Table of Contents
At times, people are quick to dismiss signs of authoritarianism mainly because it is convenient for them to do so. The recent ruling by the Supreme Court in Rwanda that insulting the President is a crime clearly reveals the side of President Paul Kagame that does not tolerate opposing views.
Making a piece of law that criminalizes criticizing the president is evidently a sign of deception from the top echelons of the political order. It means that there is a prevailing fear to tolerating alternative views.
The Supreme Court in Rwanda rejected a challenge to a law which says that insulting the president is a crime. The law was introduced last year, and the implications of this draconian law means that a person faces between five and seven years in prison if found guilty of the offence.
This shows democratic values are ignored in Rwanda, possibly for the convenience of economic development. It also shows that Rwanda is ruled with an iron fist veiled in legislation. There are always laws which make one afraid of challenging the established regime.
The ruling also leads to the question - do Rwandans genuinely love Paul Kagame or they fear him?
The African Exponent Weekly
Every week, get a digest of Top African News and Articles from The African Exponent.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
It is farcical to purport democratic values when the fundamental right to present alternative views to the president is blatantly ignored. It is obvious that President Paul Kagame has done much to the economic development of Rwanda, and bringing stability to the country after a period of a devastating genocide. But to hail his authoritarian side is tantamount to endorsing democratic and human rights violations.
Kagame's government has been notoriously known for imprisoning political opponents. Clearly, his government believes in ruling with an iron fist. They do not want to be challenged.
This law is unconstitutional because of how it disregards the fundamental right to freedom of expression. However the Supreme Court said that the law stands due to the responsibility that the office of the President bears.
Not to go overboard, the same court ruled that a law which prohibits writing articles or drawing cartoons that humiliate MPs, ministers or other government officials should be annulled.
Header image credit - BBC
Pro Tip: Become a Blogger
Publish your own articles by creating your blog on The African Exponent. More info
Next From Your Saved Articles
Log in or create an account to add articles to your saved articles list.
Related Articles
In China last year, a former vice-mayor was senten…
A Russian businessman, notorious for interfering i…
Rwanda has taken a very decisive, bold step to abo…
Family planning is a conversation everyone should …
Tony Blair wanted Mbeki to help him remove Mugabe …
Most Read Articles
WHO met and WHO decided to chop African foreskins.…
A look at costumes from within and without Africa …
The presidency has defended the appointment, sayin…
Nigerian inventor Jerry Mallo has created the firs…
It has been an impressive year for Akech who won M…
More Articles
Looking to cut down on your home's energy consumpt…
Due to climate change, Southern Africa has been af…
Nairobi has the most expensive international schoo…
Britain defiles UN and International Court of Just…