BURUNDI SINCE THE GENOCIDE
  

The Minority Rights Group

Reginald Kay

April 1987

 

_____________________________________________________________________________________

 

______________________________________________________________________________________

 

________________________________________________________________________________________

 

 

 

THE UNITED NATIONS

UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS

 

Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom. justice and peace in the world.

Whereas disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind, and the advent of a world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom from any fear and want has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of the common people,

Whereas it is essential, if a man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law,

Whereas it is essential to promote the development of friendly relations between nations,

Whereas the peoples of the United Nations have in the Charter reaffirmed their faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person and in the equal rights of men and women and have determined to promote social progress and better standards of lift in larger freedom,

Whereas Member States have pledged themselves to achieve, in cooperation with the United Nations, the promotion of universal respect for and observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms,

Whereas a common understanding of these rights and freedoms is of the greatest importance for the full realization of this pledge,

 

 

Now. Therefore,

THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY proclaims

 

THIS UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS as a common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations, to the end that every individual and every organ of society, keeping this Declaration constantly in mind, shall strive by teaching and education to promote respect for these rights and freedoms and by progressive measures, national and international, to secure their universal and effective recognition and observance, both among the peoples of Member States themselves and among the peoples of territories under their jurisdiction.

Article 1. All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.

Article 2. Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour. sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin,property, birth or other status.

Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political,. jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.

Article 3. Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.

Article 4. No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms.

Article 5. No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

Article 6. Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law.

Article 7. 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 any discrimination in violation of this Declaration and against any incitement to such discrimination.

Article 8. Everyone has the right to an effective remedy by the competent national tribunals for acts violating the fundamental rights granted him by the constitution or by law.

Article 9. No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile.

Article 10. Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of his rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him.

Article 11. ( 1 )  Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence.

(2) No one shall be held guilty of any penal offence on account of any act or omission which did not constitute a penal offence, under national or international law, at the time when it was committed. Nor shall a heavier penalty be imposed than the one that was applicable at the time the penal offence was committed.

Article 12. No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.

Article 13. (1 ) Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each state.

(2) Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country.

Article 14. (1 ) Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution.

(2) This right may not be invoked in the case of prosecutions genuinely arising from non-political crimes or from acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.

Article 15. ( 1 ) Everyone has the right to a nationality.

(2 ) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to change his nationality.

Article 16. (1 ) Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family. They are entitled to equal rights as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution.

(2) Marriage shall be entered into only with the free and full consent of the intending spouses.

(3) The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State.

Article17.(1) Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others.

(2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property.

Article 18. Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.

Article 19. Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

Article20.(1) Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association.

(2) No one may be compelled to belong to an association.

 Article 21.(1) Everyone has the right to take part in the government of his country, directly or through freely chosen representatives.

(2) Everyone has the right of equal access to public service in his country.

(3) The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government; this will shall be expressed in periodic and genuine elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret vote or by equivalent free voting procedures.

Article 22. Everyone, as a member of society, has the right to social security and is entitled to realization, through national effort and international cooperation and in accordance with the organization and resources of each State, of the economic, social and cultural rights indispensable for his dignity and the free development of his personality.

Article 23. (1) Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favourable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment .

(2) Everyone, without any discrimination, has the right to equal pay for equal work.

(3) Everyone who works has the right to just and favourable remuneration ensuring for himself and his family an existence worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection.

(4) Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interest.

A rticle 24. Everyone has the right to rest and leisure, including reasonable limitation of working hours and periodic holidays with pay.

Article25.(1) Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood,old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.

(2) Motherhood and childhood are entitled to special care and assistance. All children, whether born in or out of wedlock, shall enjoy the same social protection.

Article 26. (1 )Everyone has the right to education. Education shall be free, at least in the elementary and fundamental stages. Elementary education shall be compulsory. Technical and professional education shall be made generally available and higher education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit.

(2) Education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and to the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. It shall promote understanding. tolerance and friendship among all nations, racial or religious groups. and shall further the activities of the United Nations for the maintenance of peace.

(3) Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children.

Article 27. (1 ) Everyone has the right freely to participate in the cultural life of the community, to enjoy the arts and to share in scientific advancement and its benefits.

(2) Everyone has the right to the protection of the moral and material interests resulting from any scientific, literary or artistic production of which he is the author.

Article 28. Everyone is entitled to a social and international order in which the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration can be fully realized.

Article 29. (1 ) Everyone has duties to the community in which alone the free and full development of his personality is possible.

(2) In the exercise of his rights and freedoms, everyone shall be subject only to such limitations as are determined by law solely for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and of meeting the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic -society.

(3) These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.

Article 30. Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein.

 

 

__________________________________________________________________________________________

-3-

 

 

INTRODUCTION

 

The understanding of recent and current developments in Burundi is complicated by the scarcity of independent information. This was a problem with the MRG's earlier report of July 1974, 'Selective Genocide in Burundi', by Lemarchand and Martin, and remains so today. The official media is tightly controlled by the government which has systematically closed independent channels of information. Any observer, however, confronted with the evidence of the killing of at least 100,000 people in 1972, has enough reliable information to explain the events in ethnic terms as a slaughter of the Hutu majority, with the particular attention of the murderers in the Party youth and the military directed at the educated. The further development of the same argument - which has the sympathy of the present author but not his support on account of the necessarily weak data - is that the Micombero government started to plan the massacres through carefully calculated provocations and misinformation as soon as it overthrew the monarchy in November 1966.

 

A new MRG report on developments since 1972 is necessary, despite continuing problems with evidence. The government of the Second Republic, inaugurated in November 1976 when Colonel Bagaza replaced Micombero as president in a bloodless coup, has consolidated the power of the same ethnic minority with a series of measures that are presented by the official media as isolated and unconnected steps. However they point to increased centralization and to growing restrictions on the rights of the individual. The policy of villagization has supposedly economic benefits but also has the effect of regrouping the community in units which can be effectively managed by the authorities. Restrictions on religious worship are intended to maximize agricultural production but they also impinge on liberty of worship and weaken the authority of the Catholic Church, the leading non-governmental organization in Burundi, and the smaller Protestant sects. The government has expanded the network of state schools but at the same time tightened its control over access to the necessarily limited places at the secondary level: the evidence is strengthened by reliable reports from Kirindo in 1986 that the government inspectors make a note of the ethnic origins of students when assessing the merits of those in the final year of primary school. Not surprisingly, these reports have been denied - since the authorities maintain that thew are no ethnic distinctions in Burundi and certainly no ethnic discrimination.

 

Part 1: THE SELECTIVE GENOCIDE*(1)

 

The background to the crisis

 

Burundi, a small landlocked country in the heart of the African continent and currently among the ten poorest nations of the world, became, along with neighbouring Rwanda, part of German East Africa in 1899.(2) Following the First World War, German rule was replaced by a Belgian mandate over the two territories, administered as a single entity, Ruanda-Urundi. In 1946 the basis of Belgian administration was transformed into a trusteeship on behalf of the United Nations. The colonial power experimented with political reform, introducing advisory councils in 1952 and elections at both local and national level in 1960. Factions, based on largely pre-colonial patterns and each reflecting the interests of ganwa groups (families of the nobility with royal antecedents), fought the legislative elections in Burundi in September 1961. UPRONA (Parti de I'Unité et du Progrès National) secured a resounding victory over the PDC (Parti Démocrate Chrétien ). The assassination of Prince Rwagasore, the eldest son of Mwami (King) Mwambutsa and UPRONA leader, the following month led to a short period of near absolute monarchy and caused growing suspicions of the Roman Catholic Church which had supported the losing PDC. On 1 July 1962 the former trust territory of Ruanda- Urundi became two separate states, the Republic of Rwanda and the Kingdom of Burundi.

The structure of society in Burundi was unchanged in any significant way during the colonial period. The population consists of three very different ethnic groups. An estimated population of 3.5 million in 1972 was comprised of Tutsi (16%, people of Ethiopid stock), Hutu (83%, negroid origin) and Twa ( 1%, pygmoid stock).(3) Terms such as 'Ethiopid' and 'negroid' should be used sparingly, and the estimates should be considered as no more than a very rough estimate, not least because of intermarriage which was not uncommon. A more recent calculation is not available since the Second Republic, established after the overthrow of the Micombero government in November 1976, does not admit the existence of ethnic differences. The mass killings of 1972 would have altered the numerical balance by a few points in favour of the Tutsi.

An understanding of society is further complicated by divisions within the various groups. The mwami and the ganwa were Tutsi. They stood apart from the two principal Tutsi groups, the Banyaruguru ('those who came from the north'), pastoralists who started to immigrate from the early 16th century, and the Hima, also cattle raisers who began to settle in the area from the east in the 17th century and who are generally considered, at least by the Banyaruguru and by Western sociologists, of'low caste'. Neither Tutsi grouping can be definitively considered as living in a certain area of the country although the Hima are associated with the southern provinces. Readers of works recommended in the bibliography are likely to come across the term Banyabururi ('those from the province of Bururi'). It is a geographical and not an ethnic definition. The current head of state and his predecessor fall into this category and are also Tutsi-Hima. Nor are the Hutu, established in Burundi before the arrival of the Tutsi, a monolithic ethnic group. Although generally farmers and, since the development of the market economy small traders, they, too, are divided by wealth, status and geographical location. In some areas they became cattle owners with a marked tendency to intermarry with the Tutsi, in others the relationship was more likely that of serf to the Tutsi lord.

At the start of the colonial era, Burundi had been governed by a sacred monarchy for about a century. The succession was passed in turn to the four principal ganwa groupings, each descended from past rulers. The mwami was seen as a figurehead with near-divine powers and a symbol of national unity. His court was staffed by both Hutu and Tutsi officials with religious and secular functions. He delegated authority to ganwa chieftains within his kingdom: they, in turn, delegated power to sub-chieftains who tended to be responsible for one hill, then as now the basic social and economic unit in Burundi. Both the German and the Belgian administrations worked with the existing social structure and recognized the mwami as the indigenous head of the people. Indeed, there is a case for arguing that the Belgians helped the mwami to increase his authority through measures of centralization, which ironically have facilitated the consolidation of power by UPRONA in the past decade.

Probably the most important development in the colonial period in the light of events in the early 1980s was the advent of Christianity. German White Father missionaries f irst set foot in the country in 1881 but their stay was short-lived. Foreign missionaries, mostly Catholic but some Protestant, arrived in large numbers during the Belgian administration. The result has been a substantial catholicization which is among the highest in Africa. The Catholics came to play the dominant role in health care and education, especially in rural areas. Their contribution in the colonial era is not regarded favourably by the government of the Second Republic.

'We had to wait until the end of the 1950s for the creation of the first state schools in Burundi and then it was a difficult birth. Pupils in these state schools were considered atheists and their parents risked excommunication. The local clergy did not stand apart from political confrontation but openly supported political parties and opposed UPRONA which was fighting for independence. UPRONA militants were branded as communist agents.’(4)

This is a highly exaggerated version of the role of the Catholic Church, one with a partly ethnic explanation which will be more fully developed in Part II.

As has already been suggested, the assassination of Prince Rwagasore enabled Mwami Mwambutsa to profit from divisions within UPRONA and increase his political power in the years immediately after independence in July 1962. This was made abundantly clear by his reaction to the overwhelming Hutu victory in the legislative elections of May 1965. He appointed a wellknown ganwa, Leopold Biha, as prime minister in September 1965, underlining his stated refusal to'subscribe to a subterfuge of

 

*  For footnotes to Part 1 see page 6

 

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

-4-

 

 

PROVINCIAL BORDERS 1962-1984

 

 

 

 

 

_____________________________________________________________________________________________

 

- 5 -

 

 

 

language that would deprive (him) of all control, of all authority, and of all possibilities to extend (to his people) the benefit of his protection.'(5) A mutiny of Hutu military officers in October 1965 was defeated and Mwambutsa fled to Switzerland, never to return. Reprisals by the government involved the execution of more than one hundred prominent Hutu government officials and officers, which resulted in some Hutu fleeing to Rwanda. Apparent continuity was restored by the proclamation of Mwambutsa's second son, Prince Charles, as head of state in July and Mwami Ntare in September 1966. The monarchy in Burundi did not survive the year for Ntare was overthrown in a military coup by his prime minister, Captain Micombero, in November.

Although Micombero's first government represented an attempt at satisfying the various ethnic factions, appointing Hutu to five ministries and sharing the balance of eight between Tutsi-Hima and Tutsi-Banyaruguru, politics came soon to warrant the analysis of an increasing trend towards ethnic supremacy. In this development the president was heavily influenced by a small clique of Hima politicians, notably Arthémon Simbabaniye. In July 1968 eight Belgian military officers, acting as technical assistants to the armed forces, were suddenly removed. This made possible a reshuffle of senior military appointments and the introduction of new recruiting policies along thinly-veiled lines of ethnic discrimination. The discovery of a Hutu-planned coup in September 1969 provided the government with the opportunity to undertake a new set of purges. About thirty prominent Hutu, including one minister and two former ministers, were arrested, of whom twenty were summarily executed. Hutu students found it almost impossible to obtain permits to study abroad. In July 1971 it was the turn of the Tutsi-Banyaruguru : three former foreign ministers were found guilty of conspiracy and executed while nine other death sentences were commuted to life imprisonment as a result of international pressure. Ominously, the legal proceedings throughout were given extensive media coverage by the government which had the effect of raising the political tensions in the country only months before the start of massacres on an enormous scale.

 

The events of 1972(6)

 

President Micombero, apparently trying to reassert his authority over his ministers, dismissed his entire cabinet on 29 April 1972. The same evening, a Hutu rebellion erupted in Bujumbura and the southern districts of Rumonge, Nyanza Lac and Bururi.(7) This was no coincidence since Tutsi-Hirna supremacy was particularly marked in these areas. Local Hutu were joined by Hutu exiles in Tanzania and by 'Mulelists' from Zaire.(8) An estimated 10,000 Hutu indulged in the indiscriminate killings of Tutsi in the southern provinces. The rebellion was especially intense in Bururi where the dead included the provincial governor (Micombero's brother-in- and forty local administrators. In Bujumbura, attacks on the radio station and the military were easily repulsed. The subsequent despatch of a Zairian contingent of troops to Bujumbura sent in support of the government by President Mobutu Sese Seko meant that the authorities could devote their attention to the provinces. It is thought that the Hutu rebellion cost as many as 2000 lives. According to one school of thought, it is incorrect to refer to a rebellion by the Hutu and is appropriate to stress acts of provocation by a few Tutsi collaborators in the pay of the government.

The reprisals of the government were systematic by contrast and many times more severe. One of the first casualties was ex-Mwami Ntare who had been in Uganda on business. Micombero provided a guarantee for his safety in a communication of 28 March to Ugandan President Idi Amin. 'Just like you, 1 believe in God ...Your Excellency can be assured that as soon as Mr Charles Ndizeye returns back to my country he will be considered as an ordinary citizen and that as such his life and security will be assured.’(9) This did not put Ntare's mind at rest since he was called to Amin's palace under false pretences and flown to Bujumbura in the presidential aircraft on 30 March against his will. Taken to Gitega and placed under house arrest, he was executed on the night of 29 April although the government claimed initially that he died during a rebel attack on his residence. The government still maintains that Ntare was plotting insurrection. This effectively eliminated the monarchy as a political force since Mwambutsa's two sons were now dead.

On 30 April the government imposed martial law and a dawn-to- curfew. The armed forces and party youth. the JRR (Jeunesse Révolutionnaire Rwagasore), appeared to lead govemment reprisals after the Hutu rebellion.'The JRR took the lead in what is widely described as arbitrary arrests and killings. These were aggravated by personal acts of revenge, with people being denounced as plotters because of disputes over land or a cow.’(10) The reprisals, as the original rebellion, were most violent in Bururi where the army attacked Hutu without discrimination.

Elsewhere there was a clearly discernible pattern of killings of Hutu with money, education and/or government employment. The best chronicled case is that of Martin Ndayahoze, formerly general secretary of UPRONA and Minister of the Economy.(11) The government exacted its revenge with extreme cruelty. Observers in the country at the time have testified to Hutu students being pulled out of their classes and beaten to death and to Hutu functionaries being selected arbitrarily from lists and killed without even the pretence of a trial. A Tutsi witness in Bujumbura reported that they 'picked up almost all the Hutu intellectuals above the secondary school level'.(12) The scale of killings at school and universities can reliably be assessed from the registration rolls. At the Université Officielle in Bujumbura, almost one third of the students (about 120 people) were killed or disappeared. At the Athénée (secondary school) in the capital, the corresponding figure was a minimum of 300 out of 700 pupils enrolled

The churches also suffered during the reprisals. This was, regrettably, not a surprise, given their unpopularity with the Tutsi-Hima who by this stage had secured their hold over the country. Proportionately the Protestant churches were the worst affected, losing as many as 60% of their pastors in 1972. This is explained by the practice of many Protestant missionaries, most of whom came from North America, the United Kingdom and Denmark, of recommending Hutu candidates to their congregations at election times. By contrast, the Catholic priests tended to suggest tactfully that the faithful support the 'best' candidate. Religious schools received the same attention from JRR militants as secular institutions.

The victims of the reprisals were predominantly although not exclusively Hutu. There is evidence to show that the killings provided an opportunity for the settlement of old intra-Tutsi disputes. An estimated 100 Tutsi were executed at Gitega on 6 May. This is one of the few instances of the killing of Tutsi. It seems reasonable to conclude that the Hima at Gitega were resolving their differences with the Banyaruguru. By the end of June, the height of the reprisals had passed. Conservative estimates point to 80,000-100,000 deaths, including the initial Hutu rebellion. By no means fanciful reports have suggested that the figure was closer to 150,000 casualties or almost 5% of the population. In addition, about 150,000 others, again overwhelmingly Hutu, left Burundi for refuge in Rwanda, Zaire and Tanzania. A number of the refugees have since returned and the current magnitude of the problem, with its implications for domestic politics and regional stability, will be examined in Part II.

What may be literally termed as genocide was largely ignored outside the country. The UN only became involved when its services were required to assist with the enormous refugee problem. The Organization of African Unity ( OAU) meeting in Morocco in May, expressed no opinion of the killings: its former administrative general secretary, Diallo Telli, passed through Bujumbura at the time, accepted the official position that the government had responded quite legitimately to the Hutu rebellion and to a supposed call to arms from the ex-mwami, and repeated this version of events as the established facts of the case. This has made it that much more difficult for the OAU to respond now to the call for a proper investigation of the killings. Sadly the anglophone world has little interest in the small countries of francophone Africa. The role of France was not surprising to outside observers. The French government provided military assistance during and after the killings. The countries still operate a military training agreement. Belgium did at least terminate its military cooperation pact with Burundi in protest at the killings. The Catholic Church responded with a series of platitudes which denounced legalized injustice and anticipated a violent reaction. Given that the five bishops in Burundi in 1972 (two Tutsi, two Hutu and one European) would most likely have given different emphasis of the events to their superiors, the Church's rather insipid reply was predictable. The apparent indifference of the international community, especially that of Western governments. may be explained by a deeply-rooted and guilt-based fear of censuring the

 

 

_____________________________________________________________________________________________

- 6 -

 

 

conduct of nations in the developing world. This is no less the case today. The virtual absence of international protest at the time surely encouraged the government to pursue its discriminatory policies. While the official version is barely plausible to impartial observers, Burundi's bilateral and multilateral relations have not been affected.

The immediate result was that the structure of society altered more dramatically in a few months in 1972 than in the decade of independence and the more than sixty years of colonial rule that had preceded them. The domination of the Tutsi and particularly (5) by the Hima, was now nearly complete. The conclusion that the few Hutu in prominent positions have served only as window dressing for the outside world has been inescapable. It is an especially unfortunate irony that the rulers of Burundi, while denying the existence of ethnic differences, clearly felt those very divisions had to be exhibited as a public relations exercise. The surviving educated people in Hutu society were almost entirely excluded from influence in the armed forces, civil service, public sector companies and institutions of higher education. With the devastating and genocidal assault on the Hutu community in 1972 from which they have never recovered, it is understandable that the Church's prediction of a violent reaction is yet to be fulfilled.

FOOTNOTES TO PART 1

 (1) Part I is drawn heavily from Professor Rene Lemarchand's contribution to the MRG's report No 20 of July 1974, Selective Genocide in Burundi. To this authoritative account of the events of 1972 the present author has added information and insights made available to him. Part I serves as a starting point for an analysis of more recent developments in Burundi. Part II will examine the political record of the Second Republic, the policy to reduce the influence of the Catholic Church and the condition of the Burundian refugees in neighbouring countries.

(2) The World Bank's World Development Report (1985) shows Burundi as the tenth poorest nation in the world with Gross National Product per capita of $240 in 1983.

(3) The World Bank's World Bank Atlas (1974) provides the population figures but not. of course, the ethnic composition.

(4) This is a translation from the text of a public statement issued by the Burundian ambassador in Brussels on 27 August 1985, Mise au point de l'ambassade du Burundi à Bruxelles au sujet des relations entre l'église et l'état du Burundi.

(5) Rene Lemarchand, Rwanda and Burundi (London and New York), 1970, page 414.

(6) Official pronouncements under the Second Republic refer only to 'les évènements'.

(7) The 8 provinces of the Republic were increased to 15, and the 78 communes to 118 in July 1984. A governor is responsible for the administration of a province.

(8) The term is used to denote followers of Pierre Mulele, the revolutionary leader of the rural uprising in Kwilu in western Zaire in 1963. He was lured back to Kinshasa from exile in 1968 by a promise of an amnesty, accused of high treason and executed. For a partisan and orthodox Marxist evaluation of Mulele, readers should consult C. N'Dom P. Mulele assassiné - la révolution Congolaise étranglée (CEP, Brussels, 1984). In this context, the Zairian contingent supporting the Hutu were incorrectly labelled by the official media in Bujumbura. They were from the Bembe tribe across Lake Tanganyika whereas Mulele was based at the opposite end of Zaire. It has been suggested that the inaccurate description was a deliberate ruse by President Micombero to secure military support from the Zairian government.

(9) Uganda Argus 5 April 1972.

(10) Marvin Howe,'Slaughter in Burundi - how ethnic conflict erupted', New York Times, 11 June 1972.

(11) His case has been publicized by his widow, Rose Ndayahoze Karambizi. A Rwandan Tutsi, she recalls the arrest of prominent Hutu at the time in her Open letter to the Right Reverend Michael Ntuyahaga, Bishop of Bujumbura (Montreal, 24 November- 1985).

(12) Marvin Howe, op.cit.

 

 

 

PROVINCIAL BORDERS AS BEDRAWN 1984

 

 

 

 

_____________________________________________________________________________________________

 

- 7-

 

 

Part II: SINCE 1972 - THE CONSOLIDATION OF POWER BY THE MINORITY

 

The political record of the Second Republic

 

After the events of 1972 it was to be expected that the downfall of the Micombero government would be welcomed both inside and outside the country. He was replaced by his cousin, Colonel Jean- Bagaza, in a bloodless military coup on 1 November, 1976.*(1) One of the most favourable reactions to the new government came from the Catholic Church in a pastoral letter from the bishops in December.

'We would like to pay tribute to the efforts that the Second Republic is making to give the people of Burundi the structure that will enable them to follow the path towards development with dignity for all. We wish the government every success and guarantee our support for its endeavours. The Church has no other calling than to proclaim the vocation of man.'

Initially the grounds for this optimistic response were well founded. Bagaza appeared to attempt a reconciliation among opposing Tutsi groups.(2) He extended an amnesty to all Hutu refugees abroad. Shortly before the first national congress of UPRONA in December 1979, the president announced a limited amnesty for Burundi's prison population.

The establishment of the Second Republic in 1976 enabled the government to make political capital of a real or The supposed new beginning. Bagaza has been able to distance himself personally from the killings since he was out of the country in 1972. Official thinking has tended to lump together the First Republic and the colonial era as one long age of darkness. Further opportunities were presented by a new constitution, adopted by 98.6% of voters in a referendum on 18 November and promulgated on 21 November 1981. This has three aspects which are of particular interest in view of recent developments. It establishes that the Republic is a lay state, a point frequently made by the authorities in defence of its treatment of the Church.(3) Article 16 of the Constitution guarantees freedom of opinion, religion and expression with the proviso that these rights are exercised in ways established by law. This restriction allows the government considerable room for manoeuvre. Article 12 guarantees the right to liberty and security of the person.

The 1981 Constitution confirmed that UPRONA is the only recognized political party. Membership at the time of the second national congress in July 1984 stood at 1.38 million with an annual subscription of FrBu50.(4) Party statutes stipulate that anybody who is 18 years of age can be admitted to membership provided that they have never been found guilty of fraud, speculation or conduct harmful to the national economy, that they can prove their possessions have been legally acquired, and that they are well known for their loyalty to the cause of national independence and their opposition to divisive and bourgeois influences. A measure of democracy has been introduced into the party. The Central Committee, with 33 of its 70 members elected, meets every three months. In the intervening periods, decision-taking by UPRONA is the responsibility of the Political Bureau.

There are, however, justified doubts about the practice of democracy on the thousands of small hills which constitute rural Burundi. These arise because of the dearth of information on the subject and because of the extent of party membership which, according to official figures, amounted to no more than 60-65 % of the adult population in 1984. While comparing favourably to other one-party African states, such as Angola and Zambia, these figures, almost certainly overstated, reflect in part the wish of many Burundians to stay out of trouble and their recognition of an obvious means to preferment. Non-Party members do have the right to vote in National Assembly and presidential elections. At the most recent Assembly elections on 22 October 1982, 102 candidates stood for 5 2 seats. Those elected were joined by 13 deputies nominated by President Bagaza. On 31 August 1984 he was re-elected, unopposed, for a second presidential term.

Workers', women's and youth movements are integrated within UPRONA. These groups tend to be the most vocal in their support of the Second Republic and Bagaza, and have an educational role within the party which, along with the language of propaganda, is reminiscent of Eastern Europe. The workers' movement, the Union des Travailleurs du Burundi (UTB), was founded in 1967 and has today perhaps 50,000 members. Its authority is limited by the small base of salaried workers in a country with a predominantly subsistence economy. The women's movement, the Union des Femmes Burundaises (UFB), was also established in 1967. Numerically a very strong organization, it is administered in the same way as the party with a pyramidal structure from a national committee to units on the hills. The youth movement has undergone a change of name from the old JRR, which featured prominently in the killings in 1972, to the Union de la Jeunesse Révolutionnaire Burundaise (UJRB). It is represented in all secondary schools and institutions of higher education. It presents itself as the incorruptible, eternally vigilant and militant face of the Second Republic. The three movements make their own separate contributions to national congresses and are guaranteed, along with the armed forces and the provincial administration, representation in the party's ruling organs.

-Burundi is a signatory to some of the international conventions in the field of human rights. In 1977 the government ratified the International Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Racial Discrimination and the following year had no difficulty in signing the International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid. It has to date refrained from acceding to the Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, which was adopted by the UN General Assembly in December 1984 Belgium, as the UN trustee for the territory, ratified the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide but this commitment ceased to have any validity after independence and has not since been renewed. Burundi has never signed the UN's International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and is one of a small minority of African states to have neither signed nor ratified the OAU's Africa Charter of Human and People's Rights.

The distribution of power in government, in the legislature and in the provincial administration under the Second Republic, however, is such that the Tutsi-Hirna supremacy has evidently been maintained. A precise ethnic categorization is not possible since the government does not acknowledge ethnic distinctions and the mere mention of the country's glaring divided loyalties could well prompt a charge of incitement to racial hatred. Nonetheless, it appears that the Hutu, who account for roughly 80% of the population, hold only 4 ministries out of 20 in the government, 7 seats out of 65 in the National Assembly and 2 places out of 65 in the Central Committee. Other than the province of Bubanza, they are not represented among the 15 provincial governors.

It can also be concluded from the limited evidence that discrimination in the educational system has become a hallmark of the Second Republic. A steady stream of Hutu secondary school students arrived in neighbouring countries from 1973 to 1980.(5) Limited budgetary resources restrict the access of pupils to secondary education. Of an average of 36,000 who currently complete their primary education every year, about 4000 are admitted to the next level. It is reported that the 7 regional and 15 cantonal inspectors who determine which students pass to the secondary level are currently all Tutsi. Consistently and markedly the Hutu are underrepresented. One explanation is to be found in the reluctance of many Hutu parents, mindful of the pattern of the killings in 1972, to allow their children to submit themselves for the higher level. Other parents optimistically pay the fees for the sixth year at primary school in the hope that their children pass to the secondary stage. Also, the significant number of students from the southern provinces in the secondary schools in the north (and most populated part) of Burundi suggests that Tutsi-Hima parents have an advantage in gaining access to the necessarily limited opportunities. As for higher education, the record of the Second Republic is certainly good in terms of substantially higher allocations from the state budget yet it appears that only one third of the students at the University of Burundi in Bujumbura are Hutu As a general educational principle, the government has pushed the indigenous language, Kirundi, at the expense of French. The latter has now been almost entirely abandoned in primary schools, which has the disadvantage (for the pupils) of making the population more insular and less informed on events outside the country. Without a knowledge of French, their employment prospects in the modern sector are limited.

The economic policies of the Second Republic are perhaps best characterized by the official enthusiasm for villagization, cooperatives and a dominant role for the state in the economy although the

 

* For footnotes to Part 11 see page 12

 

 

______________________________________________________________________________________________

 

- 8 -

 

 

government's agreements in August 1986 with the International Monetary Fund (IMF), which involve an ordinary standby loan and the first credit under the Fund's new structural adjustment facility, suggest that a change in direction is likely.(6) Villagization, adopted by the first national congress in 1979, means the regrouping of peasants to form new self-sufficient units of production. The government argues that individual farming enterprise in Burundi is no longer appropriate in conditions of substantial demographic growth in an already densely populated country, of soil erosion and of declining yields on overworked agricultural land. It established a special fund which gives priority in lending to those resettling in villages. By the end of 1983, 102 villages, each accommodating between 50 and 200 families, had been created, notably in the south. The development of the programme has since slowed, not least because of the reluctance of some peasants to abandon their traditional habits and of their suspicion that the, movement represents another move by the government to regulate their lives.

 

The government's encouragement of cooperatives has not attracted the same level of unpopularity, ostensibly because it does not require the uprooting of established farming communities. A law of February 1981 defined the general statutes of a cooperative. Soon afterwards the Ministry of Rural Development created a cell to provide appropriate training. By the end of 1984, more than 200 cooperatives had been formed, mostly involved in production or marketing or distribution.The government is anxious to encourage multifunctional cooperatives but is restricted by lack of funding. The system has the advantage of cutting out the middleman since the public agency for the particular commodity buys direct from the cooperative but it co