avuga ko indishyi Ruhimbaza Modeste asaba ntazo akwiye kuko ariwe ukomeza kwishora mu manza nta mpamvu. Avuga ko indishyi yatsindiye yazihawe mu manza zabanje ariko akomeza gushora Banki ya Kigali Ltd mu manza zitari ngombwa bituma yitabaza Abavoka, ko ahubwo ari Banki ya Kigali Ltd izikwiye, ariyo mpamvu asaba indishyi za 1.000.000Frw y’ikurikiranarubanza na 1.000.000Frw y’igihembo cy’Avoka.

UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [38] Ingingo ya 258 y’Igitabo cya Gatatu cy’Urwunge rw’Amategeko Mbonezamubano, iteganya ko “Igikorwa cyose cy’umuntu cyangirije undi gitegeka nyir’ugukora ikosa rigikomokaho kuriha ibyangiritse”. [39] Urukiko rurasanga, Ruhimbaza Modeste nyuma yo kwirukanwa ku kazi nta mpamvu, yaritabaje inkiko kandi akaburanirwa n’Avoka, bityo akaba hari ibyo yatakaje, indishyi asaba z’igihembo cy’Avoka n’ikurikiranarubanza akaba azikwiye, ariko kubera ko izo asaba ari nyinshi, mu bushishozi bw’Urukiko akaba agenewe kuri uru rwego 500.000Frw y’igihembo cy’Avoka na 300.000Frw y’ikurikiranarubanza, yose hamwe akaba 800.000Frw.

Page 124

97 [40] Ku bijyanye n’indishyi zisabwa na Banki ya Kigali Ltd, Urukiko rurasanga nta shingiro zifite, kuko ntacyo itsindiye muri uru rubanza. III. ICYEMEZO CY’URUKIKO [41] Rwemeje ko inzitizi yo kutakira ikirego cya Ruhimbaza Modeste cyo gusubirishamo urubanza RSOCAA0011/11/CS ku mpamvu z’akarengane yatanzwe na Banki ya Kigali Ltd nta shingiro ifite; [42] Rwemeje ko indishyi zingana na 3.934.134Frw zituruka ku ikosa ryo kwirukanwa ku buryo bunyuranye n’amategeko zitagombaga kuvanwamo amafaranga angana 3.139.359 yahawe yirukanwa ku kazi;

[43] Rutegetse Banki ya Kigali Ltd guha Ruhimbaza Modeste indishyi zikomoka ku kwirukanywa ku kazi mu buryo bunyuranije n’amategeko zinganga na 3.934.134Frw ; [44] Rutegetse Banki ya Kigali Ltd guha Ruhimbaza Modeste amafaranga ya gratification na prime de bilan angana na 728.544Frw ;

[45] Rutegetse Banki ya Kigali Ltd guha Ruhimbaza Modeste indishyi z’ikurikiranarubanza n’igihembo cy’Avoka bingana na 800.000Frw;

[46] Ruvuze ko urubanza RSOCAA0011/11/CS rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga kuwa 22/02/2013, ruhindutse kubirebana n’ingano z’indishyi zikomoka ku kwirukanywa ku kazi no ku mafaranga ya gratification na prime de bilan;

RUHIMBAZA v. BANKI YA KIGALI LTD

Page 125

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 98 [47] Rutegetse ko amagarama ahwanye na 100.000Frw aherera kuri Banki ya Kigali Ltd.

Page 126

IMANZA NSHINJACYAHA

Page 128

NTIBAJYINAMA v.

UBUSHINJACYAHA [Rwanda URUKIKO RW’IKIRENGA– RPAA0078/15/CS (Rugege, P.J., Gakwaya na Mukandamage, J.) 01 Kamena 2018] Itegeko Nshinga – Inshingano za Leta mu guteza imbere ubuzima bwiza – Ikigaragaza ko Leta yakoze inshingano zayo z’ibanze mu kubahiriza uburenganzira ku buzima bwiza – Kuba Leta yarashizeho amavuriro, abakozi n’ibikoresho ndetse ikorohereza abaturage kubona ubuvuzi buhendutse hakoreshejwe ubwisungane mu kwivuza (mutuelle de santé) bigaragaza ko Leta yujuje inshingano zayo z’ibanze – Itegeko Nshinga rya Repubulika y’u Rwanda ryo muri 2003 ryavuguruwe muri 2015, ingingo ya 45. Amategeko agenga imiburanishirize y’imanza nshinjabyaha – Uburenganzira bwo kunganirwa – kunganirwa kw’abaregwa ibyaha bihanishwa igihano cy’igifungo cya burundu badashobora kwiyishyurira ababunganira – Mu nyungu z’ubutabera no kubungabunga uburenganzira bwo kunganirwa imbere y’amategeko no ku butabera buboneye muri rusange, abaregwa ibyaha bihanishwa igihano kiremereye cy’igifungo cyaburundu badashobora kwiyishyurira ababunganira, Leta izajye ibagenera ababunganira cyangwa ibashakire abafatanyabikorwa bashobora gutanga ababunganira mu mategeko. Igihe ibyo bitaragerwaho, abagenzacyaha n’abashinjacyaha bakwiye kubisaba Urugaga rw’Abavoka. Amategeko mpanabyaha – Impamvu nyoroshyacyaha – Kwemera icyaha mu bujurire – Kuba uregwa yemeye icyaha mu 101

Page 129

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 102 buryo budashidikanywaho mu bujurire bwa mbere n’ubwa kabiri akanagisabira imbabazi, kandi n’imibereho yabayemo yo guhangayika no kwiheba yarabaye intandaro yo guhitamo kwihekura, bikwiye kumubera impamvu nyoroshyacyaha – Itegeko Ngenga Nº 01/2012/OL ryo kuwa 02/05/2012 rishyiraho Igitabo cy’amategeko ahana, ingingo ya 71, 76, 77, 78. Amategeko agenga ububasha bw’inkiko – Ububasha bw’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga – Inama itangwa n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga – Inama Urukiko rw’Ikirenga rugira inzego za leta zibishinzwe kongera gusuzuma ingingo z’itegeko zijyanye n’icyaha cyo kwihekura – Itegeko-Ngenga Nº01/2012/OL ryo ku wa 02/05/2012 rishyiraho Igitabo cy’amategeko ahana ntiritandukanya icyaha cyo kwihekura n’ubwicanyi busanzwe kuko byose bihanishwa igifungo cya burundu kandi rikaba ritagaragaza ingano umwana wishwe agomba kuba atarengeje – Imiterere y’icyaha cyo kwihekura cyane cyane ku bakobwa n’abagore bamaze kubyara itandukanye n’ubwicanyi busanzwe kuko akenshi icyaha cyo kwihekura giterwa no kwiheba, guhangayikishwa no kutazashobora kurera uwo mwana ibi bikaba byamutera guhungabana, mu gihe icyaha cy’ubwicanyi gikoranwa ubugome bukabije, akenshi buba bugamije inyungu kubabukora, urwango, ivangura rikabije n’izindi mpamvu. Bityo icyaha cyo kwihekura ku mubyeyi umaze igihe gito abyaye nticyafatwa nk’icyaha cy’ubugome bukabije gihanishwa igifungo cya burundu, ahubwo hakabayeho igihano kigereranije ushyize mu gaciro n’ibihe icyo cyaha kiba cyakorewemo n’uwagikoze;Urukiko rurasaba inzego za Leta zibishinzwe kongera gusuzuma ingingo z’itegeko zijyanye n’icyaha cyo kwihekura mu buryo gisobanurwa n’imihanire yacyo.

Page 130

103 Incamake y’ikibazo: Ntibajyinama yakurikiranywe n’ubushinjacyaha icyaha cyo kwihekura mu Rukiko Rwisumbuye rwa Nyagatare, nyuma yuko agiye kwa muganga atwite akabwirwa yuko umwana ameze neza ariko aho kuguma ku bitaro aritahira, ajyeze mu rugo abyarira mu ibasi maze ajugunya umwana mu musarani, maze urwo rukiko rumuhamya icyo cyaha ahanishwa igihano cy’igifungo cya burundu. Yajuririye mu Rukiko Rukuru urugereko rwa Rwamagana asaba kugabanyirizwa igihano kuko yemera icyaha akanagisabira imbabazi. Urwo rukiko rwemeza ko adashobora kugabanyirizwa igihano, kuko ukwemera kwe kutuzuye kandi gushidikanywaho kuko atemera ko yihekuye abigambiriye. Muri izi nkiko zibanza Ntibajyinama yaburanye atunganiwe. Yongeye ajurira mu Rukiko rw’Ikirenga avuga ko yahanishijweigihano cya burundu kandi yaremeye icyaha akanagisabira imbabazi ariko urukiko ntirwabiha agaciro, akaba asaba ko yagabanyirizwa igihano yahawe. Mu iburanisha, umuryango mpuzamahanga udaharanira inyungu wita kuburenganzira bw’abagore n’ abakobwa witwa “Women’s Link World wide” wasabye Urukiko rw’Ikirenga kuza mu rubanza nk’inshuti y’Urukiko “amicus curiae” kugirango ugire ibyo usobanura birebana narwo, ukanageza ku Rukiko ibyanditswe n’abahanga n’imanza zaciwe muri aka karere no ku rwego mpuzamahanga ku bibazo bisa n’ibirugaragaramo, Urukiko rw’Ikirenga rwemeza ko ubusabe bw’inshuti y’urukiko bwemerewe. Mu Rukiko rw’Ikirenga yaburanye yunganiwe n’umunyamategeko, maze Ntibajyinama yiregura avuga ko mu rukiko rubanza yahakanye icyaha ariko mu bujurire aracyemera asaba kugabanyirizwa igihano yahawe n’inkiko zibanza kandi NTIBAJYINAMA v. UBUSHINJACYAHA

Page 131

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 104 ko icyamuteye kwihekura aruko akimara gutwita yahuye n’ibibazo byuko yari imfubyi, aho yakoraga bakaba baramwirukanye kuburyo nta mafaranga yari afite yo kumutunga no kwivuza ibyo byose akaba aribyo byatumye ajugunya umwana yari yabyaye mu musarani. Umwunganira yasobanuye ko uwo yunganira yahakanye icyaha kuko nta mufasha mu mategeko yari afite ariko nyuma yo kubona umwunganizi akamugira inama byatumye yemera icyaha ndetse akanasobanura neza imikorere yacyo. Akomeza avuga ko asaba yuko agabanyirizwa igihano yari yahawe cya burundu kikagera kumyaka icumi hashingiwe ku mpamvu nyoroshyacyaha zishingiye ku bibazo uwo yunganira yahuye nabyo. Women’s Link (inshuti y’urukiko) ihawe umwanya kugirango igire icyo ivuga, yavuze ko abakobwa n’abagore bahura n’ibibazo binyuranye bituma bafata ibyemezo bidakwiye, bimwe muri ibyo bibazo, ni nko kuba batwita bakiri bato, kuba bakomoka mu byaro badasobanukiwe, kuba badashobora kubona ubufasha mu rwego rw’ubuzima n’ubuvuzi, gucibwa mu miryango bakomokamo no gufatwa ku ngufu. Yasabye urukiko kuzita by’umwihariko ku mibereho y’uregwa kuko yari atuye mu cyaro, atarize amashuri, akaba atarabonye ubufasha mu buzima bujyanye n’imyororokere kandi akazita cyane cyane ku kuba atarigeze abona umwunganira mu nkiko zabanje, bityo rukamugabanyiriza igihano yahanishijwe mu nkiko zibanza. Inshuti y’urukiko ikomeza ivuga ko uburenganzira ku buvuzi busobanura ko abakobwa n’abagore babona “services’’ za ngombwa mu gihe cyo gutwita no mu gihe cyo kubyara, byaba bitabonetse bigafatwa nk’ivangura kuko gutwita ari umwihariko wabo bonyine, ibyo bakenerabikaba bidakenerwa n’abagabo, bityo isanga uburenganzira ku buvuzi bw’uregwa

Page 132

105 butarubahirijwe kuko amikoro ye yatumye adashobora kubona service z’ubuvuzi amaze kugira ibise, bikaba byarashyize mu makuba ubuzima bwe n’ubw’umwana yari atwite. Ikomeza ivuga ko hari isano hagati y’uburenganzira ku buzima bw’abagoren’abakobwa n’ibyaha baregwa bishingiye ku gitsina n’imyirorokere, ibyaha bakora byo kwihekura no gukuramo inda babiterwa ahanini no kuba ise w’umwana amwihakana cyangwa yanga gufasha uwo bamubyaranye, iyo gutwita byaturutse ku gusambanywa, umugore aba mu bukene bukabije, akeka ko yakwirukanwa mu ishuri no gutakaza akazi bitewe no gutwita, no kuba umugore ubyaye yibanaahezwa mu muryango. Ubushinjacyaha buvuga ko bimwe mu bivugwa n’inshuti y’urukiko nta shingiro bifite, ko amategeko n’umuco nyarwanda biha agaciro ubuzima bwa muntu muri rusange, ndetseby’umwihariko bigaha n’agaciro ubuzima bw’umwana. Avuga kandi ko mu muco nyarwanda hatabamo kwihekura no kuvanamo inda nko mugihe habayeho gutwita igitsina cy’umwana umuntu adashaka, umwana yavukanye ubumuga cyangwa ari nyamweru (albinos), gutwita no kubyara impanga, cyangwa se umwana ufite ibibazo by’ubuzima, ko hari naho kwihekura cyangwa kuvanamo inda bishingira kuri politiki y’igihugu igamije kuringaniza imbyaro ku buryo ibyo bidafatwa nk’icyaha, ariko atariko bimeze mu Rwanda. Yanzura avuga ko nubwo mbere uregwa yaburanaga ahakana icyaha, ariko ukwemera kwe mu Rukiko rw’Ikirenga kutateshwa agaciro, bityo busanga ko yahabwa igihano kitari munsi y’imyaka makumabyiri (20) nk’uko biteganywa n’amategeko. Incamake y’icyemezo:1.Kuba Leta yarashyizeho amavuriro, abakozi n’ibikoresho ndetse ikorohereza abaturage kubona ubuvuzi buhendutse hakoreshejwe ubwisungane mu kwivuza NTIBAJYINAMA v. UBUSHINJACYAHA

Page 133

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 106 (mutuelle de santé) bigaragaza ko leta yujuje inshingano zayo zibanze zo kugeza ku baturage ubuzima bwiza, bityo Ntibyajyinama nk’umuturage, icyo yasabwaga kugirango ubwo burenganzira ku buzima bwe bwiza bugerweho kwari ukugana ivuriro agahabwa serivisi zihatangirwa ariko kuba yaravuye mu bitaro adasezerewe ntibyafatwa nkaho leta itakoze inshingano zayo 2. Mu nyungu z’ubutabera no kubungabunga uburenganzira bwo kunganirwa imbere y’amategeko no ku butabera buboneye muri rusange, abaregwa ibyaha bihanishwa igihano kiremereye cy’igifungo cya burundu badashobora kwiyishyurira ababunganira, Leta izajye ibagenera ababunganira cyangwa ibashakire abafatanya bikorwa bashobora gutanga ababunganira mu mategeko. Igihe ibyo bitaragerwaho, abagenzacyaha n’abashinjacyaha bakwiye kubisaba Urugaga rw’Abavoka 3. Kuba uregwa yaraburanye atunganiwe mu nkiko zibanza kandi yararegwaga icyaha gihanishwa igihano gikomeye cy’igifungo cya burundu, ntiyagize amahirwe yo gusobanurirwa ingaruka z’icyo cyaha mu rwego rw’amategeko, inyungu zo kwemera icyaha ku buryo bwuzuye kandi budashidikanwaho, kutunganirwa kw’uregwa kwagize uruhare mu kutamenya ibyo uregwa ashobora kuvuga byafasha urukiko kumva neza imiterere y’ikibazo n’ibigomba gusuzumwa kugirango afatirwe icyemezo gikwiye.

4. Uregwa yemeye icyaha mu buryo budashidikanywaho mu Rukiko Rukuru no mu Rukiko rw’Ikirenga, akagisabira imbabazi, kandi n’imibereho yabayemo yo guhangayika no kwiheba yarabaye intandaro yo guhitamo kwihekura, bikwiye kumubera impamvu nyoroshyacyaha. Bityo agomba kugabanyirizwa igihano kikagera ku gifungo cy’imyaka icumi (10).

Page 134

107 5. Urukiko rw’Ikirenga rutanga inama ku miterere y’ingingo irebana n’icyaha cyo kwihekura iri mu Itegeko-Ngenga 01/2012/OL ryo ku wa 02/05/2012 rishyiraho Igitabo cy’amategeko ahana aho ridatandukanya icyaha cyo kwihekura n’ubwicanyi busanzwe kuko byose bihanishwa igifungo cya burundu kandi rikaba ritagaragaza ingano umwana wishwe agomba kuba atarengeje. Imiterere y’icyaha cyo kwihekura cyane cyane ku bakobwa n’abagore bamaze kubyara itandukanye n’ubwicanyi busanzwe kuko akenshi icyaha cyo kwihekura kiterwa no kwiheba, guhangayikishwa no kutazashobora kurera uwo mwana ibi bikaba byamutera guhungabana, mu gihe icyaha cy’ubwicanyi gikoranwa ubugome bukabije, akenshi buba bugamije inyungu kubabukora, urwango, ivangura rikabije n’izindi mpamvu. Bityo icyaha cyo kwihekura ku mubyeyi umaze igihe gito abyaye nticyafatwa nk’icyaha cy’ubugome bukabije gihanishwa igifungo cya burundu, ahubwo hakabayeho igihano kigereranije ushyize mu gaciro n’ibihe icyo cyaha kiba cyakorewemo n’uwagikoze. Urukiko rurasaba inzego za Leta zibishinzwe kongera gusuzuma ingingo z’itegeko zijyanye n’icyaha cyo kwihekura mu buryo gisobanurwa n’imihanire yacyo. Ubujurire bufite ishingiro. Imikirize y’urubanza RPA0001/2015/HC/RWG ihindutse ku birebana n’igihano. Uregwa ahanishijwe igifungo cy’imyaka icumi(10). Amagarama y’urubanza aherereye ku isanduku ya Leta kuko uregwa aburana afunze. Amategeko yashingiweho: Itegeko Nshinga rya Repubulika y’u Rwanda ryo muri 2003 ryavuguruwe muri 2015, ingingo ya 45. NTIBAJYINAMA v. UBUSHINJACYAHA

Page 135

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 108 Itegeko Ngenga Nº 01/2012/OL ryo kuwa 02/05/2012 rishyiraho Igitabo cy’amategeko ahana, ingingo ya 71, 76, 77, 78. Itegeko Nº30/2013 ryo kuwa 24/5/2013 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’inshinjabyaha, ingingo ya 39. Imanza zifashishijwe: Beatrice Wambui Kariuki vs Republic [2005] e KLR,Court of appeal, Kenya. R. vs Lisa Gore (deceased) Court of appeal, England, 2007 S vs Muhungu HB11/2005, Zimbabwe. Ubushinjacyaha vs Muhindakazi, RP00090/16/TGI/NGOMA, rwaciwe n’urukiko rwisumbuye rwa Ngoma. Ubushinjacyaha v Uwamahoro, RPA0087/12/CS, rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga kuwa 11/03/2016. Ubushinjacyaha v. Batamuliza, RPA0207/12/CS, rwaciwe n’urukiko rw’Ikirenga kuwa 17/06/2016. Urubanza I. IMITERERE Y’URUBANZA [1] Uru rubanza rwatangiriye mu Rukiko Rwisumbuye rwa Nyagatare, Ubushinjacyaha bukurikiranyeho Ntibajyinama Esther icyaha cyo kwihekura. Urukiko rwaciye urubanza RP0231/014/TGI/NYG kuwa 28/11/2014, rumuhamya icyaha, rumuhanisha igifungo cyaburundu. [2] Ntibajyinama Esther yajuririye urwo rubanza mu Rukiko Rukuru, Urugereko rwa Rwamagana avuga ko yemera icyaha,

Page 136

109 asaba kugabanyirizwa igihano. Urukiko rwajuririwe rwaciye urubanza RPA0001/2015/HC/RWG kuwa 30/04/2015, rwemeza ko ubujurire bwe nta shingiro bufite, ko igihano yahawe kigumyeho. [3] Urukiko Rukuru rwavuze ko Ntibajyinama Esther adashobora kugabanyirizwa igihano hashingiwe kukwemera icyaha kuko ukwemera kwe kutuzuye kandi gushidikanywaho. Rwasobanuye ko atemera ko yishe umwana abigambiriye, nyamara yaragiye kwa muganga akabwirwa ko umwana ameze neza, aho kuguma mu bitaro agatoroka, yagera mu rugo akabyarira mu ibase, akajya kujugunya umwana mu musarani. [4] Rwasobanuye kandi ko kuvuga ko yishe umwana kubera ko uwamuteye inda yari yamwihakanye kandi nta bushobozi afite bigatuma akora icyaha atagambiriye, bidafite ishingiro, bityo ko adashobora kugabanyirizwa igihano kuko aterekana ukwicuza kandi akaba atavugisha ukuri. [5] Ntibajyinama Esther ntiyishimiye imikirize y’urwo rubanza rwaciwe n’Urukiko Rukuru, yarujuririye mu Rukiko rw’Ikirenga kuwa 25/05/2015, avuga ko yahawe igihano cya burundu kandi yaraburanye yemera icyaha asaba imbabazi, Urukiko ntirubihe agaciro, asaba kugabanyirizwa igihano yahawe n’Urukiko Rukuru. Ubwo bujurire bwanditswe kuri RPAA0078/15/CS. [6] Iburanisha ry’urubanza mu mizi ryabaye kuwa 04/12/2017, Ntibajyinama Esther yunganiwe na Me Mukiza Bizimana Silas, Ubushinjacyaha buhagarariwe na Munyaneza Nkwaya Eric, Umushinjacyaha ku rwego rw’Igihugu. Ku itariki ya 11/12/2017, Umuryango mpuzamahanga udaharanira inyungu wita kuburenganzira bw’abagore n’abakobwa witwa NTIBAJYINAMA v. UBUSHINJACYAHA

Page 137

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 110 “Women’s Link Worldwide” wandikiye Urukiko rw’Ikirenga usaba ko wakwemererwa kuza muri uru rubanza nk’inshuti y’Urukiko “amicus curiae”, ukagira ibyo usobanura birebana narwo, ukanageza ku Rukiko ibyanditswe n’abahanga n’imanza zaciwe muri aka karere no ku rwego mpuzamahanga ku bibazo bisa n’ibirugaragaramo. [7] Kuwa 05/01/2018, Urukiko rwafashe icyemezo cyo gupfundura iburanisha, Ntibajyinama Esther n’Ubushinjacyaha bakagira icyo bavuga ku busabe bwa “Women’s Link Worldwide” bwo kuza mu rubanza nk’inshuti y’urukiko “amicus curiae”. Kuwa 22/01/2018, Urukiko rwafashe icyemezo cyo kwemerera “Women’s Link Worldwide” kuza mu rubanza nk’inshuti y’Urukiko. [8] Iburanisha ryabaye kuwa 30/04/2018, Ntibajyinama Esther yunganiwe na Me Mukiza Bizimana Silas, Women’s Link Worldwide ihagarariwe n’Umuyobozi wayo Viviana Waisman, Advocate Lydia Munyiva Muthiani na Me Kabasinga Florida, naho Ubushinjacyaha buhagarariwe na Munyaneza Nkwaya Eric,Umushinjacyaha ku rwego rw’Igihugu. II. ISESENGURA RY’IKIBAZO KIGIZE

URUBANZA Kumenya niba Ntibajyinama Esther yagabanyirizwa igihano [9] Ntibajyinama Esther avuga ko mu rukiko rubanza yaburanye ahakana icyaha ariko mu bujurire aracyemera ndetse avugisha ukuri ku mikorere yacyo, asaba ko yagabanyirizwa igihano yahawe n’inkiko zabanje.

Page 138

111 [10] Asobanura ko icyamuteye kwihekura ari uko akimara gutwita yahuye n’ibibazo binyuranye kuko yari impfubyi, ndetse ko naho yakoraga bari baramwirukanye ku buryo nta mafaranga yari afite yo kumutunga no kwivuza. Avuga ko yagiye kwa muganga kwisuzumisha kuko yari atwite bamubwira kujya kugura imiti muri farumasi, ariko kuko ntabushobozi yari afite, yafashe icyemezo cyo gutaha mu rugo, agezeyo abyara umwana amujugunya mu musarani. [11] Me Mukiza Bizimana Silas, wari umwunganiye, yavuze ko mu nkiko zabanje Ntibajyinama Esther yaburanye ahunga uruhare rwebitewe nuko atari afite umufasha mu mategeko, ndetse akaba yaraburanye atunganiwe, ko nyuma yo kuganira nawe byatumye yemera icyaha ndetse asobanura neza imikorere yacyo. [12] Avuga kandi ko hari izindi mpamvu nyoroshyacyaha zishingiye kubibazo Ntibajyinama Esther yahuye nabyo nko kuba ari impfubyi, nyuma yo gutwita akaba yarahahamutse abura umugira inama kuko yabaga wenyine n’uwamuteye inda aramutererana bituma ata ubwenge, byongeye kandi akaba atarigeze yivuza neza nyuma yogutwita kubera kubura ubushobozi. Akomeza asaba ko uwo yunganira yagabanyirizwa igihano yari yahawe, kikagera ku myaka icumi (10) hashingiwe ku biteganywa n’ingingo ya 77, agace ka 3 na 78 z’Itegeko Ngenga Nº 01/2012/OL ryo kuwa 02/05/2012 rishyiraho Igitabo cy’amategeko ahana. [13] Viviana Waisman, Umuyobozi wa Women’s Link Worldwide, avuga ko mu kugena ibihano kuri Ntibajyinama Esther, Urukiko rwazita ku ruhurirane rw’ibibazo binyuranye abakobwa n’abagore bahura nabyo, bigatuma bafata ibyemezo bidakwiye. Bimwe muri ibyo bibazo, ni nko kuba batwita bakiri NTIBAJYINAMA v. UBUSHINJACYAHA

Page 139

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 112 bato, kuba bakomoka mu byaro badasobanukiwe, kuba badashobora kubona ubufasha mu rwego rw’ubuzima n’ubuvuzi, gucibwa mu miryango bakomokamo no gufatwa ku ngufu. Yavuze kandi ko Urukiko rwazita by’umwihariko kumibereho y’uregwa kuko yari atuye mu cyaro, atarize amashuri, akaba atarabonye ubufasha mu buzima bujyanye n’imyororokere. [14] Akomeza avuga ko uburenganzira ku buvuzi busobanura ko abakobwa n’abagore babona “services’’ za ngombwa mu gihe cyo gutwita no mu gihe cyo kubyara, byaba bitabonetse bigafatwa nk’ivangura kuko gutwita ari umwihariko wabo bonyine, ibyo bakenera bikaba bidakenerwa n’abagabo. Asaba ko mu gusesengura urubanza, Urukiko rwazita ku mibereho n’amikoro bya Ntibajyinama Esther kimwe n’abandi bafite ibibazo nk’ibye. [15] Yasabye kandi ko mu kugena ibihano kuri Ntibajyinama Esther, Urukiko rwazita ku kuba atarigeze abona umwunganira mu nkiko zabanje, ndetse hakarebwa niba nta burwayi bwo mu mutwe uregwa yari afite igihe yakoraga icyaha bitewe n’ihungabana no kwiheba. Yasoje avuga ko mu rwego rwo kubahiriza amategeko, Urukiko rwazasuzuma niba igihano Ntibajyinama Esther yahanishijwe kitari mu rugero rudakwiye hagendewe ku bibazo by’abakobwa n’abategarugori bahura nabyo. [16] Advocate Lydia Munyiva Muthiani, uhagarariye Women’s Link, yavuze ko hashingiwe ku Itegeko Nshinga rya Repubulika y’u Rwandano ku masezerano mpuzamahanga atandukanye, asanga uburenganzira ku buvuzi bwa Ntibajyinama Esther butarubahirijwe, ko amikoro ye yatumye adashobora kubona “services’’ z’ubuvuzi amaze kugira ibise,

Page 140

113 bikaba byarashyize mu makuba ubuzima bwe n’ubw’umwana yari atwite, kubera ko yabyaye mu buryo atifuzaga ndetse nta bufasha bundi yari afite. Akomeza avuga ko hari isano hagati y’uburenganzira ku buzima bw’abagore n’abakobwa n’ibyaha baregwa bishingiye ku gitsina n’imyirorokere, ko ibyaha bakora byo kwihekura no gukuramo inda babiterwa ahanini no kuba ise w’umwana amwihakana cyangwa yanga gufasha uwo bamubyaranye, iyo gutwita byaturutse ku gusambanywa, iyo umugore aba mu bukene bukabije, iyo akeka ko yakwirukanwa mu ishuri no gutakaza akazi bitewe no gutwita, no kuba umugore ubyaye yibana, ahezwa mu muryango. [17] Akomeza avuga ko uburenganzira ku buzima bwiza, binasobanura ko hatangwa ubufasha n’inyigisho ku birebana n’igitsina n’imyororokere, amakuru ajyanye nabyo, kubona ubufasha n’inyigisho zirebana no kuringaniza urubyaro ndetse no kuba abagore bashobora kubona ibitunga abana nyuma yo kubyara. Avuga kandi ko kubahiriza ububurenganzira, bikumira ibyaha ku bagore n’abakobwa bikagabanya n’impfu z’abana. [18] Asoza avuga ko hashingiwe ku mategeko mpuzamahanga no ku mategeko y’u Rwanda, Urukiko rwazirikana ko abakobwa n’abagore batuye mu cyaro bahura n’ibibazo igihe batwite n’igihe cyo kubyara bishobora no gutuma batakaza ubuzima, kugira umuvuduko ukomeye w’amaraso n’ibise bishobora kuza igihe kitaragera no kuba umuntu yajya ku bise nta wundi muntu bari kumwe. Izo ngorane zose zikabazigira ingaruka ku bagore b’abakene batashoboye kwiga cyangwa se bakaba barize amashuri make, kandi akenshi nta kazi bafite. [19] Me Kabasinga Florida avuga ko Ntibajyinama Esther yaciriwe urubanza hirengagijwe amahame agenga NTIBAJYINAMA v. UBUSHINJACYAHA

Page 141

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 114 uburenganzira ku butabera buboneye, kuko yaburanye adafite umwunganizi mu mategeko, ko nta n’iperereza ryigeze rikorwa ngo hamenyekane niba uregwa nta bibazo by’ihungabana no kwiheba gukabije yagize. Akomeza asaba ko Urukiko rwazasuzuma niba Ubugenzacyaha n’Ubushinjacyaha bwarubahirije inshingano yo gushaka ibimenyetso bishinja n’ibishinjura. [20] Avuga kandi ko inkiko zabanje zafashe icyemezo zitabanje kugaragarizwa impamvu zabanjirije icyaha n’izagikurikiye kandi zarizihari kuko iyo umuntu akoze icyaha, mu kumuhana harebwa uko yariasanzwe yitwara hashingiwe ku biteganywa n’ingingo ya 71 y’Itegeko Ngenga Nº01/2012/OL ryo kuwa 02/05/2012 rishyiraho Igitabo cy’amategeko ahana, ndetse Ntibajyinama Esther akaba yaraburanye atunganiwe bitewe no kubura ubushobozi kandi yararegwaga icyaha gikomeye. [21] Uhagarariye Ubushinjacyaha atangira avuga ko bimwe mu bivugwa n’inshuti z’urukiko nta shingiro bifite, ko amategeko n’umuco nyarwanda biha agaciro ubuzima bwa muntu muri rusange, ndetse by’umwihariko bigaha n’agaciro ubuzima bw’umwana. Avuga ko mu muco nyarwanda hatabamo kwihekura no kuvanamo inda nko mu gihe habayeho gutwita igitsina cy’umwana umuntu adashaka, umwana yavukanye ubumuga cyangwa ari nyamweru (albinos), gutwita no kubyara impanga, cyangwa se umwana ufite ibibazo by’ubuzima, ko hari naho kwihekura cyangwa kuvanamo inda bishingira kuri politiki y’igihugu igamije kuringaniza imbyaro ku buryo ibyo bidafatwa nk’icyaha, ariko atariko bimeze mu Rwanda. [22] Uhagarariye Ubushinjacyaha akomeza avuga ko mu mategeko u Rwanda rugenderaho nta vangura rigaragaramo, ko

Page 142

115 umukobwa n’umugore wagize ikibazo giturutse ku mikoro make no ku miterere ye karemano bitafatwa nk’ivangura kuko hari n’abagabo bihekura. Avuga ko hari gahunda nyinshi Leta yashyizeho zifasha abagore n’abakobwa kubona ‘‘services’’ ku buzima, ndetse zinagamije kugabanya umubare w’abana bapfa bavuka. Akomeza avuga ko Ntibajyinama Esther yakoze icyaha yatekereje, ko atabitewe no kutabona uburenganzira ku buzima kuko yafashe icyemezo cyo gutoroka ibitaro ntawumwirukanye. Avuga ko nta kibazo cy’ivangura rishingiye kugitsina n’ibisa nabyo nk’ubukene no kutamenya gusoma kuri Ntibajyinama Esther; kandi ko kuba adashyigikiwe cyangwa se atishoboye, ntibyamubera impamvu yo kwihekura. [23] Uhagarariye Ubushinjacyaha avuga kandi ko Ntibajyinama Esther yaciriwe urubanza amahame agenga uburenganzira ku butabera buboneye yubahirijwe yose, ko uregwa yamenyeshejwe icyaha aregwa, amenyeshwa n’uburenganzira bwe bwo kuburanishwa yunganiwe. Asanga kuba atari afite umwunganizi byaratewe n’ubushake bwe kuko abazwa mu bugenzacyaha yabyibukijwe, we agasubiza ko yiteguye kwisubiriza no kwiburanira. [24] Yanzura avuga ko nubwo mbere Ntibajyinama Esther yaburanaga ahunga icyaha, ukwemera kwe mu Rukiko rw’Ikirenga kutateshwa agaciro, akaba yahabwa igihano kitari munsi y’imyaka makumabyiri (20) nk’uko biteganywa n’amategeko ku muntu wemeye icyaha mu buryo budashidikanywaho ndetse agasaba imbabazi. [25] Dosiye y’urubanza igaragaza ko Ntibajyinama Esther yahamwe n’icyaha cyo kwihekura mu Rukiko Rwisumbuye rwa Nyagatare, ahanishwa igifungo cya burundu, ajuririra urwo rubanza mu Rukiko Rukuru, Urugereko rwa Rwamagana avuga NTIBAJYINAMA v. UBUSHINJACYAHA

Page 143

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 116 ko yemera icyaha asaba kugabanyirizwa ibihano ariko igihano yahawe kigumaho kuko rwasanze ukwemera kwe kutuzuye kandi gushidikanywaho. [26] Ntibajyinama Esther yajuriye mu Rukiko rw’Ikirenga asaba kugabanyirizwa ibihano hashingiwe ku mpamvu nyoroshyacyaha yo kuba aburana yemera icyaha. Urukiko rurasanga nta mpaka zihari kubirebana no kuba Ntibajyinama Esther yarakoze icyaha cyo kwihekura giteganywa n’ingingo ya 143 y’Itegeko-Ngenga Nº01/2012/OL ryo kuwa 02/05/2012 ryavuzwe haruguru. Nk’uko kandi biteganywa n’iyo ngingo, igihano cy’icyaha cyo kwihekura, ni igifungo cya burundu. [27] Ingingo ya 76 n’iya 77 z’Itegeko Ngenga Nº01/2012/OL ryo kuwa 02/05/2012 rishyiraho Igitabo cy’amategeko ahana, zemera ko urukiko rushobora kugabanya ibihano ruhereye ku mpamvu zoroshya uburemere bw’icyaha rwahaye agaciro kandi rwasobanuye, zaba izakibanjirije, izagiherekeje cyangwa se izagikurikiye. Ntibajyinama Esther n’umwunganira, abahagarariye umuryango Women’s Link Worldwide wemerewe kuza mu rubanza nk’inshuti y’urukiko bagaragaza impamvu zinyuranye basaba ko zakwitabwaho hasuzumwa icyemezo gikwiye cyafatirwa Ntibajyinama Esther. [28] Uburyo Ntibajyinama Esther yasobanuyemo imikorere y’icyaha, nibwo Urukiko Rukuru, Urugereko rwa Rwamagana, rwahereyeho ruvuga ko ukwemera kwe kutuzuye. Nyamara biragaragara mu myanzuro y’ubujurire no mu nyandiko mvugo y’iburanisha muri urwo Rukiko ko Ntibajyinama Esther yasobanuye ko yasabwe kujya kugura imiti muri farumasi, abonye ko ari nta mafaranga yo kuyigura, ko ntawundi wamufasha, ari mu nzu akodesha kandi adafite akazi, ko atari afite ibyo gushyiramo umwana, ko ntacyo kumutunga nyuma yo

Page 144

117 kubyara, yumva biramurenze, nibwo yasubiye mu rugo abyarira mu ibase, umwana amuta mu musarane. Ntabwo Urukiko Rukuru, Urugereko rwa Rwamagana rwagaragaje ikindi yagombaga kuvuga gitandukanye n’ibi yavuze ku bijyanye n’imikorere y’icyaha. Urukiko rw’Ikirenga, ruhereye ku byavuzwe na Ntibajyinama Esther rurasanga yaremeye icyaha atagamije kujijisha Urukiko cyangwa kugira ibyo ahisha ngo yerekane ko ari umwere, ku buryo ukwemera icyaha kwe kutari kwemerwa ngo kumubere impamvu nyoroshyacyaha. [29] Dosiye y’urubanza igaragaza kandi ko haba mu Rukiko Rwisumbuye rwa Nyagatare, haba no mu Rukiko Rukuru, Urugereko rwa Rwamagana Ntibajyinama Esther yaburanye atunganiwe nk’umuntu waregwaga icyaha cyo kwihekura kandi gihanishwa igifungo kiremereye cya burundu, ntiyagize amahirwe yo kubona umwunganira washoboraga kumusobanurira ingaruka mu rwego rw’amategeko z’icyaha yarezwe, inyungu zo kwemera icyaha, ndetse no gusobanurirwa ukwemera icyaha kuzuye kandi kudashidikanywaho icyo aricyo n’ibikigize kugirango mu gihe yaba ahisemo kwemera icyaha, abihuze n’ibiteganywa n’amategeko. Urukiko rw’Ikirenga rurasanga uko kutunganirwa kwa Ntibajyinama Esther nako kwaragize uruhare rwo kutamenya ibyo uregwa ashobora kuvuga byafasha urukiko kumva neza imiterere y’ikibazo n’ibigomba gusuzumwa kugirango afatirwe icyemezo gikwiye. [30] Dosiye y’urubanza igaragaza nanone ko mu mwanzuro w’ubujurire mu Rukiko rw’Ikirenga, no mu iburanisha muri uru Rukiko ryo kuwa 04/12/2017, Ntibajyinama Esther yongeye kwemera icyaha, agisabira imbabazi, asobanura ko yagiye kwa muganga agasuzumwa akabwirwa ko umwana ameze neza, bigeze nijoro arataha nyuma aza kubyarira mu rugo umwana NTIBAJYINAMA v. UBUSHINJACYAHA

Page 145

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 118 amujugunya mu musarani. Yakomeje asobanura ko yihekuye bitewe n’ibibazo binyuranye yari afite nko kuba ari impfubyi yirera, kutagira amafaranga yo kwishyura kwa muganga nta n’ubwishingizi bwo kwivuza yari afite, aho yakoraga baramwirukanye. Ibi bigaragaza ko yemera icyaha aregwa mu buryo budashidikanywaho, bityo ukwemera icyaha kwe mu bujurire mu Rukiko rw’Ikirenga kukaba ari impamvu yoroshya ububi bw’icyaha cyo kwihekura aregwa. [31] Nk’uko byagaragaye kandi mu iburanisha muri uru Rukiko, Ntibajyinama Esther yagiye agaruka ku buzima bubi yari abayemo bwo kutagira ababyeyi, kutagira umufasha, guterwa inda atiteguye, uyimuteye akamutererana, kwirukanwa ku kazi n’umukoresha amaze kumenya ko Ntibajyinama Esther atwite, kwibana mu nzu n’ibindi. Urukiko rurasanga iyo mibereho yabayemo yarabaye intandaro yo guhangayika no kwiheba bigatuma ahitamo kwihekura, ibyo nabo bikaba bikwiye kumubera impamvu nyoroshyacyaha. Uyu kandi ni nawo murongo wafashwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga mu rubanza RPA0087/12/CS rwa Uwamahoro Spéciose n’Ubushinjacyaha rwaciwe kuwa 11/03/2016, no mu rubanza RPA0207/12/CS rwa Batamuliza Clémence n’Ubushinjacyaha rwaciwe kuwa 17/06/2016. Kuri ibi, Urukiko rwemeranywa n’ibivugwa n’abahagariye Women’s Link Worldwide muri uru rubanza ko guhezwa no kudafashwa ku bakobwa n’abagore batwaye inda, cyane cyane abaturuka mu miryango itishoboye, n’abibana batereranywe ntabufasha, bishobora gutuma biheba bakaba bakora ibyaha bitandukanye nko gukuramo inda no kwica umwana babyaye. [32] Ku birebana n’iyubahirizwa ry’uburenganzira ku buzima bwiza byabyukijwe n’abahagarariye Inshuti y’Urukiko, Urukiko

Page 146

119 rusanga icyo kibazo kitagaragara muri uru rubanza. Ingingo ya 21 y’Itegeko Nshinga rya Repubulika y’u Rwanda ryo mu 2003 ryavuguruwe mu 2015 ivuga ko : « abanyarwanda bose bafite uburenganzira bwo kugira ubuzima bwiza ». Naho iya 45 ikavuga ko : « Leta ifite inshingano zo gukangurira abenegihugu ibikorwa bigamije ubuzimabwiza no kubafasha kubigeraho. Buri Munyarwanda afite inshingano zo kwitabira ibikorwa bigamije ubuzima bwiza ». Ingingo ya 14 y’Amasezerano ya Maputo yo ku wa 11 Nyakanga 2003 yerekeranyeno kurengera uburenganzira bw’abagore muri Africa (The Protocol to the African Charter on Human and People’s Rights on the Rights of Women in Africa)1, yashyizweho umukono n’u Rwanda, iteganya ko ibihugu byayashyizeho umukono byiyemeje kubahiriza no guteza imbere uburenganzira ku buzima bushingiye ku gitsina n’imyororokere y’umugore mu buryo buvugwa muri iyo ngingo2. [33] Ibikubiye mu ngingo z’Itegeko Nshinga n’Amasezerano Mpuzamahanga avugwa mu gika kibanziriza iki u Rwanda rwashyizeho umukono, bigaragaza ko u Rwanda nk’Igihugu, rufite ubushake bwo kuteza imbere no kubungabunga uburenganzira kubuzima bw’abakobwa n’abagore harimo n’ubuzima bushingiye ku gitsina n’imyororokere. Inshingano ya Leta ikaba iyo gukangurira abenegihugu ibikorwa bigamije ubuzima bwiza no kubafasha kubigeraho, naho inshingano

1Yemejwe n’Iteka rya Perezida Nº11/1 ryo ku wa 24 Kamena 2004. 2 States Parties shall ensure that the right to health of women, including sexual and reproductive health is respected and promoted. This includes: a) the right to control their fertility; b) the right to decide whether to have children, the number of children and the spacing of children; c) the right to choose any method of contraception;

NTIBAJYINAMA v. UBUSHINJACYAHA

Page 147

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 120 y’abaturage ikaba iyo kwitabira ibikorwa bigamije ubuzima bwiza. Ku birebana n’inshingano ya Leta yo gukangurira abenegihugu ibikorwa bigamije ubuzima bwiza no kubafasha kubigeraho, Urukiko ntirwakwemeza aho Leta igeze iyuzuza kuko bidakenewe muri uru rubanza. Ikidashidikanywaho nuko hari ibyagezweho nko kubaka amavuriro no kuyabonera abakozi n’ibikoresho bijyanye n’amikoro y’igihugu, no gukangurira abatwite kugana ibigo by’ubuzima igihe batwite kugira ngo bakurikiranwe n’abaganga, no kubyarira kwa muganga. [34] Ku bijyanye n’uru rubanza, dosiye igaragaza ko Ntibajyinama Esther yagiye kwa muganga kwipimisha kuko atwite. Intambwe ya mbere yo kubahiriza uburenganzira ku buzima, Leta ikaba yarayiteye ishyiraho amavuriro, abakozi n’ibikoresho ndetse no korohereza abaturage kubona ubuvuzi buhendutse hakoreshejwe ubwisungane mu kwivuza (mutuelle de santé). Ntibajyinama Esther nk’umuturage, icyo yasabwaga kugirango uburenganzira ku buzima bwe bugerweho, kwari ukugana ivuriro, agahabwa serivisi zihatangirwa. Urukiko rurasanga nta kigaragaza ko inshingano y’ibanze za Leta ku buzima bwiza itazubahirije. [35] Dosiye y’urubanza igaragaza kandi ko Ntibajyinama Esther yagiye kwa muganga yijyanye akaza kuvayo nyuma ya saa tanu n’igice z’ijoro (23h30) adasezerewe (cote ya 26). Urukiko ntirwakwemeza ko ibyo avuga ko nta mafaranga yari afite yo kugura imiti no kwivuza atari ukuri, kuko bishoboka ko yatinye ko azabyara ntabone amafaranga yo kwishyura ibitaro bitewe nuko nta bwishingizi bw’ubuzima yari afite. Ariko kandi, nta kimenyetso kigaragaza ko yimwe imiti na serivisi zitangirwa kwa muganga bitewe no kubura amafaranga yo kwishyura no kutagira ubwishingizi bw’ubuzima, Urukiko

Page 148

121 rukaba rutakwemeza ko Leta yateshutse ku nshingano yo gufasha abatishoboye kubona ubuvuzi bakeneye, bigatuma Ntibajyinama Esther yihekura. [36] Ku bivugwa n’abahagarariye “Women‘s Link Worldwide” ko kutabonera abakobwa n’abagore ibyangombwa bakenera mu gihe cyo gutwita no kubyara ko byafatwa nk’ivangura rishingiye ku miterere yabo, Urukiko rurasanga byaba ari ivangura mu gihe abagore n’abakobwa hari ibyo bimwe biturutse ku miterere yabo ishingiye ku gitsina. Mu rubanza rwa Ntibajyinama, abahagarariye “Women’s Link Worldwide” ntibagaragaza ko ibyo bavuga ko atabonye, byatewe no kuba yarabibuze cyangwa akabyimwa bitewe nuko ari umugore cyangwa umukobwa. Urukiko rukaba rero ntaho rwahera rwemeza ko yihekuye bitewe no gukorerwa ivangura cyangwa se ko hari uburenganzira yavukijwe hashingiwe ku ivangura yaba yarakorewe. [37] Dosiye y’urubanza igaragaza na none ko Ntibajyinama Esther igihe yari kwa muganga, yapimwe akabwirwa ko umutima w’umwana utera neza. Ibi bigaragaza ko mu gufata icyemezo cyo kuva kwa muganga akajya kubyarira mu rugo, yari yashyize ubuzima bwe mu kaga kashoboraga no gutuma atakaza ubuzima bitewe no kubura abamufasha kubyara babifitiye ubumenyi. Urukiko rurasanga imyumvire ya Ntibajyinama Esther yo gutoroka ibitaro akajya kubyarira mu rugo yarabitewe no kuba atarasobanukiwe n’ingaruka zashoboraga gukurikiraho, cyangwa se akaba yari azizi ariko icyatumye atoroka ibitaro kikaba cyari kimuremereye kurusha kubyarira mu rugo. Ibi, Urukiko ntirwabyirengagiza ngo rumufate nk’uwakoze icyaha mu buryo busanzwe, ahubwo afite NTIBAJYINAMA v. UBUSHINJACYAHA

Page 149

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 122 icyabimuteye kirenze kugira ubushake bwo gukora icyaha nubwo ibyo bidatuma agihanagurwaho. [38] Ku birebana n’ikibazo cy’uburenganzira bwa Ntibajyinama Esther ku butabera buboneye cyavuzweho na Me Kabasinga Florida, dosiye y’urubanza igaragaza ko uretse mu Rukiko rw’Ikirenga, ahandi hose Ntibajyinama Esther yaburanye atunganiwe. Mu ibazwa rye mu Bugenzacyaha agifatwa (cote ya 10), hagaragara ikibazo yabajijwe kibazwa abafashwe bose: “Ingingo ya 39 y’Itegeko Nº30/2013 ryo ku wa 24/5/2013 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’inshinjabyaha iguha uburenganzira bwo kubazwa ufite ukunganira mu rwego rw’amategeko. Waba ufite ukunganira cyangwa uremera gusubiza utamufite?ˮ. Ntibajyinama Esther yasubijengo: “Ndisubirizaˮ. Nyamara, ntabwo bigaragara ko yamenyeshejwe ko niba adashoboye kumwiyishyurira, Urugaga rw’Abavoka rwamufasha bisabwe n’Umugenzacyaha cyangwa Umushinjacyaha nk’uko biteganywa n’iyo ngingo ya 39. Mu Bushinjacyaha naho Ntibajyinama Esther yamenyeshejwe uburenganzira bwo kunganirwa, abazwa niba yemera kubazwa adafite umwunganizi mu mategeko (cote 24) ariko ntiyamenyeshejwe ko ashobora gushakirwa umwunganizi. Mu nkiko zibanza, ikibazo cy’ubwunganizi nticyagarutsweho. Birashoboka ko kuri Ntibajyinama Esther kimwe n’abandi nkawe baba bafite ubwo burenganzira ariko kubera kubura amikoro yo kwiyishyurira umwunganizi, bigatuma ubwo burenganzira budakoreshwa. Ibi bigira ingaruka zikomeye zo kuba uregwa atabasha kwiregura no kuburana mu buryo bwuzuye nk’ufite umwunganizi. [39] Byaba byiza ko buri muntu wese ukekwaho icyaha aburana yunganiwe, yaba atabashije kwishyura umwunganizi,

Page 150

123 Leta ikamumwishyurira. Birumvikana ko bitewe n’amikoro adahagije, Leta idashobora kwishyurira ababikeneye bose. Urukiko rurasanga ariko mu nyungu z’ubutabera no kubungabunga uburenganzira bwo kunganirwa imbere y’amategeko no ku butabera buboneye muri rusange, abaregwa ibyaha bikomeye bihanishwa igifungo cya burundu badashobora kubiyishyurira, Leta yajya ibagenera abunganizi mu mategeko cyangwa ikabashakira abafatanya bikorwa bashobora gutanga abunganizi mu mategeko. Igihe ibyo bitaragerwaho, abagenzacyaha n’abashinjacyaha bakwiye gukoresha ingingo ya 39 y’Itegeko ryavuzwe haruguru kugirango Urugaga rw’Abavoka rufashe abaregwa batishoboye kuva bagifatwa. [40] Mu kwanzura, Urukiko rurasanga Ntibajyinama Esther yahanwa hitawe ku mpamvu nyoroshyacyaha zasobanuwe mu bika bibanziriza iki ndetse hakitabwa no ku nyungu z’uregwa hakurikijwe uburyo yakozemo icyaha. Ibi kandi bihura n’ibiteganywa n’ingingo ya 71y’Itegeko Ngenga N°01/2012/OL ryo ku wa 02/05/2012 rishyiraho Igitabo 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”, kugabanya ibihano bigakorwa hashingiwe ku ngingo ya 78 y’icyo gitabo ivuga ko: “Igihe hari impamvu zoroshya uburemere bw’icyaha, ibihano bigabanywa ku buryo bukurikira: 1° igihano cyo gufungwa burundu cyangwa cya burundu y’umwihariko gisimbuzwa igihano cy’igifungo kitari munsi y’imyaka icumi (10)”. Urukiko ruhereye kuri iyi ngingo no ku mpamvu nyoroshyacyaha zasobanuwe hejuru, rurasanga Ntibajyinama Esther agomba kugabanyirizwa igihano kikagera ku gifungo cy’imyaka icumi(10). Ingingo y’Itegeko irebana n’icyaha cyo kwihekura NTIBAJYINAMA v. UBUSHINJACYAHA

Page 151

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 124 [41] Mbere yo gusoza, Urukiko rurasanga ari ngombwa kugira icyo ruvuga ku miterere y’ingingo y’Itegeko irebana n’icyaha cyo kwihekura n’aho gitandukaniye n’ubwicanyi busanzwe. Ingingo ya 143 y’Itegeko-Ngenga Nº01/2012/OL ryo kuwa 02/05/2012 rishyiraho Igitabo cy’amategeko ahana ivuga ngo: “Kwihekura ni ubwicanyi bukorewe umwana wabyaye cyangwa uwo ubereye umubyeyi mu buryo bwemewe n’amategeko. Kwihekura bihanishwa igifungo cya burundu”. Mu cyongereza, iyo ngingo ivuga ngo: “A person who kills his/herbiological or adopted child shall commit infanticide. Infanticide shall be punished by life imprisonment”. Mu gifaransa ivuga ngo: “L’infanticide est le meurtre commis par une personne sur son enfant biologique ou adoptif. L’infanticide est punissable d’un emprisonnement à perpuité’’ itegeko ridashyiraho ikigero umwana wishwe agomba kuba agezeho cyangwa atararenza. Ni ukuvuga ko umubyeyi, yaba umugore cyangwa umugabo wishe umwana we w’imyaka mirongo itanu nawe aba akoze icyaha cyo kwihekura. Ibi niko byagenze mu rubanza rw’Ubushinjacyaha na Muhindakazi Didacienne wahamijwe icyaha cyo kwihekura kuko yishe umwana we w’imyaka 283. Mu bindi bihugu nk’ibyo mu burayi aho iyi nyito ya ‘‘infanticide’’ yaturutse, itegeko rigena igihe umwana wishwe agomba kuba atarengeje nk’amezi cumi n’abiri (12) cyangwa imyaka ibiri (2) kandi icyo cyaha kikaba kireba umugore wishe umwana, ntikireba umugabo wishe umwana. Nko mu Bwongereza kugira ngo umuntu wishe umwana ahamwe n’icyaha cyo kwihekura, uwo mwana wishwe agomba

3Urubanza RP 00090/16/TGI/NGOMA, Ubushinjacyaha vs Muhindakazi Didacienne

Page 152

125 kuba atarengeje amezi cumi n’abiri (12)4. Uku ni nako bimeze mu mategeko ya Canada5, Kenya6na Uganda7. [42] Urukiko rusanga igihano cyo gufungwa burundu ku mugore wakoze icyaha cyo kwihekura kiremereye cyane hitawe ku buryo n’ibihe icyaha gikorwamo. Urebye nko mu bihugu bimwe na bimwe, ibihano kuri iki cyaha biri munsi cyane y’ibiteganywa n’Itegeko rishyiraho Igitabo cy’amategeko ahana mu Rwanda. Nko mu rubanza rwa Wambui Kariuki v Republic8, Urukiko rw’Ubujurire rwo mu gihugu cya Kenya rwagabanije igihano kugeza ku mwaka umwe n’igice ku mugore wari wishe umwana we utagejeje amezi 12 kuko urukiko rwa mbere rutari rwasuzumye ubuzima bukomeye uwarezwe yari abayemo harimo no kutagira ubushobozi bwo kurera abandi bana yareraga wenyine (single mother). Muri Zimbabwe, mu rubanza rwa S v Mhungu HB11/2005,9 uregwa yaburanye yemera icyaha

4Infanticide Act, 1938 (United Kingdom) Sections 1(1) to (3): “(1) Where a woman by any wilful act or omission causes the death of her child being a child under the age of twelve months, but at the time of the act or omission the balance of her mind was disturbed by reason of her not having fully recovered from the effect of giving birth to the child or by reason of the effect of lactation consequent upon the birth of the child, then, [if] the circumstances were such that but for this Act the offence would have amounted to murder [or manslaughter], she shall be guilty of felony, to wit of infanticide, and may for such offence be dealt with and punished as if she had been guilty of the offence of manslaughter of the child.” 5Criminal Code of Canada, 1948 as amended in 1955, Section 233. 6Section 210, Kenya Penal Code 7Section 213 Uganda Penal Code, Cap. 120, 1950. 8Beatrice Wambui Kariuki vs Republic [2005] eKLR 9Uru rubanza ruvugwaho mu nyandiko ya Mary Clausina OUNDO: “A critical analysis of the judicial Response to the crime of Infanticide”, kuri page 37-38; iboneka kuri https://searcwl.ac.zw/index.php NTIBAJYINAMA v. UBUSHINJACYAHA

Page 153

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 126 cyo kwica uruhinja yari amaze kubyara, ku rwego rwa mbere ahanishwa igifungo cy’imyaka ibiri (2). Mu bujurire, umucamanza yibanze ku mibereho ye n’izindi mpamvu nyoroshyacyaha nko kuba yari umukobwa w’imyaka makumyabiri (20) gusa, uwamuteye inda akaba yaramutaye, nta kazi agira, nta n’andi mikoro afite, afite abandi bana babiri arera, no kuba bwari ubwa mbere aguye mu cyaha. Igihano cy’imyaka ibiri (2) yariyahawe cyasubitsweho amezi makumyabiri (20) mu gihe cy’imyaka itanu (5). Biragaragara ko guhana bene uyu mubyeyi wihanukiriye ntacyo bifasha abagore baba bahungabanye cyangwa ngo bibuze abandi bashobora kugwa muri icyo cyaha. [43] Hakurikijwe uko Itegeko riteye, icyaha cyo kwihekura mu Rwanda ntaho gitandukaniye n’ubundi bwicanyi buhanwa n’Itegeko-Ngenga Nº01/2012/OL ryo kuwa 02/05/2012 rihana ibyaha ryavuzwe haruguru, kuko igihano cya burundu ni nacyo kigenerwa abakoze icyaha cy’ubuhotozi n’ubundi bwicanyi. Ni ukuvuga ko uburemere bufatwankaho ari bumwe. Umwihariko w’icyaha cyo kwihekura ukaba ari uko ubwicanyi buba bwakorewe umwana wabyaye cyangwa uwo ubereye umubyeyi. Nyamara, imiterere y’icyaha cyo kwihekura, cyane cyane ku bakobwa n’abagore bakimara kubyara, itandukanye n’ubwicanyi busanzwe, burimwo ubugome bukabije, akenshi buba bugamije inyungu ku babukora, urwango, ivangura rikabije, n’izindi mpamvu. Mu bihugu byinshi, icyaha cyo kwihekura ntigihabwa uburemere nk’ubuhabwa icyaha cy’ubuhotozi. Dufashe urugero rwo mu Bwongereza, mu rubanza rwa R. v. Lisa Gore Urukiko rw’ubujurire rw’icyo gihugu rwasobanuye ko infanticide ari icyaha gitandukanye n’ubuhotozi, ko hatagomba kugaragazwa umugambi wo kwica,

Page 154

127 ko cyashyizweho nk’icyaha cyoroheje ugereranije n’ubwicanyi busanzwe kubera ibihe kiba cyakozwemo, n’ikibitera.10 [44] Urukiko rusanga umugore umaze amezi agera ku icyenda atwite, yamara kubyara akica uwo yabyaye, akenshi mu gihe kitarenze amasaha mirongo ine n’umunani (48) amaze kubyara (icyo abahanga bita neonaticide mu rurimi rw’icyongereza), atabiterwa n’ubugome ahubwo akenshi biterwa no kwiheba, guhangayikishwa no kutazashobora kurera uwo mwana, cyangwa se uko guhangayika kukaba kwamutera ihungabana ryo mu mutwe. Kubera izo mpamvu, kwihekura k’umubyeyi umaze igihe gito abyaye ntibyagafashwe nk’icyaha cy’ubugome bukabije gihanishwa igifungo cya burundu, ahubwo hakabayeho igihano kigereranije ushyize mu gaciro n’ibihe icyo cyaha kiba cyakorewemo, n’uwagikoze. Muri make, ni byiza ko habaho guhuza igihano n’imiterere y’icyaha cyo kwihekura (proportionality). Urukiko rurasaba inzego za Leta zibishinzwe kongera gusuzuma ingingo z’itegeko zijyanye n’icyaha cyo kwihekura mu buryo gisobanurwa n’imihanire yacyo. Itegeko rihana icyaha cyo kwihekura muri Zimbabwe ryafasha mu gusuzuma uko iryo mu Rwanda ryavugururwa. Rivuga ngo: “48(1) Any woman who, within six months of the birth of her child, causes its death(a) intentionally; or(b) by conduct which she realizes involves a real risk to the child’s life;at a time when

10R. v. Lisa Gore (Deceased) [2007] EWCA Crim 2789. Lady Justice Hallet yaravuze ati: “We are satisfied that Parliament intended to create a new offence of infanticide…If the criteria in sub-section (1) are fulfilled, the mother who kills her child does not have to face an indictment of murder. She faces a lower grade criminal charge, namely infanticide.” NTIBAJYINAMA v. UBUSHINJACYAHA

Page 155

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 128 the balance of her mind is disturbed as a result ofgiving birth to the child, shall be guilty of infanticide and liable toimprisonment for a period not exceeding five years. 48(2) Where a woman is charged with the murder of her child committed within six months of the child’s birth and it is proved that she caused the child’s death at a time when the balance of her mind was disturbed as a result of giving birth to the child, she shall not be found guilty of murder but may be found guilty of infanticide if the evidence establishes that she committed that crime. 48(3) For the purposes of this section, in determining whether or not the balance of a woman’s mind was disturbed as a result of giving birth to a child, regard shall be taken to any pressure or stress from which she suffered arising out of any one or more of the following circumstances or considerations.(a) the effects which the birth had, or which she believed it would have, on her social, financial or marital situation;(b) the difficulties which were created, or which she believed would be created, in caring for the child in the social, financial or marital situation in which the child was born;(c) the difficulties which she had, or which she believed she would have, in caring for the child due to her inexperience or incapacity;(d) any other relevant circumstance or consideration,

whether based on the psychological effects on the woman's mind arising from the birth itself, or otherwise. 48(4) For the avoidance of doubt it is declared that nothing in this section precludes: (a) a woman from being charged with the murder of her child and, subject to subsection (2), from being convicted of and punished for that crime; or (b) a court from returning a special verdict in terms of section 29 of the

Page 156

129 Mental Health Act [Chapter 15:12] (No. 15 of 1996) in respect of a woman charged with causing the death of her child.”11 Urukiko rusanga iri tegeko rikubiyemo impamvu zituma ababyeyi bihekura bisa n’ibyo mu Rwanda ku buryo ryafasha mu gusuzuma iryacu mu rwego rwo kurivugurura. III. ICYEMEZO CY’URUKIKO. [45] Rwemeje ko ubujurire bwa Ntibajyinama Esther bufite ishingiro. [46] Rwemeje ko imikirize y’urubanza RPA0001/2015/HC/RWG rwaciwe kuwa 30/04/2015 n’Urukiko Rukuru, Urugereko rwa Rwamagana rujuririrwa, ihindutse ku birebana n’igihano Ntibajyinama Esther yari yahawe. [47] Ruhanishije Ntibajyinama Esther igifungo cy’imyaka icumi (10). [48] Rutegetse ko amagarama y’urubanza aherera ku Isanduku ya Leta kuko uregwa aburana afunze.

11 Section 48 of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act [Chapter 9:23] (Zimbabwe 2004)

NTIBAJYINAMA v. UBUSHINJACYAHA

Page 158

UBUSHINJACYAHA v. HABYARIMANA ET.AL [Rwanda URUKIKO RW’IKIRENGA – RPA0154/13/CS (Mugenzi, P.J., Muhumuza na Mukamulisa, J.) 08 Ukuboza 2017] Amategeko Mpanabyaha – Impurirane y’ibyaha – Uburyozwe bw’ibyaha – Igihe icyaha kimwe cyabaye intandaro y’ibindi – Mu gihe Icyaha kimwe cyabaye intandaro y’ibindi bituma abaregwa baryozwa ibyo byaha byose kabone nubwo umwe muribo atamenyesha abandi ko agiye kugikora – Itegeko Ngenga No01/2012/OL ryo kuwa 02/05/2012 rishyiraho Igitabo cy’amategeko ahana, Ingingo ya 98. Amategeko Mpanabyaha – Impurirane y’ibyaha – Ibihano – Mu gihe hakozwe ibyaha binyuranye bifitanye isano bigomba guhanwa mu buryo bw’impurirane mbonezamugambi maze abahamwa n’ibyaha bagahanishwa igihano giteganyirizwa icyaha kirushije ikindi uburemere – Itegeko Ngenga No01/2012/OL ryo kuwa 02/05/2012 rishyiraho Igitabo cy’amategeko ahana, Ingingo ya 84. Incamake y’ikibazo: Urubanza rwatangiriye mu Rukiko Rukuru, Urugereko rwa Nyanza abajuriye bakurikiranwe n’Ubushinjacyaha ku cyaha cyo kwinjira mu rugo rw’umuntu mu buryo budakurikije amategeko, hamwe n’icyaha cy’ubwicanyi, ibi byaha bikaba byarakozwe ubwo Habyarimana wari umunyamabanga Nshingwabikorwa w’Umurenge, atwaye mu modoka abandi bakurikiranywe hamwe, mu gikorwa abajuriye bavugaga ko ari irondo, bakajya kwa Sebera mu ma 131

Page 159

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 132 saa sita z’ijoro, bakamukomangira, akanga gukingura ahubwo agatabaza, aho asohokeye akaza kuraswa numwe muribo witwa Uwiragiye, wanarashe Mutuyimana wari utabaye, akabica bombi. Mukambanda na Nkurirehe bisunze Ubushinjacyaha baregera indishyi ariko ikirego cya Nkurirehe nticyakirwa kuko atagaragaje ububasha bwo kurega. Urwo rukiko rwasanze ibyaha baregwaga bibahama rubahanisha igifungo cy’imyaka 25 buri wese rubagabanyirije kuko ari ubwa mbere bari bakurikiranywe mu nkiko, runabategeka kwishyura Mukambanda indishyi zingana na 10.000.000Frw. Abaregwa ntibishimiye imikirize y’urubanza maze barujuririra mu Rukiko rw’Ikirenga bavuga ko ubushinjacyaha butari kubakurikirana ku cyaha cyo kwinjira mu rugo rw’umuntu mu buryo budakurikije amategeko bidasabwe n’abagikorewe bakaba kandi bataranemeraga ko hari ibikorwa bigize icyo cyaha bakoze, bakaba barasobanuraga ko byari mu nshingano zo gucunga umutekano bagenzura irondo. Ubushinjacyaha bwo bukaba bwaragaragazaga ko abaregwa binjiye mu rugo rwa Sebera kuko bitari gushoboka ko bavugana nawe ari mu nzu bo bari hanze y’urugo bakaba kandi batari bafite inyandiko zo gusaka ubwo bageragayo nka saa sita z’ijoro. Ku byerekeye icyaha cy’ubwicanyi uretse Uwiragiye waburanye yemera ko ariwe warashe Sebera na Mutuyimana ariko akavuga ko yarashe arengera ubuzima bwe kuko nabo bari bamutemye ndetse akomeza agaragaza ko habaye ubusembure, abandi bajuriye basobanura ko bahamijwe ibyaha batakoze, kubera ko hari uwagikoze kandi ucyemera, Habyarimana we akaba yarahakanaga ko atariwe wahaga abapolisi amabwiriza. Ubushinjacyaha bwo bwaburanye bugaragazagako uruhare rwa Habyarimana rushingiye ku kuba ariwe wari ukuriye kiriya gikorwa akanabatwara mu modoka ye, akaba yaranafitanye

Page 160

133 amakimbirane na Sebera wishwe nkuko byanavuzwe n’ababajijwe mu gihe cy’iperereza. Uwaregeye indishyi yatanze ubujurire bwuririye ku bundi avuga ko yagenewe indishyi nke asaba urukiko ko rwagena indishyi zikwiye. Habyarimana, Rugamba na Karemera bakavuga ko badakwiye kwishyura indishyi kuko ataribo bakoze icyaha ahubwo bakwiye kugirwa abere, naho Uwiragiye we akagaragazako yaciwe indishyi zidakwiranye n’icyaha yakoze kandi ko hagobokeshwa Leta kuko icyaha cyakozwe ari mu kazi. Incamake y’icyemezo: 1. Kuba Mukambanda nyir’urugo abaregwa bavogereye yaragiye asobanura ko umugabo we yishwe nyuma yuko abaregwa bavogereye urwo urugo mu gicuku ndetse akaregera n’indishyi bigaragazako yari afite ubushake bwo gukomeza gukurikirana ikirego cye, bityo rero abaregwa bagomba gukurikiranwa ku cyaha cyo kwinjira mu rugo rw’umuntu mu buryo bunyuranyije n’amategeko.

2. Kuba abaregwa baragiye kwa Sebera nijoro bakamukinguza badafite uruhushya rwo gusaka bituma bahamwa n’icyaha cyo kwinjira mu rugo rw’umuntu mu buryo budakurikije amategeko.

3. Kuba icyaha cyo kwinjira mu rugo rw’umuntu binyuranyije n’amategeko cyarabaye intandaro y’icyaha cy’ubwicanyi, isano iri hagati yibyo byaha ituma abaregwa baryozwa ibyo byaha byombi nubwo uwakoze icyaha cy’ubwicanyi yaba ataramenyesheje abandi ko agiye kugikora.

4. Igenwa ry’igihano mu gihe habaye ibyaha binyuranye bifitanye isano bigomba guhanwa mu buryo bw’impurirane UBUSHINJACYAHA v. HABYARIMANA ET.AL

Page 161

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 134 mbonezamugambi maze abahamwa n’ibyaha bagahanishwa igihano giteganyirizwa icyaha kirushije ikindi uburemere.

5. Kubera ko urugero rw’indishyi zisabwa rukabije kandi nta bisobanuro byumvikana uzisaba atanga bituma avugako izagenwe ku rwego rwa mbere ari nke, hagomba kwemezwa ko izagenwe mbere ziri ku rugero rukwiye. Ubujurire bufite ishingiro kuri bimwe; Ubujurire bwuririye ku bundi nta shingiro bufite; Amagarama aherereye ku isanduku ya Leta. Amategeko yashingiweho: Itegeko Ngenga No01/2012/OL ryo kuwa 02/05/2012 rishyiraho igitabo cy’amategeko ahana, ingingo ya 291, 280, 98, 99, 105, 106, 74, 140, 84, 76, 78 na 45. Itegeko teka ryo kuwa 30/07/1888 ryerekeye imirimo nshinganwa cyangwa amasezerano, ingingo ya 258. Itegeko N°21/2012 ryo kuwa 14/06/2012 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi, ingingo ya 118. Imanza zifashishijwe: Ubushinjacyaha v. Sezikeye, RPAA038/15/CS rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga kuwa 15/09/2015. Inyandiko z’abahanga zifashishijwe: Isabelle Rolive & D.Bosquet, “ La renonciation au meurtre: une limite au système de l’imputation automatique du meurtre à tous les participants au vol”, Revue de Droit Penal et de Criminologie, Avril 2002, p.371.

Page 162

135 Urubanza I. IMITERERE Y’URUBANZA [1] Mu Rukiko Rukuru Urugereko rwa Nyanza, Ubushinjacyaha bwakurikiranye Habyarimana Festus, Uwiragiye Fabiola, Rugamba Frank, Karemera Steven Alias Maridadi na Ngezahayo David, ku cyaha cyo kwinjira mu rugo rw’umuntu mu buryo budakurikije amategeko, hamwe n’icyaha cy’ubwicanyi cyakorewe Sebera Laurent na Mutuyimana Innocent wari uje atabaye, mu ijoro ryo kuwa 02/07/2012, ubwo Habyarimana wari umunyamabanga Nshingwabikorwa w’Umurenge, atwaye mu modoka abo bandi baregwa hamwe, bajyaga kwa Sebera mu ma saa sita z’ijoro, bakamukomangira, akanga gukingura ahubwo agatabaza, aho asohokeye akaza kuraswa na Uwiragiye, wanarashe Mutuyimana Innocent wari utabaye, akabica bombi. [2] Mukambanda Dorothée na Nkurirehe Eugénie, baregeye indishyi, bisunze Ubushinjacyaha, ariko ikirego cya Nkurirehe nticyakirwa kubera ko atagaragaje ububasha afite bwo kurega, ntiyanajuririra icyo cyemezo. [3] Urukiko Rukuru, Urugereko rwa Nyanza, rwemeje ko abaregwa bahamwa n’ubufatanyacyaha mu kwinjira mu rugo rw’umuntu mu buryo budakurikije amategeko, n’icyaha cyo kwica Sebera Laurent na Mutuyimana Innocent ku bushake, bahanishwa igifungo cy’imyaka 25 buri wese, bagabanyirijwe ibihano kuko ari ku nshuro ya mbere bari bakurikiranywe mu nkiko, runabategeka guha Mukambanda, umupfakazi wa Sebera, indishyi zingana na 10.000.000Frw. UBUSHINJACYAHA v. HABYARIMANA ET.AL

Page 163

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 136 [4] Mu guhamya abaregwa icyaha, Urukiko Rukuru rwasobanuye ko bari bahuriye ku mugambi wo kwica Sebera, ukaba ugaragazwa n’ibikorwa byabanjirije icyaha, babyumvikanaho, bohereza Karemera Steven na Rugamba Frank baza kwa Sebera, bamubwira ko Habyarimana, Umunyamabanga Nshingwabikorwa amushaka, bikurikirwa no kumurasa nijoro, banarasa Mutuyimana Innocent wari uje kumutabara, bakaba bahamwa n’impurirane mbonezamugambi. [5] Urukiko Rukuru rwashingiye ku kuba abaregwa bemera ko bagiye kwa Sebera nijoro, badafite uruhushya rwo gusaka, kandi urusaku bitwaza ko rwumvikanagayo, nk’impamvu yatumye bajyayo, rutaragaragarijwe ibimenyetso, akaba atarigeze yihanangirizwa nk’usakuriza abantu, kuko n’abatangabuhamya Mukamana Jeanne na Muhawenimana Josephine bahakanye urwo rusaku. [6] Ku bijyanye n’uruhare rwa Habyarimana ku cyaha cy’ubwicanyi, Urukiko rwashingiye ku kuba yarabaye nyirabayazana wo kuvogera urugo rwa Sebera, akaba kandi yari afite uwo mugambi, kuko na mbere y’uko Sebera araswa, Habyarimana yari yohereje Karemera Steven n’inkeragutabara kumubwira ko agomba kumwitaba ku Murenge (kote 94), hanyuma araswa uwo munsi, Habyarimana ahagarikiye uwarashe, Mutuyimana Innocent we agwa mu bwicanyi aje gutabara. [7] Ku byerekeye Uwiragiye Fabiola, Urukiko rwasobanuye ko nta cyemeza ko yishe abantu 2 yitabara, kuko nta kigaragaza ko bari bafite imihoro bakanamutema mu mutwe, nk’uko abiburanisha, kuko na muganga wemewe na Leta yavuze ko Uwiragiye yari afite udusebe duto 3, dukira nta ngorane, kandi hatagaragara icyaduteye, rwongeraho ko n’iyo yari kuba

Page 164

137 yatemwe, bitari gufatwa nko kwitabara kuko atari gukoresha imbunda ku bantu bafite umuhoro ikaba kandi itaragaragajwe, kandi ntiyerekana ko nta bundi buryo yari afite bwo gukoresha. [8] Ku birebana na Karemera Steven alias Maridadi, Urukiko rwasobanuye ko ahamwa n’icyaha kubera ko nawe yemera ko yajyanye n’abo baregwa hamwe kwa Sebera, igikorwa cyo kuvogera urugo nawe akaba yaragikoze, Sebera akaraswa nawe ahari, kandi abatangabuhamya Uwanzuwe (kote ya 64-65) na Barame Samuel (71-72) bakemeza ko yanaje mbere kwa SEBERA ari kumwe n’abandi mu gikorwa cy’ubutasi, yashaka kumwambika amapingu, undi akabyanga. [9] Ku birebana na Rugamba Frank, Urukiko rwasobanuye ko mu iburanisha yemeye ko yarashe hejuru, ahagarika ubwicanyi, ariko akaba yari yanaje mu gikorwa cyabanjirije ubwicanyi, cy’ubutasi, nk’uko byemejwe n’umumotari Nsanzimana JMV wabatwaye (kote ya 64-65). [10] Ku byerekeye Ngezahayo David waburanishjijwe adahari ariko yarahamagajwe mu buryo buteganyijwe n’amategeko, Urukiko rwasobanuye ko yagaragaye mu mugambi wo gukora icyaha kimwe n’abo baregwa hamwe. [11] Habyarimana, Uwiragiye, Rugamba na Karemera1, bajuririye Urukiko rw’Ikirenga, bavuga ko bakurikiranywe ho icyaha cyo kwinjira mu rugo rw’umuntu bidakurikije amategeko kandi batarakiregewe n’uwagikorewe, ko bahamijwe ibyaha nta bimenyetso bishingiweho, hirengagizwa imvugo zabo, Uwiragiye akanavuga ko hirengangijwe ko yarashe Sebera

1 Utarajuriye ni Ngezahayo David waburanishijwe adahari. UBUSHINJACYAHA v. HABYARIMANA ET.AL

Page 165

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 138 yitabara kuko bamurwanyije bashaka kumwicisha imipanga. Abandi baregwa bavuga ko nta ruhare bagize mu bwicanyi. [12] Mu bujurire bwuririye ku bundi, Mukambanda uregera indishyi avuga ko izo yagenewe ari nke, agasaba ko zakongerwa. [13] Urubanza rwaburanishijwe mu ruhame kuwa 03/04/2017, kuwa 24/07/2017, no kuwa 09/10/2017, Habyarimana Festus yunganiwe na Me Nsengiyumva Viateur na Me Nsengiyumva Enos, Karemera Steven yunganiwe na Me Habyarimana Flavienne na Me Gatabazi Nuru Claudine, Rugamba Frank yunganiwe na Me Hakizimana Martin na Me Habiyambere Aphrodis na Me Gatabazi Nuru Claudine, Uwiragiye Fabiola yunganiwe na Me Kabasenga Berthilde na Me Gatabazi Nuru Claudine na Me Hakizimana Martin, naho Mukambanda Dorothée uregera indishyi yunganiwe na Me Karamira Jacques. II. IBIBAZO BIGIZE URUBANZA N’ISESENGURWA RYABYO [14] Muri uru rubanza, harasuzumwa niba abaregwa bataragombaga gukurikiranwa ku cyaha cyo kwinjira mu rugo rw’umuntu mu buryo budakurikije amategeko, hasuzumwe niba hari ibimenyetso bishyitse bibahamya icyo cyaha, kimwe n’icy’ubwicanyi baregwa, hanasuzumwe ibyerekeranye n’indishyi. Kumenya niba icyaha cyo kwinjira mu rugo rw’umuntu mu buryo budakurikije amategeko kitaragombaga gukurikiranwa kuko kitaregewe n’uwagikorewe.

Page 166

139 [15] Habyarimana Festus, Uwiragiye Fabiola, Rugamba Frank, Karemera Steven n’ababunganira bavuga ko, usibye ko batanemera ko hari ibikorwa byo kuvogera urugo rwa Sebera bakoze, banasanga Ubushinjacyaha butari kubakurikirana kuri icyo cyaha bidasabwe n’abagikorewe, nk’uko biteganywa mu ngingo ya 291 y’Itegeko-Ngenga Nº01/2012/OL ryo kuwa 02/05/2012 rishyiraho Igitabo cy’amategeko ahana, bakaba bemeza ko kitaregewe. [16] Uhagarariye Ubushinjacyaha avuga ko n’ubwo uwakorewe icyaha atiregeye, Ubushinjacyaha buharanira inyungu rusange z’abaturage butarebera icyaha gikorwa, ngo bureke gukurikirana.

UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [17] Ingingo ya 291 y’Itegeko Ngenga Nº01/2012/OL ryo kuwa 02/05/2012 rishyiraho Igitabo cy’amategeko ahana iteganya ko, ku byaha bibangamira imibereho bwite y’abantu, ikurikirana ry’icyaha rikorwa n’Ubushinjacyaha bisabwe n’uwahemukiwe, umuhagarariye mu buryo bwemewe n’amategeko cyangwa umufiteho uburenganzira, naho ingingo ya 280 y’iryo Tegeko-Ngenga, ikaba iteganya muri ibyo byaha, icyo kwinjira mu rugo rw’umuntu mu buryo budakurikije amategeko. [18] Urukiko rurasanga imiburanire y’abaregwa bemeza ko ikirego kitatanzwe n’uwakorewe icyaha nta shingiro yahabwa, kuko nk’uko dosiye ibigaragaza, mu nzego zose yabarijwemo, haba mu bugenzacyaha, mu bushinjacyaha ndetse n’imbere y’inkiko, Mukambanda nyir’urugo abaregwa bajemo akaba UBUSHINJACYAHA v. HABYARIMANA ET.AL

Page 167

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 140 n’umupfakazi wa Sebera waharasiwe agapfa, yagiye asobanura ko umugabo we yishwe nyuma y’uko abaregwa bateye urugo rwe mu gicuku, ndetse yaranaregeye indishyi kubera ibyo bikorwa, abaregwa bakaba baterekana ko Mukambanda yaba yarigeze agaragaza ubushake bwo kudakomeza gukurikirana ikirego cye. Kumenya niba hari ibimenyetso bihagije byashingiweho mu guhamya abaregwa icyaha cyo kwinjira mu rugo rw’umuntu mu buryo budakurikije amategeko. [19] Abajuriye bose bavuga ko batakoze icyaha cyo kwinjira mu rugo rw’umuntu mu buryo budakurikije amategeko, kuko bari mu nshingano zo gucunga umutekano w’abantu n’ibintu byabo bagenzura irondo nk’uko bagiye n’ahandi, bakajya kwa Sebera kubera urusaku bari bahumvise. [20] Uwiragiye, Rugamba na Karemera n’ababunganira bemera ko bageze kwa Sebera, ariko ko nta cyaha cyo kwinjira mu rugo rw’umuntu mu buryo budakurikije amategeko bakoze, kuko bose bari mu nshingano zo gucunga umutekano w’abantu n’ibintu byabo, bakaba barahageze bagenzura irondo, nk’uko bagiye n’ahandi, kujya iwe bikaba byaratewe n’urusaku rwahumvikaniraga. [21] Basobanura ko, bari kumwe na Ngezahayo bagiye kwa Sebera mu rwego rwo kugenzura irondo ryakorerwaga hafi y’iwe, babura abarikoraga ariko bumva abantu bavugira kwa Sebera, bajyayo maze Ngezahayo na Rugamba barakomanga, babonye Sebera asohokanye umuhoro basubira inyuma. [22] Rugamba na Me Hakizimana, Me Habiyambere na Gatabazi Nuru, bavuga ko yahamijwe icyaha cyo kuvogera

Page 168

141 urugo kandi atari byo kuko binjiye mu rugo bakomanze, bene urugo banga ko binjira, bivuze ko batageze ahateganywa n’ingingo ya 280 y’Itegeko Nº01/2012/OL ryo kuwa 05/02/2012 rishyiraho Igitabo cy’amategeko ahana kuko bari inyuma y’urugi, mu Bugenzacyaha akaba yaranasobanuye ko bakomanze babwira Sebera ko bari kumwe n’Umuyobozi w’Umurenge. [23] Karemera na Me Habyarimana na Me Gatabazi Nuru bamwunganira, basobanura ko adahamwa n’icyaha cyo kwinjira mu rugo rw’umuntu mu buryo budakurikije amategeko kuko we yagiye kwa Sebera yategetswe n’abamuyobora kujya kugenzura irondo, ajyana n’abapolisi babiri aribo Uwiragiye na Rugamba, bagira ngo bamubaze impamvu acuruza ari nijoro. [24] Habyarimana na Me Nsengiyumva Viateur na Me Nsengiyumva Enos bamwunganira, bavuga ko we atagiye mu rugo rwa Sebera, ko yasigaye ku modoka, ndetse ko na Mukambanda yabwiye Urukiko mu iperereza ko atageze mu rugo, akaba rero atahanirwa icyaha atigeze akora. [25] Uhagarariye Ubushinjacyaha avuga ko abaregwa binjiye mu rugo rwa Sebera kuko bitari gushoboka ko bavuganira hanze nawe ari mu nzu, bo bari inyuma y’urugo, bakaba kandi bagerayo nka saa sita z’ijoro, batari bafite inyandiko zo gusaka. Avuga ko Habyarimana atabasha guhunga icyo cyaha kandi ari we wabohereje, yanabazanye mu modoka. [26] Mukambanda uregera indishyi, na Me Karamira umwunganira basobanura ko Uwiragiye, Rugamba na Karemera na Ngezahayo, baje mu rugo mu gicuku, binjira iwe mu rugo, nta burenganzira bafite, bakoresheje ibikangisho kugira ngo UBUSHINJACYAHA v. HABYARIMANA ET.AL

Page 169

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 142 Sebera asohoke, kandi ko bahaje babisabwe n’Umunyamabanga Nshingwabikorwa Habyarimana.

UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [27] Ku byerekeyeye Uwiragiye, Rugamba na Karemera bagiye mu rugo kwa Sebera, Urukiko rurasanga, nk’uko n’Urukiko Rukuru, Urugereko rwa Nyanza rwabisobanuye, abaregwa bahamwa n’icyaha cyo kwinjira mu rugo rw’umuntu mu buryo budakurikije amategeko, kuko nabo bemera ko bagiye kwa Sebera nijoro bakajya kumukinguza, badafite uruhushya rwo gusaka, kandi ingingo ya 280 y’Itegeko Ngenga Nº01/2012/OL ryo kuwa 02/05/2012 rishyiraho Igitabo cy’amategeko ahana, ibuza kwinjira mu rugo rw’umuntu utabifitiye inyandiko zibitangira uburenganzira, uretse igihe amategeko abiteganya ukundi. [28] Urukiko rurasanga, n’urusaku abajuriye bitwaza nk’impamvu yatumye bajya kwa Sebera bemeza ko rwari urw’abahanyweraga inzoga, nta bimenyetso barutangiye, cyane ko nta n’undi muntu bavuga utari uwo muri urwo rugo baba barasanze yo, na nyuma y’uko Sebera asohotse, usibye Mutuyimana nawe waharasiwe aturutse iwe atabaye, ndetse no mu ibazwa rye mu Bugenzacyaha, Habyarimana yavuze ko Sebera yasohotse wenyine mu nzu (kote ya 117)2. [29] Ku byerekeye Habyarimana utarageze mu rugo rwa Sebera nk’uko na Mukambanda abyivugira, kimwe na Uwiragiye na Rugamba na Karemera, Urukiko rusanga, n’ubwo

2 Uwo twabonye wasohotse ni Sebera niba abandi barasohotse nyuma simbizi kuko twari twirutse twatatanye.

Page 170

143 yaba atarageze muri urwo rugo, yasigaye ku muhanda, abo baregwa hamwe bose bemeza ko ariwe wabohereje ngo bagende bajye kuzana Sebera, kandi ko ari we wari ubazanye mu modoka, anakuriye igikorwa cy’iryo rondo nk’Umuyobozi w’Umurenge. [30] Ingingo ya 98 y’Itegeko Ngenga Nº01/2012/OL ryo kuwa 02/05/2012 rishyiraho Igitabo cy’amategeko ahana, iteganya ko, mu rwego rw’ubufatanyacyaha, uwoshya undi gukora icyaha aba ari icyitso cye, iya 99 y’iryo Tegeko Ngenga igateganya ko umucamanza ahana icyitso akurikije ko uruhare rw’icyitso mu gukora icyaha rungana cyangwa ruruta urwa gatozi. [31] Urukiko rurasanga, n’ubwo Habyarimana ashaka guhunga uruhare rwe mu cyaha cyo kwinjira mu rugo rw’umuntu mu buryo butemewe n’amategeko, asobanura ko we atagiye mu rugo rwa Sebera kuko yasigaye ku muhanda mu modoka, yirengagiza ko ariwe, nk’umuyobozi w’Umurenge, wazanye mu modoka abagiye mu rugo rwa Sebera mu masaha y’igicuku kandi nta nyandiko zibibahera uburenganzira, akaba ari we wabatumye kumuzana, ayo mabwiriza yatanze akaba amugira icyitso, hakurikijwe ibiteganywa n’ingingo ya 98 yibukijwe haruguru. [32] Ku bijyanye n’imiburanire ya Habyarimana y’uko nta bubasha afite ku bapolisi kuko atabayobora, Urukiko rurasanga ibyo bisobanuro nta shingiro bifite, kuko, nk’Umuyobozi w’Umurenge, ari we wari uyoboye igikorwa cy’irondo ahibereye, abapolisi yari yitwaje akaba ari abakimufashagamo, ari nayo mpamvu yabashije kubaha amabwiriza yo kujya kwa Sebera bakajyayo, nk’uko nawe yivugiye mu iburanisha ryo UBUSHINJACYAHA v. HABYARIMANA ET.AL

Page 171

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 144 kuwa 03/04/2017, ati: “Nasigaye ku modoka mboherezayoˮ, akaba rero atavuga ko atabahaye amabwiriza nk’umuyobozi. [33] Urukiko rurasanga rero, hashingiwe ku bisobanuro bitanzwe haruguru, Habyarimana, Uwiragiye, Rugamba na Karemera, bahamwa n’icyaha cyo kwinjira aho umuntu atuye mu buryo butemewe, giteganywa kandi kigahanishwa ingingo ya 280 y’Itegeko Nº01/2012/OL ryo kuwa 02/05/2012 ryavuzwe huruguru, bityo ubujurire bwabo kuri iyi ngingo bukaba nta shingiro bufite. Kumenya niba hari ibimenyetso bihagije bihamya abaregwa icyaha cy’ubwicanyi a. Ku byerekeye Uwiragiye Fabiola warashe Sebera na Mutuyimana [34] Uwiragiye avuga ko yahamijwe ubufatanyacyaha mu bwicanyi kandi ari gatozi, kuko ari we warashe Sebera na Mutuyimana Innocent, akaba kandi atahamwa n’impurirane y’ibyaha kuko nta kindi cyaha yakoze, ko nta wamutumye kugira uwo yica, ahubwo yabarashe arengera ubuzima bwe kuko nabo bari bamutemye, nk’uko bigaragara muri raporo ya muganga wamwakiriye, akamukingira, akanamwohereza kuvurirwa ahandi, kandi akaba yaragiye aburana apfutse, bigaragaza ko yari yakomerekejwe. [35] Asobanura ko nta mugambi wo kwica yari afite ahubwo yabyukijwe mu buriri na “commandant” wa Polisi, amubwira kujyana n’Umuyobozi w’Umurenge n’inkeragutabara, kugenzura amarondo, asanga abandi mu modoka, bambukiranya utugari twinshi bareba irondo, bageze imbere yo kwa Sebera, ahakorerwa irondo, bumva basakuza, banywa, Rugamba na Ngezahayo bakomanga kwa Sebera ngo asohoke, nawe yumvise

Page 172

145 ari abapolisi, ababwira ko abara kabiri bagiye, Mutuyimana nawe aza afite umuhoro, bo bahita biruka. [36] Avuga ko abo bari kwa Sebera bamwirukankanye bafite intwaro z’imihoro, umwe akamukubita umuhoro, ashatse kongera kumukubita ubwa kabiri, aragwa, abandi bashatse kumutema, arasa amasasu atatu, umwe arapfa, umugore wa Sebera ashatse kumukubita umuhini aramuhirika, bakomeje kumwirukaho yongera kurasa Sebera ku kaboko, nyuma irindi sasu rinyura mu nda, akaba yararashe kuko atari afite ikindi yakora nyuma y’uko ahunze, bakamusanga mu masaka, aho Sebera yaguye, kandi yari yabanje kurasa mu kirere bakanga kugenda. [37] Avuga ko imvugo za Mukambanda Dorothée na Nyiramatama bemeje ko yagundaguranye na Sebera zigaragaza ko bamurwanyije, kandi ko mu iperereza Urukiko rwakoze, rwagaragarijwe aho imirwano yabereye, n’aho Sebera yarasiwe, bigaragaza ko yari amukurikiye, bikanagaragazwa n’uko yarashwe ku gice cy’imbere, mu mutima, na Mutuyimana araswa mu rubavu. [38] Avuga ko atigeze ategekwa na Habyarimana kurasa kuko atamutegeka, kandi ko hatagaragajwe ishingiro ry’inzangano zivugwa ko Sebera yari afitanye na Habyarimana, ko kandi atigeze ajya gutata ku manywa nk’uko byavuzwe, ko ndetse Nyiramatama, Nsanzimana na Uwanzuwe batigeze bemeza ko bamubonye kwa Sebera. [39] Me Kabasenga, wunganira Uwiragiye avuga ko habayeho ubusembure, kuko Uwiragiye yarashe ari uko atemwe, n’agapira yari yambaye kakaba kabonekaho amaraso (kote ya 59), hakaba harirengagijwe ibikomere bitoya UBUSHINJACYAHA v. HABYARIMANA ET.AL

Page 173

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 146 byagaragaye ku mubiri we byari mu kico, hakaba hanibazwa impamvu imihoro itafatiriwe kandi abatanguhamya bemeza ko yari ihari. Asaba ko Uwiragiye yahanwa hashingiwe ku busembure yakorewe. [40] Ku bijyanye n’imvugo z’abatangabuhamya babajijwe mu iperereza bakavuga ko Sebera yarashwe ahunga, Me Kabasenga avuga ko Mukambanda anyuranya n’umwana we Nyiramatama, kandi ko iyo Sebera araswa ahunga yari kuraswa mu mugongo. [41] Me Hakizimana nawe wunganira Uwiragiye, avuga ko nta mugambi wo kwica yari afite, kuko yafashe imbunda agiye mu kazi, ari kumwe n’Umuyobozi, akaba ntacyo yapfaga na Sebera, ahubwo ari impanuka yatewe n’uko yatemwe, nk’uko raporo yakozwe na muganga wa mbere ibigaragaza, nawe bimuviramo kurasa. Avuga ko imvugo z’abatangabuhamya zitahabwa agaciro kuko ababajijwe ari abari bateguwe, uwo yunganira nawe akaba yaragombaga kuhaba igihe cy’iperereza, imvugo ya Mukambanda wabajijwe icyo gihe akavuga ko Sebera yarashwe yirukankanwa ikaba idakwiye gufatwaho ukuri, kuko mbere yari yavuze ko bagundaguranye, barwana. Nawe asaba ko Uwiragiye yahanwa hashingiwe ku ngingo za 105-106 z’Itegeko Ngenga Nº01/2012/OL ryo kuwa 01/05/2012 rishyiraho Igitabo cy’amategeko ahana, zerekeranye n’ubusembure, kuko yarashe yitabara. [42] Me Karamira wunganira Mukambanda uregera indishyi avuga ko Uwiragiye abeshya, kuko nta raporo ya muganga wemewe na Leta igaragaza ko yatemwe, kuko iyabyemeje yakozwe n’umugore wa Habyarimana wakoraga ku ivuriro. Anavuga ko nta nenge igaragara mu iperereza Urukiko rwakoze.

Page 174

147 [43] Mukambanda avuga ko ku manywa, Karemera yari yazanye n’umupolisi baje gushaka Sebera, we ababwira ko adahari ariko binjira mu rugo ku gahato, bamubonye bashaka kumwambika amapingu, arabyanga hanyuma bagenda bijujuta, bagaruka mu ma saa sita z’ijoro, bakomanze ababwira ko Sebera atarimo, bakomeza gukubita imigeri ku rugi, yanga gusohoka ahubwo aratabaza, hatabara Mutuyimana maze agwa mu gico cy’abasigaye ku irembo, baramukubita, atatse bituma Sebera asohoka, baramufata ariko arabacika, bamwirukaho kugeza ubwo bamurasiye mu masaka. [44] Avuga ko ubwo abapolisi birukaga ku mugabo we nawe yirutse abakurikiye asaba imbabazi ariko asanga bamaze kwica umugabo we, hanyuma Umuyobozi w’Umurenge Habyarimana, ahita ajyana umupolisi ku ivuriro riyoborwa n’umugore we. [45] Uhagarariye Ubushinjacyaha avuga ko Uwiragiye atitabaraga, kuko raporo ya muganga wemewe na Leta yemeje ko yari afite udusebe duto tutagaragaza icyaduteye, kandi ko iyo biba umuhoro hari kuba igikomere kinini cyane, usibye ko nta n’imihoro yagaragajwe, kandi nta n’impamvu umupolisi wakoraga iperereza yari kuyihisha. avuga ko kuba Sebera yararashwe mu bitugu byerekana ko Uwiragiye yamurashe ahunga, bikaba binyuranye no kwitabara, kuko nta kigaragaza ko abo yarashe bamurwanyije ngo byitwe ubusembure. [46] Ku byerekeye imvugo z’abatangabuhamya babajijwe mu iperereza ryakozwe n’Urukiko, avuga ko zirebewe hamwe, zigaragaza ko umunsi Sebera yicwa, ku manywa iwe hari haje inkeragutabara Karemera, azanye n’abapolisi, bagaruka nijoro bazanywe no kumwica, kandi ko abatangabuhamya bahuriza ku kuba Habyarimana na Sebera bari bafitanye amakimbirane ashingiye ku birombe by’umucanga, naho iby’abantu bari UBUSHINJACYAHA v. HABYARIMANA ET.AL

Page 175

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 148 bahuriye iwe ku manywa bikaba ari ibijyanye n’ikimina kandi ko saa kumi z’amanywa bari batashye, aterwa nijoro nta muntu ugihari. [47] Uhagarariye Ubushinjacyaha avuga kandi ko Habyarimana yari kumwe n’abari mu gitero, abishwe baraswa amasasu arenze rimwe, bigaragaza ko bari bagambiriye kwica, akaba asanga ibyavugiwe mu iperereza bihuye n’ibyo abatangabuhamya bavuze mbere.

UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [48] Ingingo ya 105 y’Itegeko Ngenga Nº01/2012/OL ryo kuwa 02/05/2012 rishyiraho Igitabo cyamategeko ahana, ari nayo Uwiragiye aburanisha, iteganya, mu gace kayo ka kabiri, ko “umuntu afatwa ko yitabara igihe[...] ahanganye n’abajura cyangwa abandi bagizi ba nabi”, naho iya 106 y’iryo Tegeko Ngenga igateganya ko “umuntu usagariwe ubwe cyangwa hasagariwe undi muntu, akitabara, cyangwa akamutabara atabiryozwa, uretse iyo uburyo bwakoreshejwe mu kwitabara cyangwa mu gutabara undi busumbye kure uburemere bw’amakuba”. [49] Urukiko rurasanga, mu bisobanuro Uwiragiye atanga ashaka kugaragaza ko yarashe Sebera na Mutuyimana ari uko bamutemye bitafatwaho ukuri, kuko, nk’uko byagaragajwe na muganga wemewe na Leta wasuzumye Uwiragiye, udusebe yamusanganye twari duto, anavuga ko icyaduteye kitamenyekana, bikaba byumvikana ko iyo biba ibikomere bitewe n’imihoro yatemeshejwe gatatu mu mutwe n’abantu bashaka kumwica nk’uko abivuga, muganga atari kubura kubibona ngo abyemeze, uretse ko nta n’ikigaragaza ko

Page 176

149 abarashwe bari bafite imihoro, kuko itafatiriwe kandi n’abatangubahamya babajijwe bakaba bataremeje ko bayibonye. Urukiko rurasanga ahubwo byakumvikana ko utwo dusebe muganga yabonye twanaturuka mu igundagurana Uwiragiye yagiranye na Sebera ubwo uyu yangaga ko bamufata nk’uko Mukambanda yemeje ko mbere y’uko araswa, Sebera yabanje kugundagurana n’abashakaga kumufata. [50] Urukiko rurasanga kandi, ingingo ya 105 y’Itegeko Ngenga No01/2012/OL ryavuzwe haruguru Uwiragiye ashingiraho ashaka kugaragaza ko yarashe abantu arengera ubuzima bwe itanajyana n’ibyabaye kwa Sebera, kuko uyu atafatwa nk’umujura cyangwa undi mugizi wa nabi ku mpamvu yo kuba atemeye ko bamufata ngo bamutware bamuvogereye urugo mu buryo bunyuranyije n’amategeko, kandi kimwe mu bisabwa kugira ngo hemerwe ko uwakoze icyaha yirwanagaho, ari uko icyamuteye kugikora kiba ari igikorwa kimurenganya (injuste) cyangwa kitemewe n’amategeko (illégal), ukwanga gufatwa kwa Sebera muri ubwo buryo kukaba kutafatwa nk’igikorwa kirenganya cyangwa kitemewe n’amategeko. [51] Urukiko rurasanga, n’ubusembure abunganira Uwiragiye bavuga butagaragazwa, kuko Sebera atafatwa nk’uwabaye nyirabayazana w’ibyamubayeho, mu gihe byagaragajwe haruguru ko yatewe mu gicuku, kuko abaje kumufata babikoze birengagije amategeko, kuba rero atarabibemereye bikaba bitatuma ariwe ufatwa nka nyirabayazana, kandi ingingo ya 74 y’Itegeko Ngenga No01/2012/OL ryavuzwe haruguru, iteganya ko habaho ubusembure ari uko uwakorewe icyaha ari we wabaye nyirabayazana wacyo3.

3Ibisobanuro byo kutemera impamvu y’ubusembure, kubera ko ububuranisha ariwe wakoze ibikorwa bitemewe byabaye intandaro y’ibyakurikiye, UBUSHINJACYAHA v. HABYARIMANA ET.AL

Page 177

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 150 [52] Urukiko rusanga rero, hashingiwe ku bisobanuro byagaragajwe haruguru, Uwiragiye ahamwa n’icyaha cy’ubwicanyi, giteganywa n’ingingo ya 140 y’Itegeko Ngenga No01/2012/OL ryo ku wa 02/05/2012 rishyiraho Igitabo cy’amategeko ahana, ubujurire bwe rero bugamije kugaragaza ko yishe umuntu yitabara cyangwa asembuwe, bukaba nta shingiro bufite. b. Ku byerekeye Habyarimana, Rugamba na Karemera. [53] Habyarimana Festus avuga ko yahamijwe icyaha atakoze, nta bimenyetso bifatika, ukwiregura kwe ntikwahabwa agaciro, kandi nyir’ukugikora ucyiyemerera atamushinja, hirengagizwa ko icyaha ari gatozi, kiryozwa nyir’ukugikora. Asobanura ko yajyanye n’abapolisi mu gikorwa cyo kugenzura ko irondo rikorwa no gufungisha utubari, nk’uko byari byemejwe mu nama y’umutekano, bakanyura mu tugari dutandukanye ariko batagambiriye kujya kwa Sebera, bakaba barajyanyweyo n’uko bahageze ntibabone irondo aho risanzwe rikorera, ahubwo bumva urusaku, yoherezayo abantu kureba, we asigara ku modoka, hanyuma haba kutumvikana hagati y’abagiyeyo n’abaturage, Uwiragiye ararasa, naho we asa n’uhungabanye, ntiyabasha kugira icyo yakora, ahubwo Uwiragiye agarutse amubwira ko habayeho amakimbirane n’abaturage, akarasa kandi ko yakomeretse, bamujyana kwa muganga. [54] Asobanura ko n’ubwo muri icyo gikorwa yari Umuyobozi, ariko bari mu nzego zitandukanye, buri wese akaba yari mukuru ku rwego rwe kandi afite ibyo asabwa

byatanzwe no mu rubanza RPAA038/15/CS rwo kuwa 15/09/2017, haburana Ubushinjacyaha na Sezikeye Emmanuel.

Page 178

151 n’abamukuriye, we, nk’umusivili, akaba atarashoboraga guha abapolisi cyangwa inkeragutabara amategeko cyangwa amabwiriza, bafite imbunda we ntayo afite, akaba kandi nta kibazo yari afitanye na nyakwigendera, cyaba icy’amabati cyangwa icy’umucanga, cyatuma amwambura ubuzima, akaba kandi nta bantu yigeze yoherezayo mbere. [55] Me Nsengiyumva Enos na Me Nsengiyumva Viateur bamwunganira, bavuga ko Urukiko Rukuru rwahamije Habyarimana icyaha nta bimenyetso, kuko Ubushinjacyaha butagaragaje ahakorewe umugambi wo kujya kurasa n’uburyo wateguwe, ahubwo nk’Umunyamabanga Nshingwabikorwa, wari ukuriye igikorwa cyo kugenzura imikorere y’irondo, nk’uko byari byemejwe mu nama y'umutekano, Habyarimana yatwaye abandi mu modoka bagiye kureba amarondo, ntibabona aho irondo rikorerwa ahubwo bumva urusaku, ariko Ubushinjacyaha ntibugaragaza niba yaratanze amabwiriza yo kurasa, kandi nta kigaragaza ko abantu bagiyeyo ku manywa batumwe koko na Habyarimana, kuko batamushinja, ntashinjwe na Uwiragiye warashe abantu babiri, akaba ari we ugomba kuryozwa icyaha cye. [56] Ku byerekeranye n’imvugo z’abatangabuhamya babarijwe mu iperereza ryakozwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga, Habyarimana na Me Nsengiyumva bavuga ko imvugo z’abatangubahamya zitashingirwaho mu kumuhamya icyaha kuko zivuguruzanya, kuko mu Rukiko, Mukambanda, umugore wa Nyakwigendera Sebera, yavuze ko atigeze yumva Umuyobozi w’Umurenge mu rugo, mu iperereza avuga ko yamubonye mu rugo, Uwihanganye na Rutebuka bavuga ko icyaha cyakozwe Habyarimana adahari, Maguru avuga ko imodoka ya Habyarimana yatwaye imirambo kandi yaratwawe UBUSHINJACYAHA v. HABYARIMANA ET.AL

Page 179

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 152 n’imbangukiragutabara. Avuga ko ku byerekeye icyo Habyarimana yaba yarapfaga na nyakwigendera, Mukambanda yavuze ko yari afitanye amakimbirane n’abo bafatanyije koperative we arabunga, Mbarushimana Zacharie avuga ko amakimbirane akomoka ku mucanga kandi Umurenge wemeza ko nta birombe by’umucanga byari bihari, ko hahingwaga umuceri, iby’umucanga kandi bikaba ari bishya kuko mbere havugwaga amakimbirane ashingiye ku kibazo cy’amabati. [57] Rugamba Frank avuga ko yahamijwe icyaha cy’ubwicanyi nta bimenyetso bifatika, kubera ko hari uwagikoze kandi ucyemera akaba atarakimufashije, we ibyo yakoze bikaba byari mu nshingano z’akazi ke, akaba kandi atigeze ajya gutata nk’uko bivugwa n’Ubushinjacyaha, uretse ko ku manywa banyuze kwa Sebera, kuko ari ku nzira, bagiye mu kandi Kagari gufata abakomeretsanyije, ariko ko atari yatumwe n’Umunyamabanga Nshingwabikorwa, kuko atariwe ubaha ubutumwa, abaturage bakaba barabihuje n’urupfu rwa Sebera, n’Ubushinjacyaha bukabyita ubutasi kandi atarigeze agera kwa Sebera mu rugo cyangwa ngo bavugane, yongeraho ko ntawakora ubutasi yitwaje ibyangombwa. [58] Avuga ko ku munsi icyaha gikorwa, we yabyukijwe n’umuyobozi we, bajyana n’Umunyamabanga Nshingwabikorwa kugenzura irondo, bageze kwa Sebera basanga abantu basakuza, barabakomangira, baramwibwira, aho gusohoka akoma akaruru, haza umugabo ufite umuhoro, we (Rugamba) na bagenzi be bariruka, yongeye kugaruka yumvise amasasu, asanga Uwiragiye yagoswe, arasa amasasu atatu mu kirere kugira ngo akange abaturage bamuveho. [59] Ku bijyanye n’ubuhamya bw’ababajijwe mu iperereza, Rugamba avuga ko imvugo zabo zivuguruzanya, zikaba

Page 180

153 zidakwiye gushingirwaho, kuko Nyiramatama uvuga ko yari kwa Sebera saa munani z’amanywa atabonye umupolisi kandi Mukambanda we avuga ko haje inkeragutabara n’umupolisi Rugamba saa kumi, akaba ari no ku nshuro ya mbere abivuze mu rwego rwo gushakisha, kandi ko bavuze ko nta mupolisi wakomeretse nyamara yaranajyanywe kwa muganga. Avuga ko Urukiko Rukuru rutagaragaje uburyo yaba yaratumwe na Habyarimana kandi ko no mu iperereza Urukiko rutageze aho yakoreraga ngo rubaze niba atari mu kazi. [60] Me Nuru Gatabazi na Me Habiyambere bunganira Rugamba, bavuga ko Ubushinjacyaha butagaragaza uruhare rwe mu rupfu rw’abarashwe, kuko haterekanwa ko yagiranye n’Umunyamabanga Nshingwabikorwa umugambi wo kwica Sebera, ko ahubwo bahagurutse bagiye kureba uburyo irondo rikorwa, babisabwe n’ubakuriye, ikibazo kikaza kuvuka ari uko Uwiragiye arashe, hagapfa abantu, ariko Rugamba we yahunganye imbunda, yanga kugira ibikorwa bibi yakora, akagaruka ari uko yumvise amasasu, maze akarasa mu kirere agira ngo atabare mugenzi we. [61] Karemera Steven avuga ko yahamijwe icyaha hiregangijwe ko we, nk’inkeragutabara yari ku irondo, abo baregwa hamwe bose bamukuriye, bakarimukuraho bamusaba kujyana nabo, bagera kwa Sebera bagasanga nta rondo rihari ahubwo iwe hari urusaku, Rugamba agakomanga, abari mu nzu bakamusaba kubibwira, maze Sebera agatabaza, ari bwo munsi y’urugo haturutse Mutuyimana yitwaje umuhoro nk’uwumvise urusaku, we (Karemera) aketse ko n’abari mu nzu bagiye gusohoka, atangira kwiruka, n’umupolisi asubira inyuma, ahita yiruka, yongera kugaruka, asanga Uwiragiye avuga ko umwegera amurasa, kandi imyenda ye yuzuye ho amaraso. UBUSHINJACYAHA v. HABYARIMANA ET.AL

Page 181

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 154 [62] Avuga ko ibyo kuba yari yaje gutata kwa Sebera ku manywa nta byabayeho, ahubwo bahanyuze bavuye gufata abantu, ari kumwe n’umupolisi utari unamaze igihe mu Murenge, kandi ko nta n’amapingu bari bafite. [63] Avuga ko imvugo z’abatangabuhamya Mukambanda, Nyiramatama na Muhawenimana zivuguruzanya ubwazo kandi zikavuguruzanya n’ibyo buri wese yari yaravuze mu ibazwa rya mbere, kuko Muhawenimana avuga ko yari yagiye kwiga kandi uwo munsi nta shuri ryari rihari, Mukambanda akavuga ko abapolisi bamusanze yicaranye iwe n’abana, ko atazi ibyo bavuganye na Sebera, ariko ubu akaba avuga ko bamubwiye ko Umunyamabanga Nshingwabikorwa w’Umurenge amushaka, naho Nyiramatama akavuga ko saa munani yari yicaye kwa Sebera kandi umugore we yaravuze ko nta wundi muntu wari uriyo. [64] Me Habyarimana na Me Habiyambere bamwunganira, bavuga ko abo baregwa hamwe bamufashe ngo ajye kubereka aho irondo rikorwa, bamukuye aho yarikoreraga, ko nta kigaragaza uruhare yaba yaragize mu rupfu rwa nyakwigendera, basaba ko yagirwa umwere. Me Gatabazi Nuru avuga ko imvugo z’abatangabuhamya zitera gushidikanya, kuko zidahuza ku byerekeranye n’ubutasi buvugwa ko bwabanje gukorwa, no kuba umurambo waratwawe n’imodoka y’umunyamabanga nshingwabikorwa w’Umurenge, ubundi bakavuga ko yatwawe na “ambulance”. [65] Me Karamira wunganira Mukambanda uregera indishyi avuga ko iperereza ryakozwe neza kandi rigaragaraza ko abazanywe na Habyarimana kwa Sebera baje ari igitero, kandi ko ubuhamya bwagaragaje ko impamvu yari amakimbirane

Page 182

155 Habyarimana yari afitanye na Sebera, abaje muri icyo gitero bose rero bakaba bakwiye kwemera uruhare rwabo. [66] Uhagarariye Ubushinjacyaha avuga ko uruhare rwa Habyarimana rushingiye ku kuba ariwe wari ukuriye kiriya gikorwa, n’ubwo yabanje kubihakana, ko atari we wahaga abapolisi amabwiriza, ntagaragaza impamvu ikomeye yatumye bajya kwa Sebera saa sita z’ijoro, kuko mu ibazwa rye mu nzego z’iperereza yemeye ko Sebera yasohotse wenyine mu nzu (kote ya 117), Rugamba nawe abazwa akavuga ko Sebera yari mu gikari aganira n’abandi, ntibavuge urusaku (kote ya 110), ibi bikuzuzwa n’uko ku manywa hari habayeho igikorwa cy’ubutasi kuko Habyarimana yari yatumyeho Sebera ku kibazo cy’amabati, ariko Sebera akanga kumwitaba, nk’uko binavugwa na Uwiragiye na Rugamba (kote za 51-50), akaba rero yaragiyeyo mu rwego rwo kumwihimuraho, bikaba binahuye, ku by’ingenzi, n’ibyavuzwe n’abatangabuhamya mu iperereza, ko habanje kuza abatasi, ko imodoka ya Habyarimana ariyo yazanye abishe, kandi ko Habyarimana yari afitanye amakimbirane na Sebera. [67] Ku byerekeye Rugamba Frank, Uhagarariye Ubushinjacyaha avuga yemera ko yanyuze kwa Sebera, bigafatwa ko yari agiye gutata kuko mu ibazwa rye yemeye ko yamusabye kwitaba Umunyamabanga Nshingwabikorwa, anemera ko bakomangiye Sebera ngo asohoke bamubwira ko ari abapolisi bari kumwe n’Umunyamabanga Nshingwabikorwa w’Umurenge, Urukiko rukaba rwashingira ku kwivuguruza kwe, kuko mu ibazwa rye yavuze ko yarashe batari babatema, akongera kurasa babatemye (kuri kote ya 110), akanavuga ko yaje gutabara mugenzi we, kandi mbere yaravuze ko buri wese yari yahunze ukwe, bikaba ari uburyo bwo guhunga icyaha. UBUSHINJACYAHA v. HABYARIMANA ET.AL

Page 183

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 156 [68] Ku byerekeye Karemera, avuga ko ku manywa yari yajyanye n’umupolisi kwa Sebera, gutata, anajyana nabo nijoro, ubwicanyi bukorwa ahari, ko rero n’ubwo we atari afite intwaro, abo bari kumwe mu gitero bari bazifite, asaba Urukiko gushingira no ku kwivuguruza kwe agahamwa n’icyaha kuko avuga ko nta rondo babonye mu nzira, nyamara akongera kuvuga ko bamukuye ku irondo.

UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [69] Ingingo ya 98 y’Itegeko Ngenga No01/2012/OL ryo kuwa 02/05/2012 rishyiraho Igitabo cy’amategeko ahana iteganya uburyo butatu umuntu ashobora kugira uruhare ruhanwa mu cyaha cyabaye: uwakoze icyaha, ni ukuvuga uwagikoze ubwe, umufatanyacyaha, ni ukuvuga uwafatanyije ku buryo butaziguye n’uwakoze icyaha, icyitso, ni ukuvuga uwafashije uwakoze icyaha mu byagiteguye, mu byoroheje imikorere yacyo cyangwa mu byakinononsoye kandi yarabikoze abizi, cyangwa uwoheje uwakoze icyaha, ubufatanyacyaha mu bwicanyi buregwa Habyarimana, Rugamba na Karemera, bukaba bugomba gusuzumwa hashingiwe kuri iyo ngingo y’Itegeko. [70] Urukiko rurasanga, ubwicanyi bwakozwe na Uwiragiye ari igikorwa cyagiranye isano n’ukuvogera urugo rwa Sebera, kuko yarashwe nyuma y’amakimbirane yavutse ubwo Sebera yabanzaga kwanga gukingura n’aho afunguriye akanga ko bamufata ngo bamujyane nk’uko bari babitumwe n’Umunyamabanga Nshingwabikorwa w’umurenge Habyarimana, icyo cyaha cy’ubwicanyi kikaba cyaraje mu gihe Sebera yatambamiraga icyaha cy’ibanze cyo kuvogera urugo rwe, kikaba rero gifitanye isano kandi kigaragara nk’icyongera

Page 184

157 ububi bw’icyo cy’ibanze cyari kizanye Uwiragiye, Rugamba na Karemera, batumwe na Habyarimana. [71] Ibisobanuro bitanzwe haruguru ni nako bigaragazwa n’abahanga mu mategeko, nka Isabelle Rorive na D.Bosquet bemeza ko n’iyo umuntu yaba atakoze ubwe igikorwa rukana kigize icyaha, ashobora nyamara kukiryozwa, bitewe n’ibyo yakoze byorohereje cyangwa byabaye intandaro y’icyo cyaha4, bagatanga urugero rw’ubwicanyi bukozwe n’umwe mu bagiye kwiba, bagenzi be nabo bakaba bagomba kuryozwa ubwo bwicanyi5, kuko bufatwa nk’impamvu nkomezacyaha y’ubwo bujura ireberwa ku cyaha ubwacyo (circonstance aggravante objective) aho kureberwa ku muntu (circonstance aggravante personnelle), bukaba bufitanye isano n’ubujura bahuriyeho, kabone n’iyo uwakoze ubwo bwicanyi wenyine yaba atabanje kubibamenyesha. [72] Uwo kandi ni nawo murongo wafashwe n’Urukiko Rusesa imanza rw’Ububiligi, rwagiye rwemeza mu manza zinyuranye, ko mu gihe hakozwe ubwicanyi kugira ngo ubujura bushoboke, uwagize uruhare muri ubwo bujura nawe azahanirwa n’ubwo bwicanyi, n’ubwo bitagaragara ko yabugizemo uruhare rutaziguye6, ndetse akaba ari no muri icyo

4“Sans avoir physiquement collaboré aux agissement délictueux d’autrui, une personne peut ainsi voir sa responsabilité pénale engagée parce qu’elle a favorisé ces agissements par la création d’un état délictueux latent ou par la commission d’une faute” : Isabelle Rorive, avec la collaboration de D.Bosquet, “La renonciation au meurtre: une limite au système de l’imputation automatique du meurtre à tous les participants au vol”, in Revue de Droit Pénal et de Criminologie, Avril 2002, p 371. 5 Ni byo byiswe “Système de l’imputation automatique des circonstances aggravantes objectives”: Ibidem, p. 376. 6 Cass., 18 Avril 1978 UBUSHINJACYAHA v. HABYARIMANA ET.AL

Page 185

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 158 cyerekezo Urukiko Rusesa imanza rw’Ubufaransa, rwagaragaje ko icyitso cyatumye abandi gutera umuntu ubwoba, nacyo kigomba guhanirwa iterwa ry’ibyuka bihuma amaso ku waterwaga ubwoba, n’ubwo uwabatumye atari yamenye ko banatera ibyo byuka, rusobanura ko umufatanyacyaha yirengera ibyajyanye byose n’icyaha yagizemo uruhare, n’iyo yaba atari yabimenyeshejwe7. [73] Urukiko rurasanga, harebwe uburyo icyaha cyo kwinjira mu rugo rwa Sebera bitemewe n’amategeko cyabaye intandaro y’ubwicanyi yakorewe ubwo yangaga gusohoka, n’aho asohokeye akanga ko bamufata ngo bamujyane, maze ayo makimbirane akamuviramo kuraswa agapfa, we na Mutuyimana waje atabaye, byumvikana neza ko igikorwa cyo kuvogera urugo rwe cyagiranye isano n’icyo kumwica, bityo, Habyarimana, Rugamba na Karemera bagize uruhare muri uko kuvogera urugo rwa Sebera nk’uko byagaragajwe haruguru, bakaba batabasha guhunga uruhare rwabo muri ubwo bwicanyi, n’ubwo nta kigaragaza ko Uwiragiye yaba yarabamenyesheje ko agiye kurasa abantu. [74] Ku byerekeye Habyarimana wireguza kuba ataranageze kwa Sebera, aho ibyaha byombi byabereye, Urukiko rurasanga, uretse ko hari n’aho yemera ko yageze kwa Sebera kuko avuga ko yabonye uyu asohoka wenyine (kote ya 117), hashingiwe ku ngingo ya 98 y’Itegeko Ngenga No01/2012/OL ryavuzwe haruguru, kuba ari we watanze amabwiriza yo kuvogera urugo rwa Sebera nk’uko byagaragajwe haruguru, bimugira umufatanyacyaha nk’icyitso cy’abakoze icyo cyaha, maze isano

7 Le complice encourt la responsabilité de toutes les cironstances qui qualifient l’acte poursuivi, sans qu’il soit nécessaire que cellles-ci aient été connues de lui:Cass., 21 mai 1996, Bulletin criminel 1996, Nº 206, p 584.

Page 186

159 iri hagati yacyo n’ubwicanyi bwahabereye, ikaba ituma nawe agomba kuburyozwa nk’uko byasobanuwe haruguru, cyane ko ari nawe wari uyoboye abateye kwa Sebera, anabaha amabwiriza. [75] Urukiko rurasanga ariko, ibisobanuro byatanzwe bigamije kugaragaza ko igikorwa cyo kwica Sebera cyaba cyarateguwe mbere, ku buryo hari hanabanje ku manywa icyo kuza gutata iwe, kikaba cyaranateguwe biturutse ku makimbirane Sebera yaba yari afitanye na Habyarimana bapfa ikirombe cy’umucanga Sebera yatambamiyeho Habyarimana, bitagaragaza ko ubwicanyi bwabaye bwaba bwari bwateguwe koko, ikigaragara akaba ari uko Habyarimana yashatse ko Sebera afatwa akamushyikirizwa, nk’uko byemezwa n’abatangabuhamya barimo Mukamana Jeanne8 ariko ibijyanye n’iryo fatwa n’ubwo bitagaragarijwe impamvu nyakuri, ikaba itafatwa nk’umugambi wateguwe wo kwica Sebera, cyane ko bitumvikana ukuntu Habyarimana yari gushaka kumwica agakoresha abagize inzego z’umutekano barimo abapolisi n’inkeragutabara bitagaragazwa ko baba barabigizemo ubugambanyi n’inyungu bari babifitemo, hakaba hagomba rero kwemezwa ko ari ubwicanyi bwabaye buziyeho, buhanishwa ingingo ya 140 y’Itegeko Ngenga No01/2012/OL ryavuzwe haruguru, aho kuba ubwagambiriwe. [76] Urukiko rurasanga kandi, kubera isano iri hagati y’ubwo bwicanyi n’icyaha cyo kwinjira mu rugo rw’umuntu

8Mukamana Jeanne yagize ati : “numvise imodoka iparitse imbere y’inzu yanjye, gitifu avuze ngo nimugende mumuzane, mu kanya numva amasasu aravuze, gitifu aramanuka, ahura n’umusirikari wijujuta ngo arabarashe kandi ararasa ikitwa ikinyabuzima cyose, gitifu akavuga ngo mbabarira ntiwongere kurasa” yongeraho ko iyo atamutwara aba yararashe n’abandi. UBUSHINJACYAHA v. HABYARIMANA ET.AL

Page 187

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 160 binyuranyije n’amategeko nk’uko byasobanuwe haruguru, ibyo byaha byombi bigomba guhanwa mu buryo bw’impurirane y’imbonezamugambi, buteganywa n’ingingo ya 84 y’Itegeko No 01/2012/OL ryavuzwe haruguru9, maze abaregwa bagahanishwa igihano giteganyirizwa icyaha kirushije ikindi uburemere muri byombi, ni ukuvuga icy’ubwicanyi. [77] Urukiko rurasanga kandi, mu gutanga ibihano, hanitabwa ku kuba ibyaha bikurikiranywe bitaratewe n’ubugome bwihariye, ahubwo harabaye ubushishozi buke, bwatumye abaregwa badatekereza ku ngaruka zashoboraga gukurikira ukuvogera urugo rw’umutu mu gicuku kandi abagaragariza ko atiteguye kwemera ko bamufata, bikaba byababera impamvu nyoroshyacyaha, ituma bakongera kugabanyirizwa ibihano, hashingiwe ku ngingo ya 76 y’Itegeko Ngenga No01/2012/OL ryavuzwe haruguru, iteganya ko umucamanza areba mu byabanjirije icyaha, mu byagiherekeje cyangwa mu byagikurikiye, impamvu zatuma agabanya igihano, hamwe n’iya 78 y’iryo Tegeko Ngenga, iteganya uburyo ibihano bigabanywa mu gihe hagaragaye impamvu nyoroshya cyaha, ku byerekeye igihano cy’igifungo cya burundu giteganyirizwa icyaha cy’ubwicanyi, kikaba cyagabanywa, mu buryo kitajya hasi y’igifungo cy’imyaka icumi (10).

9Iyo ngingo iteganya ko iyo ku gikorwa kimwe gusa cyangwa byinshi, uwakoze icyaha yari guhanishwa ibihano byinshi byo gufungwa cyangwa by’ihazabu, umucamanza amuhanisha igihano kiruta ibindi yongera igihe cyangwa umubare, bitewe n’uburyo ibyaha byakozwe, ariko ntarenze urugero ntarengwa wongeyeho icya kabiri (1/2) cy’icyo gihano kirushije ibindi gukomera.

Page 188

161 d.Ku bijyanye n’indishyi zisabwa na Mukambanda [78] Mu bujurire bwuririye ku bundi, Mukambanda na Me Karamira umwunganira, bavuga ko mu Rukiko Rukuru yagenewe indishyi nke zingana na 10.000.000Frw kandi yari yasabye 500.000.000Frw. Bavuga ko hari hakwiye kuzirikanwa agaciro k’umuntu, hakanarebwa ko urupfu rwa Sebera rwagize Mukambanda umupfakazi, n’abana ntibabe bagishoboye kwiga, kandi se yari afite uburyo bwo gushaka amafaranga, agatunga umuryango we, kuko yakoraga imirimo itandukanye irimo kuba ukuriye koperative z’abahinzi b’umuceri mu gishanga. Basaba Urukiko kuba rwagena indishyi zikwiye, mu bushishozi. [79] Habyarimana Festus na Me Nsengiyumva Viateur na Me Nsengiyumva Enos bamwunganira, bavuga ko adakwiye gutegekwa kwishyura indishyi kandi atari we wakoze icyaha, ko n’uziregera atagaragaza isano iri hagati y’ikosa na Habyarimana usabwa indishyi. [80] Uwiragiye Fabiola na Me Kabasenga na Me Nuru Gatabazi na Me Hakizimana bamwunganira, bavuga ko yaciwe indishyi nyinshi zidakwiranye n’icyaha yakoze, kuko yagikoze asembuwe, bagasaba kandi ko hagobokeshwa Leta kuko yari umupolisi uyikorera, icyaha kikaba cyarakozwe ari mu kazi. [81] Rugamba Frank na Me Hakizimana na Me Habiyambere na Gatabazi Nuru bamwunganira, bavuga ko nta ndishyi akwiye kwishyura kuko nta cyaha yakoze, kandi ko na 10.000.000Frw yagenewe mbere nta shingiro zifite. [82] Karemera Steven na Me Habyarimana na Me Gatabazi Nuru amwunganira, bavuga ko akwiye kugirwa umwere, ariko ko n’uburyo 10.000.000Frw, zabazwe butagaragajwe. UBUSHINJACYAHA v. HABYARIMANA ET.AL

Page 189

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 162

UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [83] Ingingo ya 258 y’Igitabo cya gatatu cy’Urwunge rw’amategeko mbonezamubano, iteganya ko nyir’ugukora igikorwa cyangirije undi ategekwa gusana ibyangiritse ku makosa ye, naho iya 45 y’Itegeko-Ngenga No01/2012/OL ryo kuwa 02/05/2012 rishyiraho Igitabo cy’amategeko ahana igateganya ko abantu bose bahaniwe icyaha kimwe bafatanya kwishyura ihazabu, ibisubizwa, indishyi z’akababaro, n’amagarama y’urubanza. [84] Urukiko rurasanga, hashingiwe ku ngingo z’amategeko zibukijwe haruguru, Habyarimana, Uwiragiye na Karemera bagomba guha indishyi Mukambanda waziregeye kuko bahamwa n’ibyaha baregwa byamwangirije bigatera urupfu rw’umugabo we, ariko kubera ko urugero rw’izo asaba zigeze kuri 500.000.000Frw rukabije, hakaba nta bisobanuro byumvikana atanga, bituma avuga ko 10.000.000Frw yagenewe mbere ari make, hagomba kwemezwa izo ndishyi yagenewe n’Urukiko Rukuru, kuko ziri mu rugero rukwiye. [85] Ku byerekeye imiburanire ya Uwiragiye uvuga ko hagombye kugobokeshwa Leta y’u Rwanda yamukoreshaga kugira ngo ibe yasabwa kwishyura indishyi, Urukiko rurasanga iryo gobokesha ku gahato atasabye ku rwego rwa mbere ritashoboka, kuko ingingo ya 118 y'Itegeko N° 21/2012 ryo kuwa 14/06/2012 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi, iteganya ko “kugoboka bigamije gusaba ko uhatiwe kugoboka agira ibyo acibwa ntibishobora gukorwa bwa mbere mu rwego rw’ubujurire”.

Page 190

163 III. ICYEMEZO CY’URUKIKO [86] Rwemeje ko ubujurire bwa Habyarimana Festus, Uwiragiye Fabiola, Karemera Steven na Rugamba Frank bufite ishingiro kuri bimwe; [87] Rwemeje ko mu buryo bw’impurirane y’imbonezamugambi, bahamwa n’icyaha cyo kwinjira mu rugo rw’umuntu mu buryo bunyuranyije n’amategeko, hamwe n’icy’ubwicanyi butagambiriwe; [88] Ruhanishije buri wese muri bo igifungo cy’imyaka cumi n’itanu (15); [89] Rubategetse gufatanya kwishyura Mukambanda indishyi zihwanye na 10.000.000Frw; [90] Rwemeje ko ubujurire bwuririye ku bundi bwa Mukambanda uregera indishyi nta shingiro bufite; [91] Ruvuze ko urubanza RP0105/12/HC/NYA rwajuririwe ruhindutse kuri bimwe; [92] Rutegetse ko amagarama y’urubanza aherera ku Isanduku ya Leta.

UBUSHINJACYAHA v. HABYARIMANA ET.AL

Page 192

RWANDA LAW

REPORTS

ENGLISH VERSION

Page 194

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TEAM OF EDITORS ............................................................. iii MULTI-INSTITUTIONAL COMMITTEE ............................. iv PREFACE ............................................................................... vi SCOPE OF THE REPORTS ...................................................vii CITATION .............................................................................vii

LIST OF STATUTES AND STATUTORY INSTRUMENTS CONSIDERED .................................................................... viii LIST OF CASES CONSIDERED ............................................ xi SUBJECT INDEX ..................................................................xii KCB BANK UGANDA LTD vs. KIIZA & LOUISE (KL) LTD ................................................................................................. 1 NYAMASWA v. MUKAMUSONI ........................................ 11 RUHIMBAZA v. BANK OF KIGALI LTD ........................... 29 MUKAMUSONI v. MUKAGASANA ET.AL ........................ 53 EQUITY BANK RWANDA LTD v. SEBAHIZI .................... 71 NTIBAJYINAMA v. PROSECUTION .................................. 93 PROSECUTION v. HABYARIMANA ET.AL..................... 122 i

Page 196

TEAM OF EDITORS

LAW REPORTING TEAM

KAGABO U. Stephanie

KAVUTSE M. Claude

KUBWIMANA Jean Claude

MUJABI K. Naphtal

MWIHOREZE Claudine

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 GIRANEZA Clémentine : Judge at Primary Court

HABARUREMA Jean Pierre : Prosecutor at National Level

KALIWABO Charles : President of High Court

Me KAYIHURA Didas : Advocate at Rwanda Bar Association

iv

Page 198

KIBUKA Jean Luc : Judge at Commercial High Court

Lt. col. MADUDU A. Charles : Judge at Military High Court

MUREREREHE Saouda : Judge at High Court

Prof. Dr. NGAGI M. Alphonse : Supreme Court Judge KABIBI Specioza : State Attorney RUKUNDAKUVUGA F. Regis : Inspector General of Courts

UWANTEGE Yvette : Judge at Intermediate Court

v

Page 199

PREFACE Esteemed readers, The Rwandan judiciary is pleased to publish the third volume of Rwanda Report for the year 2018. We reiterate our thanks to you, dear Readers, for regularly providing us with your ideas and showing us the areas of improvement. This helps us to publish a better Law Report, useful to those who face legal challenges in their profession. This volume of Rwanda Law Reports, contains seven (7) cases, consisting offive (5) case on merit; one (1) civil case, one (1) commercial case, one (1) labour case, two (2) penal while the remaining two are procedural ones. We are also pleased to remind you that published cases can also be accessed on the website of the judiciary http://decisia.lexum.com/rlr/kn/nav.do. which facilitates the users to find cases easily and quickly. We continue to encourage all legal practitioners and others who regularly deal with the law in their work to use these Law Reports. Prof. Sam RUGEGE Chief Justice

vi

Page 200

SCOPE OF THE REPORTS These reports cover cases decided by the Supreme Court and the High Court are cited under the heading below:

CITATION The Reports in this volume are cited thus: [2018] 3 RLR

vii

Page 201

LIST OF STATUTES AND STATUTORY

INSTRUMENTS CONSIDERED The constitution of republic of Rwanda of 04/06/2003 as it is amended to date, article 16........................................................................55 article 45........................................................................99 Organic Law N°01/2012/OL of 02/05/2012 instituting the penal code, article 71, 76, 77 and 78................................................99 article45,74,76,78,84,98,99,105,106,140,280and29...124 Law Nº30/2013 of 24/5/2013 relating to the code of criminal procedure, article 39.................................................................99 Law N°45/2011 of 25/11/2011 governing contracts articles 64 and 137......................................................................................74 Law Nº13/2009 of 27/05/2009 regulating labour in Rwanda, article 29, 32, 33, 35 and 57......................................................33 Law Nº15/2004 of 12/06/2004 relating to evidence and its production, article 110..............................................................74 Organic Law N°03/2012/OL of 13/6/2012 determining the organisation, functioning and jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, article 78 and 81(2).......................................................33 article 81, paragraph 2..................................................74 Organic Law Nº51/2008/OL of 09/09/2008 determining the organization, functioning and jurisdiction of courts, article 134 (2)................................................................................................3 Law No21/2012 of 14/06/2012 relating to civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure, viii

Page 202

article 6..........................................................................55 article 118....................................................................124 article 171........................................................................3 article 183 (3)................................................................14 article186 (6).................................................................34 Law No18/2004 of 20/06/2004 relating to civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure, article 6........................55 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 49, 95..............................55 Decree law of 30/07/1888 relating to contracts or conventional obligations, article 33..........................................................................3 article 258......................................................................13 article 258......................................................................33 article 258......................................................................74 article 258....................................................................124

ix

LIST OF STATUTES

Page 203

LIST OF CASES CONSIDERED Beatrice Wambui Kariuki vs Republic [2005] e KLR,Court of appeal, Kenya............................................................................99 Brasseries et Limonaderies du Rwanda (BRALIRWA) Ltd v. Sindikubwabo Cyprien, RS/REV/COM0001/13/CS, rendered by the Supreme Court on 26/02/2016.............................................14 Mukamusoni v. Buyitare, RA0967/13.03/84 rendered on 10 April 1985 by cassation Court of Rwanda................................55 Prosecution v. Batamuliza, RPA0207/12/CS, rendered by the Supreme Court on 17/06/2016..................................................99 Prosecution v. Muhindakazi, RP00090/16/TGI/NGOMA, renderd by the Intermediate Courts of Ngoma.......................................................................................99 Prosecution v. Sezikeye, RPAA038/15/CS rendered by the Supreme Court on 15/09/2015................................................124 Prosecution v. Uwamahoro, RPA0087/12/CS decided by the Supreme Court on 11/03/2016..................................................99 R. vs Lisa Gore (deceased) Court of appeal, England, 2007....99 RCA8689/132 rendered on 29 October 1996 by the Court of appeal of Nyabisindu.................................................................56 RC28.867/98 rendered on 15 December 1998 by the First instance Court of Kigali............................................................56 RC31.549/99 rendered on 16 February 2000 by the First instance Court of Kigali............................................................56 RC28.846/98 rendered on 2 November 1998 by the First Instance Court of Kigali............................................................56 x

Page 204

RC28.691/98 rendered on 22 September 1998 by First Instance Court of Kigali...........................................................................56 RC28691/98 rendered on 22 September 1999 by the First instance Court of Kigali............................................................56 S vs Muhungu HB11/2005, Zimbabwe......................................99 xi

Page 205

SUBJECT INDEX Civil procedure – Application for the case review – New element of evidence – A piece of evidence cannot be considered as new in case it has ever been produced in previous Courts and found without value – If the litigant discovers a document or any piece of evidence, he must instantly produce it before the court. If not, and the case is disposed off, he is the one to bear the consequences, but in case he wants to use it as a new element of evidence, he has to prove that it was impossible to access it during the course of the hearing – Law N°21/2012 of 14/06/2012 relating to the civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure, article 183 (3). NYAMASWA v. MUKAMUSONI...............................53 Constitutional law – The core responsibility of the Government to promote good health – Government’s health promotion indicators – The fact that the Government constructed hospitals, recruited personnel and provided its citizens with affordable social medical scheme known as (mutuelle de santé) indicates that there is a significant achievement towards the promotion to good health by the government – The Constitution of the Republic of Rwanda of 2003 revised in 2015, article 45. NTIBAJYINAMA v. PROSECUTION........................93 Criminal law – Concurrence of the offences – Criminal liability – Derivative criminal liability in the circumstances where the commission of an offence causes another offence – In case the commission of an offence causes another offence, the accused are criminally liable of both those offences even thought the author of the last offence did not inform xii

RWANDA LAW REPORTS

Page 206

others that he/she was about to commit that offence – Organic Law N°01/2012/OL of 02/05/2012 instituting the penal code, article 98 PROSECUTION v. HABYARIMANA ET.AL.........121 Concurrence of the offences – Sentencing – In sentencing of various related offences, the penalties must be in the form of ideal concurrence and the convicted sentenced to the penalty provided for the most severe offence– Organic Law N°01/2012/OL of 02/05/2012 instituting the penal code, article 84 PROSECUTION v. HABYARIMANA ET.AL.........121 Mitigating circumstances – Admission of the offence at appellate level – The fact that the accused admitted the offence on the first and second appeal requesting for pardon and considering the hard life that she went through which depressed her and led her to commit infanticide should be considered as a mitigating circumstances – Organic Law N°01/2012/OL of 02/05/2012 instituting the penal code, article 71, 76, 77and 78. NTIBAJYINAMA v. PROSECUTION........................93 Criminal procedure – Right to legal counsel – Right to legal counsel for those accused of offences punishable by life imprisonment – In the interest of justice and protecting the right to legal counsel as well as the right to due process of law in general, those who are accused of capital offences punishable by life imprisonment who cannot afford a legal counsel, the Government should assign advocates to them or get them other stakeholders who may provide them with advocates. In the meantime, before that is implemented, the Judicial Police and Prosecutors should request that service from Rwanda Bar association xiii

SUBJECT INDEX

Page 207

NTIBAJYINAMA v. PROSECUTION........................93 Family law – Succession – Custom – Right of woman to inherit or to be inherited – The fact that the Rwandan custom would not grant women/girls the right to inherit or to be inherited by their family members has negative and serious impact on the principle of the equality of all persons before the law MUKAMUSONI v. MUKAGASANA ET.AL.............53 Succession – The claims relating to succession which began before the promulgation of the succession law – To resolve the problems relating to succession which began before the promulgation of the law governing it, the jurisprudences which grant the right to succeed or to be succeeded for a woman or a girl should always be applied by the courts, for men and women to have equal right to succession MUKAMUSONI v. MUKAGASANA ET.AL.............53 Labour law – Salary – Bonus and performance allowance – Even though the employer is under no legal obligation to give bonus and performance allowance to workers, but if he decides to give them out, it is binding to him because it becomes one of the components of the worker’s salary RUHIMBAZA v. BANK OF KIGALI LTD................29 Termination of employment contract – Legal entitlements for a dismissed employee – Damages resulting from unfair dismissal – Damages for dismissal due to unfair ground are distinct from the money paid to a dismissed employee as his legal entitlements – Law Nº 13/2009 of 27/05/2009 regulating labour in Rwanda, article 32,33 and 57. RUHIMBAZA v. BANK OF KIGALI LTD................29 xiv

RWANDA LAW REPORTS

Page 208

Law determining the jurisdiction of courts – Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court – Advisory opinion – Advisory opinion of the Supreme Court to the concerned government institutions to review the provisions of the law regarding the offence of infanticide – Law Nº01/2012/OL of 02/05/2012 instituting the penal code does not differentiate the offence of infanticide from the ordinary murder because they are all punished with life imprisonment, it does not also provide for the maximum age of the child killed – The nature of the offence of infanticide, particularly committed by the girls and women who have just delivered, is different from the ordinary murder because it is often committed due to depression, stress and lack of means to raise the child, which depression may cause her mental trauma. Whilst murder is often committed with some motives on the part of the offenders such as, interests in its commission, extreme hatred, racism, and other motives. Due to these reasons, infanticide committed by a parent, who had just given birth should not be considered as a felony which is punishable by life imprisonment, rather the penalty should be proportional, considering the period when the offence was committed and the offender. The Court requests the concerned government institutions to review the provisions of the Law regarding the offence of infanticide; it is definition and its sentencing. NTIBAJYINAMA v. PROSECUTION........................93 Jurisdiction of Rwandan Courts – Contract concluded outside Rwanda – The Rwandan Courts have jurisdiction on the claims relating to contract concluded in foreign country filed by foreigners, when that jurisdiction is xv

SUBJECT INDEX

Page 209

provided for and related to that contract – Organic Law Nº51/2008/OL of 09/09/2008 determining the organization, functioning and jurisdiction of courts, article 134 (2) – The law governing the contract or contractual obligations, article 33 KCB BANK UGANDA LTD vs. KIIZA & LOUISE (KL) LTD..........................................................................1 Law regulating banks – Liability – Negligence – The fact that the bank failed to the obligation of calling the client before withdrawing money from his account and transferring it elsewhere as provided in bank’s internal rules, it is held liable – Law N°45/2011 of 25/11/2011 governing contracts, article 64. EQUITY BANK RWANDA LTD v. SEBAHIZI........71

Page 210

PROCEDURAL CASES

Page 212

CASE RELATING TO CIVIL, COMMERCIAL, LABOUR AND

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE

Page 214

KCB BANK UGANDA LTD vs. KIIZA & LOUISE (KL) LTD [Rwanda SUPREME COURT – RCOMAA0042/16/CS - RCOM00021/2016/SC (Kayitesi R, P.J., Mukamulisa and Mukandamage, J.) January 19, 2018] Law determining the jurisdiction of courts – The Jurisdiction of Rwandan Courts – Contract concluded outside Rwanda – The Rwandan Courts have jurisdiction on the claims relating to contract concluded in foreign country filed by foreigners, when that jurisdiction is provided for and related to that contract – Organic Law Nº51/2008/OL of 09/09/2008 determining the organization, functioning and jurisdiction of courts, article 134 (2) – The law governing the contract or contractual obligations, article 33. Facts: KCB BANK Uganda Ltd concluded a loan contract with KIIZA & Louise (KL) Ltd in Uganda, whereby Kiiza Mulindwa Innoncent and Ndayizeye Andrée Louise were personal guarantee and they also furnished the mortgage situated in Rwanda, and they agreed that the contract will be governed by Ugandan Laws, however they included that the bank can seize any other competent court, later on, the mortgaged house was auctioned by KCB Rwanda Ltd. Kiiza & Louise (KL) Ltd defaulted on the loan contract it had with KCB BANK Uganda Ltd, which led the bank to sue the company and guarantors before Nyarugenge Commercial Court claiming for the payment of the loan, the procedural and counsel fees and also requested for provisionally execution of judgment 1

Page 215

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 2 since the mortgaged house located in Rwanda was auctioned by KCB Rwanda Ltd. One of the guarantors raised a preliminary objection for lack of jurisdiction because according to the loan contract they made, Ugandan Courts have exclusive jurisdiction. With regard to that objection, the seized court declared itself competent on the ground that defendants reside in Rwanda, on the merits of the case, the Court found with merit the claim of KCB Uganda Ltd, it also ordered KIIZA & Louise Ltd with its guarantor to pay KCB Uganda Ltd the remaining balance of the loan after deducting the amount got from the sold mortgage, which will be paid by the receiver. The guarantor appealed before the Commercial High Court arguing that the previous Court disregarded the preliminary objection for lack of jurisdiction which raised and moreover she was not a party to the loan contract which is the gist of KCB Uganda Ltd action. The court held that the claim should not have been admitted due to lack of jurisdiction of the Rwandan Courts; and it declared that Ugandan Courts are the ones with exclusive jurisdiction as provided by the contract and thus awarded damages to the appellant for being dragged into vexatious litigation. KCB Uganda Ltd appealed before the Supreme Court arguing that the Commercial High Court ruled that the Rwandan Courts do not have jurisdiction over its claim disregarding that the owners of the sued company reside in Rwanda and even the mortgage is located in Rwanda, whilst the contract contains non - exclusive jurisdiction clause. In her defense, the guarantor argues that the contract provides for exclusive jurisdiction of the Ugandan Courts, therefore the

Page 216

3 debtor should be sued before the competent Courts, thus she observes that the Rwandan Courts do not have jurisdiction since the parties agreed to be governed by Ugandan laws. Held: The Rwandan Courts have jurisdiction over the claims relating to contract concluded in foreign country filed by foreigners, when that jurisdiction is provided for and related to that contract. Therefore, pursuant to the contract they concluded abroad, KCB BANK Uganda Ltd, a foreign company can sue KIIZA & Louise (KL) Ltd with its guarantors before the Rwandan Courts especially that the mortgage attached to that contract is located in Rwanda. Appeal has merit. The hearing of the case in merits will resume. The court fees are suspended. Statutes and statutory instruments referred to: Organic Law Nº51/2008/OL of 09/09/2008 determining the organization, functioning and jurisdiction of courts, article 134 (2). Law N°21/2012 of 14/06/2012 relating to the civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure, article 171. Decree - Law of 30/07/1888 relating to contracts or conventional obligations, article 33. No case referred to.

KCB BANK UGANDA LTD vs. KIIZA & LOUISE (KL) LTD

Page 217

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 4 Judgment I. BRIEF BACKGROUND OF THE

CASE [1] KCB BANK Uganda Ltd sued Kiiza & Louise (KL) Ltd, Kiiza Mulindwa Innoncent and his spouse Ndayizeye Andrée Louise before Nyarugenge Commercial Court claiming for the payment of the loan they owe it, the procedural and counsel fees and it requested for provisional execution of the judgment. The Counsel for Ndayizeye Andrée Louise raised an objection of lack of jurisdiction on the ground that the contract they concluded with KCB BANK Uganda Ltd, they agreed that it will be governed by Ugandan laws. With regard to this objection, basing on article 121 of the Organic Law Nº51/2008/OL of 09/09/2008 determining the organization, functioning and jurisdiction of courts, the Court declared that it has jurisdiction, on the fact that Kiiza Mulindwa Innoncent and Ndayizeye Andrée Louise reside in Rwanda. [2] On merits of the case, Nyarugenge Commercial Court rendered judgment RCOM1381/14/TC/NYGE on 10/04/2015, and found the claim filed by KCB BANK Uganda Ltd with merit, and ordered Bimenyimana Eric, the receiver to instantly give KCB BANK Uganda Ltd 110,112,570Frw got from the auction of Kiiza Mulindwa Innoncent and Ndayizeye Andrée Louise’s house and also ordered Kiiza & Louise (KL) Ltd, Kiiza Mulindwa Innoncent and Ndayizeye Andrée Louise to pay the debt of 160,945,741Frw minus the amount that the receiver will give it, 500,000Frw for procedural and counsel fees and to reimburse the court fees.

Page 218

5 [3] Ndayizeye Andrée Louise appealed to the Commercial High Court arguing that the previous Court disregarded the objection for lack of jurisdiction she raised, that she was not a party to the contract which is the subject matter of KCB BANK Uganda Ltd’s claim and basing on the contract of sharing mortgage concluded between KCB BANK Uganda Ltd and KCB Rwanda Ltd which has a defect, it decided that the balance of the money got from the auction of the house be given to that bank. That Court rendered the judgment RCOMA0241/15/HCC on 29/04/2016 and decided that the clause 22 of the contract of 10/05/2011, both parties have agreed that it will be governed by Ugandan laws, therefore the claim would not have been admitted by Nyarugenge Commercial Court, because it did not fall into the jurisdiction of Rwandan Courts, it would be rather filed before the Ugandan Courts, it overturned the appealed judgment, cancelled the garnishment of the money got from the auction of Kiiza Mulindwa Innoncent and Ndayizeye Andrée Louise’s house, and ordered KCB BANK Uganda Ltd to pay 1,500,000Frw to Ndayizeye Andrée Louise for damages of being dragged into unnecessary lawsuits and counsel fees and to reimburse 7,500Frw of deposited court fees. [4] KCB BANK Uganda Ltd appealed to the Supreme Court alleging that the Commercial High Court ruled that Rwandan Courts lack jurisdiction to hear the case on its claim by disregarding that the respondents reside in Rwanda and that is where the mortgage located, in addition, they acknowledge the loan, and that it misinterpreted clause 22 of the contract because it allows it to seize any Court. [5] The case was heard in public on 19/12/2017, Counsel Mwine Geoffrey representing KCB BANK Uganda Ltd while KCB BANK UGANDA LTD vs. KIIZA & LOUISE (KL) LTD

Page 219

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 6 Kiiza & Louise Ltd and Kiiza Mulindwa Innoncent were not present although they were legally summoned as a party with unknown domicile, while Ndayizeye Andrée Louise was assisted by Me Kabera Jean Claude. II.ANALYSIS OF LEGAL ISSUES Whether the claim of KCB BANK Uganda Ltd is admissible in Rwandan courts [6] Counsel Mwine Geoffrey, representing KCB BANK Uganda Ltd argues that the claim which KCB BANK Uganda Ltd filed before the court is not related to the loan given to the defendants, rather it was aimed at to get back the money collected from the auction of the mortgage which Kiiza Mulindwa Innoncent and Ndayizeye Andrée Louise deposited with the bank, which was sold by KCB Rwanda Ltd remained that was kept by the receiver. [7] He further argues that the Commercial High Court held that the Rwandan Courts lack jurisdiction over the case, disregarding that the owners of the Company Kiiza & Louise (KL) Ltd are Rwandese residing in Rwanda; that the mortgaged house is located in Rwanda, and also they acknowledge the loan they got from that bank. He therefore argues that the Court disregarded the provision of article 134 (2) and 135 of the Organic Law Nº51/2008/OL of 09/09/2008 determining the organization, functioning and jurisdiction of courts and article 12 of the Law N°14/2010 of 07/05/2010 modifying and complementing Law N°07/2009 of 27/04/2009 relating to companies which provides for national treatment of companies from the member states of East African Community (EAC), this

Page 220

7 implies that the Ugandan law cannot deprive KCB BANK Uganda Ltd the right to sue for its property in Rwanda . [8] Counsel Mwine Geoffrey argues in addition that the fact that the Commercial High Court relied on clause 22 paragraph 1 of the loan contract of 10/5/2011 concluded between KCB BANK Uganda Ltd and KIIZA & Louise (KL) Ltd is groundless because that clause governs banking facilities, rather it should have based on clause 8,9,10 and 11 of the mortgage contract, whereby clause 8 (2) provides for that in case of contradiction between the articles of this contract, those on the mortgage prevail, therefore nowhere that contract deprive of Rwandan Courts from having jurisdiction. [9] Kabera Jean Claude, the counsel for Ndayizeye Andrée Louise argues that clause 22 litera 1 of the contract provides for that contract will be governed by Ugandan laws; in case of dispute the bank will sue the debtor before competent courts. [10] He continues arguing that in examining of this contract, its purpose should be assessed; it is evident that two Ugandan companies concluded a contract, the laws of that country shall apply, it is not reasonable how KCB BANK Uganda Ltd seized Rwandan courts while it declared them incompetent, thus, he realises that the ruling of Nyarugenge Commercial Court that Rwandan courts lack jurisdiction has merit since the parties themselves agreed that the Ugandan laws will be applied. [11] With regard to the Security Agreement, Counsel Kabera Jean Claude argues that it is not dated and that her client was not involved in their conclusion, therefore she is not concerned with it basing on the provisions of article 113 of the Law Nº45/2011 governing the contract. KCB BANK UGANDA LTD vs. KIIZA & LOUISE (KL) LTD

Page 221

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 8

VIEW OF THE COURT [12] Article 33 of the Civil Code Book III which was into force during the conclusion of the contract on 10/05/2011 provides for that “the contract legally made becomes a law between the parties. It may be terminated up on their agreement or up on legal ground. It has to be executed in good faith”. [13] With regard to the jurisdiction of courts in relation to the cases of foreigners, article 134(2) of Organic Law Nº51/2008/OL of 09/09/2008 determining the organization, functioning and jurisdiction of courts provides that “foreigners may be sued in Rwandan Courts by a national or a foreigner in the following circumstances: where the suit involves immovable property situated in Rwanda”, while the article 135 of this law provides that “If all the different circumstances indicated in Article 134 of this Organic Law do not suffice to establish jurisdiction of Rwandan Courts over foreigners, the plaintiff may file a suit in a Rwandan Court where he/she is domiciled or resident or the subject matter is located”. [14] As indicated in the loan contract (Banking facility) of 10/05/2011 concluded between KCB BANK Uganda Ltd and Kiiza & Louise (KL) Ltd, both situated in Uganda, in its clause 22, both parties agreed that this facility letter shall be governed by and construed in all respects in accordance with the laws of Uganda. Nothing in this paragraph shall limit the right of the Bank to take proceedings against the Borrower in any other court of competent jurisdiction, nor shall the taking or proceedings at one or more jurisdictions preclude the taking of

Page 222

9 proceedings in any other jurisdiction, whether concurrently or not.1 [15] The court finds that even though both parties chose to be governed by Ugandan laws in this clause, but they also agreed that the bank is not limited to the Ugandan jurisdiction, that it may also seize other competent jurisdictions; this implies that it can also seize the Rwandan courts if they are competent to hear the case. [16] The court also finds that, in court submissions before Nyarugenge Commercial Court, KCB BANK Uganda Ltd requested the court to declare that the defendants owe it 680,905, 957 Ugandan shillings and 112,000US Dollars, to pay procedural fees and to order for provisional execution of the judgment. It is also evident in paragraph 4, page 3 of the judgment RCOM 138/14/TC/Nyge, its counsel explained that the bank gave a loan to Kiiza & Louise (KL) Ltd, whereby Kiiza Mulindwa Innoncent and Ndayizeye Andrée Louise were personal guarantee and they also furnished the mortgage situated in Rwanda, KCB Rwanda Ltd registered that mortgage and later sold it, then it is claiming for the balance and for the provisional execution of the judgment, therefore pursuant to provisions of law and clause 22 of the contract mentioned above, KCB BANK Uganda Ltd could seize Rwandan courts against Kiiza & Louise (KL) Ltd a foreign company as well as its personal guaranties especially that its claims includes a mortgage auctioned by KCB Rwanda Ltd.

1Clause 22 of the loan contract (Banking facility) of 10/05/2011. KCB BANK UGANDA LTD vs. KIIZA & LOUISE (KL) LTD

Page 223

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 10 [17] Basing on the legal and contract provisions mentioned above and also on the motivations given above, the Court finds its appeal with merit, since the Rwandan courts have jurisdiction over the claim filed by KCB BANK Uganda, therefore the hearing of the case in merits will proceed as provided by article 171 of the Law N°21/2012 of 14/06/2012 relating to the civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure that when the appeal Court overrules the appealed judgment, the Court shall hear the case in substance unless the overruling was done because there were irregularities in lodging the appeal or for lack of jurisdiction. III. DECISION OF THE COURT [18] It decides that the appeal of KCB BANK Uganda Ltd has merit. [19] It decides that the Rwandan courts have jurisdiction over the claim filed by KCB BANK Uganda Ltd against Kiiza& Louise (KL) Ltd, Kiiza Mulindwa Innoncent and Ndayizeye Andrée Louise. [20] The hearing of the case on merits will resume on 27/03/2018. [21] Suspends the court fees.

Page 224

NYAMASWA v. MUKAMUSONI [Rwanda SUPREME COURT – RS/REV/CIV 0001/15/CS (Hatangimbabazi, P.J., Gatete and Nyirandabaruta, J.) April 21, 2017] Civil procedure – Application for the case review – New element of evidence – A piece of evidence cannot be considered as new in case it has ever been produced in previous Courts and found without value – If the litigant discovers a document or any piece of evidence, he must instantly produce it before the court. If not, and the case is disposed off, he is the one to bear the consequences, but in case he wants to use it as a new element of evidence, he has to prove that it was impossible to access it during the course of the hearing – Law N°21/2012 of 14/06/2012 relating to the civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure, article 183 (3). Facts: Mukamusoni filed a claim against Nyamaswa at the Intermediate Court of Gasabo claiming that when she was serving her prison sentence he unlawfully possessed and demolished her properties and constructed new building on them; Rudasingwa and Mugorukeye intervened in this case claiming that they have properties among those in litigation. The Intermediate Court found without merit the voluntary intervention because they sued the wrong party; it further declared that Nyamaswa occupied Mukamusoni’s property when she was in prison and it ordered him to give her compensation for the demolished houses. 11

Page 225

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 12 Nyamaswa appealed to the High Court stating that he paid Zaninka, the daughter of Mukamusoni the value of those assets and he argues that Mukamusoni also was aware of it; the Court overturned the appealed judgment and ordered Mukamusoni to pay court fees. Mukamusoni appealed to the Supreme Court claiming that the High Court relied on inexistent evidence and declare that the sale of the properties by Zaninka was lawfully whilst it was not and thus ruled that the property in litigation belongs to Nyamaswa. The Supreme Court held that Nyamaswa unlawfully occupied the property which is being litigated between his family and Mukamusoni; then it ordered Nyamaswa to compensate Mukamusoni. After obtaining unequivocal elements of evidence which comprise of the minutes of the expropriation and the letter which was written by Kigali city, to prove the injustice contained in the judgment, Nyamaswa applied for the case review on the ground that if the Court had seen those elements of evidence it would have taken a different position and also that the previous Courts declared that the documents which he produced were not original copies because they did not bear the signature of authority, but now the documents he produced were issued by the authority , because it is supported by the letter of Kigali city since the minutes of expropriation is accompanied by the stamped letter of Kigali city. In her defense, Mukamusoni argues that the element of evidence should not be considered as a new evidence because the draft and the original document both were issued on the same day and the only difference is the signatures of the technicians and also

Page 226

13 that this document is not an official one because it does not bear the signature and stamp of Kigali City authorities or that of the officer in charge of planning in Gasabo District, thus nothing proves that the document was issued by the Kigali City authorities; this is the reason he argues that the submitted document had already been produced in the courts before. In conclusion, both parties request for procedural and counsel fees. Held: 1. A piece of evidence cannot be considered as new in case it has ever been produced in previous Court and found without value, therefore it is obvious that the element of evidence which Nyamaswa states that it is new was discussed upon in previous Court and it was found lacking merit because it did not bear the signature of the authority and it is the same that he has produced again as a new element of evidence.

2. If the litigant discovers a document or any piece of evidence, he must instantly produce it before the court. If not, and the case is disposed off, he is the one to bear the consequences, but in case he wants to use it as a new element of evidence, he has to prove that it was impossible to access it during the course of the hearing.

3. Procedural and counsel fees are awarded in the discretion of the Court when what is requested by the parties is excessive. Application for the case review is rejected. The court fees deposited, equal to the cost of this case. Statutes and statutory instruments referred to: Decree law of 30/07/1888 relating to contracts or conventional obligations, article 258. NYAMASWA v. MUKAMUSONI

Page 227

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 14 Law N°21/2012 of 14/06/2012 relating to the civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure, article 183 (3). Cases referred to: Brasseries et Limonaderies du Rwanda (BRALIRWA) Ltd vs Sindikubwabo Cyprien, RS/REV/COM 0001/13/CS, rendered by the Supreme Court on 26/02/2016. Authors Cited: Isabelle Desprès & Laurent Dargent, code de procédure civile, Dalloz, Paris, 2009, p.435. Serge Guinchard, Droit et pratique de la procedure civile, édition 1999, page 1270, Nº6224. Judgment I. BRIEF BACKGROUND OF THE

CASE [1] This case began at the Intermediate Court of Gasabo, Mukamusoni Astérie suing Nyamaswa Ephron claiming that when she was serving her prison sentence he unlawfully possessed and demolished her properties and constructed new building on them; Rudasingwa Emmanuel and Mugorukeye Annociata intervened in this case claiming that they have properties among those in litigation. [2] In the judgment RC0049/07/YGI/GSBO rendered by the Intermediate Court of Gasabo on 18/12/2009, it held that the plot occupied by Musabye Sebera Vincent belongs to Mugorukeye Annociata whereas, that of Rudasingwa Emmanuel

Page 228

15 is occupied by Sentama Gasore; therefore their claim lacks merit because they sued the wrong party (Nyamaswa Ephron). It further decided that Nyamaswa Ephron occupied the property of Mukamusoni Astérie while she was serving her prison sentence; it was not allocated to him by the government as he alleges, that Zaninka, the daughter of Mukamusoni Astérie whom he alleges that she sold the property to him was not given the power of attorney to represent her mother in the sale of the properties, then it ordered him to pay 29,935,545Frw equivalent to the value of her demolished houses. [3] Nyamaswa Ephron appealed to the High Court and in the judgment RCA0058/10/HC/KIG rendered on 10/02/2012 it held that Nyamaswa Ephron paid Zaninka the price of her mother’s properties in 2001, and Mukamusoni was aware of it; it overturned the appealed judgment and ordered Mukamusoni Astérie to pay the court fees worth 67,150Frw. [4] Mukamusoni Astérie was not satisfied with the rulings of the judgment; she appealed before the Supreme Court stating that the judge of the High Court relied on inexistent evidence and held that the property in litigation belongs to Nyamaswa Ephron, he declared that the sale of the properties by Zaninka was lawfully whilst it was not. [5] In the judgment RCAA0022/12/CS rendered on 09/01/2015, the Supreme Court ruled that the property being litigated between the family of Nyamaswa Ephron’s family and Mukamusoni Astérie was unlawfully acquired by former, it overturned the judgment RCA0058/10/HC/KIG rendered by the High Court on 10/02/2012; it ordered Nyamaswa Ephron to give 19,542,300Frw to Mukamusoni Astérie in compensation. NYAMASWA v. MUKAMUSONI

Page 229

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 16 [6] Nyamaswa Ephron applied for review of the judgment rendered by the Supreme Court claiming that since the delivering of the judgment there are unequivocal elements of evidence which prove the injustice contained in the judgment; he proceeds that his claim is based on article 186(3) of Law N°21/2012 of 14/06/2012 relating to the civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure, those evidence are the authentic deed of the expropriation and the letter which was written by Kigali City. [7] The hearing of the case was conducted in public on 14/03/2017, Nyamaswa Ephron represented by Counsel Nsengiyumva Niyondora and Rwihandagaza Richard whereas Mukamusoni Astérie represented by Counsel Ntigurirwa François. II. ANALYSIS OF THE LEGAL ISSUES Whether there are new elements of evidence submitted by Nyamaswa Ephron for the judgment RCAA0022/12/CS to be reviewed. [8] Nyamaswa Ephron states that since the delivering of the judgment there are irrevocable evidence which includes the authentic deed of expropriation and the letter issued by Kigali City in reply to the letter dated 12/03/2015 wrote by his wife Mukeshimana Georgette. [9] Counsel Nsengiyumva Niyondora claims that there are minutes of the expropriation which are linked to a letter of Kigali City. He states that in the judgment which is subject to review, the Court held that the land which Nyamaswa and his family occupy was unlawfully acquired; that there was no

Page 230

17 expropriation at Kimironko aimed at relocating those with ramshackle houses in order to build the houses of Kigali City plan, however on 12/03/2015, Kigali City wrote to him a letter informing him about the expropriation which was supposed to be carried out on 28/04/2001 and it indicates the one who compensated and the one who got compensation, that the Kigali City technicians drafted the minute of the expropriation and signed on it even though Mayor of Kigali city did not. This renders invalid the statements of witnesses that there was no expropriation carried out in Kimironko. [10] Counsel Nsengiyumva Niyondora states that if the Supreme Court found this element of evidence it would have not reached the same decision taken in the judgment which is subject to review, because paragraph 14 and 15 of the judgment rendered by the Intermediate Court contain a copy of minutes for expropriation which is not signed by technicians, that Court declared that there is no original copy, this also invalidate the statement that the evidence had been produced to the Court before, and even later Nyamaswa Ephron got bank statement for the payment he made which is also another new element of evidence. [11] Counsel Rwihandagaza Richard also assisting Nyamaswa Ephron explains that the reason why they did not request for that evidence from Kigali City from the beginning until the pronouncement of the judgment at the Supreme Court, because during the hearing at the Intermediate Court they demonstrated the obstacles which Nyamaswa Ephron uncounted in obtaining that element of evidence; and they had to pray for forced intervention of Kigali City hoping that it will explain on the issue of the expropriation as it is indicated in paragraph 6, NYAMASWA v. MUKAMUSONI

Page 231

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 18 page 2 of the judgment rendered by the Intermediate Court of Gasabo; this implies that even if the evidence was obtained, but it was hard. [12] He further argues that the latest document they submitted was got from the administration, because it was supported by the letter from Kigali City because expropriation minutes were accompanied by a stamped letter of Kigali City. He finds that if the judge had that new evidence, he would have taken a different position. [13] Ntigurirwa François, the counsel for Mukamusoni argues that the new evidence submitted by the appellant do not hold value because its draft was produced before the Intermediate Court of Gasabo (see paragraph 14 of the judgment), the photocopy and the alleged original copy were all issued on the 28/01/2001, this means that they are all drafts, therefore it is not a new element of evidence since that draft was produced in all Courts, what both documents indicate is the amount of money paid and the person who received that payment, the difference is that the first document does not bear the signatures of those paid while the one considered as original bears the signatures of those paid on 21/05/2001, thus it is not a new evidence. [14] Counsel Ntigurirwa further explains that the signed minutes could not be considered as a new evidence and the appellant demonstrates that the Court refused to value it because it was not signed, otherwise what they consider as the final document bears the same date as the draft, what changed are the signatures of the technicians which were added on it, however draft and the final document were issued on the same date. Furthermore, he states that this document is not an official one

Page 232

19 because it does not bear the signature and stamp of Kigali City authorities nor that of the officer in charge of planning in Gasabo District, thus nothing proves that the document was issued by the Kigali City authorities, this is the reason he argues that the submitted document had already been produced in the courts before , he also requests to examine the reason why one document bears signatures of two technicians, while the other one bears none, whilst they were both issued on the same day, he prays the Court to hold that the element of evidence at hand is not new . [15] Concerning the bank statement produced by the adversary as an evidence indicating that Nyamaswa Ephron withdrawn money from the bank, he states that nothing proves that the money withdrawn was meant for the payment of those who were expropriated, and also the date for expropriation is different from the one on which he withdrew the money from the bank, they further argue that even if he paid that money, the court ruled that he must ask the one he paid to reimburse the money because Mukamusoni did not give her the power of attorney.

VIEW OF THE COURT [16] Article 186 (3) of the Law N°21/2012 of 14/06/2012 relating to the civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure, provides the grounds for application for review which include : “…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, whether an element of evidence was in the file but was not noticed by the court or was revealed later”. NYAMASWA v. MUKAMUSONI

Page 233

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 20 [17] The case file demonstrates that there is a letter which Mukeshimana Georgette wrote to Kigali City on 16/02/2015 requesting for the minutes of the expropriation of 28/04/2001. In the letter dated 12/03/2015, Kigali City replied that pursuant to her letter, the minutes of expropriation of Zaninka and Umubyeyi Marie Claire are hereby sent to her. [18] The case file demonstrates that in the judgment RCAA0022/12/CS rendered by the Supreme Court on 09/01/2015 (paragraph 9), Nyamaswa Ephron stated that in 2001 he bought a plot of 18 meters to 35 meters at 350,000Frw from Zaninka which the latter got as the descending partition, then in order for that plot to have the required measurements it was became necessary to add 12 meters taken from Mukamusoni Astérie’s plot, in which there was an old house and he paid 418,000Frw for it. [19] Furthermore, the Case file demonstrates that in judgment RC0049/07/TGI/GSBO rendered on 18/12/2009 by the Intermediate Court of Gasabo (paragraph 12), Rwihandagaza Richard, the counsel for Nyamaswa Ephron by then stated that the authorities were aware when his client acquired that property, he got the necessary documents from the concerned organs after the expropriation. In paragraph 13, he stated that the expropriation is not only conducted for public interest, but also individuals can agree between themselves, in paragraph 15, he explained that the reason why the documents of expropriation do not indicate the date on which it was conducted and signature of authorities, it is because they gave them to him in order to see if his adversary acknowledges them, that the original copy was retained by the authority of Kigali City.

Page 234

21 [20] Concerning the new element of evidence of the minutes of expropriation submitted by Nyamaswa Ephron requesting for review of the case; the Court finds that this document should not be considered as a new evidence because it was submitted before Intermediate Court of Gasabo although it did not bear the signature of the Mayor of Kigali City; it is the same document he produces again at this instance as a new element of evidence and it is obvious that it was discussed upon but it was found lacking merit. [21] Basing on the above motivations, the Court finds that the evidence of the letter that Kigali city wrote to Mukeshimana Georgette, the wife of Nyamaswa on 12/03/2015, in response to the letter dated 16/02/2015, requesting for the minutes of expropriation of 28/04/2001, whereby it sent to her those minutes which was also not signed by the concerned authority, it cannot be considered as a new element of evidence which is provided for by article 186, 3o of the Law N°21/2012 of 14/06/2012 mentioned above and also on given motivations, because those minutes were presented before and that letter alone is no importance without minutes. [22] The Court further finds that even if those minutes are to be considered as not have been presented to Court before, on the ground that it now bear the signature of the technicians, again it cannot be considered as a new element of evidence which can based on to review the judgment RCAA0022/12/CS, because Nyamaswa Ephron who presents it was aware of its existence and did not request for it so that he produced since the hearing of the case in the Intermediate Court to the last instance at the Supreme Court until the judgment became binding. And moreover, he does not prove that it was impossible to obtain NYAMASWA v. MUKAMUSONI

Page 235

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 22 that document which he considers as a new element of evidence so that he could present it before the judgment became binding1. [23] The opinion that the evidence which could have been submitted before the judgment became final not to be considered as a new element of evidence that can lead to review of the case, is also shared by law scholars like Serge GUINCHARD2 whereby he opines that if the litigant discovers a document or any piece of evidence, he must instantly produces it before the court. The failure to do so, and the case is concluded, he is accountable for his own action, and in that case the review of the case is impossible. He further explains that even if that evidence is in the criminal file, which is still pending, whereby it cannot be available, the party in need of it must request the court to stay the hearing. [24] This concurs with the legal position established by this Court in the judgments it rendered, such as in the judgment RS/REV/COM 0001/13/CS whereby it held that “... the case

1 Isabelle Desprès et Laurent Dargent, code de procédure civile, Dalloz, Paris, 2009,P.435, Le demandeur sans faute de sa part, doit avoir été dans l’impossibilité de faire valoir la cause, avant que la décision ait acquis force de chose jugée… Et c’est au demandeur qu’il appartient de faire la preuve de cette impossibilité 2 Serge GUINCHARD, DROIT ET PRATIQUE DE LA PROCEDURE CIVILE, édition 1999, page 1270, Nº6224. “Si le plaideur découvre la pièce avant la décision, il doit en faire état sans délai. A défaut, c’est à raison de sa propre faute qu’il n’a pu en être tenu compte, et le recours en révision est fermé. S’il s’agit d’une pièce d’un dossier pénal, dont l’existence est connu, mais insusceptible d’être versé déjà aux débats parce que l’instruction n’est pas finie, il importe de demander à la juridiction de surseoir”.

Page 236

23 commenced at the Court of first instance of Kigali in 2000, in 2009 it was in Commercial High Court and it was rendered at the last instance by the Supreme Court in 2010, during those 10 years, BRALIRWA Ltd does not demonstrate the obstacle which prevented it to acquire the elements of evidence which it relies its application, or demonstrates that it tried and failed... ”. Whether Mukamusoni Astérie would be granted damages which she requests in this case. [25] Ntigurirwa, Counsel for Mukamusoni Astérie argues that Nyamaswa has to give his client damages worth 4,500,000Frw on the basis of article 258 of Decree law of 30 July 1888 civil code book III, which includes 2,000,000Frw of the counsel fees; 2,000,000Frw of the moral damages resulting from dragging her into lawsuits and 500,000Frw of the procedural fees. [26] Counsel for Nyamaswa Ephron states that those damages are unjustifiable instead; he is the one who deserves them.

VIEW OF THE COURT [27] The Court finds the fact that Nyamaswa Ephron applied for the review of the case, this led Mukamusoni Astérie to incur expenses because it became necessary to follow up the case and hiring a counsel; therefore basing on article 258 mentioned above, he must give her 700,000Frw of procedural and counsel fees, awarded in the discretion of the Court since what she requests is excessive.

NYAMASWA v. MUKAMUSONI

Page 237

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 24 III. DECISION OF THE COURT [28] Rejects the application of the case review filed by Nyamaswa Ephron. [29] Orders Nyamaswa Ephron to pay Mukamusoni Astérie 700,000Frw of the procedural and counsel fees. [30] Orders that 100,000Frw which Nyamaswa Ephron deposited as court fees are equal to the cost of this case.

Page 238

CASES IN MERITS

Page 240

ADMINISTRATIVE AND LABOR

CASES

Page 242

RUHIMBAZA v. BANK OF KIGALI LTD [Rwanda SUPREME COURT – RS/INJUST/RSOC00001/2017/SC (Kayitesi Z., P.J., Mugenzi, Kanyange, Nyirandabaruta and Ngagi, J.) 24 November 2017] Labour law – Termination of employment contract – Legal entitlements for a dismissed employee – Damages resulting from unfair dismissal – Damages for dismissal due to unfair ground are distinct from the money paid to a dismissed employee as his legal entitlements – Law Nº13/2009 of 27/05/2009 regulating labour in Rwanda, article 32,33 and 57. Labour law – Salary – Bonus and performance allowance – Even though the employer is under no legal obligation to give bonus and performance allowance to workers, but if he decides to give them out, it is binding to him because it becomes one of components of the worker’s salary. Facts: Ruhimbaza was dismissed by his employer, the Bank of Kigali on allegation that he did not have the requirements for the post he had as required by the new structure approved by the board of Directors of Bank. He sued to the Intermediate Court of Nyarugenge claiming for various damages resulting from unfair dismissal. That court held that he was unfairly dismissed and awarded him various damages which include damages for unfair dismissal, notice allowance, leave allowance, dismissal compensation, damages resulting from not being given a complete employment certificate, performance allowance, bonus, procedural and counsel fees. 29

Page 243

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 30 The employer appealed at the High Court, which also reversed the appealed judgment only on the issue regarding the amount of damages awarded to the plaintiff. Again the employer appealed to the Supreme Court on the same grounds as those he submitted to the High Court, it also held that the respondent was unfairly dismissed and thus it awarded him damages equivalent to his nine months salary, but then again it ordered that the money given to him by his employer on his dismissal, inclusive of notice allowance, dismissal compensation and leave allowance to be deducted from those damages awarded for unfair dismissal. It also ordered the employer to give him damages resulting from not being given a complete employment certificate, procedural and counsel fees. The respondent was not contented with the rulings of the Supreme Court, thus he recoursed to the Office of the Ombudsman requesting for review of that judgment due to injustice because it ordered that the money he was given at his dismissal which include the notice allowance, dismissal compensation and leave allowance be deducted from the damages he was awarded for unfair dismissal while they are not related and moreover he was not given bonus and performance allowance. That office requested for the review of that judgment and after scrutinising it, the Chief Justice ordered it to be reviewed.

The Court first examined the preliminary objection of inadmissibility, whereby the employer argues that there was a procedural flaw because what happened in the rendering of the judgment was not injustice rather it was a confusion of the damages awarded for unfair dismissal with the money he was given as terminal benefits, basing on that confusion, he had the right to apply for review of the case, thus it should not have

Page 244

31 been subjected to review on the grounds of injustice provided by article 81 of the Organic Law N°03/2012/OL of 13/06/2012 determining organisation, functioning and jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. Regarding the objection raised, the applicant argues that article 186 of the Law No21/2012 of 14/06/2012 relating to review the case it applies when, during the adjudication of the case, there were errors committed based on confusion about the situation of facts or basing on a non existing law, he argues that this is not the issue in this case because the Court did not confuse the facts, instead after analysing and explaining the facts, it found that he was unfairly dismissed and awarded him damages, the issue came up when it ordered that the money he was given as terminal benefits be deducted from those damages, and that is the injustice he suffered. During the hearing of the case in merit, the applicant argued that the judgment rendered by the Supreme Court contains injustice because it ordered that the money he was given as his legal entitlement be deducted from the damages awarded to him for unfair dismissal. He further submitted that the Court held that he is not entitled to the performance allowance on the excuse that he was not appraised and also not given the bonus allowance on the pretext that he was dismissed before his employer’s annual benefits was determined, he

finds that if he was not dismissed he would have been appraised and also he contributed to the employer’s profits for ten months he worked to. He concludes by requesting to be awarded procedural and counsel fees. In its defence, the respondent argues that the judgment was not vitiated with injustice because the Court by ordering that the payments he got when he was dismissed be deducted from the damages resulting from unfair dismissal that is how the Court RUHIMBAZA v. BANK OF KIGALI LTD

Page 245

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 32 perceived it and not being contented with the rulings of the case does not mean injustice. On the issue of performance allowance and bonus allowance, he states that pursuant to the Bank of Kigali’s regulations, performance allowance are paid after the end of the year and the employer is under no obligation to give those allowances and that the bonus allowance is paid in March basing on the annual benefits of the Bank after approval from the Board of Directors which fixes the amount and it is under no obligation to give that allowance. Regarding the counsel and procedural fees, the bank argues that its the one to be awarded damages because the applicant was awarded damages in the previous judgments but he has unrelentingly kept dragging the Bank in frivolous lawsuits. Held: 1. The Court’s decision of deducting the payments received by an employee on his dismissal from the damages he was awarded due to unfair dismissal should not be interpreted as confusing the facts, because the facts were construed by the Court and it based on those facts to decide that he was unfairly dismissed.

2. The damages resulting from unfair dismissal an employee are based on the moral prejudice caused by that dismissal and they are distinct from other payments a worker is given as his legal entitlements when the employment contract is terminated. Therefore, notice allowance, dismissal compensation and leave allowance should not be deducted from the damages awarded for unfair dismissal.

3. The employer cannot refuse to give bonus and performance allowance to an employee on the pretext that, the employee was not appraised or the annual benefits of the company had not yet been determined when the employee was dismissed on unfair

Page 246

33 ground before being appraised or the annual benefits is determined. Therefore, the grounds resulting from the effects of dismissal for unfair ground should not be based on to not give him the bonus and performance allowance if he had stayed on the job.

4. Even though the employer is under no legal obligation to give bonus and performance allowance to workers, but if he decides to give them out, it is binding to him because it becomes one of components of the worker’s salary.

5. Any act of person, which causes damage to another obliges the person by whose fault it happened to be held liable. Therefore, the applicant is awarded counsel and procedural fees, decided in the court’s discretion because what he claims for is excessive. The prelinary objection of inadmissibility of the application for review of the judgment due to injustice is overruled; The application for review of the judgment due to injustice has merit; Court fees born by the respondent. Statutes and statutory instruments referred to: Organic Law N°03/2012/OL of 13/6/2012 determining the organisation, functioning and jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, article 78 and 81(2). Law Nº13/2009 of 27/05/2009 regulating labour in Rwanda, article 29, 32, 33, 35 and 57. Decree - Law of 30/07/1888 relating to contracts or conventional obligations, article 258. RUHIMBAZA v. BANK OF KIGALI LTD

Page 247

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 34 Law N°21/2012 of 14/06/2012 relating to civil, commercial, social and administrative procedure, article186 (6). No case law referred to. Authors cited: A. Cœuret, B. Gauriau et M. Miné, Droit du travail, Edition Dalloz, 2006, pp. 386-389. Judgment I. BRIEF BACKGROUND OF THE

CASE [1] Ruhimbaza Modeste was an employee of Bank of Kigali from 20/03/1995 to 23/10/2009 when he was dismissed on the ground that he did not fulfill the requirements of the new structure as approved by the board of Directors subsequent to the organizational restructuring of Bank of Kigali. [2] After receiving the dismissal letter, he sued the Bank at the Intermediate Court of Nyarugenge, and consequently in the Judgment RSOC0243/10/TGI/NYE rendered on 21/10/2011, the Court held that Ruhimbaza was unfairly dismissed and therefore ordered Bank of Kigali to pay him 8,252,102Frw comprising of damages for unfair dismissal, notice allowance, leave compensative indemnity, dismissal compensation, damages for being given incomplete employment certificate, appraisal allowance, performance bonus, procedural and counsel fees.

Page 248

35 [3] The Bank of Kigali appealed to the High Court, and in the Judgment RSOCA0112/11/HC/KIG rendered on 18/04/2012, that Court held that the appeal of Bank of Kigali lacks merit, and the appealed judgment was reversed only on the grounds relating to the damages to be paid to Ruhimbaza Modeste. [4] The Bank of Kigali appealed to the Supreme Court and in the Judgment RSOCAA0011/11/CS rendered on 22/02/2013, it held that Ruhimbaza Modeste was unfairly dismissed, and basing on article 33 par. 3 of the Law No13/2009 of 27/05/2009 regulating labour in Rwanda, it awarded him damages totaling to 3,934,134Frw equivalent to his nine months salaries, but it ordered to deduct 3,139,359Frw given by Bank of Kigali during his dismissal, comprising of notice allowance, dismissal compensation and leave allowance from those damages and it also ordered to pay Ruhimbaza Modeste 1,311,378Frw and 1,400,000Frw for being given an incomplete employment certificate and for procedural and counsel fees respectively. [5] Ruhimbaza Modeste was not satisfied with the rulings and submitted the judgment RSOCAA0011/11/CS rendered by the Supreme Court, to the Office of Ombudsman requesting for the review due to injustice, claiming that he was prejudiced by the court’s decision that the payments for notice, dismissal compensation and leave allowance paid to him when he was dismissed be deducted from the damages awarded to him by the court whilst they are not linked also that he was not awarded appraisal allowance, performance bonus which the Bank of Kigali refused to pay him and moreover he used to get those allowances. RUHIMBAZA v. BANK OF KIGALI LTD

Page 249

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 36 [6] After analyzing his contention, the Office of Ombudsman wrote to the Chief Justice requesting for review of judgment RSOCAA0011/11/CS, after scrutinizing the request, in his order No010/2017 of 23/01/2017 the Chief Justice decided that it should be reviewed. [7] The case was heard on 17/10/2017, Ruhimbaza Modeste assisted by Counsel Munyeshema Napoléon, while the Bank of Kigali Ltd was represented by Counsel Rutembesa Phocas. II. ANALYSIS OF THE LEGAL ISSUES [8] Before examining the ground for Ruhimbaza Modeste’s application for review of Judgment RSOCAA0011/11/CS rendered by the Supreme Court on 22/02/2013 due to injustice, The Court will first examine the preliminary objection raised by Bank of Kigali of inadmissibility of Ruhimbaza Modeste’s claim due to procedural impropriety.

1. Wether the claim of Ruhimbaza Modeste is inadmissible. [9] The Counsel for Bank of Kigali Ltd, Rutembesa Phocas states that the claim for the review of judgment RSOCAA0011/11/CS due to injustice lodged by Ruhimbaza Modeste should not be admitted because of the procedural impropriety. He argues that what occurred in ruling of judgment RSOCAA0011/11/CS was not injustice rather it was confusion of the damages awarded for unfair dismissal and the money given to Ruhimbaza Modeste as terminal benefits because of this issue he was entitled to apply for review of the judgment basing on article 186 (6) of the Law N°21/2012 of 14/06/2012 relating to the civil, commercial, labour and administrative

Page 250

37 procedure, which provides that if, during the hearing, there were errors committed based on confusion about the situation of facts or basing on a non existing law, thus his claim should not be based on the procedure of application for the review of the judgment due to injustice provided by article 78 of the Organic Law N°03/2012/OL of 13/06/2012 determining the organization, functioning and jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. [10] He further argues that this remedy used by Ruhimbaza Modeste contravenes article 81 par 2 of the Organic Law N°03/2012/OL of 13/06/2012 determining the organization, functioning and jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, which provides that, the party entitled to other ordinary and extraordinary procedures to appeal who did not exercise this right within the time limit prescribed by law shall not be entitled to apply for review of a decision of the case he/she lost, therefore his claim should not be admitted. [11] The Counsel for Ruhimbaza Modeste, Munyeshema Napoléon argues that article 186 (6) of the Law N°21/2012 of 14/06/2012 mentioned above, is clear and applies when during the hearing, there were errors of confusing situation of facts which causes the court to make a wrong decision, which is not the case in the Judgment RSOCAA0011/11/CS because the Court did not confuse the facts instead after analysing and explaining the facts for Ruhimbaza

Modeste dismissal, the Court found that he was unfairly dismissed and it awarded him damages, the issue cropped up, when it ordered to deduct from those damages the terminal benefits he was given, and that is the prejudice he suffered. He adds on that the arguments of Advocate Rutembesa would be valid if the confusion was contained in the facts but in the Judgment RSOCAA0011/11/CS RUHIMBAZA v. BANK OF KIGALI LTD

Page 251

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 38 it is contained in the decision of the Court, therefore the claim of Ruhimbaza Modeste should be admitted.

OPINION OF THE COURT [12] Article 81(2) of the Organic Law N°03/2012/OL of 13/06/2012 determining the organization, functioning and jurisdiction of the Supreme Court provides that the review of a final decision due to injustice shall only be applied for on any of the following grounds:...[ when there are provisions and irrefutable evidence that the judge ignored in rendering the judgment…]”. [13] The Court finds that in Judgment RSOCAA0011/11/CS specifically in paragraphs. 15, 16 and 17, the Court deeply analyzed how Ruhimbaza Modeste was dismissed by his employer, the Bank of Kigali Ltd, basing on article 29 of the Law N°13/2009 of 27/05/2009 regulating labour in Rwanda1, it held that he was unfairly dismissed, because he was dismissed for unfair reason and that is why it awarded him the corresponding damages amounting to 3,934,134Frw. [14] This Court finds the fact that the previous court ordered to deduct the payments for notice, dismissal compensation and leave allowance from the damages awarded to Ruhimbaza Modeste for unfair dismissal, should not be considered as confusing the facts as provided by article 186(6) of the aforementioned Law N°21/2012 of 14/06/2012, because the

1 Article 29 of the Law N°13/2009 of 27/05/2009 regulating labour in Rwanda” An open-ended contract may always be terminated by the will of either of the parties but for legitimate motives. This termination is subject to a prior notice given by the party that takes initiative of termination.”

Page 252

39 facts were construed by the Court and on which it based it’s ruling that he was unfairly dismissed, instead what happened was the deduction from the damages awarded for unfair dismissal, the payments for notice allowance, dismissal compensation and leave allowance which are Ruhimbaza Modeste’s legal entitlement bestowed among others by the Labour Law, especially articles 32 paragraph two2, 35 paragraph one3 and 57 paragraph one4. [15] The Court therefore finds that in the case RSOCAA0011/11/CS there was no confusion of facts which is provided by article 186(6) of the Law N°21/2012 of 14/06/2012 mentioned above as alleged by the Counsel for Bank of Kigali Ltd, instead as explained in the previous paragraph, there was non-complience of some provisions of the Labour Law, for those reasons, Ruhimbaza Modeste had the right to base on article 78 of the Organic Law N°03/2012/OL of 13/06/2012 determining the organization, functioning and jurisdiction of the Supreme Court and request his case to be reviewed due to injustice.

2 Article 32 paragraph 2 provides that a termination of contract may take place without notice in the case of gross negligence by one of the parties. In that case, gross negligence is notified to the other party within forty-eight (48) hours 3 Article 35 paragraph 1 provides that “the dismissal or an employment contract termination for a worker who has completed a period of at least twelve (12) consecutive months of work entails the payment to the latter by the employer of dismissal benefits”

4 Article 57 paragraph 1 provides that The leave is granted to the worker for the purpose of allowing him/her to rest; the grant of a compensatory allowance in replacement of a leave is formally prohibited in all other cases. RUHIMBAZA v. BANK OF KIGALI LTD

Page 253

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 40 [16] Basing on the motivations above and on article 81(2) of the Organic Law N°03/2012/OL of 13/06/2012 determining the organization, functioning and jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, the Court finds that the claim of Ruhimbaza Modeste should be admitted.

2. Determining the amount of damages related to unfair dismissal to be awarded to Ruhimbaza Modeste a. Damages resulting from unfair dismissal. [17] Counsel Munyeshema Napoléon assisting Ruhimbaza Modeste, argues that there was injustice towards his client in the Judgment RSOCAA0011/11/CS when the Supreme Court held that the payments for notice allowance, dismissal compensation and leave allowance all amounting to 3,139,359Frw, which was paid to Ruhimbaza Modeste when dismissed as his entitlement to be deducted from the damages amounting to 3,934,134Frw it awarded him for unfair dismissal, hence the Court disregarded article 33 of the Law regulating labour in Rwanda and the evidence of terminal benefits which he produced before the court, he goes on to state that those payments should not have been confused with the damages for unfair dismissal because when the Bank of Kigali dismissed him and even during the hearings it never acknowledged that it dismissed him unfairly, that justifies the fact that the motivations of the Supreme Court in the Judgment RSOCAA0011/11/CS which is subject to review due to injustice were misguided. [18] He concludes by requesting that the errors committed by the Supreme Court in rendering the judgment RSOCAA0011/11/CS be rectified so that his client can get all amount of damages he was awarded for unfair dismissal, and

Page 254

41 even that is how it was held in other judgments of his former workmates who were dismissed together with him, which include judgment RSOCAA0013/12/CS Mukamusonera Venantie v Bank of Kigali rendered on 31/12/2013, judgment RSOCAA0017/12/CS Cyuma Yvonne v Bank of Kigali rendered on 14/06/2013, judgment RSOCAA0021/12/CS Nyirinkindi Jean Marie Vianney v Bank of Kigali rendered on 06/12/2013. [19] Counsel Rutembesa Phocas representing Bank of Kigali Ltd argues that there is no injustice in the judgment RSOCAA0011/11/CS, because the court by ordering that Ruhimbaza be awarded damages for unfair dismissal and deduct the payments he was given when he was dismissed, that is how the court perceived it and not being contented with the rulings of the case does not mean injustice.

THE OPINION OF THE COURT [20] Article 33 of the Law N°13/2009 of 27/05/2009 regulating labour in Rwanda provides that any unlawful termination of contract may result in damages. Damages paid to the unlawfully dismissed worker cannot go below his/her three months salary but they cannot exceed six (6) month salary. This does preclude the payment of indemnities and other benefits to which the worker is entitled. Where the worker has worked for the employer for a period which is longer than ten (10) years, damages shall not go beyond the salary of nine (9) months. [21] The Court finds that in the judgment RSOCAA0011/11/CS which is applied for review, in its paragraph 15,16 and 17 it demonstrates that after analyzing the RUHIMBAZA v. BANK OF KIGALI LTD

Page 255

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 42 conditions in which Ruhimbaza Modeste was dismissed, the Supreme Court found that he was dismissed due to unfair reasons and basing on article 33 paragraph (3) of the Law N°13/2009 of 27/05/2009 mentioned above, it awarded him damages equivalent to his gross salary of 9 months because his working experience was more than ten years (10), those damages were 3,934,134Frw in total as it was held by the Intermediate Court of Nyarugenge and also upheld by the High Court. [22] The Court also finds that in paragraph 33 and 37 of the Judgment RSOCAA0011/11/CS together with the document titled indémnité de depart which was received by Ruhimbaza Modeste on 25/11/2009 which is in the case file, indicates that he was given payments for notice allowance equivalent to 337,126Frw as provided by article 32, paragraph 1 of the aforementioned law, leave allowance equivalent to 79,477Frw provided by article 57, paragraph 2 of that law and dismissal compensation of his six month salary also provided by article 35 paragraph 1 equivalent to 2,622,755Frw, all totaling to 3,139,359Frw. [23] The Court finds that damages awarded in case of dismissing an employee for unfair reasons are based on article 33 of the Law N°13/2009 of 27/05/2009 mentioned above, those damages are awarded as a relief to the moral prejudice caused by that dismissal, thus they must be distinguished from other payments the employee gets as his legal entitlement when his employment is terminated. The difference between the payments given to an employee when his employment contract is ended and the damages in case there is a fault committed by the employer for dismissing him for unfair reasons, it is also

Page 256

43 emphasized by the legal scholars, whereby they opine that “When the notice period is over, each one remains with his/her rights and is obliged to perform his obligations even though the employee can be exempted by the employer. In that case, an employee is entitled to compensatory indemnities that are not identical with the dismissal damages nor with the moral damages.5 And that when an employee is dismissed before getting his annual leave of which he is entitled to, he has to get monetary compensation for it, which is different from dismissal damages because it is regarded as salary.6 [24] The Court finds that Ruhimbaza Modeste was entitled to 3,139,359Frw given by Bank of Kigali to him as terminal benefits when dismissing him, this is in accordance with articles 32 paragraph 2; 35 paragraph 1 and 57 paragraph 2, of the Law N°13/2009 of 27/05/2009 mentioned above and even article 33 paragraph 2 of that law provides that “This does preclude the payment of indemnities and other benefits to which the worker is entitled, for those reasons those payments were not supposed to be deducted from the damages originating from the fault of being dismissed unfairly”.

5 Alain Cœuret, Bernard Gauriau, Michel Miné, Droit du travail, Edition Dalloz, 2006, p. 386-387: […. Lorsque le préavis est exécuté, chacun conserve la maîtrise de ses droits ou pouvoir, chacun demeure tenu d’exécuter ses obligations…..Mais le salarié peut aussi en être dispensé par l’employeur. Dans cette hypothèse, il a droit à une indemnité compensatrice ne se confondant pas ni avec l’indemnité de licenciement….. ni avec la réparation…. ] 6 Idem, p. 388-389 : ……Lorsque le contrat de travail est résilié avant que le salarié ait pu bénéficier de la totalité du congé auquel il avait droit, il doit recevoir pour la fraction de congé dont il n’a pas bénéficié, une indemnité compensatrice……à la différence de l’indemnité de licenciement, cette indemnité a une nature salariale…] RUHIMBAZA v. BANK OF KIGALI LTD

Page 257

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 44 [25] In accordance with the motivations and the legal provisions given above, the Court therefore finds that the 3,139,359Frw given to Ruhimbaza Modeste when he was dismissed should not have been deducted from the 3,934,134Frw of damages awarded in judgment RSOCAA0011/11/CS resulting from the fault of dismissing him for unfair reasons, because that amount deducted was given to him as his benefits which he is legally entitled to. Thus, he should have been given 3,934,134Frw in their entirety. b. The issue relating to appraisal allowance and performance allowance. [26] Counsel Munyeshema Napoléon states that in the judgment RSOCAA0011/11/CS, the Supreme Court held that Ruhimbaza Modeste is not entitled to performance allowance basing on the ground that he was not appraised, nor the bonus on the ground that he was dismissed before the establishment of balance sheet which determines the annual profit of Bank of Kigali Ltd, he finds that if he was not dismissed he would have been appraised and within that period of ten months he worked in that year for that bank he contributed to its profit, therefore he finds no reason to deprive him from those allowances he is entitled to for that period. [27] He concludes his case by praying to the Court that his client be given bonus of 437,126ܨݎݓ ݔ10 12 = 364,272Frw and performance allowance of 437,126ܨݎݓ ݔ10 12 = 364,272Frw, he argues that after his case, there are judgments of his former workmates rendered by the Supreme Court who had similar issue in which the court held that they should be given that bonus and performance allowance computed on the period they

Page 258

45 had worked, those judgments include RSOCAA0013/12/CS Mukamusonera Venantie v Bank of Kigali rendered on 31/12/2013 and RSOCAA0017/12/CS Cyuma Yvonne v Bank of Kigali rendered on 14/06/2013, the fact that for him, he was not given those allowances is injustice which contained in judgment RSOCAA0011/11/CS and that is why he requests for the review to get relief. [28] Counsel Rutembesa Phocas, representing Bank of Kigali Ltd, states that the judgment RSOCAA0011/11/CS which is requested to be reviewed due to injustice in its paragraph 45, 46 and 47, the Court demonstrated the ground why Ruhimbaza Modeste was not awarded those allowances, which are based on article 76 of the Bank of Kigali’s regulations which provides that a performance allowance may be given to the worker at the end of the year. Nevertheless, the employer is under no obligation to give bonus7, and also article 77 of those regulations which stipulate that bonus is given out in march basing on the annual benefits of the Bank after approval from the Board of Directors which fixes the amount and the date of payment8 [29] Regarding the judgments rendered by the Supreme Court which granted bonus and performance allowances, he argues that they should not be referred to, they were rendered after the

7 A bonus may be given to the Worker at the end of the Year. Nevertheless, the Employer is under no obligation to give bonus. The bonus is calculated on the net salary at 31st December and evaluation points obtained by the Worker. 8 The giving of this allowance comes from the decision of the Board of Directors on the proposition of the Management Committee which fixes the amount and the date of payment. The Employer is under non legal obligation to give this appraisal allowance » RUHIMBAZA v. BANK OF KIGALI LTD

Page 259

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 46 judgment of Ruhimbaza Modeste’s case, and each quorum of judges adjudicate basing on its perception, and that is why there are other related judgments rendered by the Supreme Court such as judgment RSOCAA0010/12/CS, Mitimituje Gaëtan v Bank of Kigali, rendered on 13/06/2014, and RSOCAA0003/13/CS, Kanyandekwe Segatabazi Cisco v Bank of Kigali rendered on 30/10/2015 which did not grant bonus and performance allowances, therefore the statements of Counsel Munyeshema Napoléon that the Court can refer on the other decided cases they should not be considered, because they did not take the same position in all of them.

THE OPINION OF THE COURT [30] The Court finds that paragraphs 45-47 of the judgment RSOCAA0011/11/CS which is requested to be reviewed, Ruhimbaza Modeste was not given performance allowance because he was not appraised as stipulated by article 76 of the regulations of Bank of Kigali Ltd, which provides that performance allowance /bonus is given to a worker basing on the evaluation points obtained by the worker which also determines the performance allowance he has to get. It also indicates that he was not given bonus pursuant to article 77 of those regulations which provides that it is given basing on the annual benefits and Ruhimbaza Modeste couldn’t get it before the computation of those benefits because he was dismissed before the end of the year. [31] The Court finds that the appraisal of the worker is based on his performance and his discipline manifested within the year in his duties and in the RSOCAA0011/11/CS, the Court indicated that Ruhimbaza Modeste was dismissed due to unfair

Page 260

47 reason before the end of that year, it is obvious that he was not able to complete that year at work because of his employer’s fault of dismissing him for unfair reason, because if he was not dismissed he would have continued working and also be appraised at the end of the year like other workers who retained their posts. [32] The Court finds that because he was dismissed before the end of the year it doesn’t invalidate his work for those ten months he had worked especially when the Bank did not prove to the Court that he wouldn’t have got the required result to performance allowance apart from alleging that he did not fulfill the requirements for that post. [33] On the issue regarding the bonus, the Court finds that indeed it is given out after the end of the year basing on the annual benefits, however the Bank of Kigali does not demonstrate that it did not make profit after the dismissal of Ruhimbaza Modeste before the end of the year, this implies that he contributed to it for those ten months he worked. [34] The Court also finds the allegations that pursuant to clause 76 and 77 of the Bank of Kigali Ltd’s regulations that the employer is under no legal obligation to give those allowances do not stand, because it would have been right if for whatsoever reason the bank could demonstrate that even the other workers who were remained did not also get it, therefore if they decided to give it out, it had to do it to all workers who contributed to its benefits. This was also the position of the court of cassation of France in the case relating to the bonus for productivity whereby it held that even though the employer is under no legal RUHIMBAZA v. BANK OF KIGALI LTD

Page 261

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 48 obligation to give it to workers, but if he decides to give it out it is binding to him because it becomes part of workers salary.9 [35] The Court finds therefore that, since the Court held that Ruhimbaza was unfairly dismissed and this fault prevent him to continue the work up to the end of the year so that he can be appraised and the annual result of the Bank be established all these are result of dismissal due to unfair reasons, and should not be based on to deny him the bonus and performance allowance he was supposed to get if he stayed on work, therefore he has to get them as stipulated by article 76 and 77 of the Bank of Kigali’s regulations. Basing on the ration of the period of ten month he had worked and on the monthly average salary of 437,126Frw which was established in the judgment RSOCAA0011/11/CS requested for review, he must be paid bonus of 437,126ܨݎݓ ݔ10 12 = 364,272Frw and performance allowance of 437,126ܨݎݓ ݔ10 12 = 364,272Frw, all amounting to 728,544Frw. c. Whether damages should be awarded in this case [36] Counsel Munyeshema Napoléon, basing on article 258 of the Decree - Law of 30/07/1888 relating to the contracts or convention obligations, requests the Court to award Ruhimbaza Modeste counsel fees of 1,000,000Frw and 500,000Frw for the procedural fees because he hired the services of an advocate.

9 Cour de Cassation, Chambre Sociale, 5 Juin 1996: [….prime de productivité…lorsqu’elle est payée en exécution d’un engagement unilatéral de l’Employeur, une prime constitue un élément du salaire et est obligatoire pour l’employeur, dans les conditions fixées par cet engagement, peu importe son caractère variable].

Page 262

49 [37] Counsel Rutembesa Phocas, representing Bank of Kigali argues that the damages requested by Ruhimbaza Modeste should not be awarded because he is the one starting those unnecessary lawsuits. He argues that he was awarded damages in the previous judgments but he has continued to drag Bank of Kigali Ltd in lawsuits which required it to hire lawyers, hence its Bank of Kigali which should be awarded those damages. For that purpose he requests 1,000,000Frw of the procedural fees and 1,000,000Frw of the counsel fees.

THE OPINION OF THE COURT [38] Decree - Law of 30/07/1888 relating to the contracts or convention obligations, article 258, provides that any act of person, which causes damage to another obliges the person by whose fault it happened to repair it. [39] The Court finds that after Ruhimbaza Modeste was dismissed for unfair reasons, resorted to the courts of laws and was assisted by the advocate, thus he incurred expenses, therefore he deserves those damages, but since the amount he requests is excessive, in the discretion of the court it awards 500,000Frw of the counsel fees and 300,000Frw of the procedural fees, all amounting to 800,000Frw. [40] Regarding the damages requested by the Bank of Kigali Ltd, the court finds that they should not be awarded because it has lost the case.

RUHIMBAZA v. BANK OF KIGALI LTD

Page 263

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 50 III. THE DECISION OF THE COURT [41] Decides that the preliminary objection of inadmissibility of Ruhimbaza Modeste’s application for the review of the judgment RSOCAA0011/11/CS raised by the Bank of Kigali Ltd lacks merit; [42] Decides that 3,139,359Frw he was given when he was dismissed should not be deducted from the 3,934,134Frw of the damages resulting from unfair dismissal; [43] Orders Bank of Kigali Ltd to give Ruhimbaza Modeste 3,934,134Frw in damages resulting from unfair dismissal; [44] Orders Bank of Kigali Ltd to give Ruhimbaza Modeste performance and bonus allowances of 728,544Frw; [45] Orders Bank of Kigali Ltd to give Ruhimbaza Modeste 800,000Frw for procedural and counsel fees; [46] Declares that the judgment RSOCAA0011/11/CS rendered by the Supreme Court on 22/02/2013, is reversed on the issue regarding the amount of damages resulting from unfair dismissal, the performance and bonus allowances; [47] Orders that court fees amounting to 100,000Frw to be borne by Bank of Kigali Ltd.

Page 264

CIVIL CASE

Page 266

MUKAMUSONI v. MUKAGASANA ET.AL [Rwanda High Court – RCA0087/12/HC/KIG (Murekatete, P.J.) May 10, 2013] Family law – Succession – Custom – Right of woman to inherit or to be inherited – The fact that the Rwandan custom would not grant women/girls the right to inherit or to be inherited by their family members has negative and serious impact on the principle of the equality of all persons before the law. Family law – Succession – The claims relating to succession which began before the promulgation of the succession law – To resolve the problems relating to succession which began before the promulgation of the law governing it, the jurisprudences which grant the right to succeed or to be succeeded for a woman or a girl should always be applied by the courts, for men and women to have equal right to succession. Fact: Before high court at appellate level, Mukagasana and Sarushi were involved in a lawsuit concerning succession of estate left by Kabera and his spouse Usabuwera who passed away in 1994 without leaving a child, unfortunately, Sarushi died before the adjudication of the case. In the judgment rendered, that Court held that basing on custom, the relatives of the husband were the only ones entitled to inheritance, therefore Mukagasana should be the one to inherit estate. After realising that Mukagasana was about to sell houses in litigation, Mukamusoni lodged a third party opposition against the judgment praying for its reversal because she has interest, 53

Page 267

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 54 since she is a daughter of Sarushi, thus, she has the right to inherit Usabuwera in place of his late father, especially that the judgment was adjudicated without summoning Sarushi’s heirs. Mukamusoni claims that the irregularities which prejudice her interests in this judgment is that in its ruling, the court based its decision on custom whereas the Constitution of the Republic of Rwanda which was into force from 1962 up to the current one as well as international conventions ratified by Rwanda provide for the principle of equality of all human beings before the law without any form of discrimination. Mukamusoni continues stating that the custom may be based upon to adjudicate cases only if it is not contrary to the public order and good morals or when it is not inconsistent with the Constitution, therefore, stating that the descendants from husband’s family are the only ones entitled to inheritance was to be applied it would be contrary to those principles because a custom which discriminates people is unacceptable. In her defence, Mukagasana argues that by the time she filed a succession claim of her brother’s estate, the law of 1999 relating to succession was not yet in force and the judgment which is being opposed by a third party ruled that she is the sole heir, thus, that judgment should be sustained because it complies with the law. Mukarurinda

states that even though she is involved in this case as respondent but she also has interest because she is a mother of Usabuwera. Therefore, she finds that Mukagasana was given big portion than what she was supposed to get, due to the judge’s motivations that there was no legal provision governing that matter while there were International conventions on the rights of men and women, those treaties should be relied on.

Page 268

55 Held: 1. The fact that the Rwandan custom would not grant women/girls the right to inherit or to be inherited by their family members has negative and serious impact on the principle of the equality of all persons before the law.

2. To resolve the problems relating to succession which began before the promulgation of the law governing it, the jurisprudences which grant the right to succeed or to be succeeded for a woman or a girl should always be applied by the courts, so that men and women to have equal right to succession.

3. Damages are not awarded in case the claimant does not prove the prejudice. The third party opposition has merit; With the Court fees to Mukagasana. Statutes and statutory instruments referred to: The constitution of republic of Rwanda of 04/06/2003 as it is amended to date, article 16. Law N°21/2012 of 14/06/2012 relating to the civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure, article 6. Law No18/2004 of 20/06/2004 relating to civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure, article 6. 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 49, 95. Cases referred to: Mukamusoni and Buyitare, RA0967/13.03/84 rendered on 10 April 1985 by Cassation Court of Rwanda. MUKAMUSONI v. MUKAGASANA ET.AL

Page 269

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 56 RC28.691/98 rendered on 22 September 1998 by First Instance Court of Kigali. RC28.846/98 rendered on 2 November 1998 by the First Instance Court of Kigali. RC31.549/99 rendered on 16 February 2000 by the First instance Court of Kigali. RC28.867/98 rendered on 15 December 1998 by the First instance Court of Kigali. RC28691/98 rendered on 22 September 1999 by the First instance Court of Kigali. RCA8689/132 rendered on 29 October 1996 by the Court of appeal of Nyabisindu. Authors Cited: Sr Karomba F, Des Régimes matrimoniaux, libéralités et Succession, Notes de cours, UNR, Faculté de Droit, p.153. S. Murererehe, Analyse juridique de l’évolution des droits successoraux de la femme au Rwanda, mémoire, Faculté de Droit, UNR., Butare, 2003, p.25. Judgment I. BRIEF BACKGROUND OF THE

CASE [1] On behalf of Mukamusoni Cathérine, Counsel Nzirabatinyi Fidèle argues that on April 24, 2009, this Court on the appellate level adjudicated the case RCA0162/06/HC/KIG whose subject matter related to the partition of the property left by Kabera Charles and his spouse Usabuwera Jeannette who

Page 270

57 passed away in 1994 without leaving a child. Mukagasana Domitilla was claiming to inherit the part of her brother Kabera Charles while Sarushi requested to inherit the part of his daughter Usabuwera. Ncogoza voluntarily intervened requesting to be paid rents originating from the tenancy contract of houses located in Kicukiro which are part of the inheritance. Before the adjudication of the case, Sarushi died and his heirs including Mukamusoni Cathérine were not summoned to appear, and they came to know about it when Mukagasana started selling those houses, and this is the ground for her lodging a third party opposition to defend her interest. [2] Counsel Nzirabatinyi argues that the concerned assets should not be exclusively appropriated by Mukagasana based on custom whilst the Constitution of 1962 as well as the current one provide for equality before the law and the law on succession provides that people who were legally married without specifying their matrimonial regime are presumed to be governed by the community of property regime. He adds that the custom should not have been relied on when it is inconsistent with the Constitution as well as the International Conventions which were ratified by Rwanda which all provide for equality before the law without any form of discrimination. He concludes that given the above; even the heirs of Usabuwera, including her sister Mukamusoni Catherine, are legally entitled to that property. [3] Counsel for Mukarurinda, Mudakemwa Apolline, states that the law of succession which came in force in 1999 is not retroactive and not applicable to what happened in 1994 because at that time, succession was governed by custom, whereby the relatives of the husband were the only ones entitled to inherit. MUKAMUSONI v. MUKAGASANA ET.AL

Page 271

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 58 The fact that there is no specific will left by the deceased means Mukamusoni is not eligible to inherit from her elder sister. She prayed court to uphold the judgment subject to the third party opposition and that the Court orders Mukamusoni to pay damages equivalent to 150,000Frw for vexatious lawsuits and 200,000Frw for counsel fees. [4] Counsel Nsengimana Elie for Ncogoza, states that Ncogoza seeks confirmation of what he was awarded in the judgment RCA0162/06/HC/KIG. Whereas Counsel Hamri Dieudonné argues that his client Mukarurinda is the mother of Usabuwera Jeanette and therefore has an interest in the success of the opposition even though she is a respondent because her co-respondent Mukagasana has exclusively acquired the entire property. He furthermore states that he agrees with the submissions of Counsel Nzirabatinyi Fidėle. [5] The legal issues to be analysed are to determine the merit of the grounds for third party opposition of the judgment RCA0162/06/HC/KIG and also the merit of the requested damages. II. ANALYSIS OF THE LEGAL ISSUES a. With regard to the basis of the third party opposition of the judgment RCA0162/06/HC/KIG [6] Counsel Nzirabatinyi Fidėle states that Mukamusoni Cathérine has interest in the judgment for which she filed for third party opposition because she is the daughter of late Sarushi, and she has the right to inherit from Usabuwera in place of the deceased Sarushi. He further argues that the irregularities which prejudice her interests in that judgment is

Page 272

59 that in its ruling the court based its decision on custom whereas the Constitution of the Republic of Rwanda from the time Rwanda got independence up to the current one, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 10 December 1948,the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights of 19 December 1966 as well as African Charter on Human and Peoples Rights of 27 June 1981 provide for the equality of men and women and prohibits any form of discrimination. He added that although custom may also be based upon to adjudicate a case, it’s only based upon when it is not inconsistent with the public order and good morals, or when it is not inconsistent with the Constitution (the preamble of the Constitution of the Republic of Rwanda of 04/06/2003), and that those conventions have a binding force as that of the law, and they are superior to custom, Rwanda committed itself to abide by them. [7] He continues stating that both in the Constitution and those International Treaties, it is provided that any form of discrimination, including that one which is gender based is prohibited, and if the custom which provides that the male and his descendants are the only ones entitled to inherit were to be applied it would be contrary to those principles because a custom which treats people unequally is unacceptable. He further argues that in this case relating to the succession of two persons who jointly owned property and inheriting being a personal right, anyone deprived of it would have suffered injustice. Therefore he requests that the judgment, subject of third party opposition should be overturned for Usabuwera’s share to be inherited in the same way as that of her husband Kabera Charles. MUKAMUSONI v. MUKAGASANA ET.AL

Page 273

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 60 [8] Counsel Mudakemwa Apolline states that in 1995 Mukagasana filed a claim requesting to inherit her brother Kabera Charles’s property and in the judgment RC23.350/95/R1 she was awarded those properties. He states that at that time the Law of 1999 relating to succession was not yet in existence. The judgment subject to third party opposition agrees with that earlier decision that Mukagasana is the only lawful heir. He argues that the said judgment should be the one to be followed because it complies with the law. As regards Ncogoza, Counsel argued that he should not claim for anything because he benefited from the tenancy agreement and there were some obligations he was mandated to carry out which he did not and which offset what he would be entitled to. [9] Counsel Hamuri Dieudonne states that Mukarurinda is involved in this case as a mother of Usabuwera Jeanette and therefore has an interest. He argues that respondent Mukagasana Domitilla was given more than what she was supposed to get because the judge mistakenly relied on custom arguing that there was no legal provision relating to the matter while there was the International convention on people’s rights (article 3 of International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and article 16 of the Universal Declaration on human rights of 10 December 1948) which should have been relied on.

FINDINGS OF THE COURT [10] The court finds that article 49 of the Law No22/99 states that succession is an act by which the rights and obligations on the patrimony of the deceased are transferred to the heir. The succession starts at the death of the deceased and takes place at his/her domicile or residence. Article 95 of the same law

Page 274

61 provides that the mentioned law comes into force on the date of its publication in the Official Gazette of the Republic of Rwanda. These provisions imply that the law cannot be relied upon in matters regarding the succession which begun before its publication in the Official Gazette in November 1999. This view concurs with the decision in the judgment which is being subjected to third party opposition as it is indicated in « Court Decision part 6 » as follows: “ The court finds that Sarushi had no right to inherit the share of his daughter Usabuwera Jeanette before the Law No22/99 on succession came into force because there was no law bestowing on her such right given that at that time, it was custom, which provided that property was inheritable by only the relatives of the husband, which governed succession and, on the other hand, there was no special agreement between Kabera Charles and his wife Usabuwera Jeanette on how their property would be inherited in case they died without descendants”. [11] Concerning the legal issue which was debated upon during the hearing as to whether the custom which deprived a woman of the right to succession which was in place before the enactment of the Law No22/99 on matrimonial regimes was inconsistent with the Constitution, the court finds that it should not be examined in this case. This finding is on the ground that there is a special

procedure to be followed for such constitutional challenges. What needs to be examined is whether there exist other legal provisions or general principles of law or case law which should have been relied upon for the determination of the issue of succession on the side of Usabuwera considering the hierarchy of norms provided for by Article 6 of Law No18/2004 of 20/06/2004 relating to Civil, Commercial, Labour and Administrative Procedure which was MUKAMUSONI v. MUKAGASANA ET.AL

Page 275

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 62 in force at the time of the hearing of the case for which intervention was filed. That law provides that “Judges shall decide cases by basing their decisions on the relevant law or, in the absence of such a law, on the rule they would have enacted, had they to do so, and guided by judicial precedents, customs and usages, general principles of law and written legal opinions”. This provision implies that it is not the custom which takes precedence in the absence of the law relating to a given matter but rather judicial precedents are given preference. [12] Article 16 of the Constitution of the Republic of Rwanda of 04/06/2003 as amended to date provides that “All human beings are equal before the law. They shall enjoy, without any discrimination, equal protection of the law”. This principle is also reiterated in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 10/12/1948 as well as different international conventions ratified by Rwanda as mentioned in paragraph 6 of this judgment. Article 190 of the Constitution of Rwanda stipulates that “Upon their publication in the official gazette, international treaties and agreements which have been conclusively adopted in accordance with the provisions of law shall be more binding than organic laws and ordinary laws (…)”. Even though this principle existed and was provided for by those conventions as discussed in the

court below, this in itself is not what entitles a woman with the right to inheritance or to be inherited from in circumstances where the succession became open before the existence of the relevant law; rather, it is the interpretation of this principle by courts in different cases which triggered the evolution of the custom regarding the succession by women. For this reason, it is court decisions which should have been given weight to shape the direction on the right of succession claimed by Usabuwera’s relatives.

Page 276

63 [13] Different legal scholars who wrote on customary succession in Rwanda until the coming into force of the positive law, concur that Rwandan customary law preventing women or female child as well as her relatives to inherit or to be inherited from, had grave repercussions on the principle of equality before the law and the principle that any form of discrimination, including that based on gender, was prohibited by the Constitution of the Republic of Rwanda since Rwanda gained its independence and as subsequently amended. The customary position is also inconsistent with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 10 December 1948 ratified by Rwanda as well as other International Conventions ratified by Rwanda promoting the principle of equality. [14] Among the scholars, is a lecturer at the National University of Rwanda who in her course materials titled “Regime Matrimoniaux, Liberalités et Successions”, supports the court decisions which were made during the years 1990 - 1999 granting female litigants the right to inherit and to be inherited from, based on that principle of equality where she states: “for successions opened before the publication of the law on Matrimonial Regimes, Liberalities and Succession, courts should not apply the law N°22/99, but should be inspired by the jurisprudence to which the judges referred, especially between the years 1990-1999, where the majority of the judges seized, on the basis of the equality principle mandated by all constitutions Rwanda has known since 1962 and the international conventions to which Rwanda is a party, granted inheritance rights, on equal terms, to both girls and boys.”1 This means that in handling issues relating to succession that took

1Sr. KarombaF.,Des Régimes matrimoniaux, liberalités et succession, Notes de cours, U.N.R, Faculté de Droit, p.153, inédit. MUKAMUSONI v. MUKAGASANA ET.AL

Page 277

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 64 place before the promulgation of the succession law of 1999, court decisions on similar issues should be followed and hence men and women should be entitled to succession with equal rights. [15] In her Dissertation required for the fulfillment of university studies for the bachelor’s degree, Murererehe S. emphasized that the custom excluding the females from succession has progressively changed due to decisions rendered by Courts where the courts explained general principles provided in domestic laws as well as international conventions ratified by Rwanda’’(…)Le droit des successions est resté longtemps soumis au regime du droit coutumier, lequel droit écartait la femme de la succession. Toutefois, le droit coutumier a évolué grace à l’interprétation que les juridictions donnaient aux principes genéraux posés par le droit interne et les conventions internationales que le Rwanda a ratifiées’’.2 (“The right to succession has long been subject to customary law, which excluded the woman from succession. However, customary law has evolved through the interpretation that the courts gave to the general principles of domestic law and international conventions that Rwanda has ratified”). She then gave examples of such judgments rendered in accordance with that principle as provided in the constitution that was in force then, such as judgment RCA2995/KIG rendered by the Court of Appeal of Kigali on 5/02/1971, where she says: “It is noted that an effort was made in case law because the decisions of the judges tended to recognize for the woman, the right of succession. Thus the Kigali Court of Appeal decided that the

2S.MUREREREHE, Analyse juridique de l’evolution des droits successoraux de la femme au Rwanda, mémoire, Faculté de Droit, U.N.R., Butare, 2003, p.25.

Page 278

65 girl N. had the right to inherit the property left by her parents, and that her share must be equal to that of her brother. The court motivated this decision on the basis of Article 16 of the Rwandan Constitution, which promotes equality between children without gender distinction.3 [16] With regard to International Conventions emphasizing the principle of equality before the law without any discrimination mentioned in the previous paragraphs, which were ratified by Rwanda, Murererehe noted that they have binding force in Rwanda, and that it bestows to the women the right to inherit and to be inherited from on an equal basis with the men as indicated in various judgments such as RC28691/98 rendered by the Court of First Instance of Kigali on 22/09/1999, RCA8689/132 rendered by the Court of Appeal of Nyabisindu on 29/10/1996 ( see that dissertation on page 27). [17] It is in the above context that, pursuant to article 6 of the Law N°21/2012 of 14/06/2012, relating to the Civil, Commercial, Labour and Administrative Procedure which provides that in the absence of the law related to the subject matter judicial precedents are to be relied on the first rank in deciding cases, the court finds that in the determination of this case, it has to rely on other decisions rendered in matters of a similar nature such as RA0967/13.03/84 rendered by the Court of Cassation of Rwanda on 10 April 1985 between Mukamusoni and Buyitare whereby Mukamusoni requested for cassation of the judgment which ruled that she cannot inherit the land of her father because she is a girl. That court found merit in her arguments and held as follows:“The court finds merit in Mukamusoni’s contention because the court below had no legal

3Murererehe, as above, p.27. MUKAMUSONI v. MUKAGASANA ET.AL

Page 279

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 66 basis for declaring that a female child cannot inherit the property of her father, given that the current constitution in its article 16 does not permit any form of gender based discrimination.’’ It should be understood that the above statement by the highest court set precedent for settling such disputes in a manner which is not inconsistent with the Constitution or international principles. [18] This was also confirmed in other judgments, such as RC28.691/98 rendered on 22 September 1999 by the Court of First Instance of Kigali, RC28.846/98 rendered on 02 November 1998 by the Court of First Instance of Kigali, RC31.549/99 rendered by the Court of First Instance of Kigali on 16 February 2000 and RC28.867/98 rendered by the Court of First Instance of Kigali on 15 December 1998 (those cited judgments are found in the archives of the Intermediate Court of Nyarugenge, including those cited in paragraphs 13 and 14 of this judgment). In all those judgments the courts confirmed that a girl/woman has a right to succession on equal basis with that of a male, the decisions always taken by those courts on the basis of the principle which prohibits gender based discrimination. [19] Those judicial precedents are therefore the ones to be relied on in the determination of this case, in deciding that Usabuwera’s relatives from her natal family have the right to inherit

from her, as there is no reason as to why custom should have been applied whereas there are judicial precedents in cases of the same nature with this one which set the guidelines. [20] The parties in this case agree on the fact that Kabera Charles and Usabuwera were legally married, before the Law No99 came into force. With regard to the matrimonial regime, it was presumed that those married before the 1999 law and who

Page 280

67 did not determine their matrimonial regime, were under the regime of community property. Therefore, Usabuwera should be inherited from, in the same way as her spouse is inherited from by his relatives because they did not leave children. [21] This implies that family members of Kabera Charles the same as those of Usabuwera should inherit 50% of the whole property of late Kabera Charles and Usabuwera who died without leaving behind any children especially since Mukagasana Domitilla who wants to take over all the property for herself, does not prove that the deceased were under the regime of separation of property. b. With regard to damages requested [22] On behalf of respondent Mukagasana Domitilla, Counsel Ntamakemwa Apolline prays the Court to order Mukamusoni to pay his client 150,000Frw due to the fact that she was dragged into unnecessary law suits and 200,000Frw as the advocate fee. [23] The Appellant on the other hand submits that she does not have to pay damages rather that the decision be set aside because Mukagasana should not exclusively enjoy the property. [24] The Court finds that the prayer for damages by Mukagasana Domitilla lacks merit, because she does not show the prejudice she suffered for which she should be awarded damages, especially since the grounds for the third-party opposition of Mukamusoni have merit. The court finds no valid basis for awarding damages to Mukagasana Domitilla.

MUKAMUSONI v. MUKAGASANA ET.AL

Page 281

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 68 III. THE DECISION OF THE COURT [25] The Court finds the third party opposition filed by Mukamusoni Catherine has merit; [26] Decides that Usabuwera Jeannete’s relatives from the family in which she was born, including Mukamusoni Catherine, have the right to inherit from her 50% and those relatives on the side of Kabera Charles, including Mukagasana Domitilla, 50% of the whole property of Kabera Charles and Usabuwera Jeanette; [27] Decides that the judgment RCA0162/06/HC/KIG is set aside with regard to the grounds of the third-party opposition only; [28] Orders Mukagasana Domitilla, Ncogoza Gerard and Mukarurinda Antoinette to jointly pay court fees equivalent to thirty thousand and eight hundred Rwandan francs (30,800Frw) and failure to do so, it will be taken out of their assets by public force; [29] Reminds the parties that the judgment was not delivered on time as scheduled due to the reasons explained in the order adjourning delivery of judgment dated 19 April 2013.

Page 282

COMMERCIAL CASE

Page 284

EQUITY BANK RWANDA LTD v.

SEBAHIZI [Rwanda Supreme Court – RS/INJUST/RCOM00001/2017/SC (Mukanyundo, P.J; Kayitesi R. and Rugabirwa, J.) 26 January 2018] Law regulating banks – Liability – Negligence – The fact that the bank failed to fulfil it’s obligation of calling the client before withdrawing money from his account and transfer it elsewhere as provided in the bank’s internal rules, it has to be held liable – Law N°45/2011 of 25/11/2011 governing contracts, article 64. Facts: Sebahizi opened an account of United States Dollar (USD) in EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd on which were withdrawn 30,000USD and transferred to Singapore without his approval. He filed a claim before Nyarugenge Commercial Court requesting the bank to refund his dollars and various damages; that Court held that his claim has merit and ordered the bank to refund him 30,000USD and to pay for moral damages and attorney’s fee. EQUITY BANK RWANDA LTD appealed before Commercial High Court and ruled that the appeal has merit in part because Sebahizi did not protect properly his bank account and led to withdraw on it 30,000USD by unknown people, it held also that the cross appeal of Sebahizi has no merit, and ordered the bank to refund Sebahizi 15,000USD equivalent to the half (1/2) of 30,000USD withdrawn on his account without his approval. Sebahizi unsatisfied with the ruling of the Commercial High Court, he wrote to office of Ombudsman requesting the review 71

Page 285

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 72 due to injustice the judgment RCOMA0032/16/HCC as he did not authorize the withdrawal of 30,000USD on his account; rather it was due to the negligence of the bank. The office of the Ombudsman wrote to the president of Supreme Court requesting to review that judgment due to injustice, as the bank did not make a phone call to Sebahizi before the withdrawal of that money on his account as provided in EQUITY BANK RWANDA LTD internal rules. President of Supreme Court after considering the report of the inspectorate general of Courts, he requested the registry of this Court to put this case on the cause list. Before the Supreme Court Sebahizi states that, the Commercial High Court ruled to share the liability with the bank because he did not protect enough his account whereas the Court did not highlight what he should have done so that his account could not be hacked. He continues stating that when he opened the USD account, they agreed that before withdrawing money on his account, he must fill documents known as e-mail indemnity and Diaspora application for funds transfer using a handwriting to make sure that they are originals and they had to call him as provided by bank’s internal rules, thus, that bank must refund him his money with interests and various damages. EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd defends that it cannot refund Sebahizi 30,000USD withdrawn on his account by unknown people because it has not been involved in this operation, and it had no sine qua non obligation to call him before transferring that money, because they don’t have an agreement providing that, and the bank does not usually call its clients due to a large sums of money requested, rather it calls them when it has

Page 286

73 doubts on the cheque deposited but when the bank has no doubts it has to deliver money without any further complication. The bank also, filed a cross appeal requesting that the ruling of Commercial High Court ordering it to pay 15,000USD would be reversed because what the bank did was provided by their mutual contract. Sebahizi argues that the cross appeal is groundless because the bank did not claim beforehand to the office of Ombudsman for injustice. Held: 1. The fact that the bank failed to the obligation of calling the client before withdrawing money from his account and transferring it elsewhere as provided in bank’s internal rules, it is held liable. Thus, the fact that the bank withdrawn the money on Sebahizi’s account and transferred it to Singapore without calling him first, this makes it the sole liable.

2. The fact that Sebahizi was deprived the right to use his money due the negligence of the bank, this caused a loss to his family; therefore, the bank must give him damages.

3. Procedural and attorney’s fees are awarded in Court’s discretion when the request is excessive.

4. None can raise the inadmissibility of cross appeal in the hearing of the case review due to injustice arguing that the claim has to be filed beforehand to the office of Ombudsman because the claim is filed before Court not to the office of Ombudsman. The application of case review due to injustice has merit. The ruling of the judgment rendered by the Commercial High Court is reversed in part. EQUITY BANK RWANDA LTD v. SEBAHIZI

Page 287

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 74 Statutes and statutory instruments referred to: Organic Law Nº03/2012/OL determining the organization, functioning and jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, article 81, paragraph 2. Law N°45/2011 of 25/11/2011 governing contracts articles 64 and 137. Law Nº15/2004 of 12/06/2004 relating to evidence and its production, article 110. Decree - Law of 30/7/1888 relating to contract or convention obligations, article 258. No case referred to Judgment I. BACKGROUND OF THE CASE [1] This case started in Nyarugenge Commercial Court, Sebahizi Jules suing EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd requesting it to refund him 30,000USD withdrawn on his account Nº04003211159434 without his approval, and was also requesting various damages. [2] On 30/11/2015, the Court rendered the judgment RCOM1408/15/TC/Nyge, and ruled that the claim of Sebahizi has merit and ordered EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd to refund him 30,000USD withdrawn on his account without his approval and 2,000,000Frw for moral damages and lawyer’s fee.

Page 288

75 [3] EQUITY BANK RWANDA LTD appealed before Commercial High Court which rendered the judgment RCOMA0032/16/HCC on 19/02/2016, and ruled that its appeal has merit in part regarding the fact that Sebahizi Jules did not protect enough his account aforementioned which caused the withdrawal on that account 30,000USD by unknown people, it ruled also that the cross appeal filed by Sebahizi Jules has no merit and ordered EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd to refund Sebahizi Jules 15,000USD equal to the half (1/2) of 30,000USD withdrawn on his account and transferred to Singapore without his approval. [4] Sebahizi Jules wrote to the office of Ombudsman requesting to review the case RCOMA0032/16/HCC rendered by the Commercial High Court on 19/03/2016 due to injustice, because he was not involved in the withdrawal of 30,000USD on his account, instead it was due to the negligence of EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd because it transferred that money to Singapore without his consent. [5] After examining this issue, the Ombudsman found that the case RCOMA0032/16/HCC has to be reviewed due to injustice because based on the EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd’s internal rules known as operations procedures manual, it should have called Sebahizi Jules before withdrawing and transferring 30,000USD to Singapore, thus, since EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd admitted in the hearing of Commercial High Court that it did not call him before transferring that money abroad, this might led EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd to lose the case as provided by article 110 of the law Nº15/2004 of 12/06/2004 relating to evidence which stipulates that, the statements that the accused or his/her representative makes EQUITY BANK RWANDA LTD v. SEBAHIZI

Page 289

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 76 before the court serve as judicial admission and such statements shall serve as plaintiff arguments. Because failure to call him caused a withdrawal on his account of that money without his consent and consequently a loss to him. [6] The Ombudsman wrote to president of Supreme Court requesting to review the case RCOMA0032/16/HCC due to injustice explained above. After considering the report of general inspectorate of the Courts, president of Supreme Court made an order Nº013/2017 of 14/03/2017, requesting the registry of this Court to put the case on the cause list so that the case shall be reviewed due to injustice, then the case was recorded on RS/INJUST/RCOM00001/2017/SC [7] The case was heard in public on 18/07/2017, Sebahizi represented by Counsel Bizimana Shoshi Jean Claude while EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd was represented by Counsel Karemera Frank. [8] On 06/10/2017, the Court rendered an interlocutory judgment and ruled that the hearing of the case will be resumed on 20/12/2017, so that all parties in the case would have a say on EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd’s internal rules known as Branch Operations Procedures Manual and it suspended the court fees. [9] The hearing of the case was resumed on 20/12/2017, EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd represented by the same Counsel while Sebahizi Jules was present and assisted by Counsel Bizimana shoshi Jean Claude. II. ANALYSIS OF LEGAL ISSUES

Page 290

77 a. Whether Sebahizi Jules was involved in withdrawing 30,000USD to his account so that, he can be also held liable for the half (½) of the loss he incurred [10] Bizimana Shoshi Jean Claude, the Counsel for Sebahizi Jules states that, based on article 81 paragraph 2°, of the organic - Law Nº03/2012/OL of 13/06/2012 regulating organization, functioning and competence of the Supreme Court provides that the final decision of the Court can be reviewed when there are provisions and irrefutable evidence that the judge ignored in rendering the judgment; therefore, the judgment RCOM0032/16/HCC rendered by Commercial High Court on 19/02/2016 has to be reviewed due to injustice because that Court ordered EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd to refund him 15,000USD only because Sebahizi at his side did not protect enough his e-mail address so that his account Nº04003211159434 could not be hacked and withdrawn on it 30,000USD, but that Court did not highlight what he should have done so that his account could not be hacked. [11] He further states that EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd must refund to Sebahizi Jules 30.000USD withdrawn on his account without his approval, because the bank transferred that money to Singapore without first calling and ask him whether he is the one who authorized this operation, as provided in article 14 of it’s internal rules titled operations procedures manual which states that EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd must first call the client before the transfer of 100,000Frw elsewhere or even the amount of money less than that when it doubt on the cheque deposited, also the specific contract between two parties called e-mail indemnity, does not cancel the internal rules or EQUITY BANK RWANDA LTD v. SEBAHIZI

Page 291

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 78 other measures taken by EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd in order to protect the safety of the money of his clients from theft. [12] He continues explaining that he can not understand why EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd did not call him before transferring 30.000USD abroad as confessed by it’s Counsel at first instance, appeal level and even before this Court, while it called him three times inquiring whether he is the one who ordered the bank to give Bikema Vanessa 1.700USD; 1.500USD and 1.800USD, and these ones were local operations, whereas it is not reasonable to transfer such important amount of 30,000USD abroad basing on e-mail indemnity and Diaspora-application for funds transfer filled with computer while he has always been filing such documents with a handwriting. [13] Sebahizi Jules states that he is not a business man, instead he is an employee of USAID working in Liberia, he opened an account in EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd, Remera branch to enable him receiving money from Rwanda, but they had no agreement with the bank providing that his account will be managed on line, instead when he had to request the transfer of money from the bank, the bank used to request him to fill an e-mail indemnity and Diaspora application for funds transfer using a pen so that it can be clear that those documents are originals and he did so three times when he requested money mentioned above, even before transferring that money EQUITY BANK RWANDA had to make a phone call to him to make sure that he is the one who requested that money, then it transferred it through Bikema Vanessa as it was so required by the bank when he opened the account so that, the bank can transfer the money to an account of a person he trusts and that

Page 292

79 person received that money several times and transferred it to him through Western Union successfully. [14] He explains that EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd withdrawn from his account 8,500USD on Monday 29/06/2015 and 21.500USD on Friday 03/07/2015, all totaling to 30.000USD, and transferred it to Singapore for purchasing papers while he does not deal in papers. After transferring that amount, the manager of EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd Remera branch called on Tuesday asking him whether he is the one who authorized that operation and he denied, the branch manager told him that he is going to do his best to retrieve that money while it is still possible, afterwards, he was surprised by the fact that he switched off his phone for two weeks, and that time EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd was not denying its responsibility. He requests EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd to refund him 30,000USD withdrawn from his account without his approval and various damages. [15] Counsel Karemera Frank, representing EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd, argues that the bank cannot refund Sebahizi Jules 30,000USD withdrawn from his account Nº04003211159434 by unknown people because it was not involved, and it had no sine qua non obligation of calling him before the transfer of that money because they don’t have an agreement providing that, and the bank does not usually call its client due to large sums of money requested, instead it calls him when it has doubts on the cheque deposited but when the bank has no doubts it has to deliver money without any further complication . [16] He states further that article 14 of its internal rules titled operations procedures manual, as raised by Sebahizi Jules which EQUITY BANK RWANDA LTD v. SEBAHIZI

Page 293

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 80 requires EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd to call its client is not applicable in this case, because it is a general provision that govern all clients, thus they should be governed by a specific contract known as mail indemnity because it is the one which provides for the management of the account. He further explains that EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd concluded with Sebahizi Jules a specific agreement, because it believed that it’s internal rules are not sufficient to prevent risks available in e-commerce. [17] He states again that EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd may be liable for those dollars if this Court finds that it did not respect article 3,4, 5 and 6, paragraph 6 of the specific contract mentioned above. He explains that article 3 of that contract, provides that when the bank receives an e-mail different with the address provided by the client, it has to ignore it, but in this case the bank did not suspect that the e-mail received does not belong to Sebahizi Jules, instead it was clear that it was his, because he had sent to the bank an invoice from Hong Kong showing the recipient of that money, the country where he is located, his account number and the purpose for it. This led the bank to transfer that money, but afterwards, it was clear that his account was hacked as he also acknowledges. [18] He continues explaining that article 4 of the specific contract mentioned

above provides that the client agreed that all e-mail instructions will be considered as they were sent by him and accept all consequences related to that e-mail, this means that the client was also aware that EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd has no full capacity of supervising his e-mail. He states that article 5 of that contract, provides that the client can pay damages to the bank when necessary, and Sebahizi Jules exonerated the bank from the liability as he admitted that this

Page 294

81 business is risky. He added that article 6 paragraph 6, of that agreement indicates that the bank is not liable for false informations. In conclusion, he states that, though EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd did not call Sebahizi Jules, it cannot be held liable because it took all the necessary precautions, so that these dollars won’t be stolen even though it has been stolen against it’s will.

VIEW OF THE COURT [19] Article 81 paragraph 2° of the Organic Law Nº03/2012/OL of 13/06/2012 determining the organization, functioning and jurisdiction of the Supreme Court provides that ‟The review of a final decision due to injustice shall only be applied when there are provisions and irrefutable evidence that the judge ignored in rendering the judgment” [20] While article 64 of the Law N°45/2011 of 25/11/2011 governing contracts provides that “Contracts made in accordance with the law shall be binding between parties. They may only be revoked at the consent of the parties or for reasons based on law” [21] Article 9 of email – indemnity, concluded between EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd and Sebahizi Jules on 07/04/2015, contained in the case file states that the indemnity and all future transactions shall be governed by all applicable laws and the Banks policies and procedures. While article 14 of EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd Branch Operations Procedures Manual which govern the procedure of transfer of money from one client’s account to another provides that Operations Manager, before transfer of the money from one client’s EQUITY BANK RWANDA LTD v. SEBAHIZI

Page 295

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 82 account to another based on instructions sent by a client trough e-mail, they have obligation to check whether that e-mail is from the real client and check also, that the e-mail indemnity form is attached, If they find those requirements complete, they shall call the client to confirm the authenticity of the said instruction. [22] The case file shows that on 05/06/2012, Sebahizi Jules who was working for USAID in Liberia by then, opened an account N°4003211159434 in EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd, they agreed that for the bank to transfer money to him, he had to fill an e-mail indemnity and a document titled Diaspora application for funds transfer, and send those documents to the bank trough his e-mail address makuzajules@gmail.com. [23] The case file indicates also that on 13/03/2015 Sebahizi Jules filled an e-mail indemnity and Diaspora-application for funds transfer in his hand writing, then he sent these documents to EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd through his e-mail address, makuzajules@gmail.com mentioned above requesting to transfer 1,700USD from his account N°4003211159434 to account N°4003211287114 belonging to Bikema Vanessa an employee of that bank, and the latter transfers the money to him. Sebahizi Jules did these operations on 07/04/2015 when he requested the transfer of 1,500USD, and on 27/05/2015 when he requested the transfer of 1,800USD all transferred through Bikema vanessa’s account mentioned above and Sebahizi Jules admits that he received that money without any complication. [24] As stated by both parties, in the case file contains e-mail indemnity and Diaspora application for funds transfer of 29/06/2015 filled by unknown person using computer and bore a scanned signature of Sebahizi Jules which were sent to

Page 296

83 EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd trough Sebahizi Jules’s e-mail (makuzajules@gmail.com) mentioned above, requesting the bank to transfer 8,500USD from his account N°4003211159434 to the following address; Beneficiary’s name: Chong Tze Min, Beneficiary’s Account N°245660375, Beneficiary’s Bank: DBS Bank Limited, Country: Marina Bay, Singapore, Swift Code/IBAN/Fed wire N°DBSSSGSG. This was done again on 03/07/2015, when the same unknown person requested EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd to transfer 21,500USD from Sebahizi Jules’s account to the same address, thus EQUITY

BANK

RWANDA Ltd transferred 30,000USD (8,500USD+21,500USD) in two installments. [25] The Court finds without merit the statement of EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd’s Counsel that in this case the Equity Bank Limited, Branch Operations Procedures Manual should not be applied because it applies to all clients in general, instead of concerning Sebahizi Jules in particular because internal rules e-mail indemnity made on 07/04/2015 complement each other, and they are binding to both parties as provided for by article 64 of the Law governing contracts mentioned above. [26] Based on above provisions and motivations, the Court finds that EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd is liable for 30,000USD withdrawn from Sebahizi Jules’s account N°4003211159434 without his approval because of the following reasons: [1] The fact that EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd withdrew 30,000USD from Sebahizi Jules’s account N°4003211159434 twice in various intervals because on 30/06/2015, it withdrew 8,500USD and 21,500USD on 03/07/2015, and sent it immediately to Singapore before EQUITY BANK RWANDA LTD v. SEBAHIZI

Page 297

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 84 calling him to confirm whether he is the one who authorised that transfer to that country, though EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd had the contractual obligation of calling him before the transfer of that money as stipulated in article 14 of Equity Bank Limited, Branch Operations Procedures Manual, governing procedures of transferring money from client’s account to another. [2] - The fact that EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd failed to call Sebahizi Jules before transferring money to Singapore whereas it had enough informations to suspect that operations and would have called him before transferring those dollars to that country because comparing to previous operations it was clear that the request of the money was too high to buy papers in Hong Kong, and Sebahizi Jules is not a business man but an employee of USAID. [3] - The fact that EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd did not call Sebahizi Jules before sending such important amount of 30,000USD to Singapore while for previous operations it used to call him on phone when he requested a transfer of less money as 1,700USD, 1,500USD and 1,800USD, and transferred this money to Bikema Vanessa’s account N°4003211287114 who was in Rwanda as an employee of that bank. [4] - The fact that EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd transferred 30.000USD to Singapore without calling Sebahizi Jules to confirm if he is the one who authorised this operation while the practice of banks in Rwanda requires them to call their clients who issued cheques before paying them. This is also provided in Equity Bank Limited, Branch Operations Procedures Manual

Page 298

85 (p.82), where it requires cash officer to call clients before payment of cheques of five hundred thousand (500,000Frw) deposited by a third party. [5] - The fact that in previous Courts EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd confessed that it did not call Sebahizi Jules before the transfer of 30,000USD in Singapore this confession must serve Sebahizi Jules’s argument as provided by article 110 of the law on evidence Nº15/2004 of 12/06/2004 which stipulates that a judicial admission refers to statements the accused or his or her representative makes before the court. Such statements shall serve as plaintiff arguments. [27] Based on provisions and motivations given above, the Court finds that, Sebahizi Jules was not involved in the withdraw and the transfer of 30,000USD from his account N°4003211159434 to Singapore, this implies that EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd did this out of negligence thus, it has to refund him the whole amount. b. Whether Sebahizi Jules is entitled to damages in this case [28] Counsel Bizimana Shoshi states that Sebahizi Jules and his family were deprived the right to use their 30.000USD for a period of two years, from 29/06/2015 and 03/07/2015 when that money was withdrawn up to now due to aforementioned EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd’s fault, this caused them to live in poor welfare while they had savings, thus, he requests EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd to pay interests for that loss due to its fault, calculated as follows : 30.000ܷܵܦܺ 18 ܺ 2ݕ݁ܽݎݏ 100 = 10,800ܷܵܦ EQUITY BANK RWANDA LTD v. SEBAHIZI

Page 299

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 86 [29] He states also that EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd has to refund Sebahizi Jules 16,560USD for the loss he incurred when he travelled from his work place in Monrovia to Rwanda to follow up his case as it is evidenced by the documents in the file. [30] He continues arguing that based on article 258 of civil code book three, EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd has to pay Sebahizi Jules and his family 10,000,000Frw as moral damages, 2,000,000Frw of procedural fee, 1,000,000Frw for lawyer’s fee, for the first instance, 1,000,000Frw at first appeal and 1,000,000Frw in this Court. [31] Counsel Karemera Frank representing EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd argues that Sebahizi Jules cannot be given damages he requests because he dragged himself in Court proceedings while the bank committed no fault as explained above.

VIEW OF THE COURT [32] As regards to damages for economic loss requested by Sebahizi Jules, article 137 of the Law N°45/2011 of 25/11/2011 governing contracts, provides that the aggrieved party has right to damages from the party failing to perform his/her contractual obligations, unless the claim for damages has been suspended or withdrawn. [33] The Court finds that, indeed Sebahizi Jules and his family suffered prejudice of not using their 30,000USD due to its transfer by EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd to Singapore without the approval of Sebahizi as explained above and he

Page 300

87 could not use it in anyway neither for family needs nor for savings in bank so that it can generate interests. [34] Based on the article aforementioned, the Court finds that EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd caused a loss to Sebahizi Jules and his family and consequently there are entitled to interest due to the loss they incurred calculated on the rate of 6.576% as it was regulated by NATIONAL BANK OF RWANDA in December 2017 (average rate of debt interest) because it is on that rate on which clients’s savings for interests in banks are calculated, rather the rate of 18% per year because Sebahizi Jules is not a business man as he agreed before this Court. Thus, the fact that Sebahizi Jules spent 926 days without using that money due to the negligence of EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd as motivated above, this means that from 30/06/2015 the first day of withdrawing that money up to 26/01/2018 the date of pronouncement of the case, it must give interests calculated as follows: 30.000ܷܵܦܺ 6.576 ܺ 926days 360 ܺ100 = 5.074ܷܵܦ [35] As regards to procedural expenses incurred by Sebahizi Jules, the Court finds that the elements of evidence available in the case file indicate those expenses as follows: air return tickets paid for the flight from Liberia to Rwanda :182USD, 780USD and 592,500Frw as it is proved by the receipts of 24/08/2015 and 31/03/2017, 180USD for hotel fee and the visa paid while he was in Ghana – Accra as it is proved by the receipt of 23/08/2015, 50USD paid at the customs of that country, and 20USD paid to the driver who picked him from the Airport to the hotel in which he slept in that country as it is proved by the receipt of 22/08/2015, plus meals and local travel while he was EQUITY BANK RWANDA LTD v. SEBAHIZI

Page 301

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 88 in Rwanda to follow up his case, he has been given 500,000Frw in Court’s discretion, the total procedural expenses spent equal to 1,212USD and 1,092,500Frw. [36] As regards to lawyer’s fee, the Court finds that Sebahizi Jules hired Lawyer’s services from the first instance to this Court, Thus, EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd must pay him 500,000Frw for the first instance, 500,000Frw for the Commercial High Court and 1,000,000Frw at this level, all totaling to 2,000,000Frw awarded in Court’s discretion because the amount he requests is excessive. [37] Concerning moral damages, article 258 of civil code book three provides that any act of a person, which causes damage to another obliges that person who committed that fault to repair it. Based on this article, the Court finds that, as Sebahizi Jules and his family were deprived the right to use 30,000USD during a period of more than 2 years due to the act of EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd of transferring it abroad without Sebahizi Jules’s approval as motivated above, it is obvious, that act caused moral and psychological disorder, thus, EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd must pay for damages equal to 800,000Frw awarded in Court’s discretion because the amount requested is excessive. c. Whether the cross appeal of EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd has merit [38] Counsel Karemera Frank, representing EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd, filed a cross appeal requesting the Supreme Court to overrule the decision of Commercial High Court which orders EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd to pay Sebahizi Jules half (1/2) of 30,000USD equivalent to 15,000USD because the

Page 302

89 Bank was not involved in hacking Sebahizi’s e-mail, and it operated according to their agreement, rather it requests Sebahizi Jules to pay 2,000,000Frw of attorney’s fees. [39] Counsel Bizimana shoshi assisting Sebahizi Jules argues that the cross appeal filed by EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd has no merit because it carelessly transferred his client’s money abroad without his approval. Also, as long as EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd did not file a case beforehand to office of Ombudsman for injustice, it cannot file a cross appeal requesting to overrule the decision which awarded Sebahizi Jules 15,000USD because to file a case at that office it is a special procedure, instead it can sue for procedural and attorney’s fees only.

VIEW OF THE COURT [40] The Court finds that the cross appeal filed by EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd has no merit due to motivations aforementioned, thus, it is not entitled to procedural and attorney’s fees it requested, because it loses the case. [41] The Court finds the arguments of Counsel Bizimana Shoshi that EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd has no capacity to file a cross appeal in this Court lacks merit because the claim is filed before the Court and not at Ombudsman office. III. DECISION OF THE COURT [42] It decides that the claim of Sebahizi Jules requesting the review due to injustice of the case RCOMA0032/16/HCC rendered by commercial high Court on 19/02/2016 has merit EQUITY BANK RWANDA LTD v. SEBAHIZI

Page 303

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 90 [43] It decides that the cross appeal filed by EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd lacks merit. [44] It orders EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd to give Sebahizi Jules 1,212USD and 1,092,500Frw of procedural fee. [45] It orders EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd to give Sebahizi Jules 30,000USD withdrawn on his account without his approval and 5,074USD of economic damages that Sebahizi and his family incurred, the total is 35,074USD. [46] It orders EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd to give Sebahizi Jules 800.000Frw of moral damages and 2,000,000Frw of attorney’s fee. [47] It declares that the ruling of the judgment RCOMA0032/16/HCC rendered by the Commercial High Court on 19/02/2016 is reversed in part. [48] It orders EQUITY BANK RWANDA Ltd to deposit the Court fee equivalent to 100, 000Frw.

Page 304

CRIMINAL CASE

Page 306

NTIBAJYINAMA v. PROSECUTION [Rwanda SUPREME COURT – RPAA0078/15/CS (Rugege, P.J., Gakwaya and Mukandamage, J.) June 01, 2018] Constitutional law – The core responsibility of the Government to promote good health – Government’s health promotion indicators – The fact that the Government constructed hospitals, recruited personnel and provided its citizens with affordable social medical scheme known as (mutuelle de santé) indicates that there is a significant achievement towards the promotion to good health by the government – The Constitution of the Republic of Rwanda of 2003 revised in 2015, article 45. Criminal procedure – Right to legal counsel – Right to legal counsel for those accused of offences punishable by life imprisonment – In the interest of justice and protecting the right to legal counsel as well as the right to due process of law in general, those who are accused of capital offences punishable by life imprisonment who cannot afford a legal counsel, the Government should assign advocates to them or get them other stakeholders who may provide them with advocates. In the meantime, before that is implemented, the Judicial Police and Prosecutors should request that service from Rwanda Bar association. Criminal law – Mitigating circumstances – Admission of the offence at appellate level – The fact that the accused admitted the offence on the first and second appeal requesting for pardon and considering the hard life that she went through which depressed her and led her to commit infanticide should be considered as a mitigating circumstances – Organic Law 93

Page 307

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 94 N°01/2012/OL of 02/05/2012 instituting the penal code, article 71, 76, 77and 78. Law determining the jurisdiction of courts – Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court – Advisory opinion – Advisory opinionof the Supreme Court to the concerned government institutions to review the provisions of the law regarding the offence of infanticide – Law Nº01/2012/OL of 02/05/2012 instituting the penal code does not differentiatethe offence of infanticide from the ordinary murder because they are all punished with life imprisonment, it does not also provide for the maximum age of the child killed – The nature of the offence of infanticide, particularly committed by the girls and women who have just delivered, is different from the ordinary murder because it is often committed due to depression, stress and lack of means to raise the child, which depression may cause her mental trauma. Whilst murder is often committed with some motives on the part of the offenders such as, interests in its commission, extreme hatred, racism, and other motives. Due to these reasons, infanticide committed by a parent, who had just given birth should not be considered as a felony which is punishable by life imprisonment, rather the penalty should be proportional, considering the period when the offence was committed and the offender. The Court requests the concerned government institutions to

review the provisions of the Law regarding the offence of infanticide; it is definition and its sentencing. Facts: Ntibajyinama was prosecuted for the offence of infanticide in the intermediate Court of Nyagatare, after when she was pregnant went to the hospital and the doctor informed her that the unborn baby was in good condition but instead of waiting and give birth in the hospital she went back home, and

Page 308

95 gave birth in basin and threw the baby in the pit latrines, she was convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment. She appealed in the High Court chamber of Rwamagana requesting for a penalty reduction on the ground that she pleaded guilty and asked for forgiveness. That Court held that she can get a penalty reduction because her guilty plea was not sincere and doubtful and not complete as she does not admit that she intentionally committed infanticide. In all these lower Courts she was tried without a legal counsel. She appealed again to the Supreme Court arguing that she was sentenced to life imprisonment in disregard that she pleaded guilty and asked for forgiveness, thus she prays to this Court to reduce her penalty sentence. During the hearing a non-governmental organisation which advocates for women and girls rights called “Women’s Link Worldwide” filed “amicus curiae” submissions to the Supreme Court so that it could give explanations regarding the case and submit before it the doctrines of the law scholars and regional and international jurisprudence on the similar issue. Before the Supreme Court she had a legal counsel , in her defence, Ntibajyimana, she argued that at the first instance she pleaded not guilty but later on the appellate level she pleaded guilty and requested for a reduction of the penalty which she was given by lower Courts and she argues that it was due to the fact that when she got pregnant, she faced hardship as an orphan, she was expelled where she worked and had no means neither to upkeep nor for medical bills led to committing infanticide when she threw the baby she had just given birth in pit latrines. NTIBAJYINAMA v. PROSECUTION

Page 309

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 96 Her legal counsel explained that her client pleaded innocent because she did not have a legal counsel but after she got an advocate who advised her, she admitted the offence and explained in details its commission. Basing on the mitigating circumstances related to the hardship encountered by her client, he requests for reduction of the sentence from life imprisonment to 10 years. Women’s Link (amicus curiae) stated that the concomitance of problems women and girls face influence them in taking wrong decisions, some of those problems, is teenage pregnancy they do not have knowledge on their surroundings, they cannot get health and medical treatment aids, being expelled from their family and rape. It requested the Court to particularly consider the standard of living of the accused because she lived in rural area, uneducated and she did not get the sexual and reproductive health education and especially that she did not have a legal counsel in the previous courts, so that it reduces the sentence she was given by the previous courts. The amicus curiae further argues that the right to medical care means that girls and women get necessary services during their pregnancy and at the time of giving birth, if these services are not available, it should be considered as discrimination because pregnancy is their sole particularity, and, their needs are basically not

the same as those of men, it finds that the right to medical care of the accused was violated as her financial situation could not allow her to get medical services when she got contractions and this put her and her unborn baby in danger. It further argued that there is a link between the right to health of the women and girls and the crimes related to the sex and reproductive health which they are accused of, the offences they usually commit of infanticide and abortion are most likely a

Page 310

97 result of the father of the child not recognizing the child or refuses to give her alimony, the pregnancy from rape, living in extreme poverty, thinking that she will be expelled from school or at work and the segregation of single mother in the family. The prosecution argues that some of the statements of amicus curiae are misleading because Rwandan laws and culture recognize the value of human being in general and they recognize child’s life in particular. It states also that infanticide or abortion in case of pregnancy of non-desirable sex of the child, child born with disability or albino, pregnancy and birth of twins, or a child born with health problems, are not in Rwandan culture, somewhere else infanticide and abortion are allowed based on the policy of the state which is aimed at family planning, to the extent that, these acts are not considered as a crime, but it is not the case in Rwanda. It rests its case by stating that even though previously the accused pleaded not guilty but her guilty plea before the Supreme Court should be considered and be sentenced to not less than twenty (20) years of imprisonment as it is provided by the laws Held:1.The fact that the Government constructed hospitals, recruited personnel and provided its citizens with affordable social medical scheme known as mutuelle de santé indicates that there is a significant achievement towards the promotion to good health by the government, therefore Ntibajyinama as a citizen, her obligation towards the realisation of a good health, was to go to the hospital and get the services that are provided there but since she left the hospital without being discharged, it cannot be considered as if the State fell short in its obligation.

2. In the interest of justice and protecting the right to legal counsel as well as the right to due process of law in general, NTIBAJYINAMA v. PROSECUTION

Page 311

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 98 those who are accused of capital offences punishable by life imprisonment who cannot afford a legal counsel, the Government should assign advocates to them or get them other stakeholders who may provide them with advocates. In the meantime, before that is implemented, the Judicial Police and Prosecutors should request that service from Rwanda Bar association.

3. The fact that the accused was tried before the previous courts for a capital offence punishable by life imprisonment without a legal representation, implies that she was not guided on the consequences of the crime she is accused of, the benefits of a sincere confession, the fact of not having a legal counsel hindered the accused from knowing how to conduct her pleading for the court to appreciate the facts and the legal issues for it to take the appropriate decision.

4. The fact that the accused admitted the offence on the first and second appeal requesting for pardon and considering the hard life that she went through which depressed her and led her to commit infanticide should be considered as a mitigating circumstances, thus, her penalty is reduced to ten (10)years of imprisonment.

5. Advisory opinion of the Supreme Court to the concerned government institutions to review the provisions of the law regarding the offence of infanticide, Law Nº01/2012/OL of 02/05/2012 instituting the penal code does not differentiate the offence of infanticide from the ordinary murder because they are all punished with life imprisonment, it does not also provide for the maximum age of the child killed and moreover, the nature of the offence of infanticide, particularly committed by the girls and women who have just delivered, is different from the ordinary murder because it is often committed due to

Page 312

99 depression, stress and lack of means to raise the child, which depression may cause her mental trauma. Whilst murder is often committed with some motives on the part of the offenders such as, interests in its commission, extreme hatred, racism, and other motives. Due to these reasons, infanticide committed by a parent, who had just given birth should not be considered as a felony which is punishable by life imprisonment, rather the penalty should be proportional, considering the period when the offence was committed and the offender. The Court requests the concerned government institutions to review the provisions of the Law regarding the offence of infanticide; its definition and sentencing. The appeal has merit; The decision of the judgment RPA0001/2015/HC/RWG is overturned in regard to the sentencing; Sentences the accused to 10 years of imprisonment; The court fees on public treasury. Statutes and statutory instruments referred to: The Constitution of the Republic of Rwanda of 2003 revised in 2015, article 45. Organic Law N°01/2012/OL of 02/05/2012 instituting the penal code, article 71, 76, 77 and 78. Law Nº30/2013 of 24/5/2013 relating to the code of criminal procedure, article 39. Case laws referred to: Beatrice Wambui Kariuki vs Republic [2005] e KLR, Court of appeal, Kenya R. vs Lisa Gore (deceased) Court of appeal, England, 2007 NTIBAJYINAMA v. PROSECUTION

Page 313

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 100 S vs Muhungu HB11/2005, Zimbabwe Prosecution vs Muhindakazi, RP00090/16/TGI/NGOMA, rendered by the Intermediate Court of Ngoma. Prosecution v Uwamahoro, RPA0087/12/CS, rendered by the Supreme Court on 11/03/2016. Prosecution v. Batamuliza, RPA0207/12/CS, rendered by the Supreme Court on 17/06/2016. Judgment I. BRIEF BACKGROUND OF THE

CASE [1] The case started at the Intermediate Court of Nyagatare where the prosecution accused the Appellant of Infanticide. The court ruled on the case RP0231/014/TGI/NYG on 28/11/2014, convicting her of Infanticide and sentencing her to life imprisonment. [2] Ntibajyinama Esther appealed to the High Court, the Chamber of Rwamagana, saying that she was pleading guilty and asking that her sentence to be reduced. The Court heard the appeal as RPA0001/2015/HC/RWG and on 30/04/2015 ruled that the appeal was unfounded and that her sentence should be sustained. [3] The High Court stated that sentence against Ntibajyinama Esther could not be reduced based on her guilty plea because it was incomplete and its sincerity doubtful. The Court explained that Esther does not admit that she killed with intention yet she went to the hospital, was informed that the

Page 314

101 baby was doing well, and instead of staying at the hospital, she left, went home and gave birth in a basin and then threw the baby in the toilet. [4] The Court explained that her claim that she killed the baby because the man that impregnated her had denied the pregnancy and she had no means to care for the baby which caused her to commit the crime unintentionally could not be accepted by the Court and therefore her sentence could not be reduced because she did not show remorse and she did not speak truthfully. [5] Ntibajyinama Esther was not satisfied with the decision of the High Court and appealed to the Supreme Court on 25/05/2015, saying that the High Court rejected her pleas and sentenced her to life imprisonment, even though she pleaded guilty and asked for forgiveness. She asked the Court to reduce the sentence meted out by the High Court. The appeal is recorded as RPAA0078/15/CS. [6] This case was heard on the merits on 04/12/2017, Ntibajyinama Esther being represented by Me. Mukiza Bizimana Silas and the Prosecutor represented by the National Prosecutor Munyaneza Nkwaya Eric. On 11/12/2017, Women's Link Worldwide, an International Nonprofit Organization that promotes the rights of women and girls wrote to the Supreme Court asking that they be allowed to appear in this case as a friend of the Court, "Amicus curiae”, to explain some issues in the case and provide the Court with relevant scholarly writings and case law from regional and international courts. [7] On 05/01/2018, the Court decided to reopen the case so that Ntibajyinama Esther and the Prosecutor could consider the NTIBAJYINAMA v. PROSECUTION

Page 315

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 102 request made by “Women's Link Worldwide” to appear in the case as Amicus Curiae. On 22/01/2018 the Court decided to grant WLW leave to appear as Amicus Curiae. [8] The hearing took place on 30/4/2018; Ntibajyinama Esther was represented by Me. Mukiza Bizimana Silas, Women’s Link Worldwide was represented by its President & CEO Viviana Waisman, Advocate Lydia Munyiva Muthiani and Me. Kabasinga Florida while the Prosecution was represented by National Prosecutor Munyaneza Nkwaya Eric. II. ANALYSIS OF THE LEGAL ISSUE IN THE CASE. A. Whether Ntibajyinama Esther’s sentence should be reduced. [9] Ntibajyinama Esther says in the first instance (the intermediate Court) she pleaded not guilty but then on appeal she pleaded guilty and confessed to how she committed the crime. She prayed that her sentence be reduced. [10] She explains that she committed the crime because after getting pregnant she had to face various difficulties as she was an orphan, she had been fired from her job, and thus she did not have the money for upkeep and treatment (related to the pregnancy). She claims she went to the hospital for a checkup and was prescribed medication to pick up from the pharmacy. Because she had no money to buy the medication, she decided to go home. When she got there, she gave birth and threw the baby in the toilet.

Page 316

103 [11] Her lawyer Me. Mukiza Bizimana Silas says that in the lower courts Ntibajyinama Esther tried to avoid accepting responsibility for her crime because she did not have legal counsel before and during either of the hearings. After she got legal representation, she pleaded guilty and clearly explained how she committed the crime. [12] He also says there are other mitigating circumstances based on the problems that Ntibajyinama Esther had, for instance, she was an orphan, after getting pregnant she was traumatized and did not have anyone to advise her because she lived alone, and the father of the baby had abandoned her which made her lose her mind. In addition, she did not get proper treatment after getting pregnant because she did not have the means to pay for it. Me. Mukiza Bizimana asks that her sentence be reduced to 10 years imprisonment based on Article 77(3) and 78 of the Penal Code. [13] Viviana Waisman, the President & CEO of Women's Link says that in determining Ntibajyinama Esther's sentence, the Court should consider the intersectionality of issues that women and girls experience which could cause them to make wrong choices. Some of these issues being early pregnancies, the fact that they come from remote areas, are illiterate and lack of access to health services, being rejected by their familiesand rape. She also said the Court should specifically consider the circumstances of the appellant, the fact that she lived in a remote area, did not go to school, and did not have access to reproductive health services. [14] She further says that the right to health means that girls and women should get all necessary services during the time of pregnancy and birth. If these services are not accessible, this is NTIBAJYINAMA v. PROSECUTION

Page 317

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 104 considered as discrimination because being pregnant is something that only affects women. Their needs are not the same as men because men do not require the same services. She submits that in analyzing the case, the Court should consider the living conditions and financial capacity of the Appellant and other women who face similar problems. [15] She submits that in determining Ntibajyinama Esther's sentence, the Court should consider the fact that she had no legal representation in lower instance courts and that there should be a psychological / mental health evaluation of her mental health to assess the state of her mental health to know whether she was affected by anxiety and depression when she committed the crime. In conclusion, she said in order for there to have been a fair trial, the court should assess whether Esther's sentence was proportionate taking into account the different problems that women and girls face during pregnancy. [16] Advocate Muthiani Lydia representing women’s link argues that based on the Constitution of Rwanda and on international conventions/ different international instruments, Ntibajyinama Esther's right to health was not respected. That her financial incapacity prevented her from getting health services (treatment). She did not have access to health services when she had labor pains which jeopardized her life and the

life of the baby she was carrying. She did not give birth the way she would have wanted and she did not have any other assistance. Muthiani further says that there is a relationship between women's and girls’ right to health and reproductive health related crimes; that the crimes of infanticide and abortion are mostly caused by the fact that the father of the baby denies or refuses responsibility to support the pregnant woman or when

Page 318

105 the pregnancy is the result of rape, when the woman is living in extreme poverty, when she thinks that the pregnancy will get her expelled from school or fired from her job and the fact that a woman who has a child out of wedlock is stigmatized or rejected by her family. [17] She further says that the right to good health also means that there should be education on reproductive health, sexual education and information, family planning services and information, and women getting the support to raise their children after birth. She says that respecting/ensuring these rights, prevents women and girls from committing these types of crimes and also reduces infant mortality. [18] In conclusion, based on international human rights standards and on Rwandan laws, the Court should take into consideration the fact that women and girls who live in remote areas can face complications or problems that may lead to death, high blood pressure, premature birth or giving birth without assistance. All these issues have an effect on poor women who did not go to school or have low levels of education and most of the times are unemployed. [19] Me. Kabasinga Florida says that Ntibajyinama Esther was judged without regard to the principles of the right to due process of law because she had no legal counsel and there was no investigation to find out whether the accused did not suffer from extreme anxiety and depression. She asks the court to examine whether the judicial police and the prosecution fulfilled their duty to find both incriminating and exculpatory evidence. [20] She also says the Intermediate and High Court rendered judgment without being apprised of the circumstances before NTIBAJYINAMA v. PROSECUTION

Page 319

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 106 and after the commission of the offence yet such were present. According to article 71 of the Penal Code, in determining a penalty, the history and background of the offender must be taken into account and moreover, Ntibajyinama Esther having been charged with a serious offense, represented herself because she could not afford a lawyer. [21] The Prosecutor submits that some of the arguments of the amicus curiae are without merit because Rwandan Laws and culture value human life in general, and especially the life of a child. He says in Rwandan culture, abortion or infanticide cannot be done because of reasons like the baby is not of the preferred gender, is physically deformed or an albino, giving birth to (undesired) twins or the baby has health issues. He says there are countries where abortion or infanticide is carried out as a family planning policy, where such conduct is not criminalized which is not the case in Rwanda. [22] He further submits that in the Laws that govern Rwanda, there is no discrimination; that it cannot be considered as discrimination when a girl or woman faces a problem due to her limited means (poverty) or her nature, because men too commit infanticide. He says there are many programs put in place by the government to help women and girls to access health services and to help reduce the infant mortality rate. He further says

that Ntibajyinama Esther committed the crime intentionally and not because she had no right to health, because she left the hospital on her own accord without being sent away. [23] The Prosecutor also says that the judgment against Ntibajyinama Esther was rendered in compliance with the principles of the right to due process of law, because she was informed of the nature of the charges against her and her right to

Page 320

107 legal representation. He believes that not having legal representation was her choice because during her questioning, she was reminded she had a right to legal representation but she said she was ready to respond without one and that she would represent herself in Court. [24] He concludes that though Ntibajyinama Esther tried to avoid responsibility for her crime before, her guilty plea in the Supreme Court cannot be disregarded and thus her sentence should be reduced to not less than twenty (20) years in prison, as it is provided for regarding an accused who pleads guilty and sincerely seeks forgiveness.

THE VIEW OF THE COURT [25] The case file shows that Ntibajyinama Esther was convicted of infanticide by the Intermediate Court and sentenced to life imprisonment. She appealed against this decision in the High Court, Chamber of Rwamagana, changed her plea to guilty and asked that her sentence be reduced but it was sustained because the court found her guilty plea incomplete and doubtful. [26] Ntibajyinama Esther appealed to the Supreme Court and requested that her sentence be reduced based on her guilty plea as a mitigating circumstance. The court finds that there is no argument as to whether or not Ntibajyinama Esther committed the crime of infanticide punishable by article 143 of the Penal Code. As provided by the same article, the penalty for infanticide is life imprisonment. NTIBAJYINAMA v. PROSECUTION

Page 321

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 108 [27] Articles 76 and 77 of the Penal Code allow the Court to reduce sentences based on justified mitigating circumstances that preceded, accompanied or followed an offence. Ntibajyinama Esther and her lawyer, and the representatives of Women’s Link Worldwide that were allowed to appear as amicus curiae, mention different issues that the court should take into account in determining the appropriate sentence for Ntibajyinama Esther. [28] The way Ntibajyinama Esther explained how she committed the offense was what made the High Court, Chamber of Rwamagana say her guilty plea was incomplete. It is, however, evident from her written appeal submissions and the record of the court hearing before that Court that Ntibajyinama Esther explained that she was asked to go to a pharmacy to buy medication and seeing that she had no money to buy it or anyone else to help her; that she lived in a rented house unemployed; she had nothing in which to hold the baby; that she had nothing to sustain her after delivery, she was filled with despair. That is when she returned home, delivered in a basin and threw the baby in the pit-latrine. The High Court, Chamber of Rwamagana did not say what more she could have said regarding the commission of the crime. Based on what was said by Ntibajyinama Esther, the Supreme Court finds that she confessed to the crime without wishing to mislead the court or to conceal anything so that she could appear innocent. There was no basis for her plea of guilty not to be accepted and considered a mitigating factor. [29] In the Intermediate Court and in the High Court, Chamber of Rwamagana, Ntibajyinama Esther had no legal representation. Having been charged with infanticide which has

Page 322

109 a heavy penalty of life imprisonment, she did not get the opportunity to have a lawyer who could have explained to her the legal implications of the charge against her, the advantages of pleading guilty or the meaning of a complete and convincing guilty plea and what constitutes it, so that in the event that she chooses to plead guilty, she relates it with the law/does so the legal way. The Supreme Court finds that Ntibajyinama Esther’s lack of legal representation played a role in her inability to explain herself in a way that would help the Court understand the relevant issues and what to examine in order to render an appropriate decision. [30] The case file also shows that in her appeal to the Supreme Court and in the hearing of 4th December 2017, Ntibajyinama Esther pleaded guilty again, asked for forgiveness and explained that she went to the hospital for a checkup and was informed that the baby was okay and in the night, she went home gave birth and threw the baby in the pit latrine. She further explained that she committed the offense because of different problems she had, like the fact that she is an orphan, living alone, had no money to pay the hospital bill, had no medical insurance and had been fired from her job. This shows that she sincerely pleaded guilty and thus her guilty plea on appeal before the Supreme Court should be considered as a factor mitigating the gravity of the crime of infanticide she is accused of. [31] In the hearing before this Court, Ntibajyinama Esther repeatedly recalled the hard life she experienced: being an orphan, no support, unintended pregnancy, being abandoned by the man that impregnated her, being fired from her job when the pregnancy was discovered and living alone in a rented house, NTIBAJYINAMA v. PROSECUTION

Page 323

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 110 etc. The Court finds that the living conditions of the Appellant could have been a cause of her depression and anxiety which led her to commit the crime. This should be considered as a mitigating circumstance. This position is the similar to that held by the Supreme Court in case RPA0087/12/CS between Uwamahoro Spéciose and the Prosecution decided on 11/03/2016, and in case RPA0207/12/CS between Batamuliza Clémence and the Prosecution decided on 17/06/2016. Regarding the above, the Court agrees with Women's Link Worldwide that stigmatization and lack of support of pregnant women and girls, especially those from poor families, or those living alone without any assistance can cause depression and eventually lead them to commit crimes like abortion or infanticide. [32] Regarding the issue of observance of the right to good health raised by the Amicus Curiae, the Court finds that there is no such issue in this case. Article 21 of the Constitution says that all Rwandans have the right to good health, while article. 45 of the Constitution says, “The state has the duty to mobilize the population for activities aimed at good health and to assist them in realization of those activities. Every Rwandan has the duty to take part in the activities aimed at good health.” Article 14 of the Maputo Protocol of 11th July 2003 (The Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights on the Rights of Women in Africa)1 that was ratified by Rwanda, provides that the State parties to the Convention should ensure and promote the sexual and reproductive health rights of women as stipulated in this article.2

1Ratified by Presidential order No 11/1 of 24th June 2004.

21. States Parties shall ensure that the right to health of women, including sexual and reproductive respected and promoted. This includes:

Page 324

111 [33] The provisions of the Constitution and international conventions mentioned above, show that Rwanda has the will to promote and preserve the right to health of women and girls, including the right to sexual and reproductive health. The duty of the State is to sensitize the population (article 45) and to help them in accessing the activities aimed at good health while there is a duty on citizens to participate in those activities. Regarding the duty of the State as stated above, the Court cannot speak to the State's level of compliance as it is not necessary in this case, but one thing that is certain is that the State has made progress building hospitals, staffing hospitals, buying equipment proportionate with the financial capacity of the State and urging

a) the right to control their fertility; b) the right to decide whether to have children, the number of children and the spacing of children; c) the right to choose any method of contraception; d) the right to self-protection and to be protected against sexually transmitted infections; e) the right to be informed on one's health status and on the health status of one's partner, particularly if affected with sexually transmitted infections, including HIV/AIDS, in accordance with internationally recognised standards and best practices; g) The right to have family planning education.

2. States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to: a) provide adequate, affordable and accessible health services, including information, education and communication programmes to women especially those in rural areas; b) establish and strengthen existing pre-natal, delivery and post-natal health and nutritional services for women during pregnancy and while they are breast-feeding; c) Protect the reproductive rights of women by authorizing medical abortion in cases of sexual assault, rape, incest, and where the continued pregnancy endangers the mental and physical health of the mother or the life of the mother or the foetus. NTIBAJYINAMA v. PROSECUTION

Page 325

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 112 pregnant women and girls to go for antenatal care and deliver in hospitals. [34] In this case, the file shows that Ntibajyinama Esther went to the hospital for a check-up. The State took the first step in ensuring the right to health by providing health facilities, staff, equipment and providing affordable health insurance under the scheme Mutuelle de Santé. Ntibajyinama Esther’s role as a citizen in ensuring that her right to health was respected was to make sure that she goes to the hospital and accesses the services provided there. The Court finds that there is no indication that the primary role of the State in ensuring good health was not respected. [35] The case file shows that Ntibajyinama Esther went by herself to the hospital and left at around 11:30 pm without being discharged. The Court cannot affirm her claims that she did not have money to buy the medication are false because it is possible that she was worried that she would not be able to pay the medical bill after giving birth since she did not have insurance. However, there is no proof that she was denied the medication or other medical services because she did not have the money or medical insurance. The Court cannot find the State responsible for failing to provide treatment to vulnerable women which might have caused Ntibajyinama Esther to commit the crime of infanticide. [36] Regarding what was said by Women’s Link Worldwide that not giving women and girls the necessary services during pregnancy and at the time giving birth would be considered gender-based discrimination, the Court finds that it would be considered discrimination only if girls and women are denied the necessities based on their gender. In Ntibajyinama Esther's

Page 326

113 case, the representatives of Women’s Link Worldwide do not show that what Esther lacked was denied to her because she was a woman/girl. The Court can therefore not affirm that Esther committed infanticide because she was discriminated against or that her rights were violated as a result of discrimination. [37] The case file shows that Ntibajyinama Esther left the hospital after being informed that the baby was doing well. This shows that in taking the decision to leave the hospital and go and deliver at home, she put her life in jeopardy which could even have led to death because of having to give birth without medical assistance. The Court finds that Ntibajyinama Esther’s decision of leaving the hospital and giving birth at home was influenced by the fact that she was not aware of the consequences that could have followed or she knew the consequences but considered that her reasons for leaving the hospital outweighed the danger of giving birth at home unassisted. The Court cannot ignore this factor and hold her as having committed the offence under ordinary circumstances but rather finds that what pushed her to commit the crime goes beyond ordinary volition to commit an offence, even though that does not exonerate her from criminal liability. [38] With regard to Ntibajyinama Esther’s right to a fair trial that was mentioned by Me Kabasinga Florida, the case file shows that

except in the Supreme Court, Ntibajyinama Esther had no legal representation. During her interrogation before the judicial police after her arrest, she was asked the same question posed to all those arrested: “article 39 of the Law on Criminal Procedure gives you the right to be interrogated in the presence of your legal representative, do you have a legal representative or do you agree to respond to questions without one?” NTIBAJYINAMA v. PROSECUTION

Page 327

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 114 Ntibajyinama Esther replied that she would respond without one. However, there is no indication that she was informed that if she could not afford an attorney, the Bar Association could provide one probono at the request of the judicial police officer or the prosecutor, as provided for in the same article 39 of the Criminal Procedure law. In her interrogation before the Prosecution she was again informed that she had a right to legal assistance and asked if she agreed to be interrogated without one. She was however, again not informed that she could be provided with one. In the courts below, the issue of legal representation was not mentioned. It is the case that Ntibajyinama Esther or other people in the same situation have this right to legal representation, but because they have no means to pay for lawyers, this right is not exercised by them. This has grave consequencies in that the accused cannot defend themselves or argue their cases as effectively as they could if they were to have a lawyer. [39] It would be good if everyone accused of a crime could get legal representation and if they could not afford it, the State should provide one. It is understandable that due to limited resources, the State cannot afford legal representation to all in need. However, the Court finds that in the interests of justice, respect for the right to legal

representation before courts and for fairness in judicial processes in general, those accused of serious crimes whose sentence is life imprisonment that cannot afford legal representation, should be provided counsel by the State or the state should connect them with partners who can arrange for legal representation. In the meantime, until that is achieved, the judicial police officers and prosecutors should apply the provisions of article 39 of the above-mentioned law so that the Rwanda Bar Association provides such accused persons

Page 328

115 who cannot afford attorneys with legal representation from the moment of their arrest. [40] To Sum up, the Court finds that it should take into consideration the mitigating factors explained in the above paragraphs as well as her interests taking into account the conditions under which she committed the crime. This meets the requirements of article 71 of the Penal Code 16.01/2012/OL of 02/-5/2-12 which states that “The Judge shall determine the penalty according to the gravity of the offence taking into account the offender’s motives, history and background, circumstances surrounding the commission of the offence and individual circumstances”. The reduction of the sentence is provided by article 78 of the same law which states: “If there are mitigating circumstances, the reduction of penalties shall be as follows: (1) life imprisonment or life imprisonment with special provisions is replaced by a penalty of imprisonment of not less than ten (10) years;…” Based on the above provisions and on the mitigating circumstances already explained above, the Court decides that Ntibajyinama Esther’s sentence should be reduced to 10 years imprisonment. B. Consideration of the provision on the offence of infanticide [41] Before concluding, the Court finds it necessary that it should say something about the article of the Penal Code on Infanticide and how the crime of Infanticide differs from murder. Article 143 of Organic Law N°01/2012/OL of 02/05/2012 instituting the Penal Code says: “Kwihekura ni ubwicanyi bukorewe umwana wabyaye cyangwa uwo ubereye umubyeyi mu buryo bwemewe n’amategeko. Kwihekura bihanishwa igifungo cya burundu”. In English, it says: “A NTIBAJYINAMA v. PROSECUTION

Page 329

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 116 person who kills his/her biological or adopted child shall commit infanticide. lnfanticide shall be punished by life imprisonment “. In French, it says: “L’infanticide est le meurtre commis par une personne sur son enfant biologique ou adoptif. L'infanticide est punissable d’un emprisonnement a perpuité.” The law does not specify the age a child has to be for the crime to fall under Infanticide. This means that a parent, whether a woman or a man, who kills her/his off-spring who is fifty years old, commits the offence of infanticide. These were the kind of circumstances in the case of the Prosecutor v. Muhindakazi Didacienne who was convicted of infanticide for killing her 28- year-old son.3 Taking an example of other countries like European countries where the term infanticide originated, the law determines what age the child killed should not exceed, for example 12 months or two years and this law only applies to women and not men. In the United Kingdom, for someone who killed a child to be convicted of infanticide, the child should not exceed 12 months.4 This is also the case in Canadian5, Kenyan6 and Ugandan laws.7

3Case RP00090/16/TGI/NGOMA, Prosecution Vs Muhindakazi Didacienne. 4lnfanticide Act, 1938 (United Kingdom) Sections 1(1) to (3): “(1) Where a woman by any willful act or omission causes the death of her child being a child under the age of twelve months, but at the time of the act or omission the balance of her mind was disturbed by reason of her not having fully recovered from the effect of giving birth to the child or by reason of the effect of lactation consequent upon the birth of the child, then, [if] the circumstances were such that but for this Act the offence would have amounted to murder [or manslaughter], she shall be guilty of felony, to wit of infanticide, and may for such offence be dealt with and punished as if she had been guilty of the offence of manslaughter of the child.” 5Criminal Code of Canada, 1948 as amended in 1955, Section 233. 6Section 210, Kenya Penal Code. 7Section 213 Uganda Penal Code, Cap. 120, 1950.

Page 330

117 [42] The court finds that a life sentence for a woman convicted of infanticide is very heavy considering the circumstances under which the crime is committed. Looking at the laws of other countries, the sentence for this crime is so much lighter compared to the one under the Rwandan Penal Code. For example, in the case of Wambui Kariuki v. Republic8, the Kenyan Appellate Court reduced the sentence to 1 and a half years for a woman who had killed her child below 12 months because the trial court had not examined the difficult conditions the woman was living under, including the fact that she did not have the means to raise her other children as a single mother. In Zimbabwe, in the case of S v. Mhungu HV 11/20059, the accused at first instance, pleaded guilty of killing her newborn baby and was sentenced to 2 years imprisonment. On appeal, the judge put emphasis on her living conditions and other mitigating circumstances like the fact that she was only 20 years old, the father of the baby had abandoned her, she was unemployed and had no other means to support herself, she had 2 other children to raise and she was a first-time offender. The court suspended twenty months of her sentence which resulted in the woman serving only 4 months in prison. It is evident that to punish this kind of woman so severely does not help women who have suffered depression and trauma in the course of pregnancy or child -birth, nor does it deter other women from committing the same crime. [43] According to the Rwandan Penal Code, the crime of Infanticide is no different from other forms of homicide because

8Beatrice Wambui Kariuki vs Republic [2005] eKLR. 9See Mary Clausina OUNDO : “A critical analysis of the Judicial Response to the crime of lnfanticide”, pp 37-38; available at https://searcwl.ac.zw/index.php. NTIBAJYINAMA v. PROSECUTION

Page 331

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 118 the same life sentence is given to those that commit murder and other types of homicide. This means that these crimes are considered to be of the same gravity. The distinguishing element of Infanticide from other homicides is that Infanticide is committed against a biological or adopted child. However, the commission of the crime of Infanticide, especially by girls and women immediately or soon after child-birth, is different from murder that is characterized by extreme cruelty, often for the benefit of the perpetrators, due to hatred, extreme discrimination, and other reasons. In many countries, Infanticide is not given the same gravity as murder here. If you take the example of United Kingdom in the case of R v. Lisa Gore, the Appellate Court explained that Infanticide is different from murder in a way that it is not necessary to prove intent to kill and that the fact that it's not considered as grave as murder is because of the circumstances surrounding the commission of the crime.10 [44] A woman who carries her pregnancy for 9 months and then kills the child usually within 48 hours (what some scholars refer to as neonaticide) is not driven by cruelty but most of the time it is because of depression or anxiety as they fear they will not be able to raise the child. The anxiety may lead to trauma. In light of the above explanation, Infanticide committed a short time after birth, should not be considered as a crime committed with extreme cruelty, warranting the penalty of life imprisonment but rather there should be a balanced sentence

10R. v. Lisa Gore (Deceased) [2007] EWCA Crim 2789. Lady Justice Hallett said: “We are satisfied that Parliament intended to create a new offence of Infanticide… If the criteria in sub-section (1) are fulfilled, the mother who kills her child does not have to face an indictment of murder. She faces a lower grade criminal charge, namely infanticide.”

Page 332

119 taking into account the circumstances under which the crime was committed and the type of offender. In short, it would be better to ensure that the severity of the sentence is proportionate to the nature of the crime of Infanticide. The Court requests the responsible government agencies to examine the provisions of the law on Infanticide regarding how the crime is defined and the corresponding penalty. The Zimbabwean Penal Code may be used as a reference for amending the Rwandan Penal Code on Infanticide. It provides: “48 (1) Any woman who, within six months of the birth of her child, causes its death (a) Intentionally; or (b) By conduct which she realizes involves a real risk to the child's life; at a time when the balance of her mind is disturbed as a result of giving birth to the child, shall be guilty of lnfanticide and liable to imprisonment for a period not exceeding five years. 48 (2) Where a woman is charged with the murder of her child committed within six months of the child's birth and it is proved that she caused the child’s death at a time when the balance of her mind was disturbed as a result of giving birth to the child, she shall not be found guilty of murder but may be found guilty of lnfanticide if the evidence establishes that she committed that crime. 48 (3) For the purposes of this section, in determining whether or not the balance of a woman’s mind was disturbed as a result of giving birth to a child, regard shall be taken to any pressure or stress from which she suffered arising out of any one or more of the following circumstances or considerations: NTIBAJYINAMA v. PROSECUTION

Page 333

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 120 (a) The effects which the birth had, or which she believed it would have, on her social, financial or marital situation; (b) The difficulties which were created, or which she believed would be created, in caring for the child in the social, financial or marital situation in which the child was born; (c) The difficulties which she had, or which she believed she would have, in caring for the child due to her inexperience or (d) Any other relevant circumstance or consideration, on the psychological effects on the woman’s mind arising from the birth itself, or otherwise. 48 (4) For the avoidance of doubt it is declared that nothing in this section precludes: (a) a woman from being charged with the murder of her child and, subject to subsection (2), from being convicted of and punished for that crime; or (b) a court from returning a special verdict in terms of section 29 of the Mental Health Act [Chapter 15:12] (No. 15 of 1996) in respect of a woman charged with causing the death of her child.”11 The Court finds that according to the above law (of Zimbabwe), the circumstances under which mothers commit infanticide are similar to those in Rwanda and can thus help in reviewing our law with a view to amending it.

11 Section of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act [Chapter (Zimbabwe 2004).

Page 334

III. COURT DECISION [45] The Court decides that Ntibajyinama Esther’s appeal has merit. [46] The court decides that the judgment of High Court, Rwamagana Chamber, of April 30, 2015, is modified only with regard to the sentence Ntibajyinama Esther had been given. [47] The Court sentences Ntibajyinama Esther to 10 years in prison. [48] The Court orders that the Court fees be charged to the public treasury because the Appellant is in prison.

121

Page 335

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 122 PROSECUTION v. HABYARIMANA ET.AL [Rwanda SUPREME COURT – RPA0154/13/CS (Mugenzi, P.J., Muhumuza and Mukamulisa, J.) December 08, 2017] Criminal law – Concurrence of the offences – Joint criminal enterprise – Derivative criminal liability in the circumstances where the commission of an offence causes another offence – In case the commission of an offence causes another offence, the accused are criminally liable of both those offences even thought the author of the last offence did not inform others that he/she was about to commit that offence – Organic Law N°01/2012/OL of 02/05/2012 instituting the penal code, article 98. Criminal law – Concurrence of the offences – Sentencing – In sentencing of various related offences, the penalties must be in the form of ideal concurrence and the convicted sentenced to the penalty provided for the most severe offence– Organic Law N°01/2012/OL of 02/05/2012 instituting the penal code, article 84. Facts: This case started in the High Court, Nyanza Chamber, the appellants were prosecuted for violation of person’s domicile and for murder, and these offences were committed when Habyarimana, the then executive secretary of the sector took his co-accused in his car in an operation which the appellants allege that it was a night patrol, they went to Sebera’ home about midnight, knocked at his door but Sebera refused to open, rather, he made an alarm calling for help,and when he

Page 336

123 later got out he was shot by Uwiragiye, who also shot Mutuyimana as he came to rescue. Mukambanda and Nkurirehe filed a civil action within criminal proceedings but Nkurirehe’s claim was not admitted as she failed to prove his capacity to file such claim. That Court found them guilty of those offences, and sentenced them to a reduced penalty of 25 years of imprisonment due to the fact that it was their first time prosecuted before Courts, the Court further ordered them to jointly pay Mukambanda damages equivalent to 10,000,000Frw. Not contented with the rulings, the accused appealed before the Supreme Court stating that they should not have been prosecuted for violation of person’s domicile without prior complaint of the victims, they also did not admit having committed the acts which constitute that offence, explaining that they were fulfilling their duty of ensuring security by supervising the patrol. The prosecution explained that the accused violated Sebera’s domicile as they could not talk to him from outside when he was inside the house, they did not also have search warrants when they reached his home at around midnight. With regard to the offence of murder, except Uwiragiye who pleaded guilty, admitting that she shot Sebera and Mutuyimana in self defense as they had injured her, she further demonstrated that she was provoked, the other appellants explained that

they were wrongly convicted of those offences, because the author of that offence confessed to it, for Habyarimana, he denied having command over police personnel. The prosecution explained in its pleadings that Habyarimana’s role is based on the fact that he was the superior in that operation and he transported them in his car, he also had disputes with Sebera as it was testified by those interrogated PROSECUTION v. HABYARIMANA ET.AL

Page 337

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 124 during the investigation. The claimant in civil action instituted a cross appeal stating that she was awarded less damages and she requested the Court to award her appropriate damages. In their defense, Habyarimana, Rugamba and Karemera argue that they should not pay damages as they are not the authors of the offence and they are innocent, whereas Uwiragiye argues that she was ordered to pay damages which are not proportionate to the offence committed and that the government should be forced to intervene in the case because the offence was committed while she was on duty. Held:1.The fact that Mukambanda whose domicile was violated, she repeatedly explained that her husband was murdered after their domicile was violated at night, and thereafter claimed for damages, this proves that she had the interest to follow up on her case, therefore, the accused should be prosecuted for violation of person’s domicile.

2. The accused are guilty of violation of person’s domicile on the ground that they went to Sebera’s domicile in the night and ordered him to open without a search warrant.

3. The fact that the offence of the violation of person’s domicile sparked the offence of the murder, the link between those offences makes the accused criminally liable of all those offences even thought the author of the murder did not inform others that he/she was about to commit that offence.

4. In sentencing of various related offences, the penalties must be in the form of ideal concurrence and the convicted sentenced to the penalty provided for the most severe offence.

5. The fact that the requested damages are excessive and there is no proof that the ones awarded on the first instance are

Page 338

125 insufficient, those awarded on the first instance are confirmed to be appropriate. Appeal has merit on some grounds; Cross appeal is without merit; Court fees charged to the public treasury. Statute and statutory instruments referred to: Organic Law N°01/2012/OL of 02/05/2012 instituting the penal code, article 45,74, 76,78,84, 98, 99,105,106,140, 280 and 291 Decree Law of 30/07/ 1888 relating to contracts or conventional obligations, article 258 Law N°21/2012 of 14/06/2012 relating to the civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure, article 118 Case law referred to: Prosecution v. Sezikeye, RPAA038/15/CS rendered by the Supreme Court on 15/09/2015 Authors cited: Isabelle Rolive & D.Bosquet, “La renonciation au meurtre: une limite au système de l’imputation automatique du meurtre à tous les participants au vol’’, Revue de Droit Penal et de Criminologie, Avril 2002, p.371.

PROSECUTION v. HABYARIMANA ET.AL

Page 339

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 126 Judgment I. BRIEF BACKGROUND OF THE

CASE [1] In High Court, Nyanza Chamber, Habyarimana Festus, Uwiragiye Fabiola, Rugamba Frank, Karemera Steven alias Maridadi and Ngezahayo David were prosecuted for violation of person’s domicile and murder of Sebera Laurent and Mutuyimana Innocent, the latter had come for rescue, in the night of 02 July 2012, when at around midnight, Habyarimana, the then executive secretary of the sector drove the co-accused in his car to Sebera’s home and knocked at his door but he refused to open, instead, he made an alarm calling for help, later when he came out , he was shot by Uwiragiye, who also shot Mutuyimana who was coming to rescue. [2] Mukambanda Dorothée and Nkurirehe Eugenié filed a civil action within criminal proceedings but Nkurirehe’s action was not admitted on the ground that she failed to prove her capacity to file that action and the decision was not appealed. [3] The High Court, Nyanza Chamber, convicted the accused of criminal participation for violation of person’s domicile and murder of Sebera Laurent and Mutuyimana Innocent, it sentenced each of them to a reduced penalty of 25 years of imprisonment on the ground that it is their first time to be prosecuted before Courts, the Court further ordered them to jointly pay the widow of Sebera, Mukambanda 10,000,000Frw in damages.

Page 340

127 [4] In convicting the accused, the High Court motivated that they conspired in the murder of Sebera, this is proved by the acts which preceded the offence, in their common consent, they sent Karemera Steven and Rugamba Frank to Sebera and informed the latter that Habyarimana, Executive Secretary has sent for him, this was followed by the shooting of Sebera and Mutuyimana who came to rescue at night, therefore there are guilty of ideal concurrence. [5] The High Court based on the ground that the accused admit to have gone to Sebera’s home during night with no search warrant, and they fail to prove the commotion coming from his residence as motive to go to Sebera’s home, he has never been warned as someone causing commotion to others, this was even refuted by the witnesses Mukamana Jeanne and Muhawenimana Josephine. [6] With regard to Habyarimana’s role in the offence of murder, the Court has based on the fact that he induced the violation of Sebera’s domicile, in addition, he harboured that plot because even before shooting Sebera, Habyarimana sent Karemera Steven and Inkeragutabara to inform him that he has to report himself to his office at the Sector ( identification mark 94) and it is the same day he was shot, Habyarimana having abetted the author by his presence , and Mutuyimana Innocent was killed when he came to rescue. [7] As regards to Uwiragiye Fabiola, the Court motivated that there is no proof that she murdered two persons in self defence as nothing proves that the victims had machetes and - they hit her on head as she alleges in her pleadings, and this was emphasized by the statement of certified physician that Uwiragiye had 3 minor wounds which could easily heal and PROSECUTION v. HABYARIMANA ET.AL

Page 341

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 128 their cause is not determined. It further held that even if she would have been hit with machete, it would not have been considered as self defense because she could not use a gun against those who had machetes which were also not shown and she does not prove that she had no other means to use. [8] With regard to Karemera Steven alias Maridadi, the Court motivated that he is guilty of the offence as he admits that he went together with his co-accused to Sebera’s home, he violated the domicile and Sebera was shot in his presence, and also it was confirmed by the witnesses Uwanzuwe (identification marks 64-65) and Barame Samuel (71-72) that he first came with others to spy on Sebera, and when he tried to handcuff him, Sebera refused. [9] With regard to Rugamba Frank, the Court explained that during the hearing he confessed that he shot in the air, to prevent the killings, but he had come prior to the killings to spy on Sebera as testified by Nsanzimana JMV, the motorcyclist, who transported them (identification mark 64-65). [10] As regards to Ngezahayo David who was tried in absentia, although he was legally summoned, the Court explained that he was also involved in the plot to commit offence as his co-accused. [11] Habyarimana, Uwiragiye, Rugamba and Karemera1appealed to the Supreme Court arguing that they were prosecuted for the offence of violation of person’s domicile without prior complaint of the victim, that they were

1 Ngezahayo David who was tried in absentia did not appeal.

Page 342

129 convicted with no incriminating evidence against them and the Court disregarded their statements, for Uwiragiye, she states that the Court disregarded that she shot Sebera in self defence because they fought with her with machete intending to kill her. Other accused state that they had no role in the murder. [12] In cross appeal, Mukambanda, the claimant for the damages argues that what she was awarded is insufficient, hence those damages should be increased. [13] The public hearing was held on 03 April 2017, 24 July 2017 and on 09 October 2017, Habyarimana being assisted by counsel Nsengiyumva Viateur and Nsengiyumva Enos, Karemera Steven assisted by counsel Habyarimana Flavienne and Gatabazi Nuru Claudine, Rugamba Frank was assisted by Counsel Hakizimana Martin, Habiyambere Aphrodis and Gatabazi Nuru Claudine, Uwiragiye Fabiola was assisted by counsel Kabasenga Berthilde, Gatabazi Nuru Claudine and Hakizimana Martin, whereas Mukambanda Dorothée, the claimant for the damages was assisted by counsel Karamira Jacques. II. ANALYSIS OF LEGAL ISSUES [14] In this case, the Court examines whether the accused should not have been prosecuted for the offence of violation of person’s domicile, and whether there is incriminating evidence against them for that offence as well as for murder, and lastly, the Court examines the issue relating to damages. a. Whether the accused should not have been prosecuted for violation of person’s domicile PROSECUTION v. HABYARIMANA ET.AL

Page 343

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 130 because the complaint was not lodged by the victim. [15] Habyarimana Festus, Uwiragiye Fabiola, Rugamba Frank, Karemera Steven together with their counsels state that let alone that they don’t agree that they violated Sebera’s domicile, they should not have been prosecuted for that offence without prior complaint of the victims as provided by article 291 of Organic Law N°01/2012/OL of 02/05/2012 instituting the penal code. [16] The Prosecution argues that even if the victim did not file a complaint, the Prosecution acts in public interests, that it cannot sit aside and let offence being committed without prosecuting the offenders.

THE VIEW OF THE COURT [17] Article 291 of Organic Law N°01/2012/OL of 02/05/2012 instituting the penal code provides that for offences against privacy, legal action shall be instituted by the Public Prosecution upon request by the victim, his/her legally authorized representative or rightful claimant, article 280 of the same organic law provides violation of person’s domicile among those offences. [18] The Court finds, the pleadings of the accused that the complaint was not initiated by the victim lack merit, because the case file demonstrates that in all organs from judicial police, the Prosecution and in Courts, Mukambanda a widow of Sebera, whose domicile was violated repeatedly explained that her husband was murdered after their domicile was violated at

Page 344

131 night, she went further filed an action for damages originating from those offences, and the accused don’t demonstrate that Mukambanda lost the interest to follow up on her case. b. Whether there is incriminating evidence based on to convict the accused for the offence of violation of person’s domicile. [19] The appellants deny violating a person’s domicile as they were executing their duties of ensuring security to people and their properties, by making night patrol, because of the commotion they went to Sebera’s home the same way as they went to other places. [20] Uwiragiye, Rugamba, Karemera and their counsel admit having reached Sebera’s home, but that they didn’t commit the offence of violation of person’s domicile as they were all on duty of ensuring security to people and their properties, because of the commotion they went to Sebera’s home as they went to other places while they were on the night patrol. [21] They further explained that together with Ngezahayo went to Sebera’s residence to surpevise the night patrol which was conducted in his surrounding, that they found nobody on the patrol but they heard people talking from Sebera’s house, they went there, Ngezahayo and Rugamba knocked at the door but they returned back when Sebera got out with a machete. [22] Rugamba and counsel Hakizimana, Habiyambere and Gatabazi Nuru, state that he was wrongly convicted for violation of person’s domicile, because they entered after knocking and were denied to enter which proves that they didn’t reach the extent provided by article 280 of Organic Law PROSECUTION v. HABYARIMANA ET.AL

Page 345

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 132 N°01/2012/OL of 02/05/2012 instituting the penal code as they were outside the house, he states that before the judicial police, he explained that they knocked and informed Sebera that they are together with Executive Secretary of the Sector. [23] Karemera, counsel Habyarimana and Gatabazi Nuru assisting him, explain that he is not guilty of violation of person’s domicile, that he went at Sebera’s home on his superiors order to supervise the patrol, he went with two police personnel, Uwiragiye and Rugamba purposely to ask him reasons why he was selling late at night. [24] Habyarimana together with his counsel Nsengimana Viateur and Nsengiyumva Enos, argue that he did not go to Sebera’s home; that he stayed in the car, that even Mukambanda told the Court during investigation that Habyarimana did not enter the domicile; therefore he should not be sentenced for the offence he did not commit. [25] The Prosecutor argues that the accused entered Sebera’s home because it was impossible for them, to talk to him from outside while he was inside they went there at midnight without search warrants, The Prosecutor adds that Habyarimana cannot evade from his role in the commission of the offence whereas he is the one who sent and transported the authors. [26] Mukambanda, the claimant for the damages and her counsel Karamira explain that Uwiragiye, Rugamba, Karemera and Ngezahayo entered her home in wee hours with no authorization, threatening Sebera so that he gets out of house, all this was on request of executive secretary Habyarimana.

Page 346

133

THE VIEW OF THE COURT [27] With regard to Uwiragiye, Rugamba and Karemera who entered Sebera’s home, the Court finds, as it was held by the High Court, Nyanza chamber, the accused are guilty of violation of person’s domicile because they admit having gone to Sebera’s home, ordered him to open during night without search warrant and article 280 of Organic Law N°01/2012/OL of 02/05/2012 instituting the penal code prohibits entering person’s domicile without lawful authority except in case the law provides otherwise. [28] The court finds, the appellants failed to prove the commotion which they use as a pretext to enter Sebera’s home arguing that it was caused by those boozing from his home, and they don’t indicate any other person who is not member of the family they found there, except Mutuyimana who was shot when he came from his home to rescue, in addition, during the interrogation in judicial police, Habyarimana stated that Sebera got out of the house alone.(identification mark 117)2 [29] With regard to Habyarimana who did not enter Sebera’s domicile as affirmed by Mukambanda herself, the Court finds, like Uwiragiye, Rugamba and Karemera, even if he would not have entered, his co-accused state that he is the one who ordered them to arrest Sebera, and that he is the one who transported them and was the one coordinating that patrol as the executive secretary of the sector.

2 We noticed that Sebera is the one we saw who got out the house; I don’t know whether others exited later, as we had already ran, and scattered. PROSECUTION v. HABYARIMANA ET.AL

Page 347

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 134 [30] Article 98 of Organic Law N°01/2012/OL of 02/05/2012 instituting the penal code provides that a person who incites the offender is accomplice, article 99 of that Organic Law provides that an accomplice is punished by the judge in case he/she finds that the accomplice’s responsibility in the commission of the offence is the same as or greater than that of the principal offender. [31] The Court finds that even if Habyarimana wants to evade his role in the commission of the offence of violation of person’s domicile alleging that he did not enter Sebera’s domicile, that he stayed on the roadside in the car he disregards that as the executive secretary of the sector, who brought those who entered Sebera’s domicile during night with no lawful authorization, and ordered them to arrest Sebera, his orders render him an accomplice pursuant to article 98 mentioned above. [32] With regard to the pleadings of Habyarimana, that he has no authority over police, the Court finds it lacking merit because as the executive secretary of the sector, who was coordinating the night patrol, the police personnel he was together with, were to assist him in that patrol, that is the reason, he gave them orders to go to Sebera and they went there as he attested it himself in the hearing of 03 April 2017 as follows: I stayed in car and I sent them, thus, he does not deny that he gave them orders as a leader. [33] Basing on above motivations, the Court finds that Habyarimana, Uwiragiye, Rugamba and Karemera are guilty of violation of person’s domicile, provided and punishable by article 280 of Law N°01/2012/OL of 02/05/2012 mentioned above, therefore, this ground of appeal is without merit.

Page 348

135 c. Whether there is incriminating evidence to convict the accused of murder 1. In regard to Uwiragiye Fabiola who shot Sebera and Mutuyimana [34] Uwiragiye states that she was convicted for criminal participation for murder whereas she is the principal offender as she is the one who shot Sebera and Mutuyimana Innocent, that she is not guilty of concurrence of offences because she didn’t commit any other offence, that no one ordered her to kill, she rather shot the victims in self defence because they had wounded her as it is indicated in medical report of physician who treated, vaccinated and transferred her elsewhere, that she often attended Court trials having a medical bandage which proves that she was wounded. [35] She explains that she had no plot of murder, that she was awaken by the police commander asking her to go and supervise patrol together with the administrator of the Sector and Inkeragutabara, that she joined others in the car and they traversed through various cells in supervision of the patrol, reaching Sebera’s home, they heard people shouting and drinking, Rugamba and Ngezahayo asked Sebera to get out of the house, and when he realised that they were policemen, he told them to immediately leave his home, Mutuyimana also came with a machete, they ran away. [36] She states that people who were at the home of Sebera ran after her with machetes, one of them hit her and fell down when he was trying to hit her for the second time, when the rest of them attempted to hit her, she shot three times and one of them died, she pushed Sebera’s wife when she tried to beat her PROSECUTION v. HABYARIMANA ET.AL

Page 349

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 136 with a club and as they continued to run after her, she shot Sebera on the arm and another bullet hit him in the belly, that she shot as a last option when they found her in sorghum field where she was hiding, where Sebera died, she adds on that, she first shot in the air and they refused to withdrawal. [37] She states that, in their statements, Mukambanda Dorothée and Nyiramatama confirmed that she entangled with Sebera and they fought against her and during the investigation, the Court was shown the place where they fought as well as the spot where Sebera died and this proves that he was following after her, it is further proved by the fact that he was shot on his front side on the heart and Mutuyimana was shot in the rib. [38] She says that she was not ordered by Habyarimana to shoot as he is not his superior, and that the alleged hatred between him and Sebera was not justified, that she did not go to spy during day time as was stated, she adds that Nyiramatama, Nsanzimana and Uwanzuwe never confirmed that they saw her at Sebera’s home. [39] Kabasenga, Counsel for Uwiragiye states that Uwiragiye was provoked because she shot after being hit by a machete and the blood stains could be spotted on her T-shirt (identification mark 59), that the minor wounds found on delicate parts of her body were not considered, she wonders why the machetes were not seized whereas the witnesses testified that the machetes were there. Counsel Kabasenga requests that the provocation be considered in sentencing Uwiragiye. [40] With regard to the statements of the witnesses during investigation that Sebera was shot while fleeing, Counsel Kabasenga argues that the statements of Mukambanda and her

Page 350

137 daughter Nyiramatama contradict because if Sebera was shot while fleeing, he would have been shot in the back. [41] Counsel Hakizimana who also assists Uwiragiye states that she had not premeditated the murder because she took the gun when she was going on duty together with the executive secretary, she had no conflict with Sebera, it was rather an accident caused by being cut as indicated by the first medical report, in such circumstances she shot. He adds that the witnesses’s testimonies should not be considered because they were prepared for interrogatory, that his client should have been present during the investigation and that at the beginning, Mukambanda said that they fought each other, therefore her statement that Sebera was shot while running should not be considered. Counsel Hakizimana concludes by praying that Uwiragiye should be sentenced in accordance with articles 105- 106 of Organic Law N°01/2012/OL of 02/05/2012 instituting the penal code, provisions related to provocation. [42] Karamira, the Counsel for Mukambanda who claims for damages states that Uwiragiye is misleading the Court, as there is no medical report issued by a certified Doctor to prove that she was cut with a machete, the report was rather issued by Habyarimana’s wife who works at a dispensary, he adds that there is no imperfection in investigation carried out by the Court. [43] Mukambanda states that during day time, Karemera came with a police personel looking for Sebera, she told them that he is not around but they forcibly entered the domicile, when they saw him, they wanted to handcuff him but he refused and they went back murmuring, they came back at night and knocked at the door, once again she told them that he is not PROSECUTION v. HABYARIMANA ET.AL

Page 351

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 138 around, they insisted by kicking the door and Sebera instead of getting out, he called for a help, consequently, Mutuyimana came to rescue and he fell in an ambush of the others who had remained at the front courtyard, they hit him and as he groaned, Sebera got out of the house, they arrested him but he later escaped them and they ran after him until they shot him in sorghum field. [44] She states that when police personel were running after her husband, she also ran after them begging for mercy, she unfortunately reached them when they had already killed her husband, the executive secretary Habyarimana took the police woman to the dispensary which is managed by his wife. [45] The prosecution contends that Uwiragiye did not commit the offence in self defense, because the medical report issued by certified medical Doctor affirmed that she had minor wounds with no certain causes, that if it was a machete, there would be a severe wound, the Prosecution adds that the judicial police had no interests in concealing the machetes which were not found, he further argues that, the fact that Sebera was shot in the shoulders proves that he was shot while fleeing, which is contrary to self defense as nothing proves that the victims fought against Uwiragiye, to be qualified as provocation. [46] Concerning the witnesses’s statements during the investigation, the Prosecutor argues that when are considered together they demonstrate that the day on which Sebera was killed, inkeragutabara by the name of Karemera came with police personel during day time and they came back at night intentionally to kill him, that all witnesses testified that Habyarimana and Sebera had disputes related to sand deposit. That people gathered at Sebera during day time, were in ikimina

Page 352

139 and that they were all no longer there at 4 PM and attack occurred during night with no people still at his home. [47] The prosecutor argues that Habyarimana was among those who attacked, the victims were shot with more than one bullet, this proves the intent to murder, he finds the investigation’s findings corroborate with the witnesses’ statements.

THE VIEW OF THE COURT [48] Article 105 of Organic Law N°01/2012/OL of 02/05/2012 instituting the penal code, in its litera 2, provides that a person shall be considered to act in self-defense […] when he/she commits an act to defend him/herself against perpetrators of theft or other criminals, and article 106 of that organic law provides that a person who, in case of an unjustified attack on him/herself or another person, acts in self-defence or in case of defence of another person shall not be criminally liable, except if there is excessive disproportion between the means of defence used and the gravity of the attack. [49] The court finds Uwiragiye’s arguments intending to prove that she shot Sebera and Mutuyimana after they hit her with a machete is groundless, because as it was proven by certified medical Doctor who examined Uwiragiye, affirmed that she had minor wounds and their causes are uncertain, this implies that if the injuries were caused by machetes when Uwiragiye was hit three times on the head by people who intentionally wanted to kill her as she alleges, the Doctor would not have failed to observe and to confirm it, besides, nothing proves that the victims had machetes as they were not seized PROSECUTION v. HABYARIMANA ET.AL

Page 353

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 140 and the witnesses did not affirm that they saw those machetes. The Court finds that those injuries may have been caused by a fight between Uwiragiye and Sebera when the latter refused the arrest as revealed by Mukambanda that before Sebera was shot, he fought with those who wanted to apprehend him. [50] The Court finds that article 105 of Organic Law N°01/2012/OL of 02/05/2012 instituting the penal code mentioned above which Uwizeye relies to demonstrate that she shot them in self defense is incompatible with the facts at Sebera’s home as the latter cannot be considered as a thief or other wrongdoer because he refused to be arrested, so that they arrest him after violating his domicile, and one of the pre- conditions for the offender to invoke the excuse of self defense is that the act against him or her is injust or unlawful, Sebera’s refusal to be arrested cannot be considered as an injust or an unlawful act. [51] The Court finds that the provocation invoked by counsel for Uwiragiye, cannot be substantiated because Sebera cannot be considered as the cause of his murder, whereas as mentioned above, he was attacked late at night, in violation of laws, the fact that he refused the arrest, cannot be considered as the one who provoked the offenders, furthermore, article 74 of Organic Law N°01/2012/OL of 02/05/2012 instituting the penal code provides that it is qualified as provocation, if done by the victim3.

3 Court motivation rejecting provocation as an excuse of the commission of the offence was also held in judgment RPAA038/15/CS of 15 September 2017, Prosecution v. Sezikeye Emmanuel.

Page 354

141 [52] Considering the above motivations, the Court finds Uwiragiye guilty of murder provided by article 140 of Organic Law N°01/2012/OL of 02/05/2012 instituting the penal code, her appeal intending to prove that she committed murder in self defense or under provocation is therefore without merit.

2. With regard to Habyarimana, Rugamba and Karemera [53] Habyarimana Festus states that he was convicted for the offence he did not commit, with no concrete evidence, that his defense was not considered, he adds that the real perpetrator confessed it and did not testify against him, disregarding that criminal liability is personal. He explained that he went with police personnel to supervise the night patrol and to order pubs to close as per decisions of the security meeting, that they went to various cells with no intention to go to Sebera’s place, they only went there when they reached where those on the patrol are always stationed and they found none, instead, they heard commotion coming from Sebera’s place, and he sent people to go and check, while for him he stayed in the car on the roadside, that there was misunderstandings with those found at home, in such circumstances, Uwiragiye fired the gun, and at that juncture, he felt like traumatized, that he could do nothing, on her return, Uwiragiye told him that the disputes arose with people and she shot and that she has been wounded, hence, she was transported to hospital. [54] He further explained that even if he was coordinating patrol activities, they were in different organs, each of them with distinct obligations to fulfill towards their respective organs, that Habyarimana as a civilian, he had no authority to give orders to police who had guns or Inkeragutabara, he PROSECUTION v. HABYARIMANA ET.AL

Page 355

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 142 concludes stating that he had no conflicts with the deceased relating to iron sheets or sand deposit to the extent that he kills him and that he did not send people at Sebera before. [55] His Counsel Nsengiyumva Enos and Nsengiyumva Viateur assisting him argue that the High Court convicted Habyarimana without evidence, because the Prosecution did not demonstrate where the plot to shot was masterminded and its preparation. Instead, as an executive secretary who was coordinating the supervision of night patrol, as per security meeting, Habyarimana transported others to supervise the patrols, they did not find any one on duty of patrol stations, rather, they heard noise. They further argue that the Prosecution does not prove that he gave orders to shoot and nothing proves that those who went at Sebera’s place during the day were sent by him as they don’t testify against him, Uwiragiye who shot two people does not also testify against him, the latter must be liable for her offence. [56] With regard to the witnesses’s statements during the investigation carried out by the Supreme Court, Habyarimana and his counsel Nsengiyumva state that the witnesses’s statements cannot be relied upon to convict him because they contradict each other, because during the Court hearing, Mukambanda widow of the victim stated that she did not hear the voice of the executive secretary of the sector at her home, during investigation she stated that she saw him at her home, Uwihanganye and Rutebuka state that the offence was committed in absence of Habyarimana, Maguru stated that the dead bodies were transported by Habyarimana’s car whereas they were transported by an ambulance known as imbangukiragutabara. He stated that with regard to conflicts

Page 356

143 between Habyarimana and the deceased, that Mukambanda stated that Sebera had issues with other members of his cooperative but he reconciled them, Mbarushimana Zacharie stated that the disputes were related to sand deposit whereas the Sector confirmed that there is no sand deposit but it is rice farming, that the sand issues are new, at the beginning, the issue of iron sheets was the only one raised. [57] Rugamba Frank states that he was convicted for the murder without concrete evidence because its author has confessed it and he did not abet in its commission, that what he did was among his duties, that he didn’t go to spy as stated by the Prosecution, except that they passed at Sebera’s home during day time as they were going to other cell to arrest people who had injured each other while fighting, that he was not ordered by the Executive Secretary because they don’t take orders from him, that people from that area linked this with Sebera’s death, and the Prosecution qualified it as spying whereas he did not go to Sebera’s domicile or at least talk to him, he adds that spying cannot be conducted while bearing official document. [58] He continues stating that on the day the offence was committed, he was woken up by his superior and he went with the executive secretary to supervise the night patrol, arriving at Sebera’s place, they found people shouting, they knocked and asked to open but instead of opening, he made an alarm calling for help and came a man with a machete, that he (Rugamba) and his colleagues fled, he returned when he heard the gun shots and he found Uwiragiye circled by people, he shot thrice in air to scare them so that they leave her. PROSECUTION v. HABYARIMANA ET.AL

Page 357

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 144 [59] In regards to the testimonies of the witnesses during the investigation, Rugamba argues that they should not be considered because they are are contradictory, as Nyiramatama who testifies that she was at Sebera’s place at 2 pm , she did not see any police personel whereas Mukambanda states that Inkeragutabara and policeman named Rugamba came at Sebera’s place at 4 pm, this is the first time she is testifing this and they testified that there was no wounded police personel, moreover one was taken to hospital. He concludes stating that the High Court fell short in demonstrating how he would have been sent by Habyarimana and during Court investigation, the Court did not go to his work place to verify that he was not on duty. [60] Counsel Nuru Gatabazi and Habiyambere assisting Rugamba, state that the Prosecution does not prove his role in the victims’s death, as it doesn’t prove that he had a plot with executive secretary of murdering Sebera, rather, they went to supervise the patrol on the request of his superior, the issues arose when Uwiragiye shot and caused the death, that Rugamba fled with his gun avoiding participating in the commission of the offence, he returned when he heard gun shots, and he shot in the air to rescue his colleague. [61] Karemera Steven states that he was convicted disregarding that he was on patrol as inkeragutabara, that his co-accused were all superior to him and they took him to Sebera’s home, reaching there, they found no one on the patrol station, instead, they heard noises at Sebera’s place, Rugamba knocked at the door and people inside the house asked him to identify himself,then Sebera instantly made an alarm calling for a help, as response, Mutuyimana came to rescue with a machete,

Page 358

145 Karemera ran because he thought that those inside were about to get out,, and the police personel turned back and ran, he came back when Uwiragiye’s clothes were full of blood and she was saying that she will shoot anyone who approaches her. [62] He also argues that he did not come to spy at Sebera’s home during the daytime; rather, they passed there when they came from arresting people when he was together with police personnel who are recently deployed in the sector and that they had no handcuffs. [63] He states that the statements of the witnesses Mukambanda, Nyiramatama and Muhawenimana are contradictory, they are also different from their statements made in previous interrogatory because Muhawenimana said that she was at school whereas there was no class on that day, Mukambanda stated that the police met her when she was sitting with the kids at her home, that she is not aware of their talks with Sebera, but she is now saying that she was told that Sebera was wanted by the executive secretary of the sector, Nyiramatama states that she was at Sebera’s place at 2 pm , in contrast, his wife said that there was no any other person at home. [64] Counsel Habyarimana and Habiyambere assisting him, state that his co accused took him from where he was on the patrol duty to direct them to the patrol station, that nothing proves his role in victim’s death, they claim that the Court acquits him. Counsel Gatabazi Nuru argues that the witnesses’statements are confusing because they contradict in regards to spying invoked, and the fact that the dead body was transported in the executive secretary’s car, then again they state that the body was transported by ambulance. PROSECUTION v. HABYARIMANA ET.AL

Page 359

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 146 [65] Counsel Karamira assisting Mukambanda the claimant for damages, states that the investigation was well conducted and it proves that those brought at Sebera’s home by Habyarimana, they constituted an attack and in the testimonies, it was revealed that the conflicts between Habyarimana and Sebera were the causes of that attack, he adds that all those who came in the attack should admit their respective roles. [66] The prosecution contends that Habyarimana’s role is based on the fact that he was coordinating those activities even if he first denied them, that he was not the one to give orders to police, he does not demonstrate reasonable motive to go to Sebera’s home at midnight since in his interrogatory before judicial police admitted that Sebera got out the house alone (identification mark 117), Rugamba in his interrogatory said that Sebera was talking with the others in the rear of the house, they did not indicate the commotion (identification mark 110), in addition, during the day time there was a spying whereby Habyarimana instructed Sebera to appear before him with regard to the iron sheets’ issues and the latter refused to report himself, this is also mentioned by Uwiragiye and Rugamba(identification mark 51-50), therefore, Habyarimana went at Sebera’s home in revenge, this is also what was declared by the witnesses during the investigation,

that the spies came first, that Habyarimana’s car brought the perpetrators and that he was in conflicts with Sebera. [67] With regard to Rugamba Frank, the Prosecution contends that he confessed for having gone to Sebera’s home, and that this was considered as spying because in interrogatory he admitted that he asked Sebera to report himself before the executive secretary and that he also confessed for having

Page 360

147 knocked at Sebera’s door asking him to come out, and informing him that they are police together with the executive secretary of the sector, that the Court would base on his contradiction since in his interrogatory he stated that he shot before they were cut with a machete, that he shot again after they were cut (identification mark 110), that he (Rugamba) further stated that he came to rescue his colleague, whereas before, he mentioned that they fled separately, the Prosecution concludes stating that he wants to evade his role in the commission of the offence. [68] Concerning Karemera, the Prosecution argues that during the day time. He went with a policeman to spy to Sebera’s home, that he also went there at the night with them, the murder was committed in his presence, that even if he had no weapon, his colleagues of the attack had the weapons, the Prosecutor requests the Court to refer to his contradiction to find him guilty because he says that they didn’t see the patrol along way, in contrast he also says that they took him from patrol.

THE VIEW OF THE COURT [69] Article 98 of Law N°01/2012/OL of 02/05/2012 instituting the penal code defines three ways in which a person can be held responsible for committing an offence: offender, a person who commits an offence, co-offender, a person who directly cooperates in the commission of an offence, accomplice, a person knowingly aids or abets the offender in preparing, facilitating or committing the offence, or a person who incites the offender. The offence of murder charged to Habyarimana, Rugamba and Karemera has to be examined pursuant to that provision of the law. PROSECUTION v. HABYARIMANA ET.AL

Page 361

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 148 [70] The Court finds that the murder committed by Uwiragiye is the act linked to the violation of Sebera’s domicile, because the latter was shot after confrontation when Sebera refused to open the door, and when he came out the house, he refused to be arrested as ordered by Habyarimana, the executive secretary of the sector, the murder was committed when Sebera prevented the principal offence of the violation of his domicile, these offences are therefore interrelated and that of the murder seems to be aggravating the violation of person’s domicile, the offence by which Uwiragiye, Rugamba and Karemera came to commit on request of Habyarimana. [71] The above motivations comply with the doctrines such as those of law scholar Isabelle Rorive and D. Bosquet stating that without having physically collaborated in the criminal acts of others, a person can thus be held criminally responsible because he/she has encouraged those acts by the creation of a latent criminal offence or the commission of an offence,4 the scholars give example of the murder committed by one of the thieves, his co-offenders have to be held criminally responsible because that murder is considered as aggravating circumstances of the theft as an offence itself instead of considering personal aggravating circumstances, the murder is linked to the theft, even if the author of the murder would not have previously informed the others.

4 Sans avoir physiquement collaboré aux agissement délictueux d’autrui, une personne peut ainsi voir sa responsabilité pénale engagée parce qu’elle a favorisé ces agissements par la création d’un état délictueux latent ou par la commission d’une faute” : Isabelle Rorive, in collaboration with D.Bosquet, “La renonciation au meurtre: une limite au système de l’imputation automatique du meurtre à tous les participants au vol”, in Revue de Droit Pénal et de Criminologie, April 2002, p. 371.

Page 362

149 [72] The Cassation Court of Belgium took the same position whereby it repeatedly decided in various cases that when murder is committed to enable the commission of the theft, the author of the thief shall also be held responsible for that murder even though his direct participation is not obvious5, in such perception, the Cassation Court of France demonstrated that an accomplice who deployed others in terrorism, he/she shall also be held responsible for using tear gas to the victim of terrorism, even if he/she was not aware that they would use that gas, the Court motivated that the co-author is held liable to all charges related to the offence he/she participated even though he/she was not informed of some acts.6 [73] The Court finds, considering the fact that the violation of Sebera’s domicile provoked the offence of murder committed against him when he denied to come out, and when he came out, he refused to be arrested, that confrontation led him and Mutuyimana who came to rescue to be shot to death, it is convincing that the act of violating Sebera’s domicile and the murder committed against him are interelated, therefore, Habyarimana, Rugamba and Karemera are part of authors of violation of Sebera’s domicile as mentioned above, they cannot evade their role in the commission of that murder even if nothing proves that Uwiragiye informed them that she was about to shot people.

5 That is what qualified as system of automatic imputation of the objective aggravating circumstances, Ibid.p. 376 6 The accomplice incurs the responsibility of all the circumstances which qualify the act pursued, without being necessary that he/she was aware of them, Cass., 21 mai 1996, Bulletin criminel 1996, Nº 206, p 584. PROSECUTION v. HABYARIMANA ET.AL

Page 363

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 150 [74] With regards to Habyarimana who defends himself in stating that he did not enter Sebera’s domicile, where those both offences were committed, while he also admits to enter Sebera’s home because he states that he saw Sebera getting out alone(identification mark 117), basing on article 98 of Organic Law N°01/2012/OL mentioned above, the Court finds him guilty as an accomplice of the offenders due to the fact that he is the one who ordered to violate Sebera’s domicile as indicated above, the relation of that offence and the murder committed rendered him to be held liable of murder as explained above, especially that he was coordinating them. [75] However, the Court finds that provided explanations intending to prove that the act of murdering Sebera was premeditated, that it was preceeded by the act of spying during the day and that plot of that act might be resulted from the disputes of sand deposit arose between Sebera and Habyarimana, these do not prove that the murder committed was premeditated, what is obvious is that Habyarimana wanted Sebera to be arrested as testified by the witnesses like Mukamana Jeanne7, on the other hand, the reason of the arrestation was not proved, it cannot be considered as a premeditated plot of murdering Sebera, especially it is not reasonable that Habyarimana would have wanted to kill him by using security organs which include police personel and inkeragutabara, it is not shown that they had consipiracy and

7Mukamana Jeanne declares « I heard car sound in front of my house, when executive secretary ordered them to bring him, in short while, I heard gun shots, executive secretary moved down and met a soldier who was murmuring that she has shot them and shooting any living thing, executive secretary asked her ceasing to shoot, Mukamana adds that she would have shot more people if executive secretary failed to take her.

Page 364

151 interests, hence, it has to be decided that it is not premeditated murder which is punished by article 140 of Organic Law N°01/2012/OL mentioned above, instead of premeditation. [76] The Court finds, due to the relation between the murder and the violation of person’s domicile as motivated above, both those offences have to be punished in ideal concurrence provided by article 84 of Organic Law N°01/2012/OL stated above8 and the accused shall be sentenced by the most severe penalty which means the one provided to the offence of murder. [77] The Court finds, in the determination of the sentences, it would be considered that the offences being pursued were caused by inattention instead of severe wickedness, this led the accused not to reflect the consequences of violating someone’s domicile in wee hours while Sebera proved to them that he was not ready to be arrested, this can favour them as mitigating circumstances in order to reduce again the penalties basing on article 76 of organic law N°01/2012/OL mentioned above which states that the judge considers the appropriateness of mitigating circumstances which preceded, accompanied or followed an offence, and article 78 of that organic law which provides how the penalties are reduced in case of mitigating circumstances, in regards to the life imprisonment, the penalty for the offence of murder is replaced by a penalty of imprisonment of not less than ten (10) years.

8 That article provides that if an offender would receive several penalties of imprisonment or fine as a result of one or several acts, the judge shall apply the most severe penalty and increase its duration or the amount depending on the circumstances of the offences, but not exceeding half (1/2) in addition to the maximum of the most severe penalty. PROSECUTION v. HABYARIMANA ET.AL

Page 365

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 152 3. With regards to the damages requested by Mukambanda [78] In cross appeal, Mukambanda and her counsel state that she was awarded insufficient damages equivalent to 10,000,000Frw in High Court whereas she claimed for 500,000,000Frw. They further state that it should be considered the value of human being, the fact that Mukambanda became a widow and that the children lost the chance to study, whereas his father had resources of generating income such as being a chairman of the rice farmers’s cooperative. They conclude by praying the Court to award appropriate damages [79] Habyarimana Festus, his Counsel Nsengiyumva Viateur and Nsengiyumva Enos state that he should not be ordered to pay damages because he is not the author of the offence and that the claimant for the damages does not link the fault with Habyarimana. [80] Uwiragiye Fabiola and her counsel Kabasenga, Nuru Gatabazi and Hakizimana state that she was ordered to pay excessive damages comparing to the offence she committed, as she committed that offence under provocation, they further claim for the forced intervention of the Government in the case, because she committed the offence while she was on the duty as police personnel. [81] Rugamba Frank and his counsel hakizimana, Habiyambere and Gatabazi Nuru argue that he should not pay damages because he is not guilty, and that the damages equivalent to 10,000,000Frw which was awarded on the first instance are groundless.

Page 366

153 [82] Karemera Steven, and his counsel Habyarimana and Gatabazi Nuru state that he has to be acquitted, and the calculation of damages equivalent to 10,000,000Frw was not justified.

THE VIEW OF THE COURT [83] Article 258 of the Decree Law of 30/07/1888 relating to contracts or conventional obligations provides that any act of a person that harms another, obliges that person who committed that fault to repair and article 45 of organic law N°01/2012/OL of 02/05/2012 instituting the penal code stipulates that all persons convicted of the same offence shall be jointly liable for the payment of the fine, restitutions, damages and court fees. [84] The Court finds that in light of the provisions of the laws referred to above, Habyarimana, Uwiragiye and Karemera should pay damages to Mukambanda because they are found guilty of the offences, because they caused the death to her husband, but the fact that the requested damages equivalent to 500,000,000Frw are excessive with no convincing explanations that 10,000,000Frw awarded on the first instance are insufficient, thus, the damages awarded on the first instance have to be confirmed as they are in appropriate range. [85] With regard to Uwiragiye’s pleadings that the Government of Rwanda has to be forced to intervene, so that it can be ordered to pay damages, the Court finds that forced intervention which was not invoked on first instance cannot be admitted pursuant to article 118 of the law N°21/2012 of 14/06/2012 relating to the civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure states that forced intervention that could PROSECUTION v. HABYARIMANA ET.AL

Page 367

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 154 result in a sentencing judgment may not be made for the first time in appeal. III. THE DECISION OF THE COURT [86] Decides that the appeal lodged by Habyarimana Festus, Uwiragiye Fabiola, Karemera Steven and Rugamba Frank has merit in part [87] Finds them guilty for violation of person’s domicile and murder with no premeditation in ideal concurrence. [88] Sentences to fifteen (15) years of imprisonment to each of them [89] Orders them to pay Mukambanda in solidum, damages equivalent to 10,000,000Frw. [90] Finds cross appeal of Mukambanda without merit. [91] Overrules the appealed judgment RP0105/12/HC/NYA in part. [92] Orders that the court fees be charged to the public treasury.

Page 369

Printed by PROGRAPH LTD P.o. Box 1882 Kigali - Rwanda Tel : (+250) 788303889 E-mail:hakizae2007@yahoo.fr

Page 370

Printed by PROGRAPH LTD P.o. Box 1882 Kigali - Rwanda Tel : (+250) 788303889 E-mail:hakizae2007@yahoo.fr