RLR-V.2-2017

RLR-V.2-2017

- Source: Amategeko - Section: Rwanda law reports - Date: 2017-04-30 - Collection: Supreme Court

Text

Page 1

REPUBLIC OF RWANDA

SUPREME COURT Po. Box. 2197 KIGALI www.judiciary.gov.rw

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO Icyegeranyo V. 2 - 2017 Gicurasi, 2017 Law Report , V. 2 - 2017 May, 2017

RWANDA LAW REPORTS

Page 3

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO

IKINYARWANDA

Page 5

i

ISHAKIRO

ABAGIZE KOMITE Y’UBWANDITSI ...................................iii KOMITE YEMEZA IMANZA ................................................. iv IRIBURIRO .............................................................................. vii IBIKUBIYE MURI IKI CYEGERANYO ...............................viii INYITO ....................................................................................viii AMATEGEKO YASHINGIWEHO .......................................... ix IMANZA ZIFASHISHIJWE .................................................... xii AMAGAMBO MPINE ............................................................xiii Re AKAGERA BUSINESS GROUP (IKIREGO KIGAMIJE

KUVANAHO

INGINGO

INYURANYIJE N’ITEGEKO NSHINGA) ................................................................................. 1 NTUKAMAZINA v. PRIME INSURANCE LTD (EX- COGEAR LTD) ........................................................................ 31 NYIRANDORIMANA v. LETA Y’U RWANDA (MINADEF) N’UNDI .................................................................................... 47 KAPERE v. IYAMUREMYE .................................................. 61 NYIRAKAMANA N’ABANDI v. MUKASHARANGABO N’ABANDI ............................................................................... 89 NTEGEYE v. ECOBANK RWANDA LTD N’UNDI ........... 127 IKIGO CY’IMISORO N’AMAHORO(RRA) v. ENGEN RWANDA Ltd ........................................................................ 147

Page 6

ii

UBUSHINJACYAHA v. MINANI N’UNDI ......................... 171 UBUSHINJACYAHA v. NSANZINTWALI ......................... 183 UBUSHINJACYAHA v. UWIRINGIYIMANA ................... 193

Page 7

iii

ABAGIZE KOMITE Y’UBWANDITSI

ITSINDA RY’ABANYAMATEGEKO

BATEGUYE

IMANZA

KAGABO U. Stephanie

MUJABI K. Naphtal

MWIHOREZE Claudine

NTIHEMUKA Emmanuel

UWIMANA Gisèle

Page 8

iv

KOMITE YEMEZA IMANZA

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

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

RUTAZANA Angeline : Umwanditsi wa Komite Umugenzuzi w’Inkiko

BAGABO Faustin : Avoka mu Rugaga rw’Abavoka

BWIZA N. Blanche : Umugenzuzi w’Inkiko

DUSHIMINAMA Claudine : Umushinjacyaha ku rwego Rw’Igihugu

GIRANEZA Clémentine : Umucamanza mu Rukiko rw’Ibanze

HABARUREMA Jean Pierre : Umushinjacyaha ku Rwego rw’Igihugu

KALIWABO Charles : Perezida w’Urukiko Rukuru

Page 9

Me KAYIHURA Didas : Avoka mu Rugaga rw’Abavoka

KIBUKA Jean Luc : Umucamanza mu Rukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi

MUREREREHE Saouda : Umucamanza mu Rukiko Rukuru

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

RUBANGO K. Epimaque : Intumwa ya Leta

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

v ABAGIZE KOMITE Y’UBWANDITSI

Page 11

vii

IRIBURIRO Basomyi bacu, Tunejejwe no kubagezaho icyegeranyo cy’ibyemezo by’inkiko V.II [2017]. Nk’uko mumaze kubimenyera gisohoka rimwe mu gihembwe, hagamijwe ko imanza zatanze umurongo ku kibazo runaka zijya ahagaragara kugira ngo zigere ku bakenera kuzifashisha mu buryo bworoshye kandi bwihuse. Nk’uko bisanzwe, buri rubanza rubanzirizwa n’amagambo mpine, incamake y’ikibazo n’incamake y’icyemezo byose bigamije kwerekana umwihariko warwo bitabaye ngombwa kurusoma rwose. Muri iyi nomero murasangamo imanza icumi (10) zikubiyemo urubanza rumwe (1) rwerekeranye no gusaba gukuraho ingingo z’amategeko zinyuranyije n’Itegeko Nshinga, imanza ebyiri (2) z’imbonezamubano, urubanza rumwe (1) rw’imiburanishirize, urubanza rumwe (1) rw’ubutegetsi, imanza ebyiri (2) z’ubucuruzi, n’imanza eshatu (3) nshinjabyaha. Iki cyegeranyo mwagisanga kandi no ku rubuga rwa murandasi rw’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga http://decisia.lexum.com/rlr/kn/nav.do ruborohereza kubona urubanza mukeneye mu buryo bwihuse. Prof. Sam RUGEGE Perezida w’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga Perezida w’Inama Nkuru y’Ubucamanza

Page 12

viii

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

INYITO Imanza ziri muri iyi volime zikoreshwa muri ubu buryo: [2017] 2 RLR

Page 13

ix

AMATEGEKO YASHINGIWEHO Itegeko Nshinga rya Repubulika y’u Rwanda nk’uko ryavuguruwe mu 2015, ingingo ya 15 n’iya 16.....................................................4 ingingo ya 151………………………………….................35 Itangazo ry’Umuryango w’Abibumbye ku burenganzira bwa muntu, ryo mu mwaka wa 1948, ingingo ya 7.............................4 Amasezerano Mpuzamahanga ku burenganzira Mbonezamubano n’ubwa Politiki, 1966, ingingo ya 14 n’iya 26.................................................................................................4 Amasezerano Mpuzamahanga yerekeye guca burundu ivangura iryo ari ryo ryose rikorerwa abagore yashyiriweho umukono i New York ku wa 18 Ukuboza 1979, ingingo ya 5(a).................94 Itegeko Ngenga No03/2012/OL ryo ku wa 13/06/2012 rigena imiterere, imikorere n’ububasha by’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga, ingingo ya 79 n’iya 81.…………………………………....65 ingingo ya 81 igika cya 1, agace ka 2 n’aka 3............194 ingingo ya 53(2)..............................................................4 Itegeko Ngenga N°01/2012/OL ryo ku wa 02/05/2012 rishyiraho igitabo cy’amategeko ahana, ingingo ya 436.........................194 Itegeko Ngenga N°59/2008 ryo kuwa 10/09/2008 rikumira kandi rihana ihohoterwa iryo ari ryo ryose rishingiye ku gitsina, ingingo ya 39.............................................................................94 Itegeko Nº30/2013 ryo ku wa 24/5/2013 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’inshinjabyaha, ingingo ya 165..184

Page 14

Itegeko N°21/2012 ryo kuwa 14/06/2012, rigena imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi, ingingo ya 168(3)..…………………………………….........4 ingingo ya 186 n’iya 193..………………………………..65 ingingo ya 2...................................................................94 ingingo ya 208...............................................................34 ingingo ya 9.................................................................149 Itegeko No74/2008 ryo kuwa 31/12/2008 rihindura kandi ryuzuza Itegeko Nº25/2005 rigena imitunganyirize y’isoresha, ingingo ya 1(5)............................................................................4 Itegeko Nº15/2004 ryo kuwa 12/06/2004 ryerekeye ibimenyetso mu manza n’itangwa, ingingo ya 3...........................................65 Itegeko - teka ryo kuwa 30 Nyakanga 1888, rigenga amasezerano cyangwa imirimo nshinganwa, ingingo ya 258...............................................................49 ingingo ya 591 n’iya 595.............................................131 ingingo ya 258...............................................................66 Iteka rya Perezida Nº31/01 ryo kuwa 25/08/2003 rishyiraho uburyo bwo kwishyura indishyi ku bubabare bw’umubiri buturutse ku mpanuka zitewe n’ibinyabiziga, ingingo ya 18....49 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 56 n’iya 58...............................................................................................94 Itegeko Nshinga rya Repubulika y’u Rwanda ryo kuwa 20/12/1978, ingingo ya 16 n’iya 93(2)......................................94 x ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO

Page 15

Itegeko Nº42/1988 ryo kuwa 27/10/1988 rishyiraho igitabo cya mbere cy’urwunge rw’amategeko mbonezamubano, ingingo 175.............................................................................................94 Itegeko Nº6/1988 ryo kuwa 12/02/1988 rigenga amasosiyete y’ubucuruzi, ingingo ya 8........................................................149 Itegeko Nshinga rya Repubulika y’u Rwanda ryo kuwa 24/11/1962, ingingo ya 28.........................................................94 Itegeko-Teka No21/77 ryo ku wa 18/08/1977 rishyiraho Igitabo cy’amategeko ahana, ingingo za 82 na 312...........................173

xi

AMATEGEKO YASHINGIWEHO

Page 16

xii

IMANZA ZIFASHISHIJWE Mberabagabo n’abandi v. Dunia n’abandi, RS/REV/INJUST/COM/0001/13/CS rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga kuwa 03/01/2014...................................................66 Frank Lyon co v United States, 435 U.S. 561 (1978)..............149 Beauvallet v Naturana, No81-1372881-16259, 7 Mars 1984, Cour de cassation, chambre Commerciale.…………………...149 Salomon v Salomon & Co Ltd [1896] UKHL 1 (16 November 1896)……………......................................................................150 State versus Chretien 1981 (1) SA 1097 (A).…………………..173 Firma A. Racke v Hauptzollamt Mainz, Court of Justice of the European Union …………………………………….......................5 Backus v. Fort St. Union Depot Co., 169 U.S. 557, 18 S. Ct. 445, 42 L. Ed. 853 (1898).…………………………………….........5 S v Lawrence 1997 (4) SA 1176 para. 44-45.…………………….5 Eur.Court HR, Case “relating to certain aspects of the laws on the use of language in education in Belgium” judgment of 23 July 1968, series A, No6, p.31. para 10.…………………………..5 UNHR, Dudko v. Australia, Comm. No1347/2005, UN.Doc. CCPR//90/D/1347/2005 (Aug.29.2007 para 7.4.........................5

Page 17

xiii

AMAGAMBO MPINE Amategeko agenga amasezerano – Amasezerano yo kwikiranura – Iyo ababuranyi bagiranye ubwumvikane bagamije kwikiranura, ubwo bwumvikane bugomba guhabwa agaciro kuko amasezerano yo kwikiranura agira hagati y’abayagiranye agaciro kamwe n’ak’urubanza rwakemuwe ku buryo budasubirwaho mu rwego rwa nyuma – Iteka ryo kuwa 30/07/1888 ryerekeye amasezerano cyangwa imirimo nshinganwa, ingingo ya 591 n’iya 595.

NTEGEYE v.

ECOBANK

RWANDA LTD N’UNDI.........................................................................127 Amategeko agenga amasosiyete – Igurisha ry’imigabane – Igurisha ry’umutungo wa sosiyete – Igurisha ry’imigabane ya sosiyete ntiryakwitiranywa n’igurisha ry’umutungo wayo kandi ryo ntirisoreshwa – Itegeko Nº6/1988 ryo kuwa 12/02/1988 rigenga amasosiyete y’ubucuruzi, ingingo ya 8.

IKIGO CY’IMISORO N’AMAHORO(RRA) v. ENGEN RWANDA Ltd...............................................147 Amategeko agenga imiburanishirize y’imanza nshinjabyaha – Gushidikanya – Iyo hari impamvu zikomeye zitera gushidikanya, birengera ushinjwa – Itegeko Nº30/2013 ryo ku wa 24/5/2013 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’inshinjabyaha, ingingo ya 165. UBUSHINJACYAHA v. NSANZINTWALI.............183 Amategeko agenga ububasha bw’Inkiko – Gusubirishamo urubanza ku mpamvu z’akarengane – Urubanza rwasubirishijwemo ingingo nshya – Ikirego cyo

Page 18

gusubirishamo urubanza ku mpamvu z’akarengane ni inzira y’ubujurire idasanzwe yihariye igamije gukosora amakosa yakozwe mu rubanza rwaciwe ku rwego rwa nyuma, bityo n’urubanza rwaciwe burundu nyuma yo gusubirishwamo ingingo nshya rurebwa n’iyo nzira idasanzwe – Itegeko Ngenga Nº03/2012/OL ryo kuwa 13/06/2012 rigena imiterere, imikorere n’ububasha by’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga, ingingo ya 79 n’iya 81 – Itegeko N°21/2012 ryo kuwa 14/06/2012 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi, ingingo ya 186 n’iya 193. NYIRANDORIMANA v. LETA Y’U RWANDA (MINADEF) N’UNDI.....................................................47 Gusubirishamo urubanza ku mpamvu z’akarengane – Urubanza rwasubirishijwemo ingingo nshya – Ikirego cyo gusubirishamo urubanza ku mpamvu z’akarengane ni inzira y’ubujurire idasanzwe yihariye igamije gukosora amakosa yakozwe mu rubanza rwaciwe ku rwego rwa nyuma, bityo n’urubanza rwaciwe burundu nyuma yo gusubirishwamo ingingo nshya rurebwa n’iyo nzira idasanzwe – Itegeko Ngenga Nº03/2012/OL ryo kuwa 13/06/2012 rigena imiterere, imikorere n’ububasha by’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga, ingingo ya 79 n’iya 81 – Itegeko N°21/2012 ryo kuwa 14/06/2012 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi, ingingo ya 186 n’iya 193. KAPERE v. IYAMUREMYE.......................................61 Amategeko agenga ubutaka – Amakimbirane ku butaka – Igishushanyo cy’aho ibibanza byatangiwe kibitswe xiv ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO

Page 19

n’inzego zibishinzwe gishobora kuba ikimenyetso kimara impaka zo kumenya nyir’ikibanza kiburanwa – Itegeko Nº15/2004 ryo kuwa 12/06/2004 ryerekeye ibimenyetso mu manza n’itangwa, ingingo ya 3. NYIRANDORIMANA v. LETA Y’U RWANDA (MINADEF) N’UNDI....................................................47 Amategeko agenga umuryango – Amasezerano yo gushyingirwa – Agaciro k’amasezerano yo gushyingirwa bwakabiri ayambere ataravaho – Amasezerano yo gushyingirwa bwa kabiri ntagira agaciro igihe ishyingirwa rya mbere rikiriho – Itegeko Nshinga rya Repubulika y’u Rwanda ryo ku wa 24/11/1962, ingingo ya 28 – Itegeko Nº42/1988 ryo kuwa 27/10/1988 rishyiraho igitabo cya mbere cy’urwunge rw’amategeko mbonezamubano, ingingo ya 175.

NYIRAKAMANA N’ABANDI v. MUKASHARANGABO N’ABANDI............................89 Ubushyingiranwe – Kugabana umutungo – Mu gihe abashyingiranwe bitandukanyije bagabana umutungo wari uriho igihe batandukanaga.

NYIRAKAMANA N’ABANDI v. MUKASHARANGABO N’ABANDI............................89 Ababanye batarashakanye mu buryo bukurikije amategeko – Kugabana umutungo – Ababanaga nk’umugore n’umugabo batarasezeranye mu buryo bwemewe n’amategeko bagabana umutungo bahahanye gusa ku buryo bungana – Itegeko N°59/2008 ryo kuwa 10/09/2008 rikumira kandi rihana ihohoterwa iryo ari ryo ryose rishingiye ku gitsina, ingingo ya 39.

NYIRAKAMANA N’ABANDI v. MUKASHARANGABO N’ABANDI............................89 xv

AMAGAMBO MPINE

Page 20

Irage – Igihe irage rita agaciro – Irage nta gaciro rigira igihe risumbanisha abana hashingiwe ku gitsina ndetse n’igihe nyakwigendera yagaragaje imyitwarire yuko yisubiyeho mbere y’uko yitaba Imana – Itegeko Nshinga rya Repubulika y’u Rwanda ryo ku wa 20/12/1978, ingingo ya 16 n’iya 93(2) – Amasezerano Mpuzamahanga yerekeye guca burundu ivangura iryo ari ryo ryose rikorerwa abagore yashyiriweho umukono i New York ku wa 18 Ukuboza 1979, ingingo ya 5(a).

NYIRAKAMANA N’ABANDI v. MUKASHARANGABO N’ABANDI............................89 Impano – Igihe impano idahabwa agaciro – Impano nta gaciro igira igihe yatanzwe abasangiye umutungo batabyumvikanyeho kandi igatangwa hagamijwe gusumbanisha abana.

NYIRAKAMANA N’ABANDI v. MUKASHARANGABO N’ABANDI............................89 Amategeko Mpanabyaha – Impamvu nkomezacyaha – Kunywa ibiyobyabwenge mbere yo gukora ikindi cyaha – Gushakishiriza ubutwari bwo gukora icyaha mu biyobyabwenge ni impamvu nkomezacyaha aho kuba impamvu nyoroshyacyaha cyangwa impamvu yo kutaryozwa icyaha. UBUSHINJACYAHA v. MINANI N’UNDI..............171 Akarengane – Gutegeka uregwa kwishyura ihazabu kugira ngo abone gufungurwa ni akarengane, kuko ntaho biteganyijwe mu mategeko y’ u Rwanda. UBUSHINJACYAHA v. UWIRINGIYIMANA……193 Indishyi – Indishyi z’ububabare bw’umubiri – Indishyi z’ububabare bw’umubiri zishingirwa ku mibare ifatika xvi ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO

Page 21

harebwe ibyo umuntu yinjiza, ubumuga yasigiwe, imyaka yari asigaje yo gukora n’ibindi. NYIRANDORIMANA v. LETA Y’U RWANDA (MINADEF) N’UNDI…………………………………47 Uburyozwe – Ikosa – Uburangare – Indishyi – Inshingano yo kubika ibikoresho bya Gisirikare – N’uburangare ku ruhande rwa Leta iyo itabitse neza ika nagenzura ibikoresho byayo bya Gisirikare, iyo bikoreshejwe nabi kubera ibwo burangare ibitangira indishyi. NYIRANDORIMANA v. LETA Y’U RWANDA (MINADEF) N’UNDI.…………....................................47 Indishyi – Indishyi z’akababaro – Indishyi mbonezamusaruro – Igihembo cya Avoka – Amafaranga y’ikurikiranarubanza – Mu gihe umuburanyi atsinzwe urubanza nta ndishyi z’akababaro ahabwa – Mu gihe urukiko rusanze ikirego cy’uwareze kidakwiye kwakirwa, uregwa ahabwa indishyi z’ikurikiranarubanza n’igihembo cy’avoka iyo yamwiyambaje – Kigenwa mu bushishozi bw’urukiko iyo rusanze icyo asaba kitari mu rugero.

NTEGEYE v.

ECOBANK

RWANDA LTD N’UNDI……………………………………………….127 Indishyi z’ikurikiranarubanza – Igihembo cy’Avoka – Umuburanyi watsinzwe urubanza ntiyagenerwa indishyi z’ikurikiranarubanza kuko ahubwo ariwe uzicibwa zigahabwa uwamutsinze – Iteka ryo kuwa 30 Nyakanga 1888 rigenga amasezerano cyangwa imirimo nshinganwa, ingingo ya 258. KAPERE v. IYAMUREMYE.......................................61 Indishyi z’ikurikiranarubanza – Igihembo cy’Avoka – Umuburanyi watsinzwe urubanza ntiyagenerwa indishyi xvii

AMAGAMBO MPINE

Page 22

z’ikurikiranarubanza kuko ahubwo ariwe uzicibwa zigahabwa uwamutsinze – Iteka ryo kuwa 30 Nyakanga 1888 rigenga amasezerano cyangwa imirimo nshinganwa, ingingo ya 258. NYIRANDORIMANA v. LETA Y’U RWANDA (MINADEF) N’UNDI.…………....................................47 Irangiza ry’imanza – Kudahindura urubanza – Urubanza rugomba kurangizwa n’inzego zose zirebwa uko rwaciwe mu gihe nta nzira y’ubujurire yiyambajwe ngo ihindure ibyemejwe muri urwo rubanza – Itegeko Nshinga rya Repubulika y’u Rwanda ryo mu 2003 ryavuguruwe mu 2015, ingingo ya 151. NTUKAMAZINA v. PRIME INSURANCE LTD (EX- COGEAR LTD)………………………………………..31 Igihano gihatira kurangiza urubanza – Igihano gihatira umuburanyi kurangiza urubanza gisabwa igihe cy’iburanisha ry’urubanza mu mizi kikaba rero kitasabirwa mu rubanza rwerekeranye n’impaka zavutse mu irangiza ryarwo – Itegeko No21/2012 ryo ku wa 14/06/2012 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi, ingingo ya 217. NTUKAMAZINA v. PRIME INSURANCE LTD (EX- COGEAR LTD)………………………………………..31 Itegeko Nshinga – Amategeko anyuranyije n’Itegeko Nshinga – Ikirego kigamije gukuraho ingingo ya 1(5) y’Itegeko Nº74/2008 ryo kuwa 31/12/2008 rihindura kandi ryuzuza Itegeko Nº25/2005 rigena imitunganyirize y’isoresha – Umuburanyi w’umusoreshwa – Itangwa ry’ibimenyetso mu rwego rw’ubujurire –Kuba ababuranyi b’abasoreshwa batemerewe gutanga ibimenyetso bishya ku rwego xviii ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO

Page 23

rw’ubujurire ntibifatwa nko kubasumbanisha n’abandi baburanyi kuko bishingiye ku mwihariko wabo no ku nshingano bahabwa n’itegeko zo kubika ibitabo by’ibaruramari – Itegeko Nshinga ryo kuwa 4 Kamena 2003 nk’uko ryavuguruwe mu 2015, ingingo ya 15 n’iya 16 – Itegeko Ngenga No03/2012/OL ryo ku wa 13/06/2012 rigena imiterere, imikorere n’ububasha by’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga, ingingo ya 53(2) – Itangazo ry’Umuryango w’Abibumbye ku burenganzira bwa muntu, ryo mu mwaka wa 1948, ingingo ya 7 – Amasezerano Mpuzamahanga ku burenganzira Mbonezamubano n’ubwa Politiki yo kuwa 16 Ukuboza 1966, ingingo ya 14 n’iya 26 – Itegeko N°21/2012 ryo kuwa 14/06/2012 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi, ingingo ya 168(3) – Itegeko Nº74/2008 ryo kuwa 31/12/2008 rihindura kandi ryuzuza Itegeko Nº25/2005 rigena imitunganyirize y’isoresha, ingingo ya 1(5). Re AKAGERA BUSINESS GROUP (IKIREGO

KIGAMIJE KUVANAHO INGINGO INYURANYIJE N’ITEGEKO NSHINGA)…………...………………….1

xix

AMAGAMBO MPINE

Page 25

URUBANZA RUSABWAMO GUKURAHO INGINGO Y’ITEGEKO INYURANYIJE N’ITEGEKO

NSHINGA

Page 27

Re AKAGERA BUSINESS GROUP (IKIREGO KIGAMIJE KUVANAHO INGINGO INYURANYIJE N’ITEGEKO NSHINGA) [Rwanda URUKIKO RW’IKIRENGA – RS/SPEC/0001/16/CS (Rugege, P.J., Mukanyundo, Hatangimbabazi, Kanyange, Mukamulisa, Rugabirwa, Hitiyaremye, Ngagi na Nyirandabaruta, J.) 23 Nzeri 2016] Itegeko Nshinga – Amategeko anyuranyije n’Itegeko Nshinga – Ikirego kigamije gukuraho ingingo ya 1(5) y’Itegeko Nº74/2008 ryo kuwa 31/12/2008 rihindura kandi ryuzuza Itegeko Nº25/2005 rigena imitunganyirize y’isoresha – Umuburanyi w’umusoreshwa – Itangwa ry’ibimenyetso mu rwego rw’ubujurire – Kuba ababuranyi b’abasoreshwa batemerewe gutanga ibimenyetso bishya ku rwego rw’ubujurire ntibifatwa nko kubasumbanisha n’abandi baburanyi kuko bishingiye ku mwihariko wabo no ku nshingano bahabwa n’itegeko zo kubika ibitabo by’ibaruramari – Itegeko Nshinga ryo kuwa 4 Kamena 2003 nk’uko ryavuguruwe mu 2015, ingingo ya 15 n’iya 16 – Itegeko Ngenga No03/2012/OL ryo ku wa 13/06/2012 rigena imiterere, imikorere n’ububasha by’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga, ingingo ya 53(2) – Itangazo ry’Umuryango w’Abibumbye ku burenganzira bwa muntu ryo mu mwaka wa 1948, ingingo ya 7 – Amasezerano Mpuzamahanga ku burenganzira Mbonezamubano n’ubwa Politiki yo kuwa 16 Ukuboza 1966, ingingo ya 14 n’iya 26 – Itegeko N°21/2012 ryo kuwa 14/06/2012 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi, ingingo ya 168(3) – Itegeko Nº74/2008 ryo kuwa 31/12/2008 1

Page 28

rihindura kandi ryuzuza Itegeko Nº25/2005 rigena imitunganyirize y’isoresha, ingingo ya 1(5). Incamake y’ikibazo: ABG yatanze ikirego mu Rukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi irega Rwanda Revenue Authority (RRA) isaba ko umusoro yaciwe ungana na 1.050.442.993Frw wagabanywa. Urukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi rwemeje ko ABG itsinzwe no kutagaragaza ibimenyetso by’ibyo yaregeye. ABG yajuririye urwo rubanza mu Rukiko rw’Ikirenga ivuga ko hari ibimenyetso byashyikirijwe Urukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi rwanga kubisuzuma. Mu mwanzuro wo kwiregura, RRA yavuze ko ABG itagaragaje ibimenyetso by’ibyo iburana. Ubwo hakorwaga inama ntegurarubanza mu Rukiko rw’Ikirenga, ABG yerekanye ibimenyetso yavugaga ko byirengagijwe maze RRA nayo ihita itegura imyanzuro y’inyongera isaba ko ibyo bimenyetso bitakwakirwa ngo bisuzumwe hashingiwe ku ngingo ya 1, igika cya 5, y’Itegeko Nº74/2008 ryo kuwa 31/12/2008 rihindura kandi ryuzuza Itegeko Nº25/2005 rigena imitunganyirize y’isoresha. ABG imaze kubona ibyo bimenyetso bitazitabwaho n’Urukiko ukundi, yahise itanga ikirego mu Rukiko rw’Ikirenga ivuga ko ingingo ya 1 igika cya 5 y’Itegeko Nº74/2008 ryo kuwa 31/12/2008 rihindura kandi ryuzuza Itegeko Nº25/2005 rigena imitunganyirize y’isoresha RRA ishingiraho ikurwaho kuko isanga inyuranije n’ingingo ya 11 n’iya 16 z’Itegeko Nshinga rya Repubulika y’u Rwanda ryo kuwa 04 Kamena 2003 nkúko ryakurikizwaga igihe ikirego cyatangwaga, ikirego cyandikwa kuri RS/SPEC/0001/16/CS. Nyuma yaho icyo kirego gitangiwe, ABG yatanze ibisobanuro by’inyongera ku kirego yari yatanze igamije kwerekana uko ingingo z’Itegeko Nshinga zahindutse ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 2

Page 29

nyuma y’ivugururwa ryaryo mu mwaka wa 2015 aho ingingo ya 16 yahindutse iya 15 naho iya 11 ikaba yarabaye iya 16. Incamake y’icyemezo: 1. Urukiko rurasanga ingingo ya mbere, igika cya 5, y’Itegeko Nº74/2008 ryo kuwa 31/12/2008 rihindura kandi ryuzuza Itegeko Nº25/2005 rigena imitunganyirize y’isoresha, n’ubwo idafata ababuranyi b’abasoreshwa mu buryo bumwe nk’ababuranyi mu zindi manza, ntigaragaramo ubusumbane imbere y’amategeko no kutarengerwa n’amategeko mu buryo bumwe, ndetse ikaba itanagaragaramo ivangura iryo ariryo ryose.

2. Kuba abasora batemerewe gutanga mu bujurire ibimenyetso batatanze mu gihe cy’igenzura, umusoresha we akaba abyemerewe, ntibyafatwa nk’ubusumbane mu bushobozi bwo kwisobanura imbere y’inkiko, ahubwo ni uko abasoreshwa aribo bonyine baba bafite ibyo bimenyetso bakaba bashobora kubitanga igihe bikenewe bityo bitewe n’umwihariko wabo, itegeko ribafata ku buryo butandukanye n’abandi baburanyi hashingiwe ku mpamvu zumvikana kandi zitagamije kubavutsa uburenganzira n’andi mahirwe bahabwa n’itegeko.

3. Ingingo y’itegeko isabirwa kuvanwaho, ntinyuranyije n’ingingo za 15 na 16 z’Itegeko Nshinga kuko idasumbanisha abantu imbere y’amategeko kandi ikaba itaragaza ivangura iryo ari ryo ryose. Ikirego nta shingiro gifite. Amagarama y’urubanza aherereye k’urega.

Re AKAGERA BUSINESS GROUP 3

Page 30

Amategeko yashingiweho: Ayo mu Rwanda: Itegeko Nshinga ryo kuwa 4 Kamena 2003 nk’uko ryavuguruwe mu 2015, ingingo ya 15 n’iya 16. Itangazo ry’Umuryango w’Abibumbye ku burenganzira bwa muntu, ryo mu mwaka wa 1948, ingingo ya 7. Amasezerano Mpuzamahanga ku burenganzira Mbonezamubano n’ubwa Politiki, 1966, ingingo ya 14n’iya 26. Itegeko Ngenga No03/2012/OL ryo ku wa 13/06/2012 rigena imiterere, imikorere n’ububasha by’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga, ingingo ya 53(2). Itegeko No21/2012 ryo kuwa 14/06/2012 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi, ingingo ya 168(3). Itegeko No74/2008 ryo kuwa 31/12/2008 rihindura kandi ryuzuza Itegeko Nº25/2005 rigena imitunganyirize y’isoresha, ingingo ya 1(5). Ayo mu mahanga: Itegeko Nshinga rya Repubulika ya Kenya 2010, ingingo ya 27 agace ka 1, 4 n’aka 5. Itegeko Nshinga rya Repubulika ya Afrika y’Epfo, 1996, ingingo ya 9, para.1 n’iya 3. Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, ingingo ya 15.

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 4

Page 31

Imanza zifashishijwe: Izo mu mahanga: Firma A. Racke v Hauptzollamt Mainz, Court of Justice of the European Union Backus v. Fort St. Union Depot Co., 169 U.S. 557, 18 S. Ct. 445, 42 L. Ed. 853 (1898). S v Lawrence 1997 (4) SA 1176 para. 44-45. Eur.Court HR, Case “relating to certain aspects of the laws on the use of language in education in Belgium” judgment of 23 July 1968, series A, No6., p.31.para 10. UNHR, Dudko v. Australia, Comm. No1347/2005, UN.Doc. CCPR//90/D/1347/2005 (Aug.29.2007 para 7.4. Inyandiko z’abahanga zifashishijwe: Human Rights Committee, General Comment 18, Non- discrimination (Thirty-seventh session, 1989), Compilation of General Comments and General Recommendations Adopted by Human Rights Treaty Bodies, U.N. Doc.HRI/GEN/1/Rev.1 at 26 (1994). Primsloo Van der Linde 1997(3) SA 1012 CC para.

22. Communication No172/1984 S.W.M. Broeks v The Netherlands (views adopted on 9 April 1987) in UN Doc. GOAR, A/42/40 P.150, para 13. CJCE, aff. 283/83, 13 novembre 1984, Racke/Hauptzollamt Mainz, Rec., 1984, p.3791.; CJCE, aff. 106/83, 13décembre 1984, Société Sermide, Rec., p.4209; CEDH, 6 Avril 2000, Thlimennos c. Grèce, N°34369/97. Hogg “Proof of facts in Constitutional Cases (1976) 26.University of Toronto Law Journal 386 at 396-7. United Nations Human Rights Committee, General Comment No32, Article 14, Right to equality before Courts and tribunals and fair trial, UN.Doc. CCPR//G/32/Aug.23, 2007 para 13. Re AKAGERA BUSINESS GROUP 5

Page 32

Urubanza I. IMITERERE Y’URUBANZA [1] ABG yatanze ikirego mu Rukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi irega RwandaRevenue Authority (RRA) isaba ko umusoro yaciwe ungana na 1.050.442.993Frw wagabanywa. Urukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi rwaciye urubanza kuwa 20/12/2012, rwemeza ko ABG itsinzwe no kutagaragaza ibimenyetso by’ibyo yaregeye. ABG yajuririye urwo rubanza mu Rukiko rw’Ikirenga ivuga ko hari ibimenyetso byashyikirijwe Urukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi rwanga kubisuzuma. Mu Rukiko rw’Ikirenga, urubanza rwanditswe kuri NoRCOMA0009/13/CS. [2] Mu mwanzuro wo kwiregura, RRA yavuze ko ABG itagaragaje ibimenyetso by’ibyo iburana. Ubwo hakorwaga inama ntegurarubanza mu Rukiko rw’Ikirenga, ABG yerekanye ibimenyetso yavugaga ko byirengagijwe. RRA yahise itegura imyanzuro y’inyongera isaba ko ibyo bimenyetso bitakwakirwa ngo bisuzumwe hashingiwe ku ngingo ya 1, igika cya 5, y'Itegeko Nº74/2008 ryo kuwa 31/12/2008 rihindura kandi ryuzuza Itegeko Nº25/2005 rigena imitunganyirize y’isoresha. [3] ABG yahise itanga ikirego mu Rukiko rw’Ikirenga ivuga ko ingingo ya 1 igika cya 5 y’Itegeko Nº74/2008 ryo kuwa 31/12/2008 rihindura kandi ryuzuza Itegeko Nº25/2005 rigena imitunganyirize y’isoresha RRA ishingiraho ikurwaho kuko isanga inyuranije n'ingingo ya 11 n’iya 16 z’Itegeko Nshinga rya Repubulika y’u Rwanda ryo kuwa 04 Kamena 2003 nk'uko ryavuguruwe kugeza ubu, ikirego cyandikwa kuri N° RS/SPEC/0001/16/CS. ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 6

Page 33

[4] Nyuma yaho icyo kirego gitangiwe, habayeho ivugurura ry’Itegeko Nshinga. ABG yatanze ibisobanuro by’inyongera ku kirego yari yatanze igamije kwerekana uko ingingo z’Itegeko Nshinga zahindutse, iya 15 ikaba yarahoze ari iya 16, iya 16 yahoze ari ingingo ya 11. Ikirego cyasuzumwe mu iburanisha ryo kuwa 19/07/2016, AKAGERA BUSINESS GROUP ihagarariwe na Me Nsengiyumva Abel naho Minisiteri y’Ubutabera yari yatumiwe kugira ngo igire icyo ivuga kuri iki kibazo, mu rubanza yari ihagarariwe n’Intumwa ya Leta, Me Kabibi Speciose. II. ISESENGURA RY’IKIBAZO KIRI

MU RUBANZA Kumenya niba ingingo ya 1 igika cya 5 y’Itegeko Nº74/2008 ryo kuwa 31/12/2008 rihindura kandi ryuzuza Itegeko Nº25/2005 rigena imitunganyirize y’isoresha inyuranije n’ingingo za 15 na 16 z’Itegeko Nshinga rya Repubulika y’u Rwanda ryo kuwa 04 Kamena 2003 nk’uko ryavuguruwe muri 2015. [5] Me Nsengiyumva Abel mu mwanya wa ABG, avuga ko Itegeko Nshinga mu ngingo yaryo ya 15 n’iya 16 rirengera abantu bose ku buryo bungana ndetse ko abanyarwanda bose bavukana kandi bagakomeza kugira uburenganzira bungana, ukabihuza n’ingingo ya 1, igika cya 5, y’Itegeko Nº74/2008 ryo kuwa 31/12/2008 rihindura kandi ryuzuza Itegeko Nº25/2005 rigena imitunganyirize y’isoresha iteganya ko umusoreshwa atemerewe gutanga, ku rwego urwo ari rwo rwose rw’ubujurire, izindi nyandiko cyangwa ibitaboatagaragaje mu gihe cy’igenzura, ugasanga abasoreshwa nk’ababuranyi hari ibyo batemerewe mu manza z’imisoro nyamara abandi baburanyi Re AKAGERA BUSINESS GROUP 7

Page 34

babyemerewe mu zindi manza, ko ibyo bibavutsa uburenganzira bahabwa n’Itegeko Nshinga. [6] Akomeza avuga ko kuba umusoreshwa afite inshingano zo kubika no kuzuza ibitabo by’ibaruramari, bitaba impamvu yo kumutandukanya n’abandi baburanyi, ahubwo biramutse bigaragaye ko habayeho uburiganya mu gushaka kunyereza umusoro, uwabikoze yahanwa cyangwa se agacibwa umusoro munini nk’igihano, ariko ntabuzwe amahirwe yo gutanga ibimenyetso byamurengera igihe abiboneye kuko hari igihe aba atazi ko byamugirira akamaro. [7] Avuga kandi ko bitumvikana ukuntu mu zindi manza zitari iz’imisoro, ababuranyi bemererwa gutanga ibimenyetso mu nzego zose ndetse bikaba bitabujijwe mu rwego rw’ubujurire gutanga ingingo nshya zo kuburana cyangwa ibimenyetso bishya bitaburanishijwe mu rwego rwa mbere, ariko bikaba bitemewe mu manza z’imisoro kuko ho ubwo burenganzira bwo gutanga ibimenyetso aho urubanza rwaba rugeze hose byemerewe gusa umusoresha ariko umusoreshwa we ntabyemererwe. Asoza avuga ko ibyo binyuranye n’Itegeko Nshinga kuko umusoreshwa nk’umuburanyi uburana urubanza rw’imisoro yaba adafashwe kimwe n’undi muburanyi uburana izindi manza kandi amahame y’ingenzi abagenga yakabaye amwe ibyo bikaba ari ivangura binyuranije n’ingingo ya 15 n’iya 16 z’Itegeko Nshinga. [8] Me Kabibi Spéciose Intumwa ya Leta, avuga ko ingingo ya 1, igika cya 5, y’Itegeko Nº74/2008 ryo kuwa 31/12/2008 rihindura kandi ryuzuza Itegeko Nº25/2005 rigena imitunganyirize y’isoresha itanyuranye n’ingingo ya 15 n’iya 16 z’Itegeko Nshinga ryo mu mwaka wa 2003 ryavuguruwe muri 2015, kuko iyo ngingo itagambiriye kubuza abasoreshwa ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 8

Page 35

gutanga ibimenyetso bya kamarampaka cyangwa se ibimenyetso byagaragaza ukuri nk’uko ABG ishaka kubyumvikanisha, ko ahubwo ishimangira inshingano z’umusoreshwa zo gutunga inyandiko n’ibitabo by’ubucuruzi aho akorera, ko anafite inshingano zo kubyerekana igihe cy’igenzura uretse igihe hari impamvu zifatika agaragaza. Avuga ko bidakwiye ko Itegeko rishyiraho izo nshingano ryasubira inyuma rikemerera umusoreshwa kuzana izo nyandiko n’ibitabo mu gihe cy’ubujurire nta mpamvu zifatika agaragaza zatumye atabitanga mu gihe cy’igenzura. [9] Asobanura ko mu manza z’imisoro, umusoresha n‘umusoreshwa batari mu byiciro no mu bihe bimwe ku buryo amategeko abagenga yabarengera kimwe, kuko RRA nta nshingano ifite zo gukora no kubika ibitabo by’ibaruramari ry’umusoreshwa, mu gihe ingingo ya 13 y’Itegeko Nº25/2005 rigena imitunganyirize y’isoresha iha inshingano umucuruzi yo gutunga ibitabo n’inyandiko by’ibaruramari bigaragaza ishusho nyakuri y’ubucuruzi bwe. Kuba umucuruzi afite inshingano zo kubitunga no kubibika, niyo mpamvu umugenzuzi w’umusoro agomba kubisanga aho akorera. Aramutse yemerewe kubitanga nyuma, inshingano yahawe yo kubitunga no kubitanga igihe bikenewe ntacyo yaba imaze. [10] Asoza avuga ko ikindi gishimangira ko ababuranyi batari mu cyiciro kimwe batagomba no kugengwa n’amategeko amwe, ari uko mu manza zisanzwe igihe cyose umuburanyi yatangira ibimenyetso nta ngaruka byagira ku muburanyi mugenzi we ariko ku musoreshwa, hari igihe yakwimana ibitabo bye igihe cy’igenzura afite umugambi wo gushaka kunyereza umusoro kuko amafaranga yasohoye adashobora kugaragara kandi ariyo aherwaho hagenwa umusoro ugomba kwishyurwa. Re AKAGERA BUSINESS GROUP 9

Page 36

UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [11] Ingingo ya 53, igika cya kabiri, y’Itegeko Ngenga Nº03/2012/OL ryo ku wa 13/06/2012 rigena imiterere, imikorere n’ububasha by’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga ivuga ko Urukiko rw’Ikirenga ruburanisha (…) ibirego bisaba gukuraho Itegeko Ngenga, Itegeko cyangwa Itegeko-Teka kubera ko binyuranyije n’Itegeko Nshinga, haba kubikuraho byose cyangwa se zimwe mu ngingo zabyo zinyuranyije n’Itegeko Nshinga. Nkuko byavuzwe hejuru, ABG yareze isaba ko ingingo ya mbere, igika cya 5, y’Itegeko Nº74/2008 ryo kuwa 31/12/2008 rihindura kandi ryuzuza Itegeko Nº25/2005 rigena imitunganyirize y’isoresha ivanwaho kuko isanga inyuranye n’ingingo ya 15 n’iya 16 z’Itegeko Nshinga. [12] Ingingo ya 15 y’Itegeko Nshinga rya Repubulika y’u Rwanda ryo mu 2003 nkuko ryavuguruwe mu 2015 ivuga iti “Abantu bose barareshya imbere y’amategeko. Itegeko ribarengera ku buryo bumwe”, naho ingingo yaryo ya 16, ikavuga ko “Abanyarwanda bose bavukana kandi bagakomeza kugira uburenganzira n’ubwisanzure bingana. Ivangura iryo ari ryo ryose cyangwa kurikwirakwiza byaba bishingiye ku bwoko, ku muryango cyangwa ku gisekuru, ku nzu, ku ibara ry’umubiri, ku gitsina, ku karere, ku byiciro by’ubukungu, ku idini cyangwa ukwemera, ku bitekerezo, ku mutungo, ku itandukaniro ry’umuco, ku rurimi, ku bukungu, ku bumuga bw’umubiri cyangwa ubwo mu mutwe no ku rindi vangura iryo ari ryo ryose, birabujijwe kandi bihanwa n’amategeko”. [13] Ingingo isabirwa gukurwaho ni Ingingo ya 1, igika cya 5, y’Itegeko Nº74/2008 ryo kuwa 31/12/2008 rihindura kandi ryuzuza Itegeko Nº25/2005 rigena imitunganyirize y’isoresha ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 10

Page 37

aho ivuga iti “[…..] Umusoreshwa ntiyemerewe gutanga, ku rwego urwo ari rwo rwose rw’ubujurire, izindi nyandiko cyangwa ibitabo atagaragaje mu gihe cy’igenzura”. Iyi ngingo yahinduye kandi yuzuza ingingo ya 20 y’Itegeko Nº25/2005 ryo kuwa 04/12/2005 rigena imitunganyirize y’isoresha, iri mu gice cy’iryo tegeko kirebana n’igenzura n’iperereza. [14] Kugira ngo ikibazo kiri muri uru rubanza gisubizwe mu buryo busobanutse, ni ngombwa gusobanura ibikubiye muri izi ngingo ebyeri z’Itegeko Nshinga, n’icyo zishatse kuvuga ku birebana n'uburenganzira bwo: (i) Kureshya imbere y’amategeko (equality before the law); (ii) Kudakorerwa ivangura (non-discrimination). [15] Izi ngingo zombi zifitanye isano ku buryo gusobanura icyo zishatse kuvuga uzitandukanyije, bigoye. Ingingo ya 15 ivuga ko abantu bose bareshya imbere y’amategeko kandi bakarengerwa n’amategeko mu buryo bumwe. Ni ukuvuga ko hatagomba kubaho ivangura rituma abantu batarengerwa mu buryo bumwe cyangwa kutagira uburenganzira aho bakabugize. Naho ingingo ya 16 ikomerezaho ivuga uburyo gutandukanya abantu bifatwa nk’ivangura kandi ko bitemewe n’Itegeko Nshinga. Izi ngingo zombi zafatwa nk’izikubiyemo ihame rimwe ririmo uduce tubiri dufitanye isano. [16] Nkuko byavuzwe n’akanama kagenzura iyubahirizwa ry’uburenganzira bwa muntu k’Umuryango w’Abibumbye (United Nations Human Rights Committee): “Non- discrimination, together with equality before the law and equal protection of the law without discrimination, constitute a basic and general principle relating to the protection of human Re AKAGERA BUSINESS GROUP 11

Page 38

rights1”. Tugenekereje, ibi bishatse kuvuga ko “kudakorerwa ivangura, kureshya imbere y’amategeko no kurengerwa n’amategeko mu buryo bumwe nta vangura, bigize ihame rimwe shingiro kandi rusange ryerekeye kurinda no kurengera uburenganzira bwa muntu. Iyi sano iri hagati y’ingingo ya 15 n’iya 16 z’Itegeko Nshinga niyo ituma mu bihugu bimwe amahame azirimo ahurizwa hamwe mu ngingo imwe y’Itegeko Nshinga. Nko muri Canada aya mahame avugwa mu ngingo ya 15 ya Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms aho ivuga iti: “[e] very individual is equal before and under the law and has the right of equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and in particular without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability”. [17] Mu itangazo ry’Umuryango w’Abibumbye ku burenganzira bwa muntu, Universal Declaration of Human Rights, ryo mu mwaka wa 1948, mu ngingo yaryo ya 7 igira iti: “All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law. All are entitled to equal protection against discrimination in violation of this Declaration and against any incitement to such discrimination”. Naho ingingo ya 26 y’Amasezerano Mpuzamahanga ku Burenganzira Mbonezamubano n’ubwa Politiki (International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1966) yo ikagira iti: “All persons are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law. In this respect, the law shall prohibit any discrimination and guarantee to all

1 Human Rights Committee, General Comment 18, Non-discrimination (Thirty-seventh session, 1989), Compilationof General Comments and General Recommendations Adopted by Human Rights Treaty Bodies, U.N. Doc.HRI/GEN/1/Rev.1 at 26 (1994). ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 12

Page 39

persons equal and effective protection against discrimination on any ground such as race, colour, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social orgin, property, birth or other status”. Ingingo z’Itegeko Nshinga ry’ibihugu bya Kenya2 na South Africa3 nazo zanditswe muri ubwo buryo. Ni nayo mpamvu, Urukiko rushinzwe kurinda iyubahirizwa ry’Itegeko Nshinga (Constitutional Court) muri South Africa rwavuze ko gusuzuma ikibazo cyo kureshya imbere y’amategeko n’icyo kutavangura mu rubanza rumwe mu buryo bwihariye bidakwiye kandi bigoye kuko ihame ryo kureshya imbere y’amategeko no kutavangura ari ihame rimwe rigizwe n’uduce duhujwe4. No muri uru rubanza ibyo bibazo byombi biri busuzumirwe hamwe, hasubizwa iki kibazo: kureshya imbere y’amategeko no kurengerwa mu buryo bumwe nta vangura bivuze iki? [18] Kureshya imbere y’amategeko no kutavangura ntibivuze ko gutandukanya abantu ubwabyo mu bihe byose ari ivangura. Gutandukanya abantu cyangwa ibyiciro by’abantu bishobora kuba ngombwa bitewe n’ikigambiriwe, hari impamvu zumvikana zishingiye ku ntego ifite ireme (legitimate or rational purpose). Urugero ni uko Leta ishobora kugira ibyo igenera ibyiciro by’abantu batishoboye cyangwa bafite intege nke nk’abana, ababana n’ubumuga, abasigajwe inyuma n’amateka n’abandi, ntibigenere abandi cyangwa igafatira ibyiciro bimwe nk’abagore ingamba zigamije kubateza imbere (affirmative action). Ibyo ntibifatwa nk’ivangura, ahubwo ni ugutandukanya

2The Constitution of Kenya 2010, Article 27 agace ka 1, 4 n’aka 5. 3The Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996, Article 9, para.1 and 3. 4 “It may be neither desirable nor feasible to divide the various subsections or descriptions into watertightcompartments.”Primsloo Van der Linde 1997(3) SA 1012 CC para.22. Re AKAGERA BUSINESS GROUP 13

Page 40

abantu cyangwa kubashyira mu byiciro ku mpamvu zumvikana (legitimate differentiation). Ibi kandi byanavuzwe n’Akanama k’Umuryango w’Abibumbye muri aya magambo: “The right to equality before the law and equal protection of the law without any discrimination, does not make all differences of treatment discriminatory. A differentiation based on reasonable and objective criteria does not amount to prohibited discrimination within the meaning of Article 265. Tugenekereje mu kinyarwanda bishatse kuvuga ko: Uburenganzira bwo kureshya imbere y’amategeko no kurengerwa n’amategeko mu buryo bungana nta vangura, ntibivuze ko gufata abantu mu buryo butandukanye buri gihe biba ari ivangura. Gutandukanya bishingiye ku mpamvu zumvikana kandi zisobanutse ntabwo ari ivangura ribujijwe n’ingingo ya 26 y’Amasezerano Mpuzamahanga k’Uburenganzira Mbonezamubano n’ubwa Politiki. [19] Mu gutanga inama ku mushinga w’ivugurura ry’Itegeko Nshinga rya Costa Rica, Urukiko rugenzura iyubahirizwa ry’uburenganzira bwa muntu mu bihugu bya America yo hagati n’iyepfo (Inter American Court of Human Rights) rwasobanuye neza icyo kureshya imbere y’amategeko no kutavangura bivuze. Rwagize ruti: “Precisely because equality and nondiscrimination are inherent in the idea of the oneness in dignity and worth of all human beings, it follows that not all differences in legal treatment are discriminatory as such, for not all differences in legal treatment are in themselves offensive to human dignity […..]. There may well exist certain factual inequalities that might legitimately give rise to inequalities in

5 Communication No172/1984 S.W.M. Broeks v The Netherlands (views adopted on 9 April 1987) in UN Doc. GOAR, A/42/40 P.150, para 13. ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 14

Page 41

legal treatment that do not violate the principle of justice. They may in fact be instrumental in achieving justice or in protecting those who find themselves in a weak legal position. Accordingly, no discrimination exists if the difference in treatment has a legitimate purpose and if it does not lead to situations which are contrary to justice, to reason or to the nature of things. It follows, that there would be no discrimination in differences in treatment of individuals by a state when the classifications selected are based on substantial factual differences and there exists a reasonable relationship of proportionality between these differences and the aims of the legal rule under review. These aims may not be unjust or unreasonable, that is, they may not be arbitrary, capricious, despotic or in conflict with the essential oneness and dignity of human kind”.6 [20] Mu rubanza Firma A. Racke v Hauptzollamt Mainz, Urukiko rw’Umuryango w’Ubumwe bw’ibihugu by’Uburayi (Court of Justice of the European Union) rwasobanuye ko ivangura ari ugufata ibintu cyangwa abantu bari mu cyiciro

6 Ugenekereje mu Kinyarwanda bishatse kuvuga: “Ihame ryo kureshya imbere y’amategeko no kutavangura bishingiye ku bumwe bw’inyoko muntu bigendanye n’agaciro k’abantu bose. Ibyo bituma gutandukanya abantu ubwabyo bitafatwa nk’ivangura kuko ntabwo uburyo bwose bwo gutandukanya abantu bugira ingaruka ku gaciro kabo nk’abantu.Hari gutandukanya abantu mu mategeko bitanyuranije n’ihame ry’ubutabera.Ahubwo kudafata abantu kimwe bishobora kuba uburyo bwo gutanga ubutabera cyane cyane ku banyantege nke. Ni ukuvuga ko nta vangura ribaho iyo kudafata abantu kimwe bifite impamvu yumvikana kandi itarenganya abantu. Ushyize mu gaciro uburyo bwo gutandukanya abantu bukwiye kuba bwumvikana ugereranije n’icyari kigambiriwe cyangwa intego igomba kugerwaho”. I-A Court H.R, Proposed Amendment to the Naturalization Provision of the Constitution of Costa Rica, Advision Opinion OC 4/84 of Jan 19, 1984, series A No4, p.104-106 paras 56-57. Re AKAGERA BUSINESS GROUP 15

Page 42

kimwe mu buryo butandukanye ndetse n’abari mu byiciro bitandukanye bagafatwa kimwe. Rwagize ruti “[……] discrimination consists solely in the application of different rules to comparable situations or in the application of the same rule to differing situations [….]7”. Biragaragara rero ko, kudafata kimwe abantu bari mu byiciro bitandukanye atari ivangura, ku rundi ruhande, abantu bari mu byiciro bitandukanye baramutse bafashwe kimwe byo bishobora kuba ivangura. [21] Ingingo ya 1, igika cya 5, y’Itegeko Nº74/2008 ryo kuwa 31/12/2008 yavuzwe haruguru, niyo urega ashingiraho avuga ko inyuranije n’Itegeko Nshinga kuko avuga ko ivangura hagati y’umuburanyi w’umusoreshwa n’umuburanyi mu zindi manza ikanatuma abantu batareshya imbere y’amategeko kuko umuburanyi mu manza zitari iz’imisoro we yemerewe gutanga ibimenyetso aho urubanza rwaba rugeze hose. Ese ibi byaba ari ukutareshyeshya abantu imbere ya amategeko no kuvangura? [22] Nkuko bigaragara, Itegeko Nshinga mu ngingo yaryo ya 16 rigaragaza urutonde rw’impamvu ivangura rishobora gushingiraho. Muri rusange ivangura ni ugutandukanya abantu hagamijwe kuvutsa amahirwe bamwe no gutonesha abandi bigakorwa bishingiye ku mpamvu zitumvikana. Ku birebana n’uru rubanza, hari icyiciro cy’ababuranyi b’abasoreshwa, umusoresha ndetse n’ababuranyi mu zindi manza. Muri ibi byiciro, nta na kimwe gishingiye kuri imwe mu mpamvu ivangura rishobora gushingiraho nkuko zivugwa mu Itegeko Nshinga.

7 CJCE, aff. 283/83, 13 novembre 1984, Racke/Hauptzollamt Mainz, Rec., 1984, p.3791; CJCE, aff. 106/83, 13décembre 1984, Société Sermide, Rec., p.4209; CEDH, 6 Avril 2000, Thlimennos c. Grèce, N°34369/97. ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 16

Page 43

[23] Iyo gutandukanya abantu bishingiye ku mpamvu ivugwa mu ngingo ya 16 y’Itegeko Nshinga, bifatwa nk’ivangura keretse hagaragajwe impamvu yumvikana ituma haba gufata abantu mu buryo butandukanye hashingiwe kuri iyo mpamvu ivugwa mu ngingo ya 16. Nyamara kandi ingingo ya 16 igaragaza urutonde rw’icyo ivangura rishobora gushingiraho ariko ikongeraho amagambo “no ku rindi vangura iryo ariryo ryose”. Niyo mpamvu hagomba gusuzumwa itegeko cyangwa igikorwa icyo aricyo cyose bivugwa ko binyuranije n’iyi ngingo kugira ngo bigaragare niba koko hari ivangura cyangwa ritariho. Nkuko byasobanuwe mu bika bibanziriza iki, iyo habaye gutandukanya abantu bidashingiye kuri imwe mu mpamvu zari ku rutonde ruri mu ngingo ya 16, harebwa niba impamvu yashingiweho yumvikana, ifite icyo igamije gifitiye abantu muri rusange cyangwa icyiciro runaka akamaro. [24] Nibyo koko mu manza zisanzwe, umuburanyi yemerewe gutanga ibimenyetso bishya mu rwego rw’ubujurire atatanze mu rwego rwa mbere. Ingingo ya 168 y’Itegeko N°21/2012 ryo kuwa 14/06/2012 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi igika cya 3 ivuga iti: “[…..] Ntibibujijwe ariko mu rwego rw’ubujurire gutanga ingingo nshya zo kuburana cyangwa ibimenyetso bishya bitaburanishijwe mu rwego rwa mbere”. Hagomba rero gusuzumwa niba itegeko ridafata kimwe abantu bari mu cyiciro kimwe no mu bihe bimwe, n’impamvu y’ingingo ya 1 agace ka 5, y’Itegeko No74/2008 rihindura kandi ryuzuza Itegeko No25/2005 rigena imitunganyirize y’isoreshwa ibuza umusoreshwa gutanga ibimenyetso mu rwego rw’ubujurire. Re AKAGERA BUSINESS GROUP 17

Page 44

[25] Kubuza umuburanyi w’umusoreshwa gutanga ibimenyetso ku rwego rw’ubujurire atarabitanze igihe cy’igenzura bishobora kumvikana nko kumuvutsa uburenganzira abandi baburanyi bagenerwa, binyuranije n’ihame ryo gufatwa kimwe imbere y’amategeko no kutavangura. Mu rubanza rwa Backus v. Fort St. Union Depot Company8 rwo muri Leta Zunze Ubumwe za America, hasuzumwe itegeko ryabuzaga nyir’inzu kurega umukodesha asaba indishyi ku byangijwe, igihe nyir’inzu yakoresheje nabi ingwate y’ibizangizwa (security deposit). Urukiko rw’Ikirenga rw’icyo gihugu rwanzuye ruvuga ko itegeko ryemerera umuntu bumwe mu burenganzira mu migendekere y’urubanza mu rukiko ariko rikabibuza abandi bari mu bihe bimwe, rishobora gufatwa nk’irivangura kandi ritubahiriza ihame ryo kureshya no kurengerwa imbere y’amategeko binyuranije n’Itegeko Nshinga. [26] Nyamara muri uru rubanza, bigaragara ko ababuranyi b’abasoreshwa batari mu bihe bimwe n’abandi baburanyi. Abasoreshwa ni icyiciro cy’abantu bihariye bafite ibyo basabwa kugira ngo igikorwa cy’ingenzi ku gihugu gikorwe neza. Iyaba abasoreshwa bamwe babuzwaga gutanga ibimenyetso ku rwego rw’ubujurire abandi bakabyemererwa, byaba ari ugusumbanisha ababuranyi bari mu cyiciro kimwe mu bihe bimwe. Impamvu yo kubuza abasoreshwa muri rusange gutanga ibimenyetso mu bujurire batatanze mu gihe cy’igenzura, ni ukubatera umwete (incentive) wo gutanga ibyo bimenyetso ku gihe bigafasha umusoresha kurangiza inshingano ye yo kugenzura imisoro neza. Umusoreshwa afite uburenganzira bwo gutanga ibimenyetso byose mu gihe cy’igenzura kugira ngo abarirwe

8Backus v. Fort St. Union Depot Co., 169 U.S. 557, 18 S. Ct. 445, 42 L. Ed. 853 (1898). ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 18

Page 45

neza imisoro agomba gutanga. Ni nawe ufite ibimenyetso byose bishobora gufasha kumenya ukuri ku misoro agomba gutanga. Ibi bitandukanye n’umuburanyi usanzwe ushobora gukenera ibimenyetso bifitwe n’abandi adafite uburyo bwo kubigeraho igihe abishakiye. Uru rukiko rwumva ko ingingo y’itegeko isabirwa gukurwaho ifite impamvu yumvikana kandi ifitiye akamaro rubanda bikaba bitafatwa ko ivangura. [27] Ariko kandi, itegeko rishobora kuba rifite impamvu n’intego byumvikana ariko rikaba rikoresha uburyo burengera ugereranije n’intego igomba kugerwaho (measure not proportional to the purpose/ objective to be achieved). Ibi ninabyo byavuzwe n’Urukiko rw’Ibihugu byunze Ubumwe bw’Uburayi rugenzura iyubahirizwa ry’uburenganzira bwa muntu (European Court of Human Rights) muri aya magambo: “[…..] on this question, the Court holds that the principle of equality of treatment is violated if a distinction has no objective and reasonable justification. A difference of treatment in the exercise of a right laid down in the Convention must not only pursue a legitimate aim: article 14 is likewise violated when it is clearly established that there is no reasonable relationship of proportionality between the means employed and the aim sought to be realised”.9

9Eur.Court HR, Case “relating to certain aspects of the laws on the use of language in education in Belgium” judgment of 23 July 1968, series A, No 6.p.31.para 10. Tugenekereje mu Kinyarwanda bivuze ngo ihame ryogufata abantu kimwe riba ryishwe iyo kudafata abantu kimwe bidafite impamvu yumvikana nta n’igisobanurogifatika. Ikindi ni uko gutadukanya abantu mu buryo uburenganzira bwabo bemererwa bwubahirizwa ntibigombakugaragara gusa ko hari impamvu yumvikana ahubwo ihame riri mu ngingo ya 14 y’amasezerano riba ryishwe iyo,ushyize mu gaciro (proportionality), bigaragaye ko uburyo bwakoreshejwe ntaho buhuriye n’icyari kigamijwe). Re AKAGERA BUSINESS GROUP 19

Page 46

[28] Muri uru rubanza, hagomba gusuzumwa niba uburyo bwakoreshejwe kugira ngo umusoreshwa atange inyandiko zose zikenewe ku gihe, ni ukuvuga kubuza umusoreshwa kuzana ibimenyetso ku rwego rw’ubujurire atarabitanze mu gihe cy’igenzura, byafatwa nko kurengeera mu kugena ibyari bikenewe kugira ngo iyo ntego igerweho. Nyamara kandi, mu gusuzuma no gufata icyemezo niba ibyateganijwe mu itegeko kugira ngo intego yavuzwe igerweho cyangwa niba hari ubundi buryo butari kubangamira abasoreshwa, urukiko rugomba kwirinda kuvogera inshingano z’abashinzwe gushyiraho politiki y’igihugu no kuyishyira mu bikorwa, kimwe n’inshingano z’umushingamategeko. [29] Urukiko ntirwavuga ko itegeko rinyuranyije n’Itegeko Nshinga rushingiye gusa ku kuba mu myumvire yarwo icyo itegeko ryari rigamije cyagerwaho hakoreshejwe ubundi buryo. Umuburanyi unenga itegeko agomba kugaragaza ko inzira umushingamategeko yahisemo itumvikana, idasobanutse cyangwa se ko, ushyize mu gaciro, iyo nzira ntaho ihuriye n’intego itegeko ryashyiriweho. Ibi bijyanye n’ihame ry’uko inzego z’ubutegetsi bwa Leta zitandukanye kandi ko zigenga zikanubahana (separation of powers)10. Ibi byashimangiwe mu rubanza rwa S v Lawrence11 rwo mu rukiko rushinzwe iyubahirizwa ry’Itegeko Nshinga rya South Africa aho rwashyigikiye ibyanditswe n’umuhanga Professor Hogg aho avuga ko urukiko rufite ubwisanzure mu gufata ibyemezo bireba ibibazo biburanwaho ariko ko rutakwisanzura mu gufata ibyemezo bireba ibishingirwaho n’umushingamategeko mu gushyiraho amategeko. Icyo urukiko rwakora ni ukwemeza ko hari isano igaragara hagati y’itegeko n’intego

10Ingingo ya 61 y’Itegeko Nshinga rya Repubulika y’u Rwanda, 2015. 11S v Lawrence 1997 (4) SA 1176 para.44-45. ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 20

Page 47

umushingamategeko yashakaga kugeraho (rational connection), ni ukuvuga ko impamvu zashingiweho zumvikana kandi ko zifatika cyangwa ko ibyo Atari byo. Akomeza avuga ko bitaba aribyo ko muri demokarasi, inkiko zashyira iruhande ubushishozi bw’umushingamategeko zikabusimbuza ubwazo”.12 [30] Muri rusange, itangwa ry’ibimenyetso mu manza rigengwa n’Itegeko No15/2004 ryo ku wa 12/6/2004 ryerekeye ibimenyetso mu manza n’itangwa ryabyo, ariko mu buryo bwihariye mu manza z’imisiroro rikagenwa n’Itegeko Nº74/2008 ryo kuwa 31/12/2008 rihindura kandi ryuzuza Itegeko Nº25/2005 rigena imitunganyirize y’isoresha cyane cyane mu ngingo yaryo ya mbere. Icyo iyi ngingo igamije, si ukuvangura abasoreshwa baburana n’abandi baburanyi hagamijwe kubavutsa amahirwe yo kwiregura no gutanga

12 Hogg “Proof of facts in Constitutional Cases (1976) 26 University of Toronto Law Journal 386 at 396-7“While a court must reach a definite conclusion on the adjudicative facts which are relevant to thedisposition of litigation, the court need not be so definite in respect of legislative facts in constitutionalcases. The most that the court can ask in respect of legislative facts is whether there is a rational basis forthe legislative judgment that the facts exist.The rational-basis test involves restraint on the part of the courtin finding legislative facts. Restraint is often compelled by the nature of the issue: for example, an issue ofeconomics which is disputed by professional economists can hardly be definitively resolved by a courtstaffed by lawyers. The most that can realistically be expected of a court is a finding that there is, or is not,a rational basis for a particular position on the disputed issue.The more important reason for restraint, however, is related to the respective roles of court and legislature. Alegislature acts not merely on the basis of findings of fact, but upon its judgment as to the public perceptions of asituation and its judgments as to the appropriate policy to meet the situation. These judgments are political…. It isnot for the court to disturb political judgments, much less to substitute the opinions of experts. In a democracy itwould be a serious distortion of the political process if appointed officials (the judges) could veto the policies ofelected officials. Re AKAGERA BUSINESS GROUP 21

Page 48

ibimenyetso, ahubwo igamije gushyiraho uburyo bwihariye umusoreshwa atangamo ibimenyetso hashingiwe cyane cyane ku nshingano ahabwa n’itegeko zo kubika ibitabo n’izindi nyandiko. Umusoreshwa afite uburenganzira bwo gutanga ibimenyetso mu buryo itegeko ryagennyemo butandukanye n’abandi baburanyi. [31] Itegeko riha umusoreshwa inshingano zo kubika no gutunga inyandiko zose zirebana n’ubucuruzi bwe, akabigaragaza mu gihe cy’igenzura. Nyuma y’igenzura yemerewe gushyikiriza ubuyobozi bw’imisoro ubundi buhamya n’ibindi bimenyetso mu gihe cy’iminsi 30 kuva akibona inyandiko ikosora kugira ngo niba harabaye amakosa akosorwe1313. Uretse n’ibyo, yemerewe kubitanga ku rwego rw’ubujurire igihe agaragaje impamvu yumvikana yatumye atabitanga mu gihe cy’igenzura14. Ni ukuvuga ko ibimenyetso bitemewe ari ibyo umusoreshwa yashoboraga gutanga igihe cy’igenzura ntabitange kubera uburiganya, gushaka kujijisha cyangwa uburangare bukabije adashobora gusobanura (not justifiable). Umusoreshwa ufite ubushake bwo gutanga imisoro ye uko bikwiye kandi ku gihe ntacyo yangirizwa n’ingingo isabirwa gukurwaho kuko ibimenyetso bikenewe abimenyeshwa mbere y’igenzura yaba abifite akabitanga mu gihe cy’igenzura, ibyo adashoboye kubona icyo gihe akazabitanga aho abiboneye ariko ashoboye gusobanura impamvu bitabonetse mbere.

13Ingingo za 27 na 29 z’Itegeko Nº25/2005 ziha umusoreshwa uburenganzira bwo gushyikiriza ubuyobozibw’imisoro ubundi buhamya n’ibindi bimenyetso mu gihe cy’iminsi 30 kuva akibona inyandiko ikosora bigaragazako isoresha ryakozwe nabi kugira ngo byongere bisuzumwe kugira ngo niba harimo amakosa bibe byakosorwa. 14Agace ka nyuma k’Ingingo isabirwa gukurwaho kavuga ngo: “Ibiteganyjwe mu gika kibanziriza ikintibikurikizwa, iyo umusoreshwa abashije gutanga impamvu zifatika zatumye atagaragaza ibimenyetso mu gihecy’igenzura”. ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 22

Page 49

[32] Kuba ibyo atagaragaje mu gihe cy’igenzura atemerewe kubitanga nk’ikimenyetso mu gihe yajuririye ibyagaragajwe n’igenzura, ni ingaruka zuko aba atujuje inshingano yo kugeza ku buyobozi bw’imisoro mu gihe cy’igenzura, ibitabo n’inyandiko bivugwa mu ngingo ya 12, iya 13 n’iya 15 z’Itegeko N°25/2005 ryo kuwa 04/12/2005. Mu gihe umusoreshwa yaba yemerewe gutanga ibitabo n’inyandiko bivugwa muri iki gika igihe icyo aricyo cyose nyuma y’igenzura, kugaragaza ibitabo n’inyandiko mu gihe cy’igenzura ntibyaba bikiri inshingano, yabitanga cyangwa se agahitamo kuzabitanga mu bujurire kandi ibyo byatuma igenzura ry’imisoro ritagenda neza. [33] Nubwo Akagera Business Group mu myanzuro yayo itashingiye ku kuba hari ubusumbane mu bushobozi bw’ababuranyi (equality of arms), yabikomojeho mu miburanire imbere y’Urukiko. Yavuze ko ari ikibazo ko umusoreshwa atemerewe gutanga ibimenyetso ku rwego rw’ubujurire atarabitanze mu igenzura ariko umusoresha we akaba abyemerewe. Mu gusubiza, Intumwa ya Leta yo ivuga ko umusoresha n’umusoreshwa batari mu cyiciro n’ibihe bimwe, ko bafite inshingano zitandukanye, ko rero kudafatwa kimwe bitaba kutareshya imbere y’amategeko cyangwa ivangura. [34] Uburinganire mu bushobozi bw’ababuranyi bwo gusobanura imyanzuro yabo no gutanga ibimenyetso ntibiteganywa mu Itegeko Nshinga ry’u Rwanda, bikaba atari uburenganzira bwihariye. Ariko tugendeye ku mahame mpuzamahanga n’inyandiko z’akanama gashinzwe iyubahirizwa ry’uburenganzira bwa muntu (UNHRC), dusanga uburinganire bw’ababuranyi mu bushobozi bwo gusobanura imiburanire yabo imbere y’inkiko bifatwa nk’uruhande Re AKAGERA BUSINESS GROUP 23

Page 50

rumwe/cyangwa agace kamwe k’uburenganzira bwo gufatwa kimwe imbere y’inkiko nkuko biteganywa mu ngingo ya 14 y’Amasezerano Mpuzamahanga k’Uburenganzira Mbonezamubano n’ubwa Politiki (ICCPR). Iyo ngingo iteganya ko abantu bose barareshya imbere y’inkiko. Mu guhuza iyi ngingo n’ubushobozi bwo kwisobanura imbere y’inkiko, akanama kavuze ko ababuranyi bafite uburenganzira bungana mu migendekere y’urubanza keretse iyo kutabemerera ubwo burenganzira bigenwa n’itegeko kandi bikaba bisobanutse hashingiwe ku mpamvu zumvikana, zitavutsa amahirwe umuburanyi cyangwa ngo zimurenganye15. [35] Mu rubanza rwa Dudko v Australia, akanama (UNHRC) kavuze ngo: “It is for the State party to show that any procedural inequality was based on reasonable and objective grounds not entailing actual disadvantage or other unfairness to the author […]”16. Mu Kinyarwanda, byavugwa ko Leta igomba kugaragaza ko kudatanga uburenganzira bungana mu migendekere y’urubanza bigomba gushingira ku mpamvu zumvikana, kandi zitavutsa umuburanyi amahirwe cyangwa ngo zimurenganye mu bundi buryo. [36] Kuri iki kibazo cy’ubusumbane mu bushobozi imbere y’inkiko no gutanga ibimenyetso, Urukiko rusanga imiterere y’igenzura n’itunganya ry’imisoro no kuba umusoreshwa afite

15United Nations Human Rights Committee, General Comment No.32, Article 14, Right to equality before Courts and tribunals and fair trial, UN.Doc.CCPR//G/32/Aug.23,2007 para 13. “This means that the same procedural rights are to be provided to all the parties unless distinctions are based on law and can be justified on objective and reasonable grounds, not entailing actual disadvantage or other unfairness to the defendant”. 16UNHR, Dudko v Australia, Comm. No1347/2005, UN.Doc.CCPR//90/D/1347/2005 (Aug.29.2007 para 7.4.) ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 24

Page 51

inshingano yo gutunga no kubika ibitabo n’izindi nyandiko, akaba ari nawe wenyine uba afite amakuru ya ngombwa ashobora kuyatanga cyangwa akayimana, bituma umusoresha ahabwa uburenganzira bwo kuba yatanga ibimenyetso yabonye nyuma nubwo umusoreshwa we atabyemerewe. Ibi bikaba bitafatwa nk’ubusumbane mu bushobozi bwo gusobanura imbere y’urukiko. [37] Hashingiwe ku byasobanuwe hejuru, Urukiko rurasanga ingingo ya mbere, igika cya 5, y’Itegeko Nº74/2008 ryo kuwa 31/12/2008 rihindura kandi ryuzuza Itegeko Nº25/2005 rigena imitunganyirize y’isoresha, nubwo idafata ababuranyi b’abasoreshwa mu buryo bumwe nk’ababuranyi mu zindi manza, ntigaragaramo ubusumbane imbere y’amategeko no kutarengerwa n’amategeko mu buryo bumwe, ndetse ikaba itanagaragaramo ivangura iryo ariryo ryose. Impamvu uwareze ashingiraho avuga ko hari ivangura ntivugwa mu mpamvu zishobora gutera ivangura mu ngingo ya 16 y’Itegeko Nshinga, kandi ikaba yumvikana, ntishobora kandi gufatwa nkaho ntaho ihuriye n’intego yo gutera umwete abasoreshwa gufatanya n’umusoresha kuzuza neza inshingano ahabwa n’amategeko. Ababuranyi b’abasoreshwa, bitewe n’umwihariko wabo, itegeko ribafata ku buryo butandukanye n’abandi baburanyi hashingiwe ku mpamvu zumvikana kandi zitagamije kubavutsa uburenganzira n’andi mahirwe bahabwa n’itegeko. Byongeye kandi, kuba batemerewe gutanga mu bujurire ibimenyetso batatanze mu gihe cy’igenzura, umusoresha we akaba abyemerewe, ntibyafatwa nk’ubusumbane mu bushobozi bwo gusobanura imbere y’inkiko, ahubwo ni uko abasoreshwa aribo bonyine baba bafite ibyo bimenyetso bakaba bashobora kubitanga igihe bikenewe nkuko byasobanuwe. Muri make, ingingo y’itegeko isabirwa kuvanwaho, ntinyuranyije n’ingingo Re AKAGERA BUSINESS GROUP 25

Page 52

za 15 na 16 z’Itegeko Nshinga kuko idasumbanisha abantu imbere y’amategeko kandi ikaba itaragaza ivangura iryo ari ryo ryose. III. ICYEMEZO CY’URUKIKO [38] Urukiko rw’Ikirenga rwemeye kwakira ikirego rwashyikirijwe n’AKAGERA BUSINESS GROUP gisaba gukuraho ingingo ya mbere, igika cya 5, y’Itegeko Nº74/2008 ryo kuwa 31/12/2008 rihindura kandi ryuzuza Itegeko Nº25/2005 rigena imitunganyirize y’isoresha kuko yaba inyuranye n’Itegeko Nshinga rya Repubulika y’u Rwanda ryo muri 2003 nkuko ryavuguruwe muri 2015 mu ngingo yaryo ya 15 n’iya 16; [39] Rwemeje ko nta shingiro icyo kirego gifite; [40] Rwemeje ko ingingo ya mbere, igika cya 5, y’Itegeko Nº74/2008 ryo kuwa 31/12/2008 rihindura kandi ryuzuza Itegeko Nº25/2005 rigena imitunganyirize y’isoresha itanyuranije n’Itegeko Nshinga rya Repubulika y’u Rwanda ryo muri 2003 nk’uko ryavuguruwe muri 2015 mu ngingo yaryo ya 15 n’iya 16; [41] Ruvuze ko amagarama yatanzwe n’AKAGERA BUSINESS GROUP ahwanye n’ibyakozwe mu rubanza.

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 26

Page 53

IMANZA ZEREKEYE IMIBURANISHIRIZE Y’IMANZA

Page 55

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

Page 57

NTUKAMAZINA v. PRIME INSURANCE LTD (EX-COGEAR LTD) [Rwanda URUKIKO RW’IKIRENGA – RSOC00001/2016/CS (Kanyange, P.J., Ngagi na Mukandamage, J.) 20 Mutarama 2017] Irangiza ry’imanza – Kudahindura urubanza – Urubanza rugomba kurangizwa n’inzego zose zirebwa uko rwaciwe mu gihe nta nzira y’ubujurire yiyambajwe ngo ihindure ibyemejwe muri urwo rubanza – Itegeko Nshinga rya Repubulika y’u Rwanda ryo mu 2003 ryavuguruwe mu 2015, ingingo ya 151. Irangiza ry’imanza – Igihano gihatira kurangiza urubanza – Igihano gihatira umuburanyi kurangiza urubanza gisabwa igihe cy’iburanisha ry’urubanza mu mizi kikaba rero kitasabirwa mu rubanza rwerekeranye n’impaka zavutse mu irangiza ryarwo – Itegeko No21/2012 ryo ku wa 14/06/2012 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi, ingingo ya 217. Incamake y’ikibazo: Mu rubanza rw’umulimo Ntukamazina yaburanye na Prime Insurance yatsindiyemo indishyi zingana na mafaranga 134.185.600Frw zose hamwe. Urubanza rumaze kuba ntakuka, Ntukamazina yasabye Prime Insurance kurangiza urwo rubanza. Mwiragiza ryarwo havutse impaka, kuko Prime Insurance Ltd yashakaga kwishyura amafaranga angana na 67.975.013Frw ivuga ko ariyo ibona ikwiriye kwishyura, Ntukamazina Jean Baptiste we akabyanga avuga ko icyemezo cyafashwe mu rubanza kigomba kubahirizwa uko kiri. 31

Page 58

Ntukamazina yaregeye Urukiko rw’Ikirenga asaba ko rwa kemura izo impaka zavutse mwiragiza ryurwo rubanza ,akasaba ko urwo rukiko rwafata icyemezo rugategeka Prime Insurance Ltd kurangiza urwo rubanza, akanasaba ko Prime Insurance Ltd yahabwa igihano kiyihatira kurangiza urubanza hamwe n’indishyi zo gushorwa mu manza nta mpamvu n’igihembo cy’Avoka. Prime Insurance Ltd yatanze ingoboka ijyanye no gukobokesha Ikigo cy’Imisoro n’Amahoro (RRA) n’Ikigo cy’Ubwiteganyirize bw’Abakozi (RSSB) ivuga ko nibyo byatumye urubanza rutarangizwa kuko hari amafaranga yabyo yagombaga kuvanwa mu yemejwe n’Urukiko. Kuri iyi ngoboka, Ntukamazina avuga ko nta nyungu Prime Insurance Ltd ifite yo kugobokesha RRA na RSSB. Urukiko rwahise rusuzuma iyo ngoboka maze rusanga iryo gobokeshwa ritakwemerwa, bityo rufatira icyemezo mu ntebe cyokutaryakira, iburanisha mu mizi rirakomeza. Prime Insurance Ltd yireguye ivuga ko nta mpaka ziri mu irangiza ry’urubanza kuko amafaranga Prime Insurance Ltd ikuramo ateganyijwe n’amategeko ndetse n’inzego bireba zikaba zarabigaragaje kandi ko impamvu ayo mafaranga ya RRA na RSSB ataburanwe ari uko ababuranyi bombi bari bazi ko hari ibigomba kuvamo. Kubyerekeranye igihano gihatira kurangiza urubanza ivuga ko yari ifite ubushake bwo kurangiza urubanza kuko yari yakoze sheki, Ntukamazina akaba yagombaga kuba yarayifashe agasigara asaba ayo atabonye kandi ko niwe ugomba ku yiha amafaranga yo gusiragizwa mu manza n’igihembo cy’Avoka kuko ariwe wayishoye mu manza. ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 32

Page 59

Incamake y’icyemezo: 1. Kuba ababuranyi bombi batumvikana ku buryo urwo rubanza rugomba kurangizwa bigaragaza impaka zishingiye ku iragiza ry’urubanzabityo zikaba zigomba gukemurwa.

2. Urubanza rugomba kurangizwa n’inzego zose zirebwa uko rwaciwe mu gihe nta nzira y’ubujurire yiyambajwe ngo ihindure ibyemejwe muri urwo rubanza.

3. Igihano gihatira umuburanyi kurangiza urubanza gisabwa igihe cy’iburanisha ry’urubanza mu mizi, kikaba rero kitasabirwa mu rubanza rwerekeranye n’impaka zavutse mu irangiza ryarwo, bityo igihano kiyihatira kurangiza urubanza, kitagomba kwakirwa.

4. Uregwa agomba kwishyura uwareze indishyi zugushorwa mu manza kuko yashowe muri uru rubanza ku maherere, bigatuma atakaza igihe n’amafaranga yo kwishyura Avoka zigenwe mu bushishozi bw’urukiko. Ikirego gifite ishingiro kuri bimwe;. Urubanza RSOCAA0001&0002/16/CS rugomba kurangizwa uko rwaciwe, uwareze akishyurwa amafaranga yose yatsindiye; Uregwa agomba guha urega indishyi zo gushorwa mu manza n’igihembo cy’Avoka;. Uregwa agomba gusubiza urega ingwate y’igarama yatanze arega. Amategeko yashingiweho: Itegeko Nshinga rya Repubulika y’u Rwanda ryo mu 2003 ryavuguruwe mu 2015, ingingo ya 151. NTUKAMAZINA v. PRIME INSURANCE LTD (EX-COGEAR LTD) 33

Page 60

Itegeko No21/2012 ryo ku wa 14/06/2012 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimon’iz’ubutegetsi, ingingo ya 208. Nta manza zifashishijwe. Urubanza I. IMITERERE Y’URUBANZA [1] Mu rubanza Nº RSOCAA0001 & 0002/16/CS rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga ku wa 14/10/2016, uru Rukiko rwategetse ko Prime Insurance Ltd igomba kwishyura Ntukamazina Jean Baptiste 134.185.600Frw, akubiyemo 43.248.000Frw y’indishyi z’uko Ntukamazina yirukanywe mu buryo bunyuranyije n’amategeko, 7.208.000Frw y’integuza, 14.416.000Frw y’imperekeza zishingiye ku isezererwa, 43.248.000Frw zijyanye n’icyemezo cy’umurimo atahawe, 23.065.600Frw y’ikiruhuko na 3.000.000Frw y’igihembo cy’Avoka n’ikurikiranarubanza. [2] Nyuma y’icibwa ry’urwo rubanza, Ntukamazina Jean Baptiste yaregeye Urukikorw’Ikirenga avuga ko mu irangiza rwaryo havutse impaka, kuko Prime Insurance Ltd yashakaga kwishyura amafaranga angana na 67.975.013Frw ivuga ko ariyo ibona ikwiriye kwishyura, Ntukamazina Jean Baptiste we akabyanga avuga ko icyemezo cyafashwe mu rubanza rwavuzwe haruguru kigomba kubahirizwa uko kiri. ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 34

Page 61

[3] Mu kirego cye, Ntukamazina Jean Baptiste, asaba uru Rukiko gutegeka Prime Insurance Ltd kurangiza urubanza Nº RSOCAA0001&0002/16/CS ikamwishyura 134.185.600Frw nk’uko yategetswe n’Urukiko, Prime Insurance Ltd igahabwaigihano kiyihatira kurangiza urubanza kingana na 1.000.000Frw buri munsi kugeza igihe izarangiriza kwishyura kuko bigaragara ko yakomeje kwanga kurangiza urubanza. Asaba kandi Prime Insurance Ltd kumwishyura amafaranga angana na 5.000.000Frw y'indishyi zo gushorwa mu manza nta mpamvu, igihembo cy‘Avoka kingana na 2.000.000Frw, ndetse n’amagarama ya 100.000Frw. [4] Ku rundi ruhande, Prime Insurance Ltd yatanze ingoboka ijyanye no kugobokesha Ikigo cy’Imisoro n’Amahoro (RRA1) n’Ikigo cy’Ubwiteganyirize bw’Abakozi (RSSB2) kubera ko ari ibyo bigo byatumye urubanza rutarangizwa biturutse ku kuba hari amafaranga yabyo agomba kuvanwa mu yemejwe n’Urukiko. Kuri iyi ngoboka, Ntukamazina Jean Baptiste akaba avuga ko nta nyungu Prime Insurance Ltd ifite yo kugobokesha RRA na RSSB. [5] Urubanza rwaburanishijwe mu ruhame ku wa 10/01/2017, Ntukamazina Jean Baptiste yunganiwe na Me Rutabingwa Athanase, naho Prime Insurance Ltd iburanirwa na Me Rutembesa Phocas; Urukiko rwahise rusuzuma ingoboka yavuzwe haruguru, nyuma yo gusesengura ingingo ya 1163n’iya

1Rwanda Revenue Authority. 2Rwanda Social Security Board. 3“Guhatirwa kugoboka ni uburenganzira bw’ababuranyi bwo kuzana mu rubanza umuntu utarurezwemo”. NTUKAMAZINA v. PRIME INSURANCE LTD (EX-COGEAR LTD) 35

Page 62

1174 z’Itegeko No21/2012 ryo ku wa 14/06/2012 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi, rusanga igobokesha ryasabwe na Prime Insurance Ltd ritakwemera, bityo rufatira icyemezo mu ntebe cyo kutaryakira, iburanisha mu mizi rirakomeza. II. BIBAZO BIGIZE URUBANZA N’ISESENGURWA RYABYO Kumenya niba hari impaka zavutse mu irangiza ry’urubanza NoRSOCAA0001&0002/16/CS n’uko zakemurwa. [6] Ntukamazina Jean Baptiste n’umwunganizi we Me Rutabingwa Athanase, bavuga ko urubanza rurangizwa rwategetse ko Prime Insurance Ltd itsinzwe, itegekwa kwishyura Ntukamazina Jean Baptiste amafaranga aruvugwamo, hanyuma aho kuyishyura yose, itanga sheki iriho 67.975.013 Frw adahura n’ayo Ntukamazina Jean Baptiste yatsindiye. [7] Bavuga ko impaka mu irangiza ry’urubanza zigaragarira ku kuba Prime Insurance Ltd yagaragaje ko itagomba kwishyura 134.185.600Frw yategetswe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga kuko hari amafaranga agomba kuvanwa mo agahabwa RRA na RSSB, kandi ko na Bank of Kigali Ltd yanze gutanga amafaranga yose ari mu rubanza izo mpaka zitarakemuka, bityo ko nta bundi buryo Ntukamazina Jean Baptiste afite bwo kwihesha

4 “Guhatirwa kugoboka mu rubanza bikorwa ku muntu wese utaburana urubanza akaba ategereje ko rucibwa ngo arutambamire kandi hari umuburanyi ushaka kumufatanya n’uwo baburana ngo abatsindire mu rubanza rumwe”. ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 36

Page 63

amafaranga yatsindiye, uretse kugaruka imbere y’Urukiko kugira ngo abe ari rwo rufata icyemezo, cyane cyane ko nta rundi rwego rushobora kuyagabanya nk’uko biteganywa n’Itegeko Nshinga rya Repubulika y’u Rwanda. [8] Me Rutembesa Phocas, uburanira Prime Insurance Ltd, avuga ko nta mpaka ziri mu irangiza ry’urubanza kuko amafaranga Prime Insurance Ltd ikuramo ateganyijwe n’amategeko ndetse n’inzego bireba zikaba zarabigaragaje, ko impamvu ayo mafaranga ya RRA na RSSB ataburanwe ari uko ababuranyi bombi bari bazi ko hari ibigomba kuvamo, ndetse ko babimenyesheje Ntukamazina Jean Baptiste, ntiyabyumva, bityo biyambaza RRA kugira ngo itange umucyo (clarification) kuri icyo kibazo, irabikora, igaragaza ko amafaranga Ntukamazina Jean Baptiste yatsindiye agomba gucibwa umusoro.

UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [9] Ingingo ya 208 y’Itegeko No21/2012 ryo ku wa 14/06/2012 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi, iteganya ko: “Impaka zishingiye ku irangiza ry’ urubanza ryaba riri gukorwa cyangwa ryararangiye zikemurwa n’urukiko rwaruciye bwa nyuma cyangwa urwemeje ko urubanza rwo mu mahanga rurangirizwa mu Rwanda mu gihe kitarenze iminsi cumi n’itanu (15) guhera igihe urukiko rwakiriye ikirego. Bene izo manza ntizijuririrwa”. [10] Ingingo ya 151, agace ka 4, y’Itegeko Nshinga rya Repubulika y’u Rwanda ryo mu 2003 ryavuguruwe mu 2015, iteganya ko: “[…] Ibyemezo by’ubucamanza bigomba gukurikizwa n’abo bireba bose, zaba inzego z’ubutegetsi bwa NTUKAMAZINA v. PRIME INSURANCE LTD (EX-COGEAR LTD) 37

Page 64

Leta cyangwa abantu ku giti cyabo. Ntibishobora kuvuguruzwa keretse binyuze mu nzira no mu buryo buteganywa n’amategeko; […]”. [11] Dosiye y’uru rubanza igaragaza ko mu rubanza NoRSOCAA0001&0002/16/CS, Prime Insurance Ltd yategetswe kwishyura Ntukamazina Jean Baptiste 134.185.600Frw agizwe na 43.248.000Frw y’indishyi z’uko yirukanywe mu buryo bunyuranyije n’amategeko, 7.208.000Frw y’integuza, 14.416.000Frw y’imperekeza zishingiye ku isezererwa, 43.248.000Frw zijyanye n’icyemezo cy’umurimo atahawe, 23.065.600Frw y’ikiruhuko na 3.000.000Frw y’igihembo cy’Avoka n’ikurikiranarubanza. Ariko, mu rwego rwo kurangiza urwo rubanza, Prime Insurance Ltd ikaba ishaka kwishyura gusa 67.975.013Frw ivuga ko igomba kuvanamo umusoro wa RRA n’amafaranga y’ubwiteganyirize bw’abakozi ya RSSB. [12] Ku byerekeranye no kumenya niba hari impaka zavutse mu irangiza ry’urubanza No RSOCAA0001&0002/16/CS, Urukiko rurasanga, nk’uko bimaze gusobanurwa mu gika kibanziriza iki, kuba ababuranyi bombi batumvikana ku buryo urwo rubanza rugomba kurangizwa, aho Prime Insurance Ltd ivuga ko mu mafaranga Ntukamazina Jean Baptiste yatsindiye hari agomba kuvanwamo, naho Ntukamaniza Jean Baptiste akavuga ko urwo rubanza rugomba kurangizwa nk’uko rwaciwe, ibyo byerekana ko izo mpaka zihari, bityo zikaba zigomba gukemurwa. [13] Ku byerekeranye n’uburyo izo mpaka zakemurwa, Urukiko rurasanga, hashingiwe ku biteganywa n’ingingo ya 151 y’Itegeko Nshinga (yavuzwe haruguru), ntawemerewe ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 38

Page 65

guhindura icyemezo cy’Urukiko, uretse Urukiko rwajuririwe5, bityo Prime Insurance Ltd ikaba ntaho yahera ivuga ko hari amafaranga agomba kuvanwa muri 134.185.600Frw y‘indishyi, Ntukamazina Jean Baptiste yatsindiye mu rubanza NoRSOCAA0001&0002/16/CS rwabaye ndakuka. Kuba uburanira Prime Insurance Ltd avuga ko ababuranyi bari basanzwe bazi ko hari amafaranga agomba kuvanwamo, Urukiko rurasanga ibyo bitahabwa agaciro kuko byagombye kuba byaragiweho impaka, n’Urukiko rukabifataho icyemezo. [14] Mu gihe nta nzira y’ubujurire (voie de recours) yiyambajwe ngo ibe yarahinduye ibyemejwe mu rubanza No RSOCAA0001 & 0002/16/CS, Urukiko rurasanga urwo rubanza rugomba kurangizwa uko rwaciwe, Ntukamazina Jean Baptiste akishyurwa amafaranga yose yatsindiye uko ari 134.185.600Frw. Kumenya niba muri uru rubanza Prime Insurance Ltd yahabwa igihano kiyihatira kurangiza urubanza, no kumenya niba hari indishyi zatangwa. [15] Ntukamazina Jean Baptiste n’umwunganizi we, Me Rutabingwa Athanase, bavuga ko Prime Insurance Ltd yahabwa igihano kiyihatira kwishyura amafaranga yatsindiwe mu rubanza NoRSOCAA0001&0002/16/CS kubera ko yagize ubushake buke bwo kurangiza urubanza, ko bari basabye 100.000Frw ku munsi, ariko ko basanze ari make, ahubwo ko

5 Inzira zo kujurira zisanzwe n’izidasanzwe ziteganywa n’Itegeko No21/2012 ryo ku wa 14/06/2012 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi, mu ngingo zaryo za 155 – 161 (Gusubirishamo urubanza), 162 - 174 (Ubujurire), 175 – 183 (Gutambamira urubanza), na 184 – 193 (Gusubirishamo urubanza ingingo nshya). NTUKAMAZINA v. PRIME INSURANCE LTD (EX-COGEAR LTD) 39

Page 66

yaba 1.000.000Frw ku munsi. Basoza basaba ko Prime Insurance Ltd yategekwa kwishyura amafaranga angana na 5.000.000Frw y'indishyi zo gushorwa mu manza nta mpamvu, igihembo cy‘Avoka kingana na 2.000.000Frw, ndetse n’amagarama ya 100.000Frw. [16] Me Rutembesa Phocas, uburanira Prime Insurance Ltd, avuga ko Prime Insurance Ltd yari ifite ubushake bwo kurangiza urubanza kuko ku wa 25/11/2016 yari yakoze sheki ya 67.975.013Frw, ko Ntukamazina Jean Baptiste yagombye kuba yarafashe amafaranga yari ahawe, agasigara asaba ayo atabonye. Avuga ko indishyi zisabwa na Ntukamazina Jean Baptiste nta mpamvu yazo kuko ariwe washoye Prime Insurance Ltd mu manza, bityo ko ari we ugomba kuyishyura 2.000.000Frw yo gusiragizwa mu manza n’igihembo cy’Avoka.

UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA Ku gihano gihatira kurangiza urubanza. [17] Ingingo ya 216 y’Itegeko No21/2012 ryo ku wa 14/06/2012 ryavuzwe haruguru, iteganya ko: “Abisabwe n’umwe mu baburanyi, mu gihe cy’iburanisha ry’imanza mbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi n’iz’umurimo, umucamanza ashobora, guteganyaigihano cyo gutanga amafaranga y’ubukererwe abazwe buri munsi, buri cyumweru, buri kwezi cyangwa buri mwaka k’uwo baburana mu gihe azaba atubahirije imikirize y’urubanza rw’iremezo, bitabujije ko yacibwa indishyi z’akababaro mu gihe bibaye ngombwa […]”. Ingingo ya 217 y’iryo Tegeko, iteganya ko: “Ikirego gisaba icyo gihano kirakirwa n’ubwo cyaba gitanzwe bwa mbere mu gusubirishamo urubanza cyangwa mu rwego rw’ubujurire”. ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 40

Page 67

[18] Urukiko rurasanga, ingingo zivuzwe haruguru zumvikanisha ko igihano gihatira umuburanyi kurangiza urubanza gisabwa igihe cy’iburanisha ry’urubanza mu mizi, kikaba rero kitasabirwa mu rubanza rwerekeranye n’impaka zavutse mu irangiza ryarwo. [19] Urukiko rurasanga rero icyifuzo cya Ntukamazina Jean Baptiste cy’uko muri uru rubanza rushingiye ku mpaka zavutse mu irangiza ry’urubanza No RSOCAA0001&0002/16/CS, Prime Insurance Ltd yahabwa igihano kiyihatira kurangiza urubanza, kitagomba kwakirwa. Ku ndishyi [20] Ku bijyanye n’indishyi zisabwa na Prime Insurance, Urukiko rurasanga idakwiye kuzihabwa kuko bigaragara ko ari yo yagize uruhare mu gutuma urubanza No RSOCAA0001&0002/16/CS rutarangizwa nk’uko rwaciwe, bityo ikaba itarasiragijwe mu manza nk’uko uyiburanira abivuga. [21] Ku bijyanye n’indishyi zisabwa na Ntukamazina Jean Baptiste, Urukiko rurasanga koko akwiye kuzihabwa kuko yashowe muri uru rubanza ku maherere, bigatuma atakaza igihe n’amafaranga yo kwishyura Avoka, ndetse n’ay’ingwate y’igarama6; ko ariko amafaranga yo gushorwa mu manza n’ay’igihembo cy’Avoka yifujwe ari ikirenga, bityo, mu

6 Ingingo ya 3, igika cya mbere, y’Iteka rya Minisitiri No002/08.11 ryo ku wa 11/02/2014 rigena amafaranga atangwa mu manza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi, iteganya ko: “Iyo umuburanyi watanze amafaranga y’ingwate y‘amagarama atsinze urubanza, umucamanza ategeka, mu cyemezo cy’urukiko, uwatsinzwe kuyamwishyura, akagena n’igihe azishyurwamo.[…]”. NTUKAMAZINA v. PRIME INSURANCE LTD (EX-COGEAR LTD) 41

Page 68

bushishozi bwarwo, rukaba rumugeneye 1.000.000Frw y’indishyi zo gushorwa mu manza ku maherere na 1.000.000Frw y’igihembo cy’Avoka. III. ICYEMEZO CY’URUKIKO [22] Rwemeje ko ikirego cyatanzwe na Ntukamazina Jean Baptiste gifite ishingiro kuri bimwe; [23] Rwemeje ko urubanza NoRSOCAA0001&0002/16/CS rurangizwa uko rwaciwe, Ntukamazina Jean Baptiste akishyurwa na Prime Insurance Ltd amafaranga yose yatsindiye uko ari 134.185.600Frw; [24] Rutegetse Prime Insurance Ltd guha Ntukamazina Jean Baptiste 1.000.000Frw y’indishyi zo gushorwa mu manza na 1.000.000Frw y’igihembo cy’Avoka; [25] Ruyitegetse gusubiza Ntukamazina Jean Baptiste ingwate y’igarama yatanze arega, ingana na 100.000Frw.

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 42

Page 69

IMANZA ZACIWE MU MIZI

Page 71

URUBANZA RW’UBUTEGETSI

Page 73

NYIRANDORIMANA v. LETA Y’U RWANDA (MINADEF) N’UNDI [Rwanda URUKIKO RW’IKIRENGA – RADA006/11/CS (Nyirinkwaya, P.J., Kayitesi na Mukandamage, J.) 31Nyakanga 2015] Uburyozwe – Ikosa – Uburangare – Indishyi – Inshingano yo kubika ibikoresho bya Gisirikare – N’uburangare ku ruhande rwa Leta iyo itabitse neza ika nagenzura ibikoresho byayo bya Gisirikare, iyo bikoreshejwe nabi kubera ibwo burangare ibitangira indishyi. Indishyi – Indishyi z’ububabare bw’umubiri – Indishyi z’ububabare bw’umubiri zishingirwa ku mibare ifatika harebwe ibyo umuntu yinjiza, ubumuga yasigiwe, imyaka yari asigaje yo gukora n’ibindi. Incamake y’ikibazo: Nyirandorimana yaregeye Urukiko Rukuru asaba ko Leta y’u Rwanda (MINADEF) yafatanya na Twagirayezu wari umusirikare wayo bakamuha indishyi kubera ubumuga yatewe n’uko uwo musirikare yamurashe mu rutugu, uruhare rwa Leta y’u Rwanda (MINADEF) akaba arushingira ku burangare yagize mu kubika imbunda zayo ubwo umusirikare wayo witwa Twagirayezu yafatagamo imwe akarasa abantu nawe amurasa ku rutugu. Urwo Rukiko rwemeje ko Leta y’u Rwanda itaryozwa amakosa y’umukozi wayo kubera ko nta burangare yagize, rutegeka ko Twagirayezu ariwe ugomba kwishyura indishyi wenyine. Nyirandorimana yajuriye mu Rukiko rw’Ikirenga avuga ko indishyi asaba atazishingira ku kuba Twagirayezu yari umukozi 47

Page 74

wa Leta, ahubwo azishingira ku mpamvu y’uko Leta yagize uburangare bwo gucunga imbunda yayo kandi ari igikoresho gikomeye, bituma Nyirandorimana akomereka. Leta y’u Rwanda yiregura ivuga ko nta burangare yagize kubera ko Twagirayezu yari umusirikare ukora akazi k’umutekano, ikaba yamuhaye igikoresho itazi ko ari umusazi, bityo ikaba itashinjwa amakosa cyangwa uburangare bw’ushinzwe gukoresha icyo gikoresho, kandi ko kuba yarihishe akajya gufata igikoresho n’ubundi afitiye uburenganzira, bitakwitwa uburangare ku ruhande rwa yo. Incamake y’icyemezo: 1. Kuba umusirikare mu masaha akuze y’ijoro yarabashije kugaruka mu kigo cya gisirikare agafata imbunda aho yari ibitswe ndetse n’abari barinze ikigo ntibabasha kuyimwambura kandi babona ko agiye mu gikorwa kidasobanutse hanyuma akajya kuyirashisha abantu bigaragaza ko Leta y’u Rwanda yagize uburangare mu kubika no kugenzura imbunda zayo ikaba igomba kubitangira indishyi. Bityo rero ikaba igomba ku bimuhera indishyi ifatanyije na Twagirayezu.

2. Indishyi z’ububabare bw’umubiri zishingirwa ku mibare ifatika harebwe ibyo umuntu yinjiza, ubumuga yasigiwe, imyaka yari asigaje yo gukora n’ibindi.

3. Uwajuriye agomba kugenerwa mu bushishozi bw’urukiko amafaranga y’igihembo cy’Avoka. Ubujurire bufite ishingiro kuri bimwe; Abaregwa bagomba gufatanya kwishyura indishyi zaciwe muri uru rubanza ku buryo bungana; ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 48

Page 75

Abaregwa bagomba gufatanya kwishyura amagarama y’urubanza ku buryo bungana. Amategeko yashingiweho: Itegeko ryo kuwa 30/07/1888 rigenga amasezerano cyangwa imirimo nshinganwa, ingingo ya 258. Iteka rya Perezida Nº31/01 ryo kuwa 25/08/2003 rishyiraho uburyo bwo kwishyura indishyi ku bubabare bw’umubiri buturutse ku mpanuka zitewe n’ibinyabiziga, ingingo ya 18. Nta manza zifashishijwe. Urubanza I. IMITERERE Y’URUBANZA [1] Nyuma y’uko Twagirayezu Maurice ahamijwe icyaha cy’ubuhotozi n’ubwinjiracyaha mu buhotozi mu rubanza RP1623/CG/03 rwaciwe tariki ya 11/05/2004 n’Urukiko rwa Gisirikare, Nyirandorimana Claudine yaregeye Urukiko Rukuru asaba ko Twagirayezu na Leta y’u Rwanda (MINADEF) bamuha indishyi zingana na 19.000.000Frw kubera ubumuga yatewe n’uko Twagirayezu wari umusirikare wayo yamurashe mu rutugu bikamuviramo ubumuga, biturutse ku burangare bwayo kuko itabitse neza imbunda zayo, agafatamo imwe akamurasa. [2] Urukiko Rukuru rwaciye urubanza Twagirayezu adahari, rwemeza ko Leta y’u Rwanda itaryozwa amakosa y’umukozi wayo kubera ko nta burangare yagize, kuko nta kigaragaza ko NYIRANDORIMANA v. LETA Y’U RWANDA (MINADEF) N’UNDI 49

Page 76

imbunda Twagirayezu yarashishije abantu hari ahantu yari ibitse, noneho hakagira umusirikare uyimuha kandi atari mu kazi, ko rero Twagirayezu ariwe ugomba kwishyura indishyi wenyine, maze rumutegeka guha Nyirandorimana izingana na 5.000.000Frw, agatanga n’amagarama y’urubanza. [3] Nyirandorimana yajuririye Urukiko rw’Ikirenga avuga ko Urukiko Rukuru rwanze guca indishyi Leta y’u Rwanda (MINADEF), nyamara uyihagarariye yaremeraga mu rukiko gutanga izingana na 20% y’indishyi zose rwategeka, ntirwanamuha amafaranga y’igihembo cya Avoka kandi yari yayasabye. [4] Urubanza rwaburanishijwe mu ruhame tariki ya 13/01/2015, no kuwa 07/07/2015 Nyirandorimana Claudine aburanirwa na Me Nizeyimana Léopold, Leta y’u Rwanda ihagararire na Me Umwali Claire, naho Twagirayezu Maurice atitabye, ariko yarahamagawe ahatazwi mu buryo bukurikije amategeko. II. IBIBAZO BIGIZE URUBANZA N’ISESENGURA RYABYO Kumenya niba Leta y’u Rwanda yaragize uburangare bwatumye Nyirandoromana akomereka. [5] Me Nizeyimana uburanira Nyirandorimana avuga ko indishyi asaba atazishingira ku kuba Twagirayezu yari umukozi wa Leta, ahubwo azishingira ku mpamvu y’uko Leta yagize uburangare bwo gucunga imbunda yayo kandi ari igikoresho gikomeye, bituma Nyirandorimana akomereka. ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 50

Page 77

[6] Ku kibazo cyo kumenya niba Nyirandorimana yararashwe na Twagirayezu, Me Nizeyimana avuga ko muri dosiye y’inshinjabyaha bigaragaramo neza mu nyandikomvugo Nyirandorimana yakorewe na Major Kagiraneza wakurikiranaga dosiye ku musirikare wari warashe abantu ahitwa i Matimba, Nyamirambo aho nawe yarasiwe mu ijoro ryo kuwa 15/06/2002 rishyira kuwa 16/05/2002. Avuga kandi ko no mu ibazwa rya Twagirayezu yavuze ko yarashe abantu mu kivunge, hakaba nta wundi warashe abantu aho hantu muri iryo joro ku buryo habaho kumwitiranya n’undi. [7] Me Umwali uburanira Leta avuga ko nta burangare Leta yagize kubera ko, Twagirayezu yari umusirikare ukora akazi k’umutekano, Leta imuha igikoresho itazi ko ari umusazi, bityo ikaba itashinjwa amakosa cyangwa uburangare bw’ushinzwe gukoresha icyo gikoresho. Yongeraho ko kuba Twagirayezu yarihishe akajya gufata igikoresho n’ubundi afitiye uburenganzira, bitakwitwa uburangare ku ruhande rwa Leta. [8] Ku kibazo cyo kumenya niba Twagirayezu ari we warashe Nyirandorimana, Uburanira Leta y’u Rwanda avuga ko harimo ugushidikanya kubera ko mu nyandiko mvugo ziri mu idosiye nshinjabyaha nta kigaragaza ko uwo musirikare yamurashe, kandi ntihavugwa abantu yaba yararashe, hakaba rero nta sano iri hagati ya Nyirandorimana uregera indishyi na Twagirayezu warashe na Leta y’u Rwanda baziregwa.

UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [9] Mu rubanza RP1623/CG/03 rwaciwe tariki ya 12/05/2004 n’Urukiko rwa Gisirikare, Twagirayezu Maurice yakurikiranyweho kuba, kuwa 15/06/2002 mu ijoro rishyira iya NYIRANDORIMANA v. LETA Y’U RWANDA (MINADEF) N’UNDI 51

Page 78

16/06/2002, ari i Matimba ya Nyamirambo yarahotoye abantu 3 aribo Niyoyita Jean Bosco, Karegeya Erneste n’undi umwe utaramenyekanye. Yarezwe kandi ubwinjiracyaha mu buhotozi. [10] Ubushinjacyaha bwa Gisirikare bwasobanuye ko Twagirayezu yasangiye n’abandi bantu inzoga bagirana amakimbirane baramukubita, ajya gufata imbunda mu Kigo cya gisirikare cya Kigali, araza ashaka abamukubise abanyanyagizamo amasasu bamwe barapfa abandi barakomereka. Twagirayezu nawe yemeye ibyo byaha asaba imbabazi, urukiko rumuhamya icyaha cy’ubuhotozi n’ubwinjiracyaha mu buhotozi. [11] N’ubwo muri urwo rubanza hatavugwamo Nyirandorimana Claudine uvuga ko yakomerekejwe na Twagirayezu Maurice, bigaragara muri iyo dosiye ko yabajijwe na Major Kagiraneza Kayihura tariki ya 18/06/2002 nk’uwahohotewe (victime) ari mu bitaro bya CHK, avuga ko yarasiwe i Nyamirambo/Matimba kuri 40 kuwa 15/06/2002 mu ma saa saba z’ijoro, n’umuntu wambaye imyenda ya gisivili, ufite imbunda nini, ari kumwe n’abandi bantu bagiye kuri Brigade ya Nyamirambo kurega umuntu wari umaze kumuhohotera, ko atazi uwamurashe n’icyo yamurasiye, ko kandi uwo muntu yarashe n’abandi akikomereza. [12] Mu ibazwa rye tariki ya 15/06/2002 mu Bushinjacyaha bwa Gisirikare, Twagirayezu yavuze ko yaraye agiye kunywa inzoga i Nyamirambo, haba amakimbirane arakubitwa, agira umujinya ahita atega moto ajya mu kigo afata imbunda, ageze ku burinzi bamubaza aho agiye bashaka kumufata, arababwira ngo ntibamwegere, ibye baraba babyumva, ahita yurira moto asubira kuri 40 i Matimba aho yakubitiwe, ahita arasa abantu ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 52

Page 79

bamwe barapfa abandi barakomereka, ko ibyo byabaye ari nka saa saba z’ijoro. [13] Iyi mvugo ya Twagirayezu ihujwe n’iya Nyirandorimana zigagaza ko uyu nawe ari mu barashwe na Twagirayezu mu ijoro ryo kuwa 15/06/2002 rishyira kuwa 16/06/2002 i Matimba/Nyamirambo. [14] Imvugo ya Twagirayezu igaragaza kandi ko imbunda yarashishije abantu barimo na Nyirandorimana itari ibitse neza ahantu hafite umutekano, kubera ko yabashije kugaruka mu kigo aho yari yayibitse, mu masaha akuze ya nijoro (saa saba z’ijoro) kandi atari mu kazi, akayifataakajya kuyirashisha abantubasangiraga inzoga bakarwana nawe, ndetse n’abari barinze ikigo ntibabasha kuyimwambura kandi babona ko agiye mu gikorwa kidasobanutse. [15] Urukiko rurasanga Leta y’u Rwanda (MINADEF) yaragize uburangare mu kubika no kugenzura imbunda yayo, bituma Nyirandorimana araswa, ikaba igomba kubimuhera indishyi ifatanyije na Twagirayezu ikishyura ½ cy’indishyi kubera amakosa yayo, ikindi ½ kikishyurwa na Twagirayezu wamukomerekeje kandi wahamwe n’icyaha cy’ubuhotozi n’ubwinjiracyaha mu buhotozi mu rubanza RP1623/CG/03 rwaciwe kuwa 12/05/2004 n’Urukiko rwa Gisirikare. Ku byerekeye indishyi Nyirandorimana asaba. [16] Me Nizeyimana uburanira Nyirandorimana avuga ko mu Rukiko Rukuru, nk’uko bigaragara mu gika cya 5 cy’urubanza, Me Sebazungu waburaniraga Leta y’u Rwanda yemeraga ko Leta yakwishyura 20%, ariko ko mu guca urubanza urukiko rutayiciye ayo 20% ya 5.000.000Frw rwategetse nk’indishyi NYIRANDORIMANA v. LETA Y’U RWANDA (MINADEF) N’UNDI 53

Page 80

zigomba guhabwa Nyirandorimana, akaba asaba ko kuri izo ndishyi Twagirayezu yaciwe, Leta y’u Rwanda yakwishyura 5.000.000Frw x 20% = 1.000.000Frw. [17] Me Umwali uburanira Leta y’u Rwanda avuga ko nta ruhare yagize mu byaha Twagirayezu yahamijwe n’Urukiko rwa Gisirikare, ikaba nta ndishyi igomba kuryozwa. [18] Avuga kandi ko mu Rukiko Rukuru uwaburaniraga Leta yasobanuye ko itagomba kuryozwa indishyi kuko umukozi wayo wakoze icyaha atari mu kazi kayo, ko ariko mu gihe rwabibona ukundi yatanga 20% y’indishyi zose urega yasabaga, ko kuba rero Urukiko rwarasanze Leta nta ndishyi igomba gucibwa, bikurikije amategeko kandi biri mu murongo w’izindi manza zaciwe n’izindi nkiko.

UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [19] Ingingo ya 258 CCL.III iteganya ko “igikorwa cy’umuntu cyangirije undi gitegeka nyirugukora ikosa rigikomokaho kuriha ibyangiritse”. [20] Urukiko rurasanga mu kugenera Nyirandorimana indishyi zingana na 5.000.000Frw Urukiko Rukuru rwarabikoze mu bushishozi bwarwo kandi rushingiye ku bumuga bwa 45% yagize, nyamara bene izi ndishyi z’ububabare bw’umubiri zikwiye gushingira ku mibare ifatika harebwe ibyo umuntu yinjiza, ubumuga yasigiwe, imyaka yari asigaje yo gukora n’ibindi, ayo mafaranga rero akaba ataherwaho hagenwa indishyi agomba guhabwa n’abo azirega. ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 54

Page 81

[21] N’ubwo nta tegeko ryihariye rihari mu kugena bene izi ndishyi, Urukiko rusanga rukwiye kwifashisha ingingo ya 18 y’Iteka rya Perezida Nº31/01 ryo kuwa 25/08/2003 rishyiraho uburyo bwo kwishyura indishyi ku bubabare bw’umubiri buturutse ku mpanuka zitewe n’ibinyabiziga iteganya uko indishyi zibarwa mu gihe cy’ibikomere byo ku mubiri bidashobora kwica, ku muntu wahohotewe udashobora kwerekana umusaruro we nyakuri ukomoka ku murimo nk’uko bimeze kuri Nyirandorima, bityo indishyi zikabarwa mu buryo bukurikira: 2.500Frw1 x iminsi 25 x amezi 12ሻ x im›aa ͵͵ x Ͷ5Ψ 1 ൅ ሺͺ.͹5Ψ x im›aa ͵͵ሻ ൌ2.ͺ͸Ͷ.ͻ52Frw [22] Nk’uko byasobanuwe haruguru, Leta y’u Rwanda igomba kwishyura ½ cya 2.864.952Frw gihwanye na 1.432.476Frw, Twagirayezu nawe akishyura ½ cya 2.864.952Frw gihwanye na 1.432.476Frw. Ku byerekeye amafaranga y’igihembo cya Avoka Nyirandorimana asaba. [23] Me Nizeyimana uburanira Nyirandorimana avuga ko atagenewe amafaranga y’igihembo cya Avoka kandi yari yayasabye, anafite umuburanira yihembeye, agasaba ko yagenerwa angana na 1.000.000Frw ku nzego zombi yaburaniyeho.

1 Mu manza zitandukanye nka RCAA0003/11/CS rwaciwe kuwa 12/10/2012 na RCAA0202/07/CS rwaciwe kuwa 09/04/2009, Urukiko rw’Ikirenga rwemeje ko 2.500Frw ariyo mafaranga yafatwa nk’umushahara muto w’umuntu ku munsi. NYIRANDORIMANA v. LETA Y’U RWANDA (MINADEF) N’UNDI 55

Page 82

[24] Me Umwali uburanira Leta y’u Rwanda avuga ko niba Me Nizeyimana yarakoze akazi ko kuburanira Nyirandorimana ku rwego rwa mbere agatsindwa kubera ko ikirego cye nta shingiro gifite, Leta atari yo yari kwishyura igihembo cye, ko n’ubu kuba amuhagarariye ntacyo biyirebaho, ko mu gihe amafaranga y’igihembo cya Avoka yaramuka atanzwe, yakwishyurwa na Twagirayezu ugomba kwishyura indishyi.

UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [25] Urukiko rurasanga ku nzego zombi Nyirandorimana yaburaniyemo yariyambaje Avoka umuburanira, ariko bikaba bigaragara ko nta myanzuro yigeze amukorera ahubwo yaburaniye kuyo Nyirandorimana yikoreye ubwe, bityo amafaranga 1.000.000Frw y’Igihembo cya Avoka asaba akaba atagomba kuyahabwa, ahubwo mu bushishozi bw’urukiko yagenerwa 500.000Frw ku nzego zombi yaburaniyeho, Leta y’u Rwanda ikishyura ½ cyayo gihwanye na 250.000Frw, na Twagirayezu akishyura ½ cyayo gihwanye na 250.000Frw. III. ICYEMEZO CY’URUKIKO [26] Rwemeje ko ubujurire bwa Nyirandorimana Claudine bufite ishingiro kuri bimwe; [27] Rutegetse Leta y’u Rwanda kwishyura Nyirandorimana Claudine indishyi zingana na 1.432.476Frw na 250.000Frw y’igihembo cya Avoka, yose hamwe akaba 1.682.476Frw; [28] Rutegetse Twagirayezu Maurice kwishyura Nyirandorimana indishyi zingana na 1.432.476Frw na ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 56

Page 83

250.000Frw y’igihembo cya Avoka, yose hamwe akaba 1.682.476Frw; [29] Rutegetse Twagirayezu kwishyura ½ cy’amafaranga y’amagarama y’urubanza ikindi ½ kigaherera ku Isanduku ya Leta.

NYIRANDORIMANA v. LETA Y’U RWANDA (MINADEF) N’UNDI 57

Page 85

IMANZA MBONEZAMUBANO

Page 87

KAPERE v. IYAMUREMYE [Rwanda URUKIKO RW’IKIRENGA – RS/REV/INJUST/CIV0005/14/CS (Nyirinkwaya, P.J., Mukandamage na Nyirandabaruta, J.) 5 Gashyantare 2016] Amategeko agenga ububasha bw’Inkiko – Gusubirishamo urubanza ku mpamvu z’akarengane – Urubanza rwasubirishijwemo ingingo nshya – Ikirego cyo gusubirishamo urubanza ku mpamvu z’akarengane ni inzira y’ubujurire idasanzwe yihariye igamije gukosora amakosa yakozwe mu rubanza rwaciwe ku rwego rwa nyuma, bityo n’urubanza rwaciwe burundu nyuma yo gusubirishwamo ingingo nshya rurebwa n’iyo nzira idasanzwe – Itegeko Ngenga Nº03/2012/OL ryo kuwa 13/06/2012 rigena imiterere, imikorere n’ububasha by’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga, ingingo ya 79 n’iya 81 – Itegeko N°21/2012 ryo kuwa 14/06/2012 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi, ingingo ya 186 n’iya 193. Amategeko agenga ubutaka – Amakimbirane ku butaka – Igishushanyo cy’aho ibibanza byatangiwe kibitswe n’inzego zibishinzwe gishobora kuba ikimenyetso kimara impaka zo kumenya nyir’ikibanza kiburanwa – Itegeko Nº15/2004 ryo kuwa 12/06/2004 ryerekeye ibimenyetso mu manza n’itangwa, ingingo ya 3. Indishyi – Indishyi z’ikurikiranarubanza – Igihembo cy’Avoka – Umuburanyi watsinzwe urubanza ntiyagenerwa indishyi z’ikurikiranarubanza kuko ahubwo ariwe uzicibwa zigahabwa uwamutsinze – Iteka ryo kuwa 30 Nyakanga 1888 rigenga amasezerano cyangwa imirimo nshinganwa, ingingo ya 258. 61

Page 88

Incamake y’ikibazo: Uru rubanza rwatangiriye mu Rukiko rw’ibanze rwa Gisenyi, Iyamuremye arega Kapere ikibanza N°2129 kiri mu Mudugudu wa Nyarubande, Akagari ka Mbugangari, Akarere ka Rubavu, Intara y’Iburengerazuba. Uru Rukiko rwanzuye ko ikibanza ari icya Kapere nk’uko byanemejwe n’umubitsi w’impapuro mpamo z’ubutaka rushingiye ku bimenyetso bigizwe n’inyandiko yagiye yandikira ubuyobozi bw’Akarere asaba icyo kibanza, rwanemeje kandi ko ibyo Iyamuremye aburanisha ko ibikorwabiri mu kibanza ari ibya Kapere ariko ikibanza atari icye nta shingiro byahabwa. Iyamuremye yajuririye Urukiko Rwisumbuye rwa Rubavu, narwo rwemeza ko imikirize ya mbere idahindutse, kubera ko nta kimenyetso atanga kigaragaza nta shiti ko ikibanza aburana ari icye. Uru rubanza rumaze kuba itegeko Iyamuremye yarusubirishijemo ingingo nshya, avuga ko yabonye igishushanyo kigaragaza aho ibibanza byatangiwe nk’ikimenyetso gishya, ko kandi mu gihe urubanza rwari rukiburanishwa, Kapere yapakiye amabuye yari muri icyo kibanza akaba agomba kuyishyura. Mu rubanza RCA0495/012/TGI/RBV, urukiko rwashingiye kuri icyo kimenyetso ndetse n’iperereza rwakoze mu biro bishinzwe ubutaka by‘Akarere ka Rubavu, n’aho ikiburanwa kiri, bwumva n’abantu batandukanye, maze rwemeza ko ikibanza ari icya Iyamuremye, ko kigomba no kumwandikwaho kigakurwa kuri Kapere, ko kandi Kapere agomba kumwishyura 650.000Frw y’agaciro k’amabuye yavanye mu kibanza, indishyi z’akababaro zingana na 300.000Frw na 200.000Frw y’igihembo cya Avoka. Nyuma y’icibwa ry’urwo rubanza, Kapere yandikiye Urwego rw’Umuvunyi asaba ko urubanza RCA0495/012/TGI/RBV rwasubirishwamo ku mpamvu z’akarengane. Nyuma yo ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 62

Page 89

gusuzuma impamvu ze, Urwego rw’Umuvunyi rwandikiye Perezida w‘Urukiko rw’Ikirenga rusaba ko urwo rubanza rwasubirishwamo kubera ko hari ibimenyetso byirengagijwe mu icibwa ryarwo. Amaze gusuzuma raporo y’Ubugenzuzi Bukuru bw’Inkiko, Perezida w’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga yemeje ko dosiye ishyikirizwa Ubwanditsi bw’Urukiko kugirango urubanza ruburanishwe. Mu gihe cy’iburanisha, Me Idahemuka uburanira Iyamuremye yazamuye inzitizi avuga ko Urukiko rw’Ikirenga rudafite ububasha bwo kuburanisha ikirego cyatanzwe na Kapere cyo gusubirishamo ku mpamvu z’akarengane urubanza RCA0027/012/TGI/RBV rwaciwe n’Urukiko Rwisumbuye rwa Rubavu kubera ko urwo rubanza ari urwasubirishagamo urundi ingingo nshya, kandi ibyo bikaba binyuranyije n’ibiteganywa n’ingingo ya 193 y’Itegeko Nº21/2012 ryo kuwa 14/06/2012 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi itemera inzira iyo ari yo yose y’ubujurire kuri bene izo manza, kuko urubanza rudashobora gusubirishwamo ingingo nshya inshuro ebyiri. Me Gashagaza wunganira Kapere avuga ko ikirego cye gishingiye ku biteganywa n’ingingo ya 29 y’Itegeko Ngenga Nº03/2012/OL ryo kuwa 13/06/2012 rigena imiterere, imikorere n’Ububasha by’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga iruha ububasha bwo gusubiramo ku mpamvu z’akarengane urubanza yasabiye gusubirishamo, kuko yagaragarije Urwego rw’Umuvunyi akarengane karurimo, maze ikirego kirakirwa. Yongeraho ko iryo Tegeko Ngenga ari ryo rigomba gukurikizwa kubera ko risumba Itegeko Nº21/2012 ryo kuwa 14/06/2012 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi. KAPERE v. IYAMUREMYE 63

Page 90

Me Idahemuka wunganira Iyamuremye avuga ko Kapere nta nyungu afite muri uru rubanza kuko mu myanzuro ye yivugiye ko mu gihe ikirego cyakwakirwa n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga nta shingiro cyahabwa. Me Gashagaza wunganira Kapere avuga ko afite inyungu mu rubanza, kuko Urwego rw’Umuvunyi rwemeje ko mu rubanza asaba ko rusubirwamo harimo akarengane, ko ahubwo uwo baburana yasomye nabi imyanzuro ye. Me Gashagaza avuga na none ko Iyamuremye agomba gutegekwa guha umukiliya we 2.000.000Frw y’ikurikiranarubanza n’igihembo cya Avoka, mu gihe Me Idahemuka avuga ko Kapere ariwe ugomba kwishyura umukiliya we 1.000.000Frw y’igihembo cya Avoka yamutangishije. Nyuma y’izo ngingo z’imiburanire y’impande zombi, Urukiko rwasanze rugomba gusuzuma niba ikirego cyo gusubirishamo urubanza ku mpamvu z’akarengane urubanza rwasubirishijwemo ingingo nshya cyakwakirwa, rwasanze kandi rugomba kureba niba igishushanyo cyatangiweho ibibanza Iyamuremye yatanze asubirishamo ingingo nshya urubanza RCA0027/012/TGI/RBV rwaciwe n’Urukiko Rwisumbuye rwa Rubavu kuwa 25/04/2012 gishobora kumara impaka mu kumenya nyir’ikibanza Nº2129 kiburanwa. Incamake y’icyemezo: 1. Ikirego cyo gusubirishamo urubanza ku mpamvu z’akarengane ari inzira y’ubujurire idasanzwe yihariye igamije gukosora amakosa yakozwe mu rubanza rwaciwe ku rwego rwa nyuma, bityo n’urubanza rwaciwe burundu nyuma yo gusubirishwamo ingingo nshya rukaba rurebwa n’iyo nzira idasanzwe. ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 64

Page 91

2. Habayeho kutumva neza ibikubiye mu myanzuro ya Kapere kuko adasaba ko ikirego cye kitakwakirwa, bityo afite inyungu mu rubanza kuko ikibanza aburana avuga ko ari icye.

3. Igishushanyo cy’aho ibibanza byatangiwe kiri mu Karere ka Rubavu ni ikimenyetso kimara impaka zo kumenya nyir’ikibanza kiburanwa hagati ya Kapere na Iyamuremye, bityo kuba Urukiko Rwisumbuye rwarakiriye ikirego cya Iyamuremye gisubirishamo ingingo nshya urwo rubanza RCA0027/012/TGI/RBV rukanahindura imikirize yarwo, bikaba bifite ishingiro kandi nta karengane byateje Kapere.

4. Indishyi Kapere asaba Iyamuremye ntagomba kuzigenerwa kuko atsinzwe muri uru rubanza, ahubwo ku ruhande rwe agomba kwishyura Iyamuremye 500.000Frw kuri uru rwego agenwe mu bushishozi bw’urukiko, kuko yashatse Avoka wo kumuburanira muri uru rubanza. Ikirego nta shingiro gifite. Amagarama y’urubanza aherereye k’uwasubirishijemo urubanza ku mpamvu z’akarengane. Amategeko yashingiweho: Itegeko Ngenga Nº03/2012/OL ryo kuwa 13/06/2012 rigena imiterere, imikorere n’ububasha by’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga, ingingo ya 79 n’iya 81. Itegeko N°21/2012 ryo kuwa 14/06/2012 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi, ingingo ya 186 n’iya 193. Itegeko Nº15/2004 ryo kuwa 12/06/2004 ryerekeye ibimenyetso mu manza n’itangwa, ingingo ya 3. KAPERE v. IYAMUREMYE 65

Page 92

Iteka ryo kuwa 30 Nyakanga 1888 rigenga amasezerano cyangwa imirimo nshinganwa, ingingo ya 258. Imanza zifashishijwe: Mberabagabo n’abandi v. Dunia n’abandi, RS/REV/INJUST/COM/0001/13/CS rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga kuwa 03/01/2014. Urubanza I. IMITERERE Y’URUBANZA [1] Iyamuremye Mbanza Jeannot yareze Kapere George mu Rukiko rw’Ibanze rwa Gisenyi, asaba kwemeza ko ikibanza N°2129 kiri mu Mudugudu wa Nyarubande, Akagari ka Mbugangari, Akarere ka Rubavu, Intara y’Iburengerazuba ari icye no gutegeka ko kimwandikwaho. [2] Urukiko rwaciye urubanza RC0794/011/TB/GIS kuwa 16/12/2011 rwemeza ko ikibanza kiburanwa ari icya Kapere George, kubera ko rwasuzumye ibimenyetso yarushyikirije birimo inyandiko yo kuwa 28/04/2009 y‘Ubuyobozi bw’Umudugudu wa Nyarubande bwakemuye ikibazo cye na Iyamuremye ivuga ko ibikorwa biri mu kibanza ari ibye, ikanzura ko n’ikibanza ari icya Kapere, inyandiko yo kuwa 14/05/2009 yanditse asaba ibyangombwa by’ikibanza, inyandiko zo kuwa 21/05/2009 no kuwa 19/05/2009 zigaragaza aho yishyuriye Akarere ngo kamupimire ikibanza, inyandiko yo kuwa 15/02/2010 igaragaza ko ikibanza cyahawe Nº2129 cyabaruwe by’agateganyo kuri Kapere n’amasezerano y’ubukode burambye yo kuwa 22/07/2011 Kapere yagiranye na ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 66

Page 93

Leta, maze rusanga nta kindi rwakora uretse kwemeza ibyo umubitsi w’impapuro mpamo z’ubutaka yakoze, ko ndetse atari ngombwa kwiyambaza abatangabuhamya nk’uko ababuranyi babyifuzaga kuko hari ikimenyetso cy’inyandiko mvaho. [3] Urukiko rwasuzumye kandi amasezerano y’ubugurane bw’ikibanza yo kuwa 17/06/2004 yabaye hagati ya Iyamuremye na Kabanda Jean Népo, aho yamuguraniraga ikibanza kiri mu Mudugudu wa Mbugangari nawe akamuha ikiri mu Mujyi wa Kigali, rusanga rutayaha agaciro kuko ibyo bibanza bitagaragarizwa ibishushanyo, n’abo Iyamuremye avuga ko basinyeho, rukaba rutamenya ubuyobozi bari bahagarariye ubwo ari bwo, kuko bidahagije kuvuga ngo nyumbakumi “zone 5” rutamenya aho iherereye. [4] Urukiko rwasanze na none ibyo Iyamurenye yavugaga ko Kapere yatangiye gushaka ibyangombwa mu mwaka wa 2009 batangiye kuburana nta shingiro bifite kuko icya ngombwa ari uko yabishatse akabibona mu gihe we nta cyangombwa na kimwe afite, ko kandi n’ibyo aburanisha ko Ubuyobozi bw’Umudugudu bwanditse ko ibikorwa biri mu kibanza ari ibya Kapere ariko ikibanza atari icye nta shingiro byahabwa. [5] Iyamuremye yajuririye Urukiko Rwisumbuye rwa Rubavu, ruca urubanza RCA0027/012/TGI/RBV tariki ya 25/04/2012, rwemeza ko imikirize ya mbere idahindutse, kubera ko nta kimenyetso atanga kigaragaza nta shiti ko ikibanza aburana ari icye, rumutegeka guha Kapere 100.000Frw yo kumusiragiza mu manza, gutanga umusogongero wa Leta n’amagarama y’urubanza. [6] Uru rubanza rumaze kuba itegeko Iyamuremye Mbanza Jeannot yarusubirishijemo ingingo nshya, avuga ko yabonye KAPERE v. IYAMUREMYE 67

Page 94

igishushanyo kigaragaza aho ibibanza byatangiwe nk’ikimenyetso gishya, ko kandi mu gihe urubanza rwari rukiburanishwa, Kapere yapakiye amabuye yari muri icyo kibanza akaba agomba kuyishyura. Mu rubanza RCA0495/012/TGI/RBV, urukiko rwashingiye kuri icyo kimenyetso, iperereza rwakoze mu biro bishinzwe ubutaka by‘Akarere ka Rubavu, n’aho ikiburanwa kiri, bwumva n’abantu batandukanye, maze rwemeza ko ikibanza ari icya iyamuremye, ko kigomba no kumwandikwaho kigakurwa kuri Kapere George, ko kandi Kapere agomba kumwishyura 650.000Frw y’agaciro k’amabuye yavanye mu kibanza, indishyi z’akababaro zingana na 300.000Frw na 200.000Frw y’igihembo cya Avoka. [7] Mu gufata icyo cyemezo, urukiko rwasanze koko Kapere ariwe ufite ibyangombwa bw’icyo kibanza, ariko ubwo rwakoraga iperereza haba muri Biro by’ubutaka cyangwa ku kiburanwa, rwarabajije Bigirimana Makini ubishinzwe, aba “topographes” Munyabuhoro Jean Louis Robert na Kuramba Placide bavuga ko Kapere yabonye icyo kibanza biturutse mu buyobozi bw’Akagari ka Mbugangari, ubwo hakorwaga ibarura rishya ikibanza kigahabwa Nº2129, ariko kikaba kitagaragaza nimero cyari gisanganywe mbere, mu gihe ku gishushanyo (MAP) bigaragara ko Niyonshuti Jean Paul wagihawe yari yadikanyije na Kayitani Evariste haruguru yabo hari uwitwa Bizimana Mpakaniye, ariko Kapere akaba atakigaragaraho, icyo kibanza rero kikaba cyari gifite Nº4288 nk’uko bigaragara kuri MAP iri mu biro by’ubutaka, kandi kikaba cyari cyarabaruwe kuri Niyonshuti Jean Paul wari wadikanyije na Kayitani Evariste, Kapere rero akaba yarahawe izo nimero mu ibarura rishya ry’ubutaka ryakozwe n’Akagari bushingiye ku byo yari yabasobanuriye ku giti cye. ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 68

Page 95

[8] Rwasanze umutangabuhamya witwa Mataratara uvuga ko ikibanza cyahawe Kapere, agaragaza ikindi gishushanyo kiriho izina rya Kapere, ariko wareba aho ikibanza yita ko aricyo cyahawe Kapere kiri, ugasanga ntaho gihuriye n’ikibanza cyahawe Niyonshuti Jean Paul bigaragara ko ari we wadikanyije n’abandi basirikare bari baherewe ibibanza umunsi umwe, akibaza icyo gishushanyo cyavuye kandi kitanagaragara mu biro by’ubutaka. [9] Ku byerekeye ubuhamya bunyuranye bwatanzwe, urukiko rwasanze ubwatanzwe na Mataratara butahabwa agaciro kuko bunyuranya nibyo Kapere ubwe yivugiye ubwo yaburanaga icyo kibanza na Iyamuremye ku wa 28/04/2009 mu nzego z’ibanze, akavuga ko yaje kubaka icyo kibanza cye ahasanga umuturanyi witwa Bahati Augustin, babanza gushwana ku kibazo cy’imbibi, ariko baza kumvikana muri 2002, ko ariko ubwo rwakoraga iperereza rwabajije Bahati aho akomora ikibanza atuyemo, avuga ko yakiguze na Bizimana Mpakaniye nk’uko bigaragazwa n’amasezerano y’ubugure yo ku wa 28/08/2003, mu kureba aho ikibanza cya Bizimana Mpakaniye, Bahati yaguze, rusanga atadikanije na Kapere ahubwo yadikanyije na Kayitani Evariste ibumoso bwe uturutse kuri ITIG, hari Niyonshuti Jean Paul, wabihuza n’igishushanyo cyazanywe na Mataratara ugasanga ntaho ikibanza yita icya Kapere gihuriye n’icya Niyonshuti Jean Paul. [10] Nyuma y’icibwa ry’urwo rubanza, Kapere George yandikiye Urwego rw’Umuvunyi asaba ko urubanza RCA0495/012/TGI/RBV rwasubirishwamo ku mpamvu z’akarengane. Nyuma yo gusuzuma impamvu ze, Urwego rw’Umuvunyi rwandikiye Perezida w‘Urukiko rw’Ikirenga rusaba ko urwo rubanza rwasubirishwamo kubera ko hari KAPERE v. IYAMUREMYE 69

Page 96

ibimenyetso byirengagijwe mu icibwa ryarwo. Amaze gusuzuma raporo y’Ubugenzuzi Bukuru bw’Inkiko, Perezida w’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga yemeje ko dosiye ishyikirizwa Ubwanditsi bw’Urukiko kugirango urubanza ruburanishwe. [11] Urubanza rwaburanishijwe mu ruhame tariki ya 15/09/2015, Kapere George yunganiwe na Me Gashagaza Philbert, naho Iyamuremye Mbanza Jeannot yunganiwe na Me Idahemuka Tharcisse, urubanza rushyirwa mu mwiherero, tariki ya 16/10/2015, urukiko rufata icyemezo cyo gukora iperereza mu Biro by’ubutaka by’Akarere ka Rubavu n’aho ikibanza kiburanwa kiri, iburanisha rishyirwa tariki ya 15/12/2015, uwo munsi iburanisha rikomereza ku byavuye mu iperereza. II. IBIBAZO BIGIZE URUBANZA N’ISESENGURA RYABYO a) Kumenya niba Urukiko rw’Ikirenga rufite ububasha bwo kuburanisha ikirego cyo gusubirishamo urubanza ku mpamvu z’akarengane urubanza rwasubirishijwemo ingingo nshya. [12] Me Idahemuka uburanira Iyamuremye avuga ko Urukiko rw’Ikirenga rudafite ububasha bwo kuburanisha ikirego cyatanzwe na Kapere cyo gusubirishamo ku mpamvu z’akarengane urubanza RCA0027/012/TGI/RBV rwaciwe tariki ya 25/04/2012 n’Urukiko Rwisumbuye rwa Rubavu kubera ko urwo rubanza ari urwasubirishagamo urundi ingingo nshya, ko ibyo binyuranyije n’ibiteganywa n’ingingo ya 193 y’Itegeko Nº21/2012 ryo kuwa 14/06/2012 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi itemera inzira iyo ari yo yose y’ubujurire kuri ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 70

Page 97

bene izo manza, kuko urubanza rudashobora gusubirishwamo ingingo nshya inshuro ebyiri, ahubwo ruba rwabaye itegeko. [13] Me Gashagaza wunganira Kapere avuga ko ikirego cye gishingiye ku biteganywa n’ingingo ya 29 y’Itegeko Ngenga Nº03/2012/OL ryo kuwa 13/06/2012 rigena imiterere, imikorere n’Ububasha by’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga iruha ububasha bwo gusubiramo ku mpamvu z’akarengane urubanza yasabiye gusubirishamo, kuko yagaragarije Urwego rw’Umuvunyi akarengane karurimo, maze ikirego kirakirwa. Yongeraho ko iryo Tegeko Ngenga ari ryo rigomba gukurikizwa kubera ko rifite agaciro kari hejuru y’Itegeko Nº21/2012 ryo kuwa 14/06/2012 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi.

UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [14] Mbere yo gukomeza iburanisha mu mizi y’urubanza, Urukiko rwariherereye rusanga ingingo ya 193 y’Itegeko Nº21/2012 ryo kuwa 14/06/2012 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi iteganya ko icyemezo gifashwe mu gusubirishamo urubanza ingingo nshya kitemera inzira z’ubujurire izo arizo zose. [15] Na none igika cya mbere cy’ingingo ya 79 cy’Itegeko Ngenga Nº03/2012/OL ryo kuwa 13/06/2012 rigena imiterere, imikorere n’ububasha by’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga iteganya ko Urwego rw’Umuvunyi ari rwo rufite ububasha bwo kuregera Urukiko rw’Ikirenga ibirego byerekeranye no gusubirishamo ku mpamvu z’akarengane urubanza rwaciwe ku rwego rwa nyuma, naho ingingo ya 81 yaryo ikavuga ko urubanza rwaciwe ku KAPERE v. IYAMUREMYE 71

Page 98

rwego rwa nyuma rushobora gusubirwamo ku mpamvu z’akarengane nk’uko byavuzwe haruguru, iyo hari ibimenyetso simusiga bigaragaza ruswa, ikimenyane cyangwa icyenewabo, byagize ingaruka ku mikirize y’urubanza bikaba bitarigeze bimenywa n’uwatsinzwe mu gihe cy’iburana; iyo mu icibwa ry’urubanza hirengagijwe amategeko n’ikimenyetso bigaragarira buri wese; iyo urubanza rudashobora kurangizwa ukurikije imikirize yarwo. [16] Urukiko rwasanze rero ikirego cyo gusubirishamo urubanza ku mpamvu z’akarengane giteganywa n’ingingo ya 79 n’iya 81 zavuzwe haruguru, ari inzira y’ubujurire idasanzwe yihariye igamije gukosora amakosa yakozwe mu rubanza rwaciwe ku rwego rwa nyuma hashingiwe ku biteganywa muri izo ngingo, bityo n’urubanza rwaciwe burundu nyuma yo gusubirishwamo ingingo nshya rukaba rurebwa n’iyo nzira idasanzwe. [17] Uwo ni nawo murongo wafashwe kuri iki kibazo n’uru rukiko mu rubanza RS/REV/INJUST/COM/0001/13/CS rwaciwe tariki ya 03/01/2014 haburana Mberabagabo Innocent, Notaire Kayitesi Judith, Butera Jean Pierre na Fiat Amélie na Dunia Bakarani, hagobokeshejwe BCR, ko igihe umuburanyi agaragaza imwe mu mpamvu ziteganywa n’ingingo ya 81 yavuzwe haruguru, urubanza rwasubirishijwemo ingingo nshya hashingiwe ku mpamvu ziteganywa mu ngingo ya 186 y’Itegeko Nº21/2012 ryo kuwa 14/06/2012 ryavuzwe haruguru, rushobora gusubirishwamo ku mpamvu z’akarengane. b) Kumenya niba Kapere afite inyungu muri uru rubanza. [18] Me Idahemuka wunganira Iyamuremye avuga ko Kapere nta nyungu afite muri uru rubanza kuko mu myanzuro ye ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 72

Page 99

yivugiye ko mu gihe ikirego cyakwakirwa n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga nta shingiro cyahabwa. [19] Me Gashagaza wunganira Kapere avuga ko afite inyungu mu rubanza, kuko Urwego rw’Umuvunyi rwemeje ko mu rubanza asaba ko rusubirwamo harimo akarengane, ko ahubwo uwo baburana yasomye nabi imyanzuro ye. [20] Kuri iyi nzitizi, urukiko rwasanze harabayeho kutumva neza ibikubiye mu myanzuro ya Kapere kuko adasaba ko ikirego cye kitakwakirwa, rusanga rero afite inyungu mu rubanza kuko ikibanza aburana avuga ko ari icye. Kumenya niba igishushanyo cyatangiweho ibibanza Iyamuremye yatanze asubirishamo ingingo nshya urubanza RCA0027/012/TGI/RBV rwaciwe n’Urukiko Rwisumbuye rwa Rubavu kuwa 25/04/2012 gishobora kumara impaka mu kumenya nyiri ikibanza Nº2129 kiburanwa hagati ya Iyamuremye Jeannot na Kapere George. [21] Me Gashagaza na Kapere yunganira bavuga ko icyo Iyamuremye yitaga ikimenyetso gishya kigizwe n’igishushanyo avuga ko yahawe n’Akarere ka Rubavu cyatumye asubirishamo urubanza RCA0027/012/TGI/RBV rwaciwe n’Urukiko Rwisumbuye rwa Rubavu kuwa 25/04/2012 ntaho gihuriye n’ikibanza Nº2129 cyaburanwaga, ko kandi kitagaragaza aho gikomoka ndetse n’urwego rwagitanze, umukono na kashe by’uwagitanze. [22] Bavuga ko harebwe ibiteganywa n‘ingingo ya 186, agaka ka 3 y’Itegeko Nº21/2012 ryo kuwa 14/06/2012 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi, umucamanza atari KAPERE v. IYAMUREMYE 73

Page 100

kwakira ikirego cya Iyamuremye kuko ibyo bimenyetso bidafite aho bihuriye n’ikiburanwa, atari ibya kamarampaka. [23] Basobanura ko mu cyemezo umucamanza yafashe, yitiranyije inkomoko y’ikibanza Nº2129 aho avuga ko gikomoka ku kibanza Nº4288 cyari cyaratanzwe n’Akarere ka Rubavu (iyo barebye ku gishushanyo cy’Akarere ka Rubavu), anasobanura ko ngo bigaragara ko Kapere ari we wanditseho ikibanza akaba ari nawe ugifitiye ibyangombwa, ariko ko mu gihe yakoraga iperereza akabaza abakozi bo mu Biro bishinzwe iby’ubutaka, yasanze ko mu gihe cyo kwandikisha ikibanza Kapere yakibonye hagendewe cyangwa biturutse ku makuru bahawe n’ubuyobozi bw’Akagari ka Mbugangari, ko ariko ikibanza kitagaragaza nomero cyari gisanzwe gifite mbere mu bishushanyo by’Akarere. [24] Umucamanza kandi ngo asobanura ko ikibanza nomero 2129 gikomoka ku kibanza Nº4288 ngo nk’uko byagaragaraga ku gishushanyo kiri mu Biro by’ubutaka by’Akarere ka Rubavu, agakomeza avuga ko iyo Nº4288 yari ibaruwe kuri Niyonshuti Jean Paul wari wadikanyije na Kayitani Evariste ngo bityo Kapere akaba yarahawe iriya nomero mu biro by’ubutaka bashingiye ku byo yari yasobanuriye Akagari ku giti cye gusa, nyamara, nk’uko n’Urwego rw’Umuvunyi rwabyiboneye mu iperereza, ntabwo ikibanza Nº2129 gikomoka kuri nº 4288, ahubwo gikomoka kuri Nº4300 giherereye Nyakabungo, Mbugangari, kikaba cyari cyarahawe Nsengiyumva Eneas kuwa 28/01/2002 agihererwa “fiche cadastrale“ na “contrat de location à usage résidentiel“, ariko ananirwa kugikoresha, ubuyobozi burakimwambura bugiha Kapere ahabwa “fiche cadastrale“ anatererwa “bornes”. ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 74

Page 101

[25] Bakomeza bavuga ko kuba umucamanza yaravuze ko ntaho icyo kibanza kigaragara ku gishushanyo cy’Akarere ka Rubavu, bituruka ku kuba yaritiranyije ibintu bigatuma atamenya n’ikibanza kiburanwa, kuko gihana imbibi n’ikibanza Nº2130 na Nº1707 nk’uko bigaragara kuri icyo gishushanyo, kikaba kiri mu masangano y’umuhanda kandi cyanditse kuri Kapere. [26] Ikindi ngo kigaragaza ko ikibanza Nº2129 gikomoka kuri Nº4300 ni inyemezabwishyu zatanzwe n’Akarere ka Rubavu aho zisobanura ubwoko bw’imisoro ko ari “régularisation PC 4300”, ibyo bikagaragaza ko ntaho gihuriye n’ikibanza Nº4288 nk’uko Iyamuremye abivuga ari nabyo byayobeje urukiko.

[27] Me Gashagaza na Kapere yunganira bavuga na none ko umucamanza yitiranyije ko ikibanza Nº4288 cyahoze ari icya Niyonshuti Jean Paul, n’ubwo ntaho bigaragara ku gishushanyo cy’Akarere ka Rubavu, aricyo cyahindutse Nº2129 cyanditse kuri Kapere mu gihe cyo kwandika ubutaka. Basobanura ko Urwego rw’Umuvunyi rwasanze, mu gihe cyo kubarura ubutaka, ikibanza Nº4288 cyarahawe Nº2127 kikaba cyanditse kuri Mukamana Salima na Uwihoreye Kassim, kandi kitari muri “bloc“ imwe na Nº2129 cya Kapere. [28] Bavuga kandi ko urukiko rwirengagije ko Kapere yandikiwe n’Akarere amenyeshwa ko amaze imyaka itanu ntacyo akorera muri icyo kibanza n‘ibisubizo yatanze ndetse n’inyandikomvaho y’amasezerano y’ubukode burambye afite byose bigaragaza ko iki kibanza ari icye. [29] Me Idahemuka na Iyamuremye yunganira bavuga ko igisubizo cy‘iki kibazo kiboneka mu gika cya 15 cy’urubanza KAPERE v. IYAMUREMYE 75

Page 102

RCA0495/012/TGI/RBV rusabirwa gusubirishwamo ku mpamvu z’akarengane aho umucamanza agaragaza ko yakoze iperereza mu biro bishinzwe ubutaka ku bishushanyo ababuranyi batanze, akagaragaza abakozi yahasanze babishinzwe bamugaragariza igishushanyo cy’aho ikibanza kiri. [30] Bavuga ko uru rukiko rukwiye kwemeza ko umwanzuro w’Urwego rw’Umuvunyi uteshejwe agaciro hakemezwa ko nta karengane kabayeho kubera ko umukozi warwo wakoze iperereza yihaye ububasha adafite atesha agaciro icyemezo cyatanzwe n’umuntu ubifitiye ububasha. [31] Bakomeza bavuga ko Kapere avuga ko yahawe iki kibanza kandi cyari cyarahawe Niyonshuti Jean Paul cyatangiriyeho, kiza kugera kuri Iyamuremye, bikaba rero bitari gushoboka ko ikibanza kimwe gihabwa abantu babiri, ko kuba umukozi w’Urwego rw‘Umuvunyi avuga ko ntaho Iyamuremye na Kabanda banditse mu biro by’ubutaka, ntabwo bivuguruza urubanza rusubirishwamo, kuko umucamanza n‘ubundi atavuze ko icyo kibanza cyanditse kuri umwe muri aba bombi, ahubwo yavuze ko cyanditse kuri Niyonshuti Jean Paul kandi uyu mukozi w’Umuvunyi ngo ntiyabivuguruje. [32] Bavuga nanone ko hari ukwivuguruza mu mvugo z’uyu mukozi w’Urwego rw‘Umuvunyi aho avuga ko iki kibanza Gapere yagihawe muri 2005 cyambuwe undi, kandi rukagaragaza ko yari afite ibyangombwa byacyo kuva muri 2002. [33] Nyuma yo kumva imiburanire y’impande zombi, urukiko rwafashe icyemezo cyo gukora iperereza tariki ya 26 Ugushyingo 2015 mu Biro by’ubutaka by’Akarere ka Rubavu ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 76

Page 103

no ku kibanza kiburanwa, rwumva n’abantu banyuranye bafite icyo bakiziho. [34] Ku biro by’Akarere ka Rubavu, intumwa z’urukiko zakiriwe na Bwana Gasuku Oscar ushinzwe One Stop Center ari ryo shami rihuza icyahoze ari Ibiro by’ubutaka na Service y’imiturire na Bwana Munyabuhoro Jean Louis Robert ushinzwe gupima ubutaka (topographe), bazigaragariza amateka y’ibibanza Nº2129, Nº4300 na Nº4288 biherereye mu Kagari ka Mbugangari mu Murenge wa Gisenyi hifashishijwe ikarita yakozwe mu mwaka wa 2002 yitwa Plan Parcellaire du Site Mbugangari, ikarita iriho amazina ya ba nyiri ibibanza nayo ibitse ku biro by’Akarere ka Rubavu yakozwe ihereye kuri iyo ya mbere yatangiweho ibibanza n’indi “carte electronique” igaragaza nomero nshya zatanzwe n’Akarere ka Rubavu kuri ibyo bibanza. [35] Ku byerekeye ibishushanyo byazanywe muri dosiye n’ababuranyi bombi bifite cote 92 na cote 93, Gasuku Oscar avuga ko igishushanyo gifite cote 92 kinyuranyije n’icyakozwe n’Akarere ka Rubavu kuko hariho byinshi umuburanyi yiyongereyeho, naho icyo kuri cote 93 cyo gihuje n’icyakozwe n’Akarere, ko ariko hariho nomero umuburanyi yiyongereyeho kuko ahanditse ko nomero 4288 ari iya Niyonshuti Jean Paul, ku ikarita ibitse mu Karere nomero 4288 akaba ari iya Kayitani Evariste naho Nº4288 ikaba iya Niyonshuti Jean Paul, hepfo ya Kayitani Evariste hari Bizimana Mpakaniye afite nomero 4290 . [36] Yasobanuye ko igishushanyo gishya cya Land center cyakozwe muri 2011 kigaragaza ko: - Ikibanza cyari gifite nomero 4288 cyari icya Kayitani Evariste, ubu cyahindutse 2129 cyanditswe kuri KAPERE v. IYAMUREMYE 77

Page 104

Iyamuremye Mbanza Jannot harangizwa urubanza RCA0495/012/TGI/RBV;

- Ikibanza cyari gifite nomero 4289 cya Niyonshuti Jean Paul ku ikarita ya Land Center cyahindutse 2130;

- Ikibanza nomero 4300 bigaragara ku ikarita ko cyari kitaratangwa ubwo hakorwaga ikarita ya mbere, nyuma gihabwa Nsengiyumva Eneas, ubu gifite Nº2131.

- Ikibanza nimero 4290 cyahindutse 1707 ni icya Bizimana Mpakaniye. [37] Nyuma yo gusesengura ibigaragara ku makarita, iperereza ryakomereje aho ikiburanwa kiri, Bwana Munyabuhoro Jean Louis Robert ushinzwe gupima ubutaka (topographe) yerekana uko ibibanza biteye. [38] Madamu Mukampunga Marie Claire utuye mu kibanza Nº4300 cyahindutse 2131 yasabwe ibyangombwa by’ubutaka atuyemo yerekana amasezerano y’ubukode burambye nomero 2131/Rub/Gis yahawe tariki ya 25/02/2014, asobanura ko icyo kibanza cyaguzwe n’uwari umugabo we batandukanye witwa Mbonabucya Jean Bosco akiguze na Nsengiyumva Eneas. [39] Uwitwa Kayitani Evariste watumijwe n’urukiko yasabwe kwerekana ikibanza yahawe, yerekana ikibanza nº 4289 ubu cyabaye Nº2130, avuga ko bamaze kumwimurira muri Repubulika Iharanira Demokarasi ya Congo yahise akigurisha uwitwa Gakwe Ndabarinze amuguranira inzu arimuka, ko ariko nawe yumvise ko yakigurishije. Yabajijwe uwo bahanaga imbibi avuga ko bari abasirikare batatu, iruhande rwe hahabwa Niyonshuti Jean Paul nawe wari umusirikare. Yabajijwe na none impamvu ku ikarita yakozwe iri mu Karere biboneka ko ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 78

Page 105

yahawe ikibanza nimero 4288 ubu cyahindutse 2129, asubiza ko bishoboka ko habayeho kubihindura, ko icyo azi ari uko yahawe iruhande rwa Niyonshuti Jean Paul babanaga mu gisirikare. Ku kibazo cyo kumenya niba igihe yagurishaga nta kibazo yagiranye na Niyonshuti, yasubije ko ntacyo bagiranye, ko Niyonshuti nawe yaje kugurisha Kabanda, uyu akaba yaramubwiye ko nawe yagurishije icyo kibanza na Iyamuremye. [40] Niyonshuti Jean Paul nawe watumijwe n’urukiko yabwiye urukiko ko mu mwaka wa 2000 batanze ibibanza muri Mbugangari, bahabwa ibibanza ari abasirikare 3 (Niyonshuti, Sakera na Kayitani) bakoreraga ku kibuga cy’indege cya Gisenyi, Komisiyo yatangaga ubutaka imuha ikibanza gifatanye n’icya Kayitani. Yabajijwe impamvu ku ikarita y’Akarere bigaragara ko ikibanza nimero 4288 ubu cyahindutse 2129 yita icye cyari icya Kayitani, asubiza ko habayeho kwibeshya. Yakomeje avuga ko bamaze kumuha icyo kibanza yacyatiye Gashema akajya agihinga, nyuma baza kumwimurira i Kigali i Kanombe ahita akigurisha Kabanda kuko nta bushobozi bwo kucyubaka yari afite, aza kumva ko nawe yakigurishije Iyamuremye. [41] Ku byerekeye Kapere uvuga ko icyo kibanza ari icye, Niyonshuti Jean Paul yavuze ko nawe yari umusirikare ariko ataba i Gisenyi, ubu akaba akorera i Kanombe muri Military, ko nta kibanza yigeze ahabwa muri uwo Mudugudu. [42] Kabanda Jean Népo nawe watumijwe n’urukiko avuga ko ikibanza gifite Nº2129 cyahoze ari icya Kayitani. Asobanura ko we yari ashinzwe Ubuyobozi (administration) ku kibuga cy’indege, abasirikare Sakera Benjamin, Kayitani na Niyonshuti bakatirwa ibibanza, icyo kibanza kugeza ubu kitubatse gihabwa Niyonshuti Jean Paul, Sakera ahabwa ahagana haruguru, ko we KAPERE v. IYAMUREMYE 79

Page 106

yaguze na Niyonshuti Jean Paul, nyuma baza kumwimura ikibanza agiha Iyamuremye amurangiwe na mukuru we Ngabonziza ukora muri Marine, baragurana nawe amuha ikindi kibanza kiri i Kabuga. [43] Ku kibazo cyo kumenya impamvu bagurana batasobanuye neza mu nyandiko ngo bashyireho nimero z’ibibanza biguranywe, Kabanda yasubije ko nta nomero zari zagatangwa, ko bo bumvikanye gusa ku kibanza baguranye. [44] Topographe Munyabuhoro Jean Louis Robert yabajijwe impamvu ibiri ku makarita atari byo bigaragara aho ibibanza biri ku byerekeranye n’ababihawe, avuga ko arebye ibyo ababajijwe bavuze, akanareba ibyanditse ku bishushanyo (plan), biragaragara ko ikibanza Niyonshuti yahawe cyahinduranyijwe n’icyo Kayitani yahawe, ko bishoboka ko igihe babihabwaga nta nomero byari bifite, baraza babituramo uko babonye, ko ariko bibaye ngombwa iryo kosa ryakosorwa. [45] Mataratara Israel watumijwe n’urukiko yavuze ko Umudugudu wa Mbugangari utangwamo ibibanza yari ahari, ko mu mwaka wa 2000 iki kibanza Nº2129 yagisanzemo Kayitani, ikindi gihe agisangamo Niyonshuti, nyuma hashize iminsi Kapere aza kumusaba ko yacyubaka, arebye ku ikarita y’abahawe yikoreye mu rwego rwo guca akajagari amubonamo ariko amubwira ko icyo kibanza atari icye ko ari icya Kayitani, aranga akomeza kwemeza ko ari icye. Akomeza avuga ko nyuma yaho yamubwiye ko izo blocs 3 yazitujemo abandi bantu, amwereka ikindi kibanza, akimwanditseho aranga, ahubwo atangira kubaka fondation mu kibanza cya Kayitani, aza guhagarikwa n’abo baburana. ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 80

Page 107

[46] Bahati Augustin yavuze ko ikibanza nomero 4290 ubu cyabaye Nº1707 atuyemo yakiguze na Bizimana Mpakaniye mu mwaka wa 2002, ko mu kibanza 2129 kiri hepfo ye yasanzemo fondation, ko nyiri ikibanza atajyaga agaragara, ko nyuma y’aho hajyaga haza umuntu witwa Kapere akagisura, aza no gushyiramo akazu gato, Iyamuremye araza aragasenya, aba ari bwo batangiye kujya mu nkiko kugeza na n’ubu. [47] Iperereza rirangiye, iburanisha ryakomeje tariki ya 15/12/2015, ababuranyi bagira icyo bavuga kuri ibyo byarivuyemo. [48] Kapere avuga ko yumva ibyo iperereza ryagezeho harimo urujijo kubera ko ikibanza cye gikomoka ku kibanza Nº4300, kikaba kitubatse, ko kandi agifitiye ibyangombwa, ko haruguru ye hari Bahati ndetse yamurengereye, akaba atumva ukuntu Kayitani yagurishije ikibanza cye asize icyo yahawe. Avuga ko koko yari umusirikare ataba i Gisenyi, ko ariko mu itangwa ry’ibibanza bamenyaga abasirikare batahaba, ko yahawe na MINIREISO, Mataratara akaba ari we wamweretse aho yahawe. Asaba urukiko guha agaciro ibyangombwa yahawe kuri icyo kibanza. [49] Kapere avuga kandi ko Kabanda Jean Népo wari umuyobozi mu gisirikare atazi uko ibibanza byatangwaga, ko we bamaze kumuha ikibanza bakimweretse, ajya i Goma amarayo ibyumweru bibiri agarutse bamwereka Mataratara amubona ku rutonde rw’abahawe ibibanza, amubaza aho bamuhaye amwereka (Kapere) icyo kibanza, nawe amubwira ko hari abandi basirikare bagenzi be bahashyize, amusaba ko babaha ahandi, ahita ashyiramo fondation bwa mbere, nyuma aza kujya mu kazi agarutse asanga barahubatse. KAPERE v. IYAMUREMYE 81

Page 108

[50] Me Gashagaza avuga ko nk’uko Gasuku Oscar yabigaragaje, ibibanza mbere nta nimero byagiraga, akaba ariho habereye amakosa yo gutwara ikibanza cya Kapere. Avuga ko ababajijwe bose batagaragaza uburyo ibibanza byabusanyijwe ku buryo buri wese yagiye ajya mu kibanza kitari icye, ko Bahati yemeje ko ikibanza ari icya Kapere ndetse n’abantu bose babizi, ibyo bigashimangirwa n’ibyo Kapere avuga ko yahawe na Responsable, ko rero hari urujijo ku kibanza Kapere yahawe afitiye ibyangombwa. [51] Me Idahemuka uburanira Iyamuremye avuga ko agaragaza ko yabonye ikibanza mu mwaka wa 2002, mu mpapuro Kapere yerekana we akagaragaza ko yagihawe mu mwaka wa 2009. Avuga ko itangwa ry’ibibanza ryabereye mu ruhame, ko Iyamuremye yaguranye ikibanza yari afite i Kabuga kuko yari agiye gukorera i Gisenyi. [52] Asobanura ko mu mwaka wa 2002 ubutaka bwari butarandikishwa ku buryo bw’ikoranabuhanga, ko buri muntu yabaga azi abo bahana imbibi, akaba ariho abo basirikare batatu bahereye bavuga ko Kapere atari arimo, ko amakosa yaba arimo ku byerekeye nomero y’ibibanza yakosorwa. [53] Ku byerekeye ubuhamya bwa Mataratara, Me Idahemuka avuga ko nawe yemera ko habaye impaka, na Kapere mu rukiko akaba yemera ko batumvikanye, akaba rero asanga abantu bose bazi ko Niyonshuti ari we wahawe ikibanza kiburanwa, amasezerano nayo akagaragaza uko uburenganzira kuri ubwo butaka bwagiye buhererekanwa.

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 82

Page 109

UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [54] Ingingo ya 3 y’Itegeko Nº15/2004 ryo kuwa 12/06/2004 ryerekeye ibimenyetso mu manza n’itangwa ryabyo iteganya ko buri muburanyi agomba kugaragaza ukuri kw’ibyo aburana. [55] Ikirego cya Kapere cyo gusubirishamo urubanza RCA0495/012/TGI/RBV kigamije kugarabaza ko Urukiko Rwisumbuye rwa Rubavu rwamurenganyije kuko rwemeye kwakira ikirego gisubirishamo urubanza RCA0027/012/TGI/RBV rushingiye ku gishushanyo cy’aho ibibanza byatangiwe cyiswe kamarampaka Iyamuremye avuga ko yahawe n’Akarere ka Rubavu, kigaragaza ko ikibanza nomero 2129 ari cye kandi atari byo, kuko icyo kibanza gikomoka ku kibanza cyahoze gifite nomero 4300 cyari cyarahawe Nsengiyumva Eneas akananirwa kucyubaka akacyamburwa nk’uko bigaragazwa n’inyandiko yishyuriyeho, maze Akarere ka Rubavu kakamuha ibyangombwa kamaze kumuterera imbago (bornes). [56] Iyamuremye we avuga ko ikibanza Nº2129 aburana gikomoka ku kibanza Nº4288 cyahoze ari icya Niyonshuti Jean Paul, nyuma akigurisha Kabanda, baza kukigurana icyo yari afite i Kabuga kuko yari yimutse ku Gisenyi agiye gukorera i Kigali. [57] Isesengura ry’amakarita ari muri One Stop Center y’Akarere ka Rubavu, ari ryo shami rihuza icyahoze ari Ibiro by’ubutaka na Service y’imiturire, rihujwe n’ibiboneka aho ikiburanwa kiri, rigaragaza ko ikibanza ubu gifite Nº2129 Iyamuremye aburana na Kapere cyahoze gifite nomero 4288 cyahawe Kayitani Evariste nawe akavuga ko yakigurishije KAPERE v. IYAMUREMYE 83

Page 110

Gakwe Ndabarinze, naho ikibanza Nº4289 cyo cyahoze ari icya Niyonshuti Jean Paul, ubu gifite nimero 2130 kigahana imbibi ku ruhande rwo haruguru n’ikibanza Nº1707 cya Bahati Augustin. [58] Urukiko rurasanga kuba harabaye ukubusana kuri nimero z’ibibanza n’ababihawe hagati ya Kayitani na Niyonshuti ari amakosa ashobora kuba yarakozwe n’Akarere ka Rubavu igihe cy’itangwa rya nomero zabyo, kuko igihe byatangwaga nta nomero byari bifite, bikaba bigaragara ko ba nyiri ibibanza batura nta kibazo bagiranye kugeza ubu. [59] Ku byerekeye ikibanza Nº4300, biboneka ko cyahoze ari icya Nsengiyumva Eneas, ubu kikaba gifite nomero 2131 kikaba cyubatsemo inzu za Mukampunga Marie Claire ufite amasezerano y’ubukode burambye nomero 2131/Rub/Gis yahawe tariki ya 25/02/2014, akaba avuga ko icyo kibanza cyaguzwe n’uwari umugabo we batandukanye witwa Mbonabucya Jean Bosco akiguze na Nsengiyumva Eneas. [60] N’ubwo nomero z’ibyo bibanza zabayemo amakosa, uko ibintu bimeze ubu nyuma y’itangwa rya nomero nshya, bigaragagara ko abatuye mu bibanza Nº2130, 2131 na 1707 ntawe ufite ikibazo, ahubwo ikibazo kiri ku kibanza Nº2129 kiburanwa hagati ya Kapere na Iyamuremye. [61] Hashingiwe ku bimaze kuvugwa, urukiko rurasanga aho Kapere avuga ko akomora icyo kibanza Nº2129 hatagaragara kuko ibyo avuga ko cyahawe Nsengiyumva Enéas akananirwa kucyubaka, hanyuma Akarere ka Rubavu kakamuterera imbago kakakimuha amaze kwishyura amafaranga ya “régularisation” nta shingiro bifite, kubera ko Nsengiyumva Enéas yagurishije ikibanza Nº4300 cyahindutse Nº2131 na Mbonabucya umugabo ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 84

Page 111

wa Mukampunga Marie Claire utuyemo, hakaba ntawe ukimuburanya. Icyo kibanza kandi Kapere ntiyagihawe mu mwaka wa 2000, ubwo Kabanda na Niyonshuti bahabwaga ibibanza mu Mudugudu wa Nyarubande, Akagari ka Mbugangari, Umurenge wa Gisenyi mu Karere ka Rubavu nk’uko ababajijwe babivuze, kuko iyo ahabwa nk’abandi, ntiyari guhindukira ngo yishyure amafaranga ya régularisation y’ikibanza Nº4300 nk’uko abiburanisha. [62] Urukiko rurasanga ahubwo, hakurikijwe uburyo Kayitani na Niyonshuti bahawe ibibanza bihana imbibi, nyuma bigahabwa nimero ariko amazina ya ba nyirabyo akabusana, ikibanza kiburanwa byagaragajwe ko ubu gifite Nº2129 kitubatse, ari icya Iyamuremye, nk’uko bigaragazwa n’amasezerano y’ubugurane bwacyo yo kuwa 17/06/2004 yabaye hagati ya Iyamuremye na Kabanda Jean Népo waguze na Niyonshuti Jean Paul, aho Kabanda yaguraniraga Iyamuremye ikibanza kiri mu Mudugudu wa Mbugangari nawe akamuha ikiri mu Mujyi wa Kigali, ayo masezerano akaba kandi ashimangirwa n’imvugo z’abayagiranye, imvugo ya Niyonshuti Jean Paul ndetse n’ibishushanyo by’uko ibibanza byatanzwe biri muri One stop center y’Akarere ka Rubavu. [63] Urukiko rurasanga rero, igishushanyo cy’aho ibibanza byatangiwe kiri mu Karere ka Rubavu Urukiko Rwisumbuye rwa Rubavu rwashingiyeho rusubiramo urubanza RCA0027/012/TGI/RBV ari ikimenyetso kimara impaka zo kumenya nyir’ikibanza kiburanwa hagati ya Kapere George na Iyamuremye Mbanza Jeannot, bityo kuba urwo rukiko rwarakiriye ikirego cya Iyamuremye gisubirishamo ingingo nshya urwo rubanza rukanahindura imikirize yarwo, bikaba bifite ishingiro kandi nta karengane byateje Kapere George. KAPERE v. IYAMUREMYE 85

Page 112

[64] Nk’uko rero byemejwe mu rubanza RCA0495/012/TGI/RBV rwaciwe tariki ya 24/06/2013 n’Urukiko Rwisumbuye rwa Rubavu, urukiko rusanga ikibanza Nº2129 kiri mu Mudugudu wa Nyarubande, Akagari ka Mbugangari, Umurenge wa Gisenyi, Akarere ka Rubavu kigomba gukomeza kwandikwa kuri Iyamuremye Mbanza Jeannot kuko ariwe nyiracyo. d) Amafaranga y’ikurikiranarubanza asabwa n’ababuranyi. [65] Me Gashagaza wunganira Kapere avuga ko Iyamuremye agomba gutegekwa kumuha 2.000.000Frw y’ikurikiranarubanza n’igihembo cya Avoka, naho Me Idahemuka akavuga ko Kapere ariwe ugomba kumwishyura 1.000.000Frw y’igihembo cya Avoka yamutangishije.

UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [66] Ku byerekeye itangwa ry’indishyi, ingingo ya 258 y’Igitabo cya gatatu cy’urwunge rw’amategeko mbonezamubano (CCLIII) iteganya ko igikorwa cyose cy’umuntu cyangirije undi gitegeka nyirugukora ikosa rigikomokaho kuriha ibyangiritse. [67] Urukiko rurasanga indishyi Kapere asaba Iyamuremye atagomba kuzigenerwa kuko atsinzwe muri uru rubanza, ahubwo ku ruhande rwe agomba kwishyura Iyamuremye 500.000Frw kuri uru rwego agenwe mu bushishozi bw’urukiko, kuko yashatse Avoka wo kumuburanira muri uru rubanza.

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 86

Page 113

III. ICYEMEZO CY’URUKIKO [68] Rwemeje ko ikirego cyatanzwe na Kapere George cyo gusubirishamo ku mpamvu z’akarengane urubanza RCA0495/012/TGI/RBV rwaciwe tariki ya 24/06/2013 n’Urukiko Rwisumbuye rwa Rubavu nta shingiro gifite; [69] Rwemeje ko ikibanza Nº2129 kiri mu Mudugudu wa Nyarubande, Akagari ka Mbugangari, Umurenge wa Gisenyi, Akarere ka Rubavu ari icya Iyamuremye Mbanza Jeannot, kikaba kigomba gukomeza kumwandikwaho nk’uko byemejwe mu rubanza RCA0495/012/TGI/RBV rwaciwe tariki ya 24/06/2013 n’Urukiko Rwisumbuye rwa Rubavu; [70] Rutegetse Kapere George kwishyura Iyamuremye Mbanza Jeannot 500.000Frw y’igihembo cya Avoka kuri uru rwego; [71] Ruvuze ko nta gihindutse ku mikirize y’urubanza RCA0495/012/TGI/RBV rwaciwe tariki ya 24/06/2013 n’Urukiko Rwisumbuye rwa Rubavu; [72] Rutegetse Kapere George kwishyura 100.000Frw y’amagarama y’urubanza.

KAPERE v. IYAMUREMYE 87

Page 115

NYIRAKAMANA N’ABANDI v. MUKASHARANGABO N’ABANDI [Rwanda URUKIKO RW’IKIRENGA – RS/REV/INJUST/CIV0007/15/CS (Kayitesi Z., P.J., Hatangimbabazi, Gatete, Hitiyaremye na Ngagi, J.) 04 Ukuboza 2015] Amategeko agenga umuryango – Amasezerano yo gushyingirwa – Agaciro k’amasezerano yo gushyingirwa bwakabiri ayambere ataravaho – Amasezerano yo gushyingirwa bwa kabiri ntagira agaciro igihe ishyingirwa rya mbere rikiriho – Itegeko Nshinga rya Repubulika y’u Rwanda ryo ku wa 24/11/1962, ingingo ya 28 – Itegeko Nº42/1988 ryo kuwa 27/10/1988 rishyiraho igitabo cya mbere cy’urwunge rw’amategeko mbonezamubano, ingingo 175. Amategeko agenga umuryango – Ubushyingiranwe – Kugabana umutungo – Mu gihe abashyingiranwe bitandukanyije bagabana umutungo wari uriho igihe batandukanaga. Amategeko agenga umuryango – Ababanye batarashakanye mu buryo bukurikije amategeko – Kugabana umutungo – Ababanaga nk’umugore n’umugabo batarasezeranye mu buryo bwemewe n’amategeko bagabana umutungo bahahanye gusa ku buryo bungana – Itegeko N°59/2008 ryo kuwa 10/09/2008 rikumira kandi rihana ihohoterwa iryo ari ryo ryose rishingiye ku gitsina, ingingo ya 39. Amategeko agenga umuryango – Irage – Igihe irage rita agaciro – Irage ntagaciro rigira igihe risumbanisha abana hashingiwe ku gitsina ndetse n’igihe nyakwigendera yagaragaje imyitwarire yuko yisubiyeho mbere y’uko yitaba Imana – 89

Page 116

Itegeko Nshinga rya Repubulika y’u Rwanda ryo ku wa 20/12/1978, ingingo ya 16 n’iya 93(2) – Amasezerano Mpuzamahanga yerekeye guca burundu ivangura iryo ari ryo ryose rikorerwa abagore yashyiriweho umukono i New York ku wa 18 Ukuboza 1979, ingingo ya 5 (a). Amategeko agenga umuryango – Impano – Igihe impano idahabwa agaciro – Impano nta gaciro igira igihe yatanzwe abasangiye umutungo batabyumvikanyeho kandi igatangwa hagamijwe gusumbanisha abana. Incamake y’ikibazo: Karimunda yashakanye na Mukasharangabo, mu mwaka wa 1965 yataye umugabo we ajya kwibanira n’undi mugabo; nyuma y’icyo gihe nibwo Karimunda yabyaranye na Mukandori ariko batabana. Mu 1970, Karimunda yabanye na Nyirakamana baranasezerana mu buryo bwemewe n’amategeko; ndetse banakorana amasezerano yo gushyira hamwe umutungo mu rwego rwo guteganya ubucuruzi ndetse banafatanya ibikorwa byo guteza imbere urugo. Mu 1979 Karimunda yatanze ikirego mu Rukiko rwa mbere rw’iremezo asaba gutandukana na Mukasharangabo, hanyuma urwo Rukiko rwemeza ubutane kuko uwo mugore yataye urugo. Ubushinjacyaha bwaje gukurikirana Karimunda na Nyirakamana mu Rukiko rw’Iremezo rwa Kigali ku icyaha cy’ubuharike kuko yabanye n’uwo mugore ataratandukana na Mukasharangabo, bunasaba ko amasezerano y’ubushyingiranwe yagiranye na Nyirakamana aseswa, maze rubahamya icyaha cy’ubuharike ariko ntirwasesa ubwo bushyingiranwe, ku impamvu yuko ayo masezerano aramutse asheshwe byaba ari ugusenya urugo rwashinze imizi cyane ko amasezerano ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 90

Page 117

y’ubushingiranwe Karimunda yagiranye na Mukasharangabo atakiriho. Mu 1991, Mukasharangabo yatanze ikirego cyo gusubirishamo urubanza rw’ubutane kuko rwabaye adahari, maze rwemeza ko ubwo butane butagomba kuvanwaho kuko ariwe witandukanyije n’umugabo we Karimunda 1965. Mukasharangabo yajuririye imikirize y’urwo rubanza ariko Karimunda yitaba Imana urubanza rutaraburanishwa. Mukasharangabo yatanze ikirego mu Rukiko rw’ibanze asaba ko habaho iseswa ry’amasezerano y’ubushyingiranwe yabaye hagati ya Karimunda na Nyirakamana maze urukiko rwemeza ko ikirego cye nta shingiro gifite. Hagati aho Nyirakamana n’umwana we Karangwa batangije urubanza rwo gutambamira ikirego Karimunda yaregeye ko abana be banze kwakira umunani abaha mu rubanza;baruhuriza hamwe n’imanza abagore be ndetse n’abana babo batanze bagamije gusaba ko irage yasize akoze rivanwaho ndetse n’izindizaregwagamo Central Motors and Parts Sarl na Karangwa zose zihurizwa hamwe mu rubanza RC0153/05/TP/KIG, rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Umujyi. Urwo Urukiko rwemeje ko Mukasharangabo ahabwa ½ cy’umutungo afatanyije na Karimunda nk’umugore w’isezerano; ko abana bose ba Karimunda bazungura ½ cy’umutungo wose wa se; ko inzu iri muri “parcelle” No05/524 iri Karambo-Gikondo, igarurwa mu mutungo wa Karimunda ikajya mu bizungurwa; ko Mukandoli ahabwa isambu iri i Kiziguro yatujwemo; ko kandi Nyirakamana Marciana agumana imigabane afite muri Central Motors and Parts Sarl. Nyirakamana, Karangwa na Central motors bajuririye Urukiko Rukuru maze ubwo bujurire babuhuza n’urundi rubanza NYIRAKAMANA N’ABANDI v. MUKASHARANGABO N’ABANDI 91

Page 118

Mukasharangabo yari yarajuririye muri uru Rukiko, rwemeje ko amasezerano yo gushyingirwa ya Nyirakamana na Karimunda ataseswa; ko kuba bombibaragizwe icyarimwe abagore b’isezerano ba Karimunda ntaho rwahera rwemeza umugore ufite uruhare ku mutungo wasizwe na nyakwigendera. Rukomeza ruvuga ko irage rivugwa ritabayeho ko umutungo wose wa Karimunda uzungurwa n’abana be bose kuburyo bungana, runategeka ko n’inzu iri muri mu kibanza N°15/525 yanditse kuri Central Motors and Parts Sarl igarurwa mu umutungo waKarimunda ugomba kuzungurwa. Nyirakamana, Karangwa na Central motors bajuririye Urukiko bajuririye Urukiko rw’Ikirenga maze rusanga ubujurire bwabo butagomba kwakirwa kuko butari mu bubasha bw’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga. Abajuriye batanze ikirego cyo gusubirishamo urubanza ku mpamvu z’akarengane basaba ko irage ryakozwe na Karimunda ku wa 25/08/1981 ryahabwa agaciro ku bijyanye n’igabanywa ry’umutungo yasize, ko riramutse ridahawe agaciro, amasezerano yo gushyingirwa yabaye hagati ya Karimunda na Nyirakamana yahabwa agaciro, maze Nyirakamana akagenerwa ½ cy’umutungo ahabwa n’itegeko, ko Mukasharangabo nta ruhare yahabwa mu mutungo Karimunda yashakanye na Nyirakamana, kandi ko umutungo uri muri Central Motors and Parts Sarl utagomba gushyirwa mu mutungo wa Karimunda igomba kuzungurwa. Incamake y’icyemezo: 1. Ntawe ushobora gushyingirwa igihe ishyingirwa rya mbere rikiriho, kuba rero Karimunda yarasezeranye na Nyirakamana atarasaba ubutane hagati ye na Mukasharangabo bituma ishyingirwa bagiranye icyo gihe riteshwa agaciro. ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 92

Page 119

2. Mu gihe abashyingiranwe bitandukanyije bagabana umutungo wari uriho igihe batandukanaga, ni kubwibyo rero Mukasharangabo agomba guhabwa ½ cy’umutungo yarasangiye na Karimunda kugeza igihe yataga urugo.

3. Ababanaga nk’umugore n’umugabo batarasezeranye mu buryo bwemewe n’amategeko bagabana imitungo bahahanye, kubwibyo rero Nyirakamana afite ubureganzira bwo guhabwa ½ cy’umutungo yahahanye na Karimunda kuva batangiye kubana nk’umugabo n’umugore.

4. Irage nta gaciro rigira igihe risumbanisha abana hashingiwe ku gitsina ndetse n’igihe nyakwigendera yagaragaje imyitwarire yuko yisubiyeho mbere y’uko yitaba Imana ibyo rero bikaba byumvikanisha ko irage Karimunda yakoze ridashobora gukurikizwa mu kugena izungura rye, ahubwo koizungura rigomba gukorwa nk’aho nta rage ryigeze ribaho (Sucession ab intestat), bityo abana bose ba Karimunda bakaba bafite uburenganzira bwo kumuzungura ku buryo bungana umutungo wose yaba afite, nta mwana uhejwe.

5. Impano nta gaciro igira igihe yatanzwe abasangiye umutungo batabyumvikanyeho kandi igatangwa hagamijwe gusumbanisha abana ni kubwiyo mpamvu rero impano yahawe Central Motors and Parts Sarl nta gaciro yahabwa, ahubwo igomba kuguma mu mutungo uzungurwa Karimunda yari asangiye na Nyirakamana.

6. Ikirego nticyakirwa igihe umuburanyi nta nyungu afite mu rubanza.

7. Indishyi ntizigenwa iyo buri muburanyi afite ibyo yatsindiwe mu rubanza. Ikirego gifite ishingiro kuri bimwe. Amagarama y’urubanza aherereye ku baburanyi bose. NYIRAKAMANA N’ABANDI v. MUKASHARANGABO N’ABANDI 93

Page 120

Amategeko yashingiweho: Itegeko Nshinga rya Repubulika y’u Rwanda ryo kuwa 24/11/1962, ingingo ya 28. Itegeko Nshinga rya Repubulika y’u Rwanda ryo kuwa 20/12/1978, ingingo ya 16 n’iya 93(2). Itegeko Ngenga N°59/2008 ryo kuwa 10/09/2008 rikumira kandi rihana ihohoterwa iryo ari ryo ryose rishingiye ku gitsina, ingingo ya 39. Amasezerano Mpuzamahanga yerekeye guca burundu ivangura iryo ari ryo ryose rikorerwa abagore yashyiriweho umukono i New York ku wa 18 Ukuboza 1979, ingingo ya 5(a). Itegeko N°21/2012 ryo kuwa 14/06/2012 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi, ingingo ya 2. Itegeko N°22/99 ryo kuwa 12/11/1999 ryuzuza Igitabo cya mbere cy’urwunge rw'amategeko mbonezamubano kandi rishyiraho igice cyagatanu cyerekeye imicungire y’umutungo w’abashyingiranywe, impano n’izungura, ingingo ya 56 n‘iya 58. Itegeko Nº42/1988 ryo kuwa 27/10/1988 rishyiraho igitabo cya mbere cy’urwunge rw’amategeko mbonezamubano, ingingo 175. Nta manza zifashishijwe. Inyandiko z’abahanga: Christian Jubaut, Droit Civil, les successions. Les Libéralités, DALLOZ, 2005, pp.444-445, No751.

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 94

Page 121

Urubanza I. IMITERERE Y’URUBANZA [1] Karimunda Gérard yabanye n’abagore batatu (3) aribo Mukasharangabo Eugénie, Mukandoli Epiphanie na Nyirakamana Marcianna. Mu mwaka wa 1965 Mukasharangabo Eugénie yataye umugabo we, ajya kwibanira n’undi mugabo witwa Muvunyi Aaron, hagati aho Karimunda Gérard yacuditse n’uwitwa Mukandoli Epiphanie, ariko ntibabana nk’umugore n’umugabo, cyakora babyarana abana batatu (3). [2] Karimunda Gérard amaze kubona ko umugore we Mukasharangabo Eugénie yamutaye, yashatse undi mugore witwa Nyirakamana Marcianna, basezerana mu buryo bwemewe n’amategeko ku wa 26/11/1970. Baje gukorana amasezerano yo gushyira umutungo hamwe mu rwego rwo guteranya ubucuruzi, Karimunda Gérard azana 51.000Frw naho Nyirakamana Marciana azana 80.000Frw, maze bakora ubucuruzi. Mu mwaka wa 1975 baguze ikibanza kiri muri “parcelle” N°517 mu Mujyi wa Kigali, bubakamo inzu. Babyaranye abana batatu (3), aribo: Karangwa Denis, Karigirwa Edinace naKantamage Jacqueline. Batandukanyijwe n’urupfu rwa Karimunda Gérard mu mwaka wa 1994. [3] Hagati aho, mu mwaka wa 1979, Karimunda Gérard yari yaratanze ikirego mu Rukiko rwa Mbere rw’Iremezo ruri ku Kabaya, asaba gutandukana na Mukasharangabo Eugénie, maze mu rubanza N°RC224/79 rwaciwe ku wa 21/11/1979 Mukasharangabo Eugénie adahari, Urukiko rumwemerera ubwo butane kubera ko uwo mugore yataye urugo, rutegeka ko amasezerano y’ubushyingiranwe bari bafitanye akuweho. NYIRAKAMANA N’ABANDI v. MUKASHARANGABO N’ABANDI 95

Page 122

[4] Ku mpamvu z’uko Nyirakamana Marciana na Karimunda Gérard bari barasezeranye ku wa 26/11/1970 mu gihe uyu yari atarabona ubutane, Ubushinjacyaha bwabakurikiranye mu Rukiko rwa Mbere rw’Iremezo rwa Kigali ku cyaha cy’ubuharike, bunasaba ko amasezerano y’ubushyingiranwe bagiranye yaseswa, Urukiko rubahamya icyo cyaha, ariko ntirwasesa ubwo bushyingiranwe, Ubushinjacyaha bubijuririye mu Rukiko rw’Ubujurire rwa Kigali, narwo ruca urubanza RPA2826/KIG ku wa 19/11/1981, rwemeza ko bahamwa n’icyo cyaha, ariko ruvuga ko rutasesa amasezerano y’ubushyingiranwe bagiranye kuko rusanga ntawe byagirira akamaro, ahubwo byaba gusenya urugo rwashinze imizi bikaba byavamo guhungabanya amahoro n’umutekano rusange, cyane cyane ko amasezerano y’ubushyingiranwe ya Karimunda Gérard na Mukasharangabo Eugénie yari atakiriho. [5] Mukasharangabo Eugénie yasubirishijemo rwa rubanza rw’ubutane rwaciwe n’Urukiko rwa Mbere rw’Iremezo rwa Gisenyi, rukorera ku Kabaya adahari, maze urwo Rukiko ruca urubanza RC5195/R11/KY ku wa 21/09/1991, rwemeza ko ubwo butane butagomba kuvanwaho kuko kuva mu mwaka wa 1969 Mukasharangabo Eugénie yitandukanyije n’umugabo we Karimunda Gérard. Mukasharangabo Eugénie yajuririye mu Rukiko rw’Ubujurire rwa Ruhengeri kuri RCA6302/R14/RUH, ariko Karimunda Gérard yitaba Imana urubanza rutaraburanishwa, bityo urwo Rukiko rutegeka ko urubanza rw’ubutane rukuweho n’urupfu rwa Karimunda Gérard. [6] Nyuma y’aho, Mukasharangabo Eugénie yatanze ikirego mu Rukiko rw’Ibanze rwa Nyarugenge, asaba iseswa ry’amasezerano y’ubushyingiranwe ya Karimunda Gérard na Nyirakamana Marciana. Urwo rukiko rwaciye urubanza ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 96

Page 123

RC0379/08/TB/NYG ku wa 31/10/2008, rwemeza ko icyo kirego nta shingiro gifite. [7] Mukasharangabo Eugénie yarabijuririye mu Rukiko Rukuru kuri RC5195, ariko ikirego cye kiza guhuzwa n’izindi manza zari zaratangijwe na Nyirakamana Marciana na Karangwa Denis batambamira urubanza RC5091/R11/KYA, rwaciwe ku wa 23/05/1990 n’Urukiko rwa Mbere rw’Iremezo rwa Gisenyi, ruri ku Kabaya, aho Karimunda Gérard akiriho, yari yararegeye ko abana be banga kwakira umunani abaha. [8] Nyirakamana Marciana na Karangwa Denis bamaze gutambamira urwo rubanza RC5091/R11/KYA, urubanza rwabo rugahuzwa na rwa rubanza ku kirego cya Mukasharangabo Eugénie cyo gusaba iseswa ry’amasezerano y’ubushyingiranwe hagati yaNyirakamana Marciana na Karimunda Gérard, izo manza zahujwe n’izindi manza ku birego byatanzwe n’abandi bagore ba Karimunda Gérard n’abana babo bagamije gusaba ko irage ryakozwe na Karimunda Gérard rivanwaho, imitungo yasize ikazungurwa hakurikijwe itegeko no gusaba iminani, zihuzwa kandi n’izindi zaregwagamo Central Motors and Parts Sarl na Karangwa Denis, zihabwa numero imwe y’urubanza RC0153/05/TP/KIG, rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Umujyi wa Kigali ku wa 13/06/2005. [9] Mu byemezo rwafashe, Urukiko rw’Umujyi wa Kigali rwemeje ko Mukasharangabo ahabwa ½ cy’umutungo afatanyije na Karimunda Gérard nk’umugore w’isezerano; ko abana bose ba Karimunda Gérard bazungura ½ cy’umutungo wose wa Karimunda Gérard na Mukasharangabo Eugénie; ko inzu iri muri “parcelle” No05/524 iri Karambo-Gikondo, igarurwa mu mutungo wa Karimunda Gérard ikajya mu bizungurwa; ko Mukandoli ahabwa isambu iri i Kiziguro NYIRAKAMANA N’ABANDI v. MUKASHARANGABO N’ABANDI 97

Page 124

yatujwemo; ko kandi Nyirakamana Marciana agumana imigabane afite muri Central Motors and Parts Sarl. [10] Nyirakamana Marciana, Karangwa Denis na Central Motors and Parts bajuririye urwo rubanza mu Rukiko Rukuru, ruhuzwa n’urundi rubanza rwa Mukasharangabo Eugénie ajuririra urubanza NoRC5195 rwavuzwe haruguru, rwari rwaremeje ko amasezerano y’ubushyingiranwe yaKarimunda Gérard na Nyirakamana adasheshwe, ziba urubanza rumwe N°RCA0221/05/HC/KIG, RCA0221/09/HC/KIG, rucibwa ku wa 02/04/2010, maze Urukiko Rukuru rwemeza ko amasezerano yo gushyingirwa ya Nyirakamana Marciana na Karimunda Gérard ataseswa; ko kuba Mukasharangabo Eugénie na Nyirakamana Marciana baragizwe icyarimwe abagore b’isezerano ba Karimunda Gérard ntaho rwahera rwemeza umugore ufite uruhare ku mutungo wasizwe na Karimunda Gérard. [11] Ku birebana n’irage, Urukiko Rukuru rwemeje ko iryo rage ritabayeho, maze rutegeka ko umutungo wa Karimunda Gérard uzungurwa n’abana be bose ku buryo bungana, rutegeka kandi ko n’inzu iri muri “parcelle” N°15/525 yanditse kuri Central Motors and Parts Sarl igarurwa mu mitungo ya Karimunda Gérard igomba kuzungurwa. [12] Nyirakamana Marciana, Karangwa Denis na Central Motors and Parts Sarl bajuririye muRukiko rw’Ikirenga, umucamanza w’ibanzirizasuzuma yemeza ko ubujurire bwabo butakiriwe kuko butujuje ibisabwa n’itegeko kugira ngo bube mu bubasha bw’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga. Bajuririye icyo cyemezo, Urukiko ruca urubanza RCAA0038/10/CS ku wa 16/03/2012, rwemeza ko ubujurire bwabo nta shingiro bufite, bityo ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 98

Page 125

hagumaho urubanza RCA0221/05/HC/KIG, RCA0221/09/HC/KIG rwaciwe ku wa 02/04/2010. [13] Nyirakamana Marciana, Karangwa Denis na Central Motors and Parts Sarl batanze ikirego gisaba gusubirishamo urubanza RCA0221/05/HC/KIG, RCA0221/09/HC/KIG kubera impamvu z’akarengane basaba ko irage ryakozwe na Karimunda Gérard ku wa 25/08/1981 ryahabwa agaciro ku bijyanye n’igabanywa ry’umutungo yasize, ko riramutse ridahawe agaciro, amasezerano yo gushyingirwa yabaye hagati ya Karimunda Gérard na Nyirakamana Marciana yahabwa agaciro, maze Nyirakamana Marciana akagenerwa ½ cy’umutungo ahabwa n’itegeko, ko Mukasharangabo nta ruhare yahabwa mu mutungo Karimunda Gérard yashakanye na Nyirakamana Marciana, kandi ko umutungo uri muri Central Motors and Parts Sarl utagomba gushyirwa mu mitungo ya Karimunda Gérard igomba kuzungurwa. [14] Abaregwa muri uru rubanza, ndetse na bamwe mu bagobokeshejwe batanze inzitizi z’uko icyo kirego kidakwiriye kwakirwa, ariko mu rubanza rubanziriza urundi rwaciwe ku wa 30/06/2015, Urukiko rw’Ikirenga rwemeza ko inzitizi zatanzwe nta shingiro zifite, rwemeza ko iburanisha ry’urubanza rizakomeza mu mizi. [15] Urubanza rwaburanishijwe ku wa 07/10/2015, ababuranyi bitabye, Nyirakamana Marciana na Central Motors and Parts Sarl na Karangwa Denis bahagarariwe na Me Kayirangwa Claire afatanyije na Me Gashagaza Philbert, Mukasharangabo Eugénie ahagarariwe na Me Twayigize Jean Claude, abazungura ba Bitwayiki Martin, abazungura ba Ntahobari Nasson, abazungura ba Mukanoheli, abazungura ba Mukandekezi Alphonsine bahagarariwe na Me Nsabimana Jean NYIRAKAMANA N’ABANDI v. MUKASHARANGABO N’ABANDI 99

Page 126

Baptiste afatanyije na Me Ndereyimana Sylvestre, Mukandori Epiphanie, Nyirashema Marie, na Karimunda Hakizimana Alphonse bunganirwa na Me Nsabimana Jean Baptiste, naho GT Bank Ltd yahoze yitwa FINA Bank ihagarariwe na Me Nkurunziza François Xavier. II. IBIBAZO BIGIZE URUBANZA N’ISESENGURWA RYABYO Kumenya hagati ya Nyirakamana Marciana na Mukasharangabo Eugénie, umugore ukwiye kugira uburenganzira ku mutungo uzungurwa wa Karimunda Gérard. [16] Ababuranira Nyirakamana Marciana bavuga ko akarengane afite kakemurwa n’uko hakubahirizwa irage Karimunda Gérard yakoze ku wa 25/08/1981 ryamugeneye inzu iri mu kibanza No05/224 iri i Gikondo, ko ariko mu gihe Urukiko rwasanga iryo rage ritagomba kubahirizwa, Urukiko rw’Ikirenga rwakwemeza ko ari we mugore w’isezerano wa Karimunda Gérard, maze akagenerwa kimwe cya kabiri (½) cy’umutungo wa Karimunda Gérard uzungurwa, naho Mukasharangabo Eugénie ntagire uruhare ahabwa muri uwo mutungo, kuko Karimunda Gérard yawushakanye na Nyirakamana Marciana, igihe Mukasharangabo Eugénie yari yarataye umugabo we. [17] Basobanura ko Nyirakamana Marciana ariwe mugore w’isezerano kubera ko nyuma y’aho Mukasharangabo Eugénie atereye urugo, Karimunda Gérard yatanze ikirego asaba ubutane, maze mu rubanza RC224/79, Urukiko rwaregewe rukemeza ko Mukasharangabo Eugénie avanwa mu bitabo ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 100

Page 127

by’irangamimerere, nyuma Mukasharangabo Eugénie yatanga ikirego gisubirishamo urubanza, hagafatwa icyemezo cy’uko ubutane bukomeza kugumaho, akijuririye, Karimunda Gérard aza gupfa urubanza rutaracibwa, bakaba basanga uburenganzira Mukasharangabo Eugénie yasabaga yari atarabuhabwa, ahubwo hakaba haragumyeho urubanza rw’ubutane, bityo bakaba basanga Nyirakamana Marciana ari we wasigaye ari umugore w’isezerano. [18] Bavuga ko no mu rubanza nshinjabyaha RPA2826/KIG rwo ku wa 19/11/1981 rwahamije Nyirakamana Marciana na Karimunda Gérard icyaha baregwaga cy’ubuharike, Urukiko rwavuze ko rutasesa amasezerano yabo kubera ko ntawe byagirira akamaro, ko ahubwo byateza imidugararo bashenye urugo rwarangije gushinga imizi, bityo bakaba basanga Inkiko zaremereye Nyirakamana Marciana kuba umugore w’isezerano. [19] Uburanira Mukasharangabo Eugénie avuga ko Karimunda Gérard yasezeranye na Nyirakamana Marciana agifite undi mugore w’isezerano, ari we Mukasharangabo Eugénie, ko ariko ashyigikiye ibyavuzwe n’Urukiko Rukuru ko ntaho rwahera ngo rwemeze ko umwe muri abo bagore ari uw’isezerano cyangwa atari we, icyo kibazo kikaba atari na cyo kiburanwa ubu, kuko ikigibwaho impaka ari irage Karimunda yakoze, niba ryarakurikije amategeko cyangwa ritarayakurikije. [20] Ababuranira Mukandori Epiphanie, abana be, n’abana ba Mukasharangabo Eugénie bavuga ko Nyirakamana Marciana adashobora kwitwa umugore w’isezerano, mu gihe bigaragara ko na Mukasharangabo Eugénie ari uw’isezerano, bakaba basanga Itegeko Nshinga ritemereraga Karimunda kugira abagore babiri b’isezerano, n’urubanza rwabyemeje bakaba basanga rwarakoze amakosa (abus de droit) NYIRAKAMANA N’ABANDI v. MUKASHARANGABO N’ABANDI 101

Page 128

UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [21] Ingingo ya 28 y’Itegeko Nshinga rya Repubulika y’u Rwanda ryo ku wa 24/11/1962 ryakurikizwaga igihe Karimunda Gérard yasezeranaga na Nyirakamana Marciana ku wa 25/11/1970 iteganya ko isezerano ry’umugabo umwe n’umugore umwe ari ryo ryemewe.1 [22] Ingingo ya 101 y’Igitabo cya mbere cy’urwunge rw’amategeko mbonezamubano cyakurikizwaga2 igihe Karimunda Gérard yasezeranaga naNyirakamana Marciana ku wa 25/11/1970 ivuga ko “ntawe ushobora gushyingirwa ugushyingirwa kwa mbere kukiriho”. [23] Dosiye y’uru rubanza igaragaza ko Mukasharangabo Eugénie yashakanye na Karimunda Gérard mu mwaka wa 1952 imbere y’umwanditsi w’irangamimerere Rwamuningi mu cyahoze ari Komini Ngororero nk’uko bigaragazwa n’icyemezo cyatanzwe n’umwanditsi w’irangamimerere w’Akarere ka Kageyo ku wa 11/06/2001 (urubanza rw’Urukiko Rukuru, igika cya 44). Muri dosiye y’uru rubanza harimo kandi icyemezo cy’ibiro by’irangamimerere cyakorewe i Runda kuwa 22/03/2002 kigaragaza koKarimunda Gérard yasezeranye na Nyirakamana Marciana ku wa 25/11/1970. [24] Nk’uko byasobanuwe haruguru mu ntangiriro z’uru rubanza, mu mwaka wa 1979, ni ho Karimunda Gérard yatanze

1Article 28: “Seul le mariage monogamique est reconnu dans les formes et les conditions prévues par la loi […]”. 2Iyo ngingo ya 101 yagaruwe mu ngingo ya 175 y’Itegeko Nº42/1988 ryo ku wa 27/10/1988 rishyiraho igitabo cya mbere cy’urwunge rw’amategeko mbonezamubano. ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 102

Page 129

ikirego asaba ubutane na Mukasharangabo Eugénie, maze mu rubanza RC224/79 rwaciwe ku wa 21/11/1979, Urukiko rwemerera Karimunda Gérard ubutane kubera ko uwo mugore yataye urugo, maze rutegeka ko amasezerano y’ubushyingiranwe bari bafitanye akuweho. [25] Ikigaragarira Urukiko rw’Ikirenga, ni uko Karimunda Gérard ajya gusezerana na Nyirakamana Marciana ku wa 25/11/1970, yari atarajya mu Rukiko gusaba gutandukana n’umugore we wa mbere Mukasharangabo Eugénie, ibyo bikumvikanisha ko ubushyingiranwe bagiranye icyo gihe butari bwemewe n’amategeko yose yavuzwe haruguru, ari yo mpamvu ubwo bushyingiranwe nta gaciro bukwiye kugira. [26] Urukiko rurasanga nk’uko na none byasobanuwe, Karimunda yarapfuye urubanza rw’ubutane yaburanaga na Mukasharangabo Eugénie rutaracibwa burundu, bikumvikanisha rero ko nta butane bwigeze bubaho, bityo Mukasharangabo Eugénie akaba ari we wari umugore w’isezerano wa Karimunda Gérard mu rwego rw’amategeko. [27] Urukiko rurasanga ariko n’ubwo Mukasharangabo Eugénie ari we wari umugore w’isezerano, dosiye y’uru rubanza igaragaza ko yari atakibana n’umugabo we Karimunda kuva mu mwaka wa 1965, igihe yajyaga kwibanira n’undi mugabo, ndetse na nyuma y’aho bakaba baraburanye urubanza rw’ubutane rutaje kurangira bitewe n’uko Karimunda yaje gupfa mu mwaka wa 1994 nta cyemezo ndakuka kirafatwa kuri ubwo butane, ibyo bikumvikanisha ko umutungo yari asangiye na Karimunda ari uwo bari bafitanye kugeza muri uwo mwaka wa 1965, akaba ari nawo gusa afiteho uburenganzira bwo kubonaho icya kabiri (1/2) nk’umugabane we. NYIRAKAMANA N’ABANDI v. MUKASHARANGABO N’ABANDI 103

Page 130

[28] Urukiko rurasanga ku bireba Nyirakamana Marciana, n’ubwo atigeze aba umugore w’isezerano hakurikijwe ibimaze gusobanurwa haruguru, bigaragara ko yabanye na Karimunda kuva ku wa 25/11/1970 kugeza Karimunda Gérard apfuye mu mwaka wa 1994, muri icyo gihe cyose bakaba barafatanyije ibikorwa by’ubucuruzi bahereye ku masezerano agaragara muri dosiye y’uru rubanza bagiranye ku wa 05/01/1968 (cote 23 Dos.CS), aho Nyirakamana Marciana yazanye amafaranga70.000 n’imashini idoda ifite agaciro ka 10.000Frw, naho Karimunda akazana 20.000Frw n’icyumba cy’iduka riri i Vunga cyahawe agaciro ka 31.000Frw, yose hamwe Karimunda akaba yarazanye umugabane uhwanye na 51.000Frw, byumvikana ko ari ayo yavanye mu mutungo yari afatanyije na Mukasharangabo Eugénie nk’umugore we w’isezerano. [29] Ku bijyanye n’ababanaga nk’umugore n’umugabo batashyingiranywe mu buryo bwemewe n’amategeko, ingingo ya 39 y’Itegeko N°59/2008 ryo ku wa 10/09/2008 rikumira kandi rihana ihohoterwa iryo ari ryo ryose rishingiye ku gitsina itegeka umugabo cyangwa umugore wabanaga n’abagore cyangwa n’abagabo benshi, gusezerana n’umugabo cyangwa n’umugore umwe, ikanabategeka ariko muri icyo gihe kubanza kugabana ku buryo bungana umutungo bari bafitanye cyangwa bahahanye mbere y’uko asezerana. Iyo ngingo inavuga ko iryo gabana ry’umutungo ritavutsa abana babyaranye uburenganzira bahabwa n’amategeko.3

3 Ingingo ya 39 iteganya ibikurikira: “Ababanaga nk’umugore n’umugabo batashyingiranywe mu buryo buteganywa n’amategeko, bashyingirwa hakurikije ihame ry’ubushyingiranywe bw’umugabo umwe n’umugore umwe.Mu gihe umwe mu barebwa n’ibivugwa mu gika kibanziriza iki, yabanaga n’abagore cyangwa n’abagabo benshi, abanza kugabana ku buryo bungana na buri wese ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 104

Page 131

[30] Hashingiwe ku ngingo ya 39 y’Itegeko N°59/2008 rimaze kuvugwa, Urukiko rurasanga Nyirakamana Marciana, n’ubwo atari umugore w’isezerano bitewe n’uko yatangiye kubana naKarimunda Gérard ataratandukana n’umugore w’isezerano, afite uburenganzira bwo guhabwa kimwe cya kabiri (½) cy’umutungo yari afitanye cyangwa yahahanye na Karimunda Gérard kuva batangiye kubana nk’umugore n’umugabo kuva ku wa 27/11/1970, ikindi kimwe cya kabiri (½) gisigaye, kigasigara ari umutungo wa Karimunda Gérard kigomba kuzungurwa hakurikijwe amategeko. [31] Hashingiwe na none ku biteganywa n’igika cya nyuma cy’ingingo ya 39 y’Itegeko N°59/2008 ryavuzwe, kivuga ko igabana ry’umutungo ritavutsa abana babyawe uburenganzira bahabwan’amategeko, Urukiko rurasanga abana Karimunda Gérard yabyaranye na Mukasharangabo Eugénie bafite uburenganzira ku mutungo w’ababyeyi babo bombi, by’umwihariko, uburenganzira bahabwa n’amategeko y’izungura yakurikizwaga igihe Karimunda Gérard yitabaga Imana mu mwaka wa 1994, kimwe n’uko abandi bana Karimunda Gérard yabyaranye na Mukasharangabo, Nyirakamana Marciana na Mukandoli, bafite uburenganzira bwo kumuzungura hakurikijwe amategeko y’izungura yakurikizwaga igihe yitabaga Imana mu mwaka wa 1994. [32] Urukiko rurasanga kugira ngo izungura rikorwe mu buryo buboneye, haba kuri Mukasharangabo, haba kuri Nyirakamana Marciana, ku ruhare rwabo rwavuzwe haruguru,

mu bo babanaga, umutungo bari bafitanye cyangwa bahahanye mbere y’uko ashyingirwa. Igabana ry’umutungo rivugwa mu gika cya 2 cy’iyi ngingo ntirivutsa abana babyaranye uburenganzira bahabwa n’amategeko”. NYIRAKAMANA N’ABANDI v. MUKASHARANGABO N’ABANDI 105

Page 132

haba ndetse no ku bana bose ba Karimunda Gérard, abazungura bose bagomba kuzagaragaza, igihe bizaba ngombwa, imitungo yose Mukasharangabo yari asangiye na Karimunda kugeza igihe yataga urugo rw’abashakanye, kimwe n’imitungo Nyirakamana Marciana yahahanye na Karimunda Gérard kuva ku wa 25/11/1970 kugeza igihe Karimunda Gérard apfiriye, iyo mitungo yaba ibanditseho cyangwa itabanditseho, yaba imitungo igizwe n’ibintu byimukanwa cyangwa bitimukanwa, yaba igizwe n’amafaranga ari ku makonti cyangwa imigabane mu masosiyete, n’ibindi. Kumenya niba irage ryakozwe na Karimunda Gérard ku wa 25/08/1981 ryahabwa agaciro. [33] Ababuranira Nyirakamana Marciana, Karangwa Denis na Central Motors and Parts Sarl, bavuga ko bagiriwe akarengane mu icibwa ry’urubanza RCA0221/05/HC/KIG rwaciwe tariki ya 02/04/2010, gashingiye ku kuba irage ryakozwe na Karimunda Gérard tariki ya 25/08/1981, ritarigeze riteshwa agaciro n’Urukiko Rukuru, kandi rwaremeje ko ritigeze ribaho rushingiye ku rubanza rwaciwe n’Urukiko rwa Mbere rw’Iremezo rwa Kabaya tariki ya 23/05/1990 aho Karimunda Gérard yahatiraga abana be kwakira iminani rukavuga ko iyo iryo rage riza kubaho, Karimunda Gérard atari kurega asaba ko abana bakira iminani yabageneye, bakaba basanga nta sesengura ry’iryo rage Urukiko Rukuru rwigeze rukora ngo hagaragazwe ko rinyuranyije n’amategeko yariho igihe ryakorwaga ku wa 25/08/1981. [34] Bavuga ko rero iryo rage ryo ku wa 25/08/1981 ryakorewe imbere ya “Notaire” rikwiye gushyirwa mu bikorwa, cyane cyane ko Karimunda Gérard atigeze arihindura nk’uko bivugwa n’ababuranira uruhande ruregwa, bitwaza ko hari ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 106

Page 133

ibaruwa Karimunda Gérard yandikiye Minisitiri w’Ingufu n’Imirimo ya Leta, avuga ko inzu yari i Gikondo ayihaye Central Motors and Parts Sarl, kuko iyo arihindura aba yarasubiye kwa “Notaire”. [35] Ababuranira Nyirakamana Marciana bavuga na none ko Urukiko Rukuru rwitiranyije irage n’umunani, kubera ko ingingo ya 42 y’Itegeko No22/99 ryo ku wa 12/11/1999 rigenga imicungire y’umutungo w’abashakanye, impano n’izungura iteganya ko “itangwa ry’umunani ni igikorwa ababyeyi bakora bakiriho kigamije kugabira umutungo abana babo cyangwa ababakomokaho bagahita bawegukana, bikitwa ko bashoje inshingano yo kubarera no kububakira”; naho ingingo ya 56 y’iryo Tegeko igateganya ko “ Irage ni igikorwa umuntu akora agena amerekezo y'umutungo we mu gihe azaba atakiriho, akagaragaza n' ibyifuzo bye bya nyuma[……]”. [36] Bavuga ko Urukiko Rukuru rwasobanuye amategeko nabi kuko rwashingiye icyemezo cyarwo ku ngingo ya 56 imaze kuvugwa, nyamara irage riburanwa ryarakozwe mbere mu mwaka wa 1981 iryo Tegeko ritarajyaho, hakaba harakurikizwaga icyo gihe umuco nyarwanda, aho hazunguraga gusa abahungu, ari yo mpamvu muri iryo rage nta bakobwa bavugwamo, naho ku mugabo ufite abagore benshi, umuco ukaba ari uko abana bazunguraga ku mitungo yaherejwe kuri ba nyina. [37] Bavuga rero ko iyo ngingo yasobanuwe mu buryo butari bwo kuko isobanura irage icyo ari cyo, ko kandi iryo Tegeko ryaje ryuzuza ibyateganywaga n’umuco nyarwanda, rigashimangira ko irage ryakozwe mu buryo bwemewe n’amategeko rikomeza kugira agaciro kugira ngo hubahirizwe ibyifuzo bya nyakwigendera. NYIRAKAMANA N’ABANDI v. MUKASHARANGABO N’ABANDI 107

Page 134

[38] Bavuga na none ko iryo rage ritari guteshwa agaciro kandi ryarakozwe mu buryo bw’inyandikomvaho nk’uko biteganywa n’ingingo ya 13 y’Itegeko N°15/2004 ryo kuwa 12/06/2004 ryerekeye ibimenyetso mu manza n’itangwa ryabyo, riteganya ko nyandikomvaho yakozwe n’ubifitiye ububasha, ibiyivugwamo bikomeza gufatwa nk’ukuri, bityo iryo rage rikaba rigomba guhabwa agaciro karyo, rikagenga ibyifuzo bya nyuma bya Nyakwigendera Karimunda Gérard. [39] Ababuranira uruhande ruregwa bavuga ko ibyo Nyirakamana Marciana, Karangwa Denis na Central Motors and Parts Sarl ndetse n’Urwego rw’Umuvunyi bavuga, by’uko habaye akarengane mu Rukiko Rukuru kajyanye no kwirengagiza irage nta shingiro bifite, kuko bigaragara ku rupapuro rwa 11, mu gika cya 47 na 48 by’urubanza, ko Urukiko Rukuru rutaryirengagije, ahubwo ko rwarisuzumye rugasanga ritagomba guhabwa agaciro. [40] Bavuga ko ingingo ya 56 y’Itegeko rimaze kuvugwa haruguru nayo itakurikijwe nabi, cyane ko n’ababuranira Nyirakamana Marciana, Karangwa Denis na Central Motors and Parts Sarl basaba Urukiko rw’Ikirenga kuyikurikiza ku bijyanye n’irage rivugwa n’iyo ngingo. Bongeraho ariko ko iryo rage rifite inenge zatumye umucamanza w’Urukiko Rukuru atariha agaciro, izo nenge zikaba izikurikira: a. Kuba mu by’ukuri ritakorewe imbere ya “Notaire” nk’uko bivugwa n’ababuranira Nyirakamana Marciana, Karangwa Denis na Central Motors and Parts Sarl kuko nta zina rya “Notaire” rigaragara kuri iryo rage. b. Kuba nta mwimerere w’iryo rage uboneka, fotokopi ikaba nta gaciro yahabwa. ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 108

Page 135

c. Kuba Karimunda Gérard yararikoze ku wa 25/08/1981, nyuma gato y’urubanza RC500/R11/KYA rwabereye ku Rukiko rwa Mbere rw’Iremezo rwo ku Kabaya rwamubuzaga kongera gutanga imwe mu mitungo ye. d. Kuba iryo rage ryaratanzwe mu buryo busumbanisha abana, kubera ko abana ba Mukasharangabo Eugénie bahawe umurima wa 50 m kuri 70 m, abana ba Nyirakamana Marciana bagahabwa igorofa mu Mujyi wa Kigali. e. Kuba yaratanze inzu inshuro ebyiri, ubwa mbere akaba yari yayihaye Nyirakamana Marciana, akongera akayiha Central Motors and Parts Sarl.

UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [41] Amategeko y’u Rwanda yakurikizwaga igihe Karimunda Gérard yakoraga irage ryo ku wa 25/08/1981 nta na hamwe yateganyaga ibijyanye n’irage cyangwa izungura. Ingingo ya 1 y’Iriburiro ry’Igitabo cya mbere cy'urwunge rw'amategeko mbonezamubano ni yo yateganyaga ko iyo ntamategeko ariho akemura ikibazo, impaka zivutse inkiko zifitiye ububasha zizakemurwa hakurikijwe umuco, cyangwa amahame rusange n’amategeko n’ubutabera.4

4 Ordonnance de l’Administrateur Général au Congo relatif aux principes à suivre dans les décisions judiciaires, approuvée par le Décret du 12 novembre 19986, rendu exécutoire au Rwanda par l’O.R.U. NO 11/82 DU 21/06/1949: «Quand la matière n’est pas prévue par un Décret, un arrêté ou une ordonnance déjà promulguée, les contestations qui sont de la compétence des tribunaux….seront jugées d’après les coutumes locales, les principes généraux du droit et l’équité». NYIRAKAMANA N’ABANDI v. MUKASHARANGABO N’ABANDI 109

Page 136

[42] Ku biyanye n’amahame rusange, ingingo ya 16 y’Itegeko Nshinga rya Repubulika y’u Rwanda ryo ku wa 20/12/1978 ryakurikizwaga igihe Karimunda Gérard yakoraga irage ryo ku wa 25/08/19815, iteganya ko “Abantu bose bangana imbere y’amategeko, kandi ko Itegeko ribarengera ku buryo bumwe nta vangura iryo ari ryo ryose, nk’irishingiye ku gitsina…”6. [43] Naho ku bijyanye n’umuco, ingingo ya 93, igika cya 2 y’Itegeko Nshinga rimaze kuvugwa iteganya ko “umuco w’Igihugu ukurikizwa gusa iyo utasimbujwe itegeko kandi ntube unyuranyije n’Itegeko Nshinga, amategeko, amabwiriza, n’amahame ndemyagihugu cyangwa umuco w’imbonezabupfura”. [44] Ingingo ya 5(a) y’Amasezerano Mpuzamahanga avanaho ivangura iryo ariryo ryose ku bagore yo ku wa 18/12/1979 u Rwanda rwemeje burundu ku wa 10/11/19807iteganya “…ivanaho ry’akarengane, imico n’imigenzo yose ishingiye ku busumbane hagati y’abagabo n’abagore cyangwa kurutanisha ibyo bitsina byombi”.8 [45] Nk’uko byari bimaze kuvugwa haruguru, igihe Karimunda Gérard yakoraga irage ryo ku wa 25/08/1981, ntaho amategeko y’u Rwanda yatangaga igisobanuro cy’irage. Ariko Abahanga mu mategeko basobanura ko “irage ari igikorwa

5 Iryo Tegeko ryasimbuye iryo ku wa 24/11/1962. 6 Article 16 : Tous les citoyens sont égaux devant la loi, sans discrimination aucune, notamment de race, de couleur, d’origine, d’ethnie, de clan, de sexe, d’opinion, de religion, ou de position sociale. 7 “Date de ratification” ni 10/11/1980 nk’uko biboneka muri Arrêté Présidentiel yo kuwa 10/11/1980. 8 Reba Iteka rya Perezida No431/16 ryo ku wa 10/11/1980. ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 110

Page 137

umuntu akora agena amerekezo y'umutungo we mugihe azaba atakiriho, akagaragaza n'ibyifuzo bye bya nyuma” 9, naho ku bijyanye n’irage mpamo, bakavuga ko “ari rikorewe imbere y'umwanditsi w'inyandiko mpamo n’abatangabuhamya babiri”10. [46] Ibi bisobanuro bihuza n’ibiteganywa n’ingingo ya 56 y’Itegeko N°22/99 ryo ku wa 12/11/1999 ryuzuza Igitabo cya mbere cy'urwunge rw'amategeko mbonezamubano kandi rishyiraho igice cyagatanu cyerekeyeimicungire y'umutungo w'abashyingiranywe, impano n'izungura iteganya ko “Irage ni igikorwa umuntu akora agena amerekezo y'umutungo we mu gihe azaba atakiriho, akagaragaza n'ibyifuzo bye bya nyuma. Ibintu nyakwigendera atatanze mu irage bikurikiza amategeko agenga izungura nta rage”11. Naho iya 58 igateganya ko “ Irage mpamo ni irage rikorewe imbere y'umwanditsi w'inyandiko mpamo cyangwa imbere y'umwanditsi w'irangamimerere w'aho uraga atuye cyangwa aho aba[…..]”. [47] Ku bijyanye n’irage Karimunda Gérard yakoze ku wa 25/08/1981, dosiye y’urubanza (cote 64 ya dosiye) igaragaza ko ryanditse mu ngingo cumi n’ebyiri (12), ingingo ya 1 ikaba

9droit-finances-net,in:http://droit- finances.commentcamarche.net/contents/1012-testament-comment-le- rediger. 10droit-finances-net,in:http://droit- finances.commentcamarche.net/contents/1012-testament-comment-le- rediger: « (Le testament authentiqueest un acte passé devant deux notaires ou devant un notaire et deux témoins». 11 Le testament est l'acte par lequel une personne détermine la destination de son patrimoine après sa mort et fixe ses dispositions de dernière volonté. Les biens dont le de cujus n'a pas disposé par testament sont dévolus conformément aux dispositions sur la succession ab intestat. NYIRAKAMANA N’ABANDI v. MUKASHARANGABO N’ABANDI 111

Page 138

ivuga ko “Isambu iri i Kiziguro, Komini Satinsyi,Prefegitura ya Gisenyi, ifata imisozi ibiri Kanyinya na Karunyambo, igabanyijwe abana be ku buryo Isambu iri i Kanyinya yagenewe iminani y’abo bana”; naho “Isambu iri i Karunyambo guhera ku rubibi rwa Kagabo kugeza ku rubibi rwa Kagenza ku mugezi witwa Kankomati” iharirwa uburage (héritage). [48] Mu ngingo ya 2, niho Karimunda Gérard aha abana be b’abahungu yabyaranye na Mukasharangabo Eugénie, uburage bugizwe ahanini n’amasambu yabagabanyije, ari bo: Bitwayiki Martin, Habimana Ildephonse, Ntahobari Naasson, na Hakizimana Alphonse mu buryo bukurikira: 1. Bitwayiki Martin: icya kabiri (1/2) cy’ishyamba riri i Karunyambo, hamwe n’umurima uri hagati y’iryo shyamba na Kagabo, amuraga n’amazu abiri (2) ari i Kiziguro; 2. Habimana Ildephonse: igice gisigaye cy’ishyamba azagabana na Bitwayiki; hamwe n’umugabane mu isambu wegereye igice cy’ishyamba; 3. Ntahobari Naasson: umugabane wo hagati mu isambu wegereye igice cy’ishyamba; 4. Hakizimana Alphonse: umugabane uhana imbibi na Kagenza kuri Kankomati n’ishyamba riwurimo; naho kuva ku ngingo ya 5 kugeza ku ngingo ya 9, Karimunda Gérard aha Nyirakamana Marciana ndetse n’abana babyaranye uburage bugizwe n’ibikurikira: a. Inzu iri i Gikondo, “parcelle” No05/524 yahawe Nyirakamana Marciana; b. Inzu iri i Kigali muri Parcelle No517, “Quartier commercial”, yahawe umuhungu waNyirakamana Marciana witwa Karangwa Denis; c. amamodoka, amafaranga Karimunda Gérard afite muri za banki no muri za sosiyete na yo yahawe umuhungu wa Nyirakamana Marciana, Karangwa Denis ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 112

Page 139

asabwa no kuzishyura imyenda Karimunda Gérard azaba afite. [49] Hasesenguwe irage (Testament) Karimunda Gérard yakoze nk’uko ryanditse, hakurikijwe n’imiterere y’inyandiko zigize dosiye y’uru rubanza, Urukiko rurasanga Karimunda Gérard afite abandi bana batavugwa muri iryo rage bakomoka ku bagore batatu yari afite ari bo: Mukasharangabo Eugénie, Nyirakamana Marciana na Mukandori Epiphanie, hakaba nta mwana n’umwe w’umukobwa uvugwa ko hari ikintu yarazwe uretse kuvuga ko naba indushyi, azajya ajya kwagira musaza we, abo bana b’abakobwa batavugwa bakaba ari abakurikira : Kantamage Jacqueline na Karimunda Kaligirwa Edinace ba Nyirakamana Marciana; Mukashema Madeleine na Nyirashema Marie ba Mukandori Epiphanie; Mukandekezi Alphonsine na Mukandori Mariane ba Mukasharangabo Eugénie. [50] N’ubwo ababuranira Nyirakamana Marciana, Karangwa Denis na Central Motors and Parts Sarl bavuga ko irage nta makemwa rifite kuko ryakurikije umuco wariho icyo gihe irage rikorwa rivuga ko hazungura gusa abana b’abahungu, kandi rikaba ryarakorewe kwa “Notaire”, Urukiko rurasanga iryo rage ritarubahirije amahame rusange avugwa mu ngingo ya 1 y’Iriburiro ry’Igitabo cya mbere cy'urwunge rw'amategeko mbonezamubano yibukijwe haruguru, rimwe muri ayo mahamwe rikaba ari iryo kudakora ivangura iryo ari ryo ryose, by’umwihariko irishingiye ku gitsina riteganywa n’ingingo ya 16 y’Itegeko Nshinga rya Repubulika y’u Rwanda ryo ku wa 20/12/1978 ryakurikizwaga igihe Karimunda Gérard yakoraga irage ryo ku wa 25/08/198112 hamwe n’ingingo ya 5(a) y’Amasezerano Mpuzamahanga avanaho ivangura iryo ariryo

12Iryo Tegeko ryasimbuye iryo ku wa 24/11/1962. NYIRAKAMANA N’ABANDI v. MUKASHARANGABO N’ABANDI 113

Page 140

ryose ku bagore ryo ku wa 18/12/1979 u Rwanda rwemeje burundu ku wa 10/11/1980. [51] Urukiko rurasanga rero iryo vangura ari inenge ikomeye kandi y’indemya gihugu (d’ordre public), ituma iryo rage ryo kuwa 25/08/1981 riheza uruhande rumwe rw’abana nta gaciro rigomba guhabwa. [52] Urukiko rurasanga kandi, kuba irage rya Karimunda ryarahaga abana bamwe imirima yo mu giturage, abandi bagahabwa imitungo itubutse irimo inzu iri i Kigali muri Parcelle No517 muri Quartier Commercial, amamodoka, amafaranga afite muri za banki, amafaranga afite muri za sosiyete byahawe Karangwa Denis wabyawe na Nyirakamana Marciana, bigaragaza na none ko iryo rage ryasumbanyishije abana, kandi na byo byari bibujijwe n’ingingo ya 16 y’Itegeko Nshinga ryavuzwe haruguru, byumvikana ko iryo rage nta gaciro rigomba kugira. [53] Urukiko rurasanga na none, uretse no kuba irage Karimunda Gérard yakoze ku wa 25/08/1981 nta gaciro ryahabwa kubera impamvu zimaze gusobanurwa, na Karimunda Gérard ubwe yagaragaje mu myitwarire ye ko iryo rage yarivanyeho (révocation), ibyo bikaba bigaragazwa n’uko muri iryo rage yari yaragaragaje ubushake bwe (volonté testamentaire) bwo guha Nyirakamana Marciana inzu iri i Gikondo mu kibanza No05/524, nyamara muri dosiye y’uru rubanza harimo “Contrat de donation” yakozwe ku wa 24/11/1992 aho Karimunda Gérard yahaga noneho icyokibanza Central Motors and Parts Sarl nk’impano; bikongera kugaragazwa no kuba muri iryo rage yari yaragaragaje ubushake bwo guha abana be b’ababungu bavugwamo iminani mu isambu iri i Kiziguro, iherereye i Kanyinya, nyamara dosiye ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 114

Page 141

y’uru rubanza igaragaza ko icyo cyifuzo Karimunda Gérard yagisubiyeho mu nyandiko yise “Itanga ry’iminani ku bana ba Karimunda Gérard” nk’uko igaragara ku rupapuro rwa kabiri rw’urubanza RC5091/R11/KYA rwaciwe n’Urukiko rwa Mbere rw’Iremezo ruri ku Kabaya ku wa 23/05/1990, aho noneho yerekanye ko “isambu iri i kanyinya ayihaye Mukanoheli Mariana, Habimana Ildephonse, Mukashema Madeleine na Nyirashema”. [54] Abahanga mu mategeko basobanura ko irage rishobora kuvanwaho ku buryo butaziguye (la révocation peut être expresse), cyangwa mu buryo bwa bucece (la révocation peut être tacite), muri ubu buryo bwa bucece, bakavuga ko ibyari byanditse mbere mu irage bishobora kuvanwaho bucece n’ibindi bikorwa bikozwe nyuma bitajyana n’ibyari byavuzwe mbere (la révocation procède de l’incompatibilité ou du caractère contraire de l’acte nouveau avec l’acte précédent).13 [55] Urukiko rurasanga kuba hari ibikorwa bya Karimunda Gérard yakoze bigaragaza ko yisubiyeho, byumvikanisha ko irage yakoze ku wa 25/08/1981 ridashobora gukurikizwa mu kugena izungura rye nk’uko Nyirakamana Marciana n’abana be babyifuza (Succession testamentaire), ahubwo izungura rye rigomba gukorwa nk’aho nta rage ryigeze ribaho (Sucession ab intestat), bityo abana bose ba Karimunda Gérard bakaba bafite uburenganzira bwo kumuzungura ku buryo bungana ku mutungo wose yaba afite, nta mwana uhejwe.

13 Christian Jubaut, Droit Civil, les successions. Les Libéralités, DALLOZ, 2005, p.444-445, No751. NYIRAKAMANA N’ABANDI v. MUKASHARANGABO N’ABANDI 115

Page 142

Kumenya niba inzu iri i Gikondo mu kibanza No05/524 yaguma mu mutungo rusange wa Karimunda Gérard ugomba kuzungurwa. [56] Ababuranira Nyirakamana Marciana, Karangwa Denis na Central Motors and Parts Sarl, bavuga ko bagiriwe akarengane mu icibwa ry’urubanza RCA0221/05/HC/KIG rwaciwe tariki ya 02/04/2010, gashingiye ku kuba Urukiko Rukuru rutaritaye ku kimenyetso cy’umutungo wa Central Motors and Parts Sarl, rugashyira ikibanza cyayo No05/524 mu mitungo igomba kugabanwa n’umuryango wa Karimunda Gérard kandi uwo mutungo wareguriwe Central Motors and Parts Sarl ifite n’icyangombwa cyawo kuva mu mwaka wa 1986, ndetse Karimunda akaba nta migabane yari anafite muri iyo sosiyete. [57] Me Twayigize Jean Claude na Me Nsabimana Jean Baptiste baburanira urundi ruhande bavuga ko iyo ngingo nta shingiro ifite kuko Urukiko rwa Mbere rw’Iremezo rwa Kabaya rwari rwabujije Karimunda Gérard kongera kuvana umutungo we mu muryango awuha Nyirakamana Marciana. Bakomeza bavuga ko ibintu byanditse kuri Central Motors and Parts Sarl byahoze ari umutungo wa Karimunda Gérard, iby’icyo kibanza kivugwa Karimunda Gérard akaba yaragitanze inshuro ebyiri, kuko mu irage yakoze ku wa 25/08/1981, yari yaragihaye Nyirakamana Marciana, noneho nyuma mu mwaka wa 1990 akaba yaragihaye Central Motors and Parts Sarl nk’uko bigaragazwa n’ibaruwa yandikiye Minisitiri w’ingufu n’imirimo ya Leta amusaba ko yacyandika ku izina rya Central Motors and Parts Sarl, aho yanavugaga ko Central Motors and Parts Sarl igifite kuva ku wa 17/11/1986, bakaba basanga ari uburiganya ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 116

Page 143

yakomeje gukoresha kugira ngo atoneshe gusa Nyirakamana Marciana n’abana babyaranye yivanaho umutungo. [58] Karigirwa Edinace avuga ko icyo kibanza kivugwa byari ibibanza bibiri, byahujwe bikabyara ikibanza kimwe, naho Karimunda Hakizimana Alphonse avuga ko ibivuzwe na mushikiwe Karigirwa Edinace ubyarwa na Nyirakamana Marciana atari ukuri, ahubwo ikibanza kikaba cyari kimwe uretse ko cyari kuri numero ebyiri, kuko bari barashatse kugihindura bandika ko ari nomero 50108, nyamara kera cyari No05/524, nk’uko bigaragara mu ibaruwa Karimunda Gérard yandikiye MINITRAPE.

UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [59] Ku bijyanye no kumenya niba inzu iri i Gikondo mu kibanza No05/524 yaguma mu mutungo rusange wa Karimunda Gérard ugomba kuzungurwa, ntukomeze kwitwa uwa Central Motors and Parts Sarl, dosiye y’uru rubanza igaragaza ko igihe yatangaga irage ku wa 25/08/1981, Karimunda Gérard yagaragaje ko iyo nzu iri mu mutungo we, aho yayiragaga umugore we Nyirakamana Marciana. [60] Na none nk’uko byari byavuzwe haruguru muri dosiye y’uru rubanza, harimo ibaruwa No012/09/90/KG/RE, Karimunda Gérard yandikiye Minisitiri w’Imirimo ya Leta, Ingufu n’amazi, ku wa 12/09/1990 asaba ko icyo kibanza cyandikwa kuri Central Motors and Parts Sarl, hakaba harimo na “Contrat de donation” yakozwe ku wa 24/11/1992 aho Karimunda Gérard yahaga icyo kibanza Central Motors and Parts Sarl. NYIRAKAMANA N’ABANDI v. MUKASHARANGABO N’ABANDI 117

Page 144

[61] Ku bijyanye n’abagize iyo sosiyete Central Motors and Parts Sarl, “statuts” zayo zo ku wa 14/03/1991 zigaragaza ko igizwe na Nyirakamana Marciana n’abana be ari bo Karangwa Denis, Karigirwa Edinace, na Kantamage Jacqueline (cote 117- 120). [62] Isesengurwa ry’izi nyandiko zose, zigaragaza ko ikibanza kivugwa n’inzu irimo byahoze mu mutungo wa Karimunda kuko iyo utaba uwe, ntaba yaragaragaje ko awutanzeho irage yahaye umugore we Nyirakamana Marciana, nyuma akaza kubihindura akawuha Central Motors and Parts Sarl. [63] N’ubwo ariko nta kibuza umuntu gutanga impano mu mutungo we bwite, hakurikijwe amahame rusange yerekeye itangwa ry’impano avuga ko impano ari uburyo umuntu akoresha akibereyeho atanga ikintu afite yivanyeho mu buryo budasubirwaho, akagiha undi muntu uriho (entre vifs), uyunta kiguzi amuhaye (gratuit)14, ikigaragara ni uko inzu imaze kuvugwa iri i Gikondo mu kibanza No05/524 mu by’ukuri itari umutungo wa Karimunda wenyine, ahubwo nk’uko byavuzwe haruguru, yari ayisangiye na Nyirakamana Marciana, uyifiteho gusa uruhare rwa kimwe cya kabiri hakurikijwe ingingo ya 39 y’Itegeko N°59/2008 ryo ku wa 10/09/2008 rikumira kandi rihana ihohoterwa iryo ari ryo ryose rishingiye ku gitsina ryibukijwe haruguru, bikaba bitumvikana rero ukuntu Karimunda Gérard yari gutanga impano kuri uwo mutungo,

14La donation consiste essentiellement dans l’aliénation gratuite que le disposant fait de tout ou partie de ses biens ou droits au profit d’une autre personne. Lire commentaires de l’article 894, du Code Civil francais, DALLOZ, Edition 2009.

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 118

Page 145

ayiha undi muntu, ari we Central Motors and Parts Sarl, atabyumvikanyeho na Nyirakamana Marciana bari bawusangiye, hiyongereyeho ko yari yaranagaragaje mbere hose ko iyo nzu ayeguriye Nyirakamana Marciana mu irage Urukiko rwasanze ritagomba guhabwa agaciro. [64] Ikindi kigaragarira Urukiko, ni uko iriya mpano yakozwe mu buryo usanga bigamije gusumbanisha abana ba Karimunda Gérard, kuko nk’uko “Statuts” za Central Motors and Parts Sarl zibigaragaza, iyo sosiyete igizwe n’abana ba Nyirakamana Marciana bafatanyije na nyina, Urukiko rukaba rusanga guha iyo nzu iyo sosiyete byambura abandi bana babyawe na Karimunda Gérard batari aba Nyirakamana Marciana, uburenganzira bwo kuzungura Ise ku ruhare uyu yari afite kuri iyo nzu. [65] Hashingiwe ku bisobanuro bimaze gutangwa, Urukiko rurasanga impano yakorewe ku nzu iri i Gikondo mu kibanza No05/524, igahabwa Central Motors and Parts Sarl, mu buryo bwasobanuwe haruguru, yaratanzwe mu buryo burenganya, ari yo mpamvu nayo itagomba guhabwa agaciro, ahubwo igomba kuguma mu mutungo uzungurwa Karimunda Gérard yari asangiye naNyirakamana Marciana. Ku byerekeranye n’ibisabwa na GT Bank Ltd yatanze byo kwishyurwa umwenda Karimunda Gérard yasize afashe. [66] Me Nkurunziza François Xavier uburanira GT Bank Ltd avuga ko umuryango wa Karimunda Gérard ukwiye gutegekwa kwishyura GT Bank Ltd amafaranga uyifitiye angana na 47.416.566Frw hashingiwe ku rubanza RCOM321/10/HCC rwaciwe n’Urukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi, rukaba rwarategetse NYIRAKAMANA N’ABANDI v. MUKASHARANGABO N’ABANDI 119

Page 146

ko bakurikirana abazungura ba Karimunda Gérard kuri uwo mwenda Karimunda Gérard yapfuye atishyuye. [67] Me Twayigize avuga ko ku kibazo cy’izungura uko giteye nta na rimwe higeze hatangazwa umutungo wa Karimunda Gérard kubera ko no mu irage rye yavugaga ko agikora, urupfu rwe rukaba rwaratangajwe mu mwaka wa 2007, uwari gufasha kumenya uwo mutungo akaba ari“Liquidateur” Karambizi Canisius wari washyizweho, Urukiko rw’Ikirenga rukaba rwarategetse ko “liquidation” iba ihagaze, akaba asaba Urukiko kumwifashisha kugira ngo agaragaze imitungo yaKarimunda Gérard kuko ikizwi gusa ari ideni riri muri GT Bank Ltd, inzu bivugwa ko ari iya Central Motors and Parts Sarl ndetse n’igorofa iri mu Mujyi wa Kigali.

UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [68] Ingingo ya 2 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 “Ikirego nticyemerwa mu Rukiko iyo urega adafite [….] inyungu n’ubushobozi bwo kurega [….]”, iya 77 y’iryo Tegeko igaha umucamanza uburenganzira bwo “kutakira ikirego cy’umuburanyi, hatinjiwe mu mizi yacyo, kubera ko adafite [….] ububasha n’inyungu zo kurega”, naho iya 78 ikemerera umucamanza kubyutsa inzitizi nk’iyo aho urubanza rwaba rugeze hose, aho ivuga ko “umucamanza ushaka kubyutsa inzitizicyangwa impamvu ituma ikirego kitakirwa abyibwirije ashobora kuyibyutsa igihe cyose urubanza rutarasomwa.” [69] Dosiye y’uru rubanza igaragaraza, nk’uko bivugwa n’uburanira GT Bank Ltd, ko hari urubanza RCOM321/10/HCC ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 120

Page 147

rwaciwe n’Urukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi, rukaba rwarabaye ndakuka, aho abazungura ba Karimunda Gérard bategetswe kwishyura GT Bank Ltd amafaranga 47.416.566Frw Karimunda Gérard yapfuye atishyuye. [70] Urukiko rurasanga urubanza rumaze kuvugwa RCOM0321/10/HCC rugaragaza ko nta nyungu GT Bank Ltd ifite mu rubanza RCA0221/05/HC/KIG rwaciwe tariki ya 02/04/2010 rusabirwa gusubirwamo ku mpamvu z’akarengane, kubera ko ibyo isaba yabyemerewe mu rubanza RCOM0321/10/HCC, bityo rero hashingwe ku ngingo z’Itegeko N°21/2012 zavuzwe haruguru, ibisabwa na GT Bank Ltd bikaba bitakwakirwa ngo bisuzumwe. Ku byerekeranye n’indishyi zisabwa. [71] Ababuranira Nyirakamana Marciana bavuga ko uyu yashowe mu manza bitari ngombwa, bakaba basaba ko Urukiko rwazamugenera indishyi z’ikurikiranarubanza zingana na 2.000.000Frw ndetse n’igihembo cy’Avoka kingana na 6.000.000Frw, naho ababuranira urundi ruhande ruregwa mu karengane bakavuga ko indishyi zisabwa nta shingiro zifite kubera ko nta muntu wabashoye mu manza, ko ahubwo ari bo bakwiye guhabwa indishyi zingana na 5.000.000Frw kubera gushorwa mu manza na 2.000.000Frw y’igihembo cya Avoka. [72] Urukiko rurasanga indishyi zisabwa n’ababuranyi muri uru rubanza batazihabwa, kubera ko buri wese afite ibyo atsindiwe.

NYIRAKAMANA N’ABANDI v. MUKASHARANGABO N’ABANDI 121

Page 148

III. ICYEMEZO CY’URUKIKO [73] Rwemeye kwakira ikirego cy’akarengane rwashyikirijwe na Nyirakamana Marciana, abana behamwe na sosiyete barimo ya Central Motors and Parts Sarl, rugisuzumye rusanga gifite ishingiro kuri bimwe; [74] Rwemeje ko Mukasharangabo Eugénie afite uburenganzira kuri kimwe cya kabiri (1/2) cy’umutungo wa Karimunda Gérard bari basangiye kugeza igihe yataga urugo rwabo mu mwaka wa 1965; [75] Rwemeje ko Nyirakamana Marciana nawe afite uburenganzira kuri kimwe cya kabiri (1/2) cy’umutungo wa Karimunda Gérard bari basangiye kuva batangiye kubana ku wa 26/11/1970 kugeza ubu; [76] Rwemeje ko irage ryakozwe na Karimunda Gérard ku wa 25/08/1981 nta gaciro rifite, bityo izungura rye rikaba rigomba gukorwa nk’aho nta rage ryabayeho; [77] Rwemeje ko impano yakorewe ku nzu iri i Gikondo mu kibanza No05/524 nta gaciro ifite, bityo iyo nzu ikaba igomba kuguma mu mutungo wa Karimunda Gérard uzungurwa yari afatanyije na Nyirakamana Marciana; [78] Rwemeje ko abana bose ba Karimunda Gérard bafite uburenganzira bungana bwo kuzungura umutungo we, havuyemo uruhare rwa Nyirakamana Marciana n’urwa Mukasharangabo Eugénie rwavuzwe haruguru; [79] Rutegetse ko Nyirakamana Marcianan’abana be ku ruhande rumwe, naMukasharangabo Eugénie n’abana be ku ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 122

Page 149

rundi ruhande, gufatanya kwishyura amagarama y’urubanza angana na 100.000Frw, buri ruhande rukishyura icya kabiri cyayo kingana 50.000Frw. [80] Ruvuze ko urubanza RCA0221/05/HC/KIG, RCA0221/09/HC/KIG rwaciwe n’Urukiko Rukuru kuwa 02/04/2010 ruhindutse kuri bimwe.

NYIRAKAMANA N’ABANDI v. MUKASHARANGABO N’ABANDI 123

Page 151

IMANZA Z’UBUCURUZI

Page 153

NTEGEYE v. ECOBANK RWANDA LTD N’UNDI [Rwanda URUKIKO RW’IKIRENGA – RS/REV/INJUST/COM0001/16/CS (Rugege, P.J., Kanyange, Gakwaya, Hitiyaremye, Ngagi na Karimunda, J.) 9 Nzeri 2016] Amasezerano – Amasezerano yo kwikiranura – Iyo ababuranyi bagiranye ubwumvikane bagamije kwikiranura, ubwo bwumvikane bugomba guhabwa agaciro kuko amasezerano yo kwikiranura agira hagati y’abayagiranye agaciro kamwe n’ak’urubanza rwakemuwe ku buryo budasubirwaho mu rwego rwa nyuma – Iteka ryo kuwa 30/07/1888 ryerekeye amasezerano cyangwa imirimo nshinganwa, ingingo ya 591 n’iya 595. Indishyi – Indishyi z’akababaro – Indishyi mbonezamusaruro – Igihembo cya Avoka – Amafaranga y’ikurikiranarubanza – Mu gihe umuburanyi atsinzwe urubanza nta ndishyi z’akababaro ahabwa – Mu gihe urukiko rusanze ikirego cy’uwareze kidakwiye kwakirwa, uregwa ahabwa indishyi z’ikurikiranarubanza n’igihembo cy’avoka iyo yamwiyambaje – Kigenwa mu bushishozi bw’urukiko iyo rusanze icyo asaba kitari mu rugero. Incamake y’ikibazo: Mu mwaka wa 1993, Ntegeye Bernard yasabye BACAR S.A inguzanyo yo kubaka ikibanza No1200 giherereye Kacyiru-Nord arayihabwa. Nyuma asaba indi yo kurangiza, arayemererwa ariko Jenoside yakorewe Abatutsi iba atarahabwa amafaranga. Nyuma ya Jenoside yegereye BCDI SA yahindutse ECOBANK Rwanda Ltd ngo imuhe amafaranga yo 127

Page 154

kuyirangiza maze imuha 50.000.000Frw ibanje kugura umwenda wa BACAR SA wanganaga na 42.485.087Frw. Ibi byatumye

BCDI SA imuha gusa 7.516.953Frw nayo ataramufashije kurangiza kubaka inzu ye bituma asaba kongererwa umwenda. Mbere y’uko ahabwa igisubizo ku nyongera yari amaze gusaba, BCDI yamwishyuje 8.527.976Frw y’inyungu. Hagati aho igisubizo ku nguzanyo y’inyongera yagihawe nyuma y’amezi 11 kandi kitayimwemerera, ahubwo Banki ihita imusaba nta nteguza kuyishyura umwenda wose wari umaze kugera kuri 73.836.942Frw. Mu rwego rwo kwishyura uwo umwenda, Ntegeye Bernard yagiranye amasezerano na Banki, bemeranywa ko ayeguriye inyubako ye n’ibikoresho byari aho, byose hamwe bifite agaciro ka 45.607.038Frw, hasigara umwenda uhwanye na 28.232.000Frw. Bemeranyijwe na none ko Banki niramuka ishatse kugurisha iyo nzu, Ntegeye Bernard afite uburenganzira bwo kugura mbere y’abandi (droit de préemption/préférence) mu gihe cy’imyaka icumi (10). BCDI SA ntiyubahirije amasezerano maze kuwa 11/04/2003, igurisha iyo nzu Banki Nkuru y’u Rwanda, itamenyesheje Ntegeye Bernard. Ntegeye Bernard yaregeye Urukiko Nkemurampaka avuga ko BCDI S.A yishe y’amasezerano bagiranye, imugurishiriza inzu itabimubwiye, bityo asaba ko igurisha ryateshwa agaciro agahabwa uburenganzira bwo kugura mbere y’abandi, guca BCDI S.A. indishyi n’inyungu. Yagobokeshe kandi Banki Nkuru y’u Rwanda avuga ko icyemezo cyose cyafatwa cyayigiraho ingaruka. Urukiko Nkemurampaka rwanzuye ko BCDI S.A. itishe amasezerano, ko rusanga nta mpamvu Banki Nkuru y’u Rwanda yagobokeshwa ndetse ko ibyo kuburanisha uburenganzira bwo kumenyeshwa ubugure «droit de préférence», Ntegeye Bernard ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 128

Page 155

aburanisha, ari amagambo gusa (théorie) kuko bigaragara ko atashoboraga kuyigura mu gihe yananiwe kwishyura umwenda wa banki. Rwemeje cyakora ko Banki yateshutse ku nshingano zayo zo kumumenyesha iby’iryo gurisha, ruyitegeka kubitangira indishyi za 5.000.000Frw. Ntegeye ntiyishimiye icyo cyemezo, aregera Urukiko Rukuru avuga ko Urukiko Nkempurampaka rwakoze ikosa ryo kwakira ikirego cyo kwiregura cya BCDI S.A. bituma rumutegeka kwishyura iyo Banki umwenda ungana na 28.232.000Frw kandi cyari ikirego kigomba gutangwa ukwacyo mu rundi rukiko rubifitiye ububasha kuko icyo kirego kitakwitiranwa no kwiregura (défense au fond). Yavuze kandi ko Urukiko rwitiranyije ibintu kuko amabwiriza ya Banki Nkuru y’u Rwanda adakuraho amasezerano yabaye hagati ye na banki. Uru Rukiko rwemeje ko Ntegeye yari afite aho abarizwa hazwi na BCDI S.A. ku buryo itari kumubura kugira ngo imumenyeshe ko inzu ye igiye kugurishwa kandi ko inzu igurishwa, igihe cy’imyaka 10 kiri mu masezerano cyari kitararangira ku buryo byafatwa nk’aho Ntegeye yatakaje uburenganzira bwo kumenyeshwa igurisha, bityo rusesa ayo masezerano y’ubugure atamenyeshejwe. Urukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi kandi rwemeje ko nta mwenda Ntegeye akibereyemo BCDI S.A. ndetse rumugenera indishyi mbonezamusaruro n’iz’akababaro. BCDI S.A. na Banki Nkuru y’u Rwanda bajuririye icyo cyemezo mu Rukiko rw’Ikirenga bavuga ko uru rukiko rwemeje iseswa ry’amasezerano y’ubugure kandi bitarasabwe n’urega, ko rwavuze ko nta mwenda abereyemo BCDI S.A. kubwo kudasobanukirwa n’imikorere y’amabanki kubirebana n’uburyo umwenda n’inyungu zose ziwukumokaho bibarwa. NTEGEYE v. ECOBANK RWANDA LTD N’UNDI 129

Page 156

Urukiko rw’Ikirenga rwanzuye ko Ntegeye agifitiye BCDI S.A. umwenda rumutegeka kuyishyura 48.102.687Frw, bituma yandikira Umuvunyi Mukuru amusaba gusuzuma akarengane kabaye mu rubanza maze Umuvunyi Mukuru yandikira Perezida w’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga amusaba ko urubanza rwasubirishwamo ku mpamvu z’akarengane. Iburanisha rigitangira, ECOBANK Rwanda Ltd yibukije inzitizi yatanze yo kutakira ikirego cya Ntegeye kubera ko nyuma y’icibwa ry’urubanza mu Rukiko rw’Ikirenga bumvikanye ku irangizwa ryarwo kandi impande zombi zemeranywa ko ntawuzatesha agaciro amasezerano yo kwikiranura bagiranye. Ntegeye we yiregura avuga ko amasezerano bagiranye ari ayo kurangiza urubanza atari ayo kwikiranura. Incamake y’icyemezo: 1. Ikirego cy’uwasubirishije urubanza ku mpamvu z’akarengane ntigikwiye kwakirwa ngo gisuzumwe kuko amasezerano yo kwikiranura yagiranye na ECOBANK Rwanda kuri urwo rubanza rwose kandi agakorwa nyuma yaho atangiye ikirego cye ku Rwego rw’Umuvunyi yasimbuye urwo rubanza.

2. Ntaho urukiko rwahera rusuzuma ishingiro ry’indishyi z’akababaro n’iz’imbonezamusaruro zisabwa n’urega mu gihe ikirego cye kitakiriwe, naho amafaranga y’igihembo cya Avoka asaba akaba atayakwiriye kubera ko atsinzwe kuri uru rwego 3. Amafaranga y’ikurikiranarubanza n’igihembo cya Avoka asabwa na ECOBANK Rwanda Ltd na Banki Nkuru y’Igihugu, izo banki ziyakwiriye kuko zagombye gukurikirana iby’uru rubanza kandi ziyambaza ba Avoka bahembwa, bityo mu bushishozi bw’Urukiko buri banki ikaba igenewe amafaranga ibihumbi magana inani (800.000Frw) y’ikurikiranarubanza n’igihembo cya Avoka. ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 130

Page 157

Ikirego nticyakiriwe. Amagarama y’urubanza aherereye k’urega. Amategeko yashingiweho: Iteka ryo kuwa 30/07/1888 ryerekeye amasezerano cyangwa imirimo nshinganwa, ingingo ya 591 n’iya 595. Nta manza zifashishijwe. Urubanza I. IMITERERE Y’URUBANZA [1] Mu mwaka wa 1993, Ntegeye Bernard yasabye BACAR SA inguzanyo yo kubaka ikibanza No1200 giherereye Kacyiru- Nord arayihabwa. Nyuma asaba indi yo kurangiza, arayemererwa ariko Jenoside yakorewe Abatutsi iba atarahabwa amafaranga. Nyuma ya Jenoside yegereye BCDI S.A (ubu yitwa ECOBANK Rwanda Ltd) ngo imuhe amafaranga yo kurangiza inzu ye. BCDI S.A imuha 50.000.000Frw ibanje kugura umwenda wa BACAR S.A wanganaga na 42.485.087Frw. Ntegeye Bernard avuga ko 7.516.953Frw yasigaye atashoboye kurangiza kubaka inzu ye bituma asaba kongererwa umwenda. Mbere y’uko ahabwa igisubizo, Banki imwishyuza 8.527.976Frw y’inyungu, igisubizo ku nguzanyo y’inyongera kiza nyuma y’amezi 11 kimwangira inyongera y’umwenda yari yasabye, ahubwo asabwa guhita yishyura umwenda wose wari umaze kugera kuri 73.836.942Frw nta nteguza. [2] Mu rwego rwo kwishyura umwenda wa Banki, Ntegeye Bernard yagiranye amasezerano na Banki ku wa 09/02/2001, NTEGEYE v. ECOBANK RWANDA LTD N’UNDI 131

Page 158

bemeranywa ko ayeguriye inyubako ye n’ibikoresho byari aho, byose hamwe bifite agaciro ka 45.607.038Frw, asigarana umwenda wa 28.232.000Frw. Mu ngingo ya 6 y’ayo masezerano bemeranywa na none ko Banki iramutse ishatse kugurisha iyo nzu, Ntegeye Bernard afite uburenganzira bwo kugura mbere y’abandi (droit de préemption/préférence) mu gihe cy’imyaka icumi (10). Kuwa 11/04/2003, BCDI S.A yagurishije iyo nzu Banki Nkuru y’u Rwanda, itamenyesheje Ntegeye Bernard. [3] Ntegeye Bernard yaregeye Urukiko Nkemurampaka avuga ko BCDI S.A yishe ingingo ya 6 y’amasezerano bagiranye, imugurishiriza inzu itabimubwiye, asaba ko ibyakozwe byose ku kibanza No1200 giherereye Kacyiru-Nord biteshwa agaciro hakubahirizwa ibyemeranyijwe ko agomba kugura mbere y’abandi, guca BCDI SA indishyi n’inyungu. Ntegeye Bernard yagobokeshe kandi Banki Nkuru y’u Rwanda avuga ko icyemezo cyose cyafatwa cyayigiraho ingaruka. [4] Mu cyemezo cyafashwe kuwa 02/12/2005, Urukiko Nkemurampaka rwasanze nta mpamvu yo kogobokesha Banki Nkuru y’u Rwanda, rusanga kandi amasezerano yegurira BCDI SA inzu yarakozwe mu rwego rwo kwishyura igice cy’umwenda Ntegeye Bernard yari abereyemo iyo Banki kuko ari we wihereye Banki ibyangombwa by’iyo nzu birimo «fiche cadastrale», «contrat de location» na «autorisation de bâtir», rwemeza ko BCDI S.A itishe amasezerano, kuko nubundi igihe Ntegeye Bernard yasabaga ko ingingo ya 6 y’amasezerano yubahirizwa yari atarishyura umwenda abereyemo iyo Banki, ko atigeze amenyesha Banki amakuru ye kuva ayo masezerano yasinywa, kandi ko inzu yagurishijwe hashingiwe ku mabwiriza ya Banki Nkuru y’u Rwanda No05/2000 yo kuwa 29/03/2000, ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 132

Page 159

rwanzura ko nta kinyuranyije n’amategeko kiri mu masezerano iyo Banki yagiranye na Banki Nkuru y’u Rwanda cyangwa cyakorewe ku kibanza No1200 nyuma yaho hagurishijwe. [5] Urukiko rwasanze kandi ibya «droit de préférence», Ntegeye Bernard aburanisha, ari amagambo gusa (théorie) kuko atakwitwaza ko yari kugura iyo nzu yagurishijwe 100.000.000Frw mu gihe yari yananiwe kwishyura umwenda wa 28.232.000Frw. Rusanga cyakora Banki yarateshutse ku nshingano zayo zo kumenyesha Ntegeye Bernard iby’iryo gurisha, ruyitegeka kubitangira indishyi za 5.000.000Frw. [6] Ntegeye Bernard ntiyishimiye icyo cyemezo, aregera Urukiko Rukuru avuga ko Urukiko Nkempurampaka rwakoze ikosa ryo kwakira ikirego cyo kwiregura cya BCDI S.A bituma rumutegeka kwishyura iyo Banki umwenda ungana na 28.232.000Frw kandi cyari ikirego kigomba gutangwa ukwacyo mu rundi rukiko rubifitiye ububasha kuko icyo kirego kitakwitiranwa no kwiregura (défense au fond). Yavuze kandi ko Urukiko rwitiranyije ibintu kuko amabwiriza ya Banki Nkuru y’u Rwanda adakuraho amasezerano yabaye hagati ye na banki. [7] Mu rubanza NoRCOMA0020/05/11/HC/KIG rwaciwe kuwa 31/05/2007, Urukiko rwasanze kuva Ntegeye Bernard agiranye amasezerano y’iguriza na BCDI S.A yarayimenyesheje ko yaboneka kuri B.P.445 KIGALI, C/O PNUD-KIGALI, B.P.2920 KIGALI, C/O Birasamashyo Augustin cyangwa kuri B.P. 910 LUANDA - ANGOLA, bivuze ko Banki itari kumuburira kuri imwe muri ayo ma sanduku y’Iposita kugira ngo imumenyeshe ko inzu ye igiye kugurishwa kandi ko igihe cy’imyaka 10 kiri mu masezerano cyari kitararangira inzu NTEGEYE v. ECOBANK RWANDA LTD N’UNDI 133

Page 160

igurishwa ngo bifatwe ko Ntegeye Bernard yatakaje «droit de préférence». [8] Rwasanze kandi BCDI S.A yaragurishije inzu nta mwenda Ntegeye Bernard ayibereyemo kuko “extrait bancaire” ya konti No110-2534703-9 igaragaza ko kuwa 31/12/2002 nta mwenda Ntegeye Bernard yari akibereyemo banki. Urukiko rwanzuye ko BCDI S.A idakwiye kwitsitsa ku mabwiriza ya Banki Nkuru y’u Rwanda yashingiyeho igurisha inzu kuko ayo mabwiriza adakuraho amasezerano yakorewe imbere ya noteri kandi yabaye itegeko, rwemeza ko amasezerano yiswe «acte de cession d’immeuble» asheshwe, Ntegeye Bernard asubijwe inzu ye, kandi agenewe indishyi mbonezamusaruro z’ubukode bw’inzu angana na 6.000.000Frw na 5.000.000Frw y’indishyi z’akababaro. [9] BCDI S.A na Banki Nkuru y’u Rwanda bajuririye icyo cyemezo mu Rukiko rw’Ikirenga bavuga ko: a) Urukiko Rukuru rwaciye urubanza ku cyo rutaregewe kuko ntawasabye iseswa ry’amasezerano yo kuwa 09/02/2001; b) Ntegeye Bernard atakwitwaza ko atamenye iby’umwenda we kandi ku wa 30/03/2001 yarandikiwe yibutswa umwenda afite anasabwa gusobanura uko azawishyura ndetse na Avoka we Birasamashyo Augutsin akaba yarabonye ibaruwa yishyuza ku wa 26/04/2001; c) Urukiko Rukuru rwibeshye ruvuga ko nta mwenda Ntegeye Bernard akibereyemo banki rushingiye kuri “extraits de compte”, bigaragaza ko rutasobanukiwe ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 134

Page 161

n’imikorere y’amabanki kubirebana n’uburyo umwenda n’inyungu zose ziwukumokaho bibarwa; d) Habayeho kwibeshya ku mabwiriza No5/2000 ya Banki Nkuru y’u Rwanda, ruvuga ko adakuraho amasezerano yakorewe imbere ya noteri nyamara ayo masezerano adashobora kuvuguruza ayo mabwiriza kuko ashyira mu bikorwa ingingo ya 34 na 35 z’Itegeko No08/99 ryo kuwa 18/06/1999 ryerekeye imitunganyirize y’amabanki n’ibindi bigo by’imari. [10] Mu rubanza NoRCOMAA005/07/CS rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga kuwa 30/07/2010, Urukiko rwasanze: a) Haraciwe urubanza ku kitarasabwe kuko Urukiko Rukuru rwerekanye ko amasezerano y’ubugure hagati ya BCDI S.A na Banki Nkuru y’u Rwanda yabayemo uburiganya, uretse ko nabwo bwagombaga kugaragarizwa ibimenyetso, aho kuyasesa, rusesa ayabaye hagati ya Ntegeye Bernard na BCDI S.A bidafitanye isano; b) Kugira ngo inzu yatanzweho ingwate ive mu maboko ya Ntegeye Bernard, habanje kubaho ibiganiro, mu mwanya wa Ntegeye Barnard hasinya Birasamashyo Augustin warubifitiye uburenganzira busesuye, humvikanwa ko Ntegeye Bernard yegurira BCDI S.A inzu ye, ikiguzi cyayo kikavanwa mu mwenda yari agezemo ungana na 73.839.942Frw, umwenda usigara ungana na 28.232.000Frw, aya masezerano akaba ntaho ahuriye n’ingingo ya 17 y’Iteka ryo kuwa 15/05/1922 ryerekeye ubugwate bw’ibitimukanwa; c) Amasezerano yakozwe hagati ya Ntegeye Bernard na

BCDI S.A akwiye gufatwa nk’ayaturutse ku NTEGEYE v. ECOBANK RWANDA LTD N’UNDI 135

Page 162

bwumvikane bwa bombi hagamijwe gushaka uburyo bwo kwishyura ndetse n’Umushingamategeko akaba yarasanze amasezerano nkayo ntaho abangamiye uwatanze ingwate kuko mw’Itegeko No13/2010 ryo kuwa 07/05/2010 rihindura Itegeko no 10/2009 ryo kuwa 14/04/2009, mu ngingo yaryo ya 2, yabishimangiye kurushaho kuko ibyari bibujijwe gushyirwa mu masezerano y’ubugwate yemeye ko bijyamo, bityo ko ibikenewe kugira ngo amasezerano yo ku wa 09/02/2001 yitwe ay’ubugure byuzuye; [11] Urukiko rw’Ikirenga rwanzuye ruvuga ko Ntegeye Bernard afitiye BCDI S.A umwenda kuko nyuma yo gusuzuma inyandiko zose zijyanye n’inguzanyo yatanzwe, na konti za Ntegeye Bernard muri BCDI SA, impuguke Habimana José yasanze nta kigaragaza ko inguzanyo ya 28.232.000Frw yishyuwe kandi ko 70.000USD yanyuze kuri konti atari «solde créditaire» ahubwo ari «mouvement créditaire» kuko hazaga make make, ni uko rwemeza ko Ntegeye Bernard agomba kwishyura

BCDI S.A 48.102.687Frw akayatangira n’umusogongero wa Leta wa 4%. [12] Ntegeye Bernard yandikiye Umuvunyi Mukuru amusaba gusuzuma akarengane kabaye mu rubanza rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga ku wa 30/07/2010. Ku wa 18/06/2014 Umuvunyi Mukuru yandikiye Perezida w’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga amusaba ko urubanza NoRCOMAA005/07/CS rwaciwe kuwa 30/07/2010 rwasubirishwamo ku mpamvu z’akarengane. [13] Mu cyemezo No011/2016 cyo kuwa 29/02/2016, Perezida w’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga yasabye Ubwanditsi bw’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga gushyira kuri gahunda y’iburanisha urubanza NoRCOMAA005/07/CS rwaciwe n’Urukiko ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 136

Page 163

rw’Ikirenga kuwa 30/07/2010 kugira ngo hasuzumwe niba rwarabayemo akarengane. [14] Iburanisha ryabereye mu ruhame kuwa 15/06/2016, Ntegeye Bernard yunganiwe na Me Zawadi Stephen hamwe na Me Mubangizi Frank, ECOBANK Rwanda Ltd ihagarariwe na Me Munyaneza Remy naho Banki Nkuru y’u Rwanda iburanirwa na Me Byiringiro Jacques, Me Cyiza Clément na Me Murego Jean-Léonard. [15] Iburanisha rigitangira, ECOBANK Rwanda Ltd yibukije inzitizi yatanze yo kutakira ikirego cya Ntegeye Bernard kubera ko nyuma y’icibwa ry’urubanza mu Rukiko rw’Ikirenga bumvikanye ku irangizwa ryarwo kandi impande zombi zemeranywa ko ntawuzatesha agaciro amasezerano yo kwikiranura. II. IBIBAZO BIGIZE URU RUBANZA N’ISESENGURA RYABYO II.1. Kumenya niba amasezerano yo kwikiranura ku irangiza ry’urubanza akumira iyakira ry’ikirego kiregera kurusubirishamo ku mpamvu z’akarengane. [16] Me Munyaneza Remy uburanira ECOBANK Ltd avuga ko nyuma y’icibwa ry’urubanza mu Rukiko rw’Ikirenga, impande zombi zagiranye amasezerano yo kwikiranura (acte transactionnel), buri ruhande rugira icyo rwigomwa, ECOBANK Rwanda Ltd yemera guhara 14.102.687Frw, ihagarika n’imihango y’irangizarubanza yari yatangije, igamije gukumira ko ururabanza rwazasubirishwamo ingingo nshya cyangwa ku mpamvu z’akarengane, bumvikana ko nta ruhande NTEGEYE v. ECOBANK RWANDA LTD N’UNDI 137

Page 164

ruzasaba ko ayo masezerano ateshwa agaciro, ayo masezerano akorwa ECOBANK Rwanda Ltd itazi ko Ntegeye Bernard yiyambaje Urwego rw’Umuvunyi, bityo akaba asaba uru Rukiko gushingira ku ngingo ya 583 y’Igitabo cya gatatu cy’urwunge rw’amategeko mbonezamubano, rukemeza ko ikirego kitakiriwe. [17] Me Cyiza Clément, Me Murego Jean-Léonard na Me Byiringiro Jacques, baburanira Banki Nkuru y’u Rwanda, bavuga ko amasezerano y’ubwumvikane yari agamije kurangiza urubanza rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga, Ntegeye Bernard ayashyiraho umukono abifitiye ububasha n’ubushobozi kandi azi ko ingaruka zayo ari ukwikiranura na ECOBANK Ltd kugirango imitungo ye idatezwa cyamunara, bituma ECOBANK Ltd imwemerera kwishyura make kuyo yari yategetswe mu rubanza, bakaba basaba uru Rukiko kwemeza agaciro k’amasezerano yo kwikiranura, ikirego cya Ntegeye Bernard nticyakirwe. [18] Ntegeye Bernard avuga ko ariwe wasabye kumvikana na banki, ECOBANK Rwanda Ltd yemera ko yishyurwa 34.000.000Frw kubera ko yari izi ko ari ay’ubusa, ayatanga agamije gukumira cyamunara ku bintu bye bifite agaciro, ibyo bikaba ntaho bihuriye n’ibyo kurenganurwa yari yasabye Urwego rw’Umuvunyi. [19] Me Mubangizi Frank wunganira Ntegeye Bernard avuga ko kurangiza urubanza bidakwiye kwitiranywa no kurusubirishamo ku mpamvu z’akarengane, ko kwita amasezerano yakozwe ayo kwikiranura byaba ari ukuyahindurira inyito kuko nta kwikiranura kwabayeho ahubwo icyabaye ari ukurangiza urubanza. Asobanura ko Ntegeye Bernard yiyambaje Urwego rw’Umuvunyi muri 2012, ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 138

Page 165

amasezerano y’ubwumvikane akorwa muri 2014, ko iyo aba yarikiranuye na ECOBANK Rwanda Ltd yari kuba yararetse ikirego, kuba atarabikoze bikaba bigaragaza ko amasezerano atari ayo kwikiranura. Asoza avuga ko ntacyo ECOBANK Rwanda Ltd na Banki Nkuru y’u Rwanda bakemanga ikirego cyashikirijwe Urwego rw’Umuvunyi, bityo akaba asaba uru Rukiko kwakira ikirego cya Ntegeye Bernard akarenganurwa. [20] Me Zawadi Stephen nawe uburanira Ntegeye Bernard, avuga ko akarengane karegewe Umuvunyi Mukuru karenze amasezerano y’ubwumvikane, ko ibyabaye hagati ya Ntegeye Bernard na ECOBANK Rwanda Ltd byari uburyo bwo kurangiza urubanza Ntegeye Bernard adahutajwe, amasezerano y’ubwumvikane agabanya ikintu gito cyane ku karengane kariho kandi ko amasezerano ashyirwaho umukono, ECOBANK Rwanda Ltd yari ifite ibaruwa Ntegeye Bernard yandikiye Urwego rw’Umuvunyi, akaba asanga uru Rukiko ntacyo rufite cyo gusuzuma kubirebana na “acte transactionnel” ahubwo rukwiye kwakira ikirego rwashikirijwe, Ntegeye Bernard akarenganurwa aho akirengana.

UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [21] Ingingo ya 81, igika cya 1 y’Itegeko-Ngenga No03/2012/OL ryo ku wa 13/06/2012 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: 1° iyo hari ibimenyetso simusiga bigaragaza ruswa, ikimenyane cyangwa icyenewabo, byagize ingaruka ku NTEGEYE v. ECOBANK RWANDA LTD N’UNDI 139

Page 166

mikirize y’urubanza bikaba bitarigeze bimenywa n’uwatsinzwe mu gihe cy’iburana; 2° iyo mu icibwa ry’urubanza hirengagijwe amategeko n’ibimenyetso bigaragarira buri wese; 3° iyo urubanza rudashobora kurangizwa ukurikije imikirize yarwo.” [22] Ingingo ya 591 y’Igitabo cya gatatu cy’Urwunge rw’Amategeko Mbonezamubano iteganya ko: “amasezerano yo kwikiranura agira hagati y’abayagiranye agaciro kamwe n’ak’urubanza rwakemuwe ku buryo budasubirwaho mu rwego rwa nyuma. Ntawe ushobora gusaba ko ateshwa agaciro yitwaje ko yibeshye kubyo amategeko ateganya, cyangwa se yitwaje ko yahenzwe”. [23] Naho ingingo ya 595 yicyo Gitabo iteganya ko: “Amasezerano yo kwikiranura ku rubanza rwaciwe burundu rudashobora no kujuririrwa, ariko abikiranuye bakaba batari bazi ko urwo rubanza rwabayeho, nta gaciro namba agira. Iyo urwo rubanza abikiranuye batari bazi rugishobora kujurirwa, amasezerano yo kwikiranura ahamana agaciro kayo”. [24] Inyandiko zigize dosiye y’urubanza zigaragaza ko mu rubanza RCOMAA0005/07/CS rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga ku wa 30/07/2010, icyabanje gusuzumwa ari ukumenya niba Urukiko Rukuru rwa Repubulika rwaraciye urubanza kucyo rutaregewe ubwo rwemezaga ko amasezerano yiswe “acte de cession d’immeuble” aseswa, rwongera gusuzuma ikibazo cyo kumenya niba ECOBANK Rwanda Ltd yaraguze ingwate yahawe kugira ngo umwenda wa Ntegeye Bernard ugabanuke cyangwa ushireho, rukomeza rusuzuma niba koko nta madolari ya Amerika 70.000 Ntegeye Bernard yanyujije kuri konti ye ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 140

Page 167

muri ECOBANK Rwanda Ltd agamije kwishyura umwenda yarimo iyo banki, kuri izi ngingo zose Urukiko rusanga ubujurire bwa ECOBANK Rwanda Ltd bufite ishingiro, rubona gusuzuma ikibazo cy’umwenda Ntegeye Bernard asigayemo ECOBANK Rwanda Ltd, rwemeza ko kugeza urubanza rucibwa (kuwa 30/07/2010), uwo mwenda ungana na 48.102.687Frw. [25] Dosiye igaragaza kandi ko Urukiko rw’Ikirenga rwasuzumye ubujurire bwa Banki Nkuru y’u Rwanda bwasabaga kwemeza ko nta nenge iri mu masezerano y’ubugure bw’inzu yagiranye na ECOBANK Rwanda Ltd, Urukiko rusanga ubwo bujurire bufite ishingiro, naho ku bujurire bwuririye ku bundi bwa Ntegeye Bernard wasabaga ko hasuzumwa niba amasezerano yagiranye na ECOBANK Rwanda Ltd yaruhabirijwe, rwemeza ko ikirego cye kitakiriwe kuko kitigeze gisuzumwa n’Inkiko zibanza. [26] Muri dosiye harimo kandi amasezerano y’ubwumvikane (Acte transactionnel) yo ku wa 06/03/2014 hagati ya Ntegeye Bernard na ECOBANK Rwanda Ltd avuga ko impande zombi zumvikanye ku irangizwa ry’urubanza NoRCOMAA0005/07/CS rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga kuwa 30/07/2010, ingingo ya mbere y’ayo masezerano ivuga ko Ntegeye Bernard yemeye kwishyura 34.000.000Frw mu rwego rwo gukemura ikibazo afitanye na ECOBANK Rwanda Ltd kivugwa mu rubanza no RCOMAA0005/07/CS (“Monsieur Ntegeye Bernard s’engage à verser la somme de 34.000.000Frw à ECOBANK Rwanda en vue de liquider tous ses engagements qu’il a envers ECOBANK Rwanda Ltd en rapport avec le jugement ci haut cite”), naho ingingo ya 3 y’ayo masezerano ivuga ko impande zombi zemeranyijwe ku kurangiza urubanza NoRCOMAA0005/07/CS, ko bemeye nta gahato gukora NTEGEYE v. ECOBANK RWANDA LTD N’UNDI 141

Page 168

amasezerano yo kwikiranura bazi ingaruka zabyo, biyemeje kudakemenga ishyirwa mu bikorwa ryayo no kuyuhabiriza nta buryarya (les parties s’engagent à clôturer la mise en application de l’arrêt RCOMAA0005/07/CS de la Cour Suprême et à exécuter de bonne foi la transaction. Les parties s’interdisent expressément de remettre en cause la mise en application de la transaction et de ce fait les parties rappellent connaitre pleinement la portée de leur engagement volontaire auquel elles ont donné un consentement libre et éclairé.» (cote 95). [27] Urukiko rurasanga ingingo ya gatatu y’amasezerano yo kwikiranura Ntegeye Bernard yagiranye na ECOBANK Rwanda Ltd ku wa 06/03/2014, yumvikanisha neza ko akiranutse na banki ku ngingo zose z’urubanza, byumvikanisha ko kuva yari yarabaye umuburanyi muri urwo rubanza, kwikiranura kuri rwo bituma amasezerano yo kwikiranura agumana agaciro kayo mu ngingo zayo zose; byongeye kandi Ntegeye Bernard yavuze ko amasezerano yo kwikiranura yayasinye azi ingaruka zayo, no mu gihe cy’iburanisha yongera gushimangira ko atayahakana, nabyo bigaragaza ko ayo masezerano akwiye gufatwa nk’urubanza rwakemuwe ku rwego rwa nyuma kuburyo budasubirwaho kandi akaba adashobora guteshwa agaciro ku mpamvu y’uko umwe mubayashyizeho umukono yibeshye kubyo amategeko ateganya cyangwa se ko yahenzwe, bityo, ibyo Ntegeye Bernard n’abamwunganira baburanisha ko amasezerano yagiranye na ECOBANK Rwanda Ltd yari ayo kurangiza urubanza aho kuba ayo kwikiranura bikaba nta shingiro bifite. [28] Urukiko rurasanga kandi Ntegeye Bernard yarakoranye amasezerano yo kwikiranura na ECOBANK Rwanda Ltd nyuma yo gushyikiriza Urwego rw’Umuvunyi ikirego cye ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 142

Page 169

cy’akarangane kuko icyo kirego yagitanze muri 2012, yikiranura na ECOBANK Rwanda Ltd ku wa 06/03/2014, mu masezerano yo kwikiranura akaba yemera ko akiranutse na banki ku ngingo zose z’urubanza harimo n’izo yari yaregeye akarengane k’Urwego rw’Umuvunyi (sans réserve), byumvikanisha ko yikiranura na banki yemeraga ko nta karengane yakorewe kuko iyo bitaba bityo yari kugaragaza ingingo yikiranuyeho na banki n’izo atikiranuyeho nayo ku mpamvu y’uko atemera imikirize y’urubanza kuri zo, kuba atarabikoze atyo, ahubwo nyuma y’amasezerano yo kwikiranura akavuga ko ayo masezerano agarukira ku mwenda wategetswe n’Urukiko, bigaragaza kwivuguruza kuko yikiranuye ku ngingo z’urubanza zose ari uko yemera ko nta karengane kazirimo. [29] Urukiko rurasanga hashingiwe ku byasobanuwe no ku ngingo z’amategeko zibukijwe hejuru, ikirego cya Ntegeye Bernard cyo gusubirishamo urubanza RCOMAA0005/07/CS rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga kuwa 30/07/2010 ku mpamvu z’akarengane kidakwiye kwakirwa ngo gisuzumwe kuko amasezerano yo kwikiranura yagiranye na ECOBANK Rwanda kuri urwo rubanza rwose kandi agakorwa nyuma yaho atangiye ikirego cye ku Rwego rw’Umuvunyi yasimbuye urwo rubanza. II.2. Kumenya niba indishyi zisabwa na ECOBANK Rwanda Ltd, Banki Nkuru y’u Rwanda n’izisabwa na Ntegeye Bernard zikwiye gutangwa. [30] Me Munyaneza Remy uburanira ECOBANK Rwanda Ltd, avuga ko Ntegeye Bernard yashoye banki mu manza nta mpamvu kubwo kutubahiriza amasezerano yo kwikiranura, akaba asaba ko yabiryorezwa indishyi z’ikurikiranarubanza n’igihembo cya Avoka bingana na 2.000.000Frw. NTEGEYE v. ECOBANK RWANDA LTD N’UNDI 143

Page 170

[31] Me Byiringiro Jacques uburanira Banki Nkuru y’Igihugu, avuga ko iyo banki yashowe mu manza ku mpamvu z’amaherere akaba abisabira amafaranga y’ikurikiranarubanza n’igihembo cya Avoka angana na 2.000.000Frw. [32] Me Mubangizi Frank na Me Zawadi Stephen bunganira Ntegeye Bernard bavugiye mu nama ntegurarubanza ko uwo bunganira ariwe ukwiriye indishyi z’akababaro zingana na 50.000.000Frw, iz’imbonezamusaruro zingana n’amadolari ya Amerika 493.584 n’igihembo cy’Abavoka babiri kingana na 15.000.000Frw. [33] Urukiko rurasanga ku birebana n’indishyi z’akababaro n’indishyi mbonezamusaruro Ntegeye Bernard asaba ntaho rwahera rusuzuma ishingiro ryazo kuko ikirego cye kitakiriwe, naho amafaranga y’igihembo cya Avoka asaba akaba atayakwiriye kubera ko atsinzwe kuri uru rwego. [34] Urukiko rurasanga, ku birebana n’amafaranga y’ikurikiranarubanza n’igihembo cya Avoka asabwa na ECOBANK Rwanda Ltd na Banki Nkuru y’Igihugu, izo banki ziyakwiriye kuko zagombye gukurikirana iby’uru rubanza kandi ziyambaza ba Avoka bahembwa, bityo mu bushishozi bw’Urukiko buri banki ikaba igenewe amafaranga ibihumbi magana inani (800.000Frw) y’ikurikiranarubanza n’igihembo cya Avoka. III. ICYEMEZO CY’URUKIKO [35] Rwemeje ko inzitizi yatanzwe na ECOBANK Rwanda Ltd ifite ishingiro; ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 144

Page 171

[36] Ruvuze ko ikirego cya Ntegeye Bernard cyo gusubirishamo ku mpamvu z’akarengane urubanza NoRCOMAA0005/07/CS rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga kuwa 30/07/2010 kitakiriwe; [37] Rutegetse Ntegeye Bernard guha ECOBANK Rwanda Ltd amafaranga y’ikurikiranarubanza n’igihembo cya Avoka yose hamwe angana n’ibihumbi magana inani (800.000Frw); [38] Rutegetse Ntegeye Bernard guha Banki Nkuru y’u Rwanda amafaranga y’ikurikiranarubanza n’igihembo cya Avoka yose hamwe angana n’ibihumbi magana inani (800.000Frw); [39] Rutegetse Ntegeye Bernard gutanga amagarama y’urubanza angana na 100.000Frw.

NTEGEYE v. ECOBANK RWANDA LTD N’UNDI 145

Page 173

IKIGO CY’IMISORO N’AMAHORO(RRA) v. ENGEN RWANDA Ltd [Rwanda URUKIKO RW’IKIRENGA – RCOMA0027/12/CS (Mugenzi, P.J., Kanyange na Nyirinkwaya, J.) 13 Gicurasi 2016] Amategeko agenga amasosiyete – Igurisha ry’imigabane – Igurisha ry’umutungo wa sosiyete – Igurisha ry’imigabane ya sosiyete ntiryakwitiranywa n’igurisha ry’umutungo wayo kandi ryo ntirisoreshwa – Itegeko Nº6/1988 ryo kuwa 12/02/1988 rigenga amasosiyete y’ubucuruzi, ingingo ya 8. Incamake y’ikibazo: TOTAL RWANDA S.A.R.L yari sosiyete nyarwanda yaje guhindura izina iba ENGEN RWANDA Ltd. Yari igizwe n’abanyamigabane babiri aribo TOTAL OUTRE MER S.A yo mu gihugu cy’Ubufaransa yari ifite imigabane hafi ya yose n’undi witwa Momar Nguer wari ufite umugabane umwe yaje kwegurira TOTAL OUTRE MER S.A. Sosiyete TOTAL OUTRE MER SA yagurishije imigabane yayo yose yari ifite muri TOTAL RWANDA S.A.R.L na ENGEN INTERNATIONAL HOLDINGS (MAURITIUS Ltd) ku giciro cya 6.867.000USD. Nyuma yaho inama rusange y’abanyamigabane yemeje ko izina rya TOTAL RWANDA SARL rihinduka ENGEN RWANDA Ltd, ibiherwa n’icyemezo cya Rwanda Development Board (RDB) kibigaragaza. Ikigo cy’imisoro n’amahoro (RRA) cyaje kumenyesha TOTAL RWANDA S.A.R.L ko irimo umusoro ku nyungu n’umusoro ku 147

Page 174

nyongeragaciro ingana na 2.150.513.368Frw ariko nyuma y’ubujurire ENGEN RWANDA Ltd yashyikirije Komiseri Mukuru wa RRA, yemeje ko umusoro ugomba kwishyurwa ungana na 1.923.619.013Frw. TOTAL RWANDA S.A.R.L/ENGEN RWANDA Ltd yaregeye Urukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi isaba kuvanirwaho uwo musoro kuberako TOTAL OUTRE MER yaragurishije imigabane yari ifite muri TOTAL RWANDA SARL, ibyo bikaba bitandukanye no kugurisha umutungo wa sosiyete ugizwe n’ibintu bitandukanye kandi icyo gikorwa kikaba kidasoreshwa. RRA ivuga ko habayeho igurisha ry’imutungo kuko imigabane itagizwe n’impapuro gusa ahubwo igizwe n’imitungo hamwe n’imyenda bya sosiyete, ko n’ubwo amasezerano yakozwe avuga ko ari igurisha ry’imigabane, mu ngingo yayo ya 2, agace ka mbere havugwamo ko ari imigabane n’ibijyanye nayo, bivuze ko n’imitungo yagurishijwe, kandi ibyo bikaba bisoreshwa. Urukiko rwemeje ko nta musoro ENGEN RWANDA Ltd igomba kwishyura kuko nta gurisha ry’imutungo ryabayeho ko ahubwo ko ari iry’imigabane ryakozwe n’umunyamigabane wa TOTAL RWANDA S.A.R.L. RRA yajuriye mu Rukiko rw’Ikirenga ivuga ko Urukiko rwirengagije ibimenyetso bigaragaza ko habayeho igurisha ry’imitungo. ENGEN RWANDA Ltd ivuga ko ntacyo yagurishije cyatuma icibwa umusoro kubera ko uwagurishije ari TOTAL OUTRE MER kandi amasezerano y’igurisha yakozwe agaragaza neza ko icyagurishijwe ari imigabane kuko kugurisha uburenganzira bitandukanye no kugurisha umutungo wa sosiyete. ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 148

Page 175

Inshuti y’urukiko (amicus curiae), yari yiyambajwe muri uru rubanza yatanze igitekerezo igaragaza ko ibikorwa byabaye ari uguhererekanya imigabane, bikaba bisonewe gutanga imisoro ku nyongeragaciro kuko bitandukanye n’ibikorwa by’ubucuruzi. Incamake y’icyemezo: Kuba nta kindi kimenyetso RRA ishingiraho ivuga ko habaye igurisha ry’umutungo wa TOTAL RWANDA SARL, bituma hagomba gushingirwa ku bivugwa mu masezerano agaragaza ko icyakozwe ari igurisha ry’imigabane ryakozwe na TOTAL OUTRE MER. Ibi kandi bihura n’umwanzuro w’Inshuti y’Urukiko wagaragaje ko nyuma yo gusuzuma ibikorwa byabaye, icyabaye ari ihererekanya ry’imigabane. Ubujurire nta shingiro bufite. Nta gihindutse ku mikirize y’urubanza rwaciwe n’urukiko rubanza. Amagarama y’urubanza aherereye ku wareze. Amategeko yashingiweho: Itegeko Nº21/2012 ryo kuwa 14/06/2012 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi, ingingo ya 9. Itegeko Nº6/1988 ryo kuwa 12/02/1988 rigenga amasosiyete y’ubucuruzi, ingingo ya 8. Imanza zifashishijwe: Frank Lyon co v United States, 435 U.S. 561 (1978) Beauvallet v Naturana, No81-1372881-16259, 7 Mars 1984, Cour de cassation, chambre Commerciale. IKIGO CY’IMISORO N’AMAHORO (RRA) v. ENGEN RWANDA Ltd 149

Page 176

Salomon v Salomon & Co Ltd [1896] UKHL 1 (16 November 1896). Urubanza I. IMITERERE Y’URUBANZA [1] TOTAL RWANDA S.A.R.L ni sosiyete nyarwanda yari igizwe n’abanyamigabane babiri aribo TOTAL OUTRE MER S.A (de droit français) yari ifitemo imigabane hafi yose kuko undi munyamigabane, Didier Harel, yari afite umugabane umwe gusa yaje guha Momar Nguer. Kuwa 30/07/2008, hakozwe amasezerano hagati ya TOTAL OUTRE MER S.A, ENGEN INTERNATIONAL HOLDINGS (MAURITIUS) Ltd na ENGEN PETROLEUM LIMITED agamije igurisha n’igura ry’imigabane muri TOTALRWANDA S.A.R.L, naho kuwa 27/10/2008, inama rusange y’abanyamigabane yemeza itangwa ry’umugabane Momar Nguer yari afite muri TOTAL RWANDA SARL akawuha TOTAL OUTRE MER SA, n’itangwa ry’imigabane yose TOTAL OUTRE MER yari ifite muri

TOTAL

RWANDA S.A.R.L ikayiha

ENGEN INTERNATIONAL HOLDINGS (MAURITIUS) Ltd, iyi nayo yishyura 6.867.000USD. [2] ENGEN INTERNATIONAL HOLDINGS Ltd yari yaguze imigabane yose muri TOTAL RWANDA S.A.R.L, yahaye umugabane umwe Adama Soro, Umuyobozi mukuru wayo, naho kuwa 13/02/2009, inama rusange y’abanyamigabane yemeza ko izina rya sosiyete rihinduka rikaba

ENGEN

RWANDA Ltd inabiherwa icyemezo n’Umwanditsi Mukuru wa Rwanda Development Boad (RDB). ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 150

Page 177

[3] Ikigo cy’imisoro n’amahoro (RRA) cyaje kumenyesha TOTAL RWANDA S.A.R.L ko irimo imisoro ingana na 2.150.513.368Frw, nyuma y’ubujurire hasigara umusoro ungana na 1.923.619.013Frw. TOTAL RWANDA S.A.R.L/ENGEN RWANDA Ltd yaregeye kuvanirwaho uwo musoro, Urukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi rusuzuma ikibazo kimwe kirebana no kumenya niba harabayeho igurisha ry’imigabane cyangwa igurisha ry’imitungo ya TOTAL RWANDA S.A.R.L, rigomba gushingirwaho icibwa umusoro ku nyungu n’umusoro ku nyongeragaciro. [4] Urukiko rwemeje ko ikirego cya TOTAL RWANDA S.A.R.L yahindutse ENGEN/RWANDA Ltd gifite ishingiro, ko nta musoro igomba gukurikiranwaho kuko nta mutungo yagurishije, rubishingiye ko TOTAL OUTRE MER SA yagurishije ENGEN INTERNATIONAL HOLDINGS Ltd imigabane yari ifite muri TOTAL/RWANDA S.A.R.L, ko ababuranyi n’urukiko bemeranya ko iyo sosiyete, ikoresheje imbaraga yahabwaga n’uko ari “actionnaire majoritaire”, yahindutse ENGEN RWANDA Ltd, ko rero igikorwa TOTAL OUTRE MER SA yakoze ubwacyo kitaba ishingiro ry’umusoro ugomba gucibwa TOTAL RWANDA S.A.R.L kuko RRA itagaragaza ikimenyetso cy’uko hari umutungo ubwayo yagurishije, ko kandi n’ubwo imvugo yayo yahabwa agaciro, ntacyo

TOTAL

RWANDA S.A.R.L yabazwa kuko amasezerano agira agaciro hagati y’abayagiranye. [5] Rwasobanuye kandi ko kuba imitungo ya TOTAL RWANDA S.A.R.L yaragaragaye muri ‘’états financiers’’ za ENGEN RWANDA Ltd, RRA itabishingiraho ngo yemeze ko yagurishijwe kuko kwaba ari ukugenekereza mu mvugo gusa, ko no kuba RRA ivuga ko nyuma y’uko TOTAL OUTRE MER IKIGO CY’IMISORO N’AMAHORO (RRA) v. ENGEN RWANDA Ltd 151

Page 178

SA yegukanye imigabane yose ya TOTAL RWANDA SARL, iyi ya nyuma nta bushobozi yari igifite, cyane ko n’amategeko atateganyaga sosiyete y’umuntu umwe, iyo mpamvu itarengera RRA kuko bifashwe gutyo TOTAL OUTRE MER SA ariyo yagombye gukurikiranwa nk’iyakoze igikorwa RRA ishingiraho ica umusoro, ko kandi nubwo iyo mpamvu yakwemerwa, TOTAL RWANDA SARL itaregwa kuko yaba yarahise itakaza ububasha hashingiwe ku ngingo ya mbere y’itegeko ryagengaga amasosiyete. Rwavuze kandi ko hatagomba guteshwa agaciro ihame ry’uko sosiyete igira ubuzimagatozi butandukanye n’ubw’abayigize. [6] Rwasanze ahubwo igurisha ry’imigabane no guhinduza izina rya sosiyete byarubahirijwe, na RRA yemera guha ENGEN RWANDA Ltd TIN yayo izi neza ko ariyo yahoze ari TOTAL RWANDA SARL, ikaba kandi itagaragaza ko icyo gikorwa cyari kigamije uburiganya bwo guhunga imisoro. [7] RRA yajuririye Urukiko rw’Ikirenga, ivuga ko umucamanza wa mbere yirengagije ibimenyetso bigaragaza ko habayeho igurisha ry’imitungo ya TOTAL RWANDA S.A.R.L, ko atari igurisha ry’imigabane. [8] Urubanza rwaburanishije mu ruhame ku matariki atandukanye, RRA ihagarariwe na Me Kabibi Spéciose hamwe na Me Gasana Raoul, TOTAL/RWANDA SARL/ENGEN ihagarariwe na Me Nsengiyumva Abel, Me Kamanzi Désiré hamwe na Me Kabera Jean Claude, impande zombi zemeranya ko nta kibazo zifite ku byerekeye umusoro ku bihembo (TPR) waciwe TOTAL RWANDA/ENGEN RWANDA Ltd, ikibazo kigomba gusuzumwa kikaba gishingiye gusa ku kumenya niba harabayeho igurisha ry’umutungo cyangwa igurisha ry’imigabane. ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 152

Page 179

[9] Mu isesengura ry’icyo kibazo, Urukiko rwasanze hakenewe impuguke yatanga ibitekerezo mu rwego rw’amategeko, rugena Bwana Habimana Pie umwarimu muri Kaminuza y’u Rwanda, nk’inshuti y’Urukiko (amicus curiae), watanze ibitekerezo bye mu nyandiko yagejejwe no ku baburanyi, bakaba barahawe umwanya wo kugira icyo bayivugaho mu iburanisha ryo kuwa 24/11/2015, n’inshuti y’urukiko ihari. II. IKIBAZO KIGIZE URUBANZA N’ISESENGURWA RYACYO Kumenya niba Urukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi rwaribeshye mu kwemeza ko hatabayeho igurisha ry’imitungo ya TOTAL RWANDA SARL. [10] Ababuranira RRAbavuga ko urukiko rwirengagije ibimenyetso bigaragaza ko habayeho igurisha ry’imutungo kuko imigabane itagizwe n’impapuro gusa ahubwo igizwe n’imitungo hamwe n’imyenda bya sosiyete, ko n’ubwo amasezerano yakozwe avuga ko ari igurisha ry’imigabane, mu ngingo yayo ya 2, agace ka mbere havugwamo ko ari imigabane n’ibijyanye nayo, bivuze ko n’imitungo yagurishijwe, kandi iyo mitungo ikaba yaravuye mu ibaruramari rya TOTAL RWANDA S.A.R.L ikajya mu rya ENGEN S.A.R.L, ko no mu gusaba ko imitungo yandikwa kuri ENGEN RWANDA, bavuze ko haguzwe imitungo n’imyenda (assets and liabilities) bya TOTAL RWANDA S.A.R.L. [11] Basobanura ko ubwo urukiko rwemeje ko hagurishijwe imigabane yose, rwagombaga no kwemeza ko imitungo yose yagurishijwe, kuko uburenganzira umuntu afite ku migabane IKIGO CY’IMISORO N’AMAHORO (RRA) v. ENGEN RWANDA Ltd 153

Page 180

bungana n’ubwo afite ku mutungo, ko kandi kuba abo baburana bavuga ko uwagurishije imigabane ari TOTAL OUTRE MER, ntacyo byahindura kuko mu gihe iyo sosiyete yari “actionnaire majoritaire”, ntakiyitandukanya na

TOTAL

RWANDA S.A.R.L. Bavuga ko ikindi gishimangira ko habaye igurisha ry’umutungo ari uko corporate income tax (CIT) declaration 2009 ya ENGEN RWANDA Ltd yerekanye ko imitungo ya TOTAL RWANDA SARL iri muri ‘’états financiers’’z’iyo sosiyete ya mbere, ko rero hashingiwe ku ngingo ya 4 agace ka 11 y’Itegeko Nº16/2005 ryo kuwa 18/08/2005 rigena umusoro utaziguye ku musaruro ivuga ku nkomoko y’umusaruro, TOTAL RWANDA/ENGEN RWANDA igomba kwishyura umusoro yaciwe kuko iyo ngingo iteganya igikorwa cyose cyabyaye inyungu. [12] Bavuga kandi ko umucamanza wa mbere yemeje ko nyuma y’uko TOTAL OUTRE MER yegukanye imigabane yose, TOTAL RWANDA S.A.R.L itashoboraga gusoreshwa kuko itari gukomeza gufatwa nka sosiyete hashingiwe ku ngingo ya mbere y’Itegeko ryagengaga amasosiyete, yirengagiza ariko ko hadasora sosiyete gusa kuko n’ibikora nkayo cyangwa amashyirahamwe, uko byaba biteye kose bisora, iyo bikora imirimo igomba kubyara inyungu nk’uko biteganywa n’ingingo ya 38.6 y’Itegeko Nº16/2005 ryo kuwa 18/08/2005 rigena umusoro utaziguye ku musaruro. Banavuga ko n’ubwo icyo gihe TOTAL RWANDA S.A.R.L itariho mu buryo bw’itegeko nk’uko umucamanza yabibonye, yitwaye nka sosiyete kuko yabonye inyungu kubyo yagurishije. [13] Ababuranira RRA bavuga kandi ko, n`ubwo TOTAL RWANDA S.A.R.L yari igizwe n’abanyamigabane babiri, igihe cy`igurisha TOTAL OUTRE MER itavanguye imigabane, ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 154

Page 181

bivuze ko habaye igurisha rya sosiyete yose n`ibiyigize. Bongeraho ko Itegeko ryagengaga amasezerano ubwo igurisha ryabaga, ryateganyaga ko sosiyete yagombaga kuba igizwe nibura n’abanyamigabane babiri, ariko igihe cy’igurisha TOTAL OUTRE MER ikaba yari umunyamigabane umwe, bivuze ko ibyo yakoze bigomba gufatwa ko byakozwe na TOTAL RWANDA S.A.R.L kuko bari bamwe, ko rero imitungo yagurishijwe na TOTAL RWANDA S.A.R.L. Banavuga ko mu mategeko y`ibindi bihugu, hari “notion” ya “corporate veil” igamije kugaruza imisoro mu gihe sosiyete yihishe inyuma y`igikorwa igamije guhunga imisoro. [14] Bakomeza basobanura ko isesengura ry’amasezerano yavuzwe haruguru rigaragaza ko mu kugurisha imigabane hanagurishijwe imitungo ya sosiyete, ko mu ngingo ya 6.4.1 havugwa ko uwaguze azi uko imitungo imeze, ko kandi uwagurishije atazirengera ibyagaragara nyuma, naho mu ngingo ya 5.1(a) TOTAL RWANDA S.A.R.L ikaba yarambuwe uburenganzira bwo kugurisha, gukodesha cyangwa gutanga imitungo itimukanwa (..), ibyo byose bikaba bigaragaza ko hagurishijwe imitungo aho kuba imigabane gusa. [15] Batanze kandi urugero rw’urubanza rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga muri Amerika (Frank Lyon co v United States), rwemeje ko uburenganzira bwa sosiyete bwo kugurisha imitungo yayo ari bwo buranga ba nyiri imitungo, ko na TOTAL RWANDA S.A.R.L itari kwemera kwamburwa uburenganzira ku mitungo yayo na

ENGEN INTERNATIONAL iyo iyo mitungo iba ikiri iyayo, ahubwo ari icyemeza ko nayo yari yagurishijwe kandi bikaba bigaragarira mu ngingo ya 5.1.(b), (c), (d), (e),(f)… y’amasezerano. IKIGO CY’IMISORO N’AMAHORO (RRA) v. ENGEN RWANDA Ltd 155

Page 182

[16] Basobanura kandi ko impamvu mu baregwa harimo ENGEN RWANDA Ltd,byatewe n`uko TOTAL RWANDA S.A.R.L yaburiwe irengero ahubwo haboneka ENGEN RWANDA, ko ariko n`ubwo yaburiwe irengerero mu buryo bw`impapuro, ibikorwa byayo bigihari, ikaba kandi yaragombaga kumenyesha RRA ko ihinduye statuts, igakorerwa igenzura nk’uko biteganywa n’ingingo ya 10 y’Itegeko Nº25/2005 ryavuzwe haruguru, ko kandi kuba mu rwego rw`amategeko TOTAL RWANDA ikiriho, kuko hari inshingano yasize itarangije kandi hari imitungo zarangirizwaho, itegeko rigenga umusoro ku nyongeragaciro (TVA) rikaba ryemera ko icibwa umusoro ujyanye n`igurisha ryakozwe. [17] Ababuranira TOTAL RWANDA SARL /ENGEN RWANDA Ltdbavuga ko nta gishya RRA yazanye mu bujurire, kuko amasezerano yakozwe asobanura neza ko icyagurishijwe ari imigabane kandi n’Itegeko rigenga amasosiyete riteganya uburyo igurisha ry’imigabane rikorwa (art 75), TOTAL OUTRE MER ikaba yaragurishije uburenganzira yari ifite muri TOTAL RWANDA SARL, bitandukanye no kugurisha umutungo wa sosiyete ugizwe n’ibintu bitandukanye (amamodoka, ibibanza, ama konti, n’ibindi), ko Momar wari ufite umugabane umwe yemeye ko igurisha riba, sosiyete ikaba yarasigaye kuko imigabane itari iyayo, isigarana umutungo wayo ugizwe n`ibintu bitandukanye (ibibanza, amamodoka, biens réalisables, stock ya essence...), ko ahubwo bibaza icyo TOTAL RWANDA S.A.R.L yagurishije cyatuma icibwa umusoro mu gihe uwagurishije ari TOTAL OUTRE MER. [18] Bavuga ko iyo haza kuba haragurishijwe umutungo wa TOTAL RWANDA S.A.R.L, RRA yari kubarira umusoro ku gaciro kawo kari karenze miliyari esheshatu z’amafaranga y’u ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 156

Page 183

Rwanda, ukaba utari kugurishwa miliyoni ebyiri zonyine, ko kandi igurisha ry’imigabane ryanabaye mu yandi masosiyete ariko akaba ataraciwe umusoro, RRA ikaba rero itagomba kwitiranya igurisha ry’imigabane n’iry’umutungo, kuko wo ari uwa sosiyete nkuko byemejwe mu rubanza rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga rwo mu Bwongereza, haburana Macaura v Nothem Assurance company, ndetse no mu rubanza rwaciwe n’Urukiko Rusesa imanza rwo mu Bufaranga haburana sosiyete Beauvallet v sosiyete Naturana, ko n’ingingo ya 8 y’Itegeko ryagengaga amasezerano ubwo igurisha ryabaga nayo yateganyaga ko sosiyete igira umutungo wayo bwite. [19] Basobanura kandi ko impamvu ENGEN RWANDA Ltd yasabye ko umutungo uyandikwaho byatewe n’uko izina rya sosiyete ryari ryahindutse nk’uko byari byemeranyijweho mu ngingo ya 4 y’amasezerano kuko, nka “propriété intellectuelle” ya TOTAL, iryo zina ritari mu byagurishijwe, bakanavuga ko TOTAL RWANDA S.A.R.L na ENGEN RWANDA Ltd zitigeze zibaho nka sosiyete ebyiri zitandukanye, kandi sosiyete imwe ikaba itakwigurishaho imitungo, ko ahubwo “états financiers” za ENGEN ari nazo za TOTAL RWANDA, yahindutse ENGEN. [20] Ku birebana n’ingingo ya 6.4.1 y’amasezerano RRA iburanisha, bavuga ko n’ubwo sosiyete itandukanye n’abanyamigabane bayo ikanagira imitungo yayo, iyo abanyamigabane bemeje gushora imari muri sosiyete baba bagamije ko ikora ubucuruzi mu nyungu zabo (avoir des dividendes), ko rero na

ENGEN

INTERNATIONAL yagombaga kumenya uko sosiyete ihagaze n’ubwo itari igiye kugura imitungo yayo. Bavuga kandi ko kuba hari ibyo TOTAL

RWANDA S.A.R.L yabujijwe gukora itabiherewe IKIGO CY’IMISORO N’AMAHORO (RRA) v. ENGEN RWANDA Ltd 157

Page 184

uburenganzira na ENGEN INTERNATIONAL, kwari ukugira ngo uko sosiyete ihagaze bidahinduka mu gihe ihererekanya ry’imigabane ritararangira. Basanga urubanza rwa Frank Lyon v United States ntacyo rwafasha kuko ikibazo kirimo gitandukanye n’icyo mu rubanza ruburanwa. [21] Ku birebana n’amahame y’isoresha, bavuga ko RRA yatangiye ivuga ko hari inyungu zitamenyekanishijwe zavuye mu igurisha ry’imigabane, ko nyuma y’uko TOTAL RWANDA S.A.R.L iyisobanuriye ko imibane yagurishijwe itari iyayo ahubwo yari iya TOTAL OUTRE MER kandi nka sosiyete y’inyamahanga ikaba itarashoboraga gusoreshwa, RRA yahinduye ivuga ko ari umusoro ku mutungo wagurishijwe, bivuze ko yashatse uburyo bwose yabonamo umusoro. [22] Basanga kandi “notion” ya “corporate veil” itashingirwaho, kuko itegeko ariryo rishyiraho umusoro nk’uko biteganywa n’ingingo ya 81 y’Itegeko Nshinga, hakaba hatanashingirwa ku ngingo ya 4 y’Itegeko Nº16/2005 ryo kuwa 18/08/2005 ryavuzwe haruguru kuko ivuga icyagurishijwe ku butaka bw’u Rwanda, usibye ko iyo iba ikemura ikibazo gihari, RRA itari gusaba ko hakoreshwa “notion” ya “corporate veil”. [23] Ku birebana n’imiterere ya TOTAL RWANDA S.A.R.L ubwo hakorwaga amasezerano y’igurisha kuwa 30/07/2008, abayiburanira bavuga ko nubwo ayo masezerano yashyizweho umukono kuri iyo tariki, hari ibindi byagombaga kuzuzwa kugira ngo igurisha ry’imigabane ribe ryuzuye nkuko biteganywa mu ngingo ya 4 y’ayo masezerano, harimo kuba abandi banyamigabane ba

TOTAL

RWANDA

SARL baragombaga kwemera iryo gurisha, ko ibyo byakozwe mu nama y’abanyamigabane yo kuwa 27/10/2008 yemeje igurisha ry’imigabane, binemezwa burundu mu nama yo kuwa ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 158

Page 185

13/02/2009, ko ku itariki ya 30/07/2008, TOTAL RWANDA SARL yari igizwe n’abanyamigabane babiri : TOTAL OUTRE MER SA yari ifite imigabane 25.749 na Momar Nguer wari ufite umugabane umwe. [24] Inshuti y’Urukikonayo yatanze ibitekerezo ku kibazo kiri mu rubanza, aho yagaragaje, ishingiye ku ngingo za 4 na 37 z’Itegeko Nº16/2005 ryo kuwa 18/08/2005 rigena imisoro itaziguye ku musaruro, ko niba igikorwa cyakozwe ari icy’ubucuruzi cyabyaye inyungu ku musaruro ukomoka mu Rwanda, umusoro ku nyungu ugomba gutangwa, ko kandi igikorwa gifatwa nk’icy’ubucuruzi igihe gikozwe n’umuntu cyangwa sosiyete ku buryo bwa kinyamwuga, ku birebana na TOTAL RWANDA S.A.RL, akaba asanga ibikorwa byagiye bibaho ari uguhererekanya imigabane muri iyo sosiyete yaje guhinduka ENGEN RWANDA Ltd, ibyo kandi bikaba atari ibikorwa by’ubucuruzi kuko bitakozwe na sosiyete isanzwe ikora ibikorwa byo gucuruza imigabane mu rwego rwo gushaka inyungu, ko no guhindura izina atari igikorwa cy’ubucuruzi cyabyarira ugikoze inyungu, n’ubwo ibyo bitavanaho uburyozwe ku musoro TOTAL RWANDA S.A.R.L yaba ifite nka sosiyete y’ubucuruzi. [25] Ku birebana n’umusoro ku nyongeragaciro, Inshuti y’Urukiko isobanura ko,harebwe igihe ibikorwa byabereye, asanga ingingo ya 2 y’Itegeko Nº06/2001 ryo kuwa 20/01/2001 rishyiraho umusoro ku nyogeragaciro (yahinduwe muri 2010), yarashyizeho umusoro wakwa ku bintu n’imirimo ikorerwa mu Rwanda no ku bintu, ibikoresho n’imirimo bitumizwa hanze y’Igihugu, naho ingingo ya 3 igasobanura byimbitse gutanga ikintu cyangwa gukora umurimo icyo aricyo, ikaba yumvikanisha ko gutanga ikintu cyangwa gukora umurimo IKIGO CY’IMISORO N’AMAHORO (RRA) v. ENGEN RWANDA Ltd 159

Page 186

bicibwa umusoro ku nyongeragaciro iyo ibyo bintu cyangwa umurimo byatanzwe hagamijwe kubona ikiguzi. Avuga kandi ko hashingiwe ku ngingo ya 86 y’Itegeko Nº06/2001 ryo kuwa 20/01/2001 ryavuzwe haruguru, ihererekanya ry’imigabane risonewe gutanga imisoro. [26] Asobanura kandi ko imigabane atari umutungo wa sosiyete ahubwo ari umutungo w’abanyamigabane kandi ko aribo bashobora kuyigurisha, naho imitungo ikaba ari iya sosiyete kandi mu gihe igurishijwe sosiyete ikaba ariyo yishyura imisoro, naho umusoro ku migabane ugatangwa na nyiri imigabane. [27] Kuri ibyo bisobanuro by’Inshuti y’Urukiko, RRA ivuga ko bitahabwa agaciro kuko nta gishya bigaragaza cyarufasha, ko kandi kuvuga ko icyabaye ari ihererekanya ry’imigabane gusa atari ukuri, kuko ikigomba kurebwa ari uko hari inyungu y’ubucuruzi sosiyete ubwayo yabonye nk’uko bivugwa mu ngingo ya 16 y’Itegeko Nº16/2005 rigena umusoro utaziguye ku musaruro, iyo ngingo kandi ikaba igomba kureberwa hamwe n’iya 5 hamwe n’iya 37. [28] RRA isanga kandi kuvuga ko habaye ihererekanya ry’imigabane gusa binyuranye n’ibyo ababuranira TOTAL RWANDA bavuga ndetse n’ibimenyetso bihari byerekana ko ari imitungo yagurishijwe, ko ikibazo Inshuti y’Urukiko yagombaga gusesengura ari ukumenya niba haragurishijwe imigabane cyangwa umutungo, bitewe n’uko sosiyete yose yagurishijwe, hakibazwa niba muri icyo gihe n’imitungo yayo itaba igurishijwe, bityo umusoro ukaba wabarwa mu buryo bumwe n’ubw’inyungu z’umuntu ku giti cye, naho ku birebana na TVA hagashingirwa ku ngingo ya 3 y’Itegeko Nº06/2001 riyishyiraho, irebewe hamwe n’iya 4.1 hamwe n’iya 85.16 ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 160

Page 187

z’iryo tegeko, ko kandi kuba kugurisha imitungo atari ko kazi abaregwa basanzwe bakora bitabakuraho inshingano yo kwishyura TVA mu gihe hari ikiguzi babonye. [29] Akomeza avuga ko ingingo ya 86.7.c, Inshuti y’Urukiko ishingiraho ivuga ko ihererekanya ry’imigabane risonewe TVA ntacyo yamara muri uru rubanza kuko iyo ngingo yongewemo umusoro uregerwa waravutse n’igenzura riri hafi kurangira kuko Itegeko ryasohotse kuwa 30/06/2010, byongeye kandi TVA ikaba itaraciwe ku igurisha ry’imigabane ahubwo yaraciwe ku kiguzi cy’igurisha ry’umutungo. [30] Ababuranira TOTAL RWANDA/ENGEN RWANDA bavuga ko bemeranya n’ibyo Inshuti y’Urukiko yagaragaje ko nta gurisha ry’umutungo ryabayeho ahubwo habayeho igurisha ry’imigabane yise iherekanya ryayo, ko umuntu ucuruza asorera icyo yungutse adasorera umutungo we. Bakomeza bavuga ko ingingo ya 46 y’Itegeko Nº16/2005 ryerekeye TVA ikoresha amagambo abiri (umutungo n’imigabane), ariko kuba ayo magambo akoreshwa mu ngingo imwe bitavuze ko asobanura kimwe ku buryo yakwitiranwa, ko kandi RRA yagombye kwerekana andi masezerano arebana n’igurisha ry’umutungo wa TOTAL RWANDA S.A.R.L.

UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [31] Ikigomba gusuzumwa muri uru rubanza ari nacyo cyasuzumwe mu Rukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi, ni ukumenya niba harabaye igurisha ry’imitungo ya TOTAL RWANDA SARL ryagombaga guherwaho icibwa imisoro nk’uko yabazwe, kuko impande zombi zemeranyijwe kutajya impaka ku bijyanye IKIGO CY’IMISORO N’AMAHORO (RRA) v. ENGEN RWANDA Ltd 161

Page 188

n’ingano yayo nk’uko bigaragara mu mikirize y’urubanza rwajuririwe. [32] Amasezerano yakozwe kuwa 30/07/2008, agaragaza ko ari ay’igurisha ry’imigabane (sale shares), RRA ikavuga ko ahishe igurisha ry’imitungo ya TOTAL RWANDA SARL. Ayo masezerano agaragaza ko uwagurishije ari TOTAL OUTRE MER S.A, umwe mu banyamigabane babiri bari bagize TOTAL

RWANDA SARL, naho uwaguze akaba

ENGEN INTERNATIONAL (Mauritius) Ltd. [33] Ingingo ya 8 y’Itegeko No06/1988 ryo kuwa 12/02/1988 ryagengaga amasosiyete y'ubucuruzi ubwo amasezerano yakorwaga, yateganyaga ko sosiyete igira umutungo wayo bwite, ingingo ya 122 y’iryo tegeko ikavuga ko imigabane ishobora guhabwa uwo ariwe wese mu gihe amategeko ya sosiyete atabiteganya ukundi, naho amategeko yagengaga TOTAL RWANDA S.A.R.L (statuts) nayo akaba ateganya mu ngingo ya 11, ko imigabane ishobora gutangwa ariko ubwo burenganzira bukabanza guhabwa abandi banyamigabane cyangwa sosiyete. [34] Mu kugaragaza itandukaniro riri hagati y’igurisha ry’imigabane n’igurisha ry’imitungo, inyandiko z’ababisesenguye zigaragaza ko igurisha ry’imitungo riba hagati ya sosiyete n’ugura, mu gihe igurisha ry’imigabane riba hagati y’umunyamigabane n’ugura.1 Bagaragaza kandi ingaruka iryo

1“La vente d’actifs s’effectue entre la société et l’aquéreur et elle engendre des conséquences fiscales différentes de celles dela vente des actions, laquelle s’effectue entre le vendeur (actionnaire (s)) et l’aquéreur”: UT Avovats, Aspects fiscaux des achatset ventes d’entreprises, disponible en ligne sur http://www.ljt.ca/fr/ljt-domaines/fiscalite/Aspects-fiscaux-des- achats-et-desventes-d-entreprises.sn, consulté le 11/05/2016. ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 162

Page 189

gurisha rigira, aho basobanura ko iyo hagurishijwe imigabane, sosiyete idahinduka ahubwo hahinduka gusa abayigize, mu gihe igurisha ry’imitungo ya sosiyete rigira ingaruka zikomeye ku buzima bwa sosiyete, ko muri icyo gihe havuka sosiyete nshya iyo mitungo ishyirwamo.2 [35] Basobanura kandi ko ku ruhande rw’ugura, kugura imigabane bivuze kugura ubucuruzi bwa sosiyete, iyo migabane ikava k’uwagurishije ikajya k’uwaguze ko kandi uguze imigabane adahitamo imitungo agura n’iyo atagura ahubwo muri rusange aba aguze ubucuruzi bwose (business).3 Ku birebana n’uru rubanza, kuba amasezerano yagaragajwe yarabaye hagati ya

TOTAL

OUTRE MER (wari umunyamigabane wa TOTAL RWANDA SARL) na ENGEN INTERNATIONAL (Mauritius) Ltd, ntaho RRA yashingira yemeza ko hagurishijwe imitungo ya sosiyete, kuko iyo mitungo atari iy’umunyamigabane ku buryo yagira uburenganzira bwo

2“Dans le cas de vente des actions, l’entreprise ne subit pas de modifications car il ya seulement un changement d’actionnaires.Par conséquent, les créanciers ne perdent aucun droit, et peuvent poursuivre leurs relations avec la compagnie comme d’habitude(…) L’achat des actifs a un impact important sur la vie de l’entreprise, car l’entité juridique ne sera pas la même. Unenouvelle compagnie dans laquelle les actifs vont être transférés, va être créée’’: Achat des actIons ou des actifs, les impacts áprendre en compte, disponible sur http://www.releve.qc.ca/quebec/, consulté le 27 avril 2015.

3“For the purchaser, buying the shares means that he or she buys the company which owns business…The shares of thecompany are transferred from the seller to the buyer. However, the buyer loses the ability to pick and choose among assets.Generally, he or she buys all of the business”: TD Wealth,Structuring a transaction-share sale or asset sale, available online at http://advisors.tdwaterhouse.ca/public/projectiles/5fcf3b08-020c-47c6-a74b- a8c76487fa2f.pdf,consulté le 11/05/2016.

IKIGO CY’IMISORO N’AMAHORO (RRA) v. ENGEN RWANDA Ltd 163

Page 190

kuyigurisha ahuwo ari iya sosiyete4, cyane cyane ko sosiyete ifite ubuzimagatozi butandukanye n’ubw’abayigize5 nk’uko n’urubanza rwajuririwe rwabigaragaje ruhereye ku rubanza Salomon v Salomon and co Ltd rwabaye icyitegererezo ku birebana n’iryo hame, iryo hame rikaba ryarengwaho mu gihe haba hagaragajwe ko ibyakoze bitari byemewe cyangwa bihishe ikindi gikorwa, ari nabyo RRA yaburanishije nka “piercing the corporate veil”, iyo “notion” ikaba yaragiye ikoreshwa mu manza zimwe na zimwe zo mu bindi bihugu, hagamijwe kumenya ugomba kuryozwa igikorwa runaka hagati ya sosiyete n’abayigize cyangwa hagati ya sosiyete mbyeyi n’iyo yabyaye. [36] Byongeye kandi, mu gihe habayeho igurisha ry’imigabane yo muri TOTAL RWANDA SARL, bivuze ko n’imitungo yagendeyemo kuko iri mu bigize imigabane, bitavuze ariko ko ariyo iba yagurishijwe ku buryo bwihariye kuko n’abahanga babisesenguye bavuga ko igurisha ry’imigabane ya sosiyete rijyana n’imitungo, imyenda n’inshingano byayo, mu gihe iyo ari imitungo yagurishijwe ugura ahitamo ibyo agura6.

4“The assets of the company are owneby by the company. The members do not have a legal or equitable interest in them”: Smith and Keenan’Company Law, Thirteenth edition, 2005, p.218.

5“La cession de parts ou d’actions n’est pas assimilable à une vente du fonds de commerce parce qu’elle ne portepas sur les éléments composant le patrimoine social, mais sur les titres représentatifs du capital social, déciderautrement serait méconnaitre la notion de la personnalité morale’’: J.P. Sortais, note sous arrêt de la Cour deCassation, Rev Soc.1974, p.323, cité dans le Mémoire de Sahar BADDOUR: Assimilation de la cession de droitssociaux à la cession du fonds de commerce exploité par la société.

6 “If shares in a company are purchased, all its assets, liabilities and obligations are acquired … If only the assets are purchased then, only the ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 164

Page 191

[37] Mu masezerano yo kuwa 30/07/2008, hateganyijwe mu ngingo ya 2.1, ko uguze azegukana imigabane yose hamwe n’inyungu zose zijyanye nayo,uburenganzira bwose, imyenda n’izindi nshingano zose zikomoka kuri iyo migabane (subject to the provisions of this agreement, the vendor shall sell and the purchaser shall purchase the sale shares free from encumbrances and together with all benefits, rights, libilities and obligations), bivuze ko igikorwa cyabaye ari igurisha ry’imigabane ya TOTAL OUTRE MER naho umutungo ukaba waragumye ari uwa TOTAL RWANDA SARL yahinduye izina ikitwa ENGEN INTERATIONAL Ltd nk’uko byari byemeranyijweho mu masezerano ko izina rya TOTAL ritazongera gukoreshwa, na RDB ikaba yarabyemeye nk’uko ENGEN RWANDA Ltd yabigaragaje, kandi inyandiko ziri muri dosiye zikaba zigaragaza ko iyo sosiyete yakomeje imirimo y’ubucuruzi yakorwaga na TOTAL RWANDA S.A.R.L (memorandum and articles of association yabaye hagati y’abanyamigabane bashya ba ENGEN RWANDA Ltd yahoze ari TOTAL RWANDA S.A.R.L). [38] Ibisobanuro nk’ibi byanatanzwe mu rubanza rwaciwe n’Urukiko Rusesa imanza mu gihugu cy’Ubufaransa, ahagibwaga impaka ku kibazo cyo kumenya niba igurisha ry’imigabane yose ya sosiyete rikozwe n’abanyamigabane bayo, ryafatwa nk’igurisha ry’umutungo w’iyo sosiyete no kumenya niba uwo mutungo warahereweho mu gushinga sosiyete nshya

assets (and liabilities) which the buyer agrees to obtain and which are identified in the sale agreement are acquired”: Mark Gipson, Selling a business: Shares vs. assets, published on 28/02/2012 by the Birketts, available online at http://www.birketts.co.uk/resources/legal- updates/419/selling a business shares vs assets, consulted on 11/05/2016.

IKIGO CY’IMISORO N’AMAHORO (RRA) v. ENGEN RWANDA Ltd 165

Page 192

yari yaguze imigabane yo muri sosiyete ya mbere. Urwo Rukiko rwemeje ko nta gurisha ry’imitungo ryabayeho kuko sosiyete ya mbere yakomeje kubaho inafite ubuzimagatozi, ko kandi abanyamigabane badafite ububasha (qualité) bwo kugurisha umutungo wa sosiyete (Attendu qu’en statuant ainsi, alors que la société BAUVALLET n’ayant jamais cessé d’exister en tant que personne morale et les cédants des actions n’ayant pas qualité pour disposer de l’actif social, l’opération invoquée comme réelle par l’administration des impôts ne pouvait être retenue (…)7. [39] Igitekerezo cy’uko igurisha ry’imigabane yose ya sosiyete kitagomba gufatwa nk’igurisha ry’ibigize sosiyete cyanemejwe mu rundi rubanza rwaciwe n’Urukiko Rusesa Imanza mu Bufaransa (Atttendu que la Cour d’appel a retenu à bon droit qu’une cession de parts d’une société à responsabilité limitée, même si elle porte sur la totalité de ces parts, ne peut pas être assimilée à la cession du fonds de commerce constituant l’actif de la société)8. [40] Urukiko rurasanga kandi, kuba RRA ivuga ko TOTAL RWANDA SARL ariyo yaryozwa imisoro iburanwa ngo kuko igihe cy’amasezerano itashoboraga gutandukanywa na TOTAL

OUTRE MER (ko byari bimwe) bitewe n’uko yari umunyamigabane rukumbi w’iyo sosiyete, nta shingiro bifite, kuko usibye kubivuga gusa, iyo ngaruka ntaho ishingiye mu

7Cour de Cassation, chambre commerciale, Nº de pourvoi : 81-13728 81- 16259 du 07 mars 1984.

8Cour de cassation, chambre commerciale, Nº de pourvoi: 88-15784 du 6 juin 1990.

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 166

Page 193

rwego rw’amategeko, cyane cyane ko ihame ari uko sosiyete ifite ubuzimagatozi butandukanye n’ubw’abayigize. Nubwo kandi imvugo ya RRA yakwitabwaho, ingaruka yagombaga kuba iseswa rya sosiyete nkuko byateganywaga n’ingingo ya 45 y’itegeko No06/1988 ryo kuwa 12/02/1988 ryagengaga amasosiyete y'ubucuruzi ubwo amasezerano y’igurisha yabaga, bivuze ko sosiyete yari kuba itakiriho. Abasesenguye icyo kibazo ahubwo bavuga ko muri icyo gihe umutungo wa sosiyete wegukanwa n’umunyamigabane usigaye, bigafatwa ko habaye igabana ry’umutungo kuko sosiyete iba itakiriho.9 Bivuze rero ko muri icyo gihe, hari kuregwa TOTAL OUTRE MER nk’uwari wasigaranye umutungo wa sosiyete kuko, nkuko byagaragajwe ihame ari uko sosiyete igira ubuzimagatozi butandukanye n’ubw’abayigize ku buryo ibikorwa bya TOTAL OUTRE MER bitaryozwa TOTAL RWANDA S.A.R.L. [41] Urukiko rurasanga rero, nta kintu kidasanzwe cyakozwe cyatuma hatekerezwa ko icyari kigamijwe ari igurisha ry’imitungo kuko n’ibyo RRA ivuga ko byirengagijwe n’Urukiko rwa mbere ari ingaruka zishingiye ku igurisha ry’imigabane, cyane cyane ko itabashije gutanga ibisobanuro byumvikana by’uburyo ikurikirana umusoro kuri TOTAL

9 …. “l’associé unique se voit attribuer les biens de la société. Il reçoit alors tout le patrimoine de celle-ci, étantdonné que la société disparait sans laisser de titulaire de son patrimoine, il ya immédiatement substitution d’unepersonne à la personne morale à la tête du patrimoine social”: E. Tyan, Droit commercial, Tome I, LibrairiesAntoine, 1968, p.352, cité dans le Mémoire de Sahar BADDOUR, op.cit.

IKIGO CY’IMISORO N’AMAHORO (RRA) v. ENGEN RWANDA Ltd 167

Page 194

RWANDA SARL na ENGEN RWANDA Ltd mu gihe ihakana ko ENGEN RWANDA Ltd atariyo yahoze yitwa TOTAL RWANDA Ltd. [42] Hashingiwe ku byasobanuwe byose haruguru no ku ngingo ya 9 y’Itegeko No21/2012 ryo kuwa 14/06/2012 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’imbonezamubano, iz’ubucuruzi, iz’umurimo n’iz’ubutegetsi, iteganya ko urega agomba kugaragaza ibimenyetso by’ibyo aregera yabiburaagatsindwa, Urukiko rusanga kuba nta kindi kimenyetso RRA ishingiraho ivuga ko habaye igurisha ry’umutungo wa TOTAL RWANDA SARL, bituma hagomba gushingirwa ku bivugwa mu masezerano agaragaza ko icyakozwe ari igurisha ry’imigabane ryakozwe na TOTAL OUTRE MER, uyu mwanzuro ukaba unahura n’uwo Inshuti y’Urukiko yagezeho, aho yagaragaje ko nyuma yo gusuzuma ibikorwa byabaye, icyabaye ari ihererekanya ry’imigabane, bityo imikirize y’urubanza RCOM0175/11/HCC rwajuririwe ikaba itagomba guhinduka. III. ICYEMEZO CY’URUKIKO [43] Rwemeje ko ubujurire bwa RRA nta shingiro bufite; [44] Rwemeje ko nta gihindutse ku mikirize y’urubanza RCOM0175/11/CS rwaciwe n’Urukiko Rukuru rw’Ubucuruzi kuwa 13/01/2012; [45] Rutegetse RRA gutanga amagarama y’urubanza angana na 100.000Frw.

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 168

Page 195

IMANZA NSHINJABYAHA

Page 197

UBUSHINJACYAHA v. MINANI N’UNDI [Rwanda URUKIKO RW’IKIRENGA – RPA0299/12/CS (Hatangimbabazi, P.J., Karimunda na Gakwaya, J.) 18 Werurwe 2016] Amategeko Mpanabyaha – Impamvu nkomezacyaha – Kunywa ibiyobyabwenge mbere yo gukora ikindi cyaha – Gushakishiriza ubutwari bwo gukora icyaha mu biyobyabwenge ni impamvu nkomezacyaha aho kuba impamvu nyoroshyacyaha cyangwa impamvu yo kutaryozwa icyaha. Incamake y’ikibazo: Abajuriye bakurikiranywe mu Rukiko Rukuru, urugereko rwa Rwamagana ku kuba baritwikiriye ijoro bagatera mu rugo rwa Nsabimana Didace alias Kanuma bitwaje intwaro gakondo bakica abantu batatu barusanzemo. Minani yaburanye yemera icyaha naho Ntaganira aburana agihakana.Urukiko rwasanze ukwiyemerera icyaha kwa Minani guhagije mu kumuhamya icyaha aregwa, naho kuri Ntaganira ruha agaciro imvugo z’abatangabuhamya no kuba abaregwa bombi barasanganywe ibikomere, rubahamya icyaha bakurikiranyweho, maze ruhanisha buri wese igifungo cya burundu. Ntibishimiye icyo cyemezo bajuririra mu Rukiko rw’Ikirenga, Minani avuga ko yifuza kugaragaza ukuri kugirango ashobore kugabanyirizwa igihano, naho Ntaganira avuga ko umugambi wo gukora icyaha wateguwe na Minani we atabizi, aza kumushuka amunywesha ibiyobyabwenge anamukoresha icyaha 171

Page 198

atateguye, izo mpamvu zikaba zitaritaweho n’Urukiko Rukuru ngo bahanishwe ibihano bitandukanye. Ubushinjacyaha buvuga ko n’ubwo abaregwa bashinjanya, nta n’umwe uvugisha ukuri kuko Minani avuga ko ibyuma babivanye kwa Kanuma nyamara dosiye igaragaza ko bagiye babyitwaje, naho Ntaganira agahunga urumogi arushyira kuri Minani ngo warugurishaga kandi n’ubwo nta kimenyetso atanga ko ari we wamushoye mu cyaha, kuba yaranyoye urumogi ubwabyo bitamubera impamvu nyoroshyacyaha kuko ari icyaha, byose bigaragaza ko muri bombi nta wemera icyaha mu buryo budashidikanywaho, akaba asaba uru Rukiko gufata ko ukwemera icyaha kwabo kutuzuye, ahubwo rugashingira ku kuba barakoze icyaha ndengakamere kandi bakagikorana ubugome bukabije, imikirize y’urubanza rwajuririwe ikagumaho. Incamake y’icyemezo: Gushakishiriza ubutwari bwo gukora icyaha mu biyobyabwenge ni impamvu nkomezacyaha aho kuba impamvu nyoroshyacyaha cyangwa impamvu yo kutaryozwa icyaha. Bityo, kuba abaregwa baranyweye urumogi ku bushake mbere yo gukora icyaha uretse no kuba ari icyaha gihanwa n’amategeko, bigaragaza ko umugambi wateguwe mbere y’uko banywa urwo rumogi, ahubwo barushakishirizamo imbaraga zo gushyira mu bikorwa umugambi mubisha wabo. Ibyo bituma igihano cya burundu bahawe n’Urukiko Rukuru, Urugereko rwa Rwamagana gikwiye kugumaho. Ubujurire nta shingiro. Urubanza rwajuririwe rugumyeho. Amagarama aherereye ku isanduku ya Leta. ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 172

Page 199

Amategeko yashingiweho: Itegeko-Teka No21/77 ryo ku wa 18/08/1977 rishyiraho Igitabo cy’amategeko ahana, ingingo ya 82 n’iya 312. Imanza zifashishijwe: State versus Chretien 1981 (1) SA 1097 (A). Inyandiko z’abahanga zifashishijwe: Nyabirungu mwene Songa, Traité de droit pénal Congolais, Kinshasa: Editions Universitaires, 2007, p.288. CR Snyman, Criminal Law, Durban: Lexis-Nexis, 2008, at p.222. Urubanza I. IMITERERE Y’URUBANZA [1] Uru rubanza rwatangiriye mu Rukiko Rukuru, Urugereko rwa Rwamagana, Minani Alexandre na Ntaganira Vincent baregwa kuba ku wa 21/12/2010, baritwikiriye ijoro bagatera mu rugo rwa Nsabimana Didace alias Kanuma bitwaje intwaro gakondo zirimo imihoro, ibyuma n’imihini, bakica urugi, bakinjira, bagatemagura abantu batatu barusanzemo, urugo rugasigaramo imirambo n’imivu y’amaraso. Minani Alexandre yaburanye yemera icyaha naho Ntaganira Vincent aburana agihakana. [2] Mu rubanza NoRP0009/11/HC/RWG rwaciwe ku wa 10/11/2011, Urukiko rwasanze ukwiyemerera icyaha kwa Minani Alexandre ko yishe Nsabimana Didace n’abana be babiri aribo Mukamuvunyi Joselyne na Nyiraminani Xavérine UBUSHINJACYAHA v. MINANI N’UNDI 173

Page 200

guhagije mu kumuhamya icyaha aregwa, naho kuri Ntaganira Vincent, rusanga abatangabuhamya barimo Mukarushema Christine, Ntiyamira na Twagirayezu Vianney bemeza ko babwiwe na Minani Alexandre ko yagiye kwica kwa Nsabimana Didace alias Kanuma ari kumwe na Ntaganira Vincent, ibyo yababwiye bikaba bishimangirwa no kuba Ntaganira Vincent na Minani Alexandre bombi barasanganywe ibikomere, rwemeza ko bombi bahamwa n’icyaha bakurikiranweho, ruhanisha buri wese igifungo cya burundu. [3] Minani Alexandre na Ntaganira Vincent ntibishimiye icyo cyemezo bajuririra mu Rukiko rw’Ikirenga. Minani Alexandre yajuriye avuga ko yifuza kugaragaza ukuri kugirango ashobore kugabanyirizwa igihano. Naho Ntaganira Vincent ajurira avuga ko umugambi wo gukora icyaha wateguwe na Minani Alexandre we atabizi, aza kumushuka amunywesha ibiyobyabwenge anamukoresha icyaha atateguye, izo mpamvu zikaba zitaritaweho n’Urukiko Rukuru ngo bahanishwe ibihano bitandukanye. [4] Iburanisha mu ruhame ryashyizwe ku wa 13/07/2015, ariko kubera ko Ntaganira Vincent yari atarabona umwunganira mu mategeko rigenda ryimurwa kugeza ku wa 15/02/2016. Uwo munsi Ntaganira Vincent yitabye yunganiwe na Me Habyarimana Christine, Minani Alexandre yitaba yunganiwe na Me Uwanyirigira Delphine naho Ubushinjacyaha buhagarariwe na Niyonkuru Françoise, Umushinjacyaha ku rwego rw’Igihugu.

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 174

Page 201

II. IKIBAZO KIGIZE URU RUBANZA N’ISESENGURA RYACYO Kumenya niba hari impamvu zatuma Minani Alexandre na Ntaganira Vincent agabanyirizwa igihano. [5] Minani Alexandre avuga ko Ntaganira Vincent yamusabye kumuherekeza kwishyuza amafaranga ye mu ma saa ine z’ijoro, bageze hafi yo kwa Kanuma, Ntaganira Vincent atekera urumogi bararunywa, akingura inzu nk’umuntu uhamenyereye, aba afashe Mukamuvunyi ajya kumwicira mu rutoki akoresheje umuhini wakingaga inzu, naho we asigara afashe Kanuma waje no kumukomeretsa mu kiganza barwanira umuhoro yari afite, Ntaganira Vincent agarutse yica Kanuma na none akoresheje wa muhini, hanyuma haza gusohoka umwana mu nzu, Ntaganira Vincent amusaba kumwica, nawe amwica akoresheje wa muhini. [6] Asobanura kandi ko ibyuma bavuga byaturutse iwe ntabyabayeho kuko icyo bamufatanye ari agahoro yari atunze, ko yabajije Ntaganira Vincent impamvu ibyo kwishyuza amafaranga byavuyemo kwica, akamusezeranya kumuha 20.000Frw bukeye, ariko bimwanga mu nda arara abibwiye mukuru we Ntiyamira Emmanuel na nyina, bukeye abibwira murumuna wa Ntaganira Vincent. Avuga ko Kabamba uvugwa ko bateguranye uwo mugambi bataziranye, ahubwo yamwumvanye Ntaganira Vincent, ko yemera ko yabeshye Urukiko Rukuru ariko ubu noneho yashatse kuvugisha ukuri kuko yicuza icyaha yakoze kandi agisabira imbabazi, akaba asaba uru Rukiko guca inkoni izamba akagabanyirizwa igihano. [7] Me Uwanyirigira Delphine wunganira Minani Alexandre avuga ko Minani Alexandre yemeye icyaha mu Rukiko Rukuru UBUSHINJACYAHA v. MINANI N’UNDI 175

Page 202

ariko ntiyasobanura neza imikorere yacyo n’uburyo yafatanyije na Ntaganira Vincent kwica umuryango wa Kanuma, ariko ko ubu yemera icyaha mu buryo budashidikanywaho, akaba asaba uru Rukiko guha agaciro imiburanire ye akagabanyirizwa igihano cya burundu yakatiwe hashingiwe ku ngingo ya 35 y’Itegeko ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’inshinjabyaha no ku ya 77, agace ka 3 y’Itegeko-Ngenga rishyiraho Igitabo cy’amategeko ahana gikoreshwa ubu. [8] Ntaganira Vincent avuga ko we na Minani Alexandre babanje gusangira urumogi, baza kuganira k’ubukene bubugarije kandi ari igihe cy’iminsi mikuru, aribwo bateguye umugambi wo kujya kwiba amafaranga kwa Kanuma, bagenda bambaye ibikoti kandi bitwaje ibyuma bibiri by’imishyo bavanye mu gisenge (plafond) kwa Minani Alexandre, bagezeyo Minani Alexandre yica urugi, arinjira, asanga Kanuma aho yari aryamye, atangiye kumukubita, umukobwa we mukuru asohoka yiruka, Ntaganira Vincent amutera icyuma, ariko mbere yo kugenda bumvikana ko bagomba kubanogonora kuko bari babamenye, bakirangiza kubica hasohoka undi mwana muto mu nzu, nawe baramwica. [9] Asobanura ko bavuye aho bajya kwa Ntiyamira, mukuru wa Minani Alexandre, uyu amutekerereza ibyo bavuyemo, ari nabyo umugore wa Ntiyamira yasobanuye mu Bugenzacyaha, ariko ko bageze muri Gereza yabaza Minani Alexandre icyatumye yica abo bantu akamusubiza ko ari umugambi yari amaranye iminsi, ko uwari kumufasha kuwushyira mu bikorwa witwa Kabamba yamubuze, ari nabwo bapanze uko bazaburana, Minani Alexandre akaburana abigereka kuri Kabamba naho we akaburana ahakana icyaha. ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 176

Page 203

[10] Asoza avuga ko ari ubwa mbere aguye mu cyaha, ko yakigushijwemo na Minani Alexandre wamushutse hamwe n’ibiyobyabwenge yari yanyoye, ariko ko igihe amaze muri Gereza cyatumye amenya ububi bw’icyaha, akaba acyicuza kandi agisabira imbabazi ndetse anatakambira uru Rukiko ngo rumuvane ku gifungo cya burundu ahanishwe igifungo kibarwa. [11] Me Habyarimana Christine wunganira Ntaganira Vincent avuga ko nubwo abaregwa bitana bamwana k’uwacuze umugambi n’uwatanze urumogi banyoye mbere yo gukora icyaha, Ntaganira Vincent yemera icyaha mu buryo budashidikanywaho, akaba asaba uru Rukiko guha agaciro imiburanire ye ariko rukita no kuba ari ubwa mbere yagwa mu cyaha, yaragikoze akiri mu myaka yo kubyiruka kuko yari afite imyaka 24 y’amavuko gusa kandi yari yanyoye ibiyobyabwenge, akagabanyirizwa igihano kugeza nibura ku gifungo kitari munsi y’umwaka umwe nk’uko biteganywa n’ingingo ya 82 n’iya 83 z’Itegeko-Teka No21/77 ryo ku wa 18/08/1977 rishyiraho Igitabo cy’amategeko ahana ryakoreshwaga icyaha gikorwa. [12] Uhagarariye Ubushinjacyaha avuga ko nubwo Minani Alexandre na Ntaganira Vincent bashinjanya, nta n’umwe uvugisha ukuri kuko Minani Alexandre avuga ko ibyuma babivanye kwa Kanuma nyamara dosiye igaragaza ko bagiye babyitwaje, naho Ntaganira Vincent agahunga urumogi arushyira kuri Minani Alexandre ngo warugurishaga kandi nubwo nta kimenyetso atanga ko ari we wamushoye mu cyaha, kuba yaranyoye urumogi ubwabyo bitamubera impamvu nyoroshyacyaha kuko ari icyaha, byose bigaragaza ko muri bombi nta wemera icyaha mu buryo budashidikanywaho, akaba asaba uru Rukiko gufata ko ukwemera icyaha kwabo kutuzuye, UBUSHINJACYAHA v. MINANI N’UNDI 177

Page 204

ahubwo rugashingira ku kuba barakoze icyaha ndengakamere kandi bakagikorana ubugome bukabije, imikirize y’urubanza rwajuririwe ikagumaho.

UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [13] Haseguriwe Itegeko-Ngenga No31/2007 ryo ku wa 25/07/2007 rivanaho igihano cyo kwicwa, ingingo ya 312 y’Itegeko-Teka No21/77 ryo ku wa 18/08/1977 rishyiraho Igitabo cy’amategeko ahana ryakoreshwaga icyaha gikorwa, iteganya ko “Ukwica umuntu byagambiriwe cyangwa byategewe igico, byitwa ubuhotozi; bihanishwa [igifungo cya burundu].” [14] Ingingo ya 82 y’Itegeko-Teka N°21/77 ryo ku wa 18/08/1977 ryavuzwe haruguru, iteganya ko umucamanza ariwe uha agaciro impamvu zigabanya ubugizi bwa nabi bw’uwakoze icyaha, ari izakibanjirinje, ari izagiherekeje cyangwa izagikurikiye, yaba azemeje akagomba kubisobanurira impamvu. [15] Abazwamu Bugenzacyaha no mu Bushinjacyaha, Minani Alexandre yavuze ko nyuma y’ubwicanyi bwakorewe umuryango wa Nsabimana Didace alias Kanuma, abashinzwe umutekano baje kumusaka, bamusangana agahoro, ibyuma bibiri by’imishyo hamwe n’urumogi, muri ibyo byose ako gahoro akaba ariko kari ake, kandi ko ku wa 21/12/2010, mu gihe cya saa mbiri z’ijoro, yagiye gutira mukuru we Ntiyamira Emmanuel isitimu agiye guca igitoki, agezeyo aranyerera, agahoro yari yitwaje kamukomeretsa mu kiganza, ajya kwiyomora kwa nyina Mukamurenzi Anne Marie, arangije ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 178

Page 205

arataha, bukeye abona abapolisi baje kumufata (cotes 26-29, 54- 56). [16] Dosiye y’urubanza igaragaza kandi ko Ntaganira Vincent yavugiye mu Bugenzacyaha no mu Bushinjacyaha ko nubwo ntacyo apfa n’abamushinja, mu ma saa saba z’amanywa w’umunsi ubuhotozi baregwa bwabereyeho (ku wa 21/12/2010) yari ageze i Giheta kwa Gatera agiye kubaruza umurima we, agarukana na muramu we Kayumba wari umuherekeje, bajyana kunywa inzoga kwa Ruhura, barangije nawe aramuherekeza, avuyeyo ajyana n’umugore we gukamisha kwa Mukabugingo Chantal, bataha mu ma saa kumi n’ebyiri n’igice, baguma mu rugo kugeza bagiye kuryama, bukeye nka saa kumi n’ebyiri n’igice, abona kumenya iby’urupfu rw’umuryango wa Nsabimana Didace alias Kanuma abibwiwe n’umwana witwa Pilote, ahita ajyana na mushiki we witwa Mujawayezu Vivia gutabara, naho ku bijyanye n’icyamukomerekeje kuri iyo tariki ya 21/12/2010, avuga ko ari ibyatsi ubwo yahiraga urubingo (cotes 50-52). [17] Naho aburana imbere y’Urukiko Rukuru, Urugereko rwa Rwamagana,Minani Alexandre yemeye ko mu ijoro ryo ku wa 21/12/2010 yatiye Ntaganira Vincent igare, ajyana n’uwitwa Kabamba kwa Nsabimana Didace alias Kanuma ngo agiye kumwereka aho bakura amafaranga, akinguye urugi, umukobwa we ahubukira hejuru aramumenya, Kabamba ahita amutera icyuma, Nsabimana Didace alias Kanuma, aza aje gutabara bararwana aramukomeretsa ariko ashobora kumutura hasi, Kabamba atwara wa mukobwa mu rutoki batindayo, agarutse amubwira ko amaze kumwica, babona kujya kwa nyina Mukamurenzi. Naho Ntaganira Vincent yavuze ko abamushinja babanje gukubitwa babona guhuza imvugo zabo n’uko yari afite UBUSHINJACYAHA v. MINANI N’UNDI 179

Page 206

ikiguma kandi yatije Minani Alexandre igare umunsi icyaha gikorwa, bigaragaza ko imvugo zabo zari amatakirangoyi kuko atashoboraga kwica abaturanyi be (cotes 101-105). [18] Urukiko rurasanga na n’ubu Minani Alexandre na Ntaganira Vincent batavugisha ukuri kwatuma hamenyekana uwateguye umugambi w’ubwicanyi, uwari utunze intwaro zakoreshejwe, uwatekeye urumogi banyoye n’uburyo banyakwigendera bishwe. Cyakora niyo bari kubigaragaza, kuba barakoze icyaha gikomeye, bitwaje irari ry’amafaranga batari bazi ko Nsabimana Didace alias Kanuma afite, bakica abaturanyi b’inzirakarengane, bakarimbura umuryango wose mu buryo bwa kinyamaswa bakoresheje ibyuma n’imihini, bagahotora abana bato b’abakobwa bari bazi ko badafite amafaranga yabajyanye kandi ko batari bubarwanye, barangiza bakabashinyagurira kuko basize imirambo yambaye ubusa kandi bayigeretseho amabuye, ubwabyo bihagije kugirango batagabanyirizwa igihano bakatiwe n’Urukiko Rukuru. [19] Urukiko rurasanga kandi kuba Minani Alexandre na Ntaganira Vincent bavuga ko mbere yo kujya guhotora umuryango wa Nsabimana Didace alias Kanuma babanje kunywa urumogi, nubwo bataragaraza urumogi banyoye uko rungana n’ingaruka zarwo ku myitwarire yabo, kunywa urumogi ku bushake mbere yo gukora icyaha bitafatwa nk’impamvu nyoroshyacyaha kuko, uretse kuba ari icyaha gihanwa n’amategeko, bigaragaza ko umugambi wateguwe mbere y’uko banywa urwo rumogi, ahubwo barushakishirizamo imbaraga zo gushyira mu bikorwa umugambi mubisha wabo. Inkiko1 n’abahanga mu mategeko2 bakaba bemeranywa

1“Society has for years been subjected to alcohol abuse by certain of its members. This abuse has continued unabated and today is often accompanied ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 180

Page 207

kogushakishiriza ubutwari bwo gukora icyaha mu biyobyabwenge ari impamvu nkomezacyaha aho kuba impamvu nyoroshyacyaha cyangwa impamvu yo kutaryozwa icyaha, nabyo bishimangira ko igihano cya burundu cyatanzwe n’Urukiko Rukuru, Urugereko rwa Rwamagana kuri Minani Alexandre na Ntaganira Vincent gikwiye kugumaho. III. ICYEMEZO CY’URUKIKO [20] Rwemeje ko ubujurire bwa Minani Alexandre na Ntaganira Vincent alias Rudomoro, Vuduka, Kiwani nta shingiro bufite. [21] Ruvuze ko nta gihindutse ku mikirize y’urubanza NoRP0009/11/HC/RWG rwaciwe n’Urukiko Rukuru, Urugereko rwa Rwamagana ku wa 10/11/2011.

by drug abuse. Because so many assaults and deaths are caused by persons under the influence of alcohol, a section of the community have in the past been skeptical about the “soft treatment meted out to intoxicated offenders…” State versus Chretien 1981 (1) SA 1097 (A). 2 “Il est unanimement admis que lorsque l’auteur d’une infraction a bu et s’est enivré pour se donner le courage de la commettre, étouffer les cris de sa conscience ou s’aménager une excuse, l’ivresse, loin de lui profiter, devient une circonstance aggravante.” Nyabirungu mwene Songa, Traité de droit pénal Congolais, Kinshasa : Editions Universitaires, 2007, p.288. “X intends to commit a crime but does not have the courage to do so and takes to drink in order to gain the necessary courage, knowing that he will be able to perpetrate the crime once he is intoxicated. In this instance, intoxication is not a defense whatsoever. It is not even a ground for mitigation of punishment; in fact it would be a ground for imposing a heavier sentence than the normal.” CR Snyman, Criminal Law, Durban: Lexis-Nexis, 2008, at p.222. UBUSHINJACYAHA v. MINANI N’UNDI

Page 208

[22] Rutegetse ko amagarama y’urubanza aherera ku isanduku ya Leta.

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 182

Page 209

UBUSHINJACYAHA v. NSANZINTWALI [Rwanda URUKIKO RW’IKIRENGA – RPAA0048/12/CS (Hatangimbabazi, P.J., Karimunda na Gakwaya, J.) 6 Gicurasi 2016] Amategeko agenga imiburanishirize y’ imanza Nshinjabyaha – Gushidikanya – Iyo hari impamvu zikomeye zitera gushidikanya, birengera ushinjwa – Itegeko Nº30/2013 ryo ku wa 24/5/2013 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’inshinjabyaha, ingingo ya 165. Incamake y’ikibazo: Uregwa yakurikiranywe ku cyaha cyo gusambanya umwana w’imyaka hafi itanu ariko we aburana ahakana icyaha, asobanura ko impamvu yacyemeye imbere y’Umucamanza w’ifunga n’ifungurwa ry’agateganyo ari ukubera ububabare yari afite. Urukiko Rwisumbuye rwamuhamije icyaha rushingiye ku kuba yaracyiyemereye imbere y’Umucamanza w’ifunga n’ifungurwa ry’agateganyo, no kuri raporo ya Muganga igaragaza ko umwana yasambanyijwe koko, rumuhanisha igifungo cy’imyaka makumyabiri (20 ans) n’ihazabu y’amafaranga 20.000Frw, agabanyirijwe ibihano kubera ko yemeye icyaha no kuba ari ubwa mbere yagwa mu cyaha. Ntiyishimiye imikirize y’urubanza, ajuririra Urukiko Rukuru, Urugereko rwa Nyanza, asaba kugabanyirizwa ibihano kubera ko yemera icyaha, akanagisabira imbabazi, maze Urukiko rumugabanyiriza ibihano, rumuhanisha igifungo cy’imyaka cumi n’itanu. Uregwa yajuriye nanone mu Rukiko rw’Ikirenga, asaba kugabanyirizwa ibihano kubera ko yemera icyaha, agasaba n’imbabazi, ariko iburanisha ritangiye, avuga ko n’ubwo 183

Page 210

yajuriye ashaka kugabanyirizwa ibihano yahawe, ariko mu by’ukuri atemera icyaha yarezwe cyo gusambanya umwana akaba atazi n’uburyo icyo cyaha cyakozwe, akaba yaracyemeye mu Rukiko agira ngo arebe gusa ko yagabanyirizwa ibihano, ko ariko ubundi yahamijwe icyaha atigeze akora. Ubushinjacyaha bwo bwaburanye buvuga ko ubujurire bw’uregwa nta shingiro bufite kubera ko aho yaburanye hose yagiye yemera icyaha, akaba asanga kandi kuba yaremeye icyaha mu Nkiko zo hasi atari impamvu ituma agabanyirizwa igihano, ahubwo ari impamvu ituma icyaha kimuhama. Ko kuba ahakana icyaha imbere y’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga bidakwiye guhabwa agaciro, kuko hari n’ibindi bimenyetso bishimangira ko yemeye icyaha, naho ibyo kuba yaracyemeye kubera gutinya ibihano birebire akaba asanga atari ukuri, kubera ko yemeye icyaha ataramenya ibihano azahabwa. Incamake y’icyemezo: Gushidikanya birengera ushinjwa, bityo hari ugushidikanya gukabije gutuma uregwa agomba kugirwa umwere ku cyaha akurikiranyweho. Ubujurire bw’uregwa bufite ishingiro. Uregwa agizwe umwere. Amagarama aherereye ku isanduku ya Leta. Amategeko yashingiweho: Itegeko Nº30/2013 ryo ku wa 24/5/2013 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’inshinjabyaha, ingingo ya 165. Nta manza zifashishijwe. ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 184

Page 211

Urubanza I. IMITERERE Y’URUBANZA [1] Uru rubanza rwatangiriye mu Rukiko Rwisumbuye rwa Muhanga, Ubushinjacyaha burega Nsanzintwali Pascal kuba yarakoze icyaha cyo gusambanya umwana w’imyaka hafi itanu witwa I.P., Nsanzintwali Pascal aburana ahakana icyaha, asobanura ko impamvu yacyemeye imbere y’Umucamanza w’ifunga n’ifungurwa ry’agateganyo ari ukubera ububabare yari afite. [2] Urukiko Rwisumbuye rwa Muhanga rwaciye urubanza, rumuhamya icyaha rushingiye ku kuba yaracyiyemereye imbere y’Umucamanza w’ifunga n’ifungurwa ry’agateganyo, no kuri raporo ya Muganga igaragaza ko umwana yasambanyijwe koko, rumuhanisha igifungo cy’imyaka makumyabiri (20ans) n’ihazabu y’amafaranga 20.000Frw, agabanyirijwe ibihano kubera ko yemeye icyaha no kuba ari ubwa mbere yagwa mu cyaha. [3] Nsanzintwali Pascal ntiyishimiye imikirize y’urubanza, ajuririra Urukiko Rukuru, Urugereko rwa Nyanza, asaba kugabanyirizwa ibihano kubera ko yemera icyaha, akanagisabira imbabazi. [4] Uru Rukiko rwaciye urubanza ruvuga ko Nsanzintwali Pascal agomba kugabanyirizwa ibihano, rumuhanisha igifungo cy’imyaka cumi n’itanu. [5] Nsanzintwali Pascal na none ntiyishimiye imikirize y’urubanza, ajuririra Urukiko rw’Ikirenga, asaba UBUSHINJACYAHA v. NSANZINTWALI 185

Page 212

kugabanyirizwa ibihano kubera ko yemera icyaha, agasaba imbabazi. [6] Urubanza rwaburanishijwe ku wa 04/04/2016, Nsanzintwali Pascal yunganiwe na Me Girayo Eric, Ubushinjacyaha buhagarariwe na Dushimimana Claudine, Umushinjacyaha ku rwego rw’Igihugu. [7] Iburanisha ritangiye, Nsanzintwali Pascal avuga ko n’ubwo yajuriye ashaka kugabanyirizwa ibihano yahawe, ariko mu by’ukuri atemera icyaha yarezwe cyo gusambanya umwana witwa I.P., akaba atazi n’uburyo icyo cyaha cyakozwe, akaba yaracyemeye mu Rukiko agira ngo arebe gusa ko yagabanyirizwa ibihano, ko ariko ubundi yahamijwe icyaha atigeze akora. II. ISESENGURA RY’IKIBAZO

KIBAZWA MU URUBANZA  Kumenya niba hari ibimenyetso bihamya icyaha Nsanzintwali Pascal. [8] Nsanzintwali Pascal avuga ko impamvu yatumye ajurira ari uko yashakaga kugabanyirizwa ibihano yahawe, akaba asaba Urukiko ko rwamuhanisha nibura igifungo cy’imyaka itanu kuko asanga igifungo cy’imyaka icumi yahawe ari kirekire cyane. [9] Ku kibazo cyo kumenya impamvu asaba kongera kugabanyirizwa ibihano kandi yari yaragabanyirijwe, Nsanzintwali Pascal avuga ko Urukiko arirwo rwazaha agaciro ibyo asaba, kuko icyo yifuza ari uko yagabanyirizwa ibihano ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 186

Page 213

yahawe, ko ariko ubusanzwe yahamijwe icyaha atigeze akora. Asobanura ko kuba yaracyemeye mbere hose, yagira ngo arebe ko yagabanyirizwa ibihano, ariko mu by’ukuri nta cyaha yakoze, ko yacyemeye kubera ko yabonaga ari akarengane yakorewe, kuko yahakanaga icyaha bakabyanga, hakiyongeraho akababaro yahuye nako aho afungiye. [10] Ku kibazo cyo kumenya niba yifuza kugabanyirizwa ibihano cyangwa gufungurwa akagirwa umwere, Nsanzintwali Pascal avuga ko yumva yagabanyirizwa ibihano, kuko atariwe ubikuraho, gusa akaba yarahamijwe icyaha atigeze akora, kuko asanga cyarakozwe n’abandi bana bari mu rugero rw’uriya mwana bavuga ko yasambanyije, ko nyina w‘uwo mwana yageze mu rugo, amenye ko umwana we yasambanyijwe, avuga ko ari Nsanzintwali Pascal wabikoze kubera ko yageze muri urwo rugo, nyamara yarahageze gusa azanywe no kwiba ipine. [11] Me Gariyo Eric wunganira Nsanzintwali Pascal avuga ko ibyo uwo yunganira avugiye mu Rukiko yumva ari bishyashya, kuko igihe yateguraga dosiye, bavuganye, amwemerera ko azaburana yemera icyaha, asaba kugabanyirizwa ibihano, ko rero niba ubungubu ahakana icyaha, yareka ibyo gusaba kugabanyirizwa ibihano. Asaba Urukiko umwanya wo kugirango aganire na Nsanzintwali Pascal kugira ngo bafate umurongo umwe bagomba kuburanisha mu bujurire bwe kubera ko hari ubwo avuga ko hari igihe ibintu bimuyobera. [12] Nyuma yo guhabwa umwanya wo kuganira n’umwunganira, Nsanzintwali Pascal yongeye guhabwa ijambo, avuga ko yemera icyaha, ko ariko atabona uburyo yasobanura uko yagikoze n’iyo yarara atetse ibuye rigashya. UBUSHINJACYAHA v. NSANZINTWALI 187

Page 214

[13] Uhagarariye Ubushinjacyaha avuga ko ubujurire bwa Nsanzintwali Pascal nta shingiro bufite kubera ko aho yaburanye hose yagiye yemera icyaha, akaba asanga kandi kuba yaremeye icyaha mu Nkiko zo hasi atari impamvu ituma agabanyirizwa igihano, ahubwo ari impamvu ituma icyaha kimuhama. Avuga ko kuba ubungubu noneho Nsanzintwali Pascal ahakana icyaha imbere y’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga bidakwiye guhabwa agaciro, kuko hari n’ibindi bimenyetso bishimangira ko yemeye icyaha, naho ibyo kuba yaracyemeye kubera gutinya ibihano birebire akaba asanga atari ukuri, kubera ko yemeye icyaha ataramenya ibihano azahabwa, ko rero n’ubwo Nsanzintwali Pascal ahakana icyaha, ntabwo avuguruza ibimenyetso byari byatanzwe n’Ubushinjacyaha mu Rukiko, ari yo mpamvu asaba ko urubanza rwajuririwe rwagumaho mu ngingo zarwo zose.

UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [14] Ingingo ya 165 y’Itegeko Nº30/2013 ryo ku wa 24/5/2013 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’inshinjabyaha iteganya ko “Gushidikanya birengera ushinjwa. Iyo urubanza rwakurikiranywe mu buryo bwose, ntihagire ibimenyetso nyakuri biboneka byemeza nta shiti abacamanza ko ushinjwa yakoze icyaha koko, bagomba kwemeza ko atsinze”. [15] Inyandiko zigize dosiye y’uru rubanza, zigaragaza ko Nsanzintwali Pascal abazwa mu Bugenzacyaha ku wa 19/11/2009, no mu Bushinjacyaha ku wa 23/11/2009, aho hose atigeze yemera icyaha akurikiranyweho cyo gusambanya umwana witwa I.P., ndetse ageze mu Rukiko Rwisumbuye rwa Muhanga, nabwo aburana ahakana icyaha, asobanura ko impamvu yacyemeye imbere y’Umucamanza w’ifunga ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 188

Page 215

n’ifungurwa ry’agateganyo ari ukubera ububabare yari afite, akaba yarifuzaga gufungwa iminsi cumi n’itanu aho kuba iminsi mirongo itatu yasabirwaga n’Ubushinjacyaha kubera ko yabonaga ari myinshi kandi arengana. [16] Dosiye y’uru rubanza igaragaza nanone ko nyuma yo gukatirwa igifungo cy’imyaka makumyabiri (20 ans), Nsanzintwali Pascal yajuririye Urukiko Rukuru, Urugereko rwa Nyanza, yemera icyaha, anagisabira imbabazi, bituma agabanyirizwa ibihano, ahanishwa noneho igifungo cy’imyaka cumi n’itanu, nacyo akaba yarasanze ari igifungo kirekire, ari yo mpamvu yaje gutakambira Urukiko rw’Ikirenga, asaba ko icyo gifungo cyagabanywamo kabiri, agahanishwa igifungo cy’imyaka itanu. [17] Urukiko rurasanga mbere yo gusuzuma niba Nsanzintwali Pascal yagabanyirizwa igihano kimaze kuvugwa yahawe hashingiwe ku kuba yaremeye icyaha, ari ngombwa kubanza gusuzuma niba koko icyaha yavugaga yemera kimuhama. [18] Nk’uko byavuzwe haruguru, uretse imbere y’Urukiko Rukuru, Urugereko rwa Nyanza, aho Nsanzintwali Pascal yemeye icyaha, ikigaragara ni uko ahandi hose icyaha yagihakanye, n’aho yacyemeye akaba asobanura ko yabiterwaga no kugirango abone uko ava mu karengane, ni ukuvuga kajyanye no kuba yarashyizwe muri gereza ku cyaha atakoze. [19] Ku bijyanye n’icyaha aregwa cyo gusambanya umwana witwa I.P. Nsanzintwali Pascal aregwa, ibimenyetso bikubiye muri dosiye Urukiko rufite ni ibikurikira: UBUSHINJACYAHA v. NSANZINTWALI 189

Page 216

1. Imvugo ya N.C., se w’umwana uvugwa ko yahohotewe, aho yasobanuriye Umugenzacyaha ko icyamubwiye we n’umugore we ko umwana wabo yasambanyijwe ari uko barebye mu gitsina no ku matako y’umwana bakabonaho amasohoro.

2. Inyandiko yakozwe n’Umugenzacyaha ku wa 20/11/2009 iri kuri “cote” ya 7 ya dosiye, aho avuga ko yagiranye ikiganiro na I.P., akamubwira ko ari Pascal wamurongoye, akoresheje intoki ebyiri yamushyize mu gitsina.

3. Raporo ya Muganga yo ku wa 19/11/2009 ivuga mu buryo bukurikira ibyo Muganga yasanze ku mwana, akavugamo “état général bon, hymen intact, elle aurait été violée, elle aurait été violée sans maladie sexuellement transmissible”. [20] Urukiko rurasanga hasesenguwe ibimenyetso bimaze kuvugwa haruguru, hari ugushidikanya ku cyaha Nsanzintwali Pascal aregwa cyo gusambanya I.P., mu gihe raporo ya Muganga mu by’ukuri ubwayo itemeza ko uwo mwana yasambanyijwe, ahubwo ikaba ikekeranya ivuga ko umwana ashobora kuba yarasambanyijwe ku ngufu (elle aurait été violée), bigahuza n’uko Muganga yanasanze umwana agifite akarangabusugi ke (hymen intact), ndetse nta n’ikibazo cy’uburwayi afite (état général bon). [21] Ikindi gitera gushidikanya ni uko muri iyo raporo ya Muganga yakozwe rugikubita ku wa 19/11/2009, ni ukuvuga bukeye umwana amaze gusambanywa ku wa 18/11/2009 nk’uko bivugwa, nta na hamwe havugwa ko Muganga yaba yarabonye amasohoro mu gitsina cy’umwana, nyamara N.C., se ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 190

Page 217

w’umwana, avuga ko we n’umugore we bayabonye nk’uko byagaragajwe haruguru. [22] Ikindi gitera nanone gushidikanya ni uko N.C., se w’umwana, avuga ko yabonye ayo masohoro mu gitsina, bikumvikanisha ko niba Nsanzintwali Pascal yarasambanyije uwo mwana, yinjije igitsina cye mu cy’umwana agasukamo n’ayo masohoro yabonywe n’ababyeyi be, nyamara umwana yaribwiriye Umugenzacyaha ko icyo Nsanzintwali Pascal yakoze ari ukumurongora akoresheje intoki ebyiri yashyize mu gitsina cye. [23] Urukiko rurasanga rero hasesenguwe ibimaze kuvugwa, hari ugushidikanya gukabije gutuma Nsanzintwali Pascal agomba kugirwa umwere ku cyaha akurikiranyweho, hashingiwe ku ngingo ya 165 y’Itegeko Nº30/2013 ryo ku wa 24/5/2013 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza z’inshinjabyaha ryavuzwe haruguru, bityo urubanza Nsanzintwali Pascal yajuririye rukaba rugomba guhinduka mu ngingo zarwo zose. III. ICYEMEZO CY’URUKIKO [24] Rwemeje ko ubujurire bwa Nsanzintwali Pascal bufite ishingiro; [25] Rwemeje ko Nsanzintwali Pascal agizwe umwere; [26] Rutegetse ko ahita afungurwa uru rubanza rukimara gusomwa; UBUSHINJACYAHA v. NSANZINTWALI 191

Page 218

[27] Ruvuze ko urubanza RPA0263/10/HC/NYA rwaciwe n’Urukiko Rukuru, Urugereko rwa Nyanza, kuwa 08/04/2011 ruhindutse mu ngingo zarwo zose; [28] Rutegetse ko amagarama ry‘urubanza aherera ku Isanduku ya Leta.

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 192

Page 219

UBUSHINJACYAHA v. UWIRINGIYIMANA [Rwanda URUKIKO RW’IKIRENGA – RS/REV/INJUST/PEN0004/15/CS (Kayitesi, P.J., Hitiyaremye na Munyangeri, J.) 4 Werurwe 2016] Amategeko Mpanabyaha – Akarengane – Gutegeka uregwa kwishyura ihazabu kugira ngo abone gufungurwa ni akarengane, kuko ntaho biteganyijwe mu mategeko y’u Rwanda. Incamake y’ikibazo: Uwiringiyimana yakurikiranywe ku cyaha cyo gukomeretsa amatungo y’undi, Urukiko rumuhamya icyaha, rumuhanisha igifungo cy’umwaka umwe, no gutanga ihazabu y’amafaranga ibihumbi magana atanu (500.000Frw) kandi akazava muri gereza ari uko ayishyuye yose. Ntiyishimiye iyo mikirize ajurira mu Rukiko Rwisumbuye, narwo rwemeza ko nta gihindutse ku mikirize y’urubanza. Yatanze ikirego asaba gusobanuza urubanza RPA0358/13/TGI/NGOMA, no gufungurwa, ihazabu yaciwe akazayishyura ageze hanze kubera ko ari umukene udashobora kubona amafaranga y’ihazabu yaciwe kandi afunzwe, Urukiko rwemeza ko nta kidasobanutse muri urwo rubanza. Uwiringiyimana yasabye Urwego rw’Umuvunyi gusubirishamo urubanza RPA0358/13/TGI/NGOMA rwaciwe n’Urukiko Rwisumbuye rwa Ngoma ku mpamvu z’akarengane kubera ko inkiko zamurenganyije, Umuvunyi Mukuru yandikira Perezida w’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga asaba ko urwo rubanza rwasubirwamo ku mpamvu z’akarengane, maze nawe yemeza ko rusubirwamo. Ubushinjacyaha buvuga ko ibyo Uwiringiyimana avuga ko yarenganyijwe kuko Urukiko rwategetse ko azafungurwa ari 193

Page 220

uko amaze gutanga ihazabu byahabwa ishingiro, kuko asanga ashingiye ku mategeko, igihano cy’igifungo kirangirizwa muri gereza. Incamake y’icyemezo: Kuba Uwiringiyimana yarategetswe n’urukiko ko azafungurwa ari uko amaze kwishyura ihazabu ingana na 500.000Frw yaciwe, ni akarengane yagiriwe, kuko icyo gihano ntaho giteganyijwe mu mategeko y’u Rwanda. Ikirego cyo gusubirishamo ku mpamvu z’akarengane gifite ishingiro. Uwiringiyimana Aaron ahita arekurwa urubanza rukimara gusomwa. Amagarama aherereye ku isanduku ya Leta. Amategeko yashingiweho: Itegeko Ngenga N°01/2012/OL ryo ku wa 02/05/2012 rishyiraho igitabo cy’amategeko ahana, ingingo ya 436. Itegeko Ngenga N°03/2012/OL ryo ku wa 13/06/20012 rigena imiterere, imikorere n’ububasha by’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga, ingingo ya 81 igika cya 1, agace ka 2 n’aka 3. Nta manza zifashishijwe.

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 194

Page 221

Urubanza I. IMITERERE Y’URUBANZA [1] Uru rubanza rwatangiriye mu Rukiko rw’Ibanze rwa Sake mu rubanza RP0145/13/TB/SKE, Uwiringiyimana Aaron ashinjwa icyaha cyo gukomeretsa amatungo y’undi, Urukiko rwemeza ko icyo cyaha kimuhama, rumuhanisha igifungo cy’umwaka umwe (1), agatanga n’ihazabu y’amafaranga ibihumbi magana atanu (500.000Frw) kandi akazava muri gereza ari uko ayishyuye yose. [2] Uwiringiyimana Aaron ntiyishimiye iyo mikirize arajurira mu Rukiko Rwisumbuye, mu rubanza RPA0358/13/TGI/NGOMA, urukiko rwemeza ko imikirize y’urubanza RP0145/13/TB/SKE rwaciwe ku wa 31/10/2013 idahindutse muri byose. [3] Uwiringiyimana Aaron ntiyishimiye iyo mikirize atanga ikirego mu rubanza RPA0026/15/TGI/NGOMA asaba gusobanuza urubanza RPA0358/13/TGI/NGOMA, no gufungurwa, ihazabu yaciwe akazayishyura ageze hanze kubera ko ari umukene udashobora kubona amafaranga y’ihazabu yaciwe kandi afunzwe, Urukiko rwemeza ko nta kidasobanutse muri urwo rubanza. [4] Uwiringiyimana yasabye Urwego rw’Umuvunyi gusubirishamo urubanza RPA0358/13/TGI/NGOMA rwaciwe n’Urukiko Rwisumbuye rwa Ngoma ku mpamvu z’akarengane kubera ko inkiko zamurenganyije, Umuvunyi Mukuru yandikira Perezida w’Urukiko rw’Ikirenga ku itariki 25/06/2015, asaba ko urubanza RPA0358/13/TGI/NGOMArwavuzwe haruguru UBUSHINJACYAHA v. UWIRINGIYIMANA 195

Page 222

rwasubirwamo ku mpamvu z’akarengane, maze uyu yemeza ko rusubirwamo. [5] Urubanza rwaburanishijwe ku wa 29/02/2016 Uwiriyingiyimana Aaron yunganiwe na Me Mbonyimpaye Elias, Ubushinjacyaha buhagarariwe na Ntawangundi Béatrice, Umushinjacyaha ku rwego rw’Igihugu. II. IKIBAZO KIGIZE URUBANZA N’ISESENGURWA RYACYO Kumenya niba kuba Uwiringiyimana Aaron yarategetswe n’Urukiko ko azafungurwa abanje kwishyura ihazabu yose yaciwe bigize impamvu y’akarengane. [6] Uwiringiyimana avuga ko yasubirishijemo ku mpamvu z’akarengane urubanza RPA0358/13/TGI/NGOMA kubera ko Urukiko Rwisumbuye rwa Ngoma rwamuhanishije igifungo cy’umwaka umwe n’ihazabu ya 500.000Frw rugategeka ko azafungurwa abanje kuyishyura kandi adashobora kuyabona kuko afunzwe igihe kirekire kandi ari umukene. Asobanura ko mu gihe yarangije igihano cy’igifungo cy’umwaka umwe yari yarakatiwe, yakomeje gufungwa imyaka igera kuri ibiri, akaba asaba kurenganurwa akavanirwaho igihano yahawe cy’ihazabu agafungurwa. [7] Me Mbonyimpaye Elias umwunganira avuga ko umucamanza yaciye urubanza atubahirije ingingo ya 4 y’Itegeko Ngenga N°01/2012/OL ryo ku wa 02/05/2012 rishyiraho igitabo cy’amategeko ahana, aho iteganya ko inkiko zibujijwe guca imanza ku buryo bugenekereje, akaba asaba ko rero Uwiringiyimana yarenganurwa akarekurwa kuko ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 196

Page 223

atakomeza gufungwa azira ko atishyuye ihazabu, kandi atari ko amategeko abiteganya. [8] Avuga kandi ko n’ingingo ya 144 y’Itegeko Nshinga rya Repubulika y’u Rwanda ryakurikizwaga igihe Uwiringiyimana akora icyaha nayo itubahirijwe, akaba asaba ko uwo yunganira arenganurwa akarekurwa. [9] Ubushinjacyaha buvuga ko ibyo Uwiringiyimana avuga ko yarenganyijwe kuko Urukiko rwategetse ko azafungurwa ari uko amaze gutanga ihazabu yaciwe ingana na 500.000Frw kandi ari umukene atayabona kuko afunze, byahabwa ishingiro, kuko asanga ashingiye ku ngingo ya 229(1) y’Itegeko N°03/13 ryo ku wa 24/05/2013 ryerekeye imiburanishirize y’imanza nshinjabyaha iteganya ko “igihano cy’igifungo kirangirizwa muri gereza”, ku ngingo ya 232 y’Itegeko ryavuzwe ikaba iteganya ko “ihazabu ihabwa umwanditsi w’Urukiko mu minsi umunani (8) kuva urubanza rubaye ndakuka, ko icyo gihe gishobora kongerwa na Perezida w’Urukiko ariko ntikirenge amezi atandatu (6), no ku ngingo yaryo ya 233(2) igateganya ko “iyo icyo gihe kirangiye, uwatsinzwe atishyuye, hakoreshwa ingufu za Leta”, igihano cy’igifungo akaba ari cyo cyonyine kirangirizwa muri gereza, naho icy’ihazabu kikarangirizwa ku mitungo. [10] Kubera izo mpamvu, kuba muri 2014 Uwiringiyimana yari yararangije igihano cy’igifungo cy’umwaka yari yarakatiwe, ariko kugeza muri 2016 akaba agifunzwe, Ubushinjacyaha busanga yaragiriwe akarengane nk’uko abivuga, kuko yaba yaragizwe ingwate yo gufungwa mu mwanya wo kwishyura ihazabu, bisobanuye ko aramutse abuze iyo hazabu yazafungwa burundu kandi atari byo amategeko ateganya, bukaba busaba ko urukiko rwakwemeza ko yagiriwe UBUSHINJACYAHA v. UWIRINGIYIMANA 197

Page 224

akarengane, rukaba rwategeka ko afungurwa kuko yarangije igihano cy’igifungo cy’umwaka umwe yari yakatiwe.

UKO URUKIKO RUBIBONA [11] Ingingo ya 436 y’Itegeko Ngenga N°01/2012/OL ryo ku wa 02/05/2012 rishyiraho igitabo cy’amategeko ahana, urukiko rwashingiyeho ruhana Uwiringiyimana Aaron iteganya ko “Umuntu wese, ku bw’inabi kandi nta mpamvu, wica cyangwa ukomeretsa bikomeye amatungo y’undi, ahanishwa igifungo kuva ku mezi atandatu kugeza ku mwaka n’ihazabu y’amafaranga y’u Rwanda kuva ku bihumbi magana abiri kugeza kuri miliyoni ebyiri cyangwa kimwe gusa muri ibyo bihano”. [12] Ingingo ya 81 igika cya 1, agace ka 2 n’aka 3 y’Itegeko Ngenga N°03/2012/OL ryo ku wa 13/06/20012 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; Iyo urubanza rudashobora kurangizwa ukurikije imikirize yarwo. [13] Inyandiko mvugo y’ifunga iri muri dosiye y’urubanza igaragaza ko Uwiringiyimana Aaron yafunzwe ku wa 05/07/2013, naho urubanza rusabirwa gusubirwamo ku mpamvu z’akarengane rumukatira igifungo cy’umwaka n’ihazabu ya 500.000Frw akazava muri gereza ari uko ayishyuye yose. ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 198

Page 225

UBUSHINJACYAHA v. UWIRINGIYIMANA 199 [14] Urukiko rurasanga kuva Uwiringiyimana Aaron afungwa ku wa 05/07/2013 kugeza ku wa 04/07/2014, umwaka w’igifungo yakatiwe n’Urukiko Rwisumbuye rwa Ngoma yari awurangije, agumishwamo n’uko atishyuye ihazabu ya 500.000Frw kuko urwo rukiko rwategetse ko azavamo ari uko arangije kuyishyura yose. [15] Urukiko rurasanga, kuba Uwiringiyimana Aaron yarategetswe n’urukiko ko azafungurwa ari uko amaze kwishyura ihazabu ingana na 500.000Frw yaciwe, ari akarengane yagiriwe, kuko uretse ko ntaho icyo gihano giteganyijwe mu ngingo ya 436 y’Itegeko Ngenga N°01/2012/OL ryo ku wa 02/05/2012 ryavuzwe haruguru, nta n’aho giteganyijwe mu yandi mategeko y’u Rwanda. [16] Urukiko rurasanga rero, kuba muri 2014 Uwiringiyimana Aaron yari yararangije igihano cy’igifungo cy’umwaka yakatiwe, agakomeza gufungwa kugeza n’uyu munsi, ari akarengane yagiriwe, kuko yakomeje gufungwa aho kwishyuzwa ihazabu kandi atari byo amategeko ateganya. Urukiko rukaba rusanga agomba gufungurwa kuko yarangije igihano cy’igifungo cy’umwaka umwe yakatiwe, ihazabu yategetswe kwishyura ikavanwaho kuko itakurikije amategeko. [17] Hashingiwe ku ngingo z’amategeko zimaze kuvugwa, Urukiko rurasanga urubanza RPA0358/13/TGI/NGOMA rwaciwe ku wa 31/10/2013 n’Urukiko Rwisumbuye rwa Ngoma rwarirengagije amategeko kandi rutanashobora kurangizwa mu gihe Uwiringiyimana Aaron agaragaza ko atishoboye, ariko nyamara urwo rubanza rukaba rwarategetse ko azava muri gereza ari uko yarangije kwishyura 500.000Frw y’ihazabu yaciwe bivuze ko atazavamo kandi igihano cy’igifungo yakatiwe ari umwaka umwe gusa, bityo rero uru rubanza

Page 226

rwamuteje akarengane rukaba rugomba kuvanwaho ku bijyanye n’ibyo rwategetse ko azava muri gereza ari uko yarangije kwishyura 500.000Frw y’ihazabu yaciwe, akarekurwa uru rubanza rukimara gusomwa kuko yarangije igihano cy’igifungo yakatiwe. III. ICYEMEZO CY’URUKIKO [18] Rwemeje ko ikirego cya Uwiringiyimana Aaron cyo gusubirishamo ku mpamvu z’akarengane gifite ishingiro. [19] Rwemeje ko urubanza RPA0358/13/TGI/NGOMA rwaciwe ku wa 21/02/2014 n’Urukiko Rwisumbuye rwa Ngoma n’urubanza RP0145/13/TB/SKE rwaciwe n’Urukiko rw’Ibanze rwa Sake ku wa 31/10/2013 zihindutse, ku bijyanye n’ibyo zemeje ko Uwiringiyimana Aaron azafungurwa ari uko yishyuye ihazabu yose yaciwe. [20] Rutegetse ko igihano Uwiringiyimana Aaron yahawe cy’uko azava muri gereza ari uko arangije kwishyura 500.000Frw y’ihazabu yaciwe kivanyweho. [21] Rutegetse ko Uwiringiyimana Aaron ahita arekurwa urubanza rukimara gusomwa. [22] Rutegetse ko amagarama y’urubanza aherera ku Isanduku ya Leta.

ICYEGERANYO CY’IBYEMEZO BY’INKIKO 200

Page 227

RWANDA LAW

REPORTS

ENGLISH VERSION

Page 229

i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TEAM OF EDITORS ................................................................ iii PREFACE ................................................................................. vi SCOPE OF THE REPORTS .................................................... vii CITATION ............................................................................... vii

LIST OF STATUTES AND STATUTORY INSTRUMENTS CONSIDERED ........................................................................ viii LIST OF CASES CONSIDERED .............................................. x SUBJECT INDEX ..................................................................... xi Re AKAGERA BUSINESS GROUP (PETITION FOR THE

REPEAL OF THE LEGAL PROVISION INCONSISTENT WITH THE CONSTITUTION) ................................................. 1 NTUKAMAZINA v. PRIME INSURANCE LTD (EX- COGEAR LTD)........................................................................ 29 NYIRANDORIMANA v. GOVERNMENT OF RWANDA (MINADEF) ET AL ................................................................. 45 KAPERE v. IYAMUREMYE .................................................. 57 NYIRAKAMANA ET AL v. MUKASHARANGABO ET AL .................................................................................................. 85 NTEGEYE v. ECOBANK RWANDA LTD ET AL ............. 121 RRA v. TOTAL RWANDA SARL/ENGEN RWANDA LTD ................................................................................................ 141

Page 230

ii

PROSECUTION v. MINANI ET AL .................................... 165 PROSECUTION v. NSANZINTWALI ................................. 177 PROSECUTION v. UWIRINGIYIMANA ............................ 187

Page 231

iii

TEAM OF EDITORS

LAW REPORTING TEAM

KAGABO U. Stephanie

MUJABI K. Naphtal

MWIHOREZE Claudine

NTIHEMUKA Emmanuel

UWIMANA Gisèle

Page 232

iv

MULTI-INSTITUTIONAL COMMITTEE

MUGENZI Louis Marie : President of the Committee Supreme Court Judge

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

RUTAZANA Angeline : Secretary of the Committee Inspector of Courts

Me BAGABO Faustin : Advocate at Rwanda Bar Association

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

GIRANEZA Clémentine : President of Primary Court

HABARUREMA Jean Pierre : Prosecutor at National Level

KALIWABO Charles : President of High Court

Page 233

Me KAYIHURA Didas : Advocate at Rwanda Bar Association

KIBUKA Jean Luc : Judge at Commercial High Court

MUREREREHE Saouda : Judge at High Court

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

UWANTEGE Yvette : Juge at Intermediate Court

v MULTI-INSTITUTIONAL COMMITTEE

Page 234

vi

PREFACE Esteemed readers, We are pleased to present to you the Rwanda Law Report V. II [2017]. As you are aware, the Report is published once a trimester, in order to highlight the cases containing guiding principles on a specific legal issue, so that they can easily be accessible to the users. As usual, each case is preceded by catchwords, facts and the holding, aiming at giving an overview of its particularity without reading the whole of it. This volume includes ten (10) cases, namely one case (1) on a Constitutional matter, two (2) civil cases, one (1) procedural case, one (1) labour case, two (2) commercial cases, and three (3) criminal cases. This volume of Rwanda Law Reports can be accessed on the website of the judiciary: which facilitates users to find cases easily and quickly on http://decisia.lexum.com/rlr/en/nav.do. Prof. Sam RUGEGE Chief Justice

Page 235

vii

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

CITATION The Reports in this volume are cited thus: [2017] 2 RLR

Page 236

viii

LIST OF STATUTES AND STATUTORY

INSTRUMENTS CONSIDERED Constitution of the Republic of Rwanda of 2003 revised in 2015, articles 15 and 16 …………………………………………….3 article 151…………………………………………………….31 The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) of 10 December 1948, article 7……………………………………………4 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights of 16 December 1966, articles 14 and 26...……………………………..4 International Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination against Women of 18 December 1979 signed at New York, article 5(a)…..………………………………………….90 Organic Law N°03/2012/OL of 13/06/20012 determining the organization, functioning and jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, articles 79 and 81……………………………………………61 article 81 para. 1, litera 2 and 3..………………………..188 article 53(2)…………………………………………………....3 Organic Law N°01/2012/OL of 02/05/2012 instituting the penal code, article 436…………………………………………………..188 Organic Law No59/2008 of 10/09/2008 on Prevention and Punishment of Gender- based violence, article 39..…………...90 Law Nº30/2013 of 24/5/2013 relating to the code of criminal procedure, article 165…….……………………………………...178 Law N°21/2012 of 14/06/2012 relating to the civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure, article 168(3)………………….............................................4 articles 186 and 193…………………………………………61

Page 237

article2………………………………………………………..90 articles 208, 216 and 217..…………………………………31 article 9……………………………………………………...143 Law Nº74/2008 of 31/12/2008 modifying and complementing the Law Nº25/2005 on tax procedures, article 1(5).………….…4 Law Nº15/2004 of 12/06/2004 relating to evidence and its production, article 3...……………………………………………...61 Decree law of 30 July 1888 relating to contracts or obligations, article 258.……………………………………………………47 articles 591 and 595……………………………………….125 article 258…………………………………………………….61 Presidential Order No31/01 0f 25/08/2003 on compensation for personal injury due to accidents caused by motor vehicles, article 18……………………………………………………………..47 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 56 and 58.………………..90 Constitution of the Republic of Rwanda of 20/12/1978, articles 16 and 93(2).………………………………………………………...89 Law Nº42/1988 of 27/10/1988 instituting the preliminary title and civil code book I, article 175…………………………………90 Law Nº6/1988 of 12/02/1988 regulating companies, article 8...............................................................................................143 Constitution of the Republic of Rwanda of 24/11/1962, article 28..…………………………………………………………………….89 Decree - Law Nº21/77 of 18/08/1977 instituting the penal code, articles 82 and 312……………………………………..…………167 ix

LIST OF STATUTES

Page 238

x

LIST OF CASES CONSIDERED Mberabagabo et al v. Dunia et al, RS/REV/INJUST/COM/0001/13/CS rendered by the Supreme Court on 03 January 2014.........................................................61 Frank Lyon co v United States, 435 U.S. 561 (1978)..............143 Beauvallet v Naturana, No81-1372881-16259, 7 Mars 1984, Cour de cassation, chambre Commerciale.…………………...143 Salomon v Salomon & Co Ltd [1896] UKHL 1 (16 November 1896)……………......................................................................143 State versus Chretien 1981 (1) SA 1097 (A).…………………..167 Firma A. Racke v Hauptzollamt Mainz, Court of Justice of the European Union …………………………………….......................4 Backus v. Fort St. Union Depot Co., 169 U.S. 557, 18 S. Ct. 445, 42 L. Ed. 853 (1898).…………………………………….........4 S v Lawrence 1997 (4) SA 1176 para. 44-45.…………………….4 Eur.Court HR, Case “relating to certain aspects of the laws on the use of language in education in Belgium” judgment of 23 July 1968, series A, No6, p.31. para 10.…………………………..4 UNHR, Dudko v. Australia, Comm. No1347/2005, UN.Doc. CCPR//90/D/1347/2005 (Aug.29.2007 para. 7.4....................... 4

Page 239

xi

SUBJECT INDEX Company Law – Sale of shares – Sale of company asset – The sale of shares should not be considered as a sale of company assets and it is exempt from tax – Law Nº6/1988 of 12/02/1988 which regulated the companies when the contract was made, article 8. RRA v. TOTAL RWANDA SARL/ENGEN RWANDA LTD…………………………………………………...141 Constitution – Unconstitutionality – Petition to repeal the provision of article 1(5) of the Law Nº74/2008 of 31/12/2008 modifying and complementing the Law Nº25/2005 on tax procedures – Taxpayer litigant – Production of new evidence at appeal level – The fact that taxpayers are not allowed to produce new evidence at appeal level, should not be considered as different treatment with regard to other litigants, because this treatment relies on their special status and legal duty to keep account statements – The Constitution of the republic of Rwanda of 2003 revised in 2015, articles 15 and 16 – Organic Law No03/2012/OL of 13/06/2012 determining the organisation, functioning and jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, article 53(2) – The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) of 10 December 1948, article 7 – International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights of 16 December 1966, articles 14 and 26 – Law N°21/2012 of 14/06/2012 relating to civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure, article 168(3) – Law Nº74/2008 of 31/12/2008 modifying and complementing the Law Nº25/2005 on tax procedures, article 1(5). Re AKAGERA BUSINESS GROUP………………………..1

Page 240

Contract – Transaction agreement – Whenever the litigants agree to terminate a dispute, this agreement should be binding on them given that the transaction agreement stands for a final judgment – Decree of 30/07/1888 relating to contracts or obligations, articles 591 and 595. NTEGEYE v. ECOBANK RWANDA LTD ET AL.121 Criminal Law – Injustice – To order a person to remain in prison until he/she pays the fine is an injustice because it is not provided for under Rwandan law. PROSECUTION v. UWIRINGIYIMANA.………...187 Aggravating circumstance – Consuming drugs in order to commit the offence constitutes an aggravating circumstance instead of being a mitigating circumstance or a ground for escaping criminal responsibility. PROSECUTION v. MINANI ET AL……………….165 Criminal Procedure Law – Benefit of doubt – When there exist grounds of doubt, it favours the accused – Law Nº30/2013 of 24/5/2013 relating to the code of criminal procedure, article 165. PROSECUTION v. NSANZINTWALI….…………177 Damages – Body injury damages – Body injury damages computation rely on tangible facts such as the income, incapacity rate and lucrative years of survival.

NYIRANDORIMANA v.

GOVERNMENT OF RWANDA (MINADEF) ET AL.……………………..45 Procedural fees – Counsel fees – No procedural or counsel fees are awarded to the litigant who lost the case, rather it is down to him to be charged them in the benefit of his opponent – Decree of 30 July 1888 relating to contracts or obligations, article 258. KAPERE v. IYAMUREMYE………………………............57 xii

RWANDA LAW REPORTS

Page 241

Moral damages – Pecuniary damages – Counsel fees – Procedural expenses – The litigant who loses the case is not awarded moral damages – In case the court rejects the claim of the plaintiff, the respondent is awarded procedural expenses and counsel fees as long as he/she hired the advocate services – The counsel fees are awarded upon the discretion of the court in case the requested amount is excessive. NTEGEYE v. ECOBANK RWANDA LTD ET AL.121 Execution of the judgment – Entirety of the judgment – The court decisions must be executed as they were rendered unless they were reversed in the appeal process – Constitution of the Republic of Rwanda of 2003 revised in 2015, article 151. NTUKAMAZINA v. PRIME INSURANCE LTD (EX- COGEAR LTD)……………………………………….29 The motion for a penalty forcing the execution of a judgment – The motion for a penalty forcing the execution of the judgment is requested during the hearing of the case in merit and not during the hearing of the case relating to the dispute arising from the execution of the judgment – Law Nº21/2012 of 14/06/2012 Law relating to the civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure, article 217. NTUKAMAZINA v. PRIME INSURANCE LTD (EX- COGEAR LTD)……………………………………….29 Family law – Marriage contract – The validity of the second marriage contract while the first one is not annulled – No one may enter into a new marriage before the annulment or dissolution of the previous marriage – Constitution of xiii

SUBJECT INDEX

Page 242

the Republic of Rwanda of 24/11/1962, article 28 – Law Nº42/1988 of 27/10/1988 instituting civil code book I, article 175. NYIRAKAMANA ET AL v. MUKASHARANGABO ET AL…………………………………………………..85 Marriage contract – Sharing of property – In case spouses separate, they equally share the existing property at the time of their separation. NYIRAKAMANA ET AL v. MUKASHARANGABO ET AL…………………………………………………..85 Cohabitation – Sharing property – The cohabitant only share equally the property they co-owned – Organic law No59/2008 of 10/09/2008 on prevention and punishment of gender-based violence, article 39. NYIRAKAMANA ET AL v. MUKASHARANGABO ET AL…………………………………………………..85 Testament – Invalidation of the testament – The testament is invalid when it discriminates the children basing on gender and also when the de cujus tacitly changed testament before his death – Constitution of the Republic of Rwanda of 20/12/1978, articles 16 and 93(2) – International Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination against Women of 18 December 1979 signed at New York, article 5(a). NYIRAKAMANA ET AL v. MUKASHARANGABO ET AL…………………………………………………..85

xiv

RWANDA LAW REPORTS

Page 243

Donation – Invalidation of donation contract – The donation made without the consent of the co-owner and with the purpose to discriminate the children, is invalid. NYIRAKAMANA ET AL v. MUKASHARANGABO ET AL…………………………………………………..85 Jurisdiction of courts – Case review due to injustice – Judgment rendered under review – The application for review due to injustice consists of an extraordinary remedy meant to rectify the errors made in the final judgment, therefore even the judgment rendered under review is likely to be subject to this extraordinary remedy – Organic Law Nº03/2012/OL of 13/06/2012 determining the organisation, functioning and jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, articles 79 and 81 – Law N°21/2012 of 14/06/2012 relating to civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure, articles 186 and 193. KAPERE v. IYAMUREMYE………………………...57 Law governing land – Land disputes – The master plan of plots allocation in custody of competent authority can constitute a reliable evidence of ownership of disputed plot of land – Law Nº15/2004 of 12/06/2004 relating to evidence and its production, article 3. KAPERE v. IYAMUREMYE………………………...57 Liability – Tort – Negligence – Damages – Duty to safe keep the arsenal – The Government is negligent when it fails to safe keep and monitor its arsenal and in case it is illicitly used, it should be held liable for damages.

NYIRANDORIMANA v.

GOVERNMENT OF RWANDA (MINADEF) ET AL……………………...45 xv

SUBJECT INDEX

Page 245

CONSTITUTIONAL CASE

Page 247

Re AKAGERA BUSINESS GROUP (PETITION FOR THE REPEAL OF THE

LEGAL PROVISION INCONSISTENT WITH THE CONSTITUTION) [Rwanda SUPREME COURT – RS/SPEC/0001/16/CS (Rugege, P.J., Mukanyundo, Hatangimbabazi, Kanyange, Mukamulisa, Rugabirwa, Hitiyaremye, Ngagi and Nyirandabaruta, J.) September 23, 2016] Constitution – Unconstitutionality – Petition to repeal the provision of article 1(5)of the Law Nº74/2008 of 31/12/2008 modifying and complementing the Law Nº25/2005 on tax procedures – Taxpayer litigant – Production of new evidence at appeal level – The fact that taxpayers are not allowed to produce new evidence at appeal level, should not be considered as different treatment with regard to other litigants, because this treatment relies on their special status and legal duty to keep account statements – The Constitution of the republic of Rwanda of 2003 revised in 2015, articles 15 and 16 – Organic Law No03/2012/OL of 13/06/2012 determining the organisation, functioning and jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, article 53(2) – The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) of 10 December 1948, article 7 – International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights of 16 December 1966, articles 14 and 26 – Law N°21/2012 of 14/06/2012 relating to civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure, article 168(3) – Law Nº74/2008 of 31/12/2008 modifying and complementing the Law Nº25/2005 on tax procedures, article 1(5). 1

Page 248

Facts: ABG filed a claim to the Commercial High Court whereby it sued Rwanda Revenue Authority (RRA) requesting the reduction of the tax imposed amounting to 1,050,442,993Frw. The Commercial High Court ruled that the ABG loses the case due to the failure to produce evidence for its allegations. ABG appealed the case to the Supreme Court alleging that there exist elements of evidence submitted to the Commercial High Court which it did not examine. In the defence submission, RRA stated that ABG did not produce evidence in support of its allegations. In the course of preliminary hearing before the Supreme Court, ABG indicated the elements of evidence which were not examined and subsequently RRA prepared the additional defence submission whereby it requested their inadmissibility according to article 1(5) of the Law Nº74/2008 of 31/12/2008 modifying and complementing the Law Nº25/2005 on tax procedures. After ABG realised that those elements of evidence were disregarded by the court at all, it seized the Supreme Court whereby it alleged that the provision of article 1(5) of the Law Nº74/2008 of 31/12/2008 modifying and complementing the Law Nº25/2005 on tax procedures on which RRA relies, should be repealed because it is inconsistent with the provisions of articles 11 and 16 of the Constitution of Rwanda of 04 June 2003 as it was applicable at the time the petition was submitted. After the submission of the petition, ABG submitted the additional submissions whereby it intended to indicate the amendment of provisions of the constitution, where article 16 became was 15 while article 11 became 16. Held: 1. Though the provision of article 1(5) of the Law Nº74/2008 of 31/12/2008 modifying and complementing the

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 2

Page 249

Law Nº25/2005 on tax procedures does not treat the taxpayers litigants in the same manner as litigants in other kind of litigations, it does not contain inequality before and protection of the law as well as any kind of discrimination.

2. The fact that taxpayers are not allowed to produce evidence they did not exhibit at the time of audit at appeal level, while the tax administration is allowed to do so, should not be considered as inequality of arms before the court. Rather, this is justified by the fact that taxpayers are the only custodians of those elements of evidence who can avail them in due time. Therefore, due to the particularity of the taxpayer litigants, the law treats them differently from other litigants for reasonable grounds and which are not intended to prevent them from enjoyment of their rights and other privileges entitled to them by the Law.

3. The provision of the law which is petioned to be repealed is not inconsistent with the provision of articles 15 and 16 of the Constitution because it does not contain inequality of treatment and any discrimination by the law. Petion without merit. Court fees to the petitioner. Statutes and statutory instruments referred to: National statutes and ratified conventions: Constitution of the republic of Rwanda of 2003 revised in 2015, articles 15 and 16. Organic Law No03/2012/OL of 13/06/2012 determining the organisation, functioning and jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, article 53(2). Re AKAGERA BUSINESS GROUP 3

Page 250

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) of 10 December 1948, article 7. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights of 16 December 1966, articles 14 and 26. Law N°21/2012 of 14/06/2012 relating to civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure, article 168(3). Law Nº74/2008 of 31/12/2008 modifying and complementing the Law Nº25/2005 on tax procedures, article 1(5). Foreign legislation: The Constitution of the Republic of Kenya 2010, articles 27(1o, 4o and 5o). The Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996, articles 9(1) and 3. Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, article 15. Cases referred to: Cases from foreign courts: Firma A. Racke v Hauptzollamt Mainz, Court of Justice of the European Union Backus v. Fort St. Union Depot Co., 169 U.S. 557, 18 S. Ct. 445, 42 L. Ed. 853 (1898). S v Lawrence 1997 (4) SA 1176 para. 44-45. Eur.Court HR, Case “relating to certain aspects of the laws on the use of language in education in Belgium” judgment of 23 July 1968, series A, No6.p.31. para 10. UNHR, Dudko v. Australia, Comm. No1347/2005, UN.Doc. CCPR//90/D/1347/2005 (Aug. 29. 2007 para 7.4.)

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 4

Page 251

Authors cited: Human Rights Committee, General Comment 18, Non- discrimination (Thirty-seventh session, 1989), Compilation of General Comments and General Recommendations Adopted by Human Rights Treaty Bodies, U.N. Doc.HRI/GEN/1/Rev.1 at 26 (1994). Primsloo Van der Linde 1997(3) SA 1012 CC para.

22. Communication No172/1984 S.W.M. Broeks v The Netherlands (views adopted on 9 April 1987) in UN Doc. GOAR, A/42/40 P.150, para.

13. CJCE, aff. 283/83, 13 novembre 1984, Racke/Hauptzollamt Mainz, Rec., 1984, p.3791. ; CJCE, aff. 106/83, 13 décembre 1984, Société Sermide, Rec., p.4209 ; CEDH, 6 Avril 2000, Thlimennos c. Grèce, N°34369/97. Hogg “Proof of facts in Constitutional Cases (1976) 26 University of Toronto Law Journal 386 at 396-7. UNHR, Dudko v Australia, Comm. No1347/2005, UN.Doc.CCPR//90/D/1347/2005 (Aug.29.2007para 7.4. United Nations Human Rights Committee, General Comment No.32, Article 14, Right to equality before Courts and tribunals and fair trial, UN.Doc. CCPR//G/32/Aug.23, 2007 para 13. Judgment I. BRIEF BACKGROUND OF THE

CASE [1] ABG filed the claim to the Commercial High Court against Rwanda Revenue Authority (RRA) whereby it requested the reduction of imposed tax amounting to 1,050,442,993Frw. Re AKAGERA BUSINESS GROUP 5

Page 252

The Commercial High Court delivered the judgment on 20/12/2012, whereby it decided the ABG loses the case due to the failure to provide evidence in support of its allegations. ABG appealed against the case to the Supreme Court alleging that there are elements of evidence disregarded by Commercial High Court. In the Supreme Court, the judgment was recorded on NoRCOMA0009/13/CS. [2] In its defense submission, RRA stated that ABG did not produce evidence in support of its pretentions. In the course of preliminary hearing before the Supreme Court, ABG indicated elements of evidence it alleges were disregarded. Meantime, RRA prepared the additional defense submissions whereby it relied on article 1(5) of the Law Nº74/2008 of 31/12/2008 modifying and complementing the Law Nº25/2005 on tax procedures to request the rejection of those elements of evidence. [3] Subsequently, ABG petitioned the Supreme Court requesting article 1(5) of the Law Nº74/2008 of 31/12/2008 modifying and complementing the Law Nº25/2005 on tax procedures on which RRA relies to be repealed because it is inconsistent with article 11 and 16 of the Constitution of the Republic of Rwanda of June 4, 2003 as amended to date, and the petition was registered on N° RS/SPEC/0001/16/CS. [4] After the initiation of the petition, the Constitution was revised, therefore ABG submitted additional explanations of the petition intending to indicate the changes in the constitution whereby article 15 was 16 and 16 was article 11. The petition was examined in the hearing held on 19/07/2016, where AKAGERA BUSINESS GROUP was represented by Counsel Nsengiyumva Abel while the Ministry of Justice which was

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 6

Page 253

summoned to submit its opinion was represented by the State Attorney Kabibi Speciose. II. ANALYSIS OF LEGAL ISSUE Whether article 1(5) of the Law Nº74/2008 modifying and complementing the Law Nº25/2005 on tax procedures is inconsistent with the provision of article 15 and 16 of the Constitution of the Republic of Rwanda of June 4, 2003 revised in 2015. [5] Counsel Nsengiyumva Abel representing ABG states that articles 15 and 16 of the Constitution provide for equal treatment and that all Rwandans are born and remain equal in rights. These provisions read along with article 1(5) of the Law Nº74/2008 of 31/12/2008 modifying and complementing the Law Nº25/2005 on tax procedures which states that the taxpayer is not allowed to submit at any level of appeal, other documents or statements he/she did not submit at the time of tax audit, which implies that the taxpayers in the capacity of litigants are bared from some rights which are however bestowed to litigants in other kind of cases, and this is therefore the obstruction of their constitutional rights. [6] He states further that the fact that the taxpayer has obligation to prepare and preserve account statements, should not be a ground to be treated differently from other litigants, because even in case it becomes clear that there was tax fraud, the author could be punished or ordered to pay a heavy tax as a fine rather than preventing him from the opportunity to produce his supporting evidence whenever he finds them since he may be unaware of them while they may be useful. Re AKAGERA BUSINESS GROUP 7

Page 254

[7] He states in addition that it is not clear how in cases other than tax, litigants are permitted to submit new evidence and grounds at any instance level including appeal which were not raised at the first instance, while this is not allowed in tax cases whereby only the tax administration is permitted to do so and taxpayer prohibited. He closes his defence by stating that this is inconsistent with the Constitution given that the taxpayer is not treated equally with another litigant to ordinary cases whereas they should be governed by same general principles, and this consists of inequality of treatment which is inconsistent with article 15 and 16 of the Constitution. [8] Counsel Kabibi Spéciose, the state attorney states that article 1(5) of the Law Nº74/2008 of 31/12/2008 modifying and implementing the Law Nº25/2005 on tax procedure is not inconsistent with articles 15 and 16 of the Constitution of 2003 revised in 2015, because this provision does not intend to prevent the taxpayers from submitting conclusive evidence as ABG insinuates, rather, this article emphysizes the duties of the taxpayer to keep the documents and account statements at the business place and has obligation to produce them in the course of the tax audit unless there are reasonable grounds. It states that it is inconceivable for the law which provides for these obligations to allow at the same time the

taxpayer to submit these documents and statements of account at the appeal level without reasonable grounds which prevented him from submitting them at the time of the tax audit. [9] She explains that in tax cases, the taxpayer and tax administration are not in the same position to the extent that the Law may treat them equally, because RRA does not have obligation to fill and keep account statements of the taxpayer

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 8

Page 255

since article 13 of Law Nº25/2005 on tax procedure provides for the obligation of the trader to keep documents and account statements to prove the real picture of his/her business. This is the reason why the tax auditor should find them at the business place, and if the trader was allowed to submit them later, this obligation to keep them would be vain. [10] She concludes that another element emphysizing that litigants who are not in the same category should not be governed by the same law, is the fact that in ordinary cases, whenever the litigant submits elements of evidence is not likely to affect his opponent, while concerning the taxpayer, he/she may deny to submit his/her account statements at the time of tax audit with the intent of tax evasion due to the fact that his/her income cannot be known while it constitutes the tax base.

OPINION OF THE COURT [11] Article 53(2) of the Organic Law N°03/2012/OL of 13/06/2012 determining the organization, functioning and jurisdiction of the Supreme Court states that the Supreme Court shall also hear petitions regarding the partial or complete repealing of an organic law, an ordinary law, or a decree-law on account of non-conformity with the Constitution. As stated above, ABG petitioned to declare article 1(5) of the Law Nº74/2008 of 31/12/2008 modifying and complementing the Law Nº25/2005 on tax procedure because he finds it inconsistent with articles 15 and 16 of the Constitution. [12] Article 15 of the Constitution of the Republic of Rwanda of 2003 as revised in 2015 states that “All persons are equal before the law. They are entitled to equal protection of the law”, Re AKAGERA BUSINESS GROUP 9

Page 256

while its article 16 states that “All Rwandans are born and remain equal in rights and freedoms. Discrimination of any kind or its propaganda based on, inter alia, ethnic origin, family or ancestry, clan, skin colour or race, sex, region, economic categories, religion or faith, opinion, fortune, cultural differences, language, economic status, physical or mental disability or any other form of discrimination are prohibited and punishable by law”. [13] The provision for which the repeal is petitioned consists of article 1(5) of the Law Nº74/2008 of 31/12/2008 modifying and complementing the Law Nº25/2005 on tax procedure which reads “[…..] the taxpayer shall not be allowed to provide at any stage of appeal, any additional evidence that had not been produced during the audit”. This provision modified and complemented article 20 of the Law Nº25/2005 of 04/12/2005 on tax procedure which is in the title of this law concerning tax audit and investigation. [14] In order to provide a right answer to the issue raised in this case, it is necessary to interpret the provisions of both articles of the Constitution to find their meaning about the right of: (i) Equality before the law (ii) Non-discrimination. [15] These two provisions are linked to the extent that their separate interpretation is hard. Article 15 states that all persons are equal before the law. They are entitled to equal protection of the law. This implies that there should not be discrimination from equal protection or loss of rights where they should be entitled to them. Article 16 states in addition how distinction of

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 10

Page 257

people is considered as a discrimination which is prohibited by the Constitution. Both articles ought to be considered as containing same principle but which is divided into two parts which are related. [16] As it was stated by United Nations Human Rights Committee: “Non–discrimination, together with equality before the law and equal protection of the law without discrimination, constitute a basic and general principle relating to the protection of human rights1”. The link between articles 15 and 16 of the Constitution is the ground for which in other countries, the two principles are joined in single provision of the Constitution. In Canada for instance, article 15 of Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms states that: “[e]very individual is equal before and under the law and has the right of equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and in particular without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability”. [17] In Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948, its article 7 reads that: “All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law. All are entitled to equal protection against discrimination in violation of this Declaration and against any incitement to such discrimination”. In addition, article 26 of International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1966 states that: “All persons are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law. In this respect, the law shall

1 Human Rights Committee, General Comment 18, Non-discrimination (Thirty-seventh session, 1989), Compilation of General Comments and General Recommendations Adopted by Human Rights Treaty Bodies, U.N. Doc.HRI/GEN/1/Rev.1 at 26 (1994). Re AKAGERA BUSINESS GROUP 11

Page 258

prohibit any discrimination and guarantee to all persons equal and effective protection against discrimination on any ground such as race, colour, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status”. The provisions of the Constitution of Kenya2 and South Africa3 are also drafted in that way. This is the reason why the Constitutional Court of South Africa stated that the examination of the issue of equality before the law and non-discrimination in the same judgment but in separate way is not desirable and feasible because the principle of equality before the law and non-discrimination is the same principle constituted by linked parts4. Even in this judgment, both issues shall be examined together, whereby answer to the following issue shall be provided: What does equality before the law and equal protection without discrimination mean? [18] Equality before the law and non-dicrimination do not imply that distinction of individuals itself in all circumstances is a discrimination. Distinction of people or group of people could be necessary depending on objective and existence of legitimate or rational purpose. For instance, the government may award some help to needy or vulnerable groups of people like children, disabilities, indigenous and others, without according the same to the rest, or it may take affirmative action in favor of women. This may not be considered as discrimintion, rather it is alegitimate differentiation. This has also been communicated by

2The Constitution of Kenya 2010, Article 27, litera1, 4 and 5. 3The Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996, article 9, para. 1 and 3. 4 “It may be neither desirable nor feasible to divide the various subsections or descriptions into water tight compartments”. Primsloo Van der Linde 1997(3) SA 1012 CC para.

22.

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 12

Page 259

the United Nations Committee in the following terms: “The right to equality before the law and equal protection of the law without any discrimination, does not make all differences of treatment discriminatory. A differentiation based on reasonable and objective criteria does not amount to prohibited discrimination within the meaning of article 265. [19] In the course of providing advisory opinion on the revision of the constitution of Costa Rica, the Inter American Court of Human Rights explained clearly the meaning of equality and discrimination. It held that: “Precisely because equality and nondiscrimination are inherent in the idea of the oneness in dignity and worth of all human beings, it follows that not all differences in legal treatment are discriminatory as such, for not all differences in legal treatment are in themselves offensive to human dignity […..]. There may well exist certain factual inequalities that might legitimately give rise to inequalities in legal treatment that do not violate the principle of justice. They may in fact be instrumental in achieving justice or in protecting those who find themselves in a weak legal position. Accordingly, no discrimination exists if the difference in treatment has a legitimate purpose and if it does not lead to situations which are contrary to justice, to reason or to the nature of things. It follows, that there would be no discrimination in differences in treatment of individuals by a state when the classifications selected are based on substantial factual differences and there exists a reasonable relationship of proportionality between these differences and the aims of the legal rule under review. These aims may not be unjust or

5 Communication No172/1984 S.W.M. Broeks v The Netherlands (views adopted on 9 April 1987) in UN Doc. GOAR, A/42/40 P.150, para 13. Re AKAGERA BUSINESS GROUP 13

Page 260

unreasonable, that is, they may not be arbitrary, capricious, despotic or in conflict with the essential oneness and dignity of human kind”6. [20] In the case Firma A. Racke v Hauptzollamt Mainz, the Court of Justice of the European Union explained that “[……] discrimination consists solely in the application of different rules to comparable situations or in the application of the same rule to differing situations [….]7”. It is therefore clear that the differentiation of people in different groups does not constitute a discrimination, but on the other hand, the application of same rules to different groups of people may constitute a discrimination. [21] The aforementioned article 1(5) of the Law Nº74/2008 of 31/12/2008, constitutes the basis of the allegations of the petitioner concerning the inconsistency with the constitution whereby he states that this provision differentiates between a taxpayer litigant and a litigant in other kind of cases and operates inequality before the Law because the litigant in cases other than tax is allowed to produce evidence at any stage of proceedings. Do these constitute inequality before the law and discrimination? [22] Article 16 of the Constitution indicates clearly the list of reasons of differentiation. In general, discrimination means differentiation of people with intent to prevent some rights to

6 I-A Court H.R, Proposed Amendment to the Naturalization Provision of the Constitution of Costa Rica, Advisory Opinion OC 4/84 of Jan 19, 1984, series A No4, p.104-106 paras 56-57. 7 CJCE, aff. 283/83, 13 novembre 1984, Racke/Hauptzollamt Mainz, Rec., 1984, p.3791; CJCE, aff. 106/83, 13 décembre 1984, Société Sermide, Rec., p.4209; CEDH, 6 Avril 2000, Thlimennos c. Grèce, N°34369/97.

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 14

Page 261

them and favor others under illegitimate reasons. As far as this case is concerned, there exists the category of litigants in tax disputes, tax administration and litigants in other kind of cases. In these categories, none of them relies on one of legitimate reasons of differentiation as specified in the constitution. [23] In case the differentiation of people relies on the reason specified in article 16 of the Constitution, it is considered as discrimination unless it is provided a legitimate reason of unequal treatment of individuals provided in the aforementioned article 16. However, this article 16 provides for the list of reasons on which differentiation may rely but varying the text with the following sentence “or any other form of discrimination”. That is the reason why it should be examined the law or whatever act alleged to be inconsistent with this provision in order to indicate whether or not there is discrimination. As explained in previous paragraph, if differentiation of people does not rely on one of the reasons indicated on the list provided for by article 16, it is examined if the given reason is legitimate and with interest to people in general or to a given group. [24] It is realy true that in ordinary cases, the litigant is allowed to produce new elements of evidence at any stage of proceedings that was not produced at first instance level. Article 168(3) of

the Law N°21/2012 of 14/06/2012 relating to civil, commercial, labour and Administrative procedure states that: “[…..] it is not prohibited to submit in appeal new arguments or elements of evidence that were not heard at the first level”. It should therefore be examined if the law does not treat people in same category and situation equally and the rationale of the existence of article 1(5o) of the Law No74/2008 modifying and Re AKAGERA BUSINESS GROUP 15

Page 262

complementing the Law No25/2005 on tax procedure which prohibits the taxpayer to produce evidence at appeal level. [25] The prohibition of the taxpayer from production of evedence at appeal level which were not produced in the course of audit may be understood like preventing him from the right entitled to other litigants, which is inconsistent with the principle of equality before the law and nondiscrimination. In the case law Backus v. Fort St. Union Depot Company in the United States of America, the provision of the law which used to prevent the landlord to sue the tenant for damages relating to destruction, in case the landlord mismanaged security deposit was analysed. The Supreme Court of this country held that the law which entitles the individual some rights in the course of court proceedings while it prevents it to others in the same status may be perceived as discriminatory and uncomplying with the principle of equality before and protection of the law, which is inconsistent with the constitution. [26] However, it is clear in this judgment that taxpayer litigants are not in the same situation like other litigants. Taxpayers are in the category of special group which has some obligations in order for the important duty of the country to be well fulfilled. If some taxpayers were forbiden to produce evidence at appeal level while others are allowed to do so, it would

constitute an inequality between litigants in the same category and situation. The reason behind the prohibition to all taxpayers to produce evidence at appeal level which were not produced at the time of audit, consists of incentive to submit them timely in order to allow the tax administration to perform tax audit duty with ease. The taxpayer is entitled the right to produce all evidence at the time of audit in order to evaluate the

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 16

Page 263

tax due. He is even the one holding all evidence likely to indicate the veracity of the tax due. This is different from the ordinary litigant who may be in need of evidence in the custody of third parties with no access to them whenever he wishes. This court considers that the existence of the provision of the Law for which the repeal is petitioned, is ligitimate and protects public interest, the reason why it should not be considered as discriminatory. [27] However, the Law may have a reasonable and legitimate objective but with measure not proportional to the purpose or objective to be achieved. This is also what has been stated by the European Court of Human Rights in the following terms: “[…..] on this question, the Court holds that the principle of equality of treatment is violated if a distinction has no objective and reasonable justification. A difference of treatment in the exercise of a right laid down in the Convention must not only pursue a legitimate aim: article 14 is likewise violated when it is clearly established that there is no reasonable relationship of proportionality between the means employed and the aim sought to be realised”8. [28] In this case, it should be examined if the measures taken to facilitate the taxpayer to produce all necessary documents in due time, meaning the prohibition to the taxpayer to produce new evidence at apeal level which were not submitted in the course of audit, is likely to be considered as usurpation in determining the measures to be taken to achieve the objective. However, in the course of examination and ruling whether the

8Eur.Court HR, Case “relating to certain aspects of the laws on the use of language in education in Belgium” judgment of 23 July 1968, series A, No6., p.31. para 10. Re AKAGERA BUSINESS GROUP 17

Page 264

provision of the law about the achievement of its aim or if there should be another way which would not hinder taxpayers, the court should avoid interfering in the power of the policy makers and its implementation, as well as the attributions of the legislator. [29] The court should not declare the law to be inconsistent with the Constitution by relying solely on the ground that the objective of the law would be achieved through other means. The litigant who criticizes a provision of the law has the duty to indicate that the path opted by the legislator is ambiguous, unclear, or if subject to rationale, it does not meet the aim of the enactment of the law. This meets the principle of separation of powers9. This assertion has been supported in the case law S v Lawrence10 rendered by the Constitutional Court of South Africa which invoked the statements of Professor Hogg whereby hestates that the Court is free to decide on issues under litigation but that it is not free to decide on issues relating to the grounds the legislator relies on to enact laws. The act of the court would only consists of valueing the existence of rational connection between a law and the objective intended by the legislator, that is to mean whether or not facts relied on are legitimate. This author pursue stating that in democracy, it would not be rational for courts to disregard the discretion of the legislature on account of theirs”11.

9Article 61 of the Constitution of Rwanda, 2015. 10 S v Lawrence 1997 (4) SA 1176 para. 44-45. 11 Hogg “Proof of facts in Constitutional Cases (1976) 26 University of Toronto Law Journal 386 at 396-7 “While a court must reach a definite conclusion on the adjudicative facts which are relevant to the disposition of litigation, the court need not be so definite in respect of legislative facts in constitutional cases. The most that the court can ask in respect of legislative facts is whether there is a rational basis for the legislative judgment that the

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 18

Page 265

[30] In general, the production of evidence is governed by the law No15/2004 of 12/6/2004 on administration of evidence and its production but it is especially governed by the Law Nº74/2008 of 31/12/2008 modifying and implementing the Law Nº25/2005 on tax procedure in tax matters, precisely in its first article. The purpose of this provision is not the distinction of taxpayers from other litigants with the view to prevent them from the opportunity to exercice the right to defence and produce evidence, rather it intends to determine the special procedure in accordance of which the taxpayer produces evidence especially by relying on the legal obligation he has to keep account statements and other related documents. Therefore, the taxpayer is entitled the right to produce evidence according to the procedure specified by the law which is different from that provided for other litigants. [31] The law obliges the taxpayer to keep and maintain all documents relating to his/her business in order to produce them in the course of audit. Subsequent to that, he/she is allowed to produce to the tax admistration other testimonial evidence and

facts exist. The rational-basis test involves restraint on the part of the court in finding legislative facts. Restraint is often compelled by the nature of the issue: for example, an issue of economics which is disputed by professional economists can hardly be definitively resolved by a court staffed by lawyers. The most that can realistically be expected of a court is a finding that there is, or is not, a rational basis for a particular position on the disputed issue. The more important reason for restraint, however, is related to the respective roles of court and legislature. A legislature acts not merely on the basis of findings of fact, but upon its judgment as to the public perceptions of a situation and its judgments as to the appropriate policy to meet the situation. These judgments are political…. It is not for the court to disturb political judgments, much less to substitute the opinions of experts. In a democracy it would be a serious distortion of the political process if appointed officials (the judges) could veto the policies of elected officials. Re AKAGERA BUSINESS GROUP 19

Page 266

other kind of evidence within 30 days from the day he/she was served the notification of rectification document in order to correct potential mistakes12. Apart from that, he/she is allowed to submit them at appeal level whenever there is a reasonable ground to the failure of submitting them at the time of audit13. This is to mean that the evidence forbidden to be produced consists of the evidence the taxpayer would have produced in the course of audit but which he/she failed to do with bad faith, misleading or unjustifiable negligence. The taxpayer with good faith to pay the taxes due at time does not incur any damage from the provision for which repeal is requested because the required elements of evidence are communicated to him/her before the audit, whereby those still missing are submitted at the time of their finding but after providing reasonable grounds as to why they were not availed before. [32] The prohibition to produce elements of evidence at appeal level that one did not indicate at the time of audit, is the consequence of default to assume responsibility to hand to tax administration accounts statements and documents mentioned in articles 12, 13 and 15 of the Law N°25/2005 of 04/12/2005 at the time the audit was conducted. If the taxpayer is allowed to submit accounts statements and other documents at any time after the conduct of audit, this duty would no longer be mendatory as longer as he/she has option to submit them

12 Articles 27 and 29 of the Law Nº25/2005 entitles the taxpayer the right to submit to the tax administration additional testimony and evidence within 30 days from the time of reception of rectification notice, which indicate the mistakes in imposition in order to reexamine it and rectify it if necessary. 13 The last paragraph of the provision for which repeal is petitioned states that: “the preceding paragraph shall not apply in cases where the taxpayer has reasonable grounds justifying his/her inability to provide the required evidence during the audit period”.

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 20

Page 267

immediately or later at appeal level, and this is likely to hinder the tax audit. [33] Although Akagera Business Group did not rely on the equality of arms in its submissions, it raised it in the course of hearing. It alleged that it is controversial to prohibit the taxpayer to produce evidence at appeal level that was not submitted in the course of tax audit whereas the tax administration is allowed to do so. In his defence, the state attorney states that the taxpayer and tax administration as parties are not in the same category and situation, because they have different obligations, therefore their different treatment should not be considered as inequality before the law or discrimination. [34] Equality of arms between litigants is not provided for by the Constitution of Rwanda, therefore this is not a special right. However, consideration made of International principles and United States Human Rights Committee (UNHRC), the court finds that equality of arms before the court is considered as part or portion of the right to equal treatment before courts as provided for by article 14 of International Convenant on civil and pilitical rights (ICCPR). This article stipulates that all people are treated equal before courts. In linking this provision to the right to defence, the Committtee stated that same procedural rights are to be provided to all the parties unless distinctions are based on law and can be justified on objective and reasonable grounds, not entailing actual disadvantage or other unfairness to the litigant14.

14United Nations Human Rights Committee, General Comment No.32, Article 14, Right to equality before Courts and tribunals and fair trial, UN.Doc. CCPR//G/32/Aug.23, 2007 para 13. “This means that the same procedural rights are to be provided to all the parties unless distinctions are Re AKAGERA BUSINESS GROUP 21

Page 268

[35] In the case Dudko v Australia, the committee (UNHRC) stated: “It is for the State party to show that any procedural inequality was based on reasonable and objective grounds not entailing actual disadvantage or other unfairness to the author […]”15. [36] Concerning this issue relating to the inequality of treatment before the law and production of evidence, the court finds that the status of tax audit and its perception and the fact that the taxpayer has the obligation to keep account statements and other documents, therefore being the sole person who holds the reliable information of which he/she may opt to communicate or not; this entitles the tax administration with the right to produce new evidence although the taxpayer is not allowed to do so. Thus, this is not likely to be considered as inequality to the right of defence before courts. [37] Consideration made of the explanations provided above, the court finds that even if the provision of article 1(5) of the Law Nº74/2008 of 31/12/2008 modifying and complementing the Law Nº25/2005 on tax procedure does not treat taxpayers litigants in the same way as other litigants, but it does not contain inequality of treatment and protection by the law as well as discrimination of any kind. The ground relied on by the plaintiff to allege the existence of discrimination is not included into the instances likely to lead to discrimination as mentioned in article 16 of the Constitution; and this ground is clear. It should neither be considered as if it has no impact on the

based on law and can be justified on objective and reasonable grounds, not entailing actual disadvantage or other unfairness to the defendant”. 15UNHR, Dudko v Australia, Comm. No1347/2005, UN.Doc.CCPR//90/D/1347/2005 (Aug.29.2007 para 7.4.)

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 22

Page 269

objective of encouraging taxpayers to cooperate with the tax administration to abide by the obligations of the law. Due to special status of taxpayers litigants, the law treats them differently from other litigants on ligitimate grounds which do not intend to prevent them from the privileges and right they are entitled by the law. And in addition, the fact that they are not allowed to produce at appeal level, the evidence they produced at first instance level, while the tax administration is allowed to do so, this should not be considered as inequality in the exercice of the right to defense before courts, rather, it is due to the fact that only taxpayers hold those elements of evidence and may submit them at request as it was held above. In summary, the provision of the law for which the repeal is petitioned, is not inconsistent with the provision of articles 15 and 16 of the Constitution because it does not contain inequality of treatment before the law as well as any kind of discrimination. III. DECISION OF THE COURT [38] The Supreme Court admits the petition filed by AKAGERA BUSINESS GROUP for the repeal of article 1(5) of the Law Nº74/2008 of 31/12/2008 modifying and complementing the Law Nº25/2005 on tax procedure alleged to be inconsistent with the Constitution of the Republic of Rwanda of 2003 revised in 2015, in its articles 15 and 16; [39] Finds it without merit; [40] Declares that article 1(5) of the Law Nº74/2008 of 31/12/2008 modifying and complementing the Law Nº25/2005 on tax procedure is not inconsistent with the provisions of Re AKAGERA BUSINESS GROUP 23

Page 270

articles 15 and 16 of the Constitution of the Republic of Rwanda of 2003 revised in 2015; [41] Declares court fees deposited by

AKAGERA BUSINESS GROUP to be equivalent to the cost of procedures undertaken in the case.

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 24

Page 271

PROCEDURAL CASE

Page 273

CASES RELATING TO CIVIL, COMMERCIAL, LABOUR AND

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE

Page 275

NTUKAMAZINA v. PRIME INSURANCE LTD (EX-COGEAR LTD) [Rwanda SUPREME COURT – RSOC00001/2016/CS (Kanyange, P.J., Ngagi and Mukandamage, J.) January 20, 2017] Execution of the judgment – Entirety of the judgment – The court decisions must be executed as they were rendered unless they were reversed in the appeal process – Constitution of the Republic of Rwanda of 2003 revised in 2015, article 151. Execution of the judgment – The motion for a penalty forcing the execution of a judgment – The motion for a penalty forcing the execution of the judgment is requested during the hearing of the case in merit and not during the hearing of the case relating to the dispute arising from the execution of the judgment – Law Nº21/2012 of 14/06/2012 Law relating to the civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure, article 217. Facts: In the labour case between Ntukamazina and Prime Insurance, Ntukamazina won the case and was awarded damages equivalent to 134,185,600Frw. After the judgment became final he requested for its execution from Prime Insurance Ltd. Disputes arose during the course of its execution because the Prime Insurance Ltd was only willing to pay 67,975,013Frw claiming that it is the adequate amount, of which Ntukamazina Jean Baptiste declined arguing that the decision of the judgment should be executed as it was rendered. Ntukamazina seized the Supreme Court requesting it to resolve those disputes and prayed that the Court orders Prime Insurance 29

Page 276

Ltd to execute that judgment and also raised a motion for a penalty forcing the execution of the judgment to be imposed on Prime Insurance Ltd. He furthermore claimed for damages for vexatious lawsuits and counsel fees. Prime Insurance Ltd raised an incident for intervention of Rwanda Revenue Authority (RRA ) and Rwanda social Security Board (RSSB ) on the ground that those institutions are the ones which led to the failure of enforcement of that judgment because of their money which has to be deducted from the one awarded by the court. In response to this incident, Ntukamazina argued that Prime Insurance has no interest for the intervention of RRA and RSSB. The court immediately assessed the raised incident and rejected the intervention and made a bench ruling to proceed with the hearing of the case on merit. In its defence, Prime Insurance Ltd argues that there is no disputes in the execution of the judgment because the money it deducted is provided for by the law which was also clarified by the concerned institutions and the reason why that money for RRA and RSSB was not debated upon was because both parties were aware that it had to be deducted. Regarding the motion for a penalty compelling the execution of the judgment, it argues that it had the will to execute the judgment because it had issued a cheque and that Ntukamazina should have taken the money he was given and claim for the balance later. It also argued that Ntukamazina must pay damages for vexatious litigation and the counsel fees because he is the one who dragged it into lawsuits.

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 30

Page 277

Held: 1. The fact that both parties do not agree on how the judgment should be executed demonstrate disputes arising from the execution of the judgment and hence they have to be resolved.

2. The court decisions must be executed as they were rendered unless they were reversed in the remedy of appeal.

3. The motion for a penalty forcing the execution of the judgment is requested during the hearing of the case in merit, thus it cannot be filed during the hearing of the case relating to the dispute arising from the execution of the judgment, for that the motion is rejected.

4. The defendant must pay to the plaintiff the damages for unnecessarily being dragged into lawsuits which made him spent his time and money for hiring a counsel and that of court fees deposit which must be awarded in the court’s discretion. Appeal has merit in parts; The judgment RSOCAA0001&0002/16/CS should be executed as it was rendered and the plaintiff be paid all the money he won for in the case; The defendant must give damages for unnecessarily being dragged into lawsuits and counsel fees; The defendant must refund the court fees deposit. Statutes and statutory instruments referred to: Constitution of the Republic of Rwanda of 2003 revised in 2015, article 151. Law Nº21/2012 of 14/06/2012 Law relating to the civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure, articles 216, 217 and 208. NTUKAMAZINA v. PRIME INSURANCE LTD (EX-COGEAR LTD) 31

Page 278

No case referred to. Judgment I. BACKGROUND OF THE CASE [1] In the Judgment NºRSOCAA0001 & 0002/16/CS rendered on14/10/2016 by the Supreme Court, Prime Insurance Ltd was ordered to pay a total of 134,185,600Frw in damages, which includes 43,248,000Frw for unlawfully dismissal, 7,208,000Frw for dismissal notice, 14,416,000Frw as compensation for termination of employment contract, 43,248,000Frw for employment certificate which was not given to him 23,065,600Frw for leave allocation and 3,000,000Frw for procedural and counsel fees. [2] Following the delivery of that judgment, Ntukamazina Jean Baptiste petitioned the Supreme Court claiming that dispute arose in the course of its execution, because Prime Insurance Ltd was only willing to pay 67,975,013Frw claiming that it is the adequate amount, of which Ntukamazina Jean Baptiste declined arguing that the decision of the aforementioned judgment should be executed as it is. [3] In his petition, Ntukamazina Jean Baptiste, seeks that this Court orders Prime Insurance Ltd to execute judgment NºRSOCAA0001 & 0002/16/CS thereby paying him 134,185,600Frw as ordered by the Court, to impose Prime Insurance Ltd a penalty forcing the execution of the judgment of 1,000,000Frw par day until it will finish the payment because it is evident that it reluctantly refused to execute the judgment. He

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 32

Page 279

also claims for damages equivalent to 5,000,000Frw for unnecessarily being dragged into litigation, 2,000,000Frw for counsel fees and 100,000Frw of court fees. [4] On the other hand, Prime Insurance Ltd raised an incident for intervention of Rwanda Revenue Authority (RRA1) and Rwanda social Security Board (RSSB2) on the ground that those institutions are the ones which led to the non-execution of that judgment because of their money which has to be deducted from the one awarded by the court. In response to this incident, Ntukamazina argued that Prime Insurance has no interest in the intervention of RRA and RSSB. [5] The case was heard in public on 10 January 2017, Ntukamazina Jean Baptiste was assisted by Counsel Rutabingwa Athanase and Prime Insurance Ltd was assisted by Counsel Rutembesa Phocas; The court immediately assessed the raised incident and after analyzing article 1163 and 1164 of the Law N°21/2012 of 14/06/2012 relating to the civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure, it rejected the intervention requested by Prime Insurance, thereby making a bench ruling to proceed with the hearing.

1Rwanda Revenue Authority. 2 Rwanda Social Security Board. 3 Forced intervention is the right of the parties to call on a person not a party to the case. 4 Forced interventions may be instituted by any interested party against all persons who are third parties to a case against which they can sue by a third party opposition in order to challenge them in one case.

NTUKAMAZINA v. PRIME INSURANCE LTD (EX-COGEAR LTD) 33

Page 280

II. ANALYSIS OF LEGAL ISSUES Whether there are disputes in execution of the judgment NoRSOCAA0001&0002/16/CS and how they can be resolved. [6] Ntukamazina Jean Baptiste and his counsel Rutabingwa Athanase, argue that Prime Insurance Ltd lost the case and in the judgment to be executed, it was ordered to pay Ntukamazina Jean Baptiste the amount mentioned in it but instead of paying the whole amount it issued a cheque of 67,975,013Frw which does not amount to the one awarded to Ntukamazina Jean Baptiste. [7] They further argue that the disputes regarding the execution of the judgment are demonstrated by the Prime Insurance Ltd’s exhibition that it should not pay the 134,185,600Frw ordered by the Supreme Court on the allegation that some amount have to be deducted and given to RRA and RSSB. Furthermore, even Bank of Kigali Ltd refused to release the whole amount before those disputes are settled, thus there is no other means for Ntukamazina Jean Baptiste to get that money apart from returning before the Court, for it to decide especially that there is no other organ which can deduct it as provided by the Constitution of the Republic of Rwanda. [8] Counsel Rutembesa Phocas, assisting Prime Insurance Ltd, argues that there are no disputes regarding the execution of the judgment because the amount deducted by Prime Insurance Ltd is provided for by the law and also the concerned organs clarified on it. He adds that the reason why the money for RRA and RSSB was not debated upon was because both parties were aware that it had to be deducted and even they sought for RRA’s clarification after they explained it to Ntukamazina but

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 34

Page 281

failed to understand it, which indicated that the money awarded to Ntukamazina have to be charged of tax.

THE OPINION OF THE COURT [9] Article 208 of the Law N°21/2012 of 14/06/2012 relating to the civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure, provides that: “Disputes regarding the execution of judgment shall be brought before the court that rendered the final judgment or that made a foreign judgment enforceable in Rwanda. The court decides thereon within fifteen (15) days of the date of receipt of the application”. [10] Article 151, litera 4, the Constitution of the Republic of Rwanda of 2003 revised in 2015, provides that: “[…] Court rulings are binding on all parties concerned, be they public authorities or individuals. They cannot be challenged except through procedures determined by law […]”. [11] The documents in the case file indicate that in the judgment NoRSOCAA0001&0002/16/CS, Prime Insurance Ltd was ordered to pay to Ntukamazina Jean Baptiste a total amount of 134,185,600Frw which includes 43,248,000Frw for unlawfully dismissal, 7,208,000Frw for dismissal notice, 14,416,000Frw as compensation for termination of employment contract, 43,248,000Frw for employment certificate which was not given to him 23,065,600Frw for leave allocation and 3,000,000Frw for procedural and counsel fees. However for the purpose of the execution of this judgment Prime Insurance Ltd wants to pay only 67,975,013Frw alleging that it has to deduct tax for the RRA and social security contribution for RSSB. NTUKAMAZINA v. PRIME INSURANCE LTD (EX-COGEAR LTD) 35

Page 282

[12] With regard to determining whether there are disputes regarding the execution of judgment RSOCAA0001&0002/16/CS, as motivated in the previous paragraph, the Court finds that since the parties do not agree on the execution of the judgment, whereby Prime Insurance Ltd claims that some amount has to be deducted from the money Ntukamazina Jean Baptiste won in the case and on the contrary Ntukamazina Jean Baptiste argues that the judgment has to be enforced as it was rendered, demonstrates that there are disputes and hence they have to be resolved. [13] Regarding the settlement of those disputes, the Court finds that pursuant to article 151 of the Constitution (mentioned above) no one is authorized to alter the court’s decision apart from the appealed Court,5 therefore Prime Insurance Ltd cannot claim that there is certain amount which has to be deducted from the damages of 134,185,600Frw which Ntukamazina Jean Baptiste won in the case NoRSOCAA0001&0002/16/CS, which became final. For the counsel of Prime Insurance Ltd to argue that the reason why it was not debated upon was because the parties were aware that there is some amount to be deducted lacks merit because it had to be debated upon for the court to adjudicate upon it. [14] In the circumstance there was no remedy of appeal exercised to reverse the ruling of judgment RSOCAA0001&0002/16/CS, this Court finds that this judgment has to be enforced as it was rendered, and Ntukamazina Jean

5 The ordinary and extraordinary procedures of appeal are provided for by the Law No21/2012 of 14/06/ relating to the civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure, in article 155 – 161 (Opposition), 162 - 174 (appeal), 175 – 183 (Third party opposition), and 184 – 193 (Case review).

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 36

Page 283

Baptiste be paid the whole amount he won in the case, that is 134,185,600Frw. Whether a penalty forcing the execution of the judgment should be imposed on Prime Insurance Ltd and damages should be awarded. [15] Ntukamazina Jean Baptiste and his counsel Rutabingwa Athanase argue that a penalty should be imposed on Prime Insurance Ltd to compel it to pay the damages it was ordered after losing the case NoRSOCAA0001&0002/16/CS because of its unwillingness to execute the judgment, they also state that they had previously requested for 100,000Frw per day but they realized that it was little therefore they request for 1,000,000Frw per day. They conclude by requesting that Prime Insurance Ltd be ordered to pay 5,000,000Frw in damages for vexatious litigation, 2,000,000Frw for counsel fees and 100,000Frw for court fees. [16] Rutembesa Phocas, Counsel for Prime Insurance Ltd argues that Prime Insurance Ltd had the will of executing the judgment because on 25/11/2016 it issued a cheque of 67,975,013Frw, he goes on to state that Ntukamazina Jean Baptiste should have taken that money he was given and claim for the balance later. He further states that the damages claimed by Ntukamazina Jean Baptiste are baseless because he is the one who dragged Prime Insurance Ltd into lawsuits, thus he is the one who must pay 2,000,000Frw in damages for continuously dragging it into lawsuits and for counsel fees.

NTUKAMAZINA v. PRIME INSURANCE LTD (EX-COGEAR LTD) 37

Page 284

OPINION OF THE COURT Regarding the penalty forcing the execution of the judgment. [17] Article 216 of the Law No21/2012 of 14/06/2012 mentioned above provides that: “Upon request by one of the parties, during trial of civil, commercial and labour cases a judge may, provide a sentence to the adversary to pay a fine for delay payment calculated on daily, weekly, monthly or annual basis in case of failure to respect the merits of judgment without prejudice to payment of a fine of moral damages if necessary […] ”. And article 217 of that Law provides that: “The claim intended for the penalty forcing the execution shall be admitted even if it is on the first instance or during the appeal level. [18] The Court is of the view that the above mentioned articles imply that the motion for the penalty forcing the execution is requested during the hearing of the case in merit, inferring that it cannot be requested during the hearing of the case relating to the disputes arising in its execution. [19] The Court finds that the motion for imposing on Prime Insurance Ltd a penalty forcing the execution of the judgment requested by Ntukamazina Jean Baptiste in this case which relates to the disputes arising in the execution of judgment NoRSOCAA0001&0002/16/CS is inadmissible. Regarding damages. [20] Regarding the damages claimed by Prime Insurance, the Court finds that they should not be awarded as it is evident that it was responsible for not executing judgment NoRSOCAA0001&0002/16/CS as it was rendered, therefore it

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 38

Page 285

was not unnecessarily dragged in lawsuits as claimed by its counsel. [21] Regarding the damages claimed by Ntukamazina Jean Baptiste, the Court finds that he deserves them because he was unnecessarily dragged into this case whereby he spent his time and money for hiring a counsel and that of court fees deposit67 but since the damages he requested for being unnecessarily dragged into lawsuit and counsel fees are excessive, the Court awards him 1,000,000Frw in damages of unnecessarily being dragged into lawsuits and 1,000,000Frw for counsel fees in its own discretion. III. THE DECISION OF THE COURT [22] Decides that the claim filed by Ntukamazina Jean Baptiste has merit in parts; [23] Decides that the judgment No RSOCAA0001&0002/16/CS must be executed as it was rendered, and Ntukamazina Jean Baptiste must be paid by Prime Insurance Ltd the whole amount of money he won in the case, which is 134,185,600Frw;

6 Article 3, paragraph one of the Ministerial Order N°002/08.11 of 11/02/2014 on court fees in civil, commercial, social and administrative matters. Provides that: “If the party who paid fees wins the trial, the judge shall order in the court decision the losing party to refund the winning party and determines the time within which to pay.[…]”.

NTUKAMAZINA v. PRIME INSURANCE LTD (EX-COGEAR LTD) 39

Page 286

[24] Orders Prime Insurance Ltd to pay Ntukamazina Jean Baptiste 1,000,000Frw in damages for unnecessarily being dragged into lawsuits and 1,000,000Frw for counsel fees; [25] Orders Prime Insurance Ltd to refund 100,000Frw of the Court fees Ntukamazina Jean Baptiste deposited.

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 40

Page 287

CASES IN MERITS

Page 289

ADMINISTRATIVE CASE

Page 291

NYIRANDORIMANA v.

GOVERNMENT OF RWANDA (MINADEF) ET AL [Rwanda SUPREME COURT – RADA006/11/CS (Nyirinkwaya, P.J., Kayitesi and Mukandamage, J.) July 31, 2015] Liability – Tort – Negligence – Damages – Duty to safe keep the arsenal – The Government is negligent when it fails to safe keep and monitor its arsenal and in case it is illicitly used, it should be held liable for damages. Damages – Body injury damages – Body injury damages computation rely on tangible facts such as the income, incapacity rate and lucrative years of survival. Facts: Nyirandorimana seized the High Court requesting that the Government of Rwanda (MINADEF) and Twagirayezu its former soldier jointly pay her damages for the incapacity she sustained when she was shot on the shoulder by him. She argues that the liability of the Government of Rwanda (MINADEF) is premised on its negligence in safe keeping its arsenal when its soldier called Twagirayezu consequently got a gun he used to shoot people and she was also shot on the shoulder. The Court held that the Government was not vicariously liable because it was not negligent, the Court ordered Twagirayezu to solely bear the damages. Nyirandorimana appealed in the Supreme Court alleging that the basis of the damages she claims for is not the vicarious liability of the Government as an employer of Twagirayezu, 45

Page 292

instead, it is premised on the negligence of the Government to safe guard its arsenal, a lethal weapon which led to Nyirandorimana being injured. In its defense, the Government was not negligent because Twagirayezu was its soldier, and as security personnel the Government handed him a weapon without realizing that he was insane, therefore it cannot be held liable for the fault or negligence resulting from the use of that weapon. She adds that the fact for Twagirayezu to have secretly taken a weapon which he is authorized to carry cannot be regarded as negligence on the part of the Government. Held: 1. For the soldier who was not on the duty in the wee hours of the night to be able to return in the military base and pick the gun and those on the guard could not disarm him when they saw that he was going to do something rampageous and later he shot people, this demonstrates the negligence of the Government of Rwanda in safe keeping and controlling its arsenal. Therefore, it is held liable and has to pay damages jointly with Twagirayezu.

2. Body injury damages computation rely on tangible facts such as the income, incapacity rate and lucrative years of survival.

3. The appellant is awarded counsel fees in the court’s discretion. Appeal has merit in parts; Both respondents must equally pay damages to the appellant; Court fees to both parties.

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 46

Page 293

Statutes and statutory instruments referred to: Decree Law 30/07/1888 relating to Contracts or obligations, article 258. Presidential Order No31/01 0f 25/08/2003 on compensation for personal injury due to accidents caused by motor vehicles, article 18. No cases referred to. Judgment I. BACKGROUND OF THE CASE [1] After the rendering of judgment RP1623/CG/03 on 11 May 2004 by the Military Court whereby Twagirayezu was convicted of murder and attempted murder, Nyirandorimana Claudine seized the High Court claiming that Twagirayezu and the Government of Rwanda (MINADEF) pay her 19,000,000Frw in damages for the incapacity she got when its former soldier Twagirayezu shot her in the shoulder. This was due to the negligence of the Government which did not protect its arsenal and he consequently got a gun he used to shoot her. [2] The High Court rendered the judgment by default of Twagirayezu and ruled that the Government of Rwanda should not be held vicariously liable for the fault of its employee, on the ground that there was no proof that the gun Twagirayezu used in the shooting was got from its arsenal given to him by another soldier while he was not on duty, therefore it held that Twagirayezu should personally be held liable, thus it ordered NYIRANDORIMANA v. GOVERNMENT OF RWANDA (MINADEF) ET AL 47

Page 294

him to pay 5,000,000Frw in damages to Nyirandorimana as well as court fees. [3] Nyirandorimana appealed in the Supreme Court alleging that the High Court did not order the Government of Rwanda (MINADEF) to pay damages while the State attorney admitted before the Court that the Government should be held liable for 20% of all the damages likely to be ordered by the Court. She alleges in addition that she was not awarded counsel fees she requested for. [4] The hearing in public was held on 13/01/2015, in the absentia of Twagirayezu Maurice although he was summoned to unknown address while Nyirandorimana Claudine was assisted by Nizeyimana Léopold and the Government of Rwanda was represented by State attorney Umwali Claire. II. ANALYSIS OF THE LEGAL ISSUES Whether there was negligence by the Government of Rwanda which caused the injury Nyirandorimana suffered. [5] Nizeyimana, the counsel for Nyirandorimana argues that she does rely damages she claims for on fact that Twagirayezu was a civil servant instead, it is premised on the negligence of the Government to protect its arsenal in which the gun was stolen to shoot on Nyirandorimana. [6] On the issue of determining whether Nyirandorimana was shot by Twagirayezu, Counsel Nizeyimana adduces that there is a statement in the criminal file made by Nyirandorimana before Major Kagiraneza who was in charge of the case of a soldier who shot people at Matimba in Nyamirambo which

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 48

Page 295

indicates that she was also shot at that same spot in the night of 15/06/2002 dawning to 16/06/2017. He also adds that during the interrogation of Twagirayezu, he confessed that he shot indiscriminately in the crowd; therefore none else shot people at that place during that night to the extent that he would be confused to a different person. [7] The State attorney Umwali argues that the Government was not negligent because Twagirayezu was its soldier, and as the security personnel the Government handed him a weapon without realizing that he was insane, therefore it cannot be held liable for the fault or negligence resulting from the use of that weapon. She adds that the fact for Twagirayezu to have secretly taken a weapon which he is authorized to carry cannot be regarded as negligence on the part of the Government. [8] On the issue of determining whether it is Twagirayezu who shot Nyirindorimana, the State attorney argues that there is doubt because in the statements which are in the criminal file nothing proves that she was shot by the mentioned soldier. Furthermore, names of people he may have shot are not indicated, therefore there is no causal link among Nyirandorimana, the civil party, Twagirayezu, the shooter and the Government of Rwanda.

THE OPINION OF THE COURT [9] In the judgment RP1623/CG/03 rendered on 12/05/2004 by the Military Court, Twagirayezu was charged and tried for having murdered three people namely Niyoyita Jean Bosco, Karegeya Erneste and another one whose identity was unknown. He was also accused of attempted murder. NYIRANDORIMANA v. GOVERNMENT OF RWANDA (MINADEF) ET AL 49

Page 296

[10] The Military Prosecution explained that after having a conflict and being beaten by those he was boozing with, Twagirayezu went to fetch a gun from the Military base of Kigali and find for those who had beaten him and indiscriminately shot them, killing some and injuring others. Twagirayezu pleaded guilty and he was remorseful of the offence he committed. The Court convicted him of the offence of murder and attempted murder. [11] Even though Nyirandorimana Claudine who claim to be injured by Twagirayezu Maurice is not mentioned in that judgment, but the file indicates that on 18/06/2002 she was interviewed as a victim in the hospital of CHK by Major Kagiraneza Kayihura and she stated that she was shot at around one o’clock A.M by a person wearing civilian clothes with a rifle at what is commonly known as Mirongo ine (40) in Nyamirambo / Matimba on 15/06/2002, and together with others they went to Nyamirambo Brigade to report the culprit, she stated that she doesn’t know the person who shot her and the motive and that the perpetrator shot others before he left. [12] During his interrogation by the Military Prosecution on 15/06/2002, Twagirayezu stated that he went to booze in Nyamirambo and got involved in a dispute and was beaten up, he got angry whereby he boarded a motor bicycle and fetched a gun, when he reached at the entrance of the military base the guards asked him where he was going and tried to seize him but he warned them that they should not get closer to him, that they should wait to hear his fate, he got on the motor bicycle and returned to the place where he had been beaten at 40 (Mirongo ine), Matimba and shot dead some people and injured others. he explained that all of these happened at around one o’clock A.M.

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 50

Page 297

[13] The statements of both Twagirayezu and Nyirandorimana demonstrate that the latter was among those shot by Twagirayezu during the night of 15/06/2002 dawning to 16/06/2002 in Matimba/Nyamirambo. [14] The statements of Twagirayezu demonstrate that the gun used to shoot people including Nyirandorimana was not kept in a secure place, because he was able to return to the military base in the wee hours of the night and pick the gun despite of not being on duty and shot people he was boozing with and with whom he fought. In addition, those on the guard were not able to seize the gun from him while they could suspect that he was going to do something messy. [15] The Court finds that the Government of Rwanda was negligent in keeping and supervising its gun which led to the shooting of Nyirandorimana, for that the Government of Rwanda together with Twagirayezu should to jointly pay her damages. Therefore, it has to pay ½ for its negligence and another ½ must be paid by Twagirayezu who injured her and who was convicted for murder and attempted murder in the judgment RP1623/CG/03 rendered on 12 May 2004 by the Military Court. Regarding the damages claimed by Nyirandorimana. [16] Counsel Nizeyimana assisting Nyirandorimana adduces that as seen on paragraph 5 of the judgment, the State attorney Sebazungu before the High Court admitted that the Government will pay 20% of the damages awarded, but during the adjudication the Court was silent on the 20% of the 5,000,000Frw awarded to Nyirandorimana as damages, therefore he requests that the Government pays 20% of the NYIRANDORIMANA v. GOVERNMENT OF RWANDA (MINADEF) ET AL 51

Page 298

damages which Twagirayezu was ordered to pay, that is 5,000,000Frw x 20% = 1,000,000Frw. [17] The State Attorney Umwali argues that the Government of Rwanda played no role in the offences of which Twagirayezu was convicted by the Military Court, therefore it is not liable for damages. [18] She further argues that in the High Court the State attorney stated that the Government of Rwanda should not pay damages because its civil servant who committed the offence was not on duty, but if the Court opines otherwise then it should pay 20% of the damages requested by the plaintiff, therefore if the Court found that the Government is not liable for damages it is legal and it concurs with the legal position from the case laws taken by other courts.

OPINION OF THE COURT [19] Article 258 CC L.III provides that “any act which causes prejudice to person entails the author to pay damages”. [20] The Court finds that the High Court awarded Nyirandorimana damages of 5,000,000Frw in its discretion basing on the incapacity of 45% she sustained, moreover such damages for body injury are computed basing on the real figures, in the consideration of the income, incapacity, lucrative survival etc. Therefore the damages awarded in the court’s discretion cannot be the perfect damages in such a body injury claim.

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 52

Page 299

[21] Even though there is no specific statute for the computation of such damages, the Court finds that it should borrow a leaf from article 18 of the Presidential Order No31/01 of 25/08/2003 on compensation for personal injury due to accidents caused by motor vehicles which provides for computation of non- fatal personal damages for the victim whose income cannot be established as is the case for Nyirandorima, therefore they should be computed in the following way: ૛Ǥ ૞૙૙۴ܚܟ1ܠ૛૞܌܉ܡܛܠ૚૛ܕܗܖܜܐܛሻܠ૜૜ܡ܍܉ܚܛܠ૝૞Ψ ૚൅ሺૡǤ ૠ૞Ψܠ૜૜ܡ܍܉ܚܛሻ ൌ૛ǡ ૡ૟૝ǡ ૢ૞૛۴ܚܟ [22] As motivated above, the Government of Rwanda must pay ½ of 2,864,952Frw equivalent to 1,432,476Frw, and Twagirayezu also pays ½ of 2,864,952Frw equivalent to 1,432,476Frw. Regarding the counsel fees claimed by Nyirandorimana. [23] Counsel Nizeyimana assisting Nyirandorimana argues that she was not awarded the counsel fees she requested for while she engaged a lawyer, he requests that she be awarded the counsel fees equivalent to 1,000,000Frw on both instances. [24] The State Attorney Umwali argues that if Counsel Nizeyimana assisted Nyirandorimana on the first instance and lost because her claim lacked merit, the Government of Rwanda was not the one to pay his fees. He adds that the fact that he assists her on this level does not concern the Government of

1 In various cases like RCAA0003/11/CS delivered on 12/10/2012 and RCAA0202/07/CS rendered on 09/04/2009, The Supreme Court considered the amount of 2,500Frw to be the daily minimum wage. NYIRANDORIMANA v. GOVERNMENT OF RWANDA (MINADEF) ET AL 53

Page 300

Rwanda, therefore in case the counsel fees are awarded, they should be borne by Twagirayezu.

THE OPINON OF THE COURT [25] The Court finds that on both levels Nyirandorimana engaged a lawyer, but it is evident that he did not make for her the Court submissions instead he used those made by Nyirandorimana herself, therefore she cannot be awarded 1,000,000Frw for the counsel fees instead she is awarded 500,000Frw in the court’s discretion on both levels, the Government of Rwanda bears ½ equivalent to 250,000Frw, and Twagirayezu also pays ½ equivalent to 250,000Frw. III. THE DECISION OF THE COURT [26] Decides that the appeal of Nyirandorimana Claudine has merit in part; [27] Orders the Government of Rwanda to pay Nyirandorimana Claudine 1,432,476Frw in damages and 250,000Frw for the counsel fees, all equivalent to 1,682,476Frw; [28] Orders Twagirayezu Maurice to pay Nyirandorimana Claudine 1,432,476Frw in damages and 250,000Frw for counsel fees, all totalling to 1,682,476Frw; [29] Orders Twagirayezu to pay ½ of the court fees and another half be borne by the public treasury.

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 54

Page 301

CIVIL CASES

Page 303

KAPERE v. IYAMUREMYE [Rwanda SUPREME COURT – RS/REV/INJUST/CIV0005/14/CS (Nyirinkwaya, P.J., Mukandamage and Nyirandabaruta, J.) February 5, 2016] Jurisdiction of courts – Case review due to injustice – Judgment rendered under review – The application for review due to injustice consists of an extraordinary remedy meant to rectify the errors made in the final judgment, therefore even the judgment rendered under review is likely to be subject to this extraordinary remedy – Organic Law Nº03/2012/OL of 13/06/2012 determining the organisation, functioning and jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, articles 79 and 81 – Law N°21/2012 of 14/06/2012 relating to civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure, articles 186 and 193. Law governing land – Land disputes – The masterplan of plots allocation in custody of competent authority can constitute a reliable evidence of ownership of disputed plot of land – Law Nº15/2004 of 12/06/2004 relating to evidence and its production, article 3. Damages – Procedural fees – Counsel fees – No procedural or counsel fees are awarded to the litigant who lost the case, rather it is down to him to be charged them in the benefit of his opponent – Decree of 30 July 1888 relating to contracts or obligations, article 258. Facts: This case started in the Primary Court of Gisenyi, whereby Iyamuremye sued Kapere for the dispute over the plot 57

Page 304

N°2129 located in Nyarubande Village, Mbugangari Cell, Rubavu District in Western Province. This court decided that the plot belongs to Kapere as it was even approved by the Registrar of land titles whereby it relied on evidence constituted by documents he adressed to the administration of the District for the request of that plot. It also rejected the arguments of Iyamuremye that the assets in the plot belong to Kapere while the plot does not belong to him. Iyamuremye lodged an appeal before the Intermediate Court of Rubavu, which upheld the first decision because there was no evidence proving undoubtfully his owernership over the plot. After this judgment became final, Iyamuremye applied for case review whereby he advanced that he found a plan indicating the allocation of plots as a new evidence. He also alleged that when the hearing of the case was still pending, Kapere appropriated himself stones which were in the plot, therefore he should be held liable. In the judgment RCA0495/012/TGI/RBV, the court relied on that element of evidence as well as investigation carried out in the land bureau of Rubavu District, to the site of the disputed land, and it heard different witnesses, and therefore decided that the plot belongs to Iyamuremye to whom it should be registered. It decided in addition that Kapere should pay him 650,000Frw for the value of stones taken from the

plot, 300,000Frw for moral damages and 200,000Frw of counsel fees. After the delivery of that judgment, Kapere wrote to the Office of the Ombudsman requesting the review of the judgment RCA0495/012/TGI/RBV due to injustice. After the examination of his grounds, the Office of the Ombudsman requested in writting to the President of the Supreme Court the review of the case due to the disregard of some elements of evidence. After

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 58

Page 305

the examination of the report of General Inspectorate of Courts, the President of the Supreme Court ordered the dossier to be submitted to the registry of the court for hearing schedule. In the course of the hearing, Counsel Idahemuka for Iyamuremye raised an objection where he stated that the Supreme Court lacks jurisdiction to hear the application for review of the judgment RCA0027/012/TGI/RBV rendered by the Intermediate Court of Rubavu due to injustice submitted by Kapere because that judgment resulted from a review of another judgment, while that is in contradiction with article 193 of the Law Nº21/2012 of 14/06/2012 relating to civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure which prevents any way of appeal for those kind of cases because a judgment may not be subject to review twice. Counsel Gashagaza for Kapere states that his claim relies on the provision of article 29 of the Organic Law Nº03/2012/OL of 13/06/2012 determining the organisation, functioning and jurisdiction of the Supreme Court which endows it the jurisdiction to review due to injustice the judgment for which he requested it, because he indicated to the Office of the Ombudsman, the injustice contained in it and the claim was admitted. He adds that it is this Organic Law which should be applied because it is superior to the Law Nº21/2012 of 14/06/2012 relating to the civil, commercial, labour

and administrative procedure. Counsel Idahemuka for Iyamuremye alleges that Kapere has no interest in this case since he stated in his court submissions that in case the action is admitted by the Supreme Court, it should not be given merit.Counsel Gashagaza assisting Kapere states that he has interest in the case, since the Office of the Ombudsman acknowledged the existence of injustice in the KAPERE v. IYAMUREMYE 59

Page 306

judgment of which he applied for review, therefore that his opponent misunderstood his submissions. Counsel Gashagaza states in addition that Iyamuremye should be ordered to pay his clients 2,000,000Frw of procedural expenses and counsel fees. In contrast, Counsel Idahemuka states that Kapere should be the one to pay 1,000,000Frw of counsel fees he incurred due to his action. After respective grounds of both parties, the Court realised that it should first of all examine the admissibility of the application for review due to injustice of a case rendered under application for review. It realised also that it should examine if the plan for the allocation of plots which was submitted by Iyamuremye for his application for review of the judgment RCA0027/012/TGI/RBV rendered by the Intermediate Court of Rubavu on 25 April 2012 is likely to be a reliable evidence about the owner of the plot in disputes Nº2129. Held: 1. The application for review due to injustice consists of a special and extraordinary remedy with the purpose to rectify errors made in the final judgment, therefore even the judgment rendered under case review can be subject to this way of appeal.

2. There has been misunderstanding on the content of Kapere’s submissions since he does not request for inadmissibility of the claim, therefore he has interest in the case given that he claims ownership of the disputed plot.

3. The plots allocation plan in the hands of Rubavu District constitutes a reliable evidence about the owner of the disputed plot between Kapere and Iyamuremye, therefore the fact for the Intermediate Court to have admitted the application submitted by Iyamuremye for review of the judgment

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 60

Page 307

RCA0027/012/TGI/RBV and reversed its ruling, has merit and caused no injustice to Kapere.

4. Damages requested from Iyamuremye by Kapere should not be awarded, given that he loses this case, rather it is down to him to pay 500,000Frw to Iyamuremye, awarded in the discretion of the court, corresponding to this instance, because he ought to hire the services of advocate. Claim lacks merit. Court fees to the Applicant of case review due to injustice. Statutes and statutory instruments referred to: Organic Law Nº03/2012/OL of 13/06/2012 determining the organisation, functioning and jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, articles 79 and 81. Law N°21/2012 of 14/06/2012 relating to civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure, articles 186 and 193. Law Nº15/2004 of 12/06/2004 relating to evidence and its production , article 3. Decree law of 30 July 1888 relating to contracts or obligations, article 258. Cases referred to: Mberabagabo et al v. Dunia et al, RS/REV/INJUST/COM/0001/13/CS, rendered by the Supreme Court on January 03, 2014.

KAPERE v. IYAMUREMYE 61

Page 308

Judgment I. BRIEF BACKGROUND OF THE

CASE [1] Iyamuremye Mbanza Jeannot sued Kapere George before the Primary Court of Gisenyi, whereby he claimed the ownership over the plot N°2129 located in Nyarubande Village, Mbugangari Cell, Rubavu District in Western Province. In addition, he requested it to be registered in his names. [2] On 16 December 2011, the Court rendered the judgment RC0794/011/TB/GIS whereby it decided that the plot in litigation belongs to Kapere George given that after the examination of evidence he submitted including the written document of 28/04/2009 established by the Administration of the Village of Nyarubande which resolved the dispute between him and Iyamuremye, whereby it stated that since assets in the plot belongs to him, the plot belongs to Kapere too, the document he wrote on 14/05/2009 to request for the titles of the plot, the documents of 21/05/2009 and 19/05/2009 which consist of payment evidence for plot demarcation by the District, the document of 15/02/2010 indicating that the plot was given Nº2129 and provisionally registered to Kapere and the emphyteutic lease of 22/07/2011 between the Government and Kapere. It therefore found that it should only confirm what was done by the Registrar of land titles and that it was not relevant for witnesses to be heard as it was requested by parties because of the existence of the authentic deed. [3] The court examined also the plot exchange contract of 17/06/2004 concluded between Iyamuremye and Kabanda Jean

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 62

Page 309

Népo whereby the latter gave him a plot located in Mbugangari village in exchange of his plot located in Kigali City. The court disregarded this contract because it was not indicated the blueprint of both exchanged plots especially that the court could not identify in which capacity the people Iyamuremye claims to have signed it did so, since it is not enough to mention the Chief of Zone 5 without indicating its location. [4] The court found in addition that the statements of Kapere that he started to seek for the land titles in the year 2009 in the course of hearings should not be considered since for him what is relevant is that they were issued to him contrary to the other party who has not got any document, and that his grounds that the administration of the Village affirmed in writing that the assets in the plot belong to Kapere while it does not belong to him should be disregarded. [5] Iyamuremye appealed to the Intermediate Court of Rubavu, which rendered the judgment RCA0027/012/TGI/RBV on 25/04/2012, and upheld the appealed judgment due to the fact that he provided no evidence indicating without doubt his right over the plot in litigation. It ordered him to pay 100,000Frw to Kapere for dragging him into lawsuits, to pay prorated fees and court fees. [6] After this judgment became final, Iyamuremye Mbanza Jeannot applied for case review on the ground that he found

new evidence constituted by a blueprint of the allocation of plots, and that while the case was still being heard, Kapere transported stones which were in the plot, and therefore he should pay the equivalent value. In the judgment RCA0495/012/TGI/RBV, the court relied on that evidence, the investigation carried out in the Rubavu district land office and the visit of the site, as well as KAPERE v. IYAMUREMYE 63

Page 310

witness declarations, therefore declared the plot to belong to Iyamuremye. It declared in addition that it should be registered in his names and that Kapere should pay 650,000Frw for compensation of stones he appropriated himself, 300,000Frw in moral damages and 200,000Frw for counsel fees. [7] To come up with this decision, the court found that Kapere holds the titles of the said plot, but in the course of the investigation, be it to the land bureau or to the site, it interrogated Bigirimana Makini who is in charge of it, topographers Munyabuhoro Jean Louis Robert and Kuramba Placide who stated that Kapere got the plot through the administration of Mbugangari Cell in the course of general land registration whereby the plot was allocated Nº2129 without indicating its original number, while on the map, it is evident that Niyonshuti Jean Paul who was allocated it shared the limit with Kayitani Evariste and on the top, they shared the limit with Bizimana Mpakaniye, while Kapere does not appear on it. The said plot’s number was Nº4288 as seen on the map in custody of the land bureau, and was registered to Niyonshuti Jean Paul who shared the limit with Kayitani Evariste, therefore Kapere was given the number during the general systematic land registration carried out by the administration of the Cell on the basis of his own declarations. [8] It found that the witness named

Mataratara who states that the plot was given to Kapere, indicates another blueprint on which it is mentioned the name of Kapere, but if examined the location of the plot he declares to have been given to Kapere, it is evident that nothing links it to the plot allocated to Niyonshuti Jean Paul whom it is evident that his plot shares the limit with plots allocated to other militaries the same day, therefore he

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 64

Page 311

wonders the origin of the blueprint which does not exist in land bureau. [9] Concerning various witness declarations, the Court found that the declarations of Mataratara should not be considered since they contradict with those made by Kapere during the hearing in the case opposing him to Iyamuremye on 28 April 2009 before local government institutions, whereby he stated that when he started building the house in the plot he found Bahati Augustin as a neighbour, whom they disputed about the shared demarcations and later in 2002 they resolved the issue. However, when the Court interrogated Bahati about the origin of the plot during the investigation, he stated that he bought it from Bizimana Mpakaniye as indicated by the sale agreement concluded on 28/08/2003, and when it was observed to find the location of the plot of Bizimana Mpakaniye which was bought by Bahati, it found that he does not share the bounds with Kapere, rather with Kayitani Evariste and on the left side from ITIG, with Niyonshuti Jean Paul. These findings compared to the map produced by Mataratara, it is found that nowhere the plot he points to belong to Kapere shares the bounds with that of Niyonshuti Jean Paul. [10] After the ruling of the case, Kapere George wrote to the Office of the Ombudsman whereby he applied for review of the judgment RCA0495/012/TGI/RBV due to injustice. After the examination of his grounds, the Office of the ombudsman wrote to the President of the Supreme Court requesting the review of the judgment due to the fact that there have been elements of evidence which were disregarded in its ruling. Following the consideration of the report produced by the Office of the Inspector General, the President of the Supreme Court ordered KAPERE v. IYAMUREMYE 65

Page 312

the dossier to be handed to the court registry in order to be scheduled for hearing. [11] The hearing was conducted in public on 15 September 2015, whereby Kapere George was assisted by Counsel Gashagaza Philbert, while Iyamuremye Mbanza Jeannot was assisted by Counsel Idahemuka Tharcisse. The hearing was ordered to be conducted in camera on 16/10/2015, and the court decided to conduct the investigation in the land bureau of Rubavu district and to the site where the land is located. The hearing on the outcome of investigation was fixed on 15 December 2015. II. ANALYSIS OF LEGAL ISSUES a) Whether the Supreme Court is competent to hear the case review due to injustice over the judgment rendered under case review. [12] Counsel Idahemuka for Iyamuremye states that the Supreme Court does not have jurisdiction to hear the case review of the judgment RCA0027/012/TGI/RBV due to injustice initiated by Kapere which was rendered by the Intermediate Court of Rubavu because the judgment was also rendered under review, which is contrary to the provision of article 193 of the Law Nº21/2012 of 14/06/2012 relating to civil, commercial labour and administrative procedure prohibiting any kind of remedy regarding such kind of judgments because no judgments may be reviewed twice, rather, it becomes final. [13] Counsel Gashagaza for Kapere states that his claim relies on the provision of article 29 of the Organic Law

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 66

Page 313

Nº03/2012/OL of 13/06/2012 determining the organization, functioning and jurisdiction of the Supreme Court which provides for its jurisdiction to review the judgment for which he applied to be done due to injustice, because he indicated the injustice he faced to the Office of Ombudsman and his application was admitted. He declares in addition that the said Organic Law should be applied given that it is superior to the Law Nº21/2012 of 14/06/2012 relating to civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure.

OPINION OF THE COURT [14] Before the pursuit of the hearing in the merit of the case, in the course of deliberation, the court found that article 193 of the Law Nº21/2012 of 14/06/2012 relating to civil, commercial, labor and administrative procedure provides that the decision on the application for review shall not be subject to any procedure of appeal. [15] In addition, article 79(1) of the Organic Law Nº03/2012/OL of 13/06/2012 determining the organization, functioning and jurisdiction of the Supreme Court provides that The Office of the Ombudsman shall be the competent organ to petition the Supreme Court over application for review of a final decision due to injustice, while its article 81 states that a final decision may be subject to review due to injustice as mentioned above, when there is unquestionable evidences of corruption, favoritism or nepotism that were relied upon in the judgment and that were unknown to the losing party during the course of the proceedings; when there are provisions and irrefutable evidence that the judge ignored in rendering the judgment; when KAPERE v. IYAMUREMYE 67

Page 314

the judgment cannot be executed due to the drafting of its content. [16] The court found therefore that the application for review due to injustice which is provided for by articles 79 and 81 as mentioned above, constitutes an extraordinary remedy, the objective of which is to rectify the errors made in the final judgment on the basis of the above provisions, hence even the final judgment rendered under case review is concerned with this extraordinary remedy. [17] Indeed, this has been the position taken by this very court in the case RS/REV/INJUST/COM/0001/13/CS rendered on 03 March 2014 among Mberabagabo innocent, Notary Kayitesi Judith, Butera Jean Pierre, Fiat and Dunia Bakarani in which BCR was forced to intervene, that once the party exhibits one of the instances provided for by article 81 as mentioned above, the judgment rendered under review on the basis of article 186 of the Law Nº21/2012 of 14/06/2012 mentioned above; may be reviewed due to injustice. b) Whether Kapere has interest in this case. [18] Counsel Idahemuka for Iyamuremye alleges that Kapere has no interest in this case since he stated in his court submissions that in case the action is admitted by the Supreme Court, it should not be given merit. [19] Counsel Gashagaza assisting Kapere states that he has interest in the case, since the Office of the Ombudsman acknowledged the existence of injustice in the judgment of which he applied for review, therefore that his opponent misunderstood his submissions.

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 68

Page 315

[20] Concerning this objection, the Court found that there has been a misunderstanding of the content of court submissions of Kapere because he does not request the inadmissibility of the claim, and therefore it finds that he has interest in the case because he claims the ownership over the plot in dispute. Whether the plan referred to for the allocation of plots relied on by Iyamuremye for his application for review of the judgment RCA0027/012/TGI/RBV rendered by the Intermediate Court of Rubavu on 25 April 2012 is likely to settle the issue about the owner of the plot Nº2129 in dispute between Iyamuremye Jeannot and Kapere George. [21] Counsel Gashagaza and his client Kapere allege that the new evidence according to Iyamuremye consisting of a plan he has been given by the Administration of Rubavu district which enabled him to apply for review of the judgment RCA0027/012/TGI/RBV rendered by the Intermediate Court of Rubavu on 25 April 2012 has no link with the plot Nº2129 which was in dispute, and that it does not indicate its origin and the organ which issued it, as well as its signature and stamp. [22] They state that consideration made of the provisions of article 186(3) of the Law Nº21/2012 of 14/06/2012 relating to civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure, the judge should not have admitted the claim of Iyamuremye given that the lack by those elements of evidence of the link with the subject matter implies they are not conclusive. [23] They explain that in the decision of the judge, he misled between the origin of the plot Nº2129 whereby he stated that it originates from the plot Nº4288 which was delivered by the District of Rubavu (as noticed on the plan of Rubavu District), KAPERE v. IYAMUREMYE 69

Page 316

and he explains in addition that it is evident that the plot is registered in the names of Kapere and who holds its titles as well, but that when he conducted investigation where he interrogated the staff in land bureau, he found that during the plot registration, Kapere got it on the basis of the information the land bureau was provided by the administration of the Cell of Mbugangari, but that this plot does not exhibit its former number in the district plans. [24] They add that the judge explains also that the plot Nº2129 originates from the plot Nº4288 as it was clear on the plan found in the Rubavu district land bureau, and pursues that the said Nº4288 was registered to Niyonshuti Jean Paul who shared the demarcation with Kayitani Evariste, therefore that Kapere was given that number by the land bureau on the basis of his own explanations given to the Cell Administration, but that as the Office of the Ombudsman discovered in the course of investigation it conducted, the plot Nº2129 does not originate from Nº4288, rather from the plot Nº4300 located in Nyakabungo, Mbugangari which was allocated to Nsengiyumva Eneas on 28 January 2002 who was given its cadastral plan and a lease contract for residential use but failed to exploit it, therefore he was deprived of it in favor of Kapere who was given its cadastral plan and demarcation was done. [25] They go on stating that the fact that the judge held that the plot appears nowhere on the plan of Rubavu District, was the result of the misrepresentation of facts which prevented him from knowing the plot in dispute because it shares the demarcation with the plots Nº2130 and Nº1707 as indicated by the said plan, located in the roads' junction and registered in the names of Kapere.

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 70

Page 317

[26] Another element indicating that the plot Nº2129 originates from Nº4300 consists of the invoices issued by the administration of Rubavu district whereby it is explained the type of taxes to be “régularisation PC 4300”, which shows that it has no link with the plot Nº4288 as alleged by Iyamuremye, and this caused the court to be misled about facts.

[27] Counsel Gashagaza and his client Kapere state in addition that the judge misrepresented that the plot Nº4288 used to belong to Niyonshuti Jean Paul, even though it does appear nowhere on the plan of Rubavu district; is the one which became Nº2129 registered in the names of Kapere during the general land registration. They explain that the Office of the Ombudsman realized in the course of land registration that the plot Nº4288 was given Nº2127 and is registered to Mukamana Salima and Uwihoreye Kassim, and does not belong to the same bloc as the plot Nº2129 belonging to Kapere. [28] They allege in addition that the Court disregarded the letter addressed to Kapere by the District Administration whereby he was warned about the lapse of 5 years without the use of the plot and the replies he provided as well as the authentic emphyteutic lease he holds, which all indicates his ownership over the said plot. [29] Counsel Idahemuka and his client Iyamuremye state that the answer to this issue is found in 15th paragraph of the judgment RCA0495/012/TGI/RBV for which it was applied a review due to injustice, whereby the judge indicates that he conducted an investigation in the land bureau on the plans submitted by the parties and mentioned the staff in charge he found at the site who showed him the plan corresponding to the location of the plot. KAPERE v. IYAMUREMYE 71

Page 318

[30] They allege that this court should decide to invalidate the decision of the Office of the Ombudsman, and that no injustice was suffered because its staff who conducted investigation acted ultra vires by invalidating an act taken by a competent authority. [31] They further state that Kapere alleges to have been allocated this plot whereas it was initially allocated to Niyonshuti Jean Paul, and subsequently passed to Iyamuremye; therefore it was impossible for a single plot to be allocated to two individuals. For them, the fact that the Office of Ombudsman’s servant states that Iyamuremye and Kabanda appear nowhere in the land bureau, does not contradict the judgment under review, because the judge did not even hold that the plot is registered to one of those two individuals, rather he stated that it is registered in the names of Niyonshuti Jean Paul, and this was not challenged by the Office of ombudsman’s servant. [32] They state again that there is contradiction in the statements of this servant of the Office of the Ombudsman whereby he holds that this plot was given to Kapere in 2005 after being deprived of another person and at the same time the court holding that he possessed its titles from 2002. [33] After hearing all pleadings of both parties, the court decided to conduct an investigation on 26 November 2015 in the land bureau of Rubavu district and to the plot in dispute whereby it heard several people having knowledge on the matter. [34] On the Rubavu district headquarters; the delegates of the court were received by Mr Gasuku Oscar, the director of One Stop Center which combine the former land bureau and human

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 72

Page 319

habitat settlement and Mr Munyabuhoro Jean Louis Robert, the topographer. They explained the history about the plots Nº2129, Nº4300 and Nº4288 located in Mbugangari Cell in Gisenyi sector by referring to the master plan drawn in 2002 which is known as “Plan Parcellaire du Site Mbugangari”, a plan with names of the owners of the plots which is also kept in Rubavu district bureau drawn from the former one as well as “another electronic plan” indicating new numbers allocated by Rubavu district to those plots. [35] Concerning plans submitted by both parties in the dossier on pages 92 and 93, Gasuku Oscar states that the plan on page 92 is different from the one established by Rubavu District since there are many things inserted by the party, while concerning the plan on page 93, it is similar to the one in custody of the district, but that there is a number added by the party because where it is mentioned that number 4288 belongs to Niyonshuti Jean Paul, belongs rather to Kayitani Evariste on the plan in custody of the district while Nº4289 belongs to Niyonshuti Jean Paul and Bizimana Mpakaniye owns the number of the plot located to the bottom of Kayitani Evariste’s plot with Nº4290. [36] He explained that the new land center plan established in 2011 indicates that: - The plot having number 4288 which belonged to Kayitani Evariste, changed to number 2129 was registered in the names of Mbanza Jannot for the execution of the judgment RCA0495/012/TGI/RBV;

KAPERE v. IYAMUREMYE 73

Page 320

- The plot which was registered to number 4289 belonging to Niyonshuti Jean Paul according to the land center plan was changed to be number 2130;

- It is found on the plan that the plot number 4300 was not yet allocated when the first plan was established, before it was given to Nsengiyumva Eneas and is registered on Nº2131.

- The Plot number 4290 which changed to number 1707 belongs to Bizimana Mpakaniye. [37] After the analysis of the data found on different plans, the investigation continued on the site of the plot in dispute, whereby Mr Munyabuhoro Jean Louis Robert, the topographer, indicated plots demarcations. [38] Madam Mukampunga Marie Claire who resides in the plot Nº4300 which changed to No2131 was requested to produce the land titles of her plot and she produced the emphyteutic lease title number 2131/Rub/Gis that she was issued on 25 February 2014, and she explained that it was purchased by his former husband Mbunabucya Jean Bosco with whom they got divorced who purchased it from Nsengiyumva Eneas. [39] Kayitani Evariste who was summoned by the Court was requested to indicate the plot he was allocated, and he showed the plot Nº4289 which became Nº2130. He stated in addition that after he was transferred to Democratic Republic of the Congo, he exchanged it with a house given by Gakwe Ndabarinze and he moved into that house, but that later, he learnt that he also sold it. When he was asked to state his neighbours, he replied that they were three military servicemen,

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 74

Page 321

whereby Niyonshuti Jean Paul who was a soldier was allocated the plot near his. He was asked the reason why on the plan found in the district, it is indicated that he was given the plot number 4288 which is now number 2129, and he replied that it is possible that it has been modified but that what he knows it that he was allocated a plot near the one given to Niyonshuti Jean Paul with whom they served together in the army. Concerning the issue that when he sold the plot, no dispute happened between him and Niyonshuti, he answered that it did not happen and that even Niyonshuti sold his plot later to Kabanda, who told him that he also sold it to Iyamuremye. [40] Niyonshuti Jean Paul who was also summoned by the court, stated that in the year 2000, plots located in Mbugangari were allocated whereby 3 military servicemen (Niyonshuti, Sakera and Kayitani) deployed to Gisenyi airport were given plots. The commission which was in charge of plots allocation gave him a plot which shared the demarcation with the one given to Kayitani. He was asked why on the plan of the district it is clear that the plot number 4288 changed to number 2129 which he pretends to be his, belonged to Kayitani, and he replied that this was due to the mistake. He goes on stating that after he was given that plot, he leased it to Gashema who used to cultivate it and later, he was deployed to Kanombe in Kigali, and therefore he sold it to Kabanda who also sold it to Iyamuremye according to information he got. [41] Concerning Kapere who pretends the ownership over the plot, Niyonshuti Jean Paul stated that he also was a soldier but did not live in Gisenyi; that he works in Kanombe in Military police. He denies to have never been awarded any plot in that Village. KAPERE v. IYAMUREMYE 75

Page 322

[42] Kabanda Jean Népo who was also summoned by the court states that the plot Nº2129 which belonged to Kayitani. He explains that he was in charge of administration of the airport when the military servicemen named Sakera Benjamin, Kayitani and Niyonshuti were given plots and that plot which is not constructed till now was given to Niyonshuti Jean Paul, Sakera was given to the upper side and that he bought it from Niyonshuti Jean Paul and after he was deployed elsewhere, he gave it to Iyamuremye whom he was linked to by his elder brother Ngabonziza who was in marine corps in exchange of the plot located in Kabuga. [43] Concerning the issue that when they exchanged plots they did not explain in writing by mentioning numbers of exchanged plots, Kabanda replied that at the time no number were allocated yet, and that they only agreed on the plot concerned by the exchange. [44] The Topographer Munyabuhoro Jean Louis Robert was asked the reason why the mentions on the plans differ from the reality on the site as far as the beneficiaries are concerned, and he replied that consideration made of the declarations of the interrogated persons, as well as the mentions on the plans, it is evident that the plot Niyonshuti was given was exchanged with the plot given to Kayitani, and that it is possible that at the time they were allocated them, their numbers were inexistent and they occupied them in disorder but that if need be, the mistake may be rectified. [45] Mataratara Israel who was summoned by the court stated that he was present when plots were being allocated in Mbugangari Village, and that in the year 2000, the plot Nº2129 was occupied by Kayitani, and later on by Niyonshuti. After a

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 76

Page 323

long period of time, Kapere requested him to build a house in it and when he checked on the plan he himself drew in the context of fighting against the unlawful construction, he found his name but informed him that the plot does not belong to him rather to Kayitani, but he refused and persisted that it is his. He further states that he informed Kapere that he allocated those three blocks to other individuals and showed him another plot and registered it in his names, but Kapere rejected it, and in contrary, he started the construction of a house foundation in the plot of Kayitani until he was stopped by the parties to the dispute. [46] Bahati Augustin said that the plot number 4290 which became Nº1707 in which he dwells, was acquired from Bizimana Mpakaniye in the year 2002, that in the plot located at the bottom of his, there was a foundation and that the owner used not to be seen. Later, Kapere used to come to visit it and erected a small house in it which was demolished by Iyamuremye, and this triggered the court proceedings till now. [47] After the end of investigation, the hearing resumed on 15 December 2015, whereby parties submitted their comments on its outcome. [48] Kapere states that there is confusion in the outcome of investigation because his plot originates from the plot Nº4300 which is unconstructed and he holds its titles. He further states that on its upper side there is a plot of Bahati who even went beyond the boundary; therefore he does not conceive how Kayitani sold his plot while leaving aside the one he was allocated. He states that he really was a military serviceman who did not live in Gisenyi, but that in the course of allocation of plots, the in-charges used to identify military servicemen not KAPERE v. IYAMUREMYE 77

Page 324

living in the area, but that he was allocated the plot by MINIREISO and Mataratara showed it to him. He prays the court to take into consideration the plot’s titles he was issued. [49] Kapere States in addition that Kabanda Jean Népo who was the military officer ignores the procedure of plots allocation, because he was indicated the plot given to him. He spent two weeks in Goma and at his return; Mataratara identified him on the list of people who were allocated plots. Kapere asked him the plot he was allocated and he showed him the same plot, but told him that it was allocated to other soldiers and he requested him to give them other different plots. He quickly built the house foundation, but he later went back to his work and upon his return, he realized that the plot was constructed. [50] Counsel Gashagaza states that as Gasuku Oscar has indicated, plots were devoid of numbers before, and this resulted into misappropriation of the plot belonging to Kapere. He argues that all individuals interrogated did not indicate how plots were interchanged to the extent that every person shifted to the plot which does not belong to him, but that Bahati affirmed the plot to be of Kapere and that this is known by everyone, and that this is supported by the statements of Kapere that he was given by the Chief of the cell, therefore there is a confusion about the plot Kapere was allocated and of which he has titles. [51] Counsel Idahemuka for Iyamuremye states that his client indicates that he was given the plot in the year 2002, while in the documents exhibited by Kapere, it is indicated that he was allocated it in the year 2009. He argues that the allocation of

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 78

Page 325

plots was done in public, and that Iyamuremye exchanged the plot he owned in Kabuga since he was going to work in Gisenyi. [52] He explains that in the year 2002, computerized land registration was not yet done and therefore every individual used to memorize the persons with whom they shared boundaries, and this was the basis of the statements of those three military servicemen who stated that Kapere was not included, the reason why the mistake made concerning the allocation of numbers to plots may be rectified. [53] Concerning Mataratara’s witness declarations, Counsel Idahemuka states that he also admits that disputes arose, which also has been admitted by Kapere in the Court, therefore he finds that everyone knows that the plot in dispute was given to Niyonshuti and the contract shows the successive transfer of ownership right over that plot of land.

OPINION OF THE COURT [54] Article 3 of the Law Nº15/2004 of 12/06/2004 relating to evidence and its production provides that every litigant should produce reliable evidence of his allegations. [55] The objective of the claim of Kapere for case review of the judgment RCA0495/012/TGI/RBV is to demonstrate that he suffered injustice from the decision of the Intermediate Court of Rubavu by admitting the claim for case review of the judgment RCA0027/012/TGI/RBV basing on the plan of allocation of plots which was qualified to be conclusive that Iyamuremye claimed to have been allocated by the administration of Rubavu district, indicating that the plot number 2129 belongs to him, KAPERE v. IYAMUREMYE 79

Page 326

which is not true, since the said plot originates from the plot which used to be number 4300 given to Nsengiyumva Eneas who after failing to erect a house on it, was devoid of it as evidenced by the invoice, where he was subsequently issued title documents by Rubavu district after demarcation was done. [56] Iyamuremye alleges that the plot Nº2129 in dispute originates from the plot Nº4288 which belonged to Niyonshuti Jean Paul, who later exchanged it with that of Kabanda located in Kabuga since he was relocating from Gisenyi to work in Kigali. [57] The outcome of analysis of the plans found in One Stop Center of Rubavu district, which is the department regrouping the former land bureau and Settlement service, compared to the information collected from the location of the plot in dispute, it is found that the plot in litigation between Iyamuremye and Kapere which is now number Nº2129 used to be number 4288 and was allocated to Kayitani Evariste who alleges to have sold it to Gakwe Ndabarinze, while the plot Nº4289 which belonged to Niyonshuti Jean Paul, is now recorded on Nº2130 and shares the bounds to the upper side with the plot Nº1707 belonging to Bahati Augustin. [58] The court finds that the occurrence of mistake on plot numbers and their owners who were allocated them namely Kayitani and Niyonshuti may have resulted from the error made by Rubavu District at the time of allocation of numbers, because they were devoid of numbers, and it is evident that when the owners occupied them, no dispute happened till the present. [59] Concerning the plot Nº4300, it is clear that it used to belong to Nsengiyumva Eneas, and now has number 2131 and is

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 80

Page 327

accommodating houses of Mukampunga Marie Claire who has emphyteutic lease contract number 2131/Rub/Gis issued to her on 25 February 2014. She states that the plot was acquired by his husband Mbonabucya Jean Bosco whom they divorced, who purchased itfrom Nsengiyumva Eneas. [60] Although mistakes were made in allocation of numbers of those plots, the current situation after the allocation of new numbers is that no dispute arose among the occupants of the plots Nº2130, 2131 and 1707, rather over the plot Nº2129 between Kapere and Iyamuremye. [61] In consideration of aforementioned statements, the court finds that Kapere fails to indicate the origin of the plot Nº2129 because his statements that it was allocated to Nsengiyumva Enéas who was later deprived of it due to his failure to construct it, and be given to him after payment of regularisation fees lack merit, because Nsengiyumva Enéas sold the plot Nº4300 which become Nº2131 to Mbonabucya, the spouse to Mukampunga Marie Claire who resides in it, and no one disputes about it. Indeed, the said plot was not given to Kapere in year 2000, when Kabanda and Niyonshuti were given plots in Nyarubande Village, Mbugangari Cell, Gisenyi Sector in Rubavu District as it was declared by witnesses, because if he was given in the same conditions as others, he would not have paid regularisation fees for the plot Nº4300 as he alleges. [62] The Court finds in contrast that in consideration of the fact that Kayitani and Niyonshuti were allocated adjacent plots which were later given numbers but with interchanged names of their owners, the plot in disputes which was indicated to have currently Nº2129 and unconstructed, belongs to Iyamuremye as evidenced by the contract to exchange the plots concluded on 17 KAPERE v. IYAMUREMYE 81

Page 328

June 2004 between Iyamuremye and Kambanda Jean Népo who acquired it from Niyonshuti Jean Paul, whereby Kabanda exchanged with Iyamuremye the plot located in Mbugangari Village who in return gave him the plot located in Kigali City. That contract is also supported by the statements of the parties to it, the declarations of Niyonshuti Jean Paul as well as the plans in custody of Rubavu district’s One Stop Center showing the allocation of plots. [63] The Court finds therefore that, the plan of allocation of plots in custody of Rubavu District on which the Intermediate Court of Rubavu relied for the review of the case RCA0027/012/TGI/RBV consists of a reliable evidence about the owner of the plot in dispute between Kapere George and Iyamuremye Mbanza Jeannot, therefore the fact for that court to have admitted the claim for case review of the judgment RCA0027/012/TGI/RBV and modified its ruling, has merit and has caused no injustice to Kapere George. [64] As it was therefore decided in the judgment RCA0495/012/TGI/RBV rendered on 24 June 2013 by the Intermediate Court of Rubavu, the Court finds that the plot Nº2129 located in Nyarubande, Mbugangari Cell, Gisenyi Sector in Rubavu District should remain to be registered to Iyamuremye Mbanza Jeannot since he is the owner. d) Procedural fees requested by litigants. [65] Counsel Gashagaza for Kapere argues that Iyamuremye should pay to him 2,000,000Frw of procedural fees and counsel fees while counsel Idahemuka states that Kapere is the one who should pay him 1,000,000Frw of counsel fees he spent due to his claim.

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 82

Page 329

OPINION OF THE COURT [66] Concerning the payment of damages, article 258 of the civil code book III, provides that any act of a person that harms another obliges that person who committed the fault to repair. [67] The court finds that damages requested by Kapere to the expenses of Iyamuremye should not be awarded because he loses the case, rather he should pay 500,000Frw to Iyamuremye on this level of proceedings, awarded upon the court’s discretion because he ought to hire the services of an advocate for this case. III. THE DECISION OF THE COURT [68] Decides that the claim for case review due to injustice of the judgment RCA0495/012/TGI/RBV rendered on 24 June 2013 by the Intermediate Court of Rubavu submitted by Kapere George lacks merit; [69] Decides that the plot Nº2129 located in Nyarubande Village, Mbugangari cell, Gisenyi Sector, Rubavu district belongs to Iyamuremye Mbanza Jeannot, and should remain registered in his names as it was decided in the judgment RCA0495/012/TGI/RBV rendered on 24 June 2013 by the Intermediate Court of Rubavu; [70] Orders Kapere George to pay Iyamuremye Mbanza Jeannot 500,000Frw of counsel fees for this instance; KAPERE v. IYAMUREMYE 83

Page 330

[71] Upholds the ruling of the judgment RCA0495/012/TGI/RBV rendered on 24 June 2013 by the Intermediate Court of Rubavu; [72] Orders Kapere George to pay 100,000Frw for court fees.

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 84

Page 331

NYIRAKAMANA ET AL v.

MUKASHARANGABO ET AL [Rwanda SUPREME COURT – RS/REV/INJUST/CIV0007/15/CS (Kayitesi Z., P.J., Hatangimbabazi, Gatete, Hitiyaremye and Ngagi, J.) December 04, 2015] Family law – Marriage contract – The validity of the second marriage contract while the first one is not annulled – No one may enter into a new marriage before the annulment or dissolution of the previous marriage – Constitution of the Republic of Rwanda of 24/11/1962, article 28 – Law Nº42/1988 of 27/10/1988 instituting civil code book I, article 175. Family law – Marriage contact – Sharing of property – In case spouses separate, they equally share the existing property at the time of their separation. Family law – Cohabition – Sharing property – The cohabitant only share equally the property they co-owned – Organic Law No59/2008 of 10/09/2008 on prevention and punishment of gender- based violence, article 39. Family law – Testament – Invalidation of the testament – The testament is invalid when it discriminates the children basing on gender and also when the de cujus tacitly changed testament before his death – Constitution of the Republic of Rwanda of 20/12/1978, article 16 and 93(2) – International Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination against Women of 18 December 1979 signed at New York, article 5(a). 85

Page 332

Family law – Donation – Invalidation of donation contract – The donation made without the consent of the co-owner and with the purpose to discriminate the children, is invalid. Facts: Karimunda got civilly married to Mukasharangabo, who in 1965, abandoned her husband and went to cohabit with another man. After that period, Karimunda had a children with Mukandori but without cohabitation. In 1970, he civilly got married to Nyirakamana with whom they concluded a contract of for the consolidation of their property to run a business together and they contributed to their family welfare. In 1979, Karimunda filed a claim at the First Instance Court requesting to divorce Mukasharagabo, and the Court granted the divorce on the ground that wife abandoned the household. The prosecution accused Karimunda and Nyirakamana of bigamy at the First Instance of Kigali alleging that they cohabited before he divorce Mukasharangabo, and it requested for annulment of the marriage contract which he entered into with Nyirakamana. The Court convicted them of bigamy but it did not annul the marriage contract on the ground that none will benefit from its cancellation because this would consist of a dissolution of the family which is well established, especially that the marriage contract between Karimunda and Mukasharangabo does no longer exist. In 1991, Mukasharangabo applied for opposition against the divorce judgment because it was heard by her default. The court sustained the divorce on the ground that she willingly abandoned her husband Karimunda in 1965. Mukasharangabo

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 86

Page 333

appealed against the ruling but Karimunda died before its hearing. Mukasharangabo filed a claim to the Primary Court praying for the cancellation of the marriage contract between Karimunda and Nyirakamana, and the Court ruled that her claim lacks merit. Meanwhile, Nyirakamana and his son Karangwa instituted a third part opposition against the judgment in which Karimunda alleged that his children refusedthe descending partition. That case was joined to other cases which his wives and their children filed with the purpose of requesting the revocation of the testament he made as well as the case filed against Central Motors and Parts Sarl and Karangwa in single case RC0153/05/TP/KIG which was rendered by the Court of Kigali city. That Court held that Mukasharangabo should be given ½ of the property she co-owned with Karimunda as a legitimate wife, that all children of Karimunda should inherit ½ of the whole estate of their father; that the house located on plot No05/524 at Karambo - Gikondo should be included into the estate of Karimunda, that Mukandoli should be allocated the land located at Kiziguro where she resides and that Nyirakamana Marciana remains with the shares she has in Central Motors and Parts Sarl. Nyirakamana, Karangwa and Central motors appealed to the High Court and the appeal was joined to another appeal case lodged by Mukasharangabo before this Court. The court ruled that the marriage contract of Nyirakamana and Karimunda should not be annulled given that both were legitimate wives of Karimunda, therefore there is no basis to rely on and decide NYIRAKAMANA ET AL v. MUKASHARANGABO ET AL 87

Page 334

who between the two has the right on the estate of Karimunda. It declares in addition that the testament did not exist, therefore the property of Karimunda should equally be inherited by his children. It ordered also that the house on plot N°15/525 which is registered on Central Motors and Parts Sarl shall be returned into the estate of Karimunda. Nyirakamana, Karangwa and Central motors appealed to the Supreme Court which dismissed their appeal since it does not fall into its jurisdiction. Appellants applied for review of the judgment due to injustice requesting that the testament made by Karimunda on 25 August 1981 be considered concerning the estate, and if not so, the marriage contract between Karimunda and Nyirakamana should be considered and Nyirakamana Marciana be given ½ of the property that she is legally entlitled to. They allege in addition that Mukasharangabo should not be given the right over the property Karimunda acquired together with Nyirakamana, and also that the property in Central Motors and Parts Sarl should not be included among the estate of Karimunda. Held: 1. No one may enter into a new marriage before the annulment or dissolution of the previous marriage, therefore the fact that Karimunda got married to Nyirakamana before divorcing Mukasharangabo; their marriage should be nullified.

2. In case spouses separate, they equally share the existing property at the time of their separation, therefore Mukasharangabo should be given a half of the property she co- owned with Karimunda till the time she abandoned the household.

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 88

Page 335

3. The cohabitant only share equally the property they co- owned, therefore Nyirakamana has the right to be given a half (½ ) of the property she acquired together with Karimunda from the day they started to cohabit.

4. The testament is invalid when it discriminates the children basing on gender and also when the de cujus tacitly changed testament before his death. Therefore, this implies that the testament which Karimunda made should not be referred to determine his succession, rather, it should be ab intestat, therefore all children of Karimunda have equal right to inherit the estate of Karimunda.

5. The donation made without the consent of the co-owner and with the purpose to discriminate the children, is invalid. Consequently, the donation which was given to Central Motors and Parts Sarl is invalid, and must be included into the estate of Karimunda and Nyirakamana.

6. The claim is inadmissible when the party to the case has no interest in the case.

7. When each party to the case lost some of his/her claims, the damages are not awarded. The claim has merit in part. The court fees to all parties in the case. Statutes and statutory instruments referred to: Constitution of the Republic of Rwanda of 24/11/1962, article 28. Constitution of the Republic of Rwanda of 20/12/1978, articles 16 and 93(2). NYIRAKAMANA ET AL v. MUKASHARANGABO ET AL 89

Page 336

Organic Law No59/2008 of 10/09/2008 on Prevention and Punishment of Gender- based violence, article 39. International Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination against Women of 18 December 1979 signed at New York, article 5(a). Law N°21/2012 of 14/06/2012 relating to the civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure, article 2. 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 56 and 58. Law Nº42/1988 of 27/10/1988 instituting the preliminary title and civil code book I, article 175. No case referred to. Authors cited: Christian Jubaut, Droit Civil, les successions. Les Libéralités, DALLOZ, 2005, pp.444-445, No751. Judgment I. BRIEF BACKGROUND OF THE

CASE [1] Karimunda Gérard cohabited with three women namely Mukasharangabo Eugénie, Mukandoli Epiphanie and Nyirakamana Marcianna. In 1965 Mukasharangabo Eugénie abandoned her husband and went to cohabit with another man called Muvunyi Aaron. Meanwhile, Karimunda Gérard had a

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 90

Page 337

relationship with Mukandoli Epiphanie without permenant cohabitation, but they gave birth to three children. [2] After Karimunda Gérard realised that Mukasharangabo Eugénie had abandoned him, he got civily married to another wife called Nyirakamana Marcianna on 26 November 1970. They concluded a contract for the consolidation of their property to run a business together whereby Karimunda Gérard contributed 51,000Frw whereas Nyirakamana Marciana contributed 80,000Frw. In 1975 they bought a plot N°517 in Kigali City and built on a house. They gave birth to three children namely Karangwa Denis, Karigirwa Edinace and Kantamage Jacqueline. Their relationship ended by the death of Karimunda Gérard in 1994. [3] Meanwhile, in 1979, Karimunda Gérard had instituted a divorce claim at the first instance Court of Kabaya against Mukasharangabo Eugénie. On 21 November 1979 the judgment RC 224/79 was rendered in default of Mukasharangabo Eugénie, whereby a Court granted the divorce on the ground that she had abandoned the household. [4] Due to the fact that Nyirakamana Marciana and Karimunda Gérard were married on 26 November 1970 before the former got divorced, the prosecution accused them of bigamy in the First Instance Court of Kigali, and prayed for the annulment of the marriage contract. That Court found them guilty of that offence but did not annul that marriage. The prosecution appealed against the decision to the Court of appeal of Kigali, which held in the judgment RPA2826/KIG on 19/11/1981 that they are guilty but did not annul the marriage contract on the ground that none will be benefit from its cancellation because this would consist of a dissolution of the NYIRAKAMANA ET AL v. MUKASHARANGABO ET AL 91

Page 338

family which is well established, and this is likely to result in disturbance of public order, especially that the marriage was dissolved. [5] Mukasharangabo Eugénie applied for opposition against the divorce judgment which was rendered by her default by the First Instance Court of Gisenyi, located at Kabaya, which in the judgment RC5195/R11/KY rendered on 21 September 1991 upheld the divorce on the ground that since 1965 Mukasharangabo Eugénie separated with her husband Karimunda Gérard. Mukasharangabo Eugénie appealed to the Court of appeal of Ruhengeri and the case was recorded on RCA6302/R14/RUH, but Karimunda Gérard passed away while the case was still pending, therefore that Court declared the extenction of divorce proceedings by the death of Karimunda Gérard. [6] Later on, Mukasharangabo Eugénie filed a claim to the Primary Court of Nyarugenge requesting for cancellation of the marriage contract between Karimunda Gérard and Nyirakamana Marciana. The Court rendered the judgment RC0379/08/TB/NYG on 31 October 2008 and held that the claim has no merit. [7] Mukasharangabo Eugénie appealed against it to the High Court whereby the case was recorded on RC5195 but her claim was joined to other cases initiated by Nyirakamana Marciana and Karangwa Denis who applied for opposition against judgment RC5091/R11/KYA rendered on 23 May 1990 by the First Instance Court of Gisenyi located at Kabaya, the Court to which Karimunda Gérard once filed a petition alleging that his children rejected the descending partition which he bestowed to them.

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 92

Page 339

[8] Nyirakamana Marciana and Karangwa Denis lodged a third party opposition against judgment RC5091/R11/KYA, their case was joined with the case of Mukasharangabo Eugénie praying for the annulment of the marriage between Nyirakamana Marciana and Karimunda Gérard. Those judgments were also joined with other cases filed by other wives and children of Karimunda Gérard requesting for the revocation of a testament made by Karimunda Gérard so that the properties left by the de cujus be inherited in accordance with the law and requesting for the descending partition. Furthermore, those cases were joined with the others in which Central Motors and Parts Sarl and Karangwa Denis were sued and all they recorded on RC0153/05/TP/KIG which was adjudicated by Court of Kigali on 13 June 2005. [9] Among its decisions, the Court of Kigali decided that as the legitime wife, Mukasharangabo be given ½ of the properties which she co-owned with Karimunda Gérard and children of Karimunda Gérard inherit ½ of the property; that the house on plot No05/524 located in Karambo-Gikondo be included in the property of Karimunda Gérard to be inherited; and Mukandoli was allocated the land located at Kiziguro on which she resided; it further decided that Nyirakamana Marciana remains with the shares she has in Central Motors and Parts Sarl. [10] Nyirakamana Marciana, Karangwa Denis and Central Motors and Parts appealed against that judgment to the High Court and it was joined with another case in which Mukasharangabo appealed against the judgment NoRC5195 mentioned above which sustained the marriage contract between Karimunda Gérard and Nyirakamana. The cases were recorded on a single N°RCA0221/05/HC/KIG, RCA0221/09/HC/KIG NYIRAKAMANA ET AL v. MUKASHARANGABO ET AL 93

Page 340

which was adjudicated on 02 April 2010, whereby the High Court ruled that the marriage contract could not be annulled; therefore, the fact that Mukasharangabo Eugénie and Nyirakamana Marciana were both legitimate wives of Karimunda Gérard, there is no basis on which the Court would rely on to indicate the wife who is entitled to properties left by Karimunda Gérard. [11] Concerning the testament, the High Court held that it did not exist, therefore it ordered the equal inheritance of the property of Karimunda Gérard by his children. It ordered in addition that the house on plot N°15/525 registered on Central Motors and Parts Sarl be included among the estate of Karimunda Gérard. [12] Nyirakamana Marciana, Karangwa Denis and Central Motors and Parts Sarl appealed to the Supreme Court, the preliminary judge dismissed their appeal because it does not fulfil the legal requirements to fall into the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. They appealed against the order on 16 March 2012, and the Court rendered the judgment RCAA0038/10/CS holding that their appeal lacks merit. Consequently, it sustained the rulings of the judgment RCA0221/05/HC/KIG, RCA0221/09/HC/KIG rendered on 02 April 2010. [13] Nyirakamana Marciana, Karangwa Denis and Central Motors and Parts Sarl applied for the review of the judgment RCA0221/05/HC/KIG, RCA0221/09/HC/KIG due to injustice, whereby they requested the consideration of the testament made by Karimunda Gérard on 25 August 1981 regarding the partition of the estate, and if decided otherwise, the marriage contact between Karimunda Gérard and Nyirakamana Marciana should be considered as valid, and consenquently the latter be alocated

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 94

Page 341

½ of the property she is entitled by the law. They allege in addition that Mukasharangabo should not be given the portion on the property jointly acquired by Karimunda Gérard and Nyirakamana Marciana, and that the shares in Central Motors and Parts Sarl should not be included into the estate of Karimunda Gérard. [14] The respondents and some of forced interveners raised an objection of inadmissibility the claim, but the Supreme Court decided through interlocutoly judgment rendered on 30 June 2015, that the objections raised lack merit and the hearing on merit should be resumed. [15] The hearing was held on 07 October 2015, in the presence of all parties, whereby Nyirakamana Marciana and Central Motors and Parts Sarl and Karangwa Denis were represented by Counsel Gashagaza Philbert, Mukasharangabo Eugénie by Counsel Twayigize Jean Claude, successors of Bitwayiki Martin, successors of Ntahobari Nasson, successors of Mukanoheli, successors of Mukandekezi Alphonsine by Counsel Jean Baptiste and Ndereyimana Sylvestre; Mukandori Epiphanie, Nyirashema Marie, and Karimunda Hakizimana Alphonse represented by Counsel Nsabimana Jean Baptiste and GT Bank Ltd, the former FINA Bank by Counsel Nkurunziza François Xavier.

NYIRAKAMANA ET AL v. MUKASHARANGABO ET AL 95

Page 342

II. ANALYSIS OF LEGAL ISSUES To indicate who has the right on estate of Karimunda Gérard between Nyirakamana Marciana and Mukasharangabo Eugénie. [16] The Counsel of Nyirakamana Marciana states that the injustice she suffers can be resolved by respecting the testament made by Karimunda Gérard on 25 September 1981 which allocated her the house located at Gikondo on plot No05/224, but if the Supreme Court finds it otherwise, it should rule that she is legitimate wife of Karimunda Gérard, for her to be allocated ½ of estate of Karimunda Gérard, while Mukasharangabo Eugénie would not have the right to the estate, because Karimunda Gérard jointly acquired it with Nyirakamana Marciana, when Mukasharangabo Eugénie had abandoned him. [17] The counsel for Nyirakamana Marciana explains that she is a legitimate wife because after Mukasharangabo Eugénie abandoned the household, Karimunda Gérard filed divorce claim, and in the judgment RC224/79 the Court held that the divorce status of Mukasharangabo Eugénie should be registered in civil status registry; and after, Mukasharangabo Eugénie applied for an opposition against the judgment, the ruling sustained the divorce. She appealed against it but Karimunda Gérard died before delivery of the judgment, therefore the Counsel finds that the remedy requested by Mukasharangabo Eugénie was not granted; rather, it was sustained the divorce judgment, therefore Nyirakamana Marciana is a legitimate wife. [18] The Counsel alleges in addition that even in the criminal judgment RPA2826/KIG of 19 November 1981 which

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 96

Page 343

convicted Nyirakamana Marciana and Karimunda Gérard of bigamy, the Court declared that it can not cancel their marriage contract because no one will benefit from it; rather, it will cause the disturbance of public order if the established family is dissolved, therefore Counsel finds that Courts admitted her to be a legitimate wife. [19] The Counsel for Mukasharangabo Eugénie states that Karimunda Gérard married Nyirakamana Marciana while the marriage with Mukasharangabo Eugénie was still valid, but that he supports the rulings of the High Court that there is no basis to determine the legitimate spouse between the two, and this issue does not constitute the subject matter in this case because the dispute relates to whether testament Karimunda made was lawful. [20] The Counsel for Mukandori Epiphanie, her children and the children of Mukasharangabo Eugénie argues that Nyirakamana Marciana could not be considered as a legitimate wife, given that even Mukasharangabo Eugénie is legitimate, therefore for the counsel, Karimunda was not allowed by the Constitution to get married to two wives, hence, even the judgment which ruled as such erred in law.

THE OPINION OF THE COURT [21] Article 28 of the constitution of Republic of Rwanda of 24 November 1962 which was into force at the time Karimunda Gérard got married to Nyirakamana Marciana on 25 November NYIRAKAMANA ET AL v. MUKASHARANGABO ET AL 97

Page 344

1970, provides that only monogamous marriage is recognized in the forms and conditions laid down by the law1. [22] Article 101 of the civil code book I which was into force2 at time Karimunda Gérard got married to Nyirakamana Marciana on 25 November 1970 stipulates that “no one may enter into a new marriage before the annulment or dissolution of the previous marriage”. [23] The documents in the case file prove that Mukasharangabo Eugénie was married to Karimunda Gérard in 1952 before civil status officer Rwamuningi in the former district of Ngororero as it is indicated by the certificate issued by the civil status officer of Kageyo district on 11 June 2001 (judgment of the High Court, paragraph 44). The document in the case file includes also the civil status certificate issued at Runda on 22 March 2002 indicating that Karimunda Gérard was married to Nyirakamana Marciana on 25 November 1970. [24] As motivated at the beginning of this case, Karimunda Gérard filed a claim to divorce Mukasharangabo Eugénie in 1979, and it was granted in the judgment RC224/79 rendered on 21 November 1979, because the wife abandoned the household. [25] The Supreme Court is of view that Karimunda Gérard got married to Nyirakamana Marciana on 25 November 1970 before instituting a divorce claim to the Court against his first wife Mukasharangabo Eugénie. This implies that the marriage

1 Article 28: “Only monogamous marriage is recognized in the forms and conditions laid down by the Law”. 2 That article 101 became175 of the Law Nº42/1988 of 27/10/1988 instituting the civil code book I.

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 98

Page 345

which they concluded was unlawful, the reason why it should be considered invalid. [26] The Court finds in addition that as motivated, Karimunda died prior to the delivery of divorce judgment between him and Mukasharangabo Eugénie, therefore this means that the divorce was not granted, thus Mukasharangabo Eugénie remains a legitimate wife of Karimunda Gérard. [27] The Court finds that even if Mukasharangabo Eugénie was a legitimate wife, the documents in the case file prove that she separated with her husband Karimunda since 1965 when she went to cohabit with another man, and after they were involved in divorce case which was interrupted by the death of Karimunda in 1994, implying that there was no final decision, thus the property which she jointly owned with Karimunda consists of the one they co-owned till 1965, and she is only entitled to ½ of it. [28] Concerning Nyirakamana Marciana, the Court finds that even if she did not become a legitimate wife as motivated above, it is obvious that she cohabited with Karimunda from 25 November 1970 till he died in 1994. In that period they jointly carried out commercial activities according to the contract they concluded on 05 January 1968 available in the case file (page 23 Dos.CS), whereby Nyirakamana Marciana contributed 70,000Frw and a sewing machine with the value of 10,000Frw, whereas Karimunda contributed 20,000Frw and the shop room located at Vunga that was evaluated at 31,000Frw, the contribution of Karimunda amounting to 51,000Frw, which is means that he got from the property he jointly owned with his legitimate wife Mukasharangabo Eugénie. NYIRAKAMANA ET AL v. MUKASHARANGABO ET AL 99

Page 346

[29] Concerning cohabitation, article 39 of Organic Law No59/2008 of 10/09/2008 on prevention and punishment of gender-based violence, it orders husband or wife who lives with many husbands or wives, to legally marry one husband or wife, but it also orders in that time that he/she shall first of all share the commonly owned belongings or acquired together before he/she gets married. That article stipulates also that the sharing of the property shall not entrench on the children’s legally recognized rights.3 [30] Basing on article 39 of the Law N°59/2008 mentioned above, the Court finds that even if Nyirakamana Marciana is not a legitimate wife because she begun to cohabit with Karimunda Gérard before the divorce with his legitimate wife, she has the right to be given ½ of the property jointly owned or belongings acquired together with Karimunda Gérard from the time they started to cohabit on 27 November 1970, another ½ remaining the estate of Karimunda Gérard. [31] Basing also on the provision of the last paragraph of article 39 of the aforementioned Law N°59/2008 which stipulates that the property distribution shall not entrench on the children’s legally recognized rights, the Court finds that the children of Karimunda Gérard and Mukasharangabo Eugénie are entitled to the property of their both parents, especially, the

3 Article 39 provides the following: Those people entertaining unlawful marriages shall be married in accordance with the monogamous principle. If a person concerned with the provision of previous paragraph of this article was living with many husbands/wives, he shall first of all share the commonly owned belongings with those husbands/wives equally. The property distribution referred to in paragraph 2 of this article shall not entrench on the children’s legally recognized rights.

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 100

Page 347

rights they bestowed by the succession law which was in force at the time Karimunda Gérard died in 1994. Other children of Karimunda Gérard with Mukasharangabo, Nyirakamana Marciana and Mukandoli have the right to inherit him according to the succession law which was in force at time he died in 1994 as well. [32] The Court finds that for the fair succession, either in favor of Mukasharangabo or Nyirakamana Marciana, with regards to their respective share as mentioned above, as well as in favor of all children of Karimunda Gérard, all heirs will have to produce the whole estate which Mukasharangabo co-owned with Karimunda till the time she abandoned the household, as well as the one Nyirakamana Marciana acquired together with Karimunda Gérard from 25 November 1970 till his death in due time, regardless whether those properties are registered on them or not, are movable or immovable, the money in bank or shares in companies, etc... Whether the testament made by Karimunda Gérard on 25 August 1981 should be considered. [33] The counsel for Nyirakamana Marciana, Karangwa Denis and Central Motors and Parts Sarl states that they suffered injustice during the adjudication of the judgment RCA0221/05/HC/KIG rendered on 02 April 2010, based on the fact that the testament made on 25 August 1981 by Karimunda Gérard was not invalidated by the High Court, while it held that it did not exist considering the judgment rendered on 23 May 1990 by the First Instance Court of Kabaya whereby Karimunda Gérard compeled his children to receive the descending partition and declared that if that testament has ever existed, Karimunda Gérard would not have seized the Court requesting NYIRAKAMANA ET AL v. MUKASHARANGABO ET AL 101

Page 348

that they accept it; therefore the High Court did not analyse that testament in order to indicate that it is contrary to the Law which was in force at the time of its establishment on 28 August 1981. [34] Therefore, the Counsel argues that the testament of 25 August 1981 which was made in presence of notary must be executed, especially that Karimunda Gérard did not modify it as it is stated by the counsel for respondents, pretending that there is a letter which Karimunda Gérard wrote to the Minister of energy and public service whereby he allocates the house located at Gikondo to Central Motors and Parts Sarl, because if he modified it he would have returned to the notary. [35] The Counsel for Nyirakamana Marciana adds that the High Court confused the testament with the descending partition, because article 42 of the Law No22/99 of 12/11/1999 regulating matrimonial regimes, liberalities and successions provides that “the ascending partition is an act accomplished by parents while they are still alive, by which they share their patrimony between their children or their descendants who acquire, each for the portion devolved to him or her, full ownership. This partition shall be regarded as the accomplishment of parents duties to educate their children and to provide them with a personal patrimony”, whereas article 56 of that law provides for that “a testament is an act by which a person decides on the destination of his/her patrimony after his/her death and fixes provisions of his/her last will”. [36] The Counsel for Nyirakamana Marciana states that High Court misinterpreted the Law by relying its decision on aforementioned article 56, while the testament under probate was made in 1981 before the promulgation of the Law, since at

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 102

Page 349

that time the Rwandan custom was applied whereby only male child was allowed to inherit, the reason why in that testament females were not included. with regard to a polygamous, the custom dictated that children inherited the estate in custody of their mothers. [37] The Counsel for Nyirakamana Marciana states that the provision was misinterpreted because it defines the testament, and that Law came into force to supplement the Rwandan custom, and emphazises that the testament lawfully made must remain valid in order to respect the last will of the de cujus. [38] The Counsel for Nyirakamana Marciana continues to state that the testament should not have been invalidated while it was an authentic deed in confirmity with article 13 of the Law N°15/2004 of 12 /06/2004 relating to evidence and its production, which provides that an authentic deed established by a competent authority is trustworthy. Therefore that testament must be considered for it expresses the last will of de cujus Karimunda Gérard. [39] The counsel for the respondents argues that the allegations of Nyirakamana Marciana, Karangwa Denis and Central Motors and Parts Sarl and that of ombudsman office injustice at the High Court was due to the disregard of the testament, is groundless because it obvious at page eleven (11), paragraphs 47 and 48 of the judgment that the High Court did not disregard it, rather, examined it and found that it must not be considered. [40] The counsel adduces that even the provision of article 56 of the Law mentioned above was not misinterpreted, especially that the counsel for Nyirakamana Marciana, Karangwa Denis NYIRAKAMANA ET AL v. MUKASHARANGABO ET AL 103

Page 350

and Central Motors and Parts Sarl prays to the Supreme Court to apply it with regard to the testament it mentions. The counsel adds however that the testament has the defect which led the judge of High Court to dismiss it, the defects being: a. The fact that it was not actually established in presence of notary as it is mentioned by the counsel for Nyirakamana Marciana, Karangwa Denis and Central Motors and Parts Sarl since the name of notary is not indicated. b. The fact that no original copy of the testament is available, the photocopy should not be considered. c. The fact that Karimunda Gérard made it on 25 August 1981 after the delivery of the judgment RC500/R11/KYA by the First Instance Court of Kabaya that prevented him to donate some of his properties again. d. The fact that the testament discriminated the children because those of Mukasharangabo Eugénie were allocated the farm of 50m to 70m and Nyirakamana Marciana’s, the storey house in Kigali city. e. The fact that he allocated the house twice, for the first time to Nyirakamana Marciana, and the second time, to Central Motors and Parts Sarl.

THE OPINION OF THE COURT [41] The Rwandan laws which were in force at the time Karimunda Gérard made the testament of 25 August 1981, was silent with regard to the testament or succession. Article 1 of the preliminary title of the Civil Code book I provided that when

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 104

Page 351

the Law is silent with regard to a given matter, the competent courts shall refer to customs, general principles of law and equity in case disputes arise.4 [42] Concerning the general principles of law, article 16 of the Constitution of Rwanda 20/12/1978 which was in force at the time Karimunda Gérard made the testament of 25 August 19815, provides that “all human beings are equal before the law. They shall enjoy, without any discrimination like sex, equal protection of the law....”6. [43] With regard to the custom, article 93, paragraph 2 of Constitution previously mentioned provides that “the custom of a Country remains applicable as long as it has not been replaced by written laws, is not inconsistent with the Constitution, Laws and regulations, and does not violate human rights, prejudice public order or offend public decency and morals. [44] Article 5(a) of the Convention for the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination Against Women of 18/12/1979 which Rwanda ratified on 10/11/19807 provides that “... to modify the

4 Ordonnance de l’Administrateur Général au Congo relatif aux principes à suivre dans les décisions judiciaires, approuvée par le Décret du 12 novembre 19986, rendu exécutoire au Rwanda par l’O.R.U. NO11/82 du 21/06/1949 : «Quand la matière n’est pas prévue par un Décret, un arrêté ou une ordonnance déjà promulguée, les contestations qui sont de la compétence des tribunaux….seront jugées d’après les coutumes locales, les principes généraux du droit et l’équité». 5 That law was abrogated by that of 24/11/1962. 6Article 16: Tous les citoyens sont égaux devant la loi, sans discrimination aucune, notamment de race, de couleur, d’origine, d’ethnie, de clan, de sexe, d’opinion, de religion, ou de position sociale. 7 Ratification date is 10/11/1980 as it is indicated in presidential decree of 10/11/1980. NYIRAKAMANA ET AL v. MUKASHARANGABO ET AL 105

Page 352

social and cultural patterns of conduct of men and women, with a view to achieving the elimination of prejudices and customary and all other practices which are based on the idea of the inferiority or the superiority of either of the sexes or on stereotyped roles for men and women.”8 [45] As it is mentioned above, when Karimunda Gérard made the testament on 25 August 1981, the Rwandan law was silent about the definition of testament. However, the law schorals explains that “a testament is an act by which a person decides on the destination of his/her patrimony after his/her death and fixes provisions of his/her last will”9, whereas on what concerns with an authentic testament, state that it is an act passed before the notary and two witnesses.10 [46] These explanations are similar to the provision of article 56 of 22/99 of 12/11/1999 supplement book one of the civil code and to institute part five regarding matrimonial regimes, liberalities and successions provides that a testament is an act by which a person decides on the destination of his/her patrimony after his/her death and fixes provisions of his/her last will. The property which the de cujus has not disposed of by testament shall be devolved in accordance with the provisions of intestate succession.11 Whereas article 58 provides that “an authentic

8 See the presidential decree No431/16 of 10/11/1980 9droit-finances-net, in : http://droit- finances.commentcamarche.net/contents/1012-testament-comment-le-rediger 10droit-finances-net, in: http://droit- finances.commentcamarche.net/contents/1012-testament-comment-le- rediger: «(Le testament authentique est un acte passé devant deux notaires ou devant un notaire et deux témoins». 11Le testament est l'acte par lequel une personne détermine la destination de son patrimoine après sa mort et fixe ses dispositions de dernière volonté. Les

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 106

Page 353

testament is the one established by the testator/testatrix before either the notary or the registrar of his/her domicile or residence[…..]”. [47] Concerning the testament which Karimunda Gérard made on 25 August 1981, the documents in the case file (page 64) indicate that it is made up of twelve articles, whereby article one stipulates that the land located at Kiziguro, Satinsyi District, Gisenyi Province between two hills Kanyinya and Karunyambo is apportioned to his children and that the land located at Kanyinya is reserved for the descending partition among them, whereas the land located at Karunyambo from the limit of Kagabo to the limit of Kagenza at Kankomati river is reserved for inheritance. [48] It is in article 2 that Karimunda Gérard allocated the estate mostly comprised of land to his sons descending from Mukasharangabo Eugénie, namely Bitwayiki Martin, Habimana Ildephonse, Ntahobari Naasson, and Hakizimana Alphonse as follow: 1. Bitwayiki Martin, a half of the forest located at Karunyambo; the farm contiguous between that forest and Kagabo limit and two houses located at Kiziguro, 2. Habimana Ildephonse, the remained part of the aforementioned forest to share with Bitwayiki Martin as well as the land which is adjacent to that forest, 3. Ntahobari Naasson, the middle part of land near to that forest, 4. Hakizimana Alphonse, the part sharing the limit with that of Kagenza at Kankomati and the forest planted on it. In contrast, from article 5 to 9 Karimunda Gérard allocated to Nyirakamana Marciana and her children the following inheritance:

biens dont le de cujus n'a pas disposé par testament sont dévolus conformément aux dispositions sur la succession ab intestat. NYIRAKAMANA ET AL v. MUKASHARANGABO ET AL 107

Page 354

a. The house located at Gikondo, plot No05/524 to Nyirakamana Marciana; b. The house located at Kigali on plot No517, “Quartier commercial” to the son of Nyirakamana Marciana named Karangwa Denis; c. Cars, money which Karimunda Gérard possessed on bank accounts and in companies to the son of Nyirakamana Marciana. Karangwa Denis was ordered to pay the debts of Karimunda Gérard. [49] The analysis of the testament which Karimunda Gérard made, and according to the content of the documents of the case file, the Court finds that Karimunda Gérard has other children descending from three wives namely Mukasharangabo Eugénie, Nyirakamana Marciana and Mukandori Epiphanie, while no any female child was mentioned apart from stating that if she becomes miserable, she would seek help from his brother. Those female children are Kantamage Jacqueline and Karimunda Kaligirwa Edinace of Nyirakamana Marciana; Mukashema Madeleine and Nyirashema Marie of Mukandori Epiphanie; Mukandekezi Alphonsine and Mukandori Mariane of Mukasharangabo Eugénie. [50] Alhough the Counsel for Nyirakamana Marciana, Karangwa Denis and Central Motors and Parts Sarl argues that the testament is fair because it was in accordance with custom which dictated that only male children have the right to inherit, and that it was made in presence of notary, the Court finds that the testament was inconsistant with the public order provided for by article 1 of preliminary title of the Civil Code book 1 mentioned above, one of those principles relating to prohibition of any form of discrimination especially based on gender,

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 108

Page 355

provided for by article 16 of the Constitution of Rwanda of 20/12/1978 which was into force at the time Karimunda Gérard made the testament of 25 August 1981 and article 5(a) of the Convention on Elimination of all Form of Discrimination Against Women of 18/12/1979 ratified by Rwanda on 10/11/1980. [51] The Court finds that such discrimination is the serious defect which relates to a public order; therefore it renders testament of 25 August 1981 to be not considered because it discriminates some of children. [52] The Court finds in addition that the fact that the testament of Karimunda bequeathed the countryside farms to some children while valuable properties including the house located at Kigali on plot No517 at Quartier Commercial, cars, the money deposited on bank accounts and shares in companies were bequeathed to Karangwa Denis, son of Nyirakamana Marciana. This demonstrates that the testament discriminates against some children which is prohibited by article 16 of the Constitution of Rwanda mentioned above. Therefore the testament should not be considered. [53] The Court finds in addition that apart from the fact that the testament which Karimunda Gérard made on 25 August 1981 should not be considered as previously motivated, Karimunda Gérard demonstrated tacitly that he revocated that testament which is indicated by the fact that he manifested in his will the wish to allocate the house located at Gikondo on plot No05/524 to Nyirakamana Marciana while the documents in the case file include the donation contract made on 24 November 1992 whereby Karimunda Gérard donated again that plot to Central Motors and Parts Sarl. This is emphasized also by the NYIRAKAMANA ET AL v. MUKASHARANGABO ET AL 109

Page 356

fact that he intended to bequeath the ascending partition on the land located at Kiziguro, Kanyinya to his sons, while the documents in the case file indicate that Karimunda Gérard changed it through the document titled “ascending partition to the children of Karimunda Gérard” as it is clear on page two of the judgment RC5091/R11/KYA rendered on 23 May 1990 by the First Intance Court of Kabaya, whereby he demonstrated for this time that he bequeathed the land located at Kanyinya to Mukanoheli Mariana, Habimana Ildephonse, Mukashema Madeleine and Nyirashema. [54] The law scholars explain that the revocation of testament may be express or tacit. Concerning the tacit revocation, they state that the revocation results from the incompatibility or the contrary nature of the new instrument with the previous act (la révocation procède de l’incompatibilité ou du caractère contraire de l’acte nouveau avec l’acte précédent).12 [55] The Court finds that the fact that there are actions of Karimunda Gérard which demonstrate that he tacitly changed his testament, implies that the will made on 25 August 1981 should not be followed for his succession as Nyirakamana Marciana and her children allege, rather, the succession ab intestat should be followed, Therefore all children of Karimunda Gérard have equal right to succeed the whole estate without discrimination.

12 Christian Jubaut, Droit Civil, les successions. Les Libéralités, DALLOZ, 2005, pp.444-445, No751.

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 110

Page 357

Whether the house located at Gikondo on plot No05/524 should be included among the estate of Karimunda Gérard. [56] The counsel for Nyirakamana Marciana, Karangwa Denis and Central Motors and Parts Sarl states that the injustice which is in the judgment RCA0221/05/HC/KIG rendered on 02 April 2010 is due to the fact that the High Court disregarded the elements of evidence of the property of Central Motors and Parts Sarl, whereby it included its plot No05/524 among Karimunda Gérard’s estate while that property was transferred to Central Motors and Parts Sarl that possesses its title since 1986; especially that Karimunda was not even a shareholder of that company. [57] Counsel Twayigize Jean Claude and Nsabimana Jean Baptiste assisting the respondents state that this ground lacks merit because the First Instance Court of Kabaya forbade Karimunda Gérard to transfer again his property from the family to Nyirakamana Marciana. The counsel continues to argue that the properties registered on Central Motors and Parts Sarl belonged to Karimunda Gérard. With regard to the concerned plot, Karimunda Gérard transferred it twice, since he allocated it to Nyirakamana Marciana in the testament he made on 25 August 1981, and then in 1990 to Central Motors and Parts Sarl as it is indicated by the letter he wrote to the Minister of energy and public service requesting him/her to register it on

Central Motors and Parts Sarl, whereby he states that Central Motors and Parts Sarl owned it from 17 November 1986, therefore the Counsel realises that he deprived himself from his property in favor of Nyirakamana Marciana and her children with bad faith. [58] Karigirwa Edinace states that the concerned plot was a set of two plots, while Karimunda Hakizimana Alphonse argues NYIRAKAMANA ET AL v. MUKASHARANGABO ET AL 111

Page 358

that the statement of his sister Karigirwa Edinace the daughter of Nyirakamana Marciana is not true, rather, there was one plot except that it was recorded on two numbers, because they wanted to change it and was recorded on No50108 while its former number was No05/524, as it is indicated in the letter which Karimunda Gérard wrote to MINITRAPE.

THE OPINION OF THE COURT [59] Concerning the determination of whether the house located at Gikondo on plot No05/524 can be included among the estate of Karimunda Gérard and ceased to belong to Central Motors and Parts Sarl, the documents in the case file demonstrate that on 25 August 1981 the time he made the testament, Karimunda Gérard indicated that the house belongs to him, whereby he bequeathed it to his wife Nyirakamana Marciana. [60] Furthermore, as it is mentioned above, the case file contains the letter No012/09/90/KG/RE of 12 September 1990 which Karimunda Gérard wrote to the Minister of public service, energy and water requesting the registeration of that plot on Central Motors and Parts Sarl as well as the donation contract which was made on 24 November 1992 whereby Karimunda Gérard transferred that plot to Central Motors and Parts Sarl. [61] Concerning the shareholders of Central Motors and Parts Sarl, its articles of association of 14 March 1991 indicates that they are Nyirakamana Marciana and her children Karangwa Denis, Karigirwa Edinace, and Kantamage Jacqueline (pages 117-120).

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 112

Page 359

[62] The analysis of all documents, demonstrate that the concerned plot and the house on it were part of the property of Karimunda because if not so, he could have not bequeathed it to his wife Nyirakamana Marciana, and changed it and transferred to Central Motors and Parts Sarl later. [63] Even if nothing prevents a person to make a donation, according to general provisions concerning donations which provide that it consists essentially of the gratuitous disposition by the disposer of all or part of his property or rights for the benefit of another person (inter vivos) gratuitously;13 it is obvious that the mentioned house located at Gikondo on plot No05/524 does not really belong to Karimunda alone, rather, as mentioned above he co-owned it with Nyirakamana Marciana who has the right over a half of it in accordance with article 39 of Organic Law No59/2008 of 10/09/2008 on prevention and punishment of gender- based violence referred to above. Therefore it is unconceavable for Karimunda Gérard to have donated that property to Central Motors and Parts Sarl without the consent of Nyirakamana Marciana whom they co-owned it;especially that the Court disregarded the will in which he had transferred that house to Nyirakamana Marciana. [64] The Court is also of the view that the donation was concluded with the purpose of unfair distinction among children of Karimunda Gérard as it is demonstrated by the memorandum and articles of association of Central Motors and Parts Sarl that shareholders are Nyirakamana Marciana and her children.

13La donation consiste essentiellement dans l’aliénation gratuite que le disposant fait de tout ou partie de ses biens ou droits au profit d’une autre personne. Lire commentaires de l’article 894, du Code Civil français, DALLOZ, Edition 2009. NYIRAKAMANA ET AL v. MUKASHARANGABO ET AL 113

Page 360

Therefore the Court finds that the allocation of that house to the company deprives other children of Karimunda Gérard of the right to inherit the part of their father to that house. [65] Considering the motivations mentioned above, the Court finds that the donation of the house located at Gikondo on plot No05/524 to Central Motors and Parts Sarl as aforementioned, was injustly done, the reason why it should not be considered. Therefore, it should remain into the estate of Karimunda Gérard and Nyirakamana Marciana. Concerning the prayers of GT Bank Ltd to be reimbursed the loan owed by Karimunda Gérard. [66] Counsel Nkurunziza François Xavier for GT Bank Ltd claims that the family of Karimunda Gérard should be ordered to reimburse the loan worth to 47,416,566Frw it owes GT Bank Ltd pursuant to the judgment RCOM 321/10/HCC rendered by the Commercial High Court whereby it held that the successors of Karimunda Gérard are liable for that loan because Karimunda Gérard died before paying it. [67] Counsel Twayigize argues that concerning the issue of succession, the property of Karimunda Gérard was never revealed because even in the the testament he stated that he was still working, and his death was known in 2007. The one who would have declared that asset is Karambizi Canisius who was appointed as a a liquidator, but was suspended by the Supreme Court. Therefore he prays to the Court to refer to him for a assistance to reveal the property of Karimunda Gérard because only, the loan from GT Bank Ltd, the house which is pretended to belong to Central Motors and Parts Sarl and the storey house located at Kigali city are known.

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 114

Page 361

THE OPINION OF THE COURT [68] Article 2 of the Law N°21/2012 of 14/06/2012 relating to the civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure, provides that a claim cannot be accepted in Court unless the plaintiff has the status, interest and capacity to bring the suit, article 77 of the same Law confers the judge the right to reject the claim without hearing the case on merit, due to the lack of the status, capacity and interest to file a claim, whereas article 78 allows the judge to raise an objection at any stage of proceedings, whereby it stipulates that the judge can raise an incident at his/her own motion at any stage of proceedings before the pronouncement of the judgment. [69] As stated by the counsel for GT Bank Ltd, the documents in the case file demonstrate that there exists a final judgment RCOM321/10/HCC rendered by Commercial High Court whereby the successors of Karimunda Gérard were ordered to pay back 47,416,566Frw to GT Bank Ltd which Karimunda Gérard owed before his death. [70] The Court finds that consideration made of the ruling of the mentioned judgment RCOM321/10/HCC, GT Bank Ltd has no interest in the judgment RCA0221/05/HC/KIG rendered on 02 April 2010 which is subject to review due to injustice, because his request was granted in that judgment, therefore basing on articles of the Law N°21/2012 mentioned above, the request of GT Bank Ltd is not admitted. Concerning the requested damages. [71] The Counsel of Nyirakamana Marciana states that she was dragged into vexatious litigation; therefore praying to the NYIRAKAMANA ET AL v. MUKASHARANGABO ET AL 115

Page 362

Court to award her the procedural damages worth to 2,000,000Frw and the counsel fees of 6,000,000Frw, whereas the Counsel of the respondents argues that the requested damages are groundless because none dragged them into lawsuits, rather, they must be given 5,000,000Frw in damages because of being dragged into vexatious litigation and 2,000,000Frw of the counsel fees. [72] The Court finds that the requested damages by each party in this case should not be awarded to them, because everyone lost on some grounds in this case. III. DECISION OF THE COURT [73] Admits the claim of review due to injustice submitted by Nyirakamana Marciana, her children and Central Motors and Parts Sarl, but finds it with merit in part; [74] It holds that Mukasharangabo Eugénie has the right to ½ of the property of Karimunda Gérard which they co-owned till the time she abandoned household in 1965; [75] It holds that Nyirakamana Marciana has also the right on ½ of the property of Karimunda Gérard which they co-owned from their cohabition on 26 November 1970 till now; [76] It rules that the testament made on 25 August 1981 by Karimunda Gérard is not considered, therefore his succession will be ab intestat; [77] It rules that the donation of the house located at Gikondo on plot No05/524 is invalid, therefore that house should be

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 116

Page 363

included in the estate of Karimunda Gérard and Nyirakamana Marciana; [78] It rules that all children of Karimunda Gérard have the equal right to inherit his estate, exclusive of the property of Nyirakamana Marciana and that of Mukasharangabo Eugénie mentioned above; [79] It orders that Nyirakamana Marciana and her children and Mukasharangabo Eugénie and her children jointly pay the court fees of 100,000Frw, whereby each part should pay its half i.e 50,000Frw; [80] It changes the judgment RCA0221/05/HC/KIG, RCA0221/09/HC/KIG rendered on 02 April 2010 by the High Court in part.

NYIRAKAMANA ET AL v. MUKASHARANGABO ET AL 117

Page 365

COMMERCIAL CASES

Page 367

NTEGEYE v. ECOBANK RWANDA

LTD ET AL [Rwanda SUPREME COURT – RS/REV/INJUST/COM0001/16/CS (Rugege, P.J., Kanyange, Gakwaya, Hitiyaremye, Ngagi and Karimunda, J.) September 9, 2016] Contract – Transaction agreement – Whenever the litigants agree to terminate a dispute, this agreement should be binding on them given that the transaction agreement stands for a final judgment – Decree of 30/07/1888 relating to contracts or obligations, articles 591 and 595. Damages – Moral damages – Pecuniary damages – Counsel fees – Procedural expenses – The litigant who loses the case is not awarded moral damages – In case the court rejects the claim of the plaintiff, the respondent is awarded procedural expenses and counsel fees as long as he/she hired the advocate services – The counsel fees are awarded upon the discretion of the court in case the requested amount is excessive. Facts: In the year 1993, Ntegeye Bernard applied for a loan to BACAR S.A to develop his plot No1200 located at Kacyiru- North, which he was granted. Later on, he applied for another one to complete of which he got a promise to be granted it. However, the Genocide against Tutsi broke out before he got the loan. After the Genocide, he approached BCDI S.A (now called ECOBANK Rwanda Ltd) to provide him with the money to complete his house. BCDI S.A gave him 50,000,000Frw after redemption of BACAR S.A’s loan equal to 42,485,087Frw. 121

Page 368

Ntegeye Bernard states that the balance of 7,516,953Frw couldn’t cover the cost of completion of his house which led him to apply for a loan increment. Before getting the feedback, the bank requested him to reimburse 8,527,976Frw of loan interests, meanwhile the reply regarding the loan increment request was communicated 11 months later whereby it was denied, and instead he was requested to immediately pay the loan which was evaluated at 73,836,942Frw without notice. In order to reimburse the bank loan, Ntegeye Bernard signed an agreement with the bank on 09/02/2001, whereby both parties agreed that he allocates his house and garnishments valued at 45,607,038Frw, and the balance of the loan being 28,232,000Frw. In the sixth clause of the agreement, it was agreed that in case the bank decides to sell the house, Ntegeye Bernard will have pre-emption right for 10 years (10) (droit de préemption/préférence). On 11 April 2003, BCDI SA sold the house to Rwanda National Bank without serving notice to Ntegeye Bernard. Ntegeye Bernard filed to the Arbitral Tribunal stating that BCDI S.A breached the agreement they had, by selling his house without notifying him, therefore he requested the cancellation of the sale and enjoyment of pre-emption right as well as ordering BCDI to pay damages and interests. He also requested the intervention of Rwanda National Bank alleging that any decision

to be taken is likely to affect it. The Arbitral tribunal adjudicated that BCDI SA did not breach the contract therefore there is no ground for the National Bank of Rwanda to intervene. It found further that the ground of pre- emption right raised by Ntegeye to be theoretical because it is obvious that he could not buy the house sold while he failed to reimburse the loan. However, it held that the Bank did not

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 122

Page 369

respect its obligation relating to pre-emption right and therefore it was charged to pay 5,000,000Frw in damages. Unsatisfied with the decision, Ntegeye Bernard seized the High Court alleging that the arbitral tribunal erred in admitting the claim of BCDI SA, which led it to order him to reimburse 28,232,000Frw of the loan, yet it was a separate claim which ought to be filed to another competent court because it can’t be confused with a defence in merit of the case. He alleged in addition that the court was mistaken since the regulation of National Bank of Rwanda is not likely to bar the performance of the contract between him and the bank. This Court nullified the sale on the ground that Ntegeye had a known address to the extent that the bank would not fail to inform him about the sale of his house, especially that when it was sold, the period of 10 years specified in the contract was not yet expired to imply that Ntegeye was barred from the enjoyment of his pre-emption right. The High Court decided in addition that Ntegeye did no longer owe any loan to BCDI SA and was awarded pecuniary and moral damages. BCDI S.A. and National Bank of Rwanda appealed against the decision to the Supreme Court whereby they stated that the court ruled ultra petita whereby it cancelled the sale contract while it was not requested by the plaintiff. They allege in addition that the court ruled that Ntegeye did not owe any loan to BCDI SA due to the fact that it is not conversant with banking practices about the computation of the principal debt and interests. The Supreme Court decided that Ntegeye still owes 48,102,687Frw to BCDI and this led him to submit his claim to NTEGEYE v. ECOBANK RWANDA LTD ET AL 123

Page 370

the Office of the Ombudsman to examine the injustice he incurred in the judgment and the later wrote to the President of the Supreme Court praying him to order the case review due to injustice. At the beginning of the hearing, ECOBANK Rwanda Ltd reminded the objection of inadmissibility of the claim of Ntegeye it once raised alleging that after the adjudication of the case in the Supreme Court, they managed to come up with a transaction agreement on its execution in which it was agreed that none of them would seek cancellation of the contract. On the other hand, Ntegeye submits that the contract they concluded relates to the execution of the judgment rather than transaction agreement. Held: 1. The review due to injustice should not be admitted given that the transaction agreement he signed with ECOBANK Rwanda Ltd concerning the said judgment which was done after he submitted his claim to the Office of the Ombudsman, defeated that judgment.

2. Moral and pecuniary damages requested by the plaintiff, should not be examined as far as his claim was rejected and counsel fees requested are not awarded because he loses the case on this instance level.

3. The procedural expenses and counsel fees requested by ECOBANK Rwanda Ltd and National Bank Rwanda should be awarded because they ought to follow this case and hire the services of advocates, therefore each bank is awarded eight hundred thousand (800,000Frw) for procedural and counsel fees upon court’s discretion.

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 124

Page 371

Claim rejected. Court fees to the plaintiff. Statutes and statutory instruments referred to: Decree of 30/07/1888 relating to contracts or obligations, articles 591 and 595. No case referred to. Judgment I. BRIEF BACKGROUND OF THE

CASE [1] In 1993, Ntegeye Bernard applied for a loan in BACAR SA for developing the plot Nº1200 located in Kacyiru-North and it was granted. Thereafter, he applied for another one which was intended to complete the construction, and he was promised to get it but the Genocide against Tutsi took place before it was disbursed. After the Genocide, he approached BCDI SA (which became ECOBANK Rwanda Ltd) to provide him with it. BCDI SA provided him with 50,000,000Frw after redeeming the loan amounting to 42,485,087Frw from BACAR SA. Ntegeye states that the balance of 7,516,953Frw was not enough to complete his building and this made him to apply for an additional loan. Before getting the feedback, the Bank instructed him to pay 8,527,976Frw for the interests and rejected the application for additional loan after 11 months. However, he was instructed to pay immediately and without notice the whole debt which amounted to 73,836,942Frw. NTEGEYE v. ECOBANK RWANDA LTD ET AL 125

Page 372

[2] For the purpose of servicing the loan, Ntegeye Bernard made an agreement with the Bank on 09 February 2001 and agreed to give it the building and the materials therein, which had the total value of 45,607,038Frw, and remained a loan balance of 28,232,000Frw. Clause 6 of the agreement provided Ntegeye with the preferential right in case the Bank wanted to sell that house within a period of ten years. On 11April 2003, BCDI SA sold that house to the National Bank of Rwanda without notifying Ntegeye Bernard. [3] Ntegeye Bernard seized the arbitral court arguing that BCDI S.A breached clause 6 of the agreement, and sold his house without informing him. He claims that any transaction carried over the plot Nº1200 located in Kacyiru-North be nullified and the preferential right provided in the agreement be respected. In addition he requests that BCDI S.A pay damages and interests. Furthermore Ntegeye Bernard requests for the intervention of the National Bank of Rwanda arguing that it is likely to be affected by any decision taken. [4] Within the award rendered on 02 December2005, the arbitral court held that there is no ground for National Bank of Rwanda’s intervention, and also the agreement surrendering the house to BCDI SA was concluded to service a part of the loan which Ntegeye Bernard owed to the Bank since he is the one who gave the title deeds of that house encompassing the cadastral plan, lease contract and construction permit. Thus it ruled that BCDI S.A did not breach the agreement, because even at the time Ntegeye Bernard requested that clause 6 of the agreement be executed he had not yet paid the debt he owed to the Bank, and also that he did not inform the Bank about his situation since the signature of that agreement. Furthermore the

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 126

Page 373

house was sold pursuant to the Regulation of the National Bank of Rwanda No05/2000 of 29/03/2000, therefore it concluded that no clause of the agreement entered between that bank and the National Bank of Rwanda or what has been done on the plot No1200 since the day it was sold, is in contradiction with the law. [5] In addition, the court found that the defense of Ntegeye Bernard which relies on pre-emption right is only theoretical, because he couldn’t have bought the house that was sold at 100,000,000Frw while he failed to reimburse the loan amounting to 28,232,000Frw. However, the court blamed the bank to have not honoured its obligation of communication to Ntegeye Bernard about the mentioned sale; consequently, it was ordered to pay 5,000,000Frw. [6] Ntegeye Bernard was not satisfied with the decision, and he seized the High court alleging that the arbitral tribunal erred in admitting the claim of BCDI SA, which led it to order him to reimburse 28,232,000Frw of the loan and yet it was a separate claim which ought to be submitted to another competent court because it can’t be confused with a defense in merit of the case. He alleged in addition that the court mixed up the situation because the regulation of National Bank of Rwanda is not likely to bar the performance of the contract between him and the bank. [7] In the judgment RCOMA0020/05/11/HC/KIG rendered on 31 May 2007, the court found that since Ntegeye Bernard signed contracts of loan with BCDI S.A, he gave the bank his address at Po.Box.445 KIGALI, C/O PNUD-KIGALI, Po.Box.2920 KIGALI, C/O Birasamashyo Augustin or at Po.Box.910 LUANDA- ANGOLA, and this shows that the bank NTEGEYE v. ECOBANK RWANDA LTD ET AL 127

Page 374

would have found him at one of these addresses if it wanted to communicate about the house selling issue and that the 10 years period had not yet expired to imply that Ntegeye Bernard lost the pre-emption right. [8] The court found further that BCDI S.A sold the house while Ntegeye Bernard owed nothing to the bank because the bank statement of the account No110-2534703-9 indicates that on 31 December 2002 there was no loan that Ntegeye Bernard owed the bank. The court decided that BCDI S.A shouldn’t have based on Rwanda National Bank regulations that were relied on by selling the house because those regulations are not supposed to defeat the agreements signed in the presence of the notary which became binding. It ordered the termination of the agreement that was titled “acte de cession d’immeuble”, and Ntegeye Bernard was given back his house and it awarded him 6,000,000Frw of pecuniary damages in terms of the rent and 5,000,000Frw for moral damages. [9] BCDI S.A and Rwanda National Bank lodged an appeal against this decision to the Supreme Court, arguing that: a) The Supreme Court ruled ultra petita because none of the parties requested the termination of the agreement of 09 February 2001; b) Ntegeye Bernard cannot rely on the fact that he was not aware of the situation of his loan yet he was communicated on 30 March 2001 through a notice reminding him about the loan he had, and asked to explain how he will pay and his lawyer Birasamashyo Augustin received the notice to pay on 26 April 2001;

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 128

Page 375

c) The High Court erredin stating that Ntegeye Bernard owed no debt to the bank basing on bank account statement, which indicates that it was conversant with the functioning of banks regarding the computation of the loan and interests; d) There was misinterpretation of the Regulation No5/2000 of the Rwanda National Bank whereby it held that it cannot nullify the agreement signed in the presence of the notary while it cannot contradict the said regulation because it is meant to implement articles 34 and 35 of the law No08/99 of 18/06/1999 governing banks and other financial institutions. [10] In the judgment NoRCOMAA005/07/CS rendered by the Supreme Court on 30 July 2010, the court found that: a) The court ruled ultra petita because the High Court held that there was dol in sale contract between BCDI S.A and the Rwanda National Bank, even though evidence should have been provided for that, and in spite of resolving it, it terminated the one concluded between Ntegeye Bernard and BCDI S.A which had no link with it; b) In order to transfer the ownership of the house from Ntegeye Bernard, there have been negotiations, whereby Birasamashyo Augustin with full power of attorney signed in lieu of Ntegeye Bernard, and it was agreed that Ntegeye Bernard shall hand his house to BCDI S.A, and its price be deducted from the loan he owed the bank amounting to 73,839,942Frw, and the balance of the loan being 28,232,000Frw. This agreement does not fall NTEGEYE v. ECOBANK RWANDA LTD ET AL 129

Page 376

within the provision of article 17 of the Decree Law of 15/05/1922 governing mortgages; c) The agreement signed between Ntegeye Bernard and BCDI S.A should be considered as a result of both party consent meant to find a way to service the loan, especially that even the Legislator found that such agreement does not impede the interests of the mortgagee as it is emphasized in article 2 of the Law No13/2010 of 07/05/2010 modifying the Law No10/2009 of 14/04/2009, because what was prohibited to be included in the mortgage agreement was allowed, therefore the requirements for the contract concluded on 09 February2001 to be validly considered as sale, were met. [11] The Supreme Court concluded that Ntegeye Bernard owed to the BCDI S.A a loan, because after assessing all documents in relation to the loan, and Ntegeye Bernard’s bank accounts in BCDI S.A, the expert Habimana José found that there is no evidence showing that the loan of 28,232,000Frw was paid and 70,000USD which was deposited on an account is not a credit balance instead it is a credit transit because deposits were done progressively in low amounts, and therefore, decided that Ntegeye Bernard must pay BCDI S.A 48,102,687Frw and 4% of prorated fees. [12] Ntegeye Bernard wrote to the Ombudsman Office requesting to examine the injustice occurred in the judgment rendered on 30 July 2010. On the 18 June 2014 the Ombudsman Office wrote to the President of the Supreme Court requesting the review due to injustice of the judgment NoRCOMAA005/07/CS delivered on 30 July 2010.

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 130

Page 377

[13] In the order No011/2016 of 29/02/2016, the President of the court requested the Supreme Court registry to schedule the hearing of this case NoRCOMAA005/07/CS rendered by the Supreme Court on the 30July 2010 in order to examine if there was injustice. [14] The hearing was held in public on the 15 June 2016, whereby Ntegeye Bernard was represented by Counsel Zawadi Stephen and Counsel Mubangizi Frank, ECOBANK Rwanda Ltd represented by Counsel Munyaneza Remy and Rwanda National Bank was represented by Counsel Byiringiro Jacques, Counsel Cyiza Clément and Counsel Murego Jean-Léonard. [15] At the beginning of the hearing, ECOBANK Rwanda Ltd reminded the objection of inadmissibility of the claim of Ntegeye Bernard it raised because after the delivery of the judgment by the Supreme Court, they agreed on its execution and both parties agreed that none of them shall seek cancellation of this agreement. II. ANALYSIS OF LEGAL ISSUES II.1. Whether transaction agreement prevents the admissibility of the claim of case review due to injustice. [16] Counsel Munyaneza Remy for ECOBANK Ltd states that after the delivery of the judgment by the Supreme Court, both parties concluded a transaction agreement, whereby each party renounced to some of its interests and consequently ECOBANK Rwanda Ltd accepted to renounce 14,102,687Frw, and stopped the process of judgment execution, in order to avoid the case to be subject to case review or review due to injustice, and they agreed that none of them would seek the NTEGEYE v. ECOBANK RWANDA LTD ET AL 131

Page 378

termination of this contract. When the contract was signed, ECOBANK Rwanda Ltd was not aware that Ntegeye Bernard submitted his request to Ombudsman Office, therefore, he prays to this court to rely on article 583 of civil code book III, and reject the claim. [17] Counsel Cyiza Clément, Counsel Murego Jean-Léonard and Counsel Byiringiro Jacques, representing Rwanda National Bank, allege that the transaction agreement was meant to settle the execution of the judgment rendered by the Supreme Court and Ntegeye Bernard signed it with capacity and status to do so and was aware of the effect which is amicable settlement with ECOBANK Ltd in order to avoid the public auction of his properties, and this led ECOBANK Ltd to allow him to pay a small amount on the sum he was ordered to pay by the court. Therefore, they request the court to consider the transaction agreement and dismiss the claim of Ntegeye Bernard. [18] Ntegeye Bernard states that he is the one who suggested amicable agreement with the bank, ECOBANK Rwanda Ltd agreed to be paid 34,000,000Frw because it was aware that it was for nothing, and he paid it in order to avoid the public auction of his valuable properties, and this has nothing to do with the request to address the injustice he submitted to the ombudsman office. [19] Mubangizi Frank the counsel for Ntegeye Bernard argues that the execution of the judgment should not be confused with the case review due to injustice; that considering the signed agreement as a transaction would be reclassification because no transaction occurred, instead the execution of the judgment. He explains that Ntegeye Bernard submitted his request to the Ombudsman Office in 2012 while the transaction

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 132

Page 379

agreement was signed in 2014, therefore if he concluded a transaction with ECOBANK Rwanda Ltd, he would have deprived himself with the right to action, and the fact that he did not do so, indicates that the contract agreement was not a transaction. He concludes that ECOBANK Rwanda Ltd and the National Bank of Rwanda do not challenge the claim submitted to the Ombudsman Office, therefore he requests this court to admit the claim of Ntegeye Bernard. [20] Counsel Zawadi Stephen for Ntegeye Bernard, states that the injustice reported to the Ombudsman Office prevails over the transaction agreement, that what happened between Ntegeye Bernard and ECOBANK Rwanda Ltd was a way of executing the judgment without prejudicing Ntegeye Bernard, and this agreement slightly reduces injustice and that when it was signed, ECOBANK Rwanda Ltd had already received a letter that Ntegeye Bernard wrote to the Ombudsman Office, he therefore realizes that the court has nothing to examine about “transactional act” instead it should admit the case submitted to it, and redress injustice that Ntegeye Bernard is undergoing.

OPINION OF THE COURT [21] Article 81, paragraph 1 of the Organic Law No03/2012/OL of 13/06/2012 determining the organization, functioning and jurisdiction of the Supreme Court which states that: “The review of a final decision due to injustice shall only be applied for on any of the following grounds: 1° when there is unquestionable evidence of corruption, favoritism or nepotism that were relied upon in the NTEGEYE v. ECOBANK RWANDA LTD ET AL 133

Page 380

judgment and that were unknown to the losing party during the course of the proceedings; 2° when there are provisions and irrefutable evidence that the judge ignored in rendering the judgment; 3° when the judgment cannot be executed due to the drafting of its content”. [22] Article 591 of the civil code book III suggests that: “The transactions between parties have the authority of res judicata. They cannot be challenged because of an error of law or a lesion Article 595 of the same code reads that: “The transaction agreement on a final judgment, of which the parties or one of them had no knowledge of its existence, is null. If the judgment ignored by the parties was subject to appeal, the transaction will be valid.” [23] The documents in the case file indicate that in the judgment No RCOMAA0005/07/CS rendered by the Supreme Court on the 30 July 2010, it was examined in limine litis whether the High Court of the Republic ruled ultra petita when it decided the cancellation of agreement titled “acte de cession d’immeuble”, it examined again whether ECOBANK Rwanda Ltd purchased the mortgage it was given by Ntegeye Bernard in order to reduce or exhaust the loan. It further examined if really no 70,000US dollars Ntegeye Bernard transited through his account open in ECOBANK Rwanda Ltd in order to service the loan. On all these issues the court found the appeal lodged by ECOBANK Rwanda Ltd with merit, and then examined the issue relating to the balance of the loan which Ntegeye Bernard owes to ECOBANK Rwanda Ltd. Hence, it decided that at the date of the adjudication of the case, (on 30 July 2010) the said loan amounted to 48,102,687Frw.

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 134

Page 381

[24] Furthermore, the documents in the case file indicate that the Supreme Court examined the appeal lodged by the Rwanda National Bank requesting to decide that there exists no irregularity in the purchasing contract of the house it concluded with ECOBANK Rwanda Ltd, and the court found it with merit, and concerning the cross appeal of Ntegeye Bernard requesting to examine whether the agreement between him and ECOBANK Rwanda Ltd was implemented, it dismissed his claim because it was not examined by previous courts. [25] In addition, the case file contains the transaction agreement, signed on 06 March 2014 between Ntegeye Bernard and ECOBANK Rwanda Ltd indicating that both parties agreed on the execution of the judgment No RCOMAA0005/07/CS rendered by the Supreme Court on 30 July 2010, and whereby its first clause stipulates that Ntegeye Bernard accepts to pay 34,000,000Frw in order to solve the dispute with ECOBANK Rwanda Ltd as mentioned in the case No RCOMAA0005/07/CS (“Monsieur Ntegeye Bernard s’engage à verser la somme de 34,000,000Frw à ECOBANK Rwanda en vue de liquider tous ses engagements qu’il a envers ECOBANK Rwanda Ltd en rapport avec le jugement ci haut cité”), while its 3rdclause states that both partiesagreed on the execution of the judgment No RCOMAA0005/07/CS, without any duress to sign the transaction agreement with knowledge of its effects, and agreed to

follow and respect it with good faith (les parties s’engagent à clôturer la mise en application de l’arrêt RCOMAA0005/07 de la Cour Suprême et à exécuter de bonne foi la transaction. Les parties s’interdisent expressément de remettre en cause la mise en application de la transaction et de ce fait les parties rappellent connaitre pleinement la portée de leur engagement NTEGEYE v. ECOBANK RWANDA LTD ET AL 135

Page 382

volontaire auquel elles ont donné un consentement libre et éclairé.» (cote 95). [26] The court finds that the 3rd clause of the transaction agreement Ntegeye Bernard had with ECOBANK Rwanda Ltd on 06 March 2014, clarifies that all disputes he had with the bank were settled, and this indicates that for he has been a party to that case, the transaction agreement should remain valid in whole, and indeed, Ntegeye Bernard admitted that he signed the transaction agreement being aware of its consequences. Furthermore, he admitted its existence in the course of the hearing, and all these indicate that the said agreement should be considered as a final judgment and could not be terminated based on misinterpretation of the law or lesion by one of the parties. Therefore the arguments of Ntegeye Bernard and his counsels that the agreement concluded with ECOBANK Rwanda Ltd relates to the execution of the judgment instead of a transaction lack merit. [27] The court realizes furthermore that Ntegeye Bernard had concluded the transaction agreement with ECOBANK Rwanda Ltd after reporting to the Ombudsman Office his claim due to injustice because it was submitted in 2012, while he entered into transaction with ECOBANK Rwanda Ltd on 06 March 2014, whereby he agreed to settle all disputes relating to the execution including the ones submitted to the Ombudsman Office (without reserve). This implies that when he settled the disputes with the bank, he was conscious that he did not undergo the injustice otherwise, he would have indicated the grounds which were subject to the transaction agreement, therefore, given that he did contrary and instead after the transaction agreement, declared that it only concerns the loan declared by the court; that

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 136

Page 383

indicates contradiction because he agreed to amicable settlement on all parts of the judgment well aware that they contain no injustice . [28] The court finds that pursuant to the foregoing motivation and on the legal provision cited above, the claim for the review of the judgment RCOMAA0005/07/CS rendered by the Supreme Court due to injustice filed by Ntegeye Bernard on the 30 July 2010 should not be admitted on the ground that the transaction agreement concluded with ECOBANK Rwanda regarding this entire judgment and concluded after reporting his case to the Ombudsman Office replaced that judgment. II.2. Whether damages requested by ECOBANK Rwanda Ltd, National Bank of Rwanda, and Ntegeye Bernard should be awarded. [29] Counsel Munyaneza Remy representing ECOBANK Rwanda Ltd, alleges that Ntegeye Bernard dragged the bank in unnecessary trials in breach of the transaction agreement therefore should be ordered to pay 2,000,000Frw for procedural and counsel fees. [30] Counsel Byiringiro Jacques representing Rwanda National Bank states that this bank was dragged into unnecessary lawsuits so he requests for procedural and counsel fees amounting to 2,000,000Frw. [31] Counsel Mubangizi Frank and Counsel Zawadi Stephen assisting Ntegeye Bernard , stated in the preliminary hearing that it is their client who deserves to be awarded 50,000,000Frw of moral damages, 493,584USD for pecuniary damages and NTEGEYE v. ECOBANK RWANDA LTD ET AL 137

Page 384

15,000,000Frw corresponding to hiring the service of two advocates.

OPINION OF THE COURT [32] The court realizes that it should not examine moral and pecuniary damages claimed by Ntegeye Bernard, given that his claim was rejected, and concerning the counsel fees he is requesting for, they are not awarded because he has lost the case at this instance level. [33] The court finds that, regarding procedural and counsel fees requested by ECOBANK Rwanda Ltd and the National Bank of Rwanda, they deserve to be awarded them because they had to follow up their case and hired the service lawyers, therefore each one is awarded eight hundred thousand (800,000Frw) for procedural and counsel fees fixed upon court’s discretion. III. THE COURT’S DECISION [34] It finds with merit the objection raised by ECOBANK Rwanda Ltd; [35] It dismisses the claim of review of the judgment No RCOMAA0005/07/CS rendered on 30 July 2010 by the Supreme Court due to injustice filed by Ntegeye Bernard; [36] It orders Ntegeye Bernard to pay ECOBANK Rwanda Ltd procedural and counsel fees amounting to eight hundred thousand (800,000Frw);

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 138

Page 385

[37] It orders Ntegeye Bernard to pay the Rwanda National Bank the procedural and counsel fees amounting to eight hundred thousand (800,000Frw); [38] It orders Ntegeye Bernard to pay court fees of 100,000Frw.

NTEGEYE v. ECOBANK RWANDA LTD ET AL 139

Page 387

RRA v. ENGEN RWANDA LTD [Rwanda SUPREME COURT – RCOMA0027/12/CS (Mugenzi, P.J., Kanyange and Nyirinkwaya, J.) May 13, 2016] Company Law – Sale of shares – Sale of company asset – The sale of shares should not be considered as a sale of company assets and it is exempt from tax – Law Nº6/1988 of 12/02/1988 which regulated the companies when the contract was made, article 8. Facts: TOTAL RWANDA S.A.R.L was a company registered in Rwanda which became ENGEN RWANDA Ltd. It was made up of two shareholders namely TOTAL OUTRE MER S.A registered in France which was the majority shareholders and Momar Nguer who had a single share which was later transferred to TOTAL OUTRE MER S.A. TOTAL OUTRE MER SA sold all of its shares to ENGEN HOLDINGS (MAURITIUS Ltd) at a value of 6,867,000USD. Thereafter the general meeting of the shareholders decided to change the name TOTAL RWANDA SARL to ENGEN RWANDA Ltd, of which it was issued the certificate from Rwanda Development Board (RDB) proving it. RRA notified TOTAL RWANDA S.A.R.L that it owed value added tax amounting to 2,150,513,368Frw. B after lodging administrative appeal the tax was reduced to 1,923,619,013Frw. ENGEN RWANDA Ltd seized the Commercial High Court seeking the exemption of that tax on the ground that TOTAL OUTRE MER sold its shares it had in TOTAL RWANDA 141

Page 388

SARL, which is exempted from being taxed and it is different from selling the assets of the company which consists of various elements. RRA argue that there has been the sale of the assets since the shares are not constituted only of papers, rather, of assets and liabilities of the company, that even though the contract made states that it is the sale of the shares, its article 2, paragraph 1 indicates that it is the shares and aspects thereon which are concerned, which imply that even assets were sold and they are taxable. The court decided that no tax has to be waived since there was no sale of property rather of shares by the shareholder of TOTAL RWANDA S.A.R.L. RRA appealed to the Supreme Court arguing that the previous court disregarding the evidences proving that there was a sale of assets. ENGEN RWANDA Ltd argued that it sold nothing to be taxed because the seller was TOTAL OUTRE MER and the sale contract clearly indicates that the sale was that of shares and this differs from the sale of the company’s assets. The friend of the court (amicus curiae), was called upon to give some clarification to the Court, whereby he clarified that the transaction carried out was that of transfer of shares, which are exempted to taxed value added tax because it differs from commercial transaction. Held: The fact that RRA does not produce another evidence to sustain its allegation that there was a sale of assets of TOTAL RWANDA SARL, leads to the conclusion that it should be relied on the contract which indicates that the transaction made consists of sale of shares by TOTAL OUTRE MER. This decision concurs with that of amicus curiae where he has

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 142

Page 389

demonstrated that after assessing the performed transactions, there has been the transfer of shares. Appeal lacks merit. Appealed judgment sustained. Court fees to the plaintiff. Statutes and Statutory instruments referred to: Law N°21/2012 of 14/06/2012 relating to the civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure, article 9. Law Nº6/1988 of 12/02/1988 regulating companies, article 8. Case referred to: Frank Lyon co v United States, 435 U.S. 561 (1978) Beauvallet v Naturana, No81-1372881-16259, March 7, 1984, Court of cassation, Commercial chamber. Salomon v Salomon & Co Ltd [1896] UKHL 1 (16 November 1896). Judgment I. BRIEF BACKGROUND OF THE

CASE [1] TOTAL RWANDA S.A.R.L is a company registered in Rwanda which was made of two shareholders namely TOTAL OUTRE MER S.A (registered in France) which held the majority of the shares since another shareholder, Didier Harel, held only one share which he later sold to Momar Nguer. On 30 July 2008, there has been signed a sale contract between RRA v. ENGEN RWANDA LTD 143

Page 390

TOTAL OUTRE MER S.A, ENGEN INTERNATIONAL HOLDINGS (MAURITIUS) Ltd on one hand and ENGEN PETROLEUM LIMITED on the other hand of the shares in TOTAL RWANDA S.A.R.L, and on 27 October 2008, the meeting of shareholders confirmed the transfer of the share that Momar Nguer held in TOTAL RWANDA SARL to TOTAL OUTRE MER SA, and the transfer of all shares that TOTAL OUTRE MER held in TOTAL RWANDA S.A.R.L to ENGEN INTERNATIONAL HOLDINGS (MAURITIUS) Ltd, which paid 6,867,000USD. [2] ENGEN INTERNATIONAL HOLDINGS Ltd which has bought all shares from TOTAL RWANDA S.A.R.L, awarded one share to Adama Soro, its Managing Director, and on 13/02/2009, the general assembly of the shareholders decided to change the name of the company to ENGEN RWANDA Ltd and it got the certificate from the Registrar General of Rwanda Development Board (RDB). [3] Meanwhile, RRA notified to TOTAL RWANDA S.A.R.L that it owes taxes amounting to 2,150,513,368Frw, and after the appeal, the tax balance amounted to 1,923,619,013Frw. TOTAL RWANDA S.A.R.L/ENGEN RWANDA Ltd seized the court requesting the waiver of that tax. The Commercial High Court analyzed one issue concerning whether there has been a sale of shares or assets of TOTAL RWANDA S.A.R.L, which has to be considered as the basis for the computation of the income tax and value added tax. [4] The court decided that the claim of TOTAL RWANDA S.A.R.L which has become ENGEN/RWANDA Ltd has basis, therefore it should not be imposed any tax since no sale of property was done. The court relied on the fact that TOTAL

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 144

Page 391

OUTRE

MERT SA sold the shares it hold in TOTAL/RWANDA S.A.R.L to ENGEN RWANDA Ltd, especially that the parties to the case and the court concur that that company, through the veto power it got from status of majority shareholder allowed it to change to ENGEN RWANDA Ltd; therefore the transaction performed by TOTAL OUTRE MER SA itself may not constitute the basis of the tax to be charged to TOTAL/RWANDA S.A.R.L since RRA does not produce evidence the property sale that and that even though its argument may be considered, TOTAL RWANDA S.A.R.L may not be held liable for any thing since the contract binds parties. [5] It explained that the fact that the assets of TOTAL RWANDA S.A.R.L were revealed in financial statements of ENGEN RWANDA Ltd would not be relied on by RRA to assume that they have been sold since that would be baseless. In addition, the statements of RRA that after TOTAL OUTRE MER SA had secured all shares of TOTAL RWANDA SARL, the latter lost its capacity, especially that at the time, the law did not provide for sole proprietorship company, could not support the statements of RRA because if it was considered as such, it is TOTAL OUTRE MER SA which would be held liable of the transaction on which RRA relies on to tax, and that even in case that ground is accepted, TOTAL RWANDA SARL would not be sued since it would had immediately lost the capacity, considering article 1 of the law which governed companies. It held also that the principle that the company has the legal personality which is different from that of its shareholders should not be ignored. RRA v. ENGEN RWANDA LTD 145

Page 392

[6] It realised rather that the sale of the shares and the change of the name has been respected, and RRA accepted to allocate a TIN to ENGEN RWANDA Ltd with full knowledge that it is the same which used to be TOTAL RWANDA SARL, especially that it does not prove that the act intended to lead to tax evasion. [7] RRA has appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing that the first judge has disregarded elements of evidence indicating that there has been the sale of assets of TOTAL RWANDA S.A.R.L, and not of shares. [8] The hearing was held in public on different dates, whereby RRA was represented by Counsel Kabibi Spéciose and Gasana Raoul, while TOTAL RWANDA SARL/ENGEN was represented by Counsel Nsengiyumva Abel, Kamanzi Désiré and Kabera Jean Claude. All parties to the case agreed that there was no problem with regard to pay as you earn tax which was charged to TOTAL RWANDA/ENGEN RWANDA Ltd, therefore the only issue to be analysed is b whether there has been the sale of the property or of the shares. [9] In the analysis of that issue, the court realised that there was a need for an expert to provide legal arguments, therefore it appointed Habimana Pie, a lecturer in the University of Rwanda, as the friend of the court (amicus curiae), who gave his arguments in a written document which has been also provided to the parties. They have been given time to comment thereon in the hearing of 24 November 2015, in the presence of the friend of the court.

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 146

Page 393

II. ANALYSIS OF LEGAL ISSUE Whether the Commercial High Court erred in deciding that there has been no sale of the property of TOTAL RWANDA SARL. [10] The counsel for RRA argues that the court disregarded the elements of evidence indicating that there has been the sale of the assets since the shares are not constituted only of papers, rather, of assets and liabilities of the company, that even though the contract made states that it is the sale of the shares, its article 2, paragraph 1 indicates that it is the shares and aspects thereon which are concerned. This implies that the assets have been sold, and were transferred from TOTAL RWANDA S.A.R.L account statements to that of ENGEN S.A.R.L, and that in the course of application for property registration in the name of ENGEN RWANDA, they stated that the sale concerned assets and liabilities of TOTAL RWANDA S.A.R.L. [11] They explain that when the Court ruled that all shares were sold, it should have also decided that all assets were sold, since the right to shares is equivalent to the right on assets, and the fact that their adversaries state that the seller of shares is TOTAL OUTRE MER, alters nothing, because since it was a majority shareholder, it cannot be differentiated from TOTAL RWANDA S.A.R.L. They furthermore argue that another ground emphasizing that there was a sale of the assets is that the corporate income tax (CIT) declaration 2009 of ENGEN RWANDA Ltd demonstrated that assets of TOTAL RWANDA SARL were included in the financial status of the former company. They add that basing on article 4 litera 11 of the Law No16/2005 of 18/08/2005 regulating the direct income tax which provides for the origin of the income, TOTAL RRA v. ENGEN RWANDA LTD 147

Page 394

RWANDA/ENGEN RWANDA must pay the tax it was imposed since that article provides for any interest generating activity. [12] They also state that the previous Court decided that after TOTAL OUTRE MER acquired all shares, TOTAL RWANDA S.A.R.L could not be imposed of taxes since it was no longer considered as a company basing on article 1 of the Law governing companies, disregarding that not only companies are imposed of taxes but also the entities similar to them or the associations, regardless of their nature, as long as they carry out interests generating activities as provided for by the article 38.6 of the Law No16/2005 of 18/08/2005 regulating the direct income tax. They stated in addition that even if during that period TOTAL RWANDA S.A.R.L did not legally exist as realised by Court, it acted as a company because it generated interest on what it sold. [13] Counsel for RRA argue also that even though TOTAL RWANDA S.A.R.L was made up of two shareholders; during the sale of TOTAL OUTRE MER did not separate shares, implying that the entire company and its component were sold. They go further and state that the law that governed the contracts at time the sale was concluded provided that the company had to be composed of at least two shareholders. However, in course of the sale, TOTAL OUTRE MER was the sole shareholder, implying that his acts should be considered as carried out by TOTAL RWANDA S.A.R.L since they were the same. Therefore, the assets were sold by TOTAL RWANDA S.A.R.L. They furthermore argue that in the laws of other countries there is a notion of “Corporate veil” intending to

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 148

Page 395

recover taxes in case the company hides itself behind an activity in order to evade from taxes. [14] They went on explaining that interpretation of the contract mentioned above demonstrates that during the sale of shares assets of the company were also sold, that article 6.4.1 provides that when the buyer is aware of the status of assets, and that the seller will not be held liable for what will be revealed thereafter, while article 5.1(a) TOTAL RWANDA S.A.R.L was deprived of the right to sale, lease or alienate the immovable property (…). All these indicate that there was not only a sale of shares but also assets. [15] They gave an example of the judgment rendered by the Supreme Court of America (Frank Lyon co v United States), which ruled that the ownership of assets is demonstrated by the right of the company to sell them, that even TOTAL RWANDA S.A.R.L could not have accepted to be deprived of the right to its assets by ENGEN INTERNATIONAL if it was still the owner, instead it is a proof that it had been also sold as demonstrated in article 5.1(b), (c), (d), (e), (f) of the contract. [16] They explain further that the reason why ENGEN RWANDA Ltd is included among the defendants, was due to the fact that ENGEN RWANDA Ltd emerged in lieu of TOTAL RWANDA S.A.R.L which disappeared; but that even though this happened in documents, its activities still exist, and the latter had the obligation to notify RRA about the change in status, in order for its audit to be carried out as provided for by article 10 of the aforementioned Law No25/2005. they add that the fact that TOTAL RWANDA still exists legally, as far as there are unfulfilled obligations and assets likely to be seized for execution, the law governing the value added tax provides that it RRA v. ENGEN RWANDA LTD 149

Page 396

may be charged for the tax in relation to the acquisition performed. [17] Counsel for

TOTAL

RWANDA SARL/ENGEN RWANDA Ltd states that RRA raised no new ground at appeal level, since the contract concluded explains clearly that the subject of sale concerns shares and even the law governing companies provides for the sale procedure of shares (article 75). Therefore, TOTAL OUTRE MER has sold the shares it held in TOTAL RWANDA SARL, which is different from selling the assets of the company (plots, vehicles, accounts, etc…). The counsel alleges that MOMAR who owned one share submitted it to the sale, but that the company survived due to the fact that shares did not belong to it, and it remained with its assets made up of different things (plots, vehicles, liquids, stock of fuel,...), therefore the counsel wonders what TOTAL RWANDA S.A.R.L has sold to be charged taxes while the seller is TOTAL OUTRE MER. [18] The Counsel states that if there has been the sale of the capital of TOTAL RWANDA S.A.R.L, RRA would have relied the computation of the tax on its value which exceeded six billion Rwandan francs, which would not therefore have been sold at only two million, and that the sale of the shares has been performed within other companies and no tax has been charged to them, thus, RRA should not confuse the sale of the shares to that of the property, since this one belongs to the company as decided by the Supreme Court in England, in the case Macaura v Nothem Assurance company, and in the case opposing two companies, Beauvallet v Naturana decided by the Court of Appeal in France, and that article 8 of the law which governed

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 150

Page 397

contracts when the sale was made provided also that the company holds its own property. [19] It further explains that the reason why ENGEN RWANDA Ltd applied for the property to be registered under its name was due to the fact that the name of the company had changed as agreed upon in article 4 of the contract because for instance, the designation of TOTAL, falling in its intellectual property rights was not part of the assets sold. Counsel also argued that TOTAL RWANDA S.A.R.L and ENGEN RWAND Ltd had never existed as two different companies, and besides, one company may not acquire its own assets, rather, the financial reports of ENGEN are the same as those of TOTAL RWANDA, which became ENGEN. [20] With regard to article 6.4.1 of the contract that RRA relies on, the counsel states that even though the company is different from its shareholders and holds its own assets, if the shareholders decide to invest in the company they intend it to do the business in their interests (to share dividends), therefore ENGEN INTERNATIONAL had to know the status of the company even if it was not intending to buy its assets. It states in addition that the prohibition to TOTAL RWANDA S.A.R.L to perform some operations without the authorisation from ENGEN INTERNATIONAL intended to avoid the variation of the status of the company before the transfer of shares. Counsel is of the view that the ruling of the Frank Lyon v United States should not be referred to since the issue which was determined differs from the one in the case at hand. [21] With regard to the procedure of taxation, the counsel alleges that at the beginning, RRA stated that there were profits generated from sale of shares which were not declared, but that RRA v. ENGEN RWANDA LTD 151

Page 398

after TOTAL RWANDA S.A.R.L explained to it that the shares sold did not belong to it, rather, belonged to TOTAL OUTRE MER which as a foreign company would not have been charged taxes, RRA took another position and stated that the tax relies on the sold property, which implies that it sought the perception of tax at all costs. [22] Counsel further finds that the concept of "corporate veil" cannot be invoked, since the tax is established by law as provided for in article 81 of the Constitution and article 4 of Law No16/2005 of 18/08/2005 cannot be based on the fact that it relates to the sale of assets in Rwandan territory, especially that even if this article provided for a solution to the problem, RRA would not have invoked the concept of "corporate veil". [23] Regarding the situation of TOTAL RWANDA SARL at the time of signing the contract of sale on July 30, 2008, his lawyer argues that even if this contract was signed on that date, other transactions should be completed for the effectiveness of the sale in accordance with article 4 of this contract. For instance, other shareholders of TOTAL RWANDA SARL should approve such sale, which was made by the shareholders' meeting held on October 27, 2008, finally approved at the February 13, 2009 meeting. Indeed, TOTAL RWANDA SARL was owned by two shareholders on July 30, 2008; TOTAL OUTRE MER SA which held 25,749 shares and MOMAR NGUER which held a share. [24] The friend of the court also provided his arguments on the issue of the case, where he demonstrated, basing on articles 4 and 37 of the Law No16/2005 of 18/08/2005 on direct taxes on income, that if an act carried out falls within business activity and generated income in Rwanda, the direct tax on income

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 152

Page 399

should be paid, and that an act is considered to be a business activity in case it is performed by a professional individual or company. With regard to TOTAL RWANDA S.A.R.L, he is of the view that transactions which were successively done constitute the transfer of shares within that company which later became ENGEN RWANDA Ltd, and do not consist of business activities since they were not performed by capital market professional company to generate profits, and that the change of the company name is not a business activity which may generate profit. However, he states that all these operations are not likely to spare TOTAL RWANDA S.A.R.L from tax obligation as a commercial company. [25] With regard to the value added tax, the friend of the court explains that, considering the period during which the activities were carried out, he realises that the article 2 of the Law No06/2001 of 20/01/2001 on the code of value added tax (as amended in 2010), has established the tax on transactions involving the supply of goods and services in Rwanda and the importation of the same into Rwanda, while article 3 explains deeply the meaning of the supply of goods or service and that this is subject to the value added tax if those goods or services are supplied for profit. He also argues that basing on article 86 of the Law No06/2001 of 20/01/2001 mentioned above, the transfer of shares is exempted from tax. [26] He also explained that shares do not constitute assets of the company, rather, of the shareholders and they are the ones with the right to sell them, while the assets belong to the company and once they are sold, the company has the obligation to pay taxes, while the tax on dividends is paid by the shareholder. RRA v. ENGEN RWANDA LTD 153

Page 400

[27] Concerning those explanations of the friend of the Court, RRA states that they should not be considered because they consist nothing new likely to be relied on by the Court, especially that alleging that the operation done constitute a transfer of shares is wrong since what has to be considered is the generation of profit by the company as stated in article 16 of the Law No16/2005 on direct taxes on income, which must be considered along with articles 5 and 37. [28] RRA considers also that the allegation that there has been only the transfer of shares contradicts the statements of the counsel for TOTAL RWANDA Ltd as well as available elements of evidence proving that it was the sale of assets that took place. Therefore, the issue which would have been analysed by the friend of the court concerns whether there has been the sale of shares or assets, due to the fact that the entire company has been sold, and this leading to wonder whether even assets are not sold at the same occasion, therefore the tax being computed in the same way as in personal income tax, while with regard to VAT it should be relied on article 3 of the Law No06/2001 of 20/01/2001 on the code of value added tax, assessed together with article 4.1 and article 85.16 of the same law. In addition, RRA argues that the fact that the sale of assets is not part of defendant’s business is not likely to exempt

them from the obligation to pay VAT once they realised income. [29] Counsel for RRA states further that article 86.7.c, which the friend of the court relied on stating that the transfer of shares is exempted from VAT should not be considered in this case, since that provision was introduced in this Law while the operation which gave rise to that tax had already been carried out and even the tax audit was in its final stage given that the

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 154

Page 401

law was promulgated on 30 June 2010, and in addition VAT was not imposed on the sale of shares, rather, of assets. [30] The Counsel for

TOTAL RWANDA/ENGEN RWANDA argues that they concur with the statements of the friend of the Court demonstrating that there has been no sale of the assets; rather, of shares which he qualified as its transfer, therefore tax is levied on generated profit rather than on assets. The Counsel goes on stating that article 46 of the Law Nº16/2005 on the code of VAT uses two terms (property and shares), but the fact that those terms are used within one article does not imply that they have the same meaning to the extent to be confused, and that RRA should reveal another contract relating to the sale of assets of TOTAL RWANDA S.A.R.L.

OPINION OF THE COURT [31] The issue to be analysed which was also analysed by the Commercial High Court, is whether there has been the sale of assets of TOTAL RWANDA SARL which should have been tax base as computed, since both parties have agreed to refrain from debating on the amount as indicated in the appealed judgment. [32] The contract signed on 30 July 2008, indicates that it concerned the sale of share, while RRA argues that it conceals the sale of assets of TOTAL RWANDA SARL. That contract reveals that the seller is TOTAL OUTRE MER S.A which is one of the two former shareholders of TOTAL RWANDA SARL, while the buyer is ENGEN INTERNATIONAL (Mauritius) Ltd. RRA v. ENGEN RWANDA LTD 155

Page 402

[33] Article 8 of the Law No06/1988 of 12/02/1988 relating to companies which was in force when the contract was signed, provides that the company has its own assets, while article 122 of the same Law stated that shares may be transferred to any person in case articles of association do not provide otherwise, while articles of association governing TOTAL RWANDA S.A.R.L also provided in article 11, that the shares may be transferred but other shareholders or the company have pre- emption right. [34] In clarifying the difference between the sale of shares and the sale of assets, law scholars demonstrate that the sale of assets takes place between the company and the acquirer while the sale of the shares takes place between the seller (shareholder (s)) and the acquirer1. They also demonstrate the effects of the sale, whereby in case of the sale of shares, the company does not undergo any changes because there is only a change of shareholders while the sale of assets has a significant impact on the existence of the company as new company in which the assets are transferred, will be created2.

1-ʺ La vente d’actifs s’effectue entre la société et l’acquéreur et elle engendre des conséquences fiscales différentes de celles de la vente des actions, laquelle s’effectue entre le vendeur (actionnaire (s)) et l’acquéreur”: UT Avovats, Aspects fiscaux des achats et ventes d’entreprises, available online at http://www.ljt.ca/fr/ljt-domaines/fiscalite/Aspects-fiscaux-des-achats-et- desventes-d-entreprises.sn, accessed on 11/05/2016.

2 Dans le cas de vente des actions, l’entreprise ne subit pas de modifications car il ya seulement un changement d’actionnaires. Par conséquent, les créanciers ne perdent aucun droit, et peuvent poursuivre leurs relations avec la compagnie comme d’habitude (…) L’achat des actifs a un impact important sur la vie de l’entreprise, car l’entité juridique ne sera pas la même. Une nouvelle compagnie dans laquelle les actifs vont être transférés, va être créée”: Achat des actions ou des actifs, les impacts á prendre en compte,

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 156

Page 403

[35] They furthermore explain that for the purchaser, buying the shares means to buy the business of the company, those shares are transferred from the seller to the buyer. However, the buyer loses the ability to pick and choose among assets; rather, he or she buys all of the business3. With regard to this case, the fact that the revealed contract was concluded between TOTAL OUTRE MER (the shareholder of TOTAL RWANDA SARL) and ENGEN INTERNATIONAL (Mauritius) Ltd, RRA has no ground to affirm that there has been the sale of company assets, since they do not belong to the shareholder to extent that he is entitled to sell them because they are owned by the company4, especially that the latter has the legal personality different from that of its members5 as indicated by the appealed judgment

available online at http://www.releve.qc.ca/quebec/, accessed on 27 April 2015.

3“For the purchaser, buying the shares means that he or she buys the company which owns business…The shares of the company are transferred from the seller to the buyer. However, the buyer loses the ability to pick and choose among assets. Generally, he or she buys all of the business”: TD Wealth, Structuring a transaction-share sale or asset sale, available online at http://advisors.tdwaterhouse.ca/public/projectiles/5fcf3b08-020c-47c6-a74b- a8c76487fa2f.pdf, accessed on 11/05/2016.

4“The assets of the company are owned by the company. The members do not have a legal or equitable interest in them” Smith and Keenan, Company Law, Thirteenth edition, 2005, p.218.

5“La cession de parts ou d’actions n’est pas assimilable à une vente du fonds de commerce parce qu’elle ne porte pas sur les éléments composant le patrimoine social, mais sur les titres représentatifs du capital social, décider autrement serait méconnaitre la notion de la personnalité morale”: J.P Sortais, note sous arrêt de la Cour de Cassation, Rev Soc.1974, p.323, cité RRA v. ENGEN RWANDA LTD 157

Page 404

which relied also on the famous case Salomon v Salomon and co Ltd with regard to that principle. The said principle may be ignored in case it is proven that what has been done was inadmissible or conceals another activity. This ground was advanced by RRA in terms of piercing the corporate veil, the concept of which has been applied in some case in other jurisdictions, in order to determine who should be held liable for certain activity between the company and its shareholders or between the parent company and its subsidiary. [36] In addition to that, since there was the sale of shares of TOTAL RWANDA SARL, it implies that assets underwent the same fate since they are part of the shares, but this does not mean that they are the ones that have been sold in particular since even the Law scholars stated that the sale of shares of the company goes with the assets, liability and obligations, while in case of the sale of assets the purchaser has the freedom of choice6. [37] It is provided in article 2.1 of the contract of 30/07/2008 that the purchaser shall purchase shares together with all benefits, rights, liabilities and obligations, which means that what happened is the sale of the shares of TOTAL OUTRE

dans le Mémoire de Sahar BADDOUR: Assimilation de la cession de droits sociaux à la cession du fonds de commerce exploité par la société.

6“If shares in a company are purchased, all its assets, liabilities and obligations are acquired … If only the assets are purchased then, only the assets (and liabilities) which the buyer agrees to obtain and which are identified in the sale agreement are acquired”: Mark Gipson, Selling a business: Shares vs. assets, published on 28/02/2012 by the Birketts, available online at http://www.birketts.co.uk/resources/legal- updates/419/selling a business shares vs assets/, consulted on 11/05/2016.

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 158

Page 405

MER while the assets remained in the ownership of TOTAL RWANDA SARL which became ENGEN INTERNATIONAL Ltd as it was agreed up in the contract that the former name will no longer be used, and RDB approved it as ENGEN RWANDA Ltd has revealed. In addition the documents which are in the file of the case prove that this company succeeded to the services of TOTAL RWANDA S.A.R.L (memorandum and articles of association made between the new shareholders of ENGEN RWANDA Ltd, the former TOTAL RWANDA S.A.R.L). [38] The similar explanations have been given in the case decided by the Court of Cassation in France on the issue of relating to whether the sale of all shares of the company carried out by its shareholders, may be considered as the sale of assets of that company and whether that assets has been the basis to create the new company which has purchased shares of the former company. The court decided that there has been no sale of assets since the former company continued to exist with the legal personality, and that the shareholders are not entitled the right to sale the assets of the company (Attendu qu’en statuant ainsi, alors que la société BAUVALLET n’ayant jamais cessé d’exister en tant que personne morale et les cédants des actions n’ayant pas qualité pour disposer de l’actif social, l’opération invoquée comme réelle par l’administration des impôts ne pouvait être retenue (…)7. [39] The position that the sale of all shares of the company does not constitute the sale of all components of the company was also held in another judgment rendered by the Court of Cassation in France. (Atttendu que la Cour d’appel a retenu à

7 Cour de Cassation, chambre commerciale, Nº de pourvoi : 81-13728 81- 16259 of 07 March 1984. RRA v. ENGEN RWANDA LTD 159

Page 406

bon droit qu’une cession de parts d’une société à responsabilité limitée, même si elle porte sur la totalité de ces parts, ne peut pas être assimilée à la cession du fonds de commerce constituant l’actif de la société)8. [40] The Court realises further that the fact for RRA to state that TOTAL RWANDA SARL should be held liable for taxes on the ground that at the time of acquisition of shares it was impossible to distinguish it from TOTAL OUTRE MER (because they were the same) due to the fact that it was the sole shareholder of that company; is baseless, since apart from alleging it , that effect is not provided for by the Law, especially that it is a principle that a company has the legal personality which different from that of its shareholders. Even though the argument of RRA is considered, the effect should have been the liquidation of the company as it was provided for by article 45 of the Law No06/1988 of 12/02/1988 which related to companies when the contract of the sale of shares was concluded, which implies that the company would be inexistent. The scholars states in contrast that during that occasion assets of a company is acquired by the remaining shareholder, which is considered as there has been the divvying up of assets since the company no longer exists9. It implies therefore that in that case, the legal action would have been brought against TOTAL OUTRE MER in the capacity of the acquirer of the company

8Cour de cassation, chambre commerciale, Nº de pourvoi: 88-15784 of 6 June 1990. 9L’associé unique se voit attribuer les biens de la société. Il reçoit alors tout le patrimoine de celle-ci, étant donné que la société disparait sans laisser de titulaire de son patrimoine, il ya immédiatement substitution d’une personne à la personne morale à la tête du patrimoine social’’: E. Tyan, Droit commercial, Tome I, Librairies Antoine, 1968, p.352, cité dans le Mémoire de Sahar BADDOUR, op.cit.

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 160

Page 407

assets in conformity of the corporate veil principle highlighted above, therefore the liability of TOTAL OUTRE MER is not likely to shift to TOTAL RWANDA S.A.R.L. [41] The Court realises therefore that no special transaction was carried out likely to lead to belief that the objective was the sale of assets especially that even the grounds RRA alleged to have been disregarded by the previous Court constitute the effects of the sale of shares, particularly that it failed to convince how it seeks the payment of tax from TOTAL RWANDA SARL and ENGEN RWANDA Ltd while it does not admit that ENGEN RWANDA Ltd is the former TOTAL RWANDA Ltd. [42] Considering all explanations given above and the provision of article 9 of the Law N°21/2012 of 14/06/2012 relating to the civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure which provides that the plaintiff must prove a claim, failure to obtain proof, the defendant wins the case, the Court finds the fact that RRA does not produce another evidence to sustain its allegation that there have been the sale of assets of TOTAL RWANDA SARL, leads to the conclusion that it should be relied on the contract which indicates that the transaction made consists of sale of shares by TOTAL OUTRE MER. This decision concurs with that of amicus curiae where he has demonstrated that after assessing the performed transactions, there has been the transfer of shares, therefore the ruling of the judgment RCOM0175/11/HCC which has been appealed against is upheld.

RRA v. ENGEN RWANDA LTD 161

Page 408

III. THE DECISION OF THE COURT [43] Declares the appeal of RRA baseless; [44] Upholds the ruling of the judgment RCOM0175/11/HCC rendered on 13 January 2012 by Commercial High Court; [45] Orders RRA to pay the court fees amounting to 100,000Frw.

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 162

Page 409

CRIMINAL CASES

Page 411

PROSECUTION v. MINANI ET AL [Rwanda SUPREME COURT – RPA0299/12/CS (Hatangimbabazi, P.J., Karimunda and Gakwaya, J.) March 18, 2016] Criminal Law – Aggravating circumstance – Consuming drugs in order to commit the offence constitutes an aggravating circumstance instead of being a mitigating circumstance or a ground for escaping criminal responsibility. Facts: The appellants were prosecuted before the High Court, Rwamagana chamber, for having broken into Nsabimana Didace alias Kanuma household during the night, holding traditional weapons and killed three people. Minani pleaded guilty while Ntaganira pleaded not guilty. The court found that the guilty plea entered by Minani was enough to convict him of the offence he is charged with, while with regard to Ntaganira, the court considered witnesses and the fact that both accused were found with wounds. The court convicted them of the offence they were charged with and sentenced each to life imprisonment. They were not satisfied with the decision and lodged an appeal before the Supreme Court. In his appeal, Minani states that he aims at telling the truth in order to benefit the penalty reduction. As for Ntaganira Vincent, he contended that the murder was plotted by Minani Alexandre without his consent because he induced him to consume drugs and made him commit an offence. He stated that if the High Court had considered his grounds, it would have sentenced them to the different penalties. 165

Page 412

The prosecutor contends that though Minani Alexandre and Ntaganira Vincent accuse each other, none of them is sincere because Minani Alexandre states that the knives were from Kanuma’s while the case file proves that they went there holding them. As for Ntaganira Vincent, he tries to escape the hemp responsibility and states it is Minani Alexandre who used to trade it while even though he does not prove that he was induced in the offence commission by him, the fact that he consumed drugs cannot serve as a mitigating circumstance as it constitutes an offence itself. He kept on explaining that all of this proves that none of both pleads guilty in a sincere way, and then he requests to this court to consider their plea as not sincere, and maintain the appealed judgment considering that they committed an atrocious offence with high cruelty. Held: Consuming drugs with the purpose to commit the offence constitutes aggravating circumstance instead of being mitigating circumstance nor a ground for escaping criminal responsibility. Therefore, the fact that the accused consumed the hemp before committing the offence, besides it being an offence, it indicates that they had the plot before consuming the hemp and they did so to stimulate themselves in order to achieve their plot. Therefore, these emphasize that the life imprisonment sentenced to them must be sustained. Appeal lacks merit. Appealed judgment sustained. Court fees referred to the public treasury.

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 166

Page 413

Statutes and statutory instruments referred to: Organic - Law No31/2007 of 25/07/2007 repealing the death penalty. Decree – Law No21/77 of 18/08/1977 instituting the penal code, articles 82 and 312. Case Laws referred to: State versus Chretien 1981 (1) SA 1097 (A). Authors cited: Nyabirungu mwene Songa, Traité de droit pénal Congolais, Kinshasa: Editions Universitaires, 2007, p.288. CR Snyman, Criminal Law, Durban: Lexis-Nexis, 2008, at p.222. Judgment I. THE BRIEF BACKGROUND OF THE

CASE [1] The case started in the High Court, Rwamagana chamber, where Minani Alexandre and Ntaganira Vincent were accused of having broken into Nsabimana Didace alias Kanuma household on 21 December 2010 during the night, holding traditional weapons including machetes, knives and bludgeons. They broke the door and got into the house, where they deadly hit three people with machete and left corpses in the blood. Minani Alexandre pleaded guilty while Ntaganira Vincent pleaded not guilty. PROSECUTION v. MINANI ET AL 167

Page 414

[2] In the judgment NoRP0009/11/HC/RWG rendered on 10 November 2011, the court found that the guilty plea made by Minani Alexandre that he murdered Nsabimana Didace and his two children Mukamuvunyi Joselyne and Nyiraminani Xavérine is enough to convict him of the offence he is charged with, while with regard to Ntaganira Vincent, the court considered witness declarations made byMukarushema Christine, Ntiyamira and Twagirayezu Vianney who attest that Minani Alexandre told them that he went to murder the family of Nsabimana Didace alias Kanuma accompanied by Ntaganira Vincent, and this being confirmed by the fact that both Ntaganira Vincent and Minani Alexandre were found with wounds. The court convicted them of the offence they were charged with and sentenced each to life imprisonment. [3] Minani Alexandre and Ntaganira Vincent were not satisfied with the decision and lodged an appeal before the Supreme Court. In his appeal, Minani Alexandre pleaded guilty in order to get the penalty reduction. As for Ntaganira Vincent, he contended that the murder was plotted by Minani Alexandre without his consent because he induced him to consume drugs which made him commit an offence. He stated that those grounds were disregarded by the High Court while they would be sentenced to different penalties. [4] The public hearing was held on 13 July 2015, but as Ntaganira Vincent did not yet get a counsel, it was postponed until 15 February 2016. The same day, Ntaganira Vincent was present and assisted by counsel Habyarimana Christine, Minani Alexandre was assisted by Counsel Uwanyirigira Delphine while the Prosecution was represented by Niyonkuru Françoise, a National Prosecutor.

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 168

Page 415

II. ANALYSIS OF THE LEGAL ISSUE Whether there are grounds for reducing the penalty in favor of Minani Alexandre and Ntaganira Vincent. [5] Minani Alexandre states that Ntaganira Vincent asked him to accompany him to claim for his money around 10h00PM. When they reached near to Kanuma’s, Ntaganira Vincent prepared the hemp and both consumed it; he then easily opened the door as if he was of the household, took Mukamuvunyi and went to kill her in the banana plantation with the bludgeon used to close the door while he was holding Kanuma who has finally injured him in the palm when they were fighting to hold the machete. He kept on stating that when Ntaganira Vincent came back, he killed Kanuma with the other bludgeon and then killed a child who was trying to quit the house. He explained that Ntaganira Vincent ordered him to kill him with the other bludgeon. [6] He further explains that the statement made that knives were found at his home is false, because only the machete was found in his possession. He declares in addition that when he asked Kanuma the reason why he killed instead of claiming for his money and he promised him to pay him twenty thousand Rwandan francs (20,000Frw) the next day. However he failed to keep the secret and told about it to his elder brother named Ntiyamira Emmanuel and his mother and the next day, to Ntaganira Vincent’s young brother. He denies knowing Kabamba who is supposed to be their accomplice; since he has only heard about him through Ntaganira Vincent. He admits to have declared lies to the High Court but states that he is remorseful, pleads guilty and seeks forgiveness for the offence PROSECUTION v. MINANI ET AL 169

Page 416

he committed, therefore requesting to the court to be lenient for him to get the penalty reduction. [7] Uwanyirigira Delphine, the Counsel for Minani Alexandre argues that his client pleaded guilty before the High Court despite he did not explain well how it was committed and how in complicity with Ntaganira Vincent, murdered Kanuma’s family, but then he pleads guilty in a sincere way, requesting to the court to take his plea into consideration, so that the life imprisonment inflicted on him be reduced pursuant to article 35 of the Law relating to the code of criminal procedure and article 77, paragraph 3 of the Organic Law instituting the penal code that is into force. [8] Ntaganira Vincent explains that he started sharing the hemp with Minani Alexandre and then talked how they were facing the poverty while it was during festive season. At that occasion, they plotted to steal money from Kanuma’s home, wearing long coats and holding two sharp knives gotten from Minani Alexandre’s ceiling. When they reaching there, Minani Alexandre broke the door, got in and found Kanuma where he was sleeping. When he started hitting him, his elder daughter run away from the house and Ntaganira Vincent stabbed her. He kept on explaining that before leaving, they decided to make sure they were dead because they had noticed them and when they finished killing them, another small kid went out the house and they killed him also. [9] He kept on explaining that when they left, they went to Ntiyamira, Minani’s elder brother, and he told him what happened and the same was repeated by Ntiyamira’s wife before the Judicial Police but once in prison, when he asked Minani Alexandre the motive of killing, he replied that he had plotted it

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 170

Page 417

for a while but that he missed a person called Kabamba who would have helped him in its execution. At the same occasion, they planned for their plea, whereby Minani Alexandre would accuse Kabamba while Ntaganira would plead not guilty. [10] He concludes that he is the first offender and that he was induced by Minani Alexandre to consume drugs but the time passed in prison helped him to get aware of cruelty of the offence, therefore he regrets and seeks forgiveness, requesting to the court to change the life imprisonment inflicted to him into a fixed term imprisonment. [11] Habyarimana Christine,Counsel for Ntaganira Vincent states that although the appellants accuse each other regarding their respective role in the plot and the one who produced the drug they consumed before the commission of the offence, Ntaganira Vincent pleads guilty in a sincere way, therefore, requests to the court to consider his plea considering that he is the first offender, as he was young at the age of 24 and that he had consumed drugs. Therefore he requests for the benefit of penalty reduction up to imprisonment not less than one year as provided for by article 82 and 83 of the Decree – Law No21/77 of 18/08/1977 instituting the penal code that was into force at the time the offence was committed. [12] The prosecutor contends that though Minani Alexandre and Ntaganira Vincent accuse each other, none of

them is sincere because Minani Alexandre states that the knives were from Kanuma’s while the case file proves that they went there holding them. As for Ntaganira Vincent, he tries to escape the hemp responsibility and states it is Minani Alexandre who used to trade it while even though he does not prove that he was induced in the offence commission by him, the fact that he PROSECUTION v. MINANI ET AL 171

Page 418

consumed drugs cannot serve as a mitigating circumstance as it constitutes an offence itself. He kept on explaining that all of this proves that none of both pleads guilty in a sincere way, and then he requests to this court to consider their plea as not sincere, and maintain the appealed judgment considering that they committed an atrocious offence with high cruelty.

THE OPINION OF THE COURT [13] Pursuant to the Law N°31/2007 of 25/07/2007 repealing the death penalty, article 312 of the Decree – Law N°21/77 of 18/08/1977 instituting the penal code that was into force at the time the offence was committed provides “the killing committed with premeditation or ambush is assassination and is punished by the life imprisonment.” [14] Article 82 of the Decree – Law N°21/77of 18/08/1977 mentioned above provides that the judge may consider the appropriateness of mitigating circumstances which preceded, accompanied or followed an offence. [15] During his interrogation before the Judicial Police and the Prosecution, Minani Alexandre declared that after killing Nsabimana Didace alias Kanuma’s family, the security officers went to his home for search and found a machete, two knives and hemp but only the machete belonged to him. He added that on 21 December 2010, around 8h00PM, he went to his elder brother Ntiyamira Emmanuel to borrow the torch and when he went to cut off banana, he fell down and the machete he was holding injured him in the palm; he went to put traditional medicine to his mother Mukamurenzi Anne Marie, and went

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 172

Page 419

back home. The next day, the police came to arrest him (mark 26-29, 54-56). [16] The documents in the case file prove further that Ntaganira Vincent declared before the Judicial Police and the Prosecution that there is no conflicts between him and people who accuse him. He added that around 1h00PM of the same day the offence was committed (21 December 2010) he had reached at Giheta to Gatera’s home to register his plot of land, he came back with his brother in law Kayumba who was accompanying him, and they went to drink beer to Ruhura’s, and when they finished, he accompanied him too. He added that he then went to buy milk with his wife from Mukabugingo Chantal’s, and they went home around 6h30 PM, and that is at that occasion that he heard about Nsabimana Didace alias Kanuma’s family death through the kid called Pilote, and he went to bemoan their death with his sister named Mujawayezu Vivia. With regard to how he got injured on 21 December 2010, he stated that he have got injured by the reed plant he was cutting for cow (mark 50- 52). [17] When he appeared before the High Court, Rwamagana chamber, Minani Alexandre admitted that in the night of 21 December 2010, he borrowed a bicycle from Ntaganira Vincent, and went with the named Kabamba to Nsabimana Didace alias Kanuma to show him where they could find money, and when they broke the door, his daughter jumped and identified him and Kabamba immediately stabbed her, and when Nsabimana Didace alias Kanuma, came for her rescue, they fought and he injured him but he managed to get him down. He went on explaining that Kabamba took the girl into banana plantation and stayed for a while and when he came back, he told him that PROSECUTION v. MINANI ET AL 173

Page 420

he had killed her. He stated that they left there and went to his mother called Mukamurenzi. As for Ntaganira Vincent, he declared that the testimony from people who accuse him were extorted so that they corroborate to the fact that he was found injured and had lent his bicycle to Minani Alexandre, the same day the offence was committed, which indicate that their statements were just a kick of a dying horse, because he could not kill his neighbours (mark 101-105). [18] The court finds that until now Minani Alexandre and Ntaganira Vincent do not state the truth with regard to the identification of the person who plotted the killing; the owner of the weapons used; the one who prepared the hemp they consumed and how the deceased were murdered. However, even though they would have proved it, the fact that they committed a serious offence, with the greed for money which they were not even sure that Nsabimana Didace alias Kanuma was possessing, killing innocent neighbours, decimating the whole family in barbaric way, using knives and bludgeons, killing young girls, being aware that they did not have money they were searching for and who could not fight them and in addition to that, they dehumanized their corpses by leaving them naked and piling stones on their corpses, it is enough so that the penalty inflicted on them by the High Court be sustained. [19] The court finds the fact that Minani Alexandre and Ntaganira Vincent state that before murdering Nsabimana Didace alias Kanuma’s family, they consumed hemp, though they don’t clarify the quantity consumed and its effect on their behaviour, consuming hemp before committing the offence cannot be considered as a mitigating circumstance, besides

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 174

Page 421

being an offence, it indicates that they plotted before consuming the hemp and they consumed it to stimulate them to achieve their plot. Courts1 and law scholars2concur that consuming drugs in order to commit the offence constitutes aggravating circumstance instead of mitigating circumstance or a ground for criminal irresponsibility. These emphasize that the life imprisonment sentenced by the High Court, Rwamagana chamber to Minani Alexandre and Ntaganira Vincent is sustained. III. THE DECISION OF THE COURT [20] Finds the appeal lodged by Minani Alexandre and NtaganiraVincent alias Rudomoro, Vuduka, Kiwani without merit.

1“Society has for years been subjected to alcohol abuse by certain of its members. This abuse has continued unabated and today is often accompanied by drug abuse. Because so many assaults and deaths are caused by persons under the influence of alcohol, a section of the community has in the past been skeptical about the soft treatment meted out to intoxicated offenders…” State versus Chretien 1981 (1) SA 1097 (A). 2 “Il est unanimement admis que lorsque l’auteur d’une infraction a bu et s’est enivré pour se donner le courage de la commettre, étouffer les cris de sa conscience ou s’aménager une excuse, l’ivresse, loin de lui profiter, devient une circonstance aggravante.” Nyabirungu Mwene Songa, Traité de droit pénal Congolais, Kinshasa: Editions Universitaires, 2007, p.288. “.. X intends to commit a crime but does not have the courage to do so and takes to drink in order to gain the necessary courage, knowing that he will be able to perpetrate the crime once he is intoxicated. In this instance, intoxication is not a defense whatsoever. It is not even a ground for mitigation of punishment; in fact it would be a ground for imposing a heavier sentence than the normal.”CR Snyman, Criminal Law, Durban: Lexis-Nexis, 2008, at p.222. PROSECUTION v. MINANI ET AL 175

Page 422

[21] Sustains the judgment NoRP0009/11/HC/RWG rendered on 10 November 2011 by the High Court, chamber of Rwamagana. [22] Orders that the court fees be charged to the public treasury.

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 176

Page 423

PROSECUTION v. NSANZINTWALI [Rwanda SUPREME COURT – RPAA0048/12/CS (Hatangimbabazi, P.J., Karimunda and Gakwaya, J.) May 6, 2016] Criminal Procedure Law – Benefit of doubt – When there exist grounds of doubt, it favors the accused – Law Nº30/2013 of 24/5/2013 relating to the code of criminal procedure, article 165. Facts: The appellant was accused for having defiled a child of 5 years of age called I.P. He pleaded not guilty and explained that he had admitted it before the Judge of provisional detention and release because of the pain he was undergoing. The Intermediate Court of Muhanga rendered the judgment and convicted him basing on the fact that he has pleaded guilty before the Judge of provisional detention and release and on the medical report proving that the child was defiled. The court sentenced him to twenty years (20) of imprisonment and the fine of twenty thousand (20,000) Rwandan francs, reducing his penalty because he was the first offender and had pleaded guilty. He was not satisfied and lodged an appeal before the High Court, Nyanza chamber, requesting the penalty reduction based on the fact that he pleaded guilty and sought forgiveness. The court reduced his penalty and sentenced him to fifteen (15) years of imprisonment. The accused appealed before the Supreme Court, requesting the penalty reduction because he pleads guilty and seeks forgiveness but at the beginning of the hearing, he stated that though his appeal intended the reduction of his penalty, he does 177

Page 424

not plead guilty for the offence of the child defilement committed against I.P., especially that he does not even know how it was committed notwithstanding the effort put in. He explained that he pleaded guilty before the court so that his penalty be reduced, but he was innocently convicted. The Prosecutor states that the appeal lodged by Nsanzintwali Pascal lacks merit because he pleaded guilty at every instance and he finds therefore that the fact that he pleaded guilty in the lower courts is not enough for him to benefit the penalty reduction, but rather, this constitutes incriminating evidence. He argues that the non-guilty plea made by Nsanzintwali Pascal before the Supreme Court should not be considered, because there are other evidence supporting his guilty plea. He added that his statements that he pleaded guilty due to the fear of strong penalties are wrong because at that time, he had not yet know about the penalty to be inflicted on him. Held: Doubt favours the accused. Therefore, the fact that there exist grounds of doubt, the accused must be acquitted from the offence he was charged of. Appeal has merit. The accused acquitted. Court fees to the public treasury. Statutes and statutory instrument referred to: Law Nº30/2013 of 24/5/2013 relating to the code of criminal procedure, article 165. No case law referred to.

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 178

Page 425

Judgment I. BRIEF BACKGROUND OF THE

CASE [1] This case started in the Intermediate Court of Muhanga, where the Prosecution was alleging against Nsanzintwali Pascal for having defiled a child of 5 years of age called I.P. Nsanzintwali Pascal pleads not guilty and explains that he has admitted it before the Judge of provisional detention and provisional release due to the pain he was undergoing. [2] The Intermediate Court of Muhanga rendered the judgment and convicted him basing on the fact that he pleaded guilty before the Judge of provisional detention and release and on the medical report proving that the child was defiled. The court sentenced him to twenty years (20) of imprisonment and the fine of twenty thousand (20,000) Rwandan francs, reducing his penalty because he was the first offender and had pleaded guilty. [3] Nsanzintwali Pascal was not satisfied and lodged an appeal before the High Court, Nyanza chamber, requesting the penalty reduction based on the fact that he pleaded guilty and sought forgiveness. [4] The court rendered the verdict and reduced the penalty for Nsanzintwali Pascal whereby it sentenced him to fifteen years of imprisonment. PROSECUTION v. NSANZINTWALI 179

Page 426

[5] Nsanzintwali Pascal was not satisfied with the judgment and appealed before the Supreme Court, requesting the penalty reduction because he pleads guilty and seeks forgiveness. [6] The hearing was conducted on 4 April 2016, whereby Nsanzintwali Pascal was represented by the Counsel Girayo Eric, and the Prosecution was represented by Dushimimana Claudine, the National Prosecutor. [7] At the beginning of the hearing, Nsanzintwali Pascal stated that though the objective of his appeal was the benefit of the penalty reduction, he does not plead guilty for the offence of the child defilement committed against I.P. and he does not even know how it was committed. He explained that he pleaded guilty before the court so that his penalty be reduced, but that he was convicted to the offence he did not commit. II. ANALYSIS OF THE LEGAL ISSUE Whether there exist evidence convicting Nsanzintwali Pascal. [8] Nsanzintwali Pascal argues that the objective of his appeal was the benefit of the penalty reduction, whereby he requests to the court to sentence him at least to five years imprisonment because he finds the sentence of ten years of imprisonment inflicted to him too heavy. [9] With regard to the reason why he requests for the penalty reduction while he have already benefited, Nsanzintwali Pascal states that it is up to the court to exercise its discretion over his request, because his appeal aims at reducing his penalty especially that he was convicted of the offence he did not

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 180

Page 427

commit. He explains that he has previously pleaded guilty to benefit the penalty reduction, but that he did not really commit it. He kept on explaining that he did so because he suffered injustice, especially that once he denied the offence it was disregarded and in addition to that he endured the pain while in the custody. [10] With regard to whether he intends requesting the penalty reduction or the acquittal from the prison, Nsanzintwali Pascal replied that he requests for the penalty reduction but emphasized that he was convicted to the offence he did not commit, because he believes that it might have been committed by other kids of the same age as the victim. He kept on arguing that the victim’s mother assumed that it was committed by him because he went to their home, whereas he had gone there to steal the tyre. [11] Gariyo Eric, the Counsel for Nsanzintwali Pascal states that the declarations made by his client before the Court are new, because when he was preparing the case, both agreed that he will plead guilty and seek forgiveness, but that instead, he is pleading not guilty, and consequently, he should abandon the request for the penalty reduction. The counsel requested to the Court to grant him time to consult with Nsanzintwali Pascal, for them to hold the same grounds for their appeal because his client states that he is sometimes lost. [12] After the private time with his counsel, Nsanzintwali Pascal was given the floor and he stated that he pleads guilty though he cannot explain how the crime was committed notwithstanding any effort he may put in. [13] The Prosecutor states that the appeal lodged by Nsanzintwali Pascal lacks merit because he pleaded guilty at PROSECUTION v. NSANZINTWALI 181

Page 428

every instance and he finds therefore that the fact that he pleaded guilty in the lower courts is not enough for him to benefit the penalty reduction, but rather, this constitutes incriminating evidence. He argues that the non-guilty plea made by Nsanzintwali Pascal before the Supreme Court should not be considered, because there are other evidence supporting his guilt-plea. He added that his statements that he pleaded guilty due to the fear of heavy penalties are wrong because at that time, he had not yet known about the penalty to be inflicted on him. He kept on explaining that although Nsanzintwali Pascal pleads not guilty, he does not challenge the incriminating evidence produced by the Prosecution, the reason why he requests that the appealed judgment be maintained.

THE OPINION OF THE COURT [14] Article 165 of the Law Nº30/2013 of 24/05/2013relating to the code of criminal procedure provides that “The benefit of doubt shall be given in favour of the accused. If the proceedings conducted as completely as possible do not enable judges to find reliable evidence proving beyond reasonable doubt that the accused committed the offence, the judges shall order his/her acquittal”. [15] The documents in the case file prove that on 19 November 2009, when Nsanzintwali Pascal was interrogated in the Judicial Police and then on 23 November 2009 in the Prosecution, he have never admitted the offence of the child defilement committed against the named I.P.. Furthermore, when he appeared before the Intermediate Court of Muhanga, he pleaded not guilty, whereby he explained that the reason why he confessed during the provisional release and detention

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 182

Page 429

process was due to the pain he was undergoing and he wanted to be imprisoned for fifteen days instead of thirty days requested by the Prosecution because it would be too long for an innocent. [16] The documents in the case file indicate in addition that after being sentenced to twenty years (20) of imprisonment, Nsanzintwali Pascal lodged an appeal before the High Court, Nyanza chamber, whereby he pleaded guilty and sought forgiveness, which served as the basis of his penalty reduction up to fifteen years (15) of imprisonment. Furthermore, he found the penalty too long and came to seek mercy before the Supreme Court, requesting that his penalty be reduced up to five years (5) of imprisonment. [17] The Court considers that before analysing whether the penalty sentenced to Nsanzintwali Pascal after taking into account his guilt-plea can be reduced, it is worth to analyse whether he is guilty. [18] As mentioned above, except before the High Court, chamber of Nyanza, where Nsanzintwali Pascal pleaded guilty, he did not confess before other instances and he explained that his prior guilt -plea intended to get justice, as he was innocently imprisoned. [19] Elements of evidence contained in the case file with regard to the child defilement committed against the called I.P which Nsanzintwali Pascal is accused of, are the following: 1. The statements made by N.C., the victim’s father, who explained to the judicial police that he and his wife knew that their child was raped, when they noticed the semen in her sex and on the thigh. PROSECUTION v. NSANZINTWALI 183

Page 430

2. The minute established on 20 November 2009 by the Judicial Police found on page 7 in the case file, where he states that he had a conversation with I.P., and the latter told him that she was defiled by Pascal who introduced two fingers into her sex.

3. The medical report made on 19 November 2009, whereby the physician reported inter alia, “Healthy in general, intact hymen, she would have been raped, she would have been raped without sexually transmitted disease. [20] The court finds that considering elements of evidence highlighted above, there is doubt with regard to the offence charged to Nsanzintwali Pascal of having defiled I.P, while even the medical report does not confirm that she was defiled but rather, it casts doubt as follow (she might have been raped), and this is complemented by the fact that the hymen is still intact and does not suffer from any disease. [21] Another dubious fact is that the medical report which was immediately elaborated on 19 November 2009, that is to say the next day of the commission of the offence, 18 November 2009 as it is declared, the doctor never mentioned to have observed the semen in the sex of the victim, while the father of the victim informed the judicial police that he and his wife noticed them as previously indicated. [22] Furthermore, another dubious fact is that N.C., the victim’s father declared to have seen semen in the sex, which implies that in case Nsanzintwali Pascal defiled the girl, he would have introduced his sex into hers and leave behind semen seen by her parents. However, the child told the Judicial Police

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 184

Page 431

that Nsanzintwali Pascal only introduced two fingers into her sex. [23] Considering the analysis of the statements mentioned above, the Court finds that there exist grounds casting doubt which imply that pursuant to article 165 of the Law Nº30/2013 of 24/5/2013 relating to the code of criminal procedure mentioned above, Nsanzintwali Pascal must be acquitted ,. Therefore, the judgment Nsanzintwali Pascal appealed against must be quashed. III. THE DECISION OF THE COURT [24] Finds the appeal lodged by Nsanzintwali Pascal with merit; [25] Declares Nsanzintwali Pascal not guilty; [26] Orders his immediate release; [27] Overturns the judgment RPA0263/10/HC/NYA rendered by the High Court, chamber of Nyanza, on 8 April 2011; [28] Orders that the court fees be charged to the public treasury.

PROSECUTION v. NSANZINTWALI 185

Page 433

PROSECUTION v. UWIRINGIYIMANA [Rwanda SUPREME COURT – RS/REV/INJUST/PEN0004/15/CS (Kayitesi, P.J., Hitiyaremye and Munyangeri, J.) March 4, 2016] Criminal Law – Injustice – To order a person to remain in prison until he/she pays the fine is an injustice because it is not provided for under Rwandan law. Facts: Uwiringiyimana was accused of having wounded domestic animals belonging to another person, and the court convicted and sentenced him to one year (1) imprisonment, and the fine of five hundred thousand Rwandan francs (500,000Frw). The Court decided further that he will remain imprisoned until he pays the total amount of the fine imposed on him. Unsatisfied with the decision, Uwiringiyimana lodged an appeal before the Intermediate Court and the latter sustained the judgment. He filed a case for interpretation of the judgment RPA0358/13/TGI/NGOMA, and requested to be released so that he may be able to pay the fine that was imposed on him, because he is that destitute who cannot afford such fine especially that he is in prison. The court ruled on the matter and stated that nothing was to be clarified in the judgment. Uwiringiyimana applied for review of the judgment RPA0358/13/TGI/NGOMA rendered by the Intermediate Court of Ngoma due to injustice to the Office of the Ombudsman and the request was taken into consideration. The Prosecutor contended that Uwiringiyimana have been unfairly treated because the Court decided that he will not be 187

Page 434

released until he pays the total amount of the fine equivalent to five hundred thousand (500,000Frw) because pursuant to the Law, the penalty of imprisonment is served in prison. Held: The fact that the Court ordered that Uwiringiyimana will remain in the prison until he pays the total amount of the fine equivalent to five hundred thousand Rwandan francs (500,000Frw) is injustice, because it is not provided for under Rwandan law. Application for review due to njustice has merit. Uwiringiyimana Aaron must be immediately released. Court fees referred to the public treasury. Statutes and statutory instruments referred to: Organic LawN°01/2012/OL of 02/05/2012 instituting the penal code, article 436. Organic Law N°03/2012/OL of 13/06/20012 determining the organization, functioning and jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, article 81 para. 1, 2 and 3. No case referred to. Judgment I. BRIEF BACKGROUND TO THE

CASE [1] The case started in the Primary Court of Sake under RP0145/13/TB/SKE, where Uwiringiyimana Aaron was accused

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 188

Page 435

of having wounded domestic animals belonging to another person. The Court convicted him and sentenced him to one year (1) imprisonment and to the fine of five hundred thousand Rwandan francs (500,000Frw). The court decided further that he will remain imprisoned until he pays the total of the fine imposed on him. [2] Uwiringiyimana Aaron was not satisfied with the decision, therefore he lodged an appeal before the Intermediate Court whereby in the judgment RPA0358/13/TGI/NGOMA, the latter sustained the ruling of the judgment RP0145/13/TB/SKE rendered on 31 October 2013. [3] Unpleased with the decision, Uwiringiyimana Aaron filed a case RPA0026/15/TGI/NGOMA for interpretation of the judgment RPA0358/13/TGI/NGOMA, whereby he was requesting to be released so that he may be able to pay the fine that was imposed on him, because he is that indigent who cannot afford such fine especially that he is in prison. The court ruled on the matter and stated that nothing was to be clarified in the judgment. [4] Uwiringiyimana applied for review of the judgment RPA0358/13/TGI/NGOMA rendered by the Intermediate Court of Ngoma due to injustice to the Office of the Ombudsman and the latter in her letter of 25 June 2015 to the Chief Justice, requested that the judgment RPA0358/13/TGI/NGOMA be reviewed due to injustice and this was admitted. [5] The public hearing was held on 29 February 2016 whereby Uwiriyingiyimana Aaron was assisted by Counsel Mbonyimpaye Elias, while the Prosecution was represented by Ntawangundi Béatrice, the National Prosecutor. PROSECUTION v. UWIRINGIYIMANA 189

Page 436

II. ANALYSIS OF LEGAL ISSUES Weather the fact that Uwiringiyimana Aaron was ordered by the court that he will not be released until he pays the total of the fine imposed on him constitutes injustice. [6] Uwiringiyimana argues that he applied for review of the judgment RPA0358/13/TGI/NGOMA due to injustice because the Intermediate Court of Ngoma sentenced him to the penalty of one year imprisonment and the fine of five hundred Rwandan francs (500,000Frw) and ordered that he will not be released unless he pays the total of the fine and consequently he remained in prison for a while because he cannot afford it. He explains that after he served the sentence inflicted on him, he remained imprisoned for about two (2) years and then requests justice to be done by suspending the payment of the fine imposed on him. [7] His Counsel Mbonyimpaye Elias argues that the previous judge disregarded the provision of article 4 of the Decree Law N°01/2012/OL of 02/05/2012 instituting the penal code, which provides that courts are not allowed to pronounce sentences by analogy. He kept on explaining that justice should be done in favour of Uwiringiyimana so that he may be released because he should not remain in prison for failure to pay the fine while it is not provided for by the Law. [8] He further states that even the provision of article 144 of the Constitution of Rwanda that was into force at the time Uwiringiyimana committed the offence was disregarded, and therefore requests the release of his client.

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 190

Page 437

[9] The Prosecution states that the statements made by Uwiringiyimana that he suffered injustice because the court decided that he will not be released until he pays the total of the fine equivalent to five hundred thousand (500,000Frw) while he is an indigent person who cannot afford it especially that he is in prison, should be considered, because pursuant to article 229(1) of the Law N°03/13 of 24/05/2013 relating to the code of criminal procedure providing that “imprisonment penalty shall be served in prison” and article 232 of the Law mentioned above which provides also that “Fine and court fees shall be paid to the Court Registrar within a period of eight (8) days from the date of final judgment, the time that may extend by the President of the court up to six (6) months, as well as article 233(2) reading that “if the convicted person does not pay in the prescribed time limits, he/she shall be forced to pay”; the penalty of imprisonment is served in prison while the execution of the payment of the fine is sought over assets. [10] For all these grounds, the fact that Uwiringiyimana has served the sentence of one year of imprisonment that was inflicted on him in 2014 but remained imprisoned until 2016, the Prosecution finds that it is unjust as he himself alleges, because he would have been made servile in lieu of payment of fine, which implies that in case he is not able to pay, he will remain in prison forever, while it is not provided for by the Law. The Prosecution requested the court to declare that he was unjustly imprisoned and to order his release because he has already served the sentence.

PROSECUTION v. UWIRINGIYIMANA 191

Page 438

THE OPINION OF THE COURT [11] Article 436 of the Decree Law N°01/2012/OL of 02/05/2012 instituting the penal code on which the court relied to punish Uwiringiyimana Aaron provides that “Any person who maliciously and without reasonable justification kills or seriously wounds livestock or domestic animals belonging to another person, shall be liable to a term of imprisonment of six (6) months to one (1) year and a fine of two hundred thousand (200,000) to two million (2,000,000) Rwandan francs or one of these penalties”. [12] Article 81 paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 of the Organic Law N°03/2012/OL of 13/06/20012 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; When the judgment cannot be executed due to the drafting of its content. [13] The arrest warrant available in the case file proves that Uwiringiyimana Aaron was arrested on 5 July 2013, and the judgment against which the application for review due to injustice was filed sentenced him to the term of one year of imprisonment and the fine of five hundred thousand Rwandan francs 500,000Frw and ordered that he will not be released from the prison until he pays the total amount of the fine. [14] The court finds that since 5 July 2013 the time when Uwiringiyimana Aaron was arrested until 4 July 2014, he has

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 192

Page 439

already served the term of one year of imprisonment inflicted on him by the Intermediate Court of Ngoma, though he stayed in prison due to the fact that he had not paid the fine of 500,000Frw as ordered by the Court that he would not be released from the prison until he pays the total amount of the fine. [15] The court finds unfair the fact that Uwiringiyimana Aaron was ordered by the court that he will not be released until he pays the fine of five hundred thousand Rwandan francs (500,000Frw), because such penalty is neither provided for by article 436 of the Organic Law N°01/2012/OL of 02/05/2012 mentioned above, nor in any other Rwandan legislation. [16] The Court notices therefore that the fact that Uwiringiyimana Aaron has served in 2014 the penalty of one year of imprisonment inflicted on him but remained imprisoned until today instead of seeking payment of the fine from him constitutes injustice, given that it is not provided for by the Law. The court finds therefore that he must be released as he has already served the penalty of one year imprisonment inflicted on him and the fine he was ordered to pay be cancelled. [17] Considering the legal provisions mentioned above, the court finds that the judgment RPA0358/13/TGI/NGOMA rendered on 31 October 2013 by the Intermediate Court of Ngoma disregarded the Law and cannot be executed as long as Uwiringiyimana Aaron proves to be a destitute while the judgment has ordered that he will not be released until he pays the fine of five hundred thousand Rwandan francs (500,000Frw), implying that he shall never be released whereas he was sentenced to only one year of prison. Therefore, the judgment was unjust and must be quashed with regard to the fact PROSECUTION v. UWIRINGIYIMANA 193

Page 440

that he would be not released until he pays five hundred thousand (500,000Frw) of the fine and therefore he must be immediately released as he has already served the sentence. III. THE DECISION OF THE COURT [18] Finds the application for review due to injustice filed by Uwiringiyimana Aaron with merit. [19] Decides that judgments RPA0358/13/TGI/NGOMA rendered on 21 February 2014 by the Intermediate Court of Ngoma and RP0145/13/TB/SKE rendered by the Primary Court of Sake on 31 October 2013 changes with regard to their ruling that Uwiringiyimana Aaron would be released after paying the total amount of the fine imposed on him. [20] Quashes the ruling ordering that Uwiringiyimana Aaron would be released after paying the fine of five hundred thousand Rwandan francs (500,000Frw); [21] Orders immediate release of Uwiringiyimana Aaron; [22] Orders that the court fees be charged to the public treasure.

RWANDA LAW REPORTS 194

Page 442

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