Introduction This paper aims to provide a short exposition of the Gacaca court system, show the successes and

shortfalls of Gacaca and provide some concrete suggestions abo ut how to bridge those shortfalls. The Gacaca court system is a traditional approach to conflict resolution that was established in 2001 in Rwanda after the Rwandan genocide of 1994 where 800,0 00 to 1,000,000 Rwandans were killed. The word Gacaca has been defined as lawn or g rassy place, derived from the practice of members of the gacaca sitting in grassy places and resolving conflicts after which drinks would be shared by the partie s as a symbol of reconciliation (Morrill 2004, 3; Schabas 2005, 13). Traditionally, Gacaca was a justice system used in Rwanda before its colonizat ion, where it was replaced by the western justice system. The inyangamugayo, who were people of probity, old age, erudition, (employed) wisdom in decision-making , (and had) altruism or political or economic influence within the community, wer e responsible for giving judgements to parties in conflict in the community (Mor rill 2004, 3). Modern-day Gacaca is a collective effort to bring about reconciliation in post Genocide Rwanda since the colonial justice system could not keep up with the num erous suspects that were awaiting trial in Rwandan prisons. From 1996 to 2006, t he courts managed to try about 10,000 suspects (Human Rights Watch 2004, 18). Gi ven the number of suspects remaining, it would have take many years to prosecute all the suspects. As a solution, the Gacaca system was reintroduced in 2001 by the The Transitional National Assembly of Rwanda under Organic Law number 40/200 0 of 16th January 2001 (Schabas 2005, 13). Gacaca is a collective process, requiring the cooperation of the victims and th e perpetrators in resoving and reconciling the conflicts that led to the genocid e and others that have since emerged (Morrill 2004, 4). The mission of the Gacac a court system is to achieve truth, justice and reconciliation. Its aim is to pr omote community healing by making the punishment of perpetrators speedier and le ss costly for the state (Inkiko-gacaca.gov.rw). There are currently 8140 Gacaca courts located throughout Rwanda, each consisting of elected judges qualified a s inyangamugayo. The Successes of Gacaca The Gacaca court system has a hollistic approach, something which facilitates r econciliation in post-genocide Rwanda (Morrill 2004, 4). The punishment of a cri me is borne by the whole family of the perpetrator, so the family as a whole has a stake in the gacaca court process an in ensuring that all parties receive jst ice as well as forgiveness. This goes towards encouraging maximal participation and cooperation from both parties. The responsibility for repairing the broken r elationships is a collective process as it affects a large part of the community . Since the Gacaca trials are meant to promote reconciliation and justice, the wh ole trial process has suceeded in giving justice to those wronged in the 1994 ge nocide. The Gacaca trials are held in public where the victims families can face the accused and when they see that justice has been done for their relative, th ey can get closure and move on from the genocide. Also, when the suspects have been brought to trial and have either been found g uilty or innocent, they are then able to move on when they are publicly cleared, or if they are found guilty they can ask for forgiveness from the victims famili es. The accused get to move on to the next stage in their lives, even if it is s erving time in prison. The Gacaca trials have managed to speed up the justice pr ocess so that those suspects who had spent years languishing in prison can final ly receive sentencing or be cleared. Without Gacaca justice would have been dela yed which in turn would have delayed reconciliation in Rwanda and broken relatio nships would have been left unhealed. SHORTFALLS OF GACACA The Inkiko-gacaca (Gacaca jurisdiction) is based on contemporary Gacaca, which is a hybrid of the traditional Gacaca and the classical judicial system (Morrill 2 004, 4). Since it is no longer the same Gacaca that that used to be practised in pre-colonial Rwanda, the people of Rwanda are wary and untrusting of it. They a

re doubtful of modern-day Gacacas ability to uncover the truth about the genocide . The western elements in the Gacaca courts may hinder rather than facilitate th e revelation of truth about the genocide. If the people do not trust the justice system, it will affect their participation and even the reconciliation between conflicting parties. There are human rights concerns over the lack of lawyers for the suspects. The Gacaca trials require the accused to defend themselves against the required 100 winesses per session. The fairness of trials is questioned in such conditions si nce representation is supposed to be the suspects right. The weight put on witness testimony is also a concern since the witnesss memory is likely to prove unreliable after years have passed since the crime was comitt ed. If a witness saw someone being robbed in 1994, they may not clearly remember the person responsible for the crime. The acquittal rate in the Gacaca courts has been 20 per cent, leading to questi ons about the validity of the accusations (Vasagar 2005). The Gacaca court syste m allows for people with personal vendettas to abuse it. If a suspect made enemi es in prison, they could fabricate testimonies against him/her. Since the Gacaca trials are primarily based on witness testimony rather than on evidence, there is a chance that the false charges against a suspect will go to trial before the suspect is acquitted. Therefore the Gacaca court system is an avenue for reconc iliation as well as the breeding ground for new conflicts, something which could undermine the reconciliation of post-genocide Rwanda. The Inyangamugayo have been given the duty and authority to preside over Gacaca trials involving all but accused rapists where they can sentence them to life i mprisonment but cannot give a death sentence (Vasagar, 2005). Given that the Iny angamugayo only receive a few months training, it is hard for them to be unbiased and impartial. For instance, youths who were involved in the genocide in their early teens and were imprisoned as suspects awaiting trial are now older and hav e become toughened by their lives in prison. It would be hard for an Inyangamugayo to maintain the presumption of innocence after viewing the youths menacing appeara nce (Morrill 2004, 11).Also, there has been noted cases of corruption in the Gac aca courts, further eroding their ability to provide justice (Inkiko-gacaca.gov.rw ). SUGGESTIONS FOR BRIDGING THE GACACA SHORTFALLS The Gacaca courts should seek to have a social balance that does not categorize t he Rwandan people or further divide them but one that brings them together by en ding the ethnic conflicts that have plagued the country (Morrill 2004, 4). This is to avoid same political and economic imbalances which they had endured. Keeping record of the witness testimonies would be useful to increase witness r eliability. If a witness should change his/her testimony then the inyangamugayo would know and take this into consideration in the sentencing. The risk of time fading the witness testimony will be reduced. Some principles from the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) should be adopted into the Gacaca court system to ensure justice for all parties- the vic tims and the suspects. This will to ensure that the human rights of every indivi dual are protected by holding fair trials where the suspect has access to a lawy er, and promoting the protection of defendants. The enmity existing between dif ferent ethnic groups (the Hutu, Tutsi and Twa) will be lessened if the right of representation is respected. Gacaca courts need to have systematic and accurate methods of acquiring informa tion such as investigation rather than relying on eye witness accounts since it unreliable and can be biased. A clear and systematic system of case investigati ons would reduce the risk of fabricated cases based on witness testimony making it to the Gacaca courts. The creation of a politically independent body that oversees the Gacaca courts and ensures that any proven cases of corruption in Gacaca are dealt with swiftly and with an emphasis on eradicating corruption from such a socially relevant ju stice system. CONCLUSION The Gacaca court system is unique to Rwanda and was created in order to end the

conflicts in a hollistic manner so that the society can heal as a whole. After the Rwandan genocide of 1994 it was only logical that Gacaca be reistated becaus e the western justice system was not working out. Gacaca may have issues that ne ed to be dealt with but what it offers is too important to abandon. It offers th e Rwandan community a chance to heal the wounds the genocide had dealt it in a w ay that is of its own creation and choosing. As it is the Gacaca court system ne eds to be re-evaluated and some shortcomings bridged by respecting the right to representation, weeding out corruption, keeping records of witness testimonies a nd establishing a system of investigations rather than relying primarily on witn ess testimony. REFERENCES Morrill, C. (2004). Reconciliation and the Gacaca: The Perceptions and Peace-Bui lding Potential of Rwandan Youth Detainee. OJPCR: The Online Journal of Peace an d Conflict Resolution. pp 1-66. Schabas, W (2005) Genocide Trials and Gacaca Courts. Journal of International Cr iminal Justice 3. Oxford University Press. Vasagar, J. (2005). Grassroots Justice. The Guardian (London). http://www.guardi an.co.uk/world/2005/mar/17/worlddispatch.rwanda. Retrieved 03-05-2012. Objectives. Inkiko-gacaca.gov.rw. http://www.inkiko-gacaca.gov.rw/En/EnObjective s.htm. Retrieved 25/03/2012.