Blog

Addressing provincial leaders in North Kivu during a high-level meeting held in Goma on August 4, 2025, Gen. Makenga stressed that meaningful change cannot be achieved through words alone but must be reflected in actions on the ground.

“Change must be demonstrated through action,” he said. “As leaders, the people you serve must see the difference in the way you govern. The country has been in disarray for far too long, and restoring order will take time. But the roadmap exists and with collective effort, including yours and ours, transformation is possible.”

He emphasised that the process of change must begin from within the movement itself, urging fighters and leaders to embody the values they aspire to promote.

“Transformation starts with us. We must show our people and the world that we are not the same. You cannot change someone else if you have not changed yourself,” he added.

Gen. Makenga also denounced the practices that have plagued the Congolese state, including the looting of national resources and systemic corruption. He said the AFC/M23 must commit to ending such behaviours and focus on restoring peace and stability in the country.

The rebel group controls large swathes of territory in eastern DRC and is currently in talks with the Kinshasa administration in a Qatar-led process to end the longstanding stalemate.

The crises in Sudan, South Sudan and the Democratic Republic of the Congo have been driving an average of 600 people to cross the border daily in search of safety and lifesaving aid, said Farhan Haq, deputy spokesperson for the UN secretary-general, at a daily briefing, citing the UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR).

Uganda is already the largest refugee-hosting country in Africa and the third largest globally, said Haq.

Uganda’s progressive refugee policy allows refugees to live, work and access public services, but funding shortfalls are drastically impacting aid delivery and threaten to undo years of progress, he said.

Currently, Uganda’s refugee response is only 25 percent funded, and UNHCR is calling for more urgent and sustained international support and solidarity to ensure refugees and their local communities can live safe and more dignified lives, said the spokesperson.

The milestone event brought together local leaders, long-standing clients, and community members, alongside the bank’s leadership and board. It was a moment of reflection, gratitude, and renewed commitment to BPR’s founding values.

The Governor of the Eastern Province, Pudence Rubingisa, served as the guest of honor, accompanied by Kayonza District Mayor, John Bosco Nyemanzi, and Nkamba Sector Executive, Emmanuel Bisangwa.

Senior management and board members of BPR Bank were also in attendance.
As part of the celebration, BPR Bank Rwanda PLC donated 20 sewing machines to the Ruramira Tailors’ Cooperative and pledged 3,000 roofing sheets to the Kayonza District administration to support vulnerable families in need of shelter.

The bank also refurbished the building where it first opened its doors five decades ago. This building was transformed into a modern hub for the Ruramira Tailors’ Cooperative, supporting entrepreneurship and local skills development.

Ludoviko Nsengiyumva, 79, the first person to open a BPR Bank account, shared his inspiring story. He recalled how he lost his savings in a house fire while living in a traditional grass-thatched home—a painful experience that prompted him to entrust his money to the newly established bank.

He praised BPR’s contribution to community development, highlighting how it instilled a culture of saving and financial security. “Thanks to BPR Bank Rwanda PLC, many of us have been able to grow and achieve economic stability,” he said.

Speaking on behalf of more than 80 tailors, Aulerie Kantarama expressed heartfelt gratitude for the bank’s donation.

“We will use these tools to improve our lives and contribute to the development of our district and the country,” she said. “Young mothers facing hardship will now have a place to learn and grow. In the past, we lacked a permanent workspace, but today, we finally have a stable home where our business can thrive.”

In her remarks, BPR Bank Managing Director Patience Mutesi reflected on the bank’s origin and impact: “This place holds not only our origin but our enduring promise to the people of Rwanda. Fifty years ago, BPR began with a simple but powerful mission — to bring banking closer to the people and to empower communities. Today, we honor that legacy not just in words, but by transforming this former branch into a space where women in Nkamba can gather, tailor, train, and grow together.”

This transformation is repurposed into a safe and practical space for women to carry out tailoring activities, peer-to-peer learning, and build self-reliance. The initiative is a tangible example of the bank’s tagline: “For People, For Better.”

George Rubagumya, Chairman of the BPR Board of Directors, reaffirmed the bank’s commitment to continue walking with customers along the development journey.

“This is more than a celebration. It’s a reaffirmation of our promise. The trust we’ve built over five decades is what carries us forward. What we launch here today is not only a tribute to our past, but a statement about our future — empowering communities, one step at a time,” he noted.

Pascal Nyiringango, Board Director representing local shareholders, reaffirmed the Board’s support toward inclusive growth initiatives, while also outlining plans for continued investment in communities that shaped the institution’s growth.

Governor Rubingisa also hailed the bank’s legacy of empowering citizens. “What we witness today is more than a commemoration — it is a powerful reminder that when institutions stay rooted in community, they grow with the people. BPR Bank’s legacy in Nkamba is proof that sustainable progress begins at the grassroots, and I commend this initiative that empowers our citizens, especially women, with dignity and opportunity,” he noted.

Looking to the future, the bank announced a pledge to donate roofing sheets to Kayonza District in support of a planned construction project in 2026, reinforcing BPR’s long-term commitment to impactful partnerships.

This celebration is part of a series of events commemorating 50 years of BPR Bank’s transformation journey, rooted in values of closer, connected, and courageous.

“India is not only buying massive amounts of Russian Oil, they are then, for much of the Oil purchased, selling it on the Open Market for big profits,” Trump said in a post on Truth Social.

Indian goods imported into the United States will be subject to a 25 percent tariff starting August 7, according to an executive order signed by Trump on July 31.

Besides the 25 percent tariff, Trump had earlier said he would impose a penalty for India’s purchase of Russian oil, without elaborating on details.

In early April, Trump announced 26 percent reciprocal tariffs on Indian goods in addition to the 10 percent baseline tariffs, but he then paused the imposition of such tariffs.

In response to Trump’s new threat, India’s Ministry of External Affairs said in a statement that “the targeting of India is unjustified and unreasonable,” and that India’s oil imports are meant to “ensure predictable and affordable energy costs” for Indian consumers.

“Like any major economy, India will take all necessary measures to safeguard its national interests and economic security,” according to the statement on the ministry’s website.

The U.S. goods trade deficit with India was 45.8 billion U.S. dollars in 2024, up 5.9 percent from 2023, according to the Office of the United States Trade Representative.

Many countries have voiced strong opposition to the recent U.S. tariff measures.

According to Reuters, the United States has already submitted a list of 10 potential migrants to be relocated to Rwanda. This initiative is part of the U.S. government’s broader strategy to manage the influx of undocumented immigrants.

Discussions between Rwanda and the United States suggest that the number of migrants could exceed the initial 250, depending on future negotiations. Importantly, migrants will not be required to stay in Rwanda against their will; they will have the option to relocate to third countries.

Rwanda will not accept any individuals currently serving prison sentences in the U.S., as there is no legal framework between the two countries allowing inmates to complete their sentences abroad. The individuals eligible for relocation include those who have completed their sentences, those with no pending criminal charges, and individuals with no history of child abuse-related offenses.

Rwanda’s government spokesperson, Yolande Makolo, emphasized the country’s historical understanding of the hardships faced by displaced populations.

“Rwanda has agreed with the United States to accept up to 250 migrants, in part because nearly every Rwandan family has experienced the hardships of displacement, and our societal values are founded on reintegration and rehabilitation,” she said.

“Under the agreement, Rwanda has the ability to approve each individual proposed for resettlement. Those approved will be provided with workforce training, healthcare, and accommodation support to jumpstart their lives in Rwanda, giving them the opportunity to contribute to one of the fastest-growing economies in the world over the last decade,” Makolo added.

The United States will also provide financial assistance to Rwanda as part of the agreement, although the specific details regarding the amount and structure of that support have not been disclosed.

This development comes as the U.S. intensifies efforts to address undocumented immigration, a policy focus that gained momentum under President Donald Trump, who prioritized reducing the number of unauthorized migrants entering the country.

During the hearing, Ingabire presented grounds on which she is seeking the annulment of the decision by the Kicukiro Primary Court, requesting to be prosecuted while not in detention.

The Prosecution, however, argued that there are substantial reasons justifying her continued detention, as previously determined by the lower court.

Ingabire is charged with creating a criminal group, inciting public disorder, endangering the existing government, disseminating false information or propaganda intended to discredit the Rwandan government abroad, spreading rumours, conspiring to commit offences against the state, and organising illegal demonstrations.

The appeal hearing began with Ingabire expressing concerns about her legal representation. Although she is represented by Me Gatera Gashabana, she told the court that she had initially requested legal assistance from a lawyer based in Kenya. However, the lawyer was unable to obtain authorisation to practice in Rwanda, and thus, her current representation was not entirely of her choosing.

Ingabire, dressed in prison uniform and wearing her natural hair, appeared alongside her lawyer to challenge a procedural matter. They objected to the late submission of the Prosecution’s response to their appeal, which was filed in the electronic case management system at 21:06 on the eve of the hearing. They argued that this denied them sufficient time to review and respond to the submission.

Me Gashabana cited Articles 75 and 87 of the Criminal Procedure Code, which pertain to the timely notification of provisional detention decisions and the deadlines for appeals. He argued that the Prosecution should have filed its response at least five days in advance and asked the court to disregard the late filing.

The Prosecution countered by citing Article 184 of the same law, which governs the submission of responses in appellate matters. It argued that the provision does not specify a mandatory deadline and that its actions were consistent with legal procedure. The court indicated it would examine the objection and render a decision in due course.

{{Grounds presented by Ingabire Victoire
}}

{{1. Jurisdictional irregularity
}}

Ingabire’s primary argument was that her arrest was ordered contrary to the Constitution. She contended that the basis for her detention, Article 106, was applied in violation of constitutional provisions, as the court, not the Prosecution, ordered her investigation.

Ingabire and her counsel claimed they had petitioned the Supreme Court to nullify Article 106 for being unconstitutional and had requested that the Kicukiro court suspend proceedings pending the Supreme Court’s ruling. Nevertheless, the lower court proceeded and ordered her 30-day detention.

The Prosecution responded that the lower court was not barred from ruling, noting that the defence did not formally raise the constitutional matter during the initial proceedings and that the case was already heard and closed by the time the constitutional challenge was submitted on July 17, 2025.

{{2. Expiry of certain charges
}}

Ingabire argued that some charges, such as spreading rumours and conspiracy to protest, are time-barred. She stated that the rumour-related offence, which carries a maximum sentence of six months, is classified as minor and should have expired after one year. She referenced an October 12, 2021, interview with a journalist as the basis for the charge.

Similarly, she said the alleged conspiracy to protest dates back to 2021, and the three-year limitation period had already passed. Her lawyer also contested the trial court’s comment suggesting that she might still harbour intentions to commit such acts, arguing that this was speculative and lacked evidentiary basis.

In response, the Prosecution argued that the statute of limitations begins from the date of the last action related to the offence. Since the content allegedly remains available online (e.g., on YouTube), the offences have not expired.

{{3. Lack of substantiation for certain charges
}}

Ingabire submitted that some charges, namely, inciting unrest and threatening state security, were brought without the Prosecution presenting any substantive evidence. She said that testimony from Gaston Munyabugingo, a fugitive with pending charges, lacked credibility and should not be relied upon.

She also contested the legality and relevance of certain audio recordings cited by the Prosecution, alleging they were either obtained unlawfully or did not involve her.

The Prosecution responded that it had presented serious grounds for each charge and that testimony from individuals involved in the alleged crimes is admissible under the law. It argued that recordings obtained for the purpose of exposing threats to national security are permissible, citing Article 20 of the Penal Code.

{{4. No direct involvement in alleged activities
}}

Ingabire denied any role in forming or joining a criminal group. She claimed she did not attend any of the so-called coup-planning workshops and that the presence of her friends or members of her unregistered political party, DALFA-Umurinzi, does not implicate her.

The Prosecution, however, maintained that there is a clear connection between her and the participants, including testimony from a former employee who claimed he was recruited by Ingabire to attend what he believed were English classes but turned out to be strategy meetings aimed at overthrowing the government.

{{5. Insufficient grounds for the conspiracy charge
}}

Regarding the charge of conspiring to commit crimes against the government, Ingabire stated that the only evidence cited was an exchange of messages with Sylvain Sibomana, in which she was referred to as “Mukecuru.”

The Prosecution noted that it would present more evidence during the trial and reiterated that the lower court had already found sufficient grounds to support the charge.

{{6. Illegally obtained evidence
}}

Ingabire challenged the admissibility of certain recordings, arguing that they were obtained in violation of the law. However, the Prosecution countered that Ingabire had not denied the authenticity of the recordings nor explained precisely how their acquisition violated legal procedures. It accused the defence of attempting to shift the focus to the substance of the trial prematurely, while the current hearing only concerns pre-trial detention.

{{7. Low risk of flight
}}

Ingabire argued that she poses no flight risk. She cited her compliance with court appearances following her presidential pardon and her respect for a travel ban, even after her request to visit family abroad was denied. She described herself as a principled political actor committed to peaceful engagement.

The Prosecution questioned whether any reliable standard exists by which a suspect can prove they will not flee. It asserted that due to the seriousness of the charges, which carry sentences exceeding five years, Ingabire should remain in custody.

{{8. Potential to obstruct the investigation
}}

Finally, the Prosecution argued that releasing Ingabire could compromise the ongoing investigation. She had acknowledged that 26 individuals attended the alleged workshops, of whom only a few had been arrested. The Prosecution argued that if she were truly cooperative, she would identify the remaining participants, including those still at large.

The Prosecution stated: “If she were at liberty, she could interfere with the investigation. We believe continued detention is essential to ensure the integrity of the inquiry.”

After hearing arguments from both parties, the presiding judge announced that the decision on Ingabire’s appeal against her provisional detention would be delivered on August 7 2025, at 3:00 p.m.

Speaking at a media briefing in Johannesburg, International Relations and Cooperation Minister Ronald Lamola and Trade, Industry, and Competition Minister Parks Tau said that no agreement had yet been reached, despite South Africa submitting its trade framework proposal in May.

“South Africa seeks to conclude deals that promote value addition and industrialisation, rather than extractive relations that deprive the country of the ability to beneficiate our mineral wealth by mimicking extractive colonial era trade relations,” Lamola said, noting that geopolitical tensions have complicated negotiations with the United States.

Lamola warned that the proposed tariff could reduce South Africa’s gross domestic product by 0.2 percentage points. The United States is South Africa’s third-largest trading partner, making up 7.5 percent of total trade, with agricultural exports most vulnerable to the looming tariff.

“South African exports do not compete with U.S. producers and do not pose a threat to the U.S. industry. On the contrary, our exports are crucial inputs that support America’s industrial base,” Lamola said, adding that agricultural goods from South Africa to the United States are seasonal and are not “replacing” U.S. agricultural products.

He also highlighted South Africa’s efforts to diversify its export markets, particularly in agriculture. Local producers have started exporting lemons, avocados, and apples to China following the signing of bilateral protocol agreements. Similar efforts are underway to expand access to markets across Asia, Europe, the Middle East, and Africa.