Category: Justice

The Paris court handed him five-year sentence, but cleared him of other charges, including passive corruption and illegal campaign financing.

Sarkozy, who maintains that the case is politically motivated, was accused of accepting millions of euros from Gaddafi in exchange for helping improve Libya’s international image.

While the court found insufficient evidence to link Sarkozy directly to illegal campaign financing, Judge Nathalie Gavarino stated that Sarkozy allowed aides to reach out to Libyan officials for financial support.

The investigation, which began in 2013, was based on allegations from Saif al-Islam, Gaddafi’s son, and Lebanese businessman Ziad Takieddine, who claimed to have proof of the funding. Takieddine alleged that the €50 million payments continued even after Sarkozy became president.

Sarkozy’s wife, Carla Bruni-Sarkozy, was charged with hiding evidence related to the case and committing fraud, charges she denies. Since losing re-election in 2012, Sarkozy has faced multiple legal battles, including a 2024 ruling for overspending in his 2012 re-election campaign.

The former president, who was sentenced to one year in prison for bribing a judge in 2021, is expected to be sentenced in this case later today.

Speaking on September 1, 2025, at the opening of the 2025/26 judicial year, Mukantaganzwa noted that courts handled more than 109,000 cases out of over 182,000.

During the year, 106,254 new cases were filed, adding to 76,273 unresolved from the previous year, bringing the total workload to 182,527.

Of the new cases, 63,457 (60%) were registered in Primary Courts, while 42,797 (40%) went to Intermediate Courts, the Commercial Court, and High Courts. Substantive cases accounted for 85% (90,044), while bail hearings made up 15% (16,210).

Courts managed to conclude 109,192 cases, including 92,880 substantive cases and 16,312 bail-related hearings. On average, each judge resolved 26 cases per month.

Mukantaganzwa highlighted that when mediation and plea bargaining are included, a total of 124,204 cases were resolved in 2024/25.

Despite this achievement, 58,323 cases were left unresolved by year’s end, with nearly half (26,862) pending for more than six months and therefore considered backlog.

Mukantaganzwa pointed to public perceptions as a key driver of persistent backlogs: “Many citizens believe disputes can only be settled through full trials that produce winners and losers. Others refuse to accept court rulings and push cases through every stage of appeal, which extends delays.”

According to judiciary reports, backlogged cases stood at 44,799 in 2023/24 (59% of the total), showing a 10% reduction over the past two years. Mediation and plea bargaining have also grown, with 15,012 cases settled this way in 2024/25, representing 14% of new filings.

Justice Minister Dr. Emmanuel Ugirashebuja emphasized Rwanda’s commitment to alternative dispute resolution.

Cases handled through court-based mediation rose from just 243 in 2021 to more than 3,000 in 2024/25. Since 2022, over 7,000 cases have been resolved through mediation.

He said the government aims to reduce backlog to 30% and expand mediation and plea deals to cover at least 30% of cases.

“Citizens must embrace a culture of amicable dispute resolution, which delivers faster, less costly justice and avoids overburdening the courts,” he said.

The trial in substance had initially been suspended when the High Court summoned Victoire Ingabire —who was not originally part of the case—to provide clarification in court.

Her summons was based on Article 106 of the Rwandan law on offenses and penalties in general, which allows additional investigation when initial explanations are deemed insufficient. After her court appearance, the judges found her statement lacking and instructed the Prosecution to launch a more thorough investigation.

Ingabire, a self-proclaimed opposition politician, is facing six charges. These include harm to the current government, spreading false information or propaganda intended to turn foreign nations against Rwanda, creating or joining a criminal group, and plotting illegal activities such as demonstrations and subversion.

When she appeared before the Kicukiro Primary Court seeking bail, she denied all charges. However, the court remanded her for 30 days, citing serious grounds for suspecting her involvement in the alleged crimes.

While that case was underway, the High Court trial involving the other nine defendants—former Dalfa Umurinzi party members and journalist Nsengimana—was put on hold, pending a decision on whether Ingabire would be formally added to the case.

Ingabire was expected to appear for the first time as a co-defendant on July 23, 2025. However, the court has postponed the proceedings to September 1, 2025, due to the judicial recess now beginning.

The nine co-accused had already entered their pleas. The prosecution was due to present its final submissions, after which the defendants would respond before the court concluded the trial for deliberation.

Once the trial resumes, Ingabire will be allowed to present her defense and submit any exculpatory evidence. After her statement, the prosecution will submit its final recommendation, which will be addressed by all defendants before the judges begin deliberations.

According to the ruling, the court found reasonable suspicion that Ingabire may have committed six serious offenses, including the creation of a criminal gang, inciting public disorder, spreading false information intended to undermine the government, and conspiracy to harm state authority and organizing protests.

The prosecution argued that the suspect’s continued liberty would pose a risk to public order and the integrity of the investigation, adding that the gravity of the alleged offenses and existing preliminary evidence justified her remand.

Ingabire, through her lawyer Gatera Gashabana, contested the charges and requested release on bail, arguing that she posed no flight risk and was willing to comply with judicial proceedings. However, the court ruled that her release could result in the destruction of evidence, interference with ongoing investigations, or an attempt to flee.

The court cited testimony from a former combatant of the RUD-Urunana militia who alleged that Ingabire’s former political party, FDU-Inkingi, had provided support to the group ahead of its 2019 attack in Musanze. It further noted that the formation of her new party, DALFA-Umurinzi, may have been intended to mask her involvement.

Additionally, the court referenced intercepted audio recordings between Ingabire and Cassien Ntamuhanga, a convicted fugitive, in which they allegedly discussed organizing public protests.

Although Ingabire described the exchanges as hypothetical ideas, the court determined they constituted credible grounds for the charge of incitement to civil unrest.

In regard to the charge of disseminating rumors, the prosecution presented material evidence that the court deemed sufficient to sustain the allegation at this stage.

The court also found Ingabire’s statements about celebrations of a self-declared “Ingabire Day” concerning, particularly as she failed to provide context or justification. The bench held that such behavior, combined with her political activities, could threaten public order if left unchecked during the investigation.

Concluding its ruling, the court found that the legal conditions for pre-trial detention had been met, citing risks of obstruction of justice, tampering with evidence, and the potential for absconding.
Ingabire was reminded of her right to appeal the decision within five working days.

She was arrested on June 19, 2025, by the Rwanda Investigation Bureau (RIB), following a formal request from the National Public Prosecution Authority.

Ingabire will remain in custody at Nyarugenge Prison, commonly known as Mageragere, as investigations proceed.

Ingabire, who is facing six criminal charges, appeared before the court seeking provisional release. Originally from Rubavu District, she identified herself as a mother of three and a politician.

Her lead lawyer, Gatera Gashabana, told the court that while some issues had been addressed, the unresolved matter of legal representation remained.

He also raised concerns that Ingabire currently has no means to communicate with her family abroad. Gashabana argued that denying her the legal counsel of her choice contradicts her rights and could negatively affect her defense.

Despite the objections, Ingabire told the court she was willing to proceed with the hearing, though she emphasized that her right to legal representation had been violated due to the Rwanda Bar Association’s refusal to accredit the Kenyan lawyer.

The President of the Rwanda Bar Association, Moïse Nkundabarashi, previously told IGIHE that the request by Kenyan lawyer Osiemo for temporary accreditation was rejected based on the principle of reciprocity.

According to him, Kenya does not allow Rwandan lawyers to practice there, and Rwanda has thus adopted a similar stance.

Ingabire faces charges including forming a criminal gang, inciting unrest, attempting to harm state authority, spreading misinformation or inciting hatred against the government, plotting to commit crimes against the state, and organizing demonstrations. Ingabire denied all allegations, stating that she is a Rwandan politician and mother who has no ill intentions toward Rwanda.

Ingabire argued the case should be dismissed due to alleged judicial interference in prosecutorial matters, in contradiction with the Constitution. Ingabire pointed out that she is being prosecuted in connection to a case dating back four years, which has already been tried by the High Court. She was previously interrogated but not indicted, raising questions about the timing and motivation behind her arrest.

Gashabana explained that under Article 106 of the Criminal Procedure Code, courts can summon additional parties to a trial if new evidence arises. However, this does not automatically warrant detention, which he argued was the prosecution’s unilateral decision.

The prosecution countered by stating that their actions were within the bounds of Article 106 and denied any judicial interference. They emphasized that it is not the court but the prosecution that decides whether an individual should be detained pending trial.

The court ruled that the objections and the prosecution’s reasoning will be reviewed together before a final decision is made on Ingabire Victoire’s bail status.

The court determined that Fatakumavuta’s statements amounted to acts of defamation, leading to a conviction for inciting defamation. This offense is punishable by up to one year in prison and a fine of Frw 300,000.

In addition, the court found that Fatakumavuta had violated the law by spreading false information. His actions were deemed a breach of the legal provisions that criminalize the dissemination of false rumors, which is punishable by up to three years in prison and a fine of Frw 1,000,000.

The court also ruled that Fatakumavuta exceeded the legally prescribed limits for drug use, resulting in a conviction for drug abuse. Despite his denial, this offense carries a penalty of one year in prison.

Fatakumavuta’s request for a re-examination of his drug levels was rejected, as he failed to provide valid reasons or evidence to challenge the expert report submitted by the Prosecutor’s Office.

Regarding a charge of discrimination, the court found insufficient evidence to support it. The statement Fatakumavuta made about Bahati’s wife being poor was deemed not discriminatory. The court concluded that the remark did not show ill intent or malice.

Furthermore, the charge of public insult was dismissed, with the court ruling that Fatakumavuta’s comment, “The Ben likes to cry like a child,” did not meet the criteria for public insult. The judge clarified that this comment did not constitute an insult.

The court explained that, in theory, Fatakumavuta could have received a sentence of up to five years in prison and a fine of Frw 1,300,000 due to the cumulative nature of his crimes.

However, because Fatakumavuta acknowledged some of the offenses, the court applied mitigating factors, resulting in a reduced sentence.

In light of these factors, Fatakumavuta was sentenced to two and a half years in prison and a fine of Frw 1,300,000. He was informed that he has 30 days to appeal the decision.

Fatakumavuta was arrested on October 18, 2024, and is currently serving his sentence at Nyarugenge Prison. The eight months he has already spent in detention will be deducted from his sentence.

This decision overturns a 2024 ruling by a French court, which had dismissed the case on the grounds of insufficient evidence.

The Collectif des Parties Civiles pour le Rwanda (CPCR), rights group dedicated to prosecuting genocide suspects, successfully appealed the dismissal.

The Paris Court of Appeal ordered a renewed investigation into Mbarushimana’s alleged role in the atrocities.

Speaking with IGIHE, CPCR co-founder Dafroza Gauthier welcomed the ruling.

“We are pleased that the judiciary has agreed to reopen the investigation to uncover new evidence,” she said.

Mbarushimana worked for the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) during the genocide.

In April 1994, after the UN evacuated foreign staff from Rwanda, he was tasked with protecting local employees. Hired by the UN in 1992, he was dismissed in 2001 following allegations of involvement in the deaths of 32 people, including UN staff.

UN war crimes investigator Tony Greig reported that Mbarushimana personally shot two victims and was implicated in the killing of Florence Ngirumpatse, UNDP’s human resources chief in Rwanda, and several Tutsi children she had sheltered, aged 8 to 18.

Greig’s findings, submitted to the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR), included testimonies from 25 witnesses alleging Mbarushimana’s direct involvement in the massacre and support for the Interahamwe militia, which spearheaded the genocide.

On April 7, 2024, Rwandan President Paul Kagame publicly criticized Mbarushimana’s freedom, noting that Florence Ngirumpatse was his cousin.

Kagame further disclosed that his cousin was betrayed by a colleague to the killers and celebrated after her death.

He expressed his disappointment that no action was ever taken against the UNDP staffer despite evidence implicating him.

“It later emerged that a Rwandan working at the UNDP betrayed his Tutsi colleague to the killers. Witnesses remember him celebrating Florence’s murder the night after the attack. He continued his career with the UN for many years even after evidence implicating him emerged. He is still a free man now living in France,” Kagame narrated.

In 2008, the CPCR requested an investigation into Mbarushimana by the Paris court handling crimes against humanity.

French authorities dismissed the case in October 2024, citing insufficient evidence and unreliable witness testimony.

The CPCR appealed, arguing that the ruling ignored critical testimonies and a UN internal report detailing Mbarushimana’s alleged crimes.

On May 21, 2025, the Paris Court of Appeal acknowledged these oversights, ordering a re-examination of evidence and new witness interviews. The reopened investigation has renewed hopes for accountability.

{{Links to the FDLR}}

Mbarushimana’s alleged crimes extend beyond 1994. He is linked to the Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda (FDLR), a terrorist group operating in eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo, where he reportedly served as Executive Secretary.

In 2010, the International Criminal Court (ICC) arrested him in France on 13 counts of war crimes and crimes against humanity committed by FDLR fighters in 2009.

The ICC released him in 2011 citing insufficient evidence, and he has since lived freely in France.

The ruling followed a pre-trial detention hearing held on May 6, 2025.

In his defense, Turahirwa cited ongoing mental health challenges, which he said have led to impulsive behavior and poor judgment. He also informed the court that he has begun receiving medical and psychological treatment.

During the hearing, the Prosecution accused Turahirwa of drug trafficking, referencing his own admission during interrogation, where he acknowledged that the narcotics found in his possession had been brought from Kenya, and that he had personally consumed them.

The prosecution further argued for continued detention based on Turahirwa’s admission of possession, stating he was found with cannabis, although he disputes the quantity. The prosecutor claimed that he was in possession of 13 pellets at the time of arrest.

After reviewing the evidence and submissions, the court determined that remand in custody was warranted. Turahirwa has been in detention since April 22, 2025.

This is not the first time the fashion entrepreneur has faced legal trouble related to drugs. In April 2023, he was arrested on charges, including drug abuse and forgery.

He later admitted to cannabis use during his appearance before Nyarugenge Primary Court in May 2023 and was granted bail by the Nyarugenge Intermediate Court on July 15, 2023.

Following trial proceedings, on December 20, 2024, the court found him guilty of both forgery and drug consumption, sentencing him to three years in prison and imposing a fine of Rwf 2 million, in addition to Rwf 20,000 in court fees.

Turahirwa has since appealed the conviction, though the appeal hearing has not yet taken place.

The hearing, which began at 2:00 p.m. local time (0500 GMT), included the examination of evidence by Yoon’s legal team and the National Assembly, which acted as the prosecution.

Appearing in court at 9:00 p.m., Yoon expressed regret for the confusion caused by his martial law declaration, claiming it was necessary due to a national emergency. However, the opposition argued that no such emergency existed.

Yoon insisted lawmakers were not prevented from entering the National Assembly to revoke the martial law, which lasted only two and a half hours. The emergency declaration, issued on Dec. 3, was overturned by the opposition-led parliament shortly after.

During the brief imposition, military helicopters landed at the National Assembly, and armed soldiers entered the building, as shown in TV footage.

While Yoon denied ordering the removal of lawmakers, military commanders testified they had received such directives, according to the prosecution.

The National Assembly’s lawyers argued Yoon had violated the constitution and was unfit for office due to his outdated views on presidential emergency powers.

Yoon was apprehended on Jan. 15 and indicted on Jan. 26 as a suspected leader of insurrection, a charge that could lead to life imprisonment or the death penalty if convicted.

The National Assembly passed the impeachment motion on Dec. 14, suspending Yoon’s presidency while the court deliberates for up to 180 days. However, given past precedents, a final ruling is expected within two weeks.