Evaluation Report Promotion of Unity and Reconciliation in Rwanda and its Impact on Transitional Justice

Map: Courtesy of the University of Texas Libraries

All designations used in this report are supposed to refer to the terms as used in the Manual “Monitoring of effects (movie) of the zivik Funding Programme” www.ifa.de/pdf/zivik/movie_en.pdf

(Version with interleaves to keep specific information in confidence, interleaves are marked […], zivik Funding Programme, April 2009) Authors Dr. Susanne Buckley-Zistel, Germany Dr. Bernardin Rutwaza, Rwanda

1

2

Contents

Abbreviations 4

AMI – Buckley 5 0. Introduction 5 1. Current Context 5

Conflict situation, conflict scenarios, influential key actors, peacebuilding needs 5 Starting points for a change process 6

2. Project Context 7 Initial situation of the project 7 Project approach and its relevance 7

3. Impact of the project 9 Immediate positive intended effects and contributions by key actors 9 Perception of the local population of the project activities 10 Identification of risks for the project success, conditions for the project success 10 Lessons learned 11

4. Conclusions and Recommendations 11 Sustainability of the project 11 Projects contribution towards Transitional Justice 12 Recommendations 12

AMI – Rutwaza 14 0. Introduction 14 1. Organisational Analysis 14

Mandate and main objectives 14 The Association's vision and mission 15 Organisational structure 15 Background of the project 15 Administration and management of the project 15 Project funding and objectives 16

2. Implementation of the project 17 The achievements of the project 17 Effectiveness and efficiency: Working methods and procedures 19 Choice of participants and key actors 20 The role of the project partners 20 Mechanisms of planning, monitoring and evaluation 21 Media coverage and public relations 21

3

3. Networking and cooperation with other actors 22 4. Plans and future prospects 22 5. Conclusions and recommendations 23

Conclusions 23 Recommendations 23

Ibuka – Buckley 26 0. Introduction 26 1. Current Context 26

Conflict situation, conflict scenarios, influential key actors, peacebuilding needs 26 Starting points for a change process 28

2. Project Context 28 Role and ethic dimension of Ibuka 28 Initial situation of the project 29 Project approach and its relevance 30

3. Impacts of the project 31 Immediate positive intended effects and contributions by key actors 31 Problems and risks of the project that could arise in the intended change process 33 Lessons learned 34

4. Conclusions and Recommendations 34 Sustainability of the project 34 Project contribution towards Transitional Justice 35 Recommendations 35

Ibuka – Rutwaza 37 0. Introduction 37 1. Organisational Analysis 37

Mandate and main objectives 37 The Association’s vision and mission 37 Organisational structure 38 Background of the project 38 Administration and management of the project 38 Project funding and objectives 39

2. Implementation of the project 39 The achievements of the project 39 Effectiveness and efficiency: Working methods and procedures 40 Choice of participants and key actors 40 The role of the project partners 41 Mechanisms of planning, monitoring and evaluation 41

4

Media coverage and public relations 42 3. Networking and cooperation with other actors 42 4. Planning and future prospects 42 5. Conclusions and recommendations 43

Conclusions 43 Recommendations 43

Bibliography 45 Abbreviations

AMI : Association Modeste et Innocent

APSS : Animateur Psycho – Social

APTE : Animation des Projets, Transfert de compétence, Evaluation

ARCT : Association Rwandaise des Conseillers en Traumatisme

asbl : Association Sans But Lucratif

AUR : Association (club) pour l’Unité et Réconciliation

CNUR : Commission Nationale pour l’Unité et la Réconciliation

CPST : counsellor for psychosocial trauma

CTPS : Conseiller en Traumatisme Psycho – Social

EUR : Euros

FARG : Fonds d’Assistance aux Rescapés du Génocide

Frw : Francs rwandais

NGUR : Noyau Générateur d’Unité et Réconciliation

ONG : Organisation Non Gouvernementale

PSER : Planning – Monitoring – Evaluation – Reporting

PSW : psychosocial worker

SW : social worker

TIG : Travaux d’Intérêt Général

TS : Travailleur Social

5

AMI – Buckley 0. Introduction This report evaluates the project “Projet de promotion de l’unité et réconciliation dans le district de Huye” implemented by the Rwandan NGO AMI (Association Modeste et Inno-cent) and funded by zivik Funding Programme of the Institut für Auslandsbeziehungen (ifa, Institute for Foreign Cultural Relations). The evaluation was conducted in Rwanda, be-tween 23.9.-4.10.2008 and included interviews with AMI staff and local beneficiaries, their partners APTE, as well as with a number of external resource people.1 In addition, project documentation made available by zivik Funding Programme was consulted. This evaluation report focuses on the wider question whether the project contributes to transitional justice, including justice, truth and reconciliation.2 Transitional justice refers to ways of dealing with the past of a violent conflict or a dictatorial regime and has gained much currency amongst Western donors and practitioners in recent years. In this sense, ‘transition’ indicates the move from violence to peaceful coexistence while ‘justice’ is understood in both a punitive and/or restorative way. With this framework in mind this evaluation report (1) illustrates the current situation in Rwanda in order (2) to put AMI’s project into context. This will lead (3) to analysing the impact of the project and (4) to formalising some recommendations. Since the project is in a very early phase this report can only indicate tendencies regarding its potential impact. 1. Current Context Conflict situation, conflict scenarios, influential key actors, peacebuilding needs In 1994, Tutsi and moderate Hutu where massacred by mainly Hutu génocidaires in one of history’s most horrific crimes. Fourteen years later the society remains divided along many lines, including between survivors of the genocide, perpetrators, their families and rela-tions, prisoners and those released to conduct community work as a form of punishment (so called TIG). At present, the lingering conflict manifests itself inter alia in the intimida-tion of survivors; lay judges and witness to the genocide who are prepared to testify in the

1 Please refer to the appendix for more details. 2 This report is written in full awareness of the limits of the concept Transitional Justice and its am-bivalent impact on post-conflict societies. For further reading see Susanne Buckley-Zistel: Transi-tional Justice als Weg zu Frieden und Sicherheit. Möglichkeiten und Grenzen, SFB Governance Working Paper Series, Nr. 15, DFG-Sonderforschungsbereich 700, Berlin, Juli 2008.

6

local village tribunals Gacaca; the unjust accusation and imprisonment of individuals due to Gacaca; the lack of remorse about genocide crimes by some of the perpetrators and an at times lingering genocide ideology; as well as the inability to discuss and mourn the death of Hutu during and after the genocide. In particular, during the national commemo-ration week in April grief is great and tensions high. This seems to be most pertinent in the newly composed Southern Province of Rwanda where the largest number of post-genocide related atrocities have been recorded and where Huye district, where the project under review is operating, is located. Many of these antagonisms are deeply enshrined in the relationship between individuals at the local level. Even though national developments have an effect on local co-existence this is mostly the case when they affect the relationships directly, such as changes in Gacaca laws. Elections without much competition, such as for instance the recent parlia-mentarian election in September 2008 where the outcome was predictable, only have a limited effect on the daily life in rural areas. Moreover, after the genocide there has been a tendency to consider all Hutu guilty of gen-ocide crimes although not all Hutu participated in the killings and some helped to save Tutsi, at times risking their own lives. Their personal relationship to Tutsi proved to be stronger than the encouragement to kill and they provide an important example for alter-native attitudes and the dissent from manipulation in Rwanda. In the climate of mistrust after the genocide, this historic fact has often been forgotten. Starting points for a change process Today, in light of the prevailing tensions in Rwanda, it is important to focus on the above mentioned moderate community members since they can contribute to making a differ-ence through functioning as role models for a less antagonistic social structure. Since they do not fit easily into the dichotomy of victims and perpetrators they can serve to build a bridge between survivors and the family of perpetrators, if not perpetrators themselves. This recognition provides the point of departure for AMI’s project. In addition, there seems to be a general reluctance to talk about the past of the genocide amongst Rwandans leading to the perpetuation of stereotypes and aversion. An open dia-logue is needed to address at least some of the problems and to remove misperceptions and suspicion. Yet this can only happen in ‘safe spaces’ and in groups where people have learned to trust each other, potentially leading to a spill-over effect to include more and more community members. This, too, is a concern of AMI’s project.

7

2. Project Context Initial situation of the project The project was implemented in 2007. Its first step was to collect and record testimonies about cases where Hutu saved Tutsi during the 1994 genocide and to bring these people together in so-called ‘juste’ groups. While AMI is not the only organisation to concentrate on these “heroes” of the genocide, they do so less in (and for) the public eye but at the level of the communities where the revelations can have the greatest impact. In particular the negative repercussions of the Gacaca tribunals, such as at present disputes about restitution for the destruction of poverty which proves difficult against the backdrop of abject poverty in rural Rwanda, appear to be a major source of conflict in local communi-ties at present. Even though the Gacaca tribunals are coming to a close it can be assumed that the antagonisms, now deeply enshrined in the relationships between local residents, will prevail, maintaining the project’s relevance for the future. Moreover, speaking about the past is not easy in Rwanda. For survivors, it is often related to painful memories and trauma. Since hate and ethnic identification remain strong, openness can potentially lead to mutual verbal attack and renewed resentment. Project approach and its relevance The overall focus of the project is to encourage social change and the transformation of the antagonistic relationship between the various parties in the divided society as a result of the genocide and its aftermath. Through their trainings, but also through bringing together survivors with their protectors, AMI aims at influencing the attitude in the com-munities in order to reduce antagonism. Through setting up groups and clubs, which also cultivate together and meet to discuss community conflicts, AMI seeks to provide a safe environment for people to meet across ethnic and conflict lines, and to set an example for non-members that it is possible to go against the grain and have positive and functional relationships between Hutu and Tutsi. The positive – rather than always negative – stories of the ‘juste’ groups potentially contribute to an increase in self-esteem, to the recogni-tion that not all Rwandans, Hutu or Tutsi, are bad, as well as to the belief that another society is possible in the future. AMI enhances this further by encouraging people to con-sider what they have in common, rather than what divides them. Importantly, the aim of AMI is not to solve problems on behalf of their target groups, but to enable them to do so themselves in order to guarantee ownership. AMI thus takes much time to for this process by first conducting an analysis of the conflicting issues and allowing each party to express themselves in private. In particular against the backdrop of lingering suspicion this touches at the heart of current conflicts and is a vital contribution.

8

In the context of Rwanda’s conflicts, AMI deals with the most relevant actors. The main stakeholders of AMI’s project are the groups of animators and groups for unity and recon-ciliation at the village, cell and sector level; the NGUR (Noyaux Générateurs d’unité et reconciliation); the Associations for Unity and Reconciliation (AUR, also often referred to as ‘clubs’), administrative authorities, officers of the National Unity and Reconciliation Com-mission (NURC) at district level; as well as at times other local NGOs with similar objec-tives. The NGUR groups and AUR clubs are comprised of Hutu and Tutsi, in particular sur-vivors and their protectors. The project thus starts with those who already have a positive attitude to training and coexistence, since they protected Tutsi in the genocide, and serve as a first entry point. Nevertheless, ex-prisoners and TIGsts are also addressed since they encounter many difficulties when returning to their home cells, including hostilities, isola-tion and poverty. AMI’s project follows an inclusive strategy which is not often practised in Rwanda. In 2004, a punctual survey by the author of about 20 NGOs mandated with contributing to recon-ciliation illustrated that they almost exclusively focused on one section of the population, often reflecting one party to the conflict: survivors, perpetrators, prisoners, orphans, child-ren headed households etc. In this sense AMI’s approach to include a wide range of stake-holders is not only relevant but also an exemption. Through trying to bring all parties together their work is more difficult and time consuming, but also more promising regard-ing the social change the project seeks to affect. The zivik funded project is based on the assumptions that social change can be affected by providing an environment where groups of selected people from various backgrounds – in particular survivors and their protectors – can engage frankly in order to discuss communi-ty concerns and, in doing so, reduce antagonism, stereotypes and conflicts. Moreover, it is assumed that these groups serve as an encouragement for other members of the commu-nity to question their attitudes towards others, e.g. survivors, ex-prisoners or Hutu and Tutsi more generally. Even though the project is in a very early phase the impression gained during the evalua-tion trip suggests strongly that these hypotheses are correct and realistic, and that AMI is in a process of realising its objectives, as discussed in the following section.

9

3. Impact of the project Immediate positive intended effects and contributions by key actors The combination of training and accompaniment offered by AMI to local communities (cells) in the Huye district of Rwanda’s Southern Province promises to lead to a great im-pact. Even though the project only started in 2007, first results are already discernable and all participants are positive that it will be both consolidated and deepened. The following provides some anecdotal evidence from my interviews; there was however a remarkable similarity between all groups and clubs suggesting that the findings can be generalised. All groups NGUR I visited were cultivating their fields together and had a small fund in which they paid between 100-500 Rwandan Francs during their regular weekly or monthly meetings.3 The funds were less to sustain the working of the group but to help each other out in times of need. In addition to the practical benefits, working together has also sym-bolic meaning and provides an opportunity to engage informally. It is thus a good way of bringing people together voluntarily to reduce fear and mistrust, as well as sending a message to other community members. They serve as role models that a different way of living together is possible and, according to the interviews, there is some interest by non-members to join the groups. Importantly, there seems to be a high level of local ownership in the project, which is cru-cial for its impact and sustainability. According to my interviewees, there is much volun-tary engagement; the NGUR groups and AUR clubs plan constructive activities and form new groups themselves. They hold regularly meetings where they discuss current conflicts – often revolving around economic but also social issues – and try to solve them with their own capacities. One example is the way the conflict-prone discussion about restitution payments as Gacaca sentence is addressed in one of the groups. Thanks to the advice to AMI they insist on the acceptance of responsibility by the perpetrator while engaging in a mediation process with the prospect of potentially reducing the fine or turning some of it into manual labour. My interviewees also stated that in 2007, AMI started an awareness campaign one week prior to the genocide commemorations in April. It was generally agreed that this proved to be very effective regarding the reduction of antagonism in the community – which tends to exceed this time of the year – and that fewer attacks were recorded. On a more general level, one group member in Mwurire explained that AMI helped her to deal with her anger and hatred against all Hutu and that she realised that through hatred she merely perpetu-ates the conflict.

3 Please refer to appendix for details about the various groups and locations.

10

The Mwendo group was proud to explain that in their cell, the Gacaca tribunals were most effective. Initially people did not like the tribunals but due to the training by AMI they started appreciating them, leading to very good results in trying suspects, in particular be-cause they realised the value of plea bargaining, confession and apology. A male survivor described how his family was coercing him to testifying against a Hutu even though he was not sure whether the person was culpable. The training by AMI helped him not to give in to the demands to give false testimony and the person was later proven to be innocent. In sum, AMI is trying to create a critical mass to affect change. Even though this is a very long-term process, first traces are already discernable, which is a major achievement. In-terviewees agreed that their environment is far from perfect at present, but that changes have occurred and are starting to manifest themselves increasingly. One interviewee in Buvumo stated that AMI has begun a process of attitude change which cannot be reversed. Perception of the local population of the project activities According to the interviewees the project has a positive impact on community relations in general. In Mwendo, a group of NGUR stated that in cases where survivors and ex-prison-ers were not greeting each other, the intervention of AMI led to the fact that they now at least acknowledge each other’s presence. During interviews, a consensus prevailed that AMI’s work facilitates communication between group members and across group bounda-ries. Group members stated that they feel less isolated than before AMI’s intervention, that a strong bond developed between them and that the first case of intermarriage occur. Personal injuries and trauma are also address in the groups and members try to help each other individually to come to terms with their past. Moreover, all groups visit old and sick people, including survivors, to assist them. In one group in Nyumba a member gave up her right to the group’s fund so that the money could be given to a vulnerable person. If a prisoner has been released and returns to the community, they accompany him to help with re-integration and economic problems, in one case a group even collected money towards a health insurance for a released prisoner. In Mwurire cell, AMI’s training was extended to a school where students now learn to live together peacefully. Since some children are not able to go to school due to cattle herding and other responsibilities, the programme is being extended to them, too. Moreover, the Mwendo group organised an event, on their own initiative, to which all members of the community were invited, regardless of their background, and where beer was shared Identification of risks for the project success, conditions for the project success A current challenge for AMI is how to enlarge the local groups without destabilising them. Generally, AMI follows an inclusive approach but this might not always be good for the respective groups which have developed trust and a mode of being together.

11

Lessons learned One lesson AMI learned from its past is that it is crucial to maintain a good relationship with authorities. The organisation was suspended for some time on accounts of fostering genocide ideology such was justified on the suspect of being in accordance with the new political party PDR Ubuyanja which was founded by the former president Pasteur Bizimun-gu and was banned by the State of Rwanda. The motive of that suspension was due to an unclarity about the Kirundi word “Ubuyanja” which signified in AMI´s understanding the “power of living” and which AMI used since 2000 but was used as well as a nomination for this political party. Since this could not be further from its objectives, AMI now makes an explicit effort to cooperate with authorities on the district and cell level. It has a very good relationship with the director for good governance of Huye District, as well as with the regional officer of the National Truth and Reconciliation Commission. Both see AMI’s work as an extension to their own efforts and seem grateful that the NGO is able to have an impact at the grassroots, which is often not possible through their own interventions. 4. Conclusions and Recommendations Overall, AMI left a very good impression in the context of this evaluation, in particular regarding the achievement of its objectives to contribute to social change. The organisa-tion dares to address the most prominent conflict lines in Rwanda, which is rare – and hence extremely relevant – in the present context. Their inclusive approach of addressing key actors from both Hutu and Tutsi communities, and bringing them together to facili-tate a dialogue, is an exception compared to other NGOs working in the field and has great potential. The NGO itself is highly reflective and committed, as well as aware of its own strengths and limits, and adjusts its project if and when necessary. I therefore highly recommend funding AMI in the future. Sustainability of the project Regarding the sustainability of local actors and their sustainability, the NGUR groups have been working without much direct engagement of AIM for up to two years, which is a positive indicator. At present, at this very early stage of the project, they do not seem to be able to function entirely without the intervention of AMI. Nevertheless, it is very likely that their collaboration will be consolidated within one to two years. As far as the AUR clubs are concerned some of those we met are already working fairly independently from AIM and, even though they would appreciate more training and guidance, are highly likely to be self-reliant in the long-run. The project’s sustainability is moreover guaranteed by the

12

fact that AMI does not simply provide training, but that it follows up and accompanies the trainees and their groups. This is done by regular visits as well as by ad hoc advice if and when requested. Projects contribution towards Transitional Justice To return to the question whether AMI contributes to Transitional Justice in Rwanda it can be concluded that AMI appears to have an impact on the reconciliation process, bordering on issues of justice and truth if and when they occur in this context. Transitional Justice is not necessarily a good vehicle for affecting social change and conflict transformation, but might provoke the opposite if justice is understood in punitive terms, i.e. if it aims to punish a crime. Through AMI’s focus on reconciliation justice is less a matter of courts and tribunals but of finding some consensus between the parties involved through enabling them to communicate with each other. This approach is referred to as restorative justice since it aims at restoring social relationship rather than punishing individual perpetrators. This does of course not suggest that AMI does not consider punishment as appropriate, but rather that its project focuses on both getting people to accept culpability as well as reducing antagonism in the communities. This is a very important effort and rare in Rwanda. While there are a number of NGOs which attempt to work at this level, as well as the National Unity and Reconciliation Commission, AMI portrays a true commitment to its objectives and a sound professionalism which serve as a basis for its success. Recommendations • AMI now has to consider how to consolidate its current phase. There seems to be some

demand to start more groups in other cells. This would however run the risk that AMI spreads itself too widely and that the depth of its work suffers. Recommendation: The organisation should consider how it can reinforce what it has achieved so far. It seems that the ratio of AMI animator and cells is very low, so that AMI could e.g. consider enlarging its pool of animators.

• AMI’s greatest risk at present is its organisational sustainability regarding its funding. By far most of its financial support is provided by zivik Funding Programme so that the organisation heavily depends on this one donor. The fact that zivik has a funding cycle of one year is moreover detrimental to the work of AMI, in particular since affecting social change is a long term endeavour. Recommendation: AMI should make an effort to find other sources of funding to secure its budget longer-term and with more stability – while zivik should think of ways and means to assist this process through lobbying on the NGOs behalf and put-ting AMI in contact with other potential donors.

13

• Despite AMI’s efforts on the social level sustainable peace in Rwanda is closely linked to poverty reduction. Even though the capital is growing in apparent prosperity, the people in the countryside remain severely impoverished. As a consequence, poverty was an often cited concern during my interviews and requests were made that AMI should engage in development projects. Recommendation: AMI should avoid extending its work in the direction of economic development. The NGOs has specialised knowledge and experiences in social matters and including economic concerns would change the dynamic of its work considerably. Alternatively, AMI could cooperate with development projects and help to design them in a way that contributes to AMI’s objectives.

14

AMI – Rutwaza 0. Introduction The project for the Promotion of Unity and Reconciliation in Huye District has been imple-mented by the non-profit organisation Association Modeste et Innocent (AMI) since January 2007 with funding from zivik Funding Programme. The external evaluation which is the subject of this report was carried out between September 29 and October 3, 2008 and in line with its terms of reference aimed to evaluate the usefulness, the methodology, the intervention strategy and the quality of the project in the context of Transitional Justice in Rwanda. The aim of this evaluation was to establish: (1) whether the project had been conducted in an efficient and effective manner, and (2) the extent to which the specific methodology used and the intervention strategy had contributed to justice, reconciliation and truth in the context of Transitional Justice. The work was carried out by two independent consultants and the evaluation report is divided into two parts: ‘The project’s contribution in the context of Transitional Justice’ and ‘Operation of the project’. The methodology employed primarily consisted of docu-mentary analysis, interviews with the entire project staff and APTE, the technical project partner that provides back-up, as well as interviews and meetings with beneficiaries of the project and other partners (official bodies and the National Commission for Unity and Reconciliation). This report concentrates on the operational aspects of the project and comprises the following sections: (1) Description of AMI and of the project (2) Implementa-tion of the project (3) Networked operations and cooperation with other actors (4) Plan-ning and future prospects and (5) Conclusions and recommendations. 1. Organisational Analysis Mandate and main objectives AMI (Association Modeste et Innocent) is a non-profit association founded on February 1, 2000 at the initiative of Mr Laurien Ntezimana (a lay theologian) in memory of the late Rev. Modeste Mungwarareba (who died in 1999) and Mr Innocent Samusoni (a genocide victim who died in April 1994). The AMI Association came into being as a result of peace research initiated by the three above-mentioned people under the auspices of the Service d’Animation Théologique of the Catholic diocese of Butare. The aim of AMI is to ‘promote the fundamental right and duty of human beings - the right to wellbeing (physical, emoti-

15

onal, mental and spiritual health) and the duty to contribute (positive involvement in eco-nomic, political, cultural and social affairs)’. In January 2002 AMI was forced by the authorities to suspend its activities, having been falsely accused of endangering national security: its leader and two employees were imprisoned for a month and placed under house arrest for 18 months. Thanks to the intervention of the ombudsman, it was possible to resume activities in April 2004. The Association's vision and mission AMI works to establish lasting peace in society. To this end it seeks the positive and com-plete transformation of society’s problems through non-violent means. To achieve this AMI has a fourfold approach: (a) building the capacity of individuals for personal transfor-mation, (b) mobilising the organisations of civil society to work for a balanced society, (c) intensifying cooperation and solidarity among those instrumental in bringing about social change, and (d) helping to find non-violent solutions to conflict situations. Organisational structure AMI is made up of 53 members, including 18 women. The General Assembly is the Associa-tion’s principal body and holds ordinary meetings twice a year. The Association is managed by the Administrative Board comprising five people elected by the General Assembly for a period of three years. Two auditors appointed annually by the Administrative Board have the task of regularly auditing the management of the Association’s finances and other assets. The AMI Coordination has a permanent staff and is the executive body for the Asso-ciation’s activities, in the form of diverse services and projects. AMI currently has a total permanent staff of 14, including six women. Background of the project The idea for the project came about in 2004 (when the Association resumed its activities following suspension by the authorities) after it was discovered that there was a general tendency in the country to assume that all Hutus has taken part in the genocide. The idea of the project was to identify people who had acted humanely in saving Tutsis and to pub-licise positive eyewitness accounts which put the situation into perspective. The project was submitted to zivik Funding Programme in 2005 and finally launched in 2007, against the difficult background of the Gacaca trials. Administration and management of the project The project has a Coordination which includes a project coordinator, an accounts secretary and a supervisor who is also the AMI coordinator. The work of the project is completely independent, but follows the spirit and philosophy of AMI.

16

The project has a total staff of six full-time employees (or 43% of AMI staff), of whom four are promoters responsible for the implementation of the project in the field. The project’s technical staff has experience in social work and have been given training in a number of subjects relevant to its aims. The project also benefits from the specialist knowledge exist-ing generally within AMI. At the grassroots, implementation of the project is currently in the hands of 95 volunteer promoters of unity and reconciliation based in the cells and 142 promoters based in settlements, of whom 62 are women. The voluntary promoters have an adequate level of basic training and are generally well accepted by the community. Project funding and objectives Over this two-year period, the project has received funding […]. zivik Funding Programme is AMI’s main financial sponsor: zivik alone provided more than 70% of the Association’s total income […]. AMI’s second-largest sponsor is Misereor (Germany), which provides some 16% of its income (2008). AMI contributes to the project in kind and financially. […] For 2007 the project had the following objectives: (a) to gather and utilise accounts of heroism during the genocide; (b) to promote collaboration between survivors and their protectors in the promotion of unity and reconciliation; (c) to set up associations for unity and reconciliation and put them into operation throughout the area covered by the pro-ject; and (d) to establish a frank dialogue between the different categories of the target population. The following outcomes are expected of the project in 2008: (1) the Generative Cores for Unity and Reconciliation (NGURs) already created are to become operational and encourage a sense of unity and reconciliation among the local population; (2) a strength-ening of the capacity of trained promoters for analysis and intervention; (3) a strengthen-ing of the ability of local associations to promote unity and reconciliation so that they can intervene effectively in the struggle against ethnic discrimination and for the eradication of genocide ideology in their own localities; (4) greater involvement of the administrative authorities in the promotion of unity and reconciliation in their areas; (5) the population of Huye District to be kept regularly informed and mobilised in favour of reconciliation; and (6) the fostering of a common interest in healing psychological damage, to guarantee the rational management of the post-Gacaca period among the population of the project’s 26 target cells.

17

2. Implementation of the project The achievements of the project The area covered by the project’s activities is Huye District in the Southern Province of Rwanda, made up of 14 sectors and 77 cells. After two years the project is active in all sec-tors but only in 28 cells, and thus covers about 36% of the district. Ninety-five voluntary promoters of unity and reconciliation operate in these cells (an average of three people/ cell) and have facilitated the placing of other promoters in the settlements (currently 142). These cells have seen the creation of NGURs4 (Generative Cores for Unity and Reconcilia-tion), which bring together survivors of the 1994 genocide and those who protected them5, along with Associations (clubs) for Unity and Reconciliation (AUR). These groups function as an opportunity for dialogue, reflection and action in the field of unity and reconciliation. There are currently 28 NGURs (one in each cell), with 861 members (including 467 survivors), 491 women and 370 men, and 12 AURs6. The achievements listed below indicate the results of the project: a) Training sessions: training for the project’s permanent employees (2007: 3 days on the

management and transformation of conflict, 2008: 5 days on Good Power, 2 days on the management and transformation of conflict, 3 days on the community approach to healing emotional damage); training on a number of themes for the voluntary pro-moters of unity and reconciliation (2007: 6 days of training for 45 promoters, 2008: 5 days of training for 90 promoters); training for local authorities (2008: 2 days of train-ing for the authorities in Rwaniro Sector on the role of UBUNTU and Good Power in the management of public affairs, 6 days of training for 45 people in the prevention, management and transformation of conflict), training for the beneficiaries of the project (2008: 28 NGURs with around 1,120 members received 2 days of training on a number of themes, 16 young survivors from the DUHARANIREKUBAHO association received 4 days of training on the healing of emotional damage).

b) Conferences, reflection (2007: 2 reflection workshops organised at local level, 14 con-ferences organised by the project attended by an estimated audience of between 800 and 1,200 people, most of them authorities and opinion leaders, meetings and confer-ences organised at the grassroots by voluntary promoters; 2008: reflection as part of a

4 The aim of the NGURs is primarily to embody unity and reconciliation and to act as models in their communities. The NGURs have a variety of activities: raising awareness among the community with regard to unity and reconciliation, mutual assistance among members and for other members of the community such as survivors, the destitute etc., social gatherings, commercial activities etc. 5 Some groups include other interested members who wish to contribute to the promotion of unity and reconciliation, such as former prisoners of the genocide. 6 The evaluation mission has no data on AUR members.

18

process of detraumatisation and the integration of former prisoners of the genocide7, preparation for a national round table on the process of unity and reconciliation in Rwanda scheduled to be held from December 9 to 11, 2008).

c) Radio programmes broadcast by Radio Salus8 (2007: 4 programmes, 2008: one pro-gramme entitled UBUNTU usually broadcast twice monthly).

d) The development and dissemination of instruments for community awareness-raising and mobilisation: (2007: 700 copies of a leaflet in the local language entitled ‘What we have in common is much more important than what divides us’, a number of articles distributed to local authorities and opinion leaders; 2008: 500 posters on solidarity in mourning and remembering the genocide, 300 tee-shirts, the production of a 26-min-ute documentary film entitled ‘Good Power in the service of lasting peace in Rwanda’).

e) Official publications (2007: utilising eyewitness accounts of survivors and their protec-tors and publication in the local language of 800 copies of a booklet on this subject9 containing the principal statements of each pair10; 2008: 1,000 copies in the national language of a booklet whose title translates as ‘The fundamental right/duty of human beings’11.

f) Campaigns for generally raising awareness among and mobilising the population: (2007: a seven-day campaign for raising awareness with regard to unity and reconcili-ation on the theme of ‘What we have in common is much more important than what divides us’ organised by the cells and including conferences, poetry/dance/theatre competitions/football matches, and the distribution of messages of reconciliation and social gatherings attended by more than 15,000 people; 2008: an awareness campaign as preparation for the period of remembering the genocide on the subject: ‘Let us remember the genocide together in order to heal our wounds together’, with a large number of activities organised in 14 cells).

g) Ongoing monitoring and support at the grassroots (regular support for activities in the NGURs and Clubs for Unity and Reconciliation from the promoters of unity and recon-ciliation, mediation by the promoters in the cells, regular visits by the project promo-ters to the various cells).

7 Raising awareness of injury among all categories, a separate dialogue with former prisoners and genocide survivors and then dialogue with the two groups together. 8 Radio station of the National University of Rwanda which broadcasts as far as Butare (AMI headquarters). 9 Booklet entitled: ‘Ubuntu mu bihe bikomeye: Icyo dupfana kiruta kure icyo dupfa’ / ‘Ubuntu at critical moments: what we have in common is much more important than what divides us’. 10 Statement by a survivor and his protector presented together. 11 This booklet deals with Rwanda’s ethnic problems and divisionary ideology and suggests solutions through the promotion of UBUNTU.

19

h) Project management: regular planning and self-evaluation meetings, regular meet-ings with the project team and the voluntary promoters in the cells (currently on a quarterly basis), implementation of an internal monitoring and evaluation system: daily/weekly activities sheet, guide to monitoring change, twice-monthly planning, reporting system, monthly staff meetings, etc.

Effectiveness and efficiency: Working methods and procedures The project is based on an original approach called the UBUNTU and good power approach12 which provides the inspiration for all AMI projects and staff and was devised by Mr Laurien NTEZIMANA, lay theologian and founder of AMI. From its inception, the project benefited from the existence of this approach, which meant that it could move directly to taking action. Having seen what is being done in the field, the evaluation team considers this approach to be extremely practical and effective in the area of unity and reconciliation. It is an inclusive and participatory approach which takes all sides into consideration, and this gives it strong chances of producing more lasting results. The staff responsible for implementation are strongly convinced of and committed to this approach, and this is a major factor in the success of the project. The project has developed a logical, well-structured mode of action with an intervention strategy consisting of the following seven elements: results, social change, activities, implementation, key players, networking, input/investments. Within this framework the project has developed a system of strategic reflection which favours a spirit of creativity and prevents it lapsing into mere routine. The project has instituted professional working tools both at management level and at the grassroots. Tools and mechanisms for raising awareness among and mobilising the population have been created: meetings and con-ferences, radio broadcasts and a variety of publications (leaflets, posters, booklets). The project’s mode of intervention prevents it from dissipating its efforts by concentrating its activities in pilot cells, which makes them easier to monitor. Through the voluntary pro-moters the project has been decentralised to grassroots level in the cells and settlements13 and has a local structure which allows it to reach its beneficiaries as intended. The regular presence of permanent project promoters at the grassroots is guaranteed, with an aver-age of five visits to each cell every month. The project attaches considerable importance to developing the abilities of its key players. The training provided meets the needs of the project and the target groups. Training courses are organised on the basis of modules of proven efficacy. The project offers educa-

12 This approach is based on what is positive for the establishment of unity and reconciliation and aims to work with people on all levels: physical, intellectual, emotional, psychological. 13 The settlement is the smallest basic administrative unit in the country.

20

tional material (guides) down to grassroots level and provides follow-up to the training courses to evaluate how knowledge gained is being utilised. In general terms the methods of implementation are of sufficiently good quality to guar-antee the effectiveness of the project. However, three obstacles should be pointed out here: the late release of funds by zivik Funding Programme (a delay of three to four months) which interferes with the schedule of activities, the inadequate provision of transport which impedes supervisory activities in the field (two motorcycles for every four promoters, a lack of vehicles which considerably disrupts field visits in the rainy season), and the promoters’ heavy workload in terms of the volume of work and the scope of action. Choice of participants and key actors The majority of the parties concerned by the issues of unity and reconciliation in the area covered by the project have been taken into account in its implementation. The key target groups are made up of those who saved Tutsis during the genocide, survivors of the geno-cide, former prisoners of the genocide, and the political and administrative authorities. During field visits the evaluation team became aware that all those involved were well disposed towards the project’s activities and its approach. The voluntary promoters of unity and reconciliation, the Generative Cores for Unity and Reconciliation (NGUR), con-sisting mainly of genocide survivors and their protectors, and the associations/clubs for unity and reconciliation (AUR) are all essential to the success of the project at the grass-roots because it is they who are instrumental in multiplying its actions. NGURs and AURs are local, autonomous initiatives which are likely to continue. The voluntary promoters act as catalysts and multipliers of unity and reconciliation at the grassroots. They are general-ly well accepted by those they work among and, as the results of the project take root, are increasingly welcomed by the community. Some members of the NGURs are too old, how-ever, which gives rise to concern for the future of these groups. On the other hand, other members of the community who do not belong to the target groups initially envisaged by the project have begun to express the need to belong to the NGURs, something which will also require considerable thought. The role of the project partners zivik Funding Programme is the principle funder of AMI, providing more than 70% of its revenues for 2008. This partnership is much appreciated and the project team hope to strengthen relations with zivik by means of visits to the grassroots and face-to-face meet-ings to exchange ideas. Each project submitted to zivik with a request for financial support goes through the German Embassy in Rwanda. It is hoped that the Embassy will play a greater role in helping to highlight the achievements of the project. APTE supports the

21

project and also provides important technical assistance (advice and guidance in individu-al matters and on the drafting of documents, acting as consultant if AMI does not have the requisite training expertise and playing a very important part in the monitoring and internal evaluation of the project). The support provided by APTE has contributed to improving the quality of results. Mechanisms of planning, monitoring and evaluation A system of planning, monitoring, evaluation and reporting (PSER) has been developed for the project, even at grassroots level14. There are a number of different systems and tools for this: project planning on a six-monthly, quarterly and monthly basis, a work programme for voluntary promoters and the NGURs, monitoring and evaluation sheets for each activity, separate evaluation of each major activity, evaluation every 2 months as a basis for the zivik report, outline for the voluntary promoters’ quarterly report, internal evaluation conducted annually etc. An analysis of the initial situation was made at the beginning of 2008 and will serve as a reference for evaluating the impact of the changes brought about by the project. Activities in the field are regularly monitored by means of supervisory visits to grassroots activities and meetings held every quarter with all voluntary promoters in the cells. In spite of this extensive system of monitoring and evaluation, the project has so far failed to set up a database which would permit the centralised recording of all information relating to its work and outcomes. The reporting system over too short a period (two months) required by zivik is a hindrance because it requires a substantial amount of paperwork, despite the fact that no significant changes can be observed on the ground after merely two months. The project team consider acceptable reporting periods to be six months and one year. Media coverage and public relations Overall, media coverage and the publication of information are part and parcel of the pro-ject implementation strategy and have been planned and budgeted for, even in the gener-al context of AMI interventions: regular broadcasts are made through Radio Salus, a docu-mentary film has been produced, leaflets and posters have been created and distributed, two booklets have been published during the two years of the project and there have been conferences, poetry/theatre/dance competitions, football matches etc. A national round table on ‘Reconciliation and sustainable development in Rwanda’ is being prepared in co-operation with the authorities and the National Commission for Unity and Reconciliation and will be held in December 2008. In view of the importance of the media, AMI recently

14 The voluntary promoters and the NGURs have a planning and reporting system.

22

set up its own recording studio. AMI has a functioning website which is updated regularly (every two months at least). 3. Networking and cooperation with other actors Without losing its originality or specific character, AMI has succeeded in establishing strong cooperation with state partners locally, in particular with local authorities at all levels of the hierarchy (district, sector, cell and settlement) and the local branch of the National Commission for Unity and Reconciliation (CNUR). Indeed, in a politically sensitive environment, these structures are considered essential to work in the field. Thus before any new activity, contact is first made with these organisations in order to obtain their support, and this strengthens their confidence in AMI. At all levels these organisations are highly appreciative of the approach developed by AMI and its good communication skills. The burdensome administrative procedures which result can sometimes delay activities, however. In practice there is little cooperation with other members of civil society due to a lack of other organisations noticeably active on reconciliation issues. Even the district authorities recognise that no other institution has activities as well founded as those of AMI. 4. Plans and future prospects The project has been implemented in two phases. The first phase (2007) was a pilot phase and the second phase (2008) currently underway is a phase of consolidating the achieve-ments of the first phase and of extending the project. There is thus a logical connection between the planning undertaken in the first year and the second year of implementation. The evaluation team believes it still necessary to continue the project, as the issue of reconciliation is one which requires time. The next planning round should concern itself with consolidating the project’s achievements with a view to putting them on a sustain-able footing and disseminating the successes already achieved, while at the same time integrating important new aspects relevant to the context such as the management of conflict in the post-Gacaca period. The evaluation team finds, however, that the short planning period for the project (one year) hinders the sound management of the project cycle. Indeed, project objectives have changed from one year to the next without having been fully achieved, and it is generally the case that objectives relating to changes in behaviour require sufficient time.

23

AMI currently receives many requests from local authorities and communities to work in other zones, but it does not have the capacity to make extend the project substantially. This represents a challenge, but in our view the project’s approach of concentrating its efforts in pilot zones should be continued in order to maintain performance. The economic problems of the project’s target groups also represent a major challenge to AMI, which has neither the expertise nor the resources to assist in this area. Moreover, managing and motivating the voluntary promoters of unity and reconciliation should also be examined in the next phases of the project. In addition, the widespread desire of other members of the community to belong to the NGURs should be taken into consideration in the next planning round without in any way detracting from the existing momentum towards unity and reconciliation. 5. Conclusions and recommendations Conclusions The evaluation team finds that the project has been implemented in an efficient and effective manner. It is true to say that the project fits harmoniously into AMI’s approach and lines of intervention for the promotion of peace, unity and reconciliation, and has benefited from this dynamic in carrying out its work effectively. The key players in the project have been well chosen, with all parties who are concerned with the issue of unity and reconciliation in the project zone taken into account. Through its inclusive approach, AMI dares to touch on the real problems of reconciliation. Within this framework, project activities have facilitated a space for dialogue and the exchange of views on the process of unity and reconciliation. The working methods developed within the project enable it to reach grassroots level and guarantee its efficiency and effectiveness. Although the project has been running for only a short period, it has accomplished a great deal and met with considerable success. Recommendations While the project has been very successful, there is room for improvement along the following lines in the next phases of implementation: • The project should strive to strengthen its achievements in the zones in which it cur-

rently operates (taking care to achieve maximum coverage of the zones in which it is active) before thinking of extending further. An extension should only be envisaged following successful withdrawal from the cells previously involved and, for greater efficiency, the new zones chosen should be in cells adjacent to those already covered.

24

• Development of a withdrawal strategy for the project in the cells involved to avoid the possible risk of sudden departure, which could damage the continuity of achieve-ments. Building the capabilities of the voluntary promoters, the NGURs and the AURs should always be a priority here and organisational aspects should be added to the training topics. The PSER (planning, monitoring, evaluation and reporting) method ini-tiated by the project at the grassroots should be strengthened by ensuring that those involved have a sense of ownership of the process.

• Although there are activities in some cells involving schools, activities to integrate young people mainly deal with those who do not attend school. Taking account of children and young people in school through specially designed programmes (in the sectors concerned) will be indispensable and should be systematic in the forthcoming phases of the project. The same goes for the integration of the intellectual classes of the population, who have not been sufficiently included up to now. The integration of intellectuals is a difficult but necessary task given the major role that they played in the genocide.

• The NGURs established by the project also act as groups or associations for economic advancement but do not have the necessary technical skills or the financial resources. Given that this is beyond the scope of AMI’s skills and capacities, synergy with other organisations active in the economic field is essential.

• The devising of suitable and sustainable measures to encourage the work of voluntary promoters of unity and reconciliation, such as encouraging them to join forces and providing training to help them make use of existing economic opportunities. Within this framework, cooperation with other organisations will also be necessary to finance joint economic initiatives put forward by from the promoters.

• Investigating the possibility of integrating other members of the community into the existing framework of the NGURs or through other approaches towards unity and reconciliation yet to be developed, without interfering with the existing process.

• Developing further ways of disseminating the achievements of the project. Within this framework, media activities should be maintained and intensified, particularly by means of broadcasts on a more regular basis, e.g. at the same time every week. Extend-ing the project team to include an expert responsible for information and communica-tion is essential here in order to capitalise on existing opportunities (publicising positive project outcomes, using the AMI recording studio and broadcasting via Radio Salus).

• Everything possible must be done to preserve the memory of the positive outcomes of the project for present and future generations. To this end the project should continue to use several forms of documenting its activities (written, oral, visual and the website etc). Documents published in the local language should be translated into other lan-

25

guages (English and French) as this will help to provide foreigners with a better under-standing of the context of reconciliation in which this project operates.

• The setting up of a professional database for the project, with regular use of the data on achievements and outcomes, particularly for activity progress reports. In this re-spect progress reports should highlight the previous achievements and thus provide an overall view of the project's performance.

• The project management team should include a person responsible for the medium-term strategic planning of the project, even if funding from zivik remains on an annual basis. There is also a need to improve the means of transport available to the project team.

26

Ibuka – Buckley 0. Introduction This report evaluates the project “Projet du suivi psychosocial des victimes de traumatis-me pendant la Jurisdiction Gacaca” implemented by the Rwandan NGO Ibuka and funded by zivik Funding Programme. The evaluation was conducted in Kigali, Rwanda, between 23.9.-4.10.2008 and included interviews with Ibuka and DED staff, with trauma councillors and beneficiaries as well as with a number of external resource people.15 In addition, pro-ject documents provided by zivik were consulted. Psychosocial counselling refers to interventions to improve the psychological, physical and social wellbeing of people who suffer from trauma. In the project under review this is done with view to accompanying and assisting people traumatised by the 1994 genocide before, during and after the hearings of the local village tribunals Gacaca. This evaluation report focuses on the wider question whether the project contributes to transitional jus-tice, including justice, truth and reconciliation.16 Transitional justice refers to ways of deal-ing with the past of a violent conflict or a dictatorial regime and has gained much currency amongst Western donors and practitioners in recent years. In this sense, ‘transition’ indi-cates the move from violence to peaceful coexistence while ‘justice’ is understood in both a punitive and/or restorative way. With this framework in mind this evaluation report (1) illustrates the current situation in Rwanda in order (2) to put Ibuka’s project into context. This will lead (3) to analysing the impact of the project and (4) to formalising some recom-mendations. 1. Current Context Conflict situation, conflict scenarios, influential key actors, peacebuilding needs In 1994, Tutsi and moderate Hutu where massacred by mainly Hutu genocidaire in one of history’s most horrific crimes. When the local community tribunals Gacaca to prosecute genocide offenders were first established in 2001 much hope was placed in their contribu-tion to dealing with the past of the event and to improving the relationships between

15 Please refer to appendix für details. 16 This report is written in full awareness of the limits of the concept Transitional Justice and its am-bivalent impact on post-conflict societies. For further reading see Susanne Buckley-Zistel: Transi-tional Justice als Weg zu Frieden und Sicherheit. Möglichkeiten und Grenzen, SFB Governance Working Paper Series, Nr. 15, DFG-Sonderforschungsbereich 700, Berlin, Juli 2008.

27

Hutu and Tutsi. For the Government of Rwanda, the truth uncovered in Gacaca was sup-posed to lead to justice, and the rendered justice to reconciliation. However, now that the tribunals are coming to a close it transpires that in many cases rather than improving the relationship between the parties the Gacaca exacerbate the antagonism. Instead of revealing the truth about genocide crimes they often lead to false testimonies and lies to defend an accused, to a conspiracy of silence by the mainly Hutu General Assembly in order to protect an accused Hutu community member, to corruption and bribery or to the intimidation of witnesses, both Hutu and Tutsi, in order to prevent them from testifying. Where truth was spoken and justice rendered, the tribunals brought crimes and criminals to light, revealing the extent of involvement and guilt, at times instead of improving relationships increasing distrust, betrayal and hatred. This is particularly pertinent in cases where testimonies contradict each other leading to conflicts between those who testified. For the proximity of rural life in Rwanda, where Hutu and, most importantly the small number of Tutsi survivors, depend on each other the renewed tensions due to Gacaca are a very heavy burden to carry. For the survivors of the genocide, malfunctioning Gacaca are double negative: not only has the truth about the death of their loved-ones often not been brought to light – pre-venting finding their remains, providing a decent burial and allowing at least some degree of closure – but the increasing community tensions during Gacaca have also led to a renewed feeling of insecurity and fear in their daily life in general and when wanting to testify in Gacaca in particular. Moreover, given that many survivors were themselves targets of violence and assaults – especially sexual violence against women who consti-tute the vast majority of survivors – being confronted with their disturbing past during the tribunals, even when silenced, brings back haunting memories, renewed pain and re-trau-matisation. Their trauma manifests itself inter alia in sleeplessness, depression, fear and low self-esteem. As a consequence, many traumatised survivors are afraid of testifying in Gacaca where they are not only confronted with telling their version of the events publicly in front of a mainly Hutu General Assembly, but they are sometimes also confronted with verbal abuse, accusations of lying and subsequent marginalisation in the community. Naturally, many traumatised survivors shy away from participating in Gacaca, further reducing its potential to disclose the truth about the genocide. This is particularly perti-nent in this final phase of Gacaca where sexual crimes – i.e. category 1 crimes according to Gacaca law – are tried. While so far many of the testimonies were given by witnesses who observed a genocide crime, rather than having been the target, it is now the victims them-selves who testify their personal experiences. Or, as an officer of Ibuka put it, it is now the dead who speak for themselves. While the plight of genocide survivors is enormous it often goes unnoticed. Only few stud-ies – both Rwandan and international – on the rural daily life of survivors exist and reveal

28

that they are extremely vulnerable and often isolated in a local context where they live door-to-door with those who killed their loved-ones. From an economic perspective, despite some government funding such as FARG (Fond d’Assistance des Rescapé du Genocide), survivors are often incredibly poor for they have not only lost their property during the genocide but also relatives and family relations vital for cultivation. Moreover, the effects of sexual assaults during the genocide, such as HIV/AIDS, increasingly manifest themselves today so that they are still slowly dying from the consequences of the geno-cide. However, genocide trauma does not only affect those targeted by the killings but also the surrounding people as well as those who committed the crimes, and there is an increasing yet still limited awareness that some genocidaires have been traumatised by their actions, too. According to my interviewees, their unaddressed trauma at times manifests itself in aggression and anti-social behaviour targeted again, inter alia, against survivors, perpetu-ating insecurity and fear as well as causing new divisions in the community. Starting points for a change process Against this backdrop, in order to contribute to the promotion of peaceful coexistence three interrelated aspects need to be addressed by the zivik funded project: first, trauma-tised people require assistance in form of counselling so that they can increase stability and the ability to deal with their past and future; secondly, traumatised people who are willing to testify in Gacaca need emotional and at times therapeutic support so that they dare to take the step, potentially leading to an increase in truth and justice; and thirdly, to improve the antagonistic relationships between survivors, genocidaires and their rela-tions, as well as other non-affected community members, which have further deteriorated as a consequence of Gacaca to prevent future violence. It is at these levels where the pro-ject should make a contribution. 2. Project Context Role and ethic dimension of Ibuka The project is implemented by the survivors’ organisation Ibuka which plays a special yet crucial role in Rwandan society. One of its main objectives is to draw attention to the plight of survivors, to demand punitive justice and the unconditional fight against impuni-ty as well as to keep alive the memory of the genocide – Ibuka translated “Remember!”. Its lobbying role has been particular strong regarding the release of genocide prisoners fol-lowing presidential decrees, the changes in Gacaca legislation and the continuing insecur-ity of survivors (so far 2008 saw already 18 assassinations). It plays an important and

29

strong role on the political platform of the country which is crucial since, in Rwanda today, most NGOs see themselves as service providers on behalf of the government or interna-tional partners. While Ibuka’s role may lead to occasional controversies on the national political platform, supporting an NGO such as Ibuka helps to build up an independent civil society in Rwanda, consisting of a cacophony of different voices with different interests. In addition to focusing on justice, memory and the economic conditions of survivors, resolving conflicts is part of Ibuka’s mandate, particularly with view to preventing the renewed occurrence of violence in Rwanda. With the aid of the zivik funded project this aim is given additional currency. For instance, while the psychosocial accompaniment was initially considered for genocide survivors only – as shall be discussed below – it was realised that in order to contribute to co-existence and conflict prevention all victims of trauma need to be included, regardless of their group identity. Furthermore, with the zivik funded project Ibuka expands its scope from national lobbying and politics to the grass-roots. In addition to its decentralised paralegals the organisation now addresses the im-mediate concerns of its targeted groups in their daily life. This is a positive development. Nevertheless, Ibuka is a well-know survivors’ organisation and, as mentioned above, it is often vocal about the concerns and interests of survivors. This is in itself not negative yet turns the NGO into an unusual player when it comes to considering the interests of other parties such as traumatised perpetrators and/or their family members. At the same time, on the local level Ibuka might be seen as being too close to local authorities. At first sight, this appears to be in contrast with the organisations crucial lobbying role as described above, but it merely reflects the complexity of fissures in the Rwandan society. Important-ly for the zivik funded project, this perception might have a negative impact on their work on the ground and thus on their impact regarding improving the relationship between survivors and genocidaires and their communities, as discussed below. Initial situation of the project The project was implemented in 2005 and faced a highly complex situation. The most per-tinent conflicts included changes in Gacaca law leading to convicted genocidaires staying in the communities for social work (so-called TIG), the release of prisoners due to presiden-tial decrees, as well as dishonesty in Gacaca which led, or lead, to tensions between neigh-bours and which require some form of conciliation or mediation. At present, restitution payments as a punishment decided in Gacaca appear to be amongst the most significant sources of community conflicts. In addition to an improvement of their material condition, for survivors restitution also signifies an acceptance of guilt and helps in re-establishing their dignity. Nevertheless, against the backdrop of abject poverty genocidaires and their relations are often not in a position where they can afford to pay the penalties. Further causes of conflict are competition over who is most vulnerable – the survivors or the fami-

30

lies of the prisoners – and thus in need of material assistance. In many communities, the perception prevails that genocide survivors are better supported through government structures such as FARG while other impoverished members of the community remain without assistance. In the course of their work project staff thus realised that aspects of trauma cannot be deconnectd from other conflicts in the communities. As a consequence, Ibuka strengthened its focus on conflict resolution within the project, leading to the recruitment of eight social workers in 2008. Project approach and its relevance The central concern of the project is to combine political dimensions with social, legal and health aspects in order to contribute to conflict prevention and civil conflict management. Through communication during and around Gacaca tribunals the causes for the genocide and the current situation are being analysed, potentially leading to a more peaceful en-gagement. Hence, the project staff and the beneficiaries work on, as well as in, the current conflict in Rwanda. Initially, the project targeted merely traumatised survivors of the genocide, including gen-ocide widows, victims of sexual violence, orphans and children more generally if involved in Gacaca, children heading households and victims of torture. However, it was quickly realised that they were not the only ones suffering from trauma but that members of the family of genocidairs, and even genocidaires themselves, experienced similar symptoms. Thus the scope of the project was extended to include all traumatised people of a particu-lar community. This expansion was not only relevant from the point of view of key players but it also changed the rationale and the potential impact of the project to include aspects of mending relationship between the parties. Thus, in the project proposal from April 2008, the aim of the project became “to contribute to creating trust between groups of victims and perpetrators, to prevent conflicts and to consolidate peace”. This shift in the beneficiaries of the project and the corresponding emphasis is a positive development and reveals the degree of reflectiveness and flexibility of the project. The psychosocial support and accompaniment of the project is based on a series of assump-tions which are closely intertwined. Firstly, it assumes that mental stability of traumatised people is essential for their healing process and that it can be supported by local councillors and APSS. Ibuka thus tries to address current problems on the individual level. Traumatised people first need to be able to deal with their feeling of anger and resentment as well as low self esteem and depression. To realise how trauma affects them and their daily lives and to start to come to terms with their past requires space and time. Improving the per-sonal situation shall than also improve interpersonal relationships. Secondly, the project contends that traumatised people have difficulties participating in Gacaca tribunals and that being accompanied by an APSS provides them with enough

31

safety to testify in front of people related to the death of their loved-ones. Ibuka thus does not directly intervene in Gacaca but indirectly improve its effectiveness so that Gacaca can lead to its objectives. Thirdly, as an intended consequence, the project assumed that the newly gained strength puts genocide survivors in a position where they can consider for themselves if they want to mend relations with those who are responsible for the crimes, breaking down barriers of “us” vs. “them”, “Hutu” vs. “Tutsi” and encouraging a dialogue. However, importantly, reconciliation is not a direct objective of the project but rather providing conditions in which people are able to choose if they want some form of reconciliation. Whether the newly gained strength of traumatised survivors leads to pardoning their perpetrators or seeking reconciliation remains at their own discretion. 3. Impacts of the project As illustrated above, given the current Rwandan context the project aims to contribute to conflict transformation between the various parties by providing assistance to trauma-tised people so that they regain stability, to accompany them during Gacaca so that they are able to testify, and to improved the antagonistic relationship between the various actors on the ground which has been destroyed due to the genocide and subsequently the Gacaca tribunals. As illustrated in the following, these aspects are largely being met. Nevertheless, given the limited scope of the evaluation, the evidence of the impact of the project can be merely anecdotal Immediate positive intended effects and contributions by key actors According to the APSS, their presence improves the general context of traumatised people. Initially, there was no or only little knowledge about trauma and affected people were met with ignorance by community members. For instance, in cases of breakdowns during Gacaca, or more generally, community members rushed to assist the person and at times worsened the situation. Now a qualified APSS takes care of the person. The increase of trauma awareness has also led to a higher demand on APSS and CTPS. The beneficiaries stated that thanks to the counselling they find it easier to articulate their fears and anxieties, aiding in coming to terms with them. For those who have lost all fami-ly members counselling provides an almost unique opportunity to talk to somebody. The mere fact of expressing what has been bottled up inside, as well as becoming a member of a community again, has been referred to as a positive effect. Importantly, though, the psychosocial process is not imposed but people have the choice to ask for assistance.

32

Amongst the people who benefit from the project are also the CTPS and APSS themselves. Thanks to their training, they reported, they acquired ways and means of dealing with their own trauma – many are survivors themselves – and have learned to face their past. At the same time, though, the listening to and counselling of fellow community members can be a serious challenge to their own mental stability, often referred to a secondary traumatisation, and some pointed out that it hinders their own “healing” process. A further aspect of counselling concerns the integration of survivors into the community. If they testify having been raped they risk being stigmatised. Moreover, they often have troubled relationships with their children conceived due to rape and face the problem of explaining to the now 13 year-old their origin. These aspects are directly addressed by the zivik funded project. All interviewees agreed that, in particular in this last phase of Gacaca where sexual crimes are on trial, the support of trauma victims is crucial. It is now mandatory that victims are accompanied by an APSS, such as those trained by Ibuka or otherwise provided by the tribunals themselves. After the termination of Gacaca the accompaniment of traumatised people remains important since their suffering continues, at times heightened by tensions in the community due to Gacaca but also more widely. In cases where a traumatised person is cautious about giving testimony before the tribu-nal the APSS encourage them to first testify to them so that they have already publicly expressed their sentiments in front of somebody before doing so in front of the General Assembly. In my interviews, the beneficiaries described that they found the presence of an APSS to be reassuring while testifying in Gacaca. Furthermore, the councillors explained that traumatised people are often not able to ex-press themselves clearly and might mix up their personal experiences with rumours. Counselling helps to get their own story straight and to draw a line between their own and other person’s experience. This helps to reveal the truth about the genocide, in partic-ular when they chose to testify in Gacaca. During the interviews, Ibuka staff stated that in this project it is not Ibuka’s aim to contrib-ute to uncovering the truth about the genocide directly, but to bring individuals in a posi-tion where they themselves can decide if and how they testify. Nevertheless, according to my interviewees with CTPS and APSS, through the presence of psychosocial councillors the project increased the sensation of security amongst traumatised people and their wish to testify in Gacaca. It can thus be assumed that Ibuka’s project has a positive impact on dis-closing all sides of what happened during the genocide and thus on punitive justice. Crucially, occasionally the councillors are themselves involved in Gacaca cases, for instance when the death of a family member is being discussed. The APSS then have the opportuni-ty to turn to their supervisors for assistance. Further difficulties encountered by APSS and CTPS include their high demand, the accompaniment of several traumatised people in one

33

Gacaca session, and the negative impact of politics such as changes in the Gacaca law. In order to deal with their situation the councillors started their own therapeutic group where they regularly discuss work-related and personal problems. Through offering psychosocial counselling to all traumatised people within a community the APSS have the potential to decrease the antagonism exacerbated by the Gacaca trib-unals. The counselling processes, but also the presentation about causes and signs of trauma by APSS before Gacaca hearings, made survivors realise that perpetrators and their relations can also be affected by trauma, which potentially increases mutual understand-ing. A further positive impact of the counselling seems to be that Tutsi survivors begin to real-ise that not all Hutu are genocidaires. Being able to differentiate between regular mem-bers of the community and perpetrators helps to improve community relations. Moreover, project staff explained that family members of perpetrators sometimes feel guilty and do not know how to face a survivor. In the course of the counselling they seem to be able to express these feelings, leading to building bridges and an increase in trust and confidence between them and the survivors. This is particularly pertinent in cases where blood rela-tions were affected by the genocide. In some cases the counselling of both sides has led to asking pardon by a perpetrator. Through bringing people of all sides together Ibuka is try-ing to set a positive example for peaceful cohabitation. Problems and risks of the project that could arise in the intended change process Despite its positive impact, the project remains not without challenges. That development projects, both economic and social, can do harm as well as good is meanwhile a wieldy accepted insight. The zivik funded project, too, has the potential to, instead of improving community relations, provoke additional resentment. Since Ibuka is first of all a survivors’ organisation there is a risk that it does not obtain the respect and appreciation of the families of perpetrators, or even the local Hutu constituencies more generally. Against the backdrop of the genocide-torn communities the impact of its psychosocial counselling for traumatised people could be interpreted as lobbying on behalf of survivors and thus have a negative effect on peaceful coexistence through perpetuating group affiliation and the prevailing “us” vs. “them” dichotomy. Against this backdrop the recruitment of eight social workers to facilitate mediation and conflict resolution is an important step. It remains to been seen whether all community members consider Ibuka as the appropriate organisation to turn to when in need of assistance. Mediation and conflict resolution requires the trust and confidence of both parties and non-survivors might be reluctant to accept representatitives of a survivors’ organisation in such a role.

34

Lessons learned In the course of the project, Ibuka learned some lessons which are pertinent for improving the relationship between the various parties. Most importantly, it realised the necessity to include non-genocide survivors and Hutu more generally in the APSS teams as well as in their groups of beneficiaries. Thus, even though it was not initially intended some groups of accompanied traumatised now also include family members of perpetrators. Even though these efforts are important and a step in the right direction, they are no guarantee that Ibuka is accepted by all. In fact, the perception of Ibuka might differ from cell to cell, depending on the history of the place and the personal capacity – and attitude – of the APSS. The fact that some Tutsi survivor APSS were initially reluctant to work with Hutu APSS indicates that they too have difficulties moving beyond the dichotomy of Hutu vs. Tutsi, which is not surprising after the experiences of the genocide and its aftermaths, including Gacaca. 4. Conclusions and Recommendations Sustainability of the project Overall, the impression of Ibuka’s project was positive. The project has been successful re-garding its main objective, the accompaniment of traumatised people before, during and after Gacaca. It hence responds to pertinent challenges during the last phase of Gacaca, the APSS and CTPS seem committed and well-trained and all interviewees provided a positive feedback on the implementation and results of the project. The work of the APSS and CTPS is well situated in Ibuka’s structures which adds to its sus-tainability. Some of the APSS groups have formed small associations which might, in the long run, lead to stabilising their work. Nevertheless, since the objective of the project is mainly to deliver a service, i.e. psychosocial accompaniment, the creation of autonomous structures has not been of central concern. Since the Gacaca tribunals are phasing out the project comes to a natural close unless Ibuka develops a new, post-Gacaca project. This could, for instance, be based stronger on conflict resolution and the mediation of community relations. For given the complexity of latent conflicts at the community level the project’s extension towards conflict resolution and mediation is essential and should be reinforced. However, for the project to success-fully contribute to conflict resolution all members of the community, survivors, perpetra-tors and their families, by-standers and non-affected people, need to be involved. Thus, in particular against the backdrop of Ibuka’s political role in the society, in order not to do harm project staff should conduct a careful analysis of their work and its impact on the local level. This should be a condition for future funding.

35

Project contribution towards Transitional Justice To return to the question if and how Ibuka’s psychosocial accompaniment contributes to transitional justice, it is important to note more generally that truth and justice are not necessarily preconditions for reconciliation but may, at times, provoke the opposite. Thus, even though psychosocial counselling might increase the participation in Gacaca, the truth revealed and justice rendered in the process, this might obstruct rather than foster reconciliation. As illustrated above, one challenge of Gacaca is that it may lead both to truth and lies, with either potentially having a negative impact on the community for either the survivors’ side is frustrated about cover-ups and lies, or the perpetrators and their families are upset about sentences and punishment (at time for crimes for which they feel no remorse and do not take personal responsibility). This is a general problem of transitional justice faced by all post-conflict societies and not unique to the role of Ibuka in this context. Nevertheless, it means that it cannot be readily assumed that the project leads to reconciliation at this level but highlights the need to include conflict resolution elements. Transitional justice processes in divided societies do not necessarily lead to reconciliation but require a realistic assessment of emerging conflicts and their resolution through special projects. Recommendations • In the course of the evaluation, my interviews highlighted the linked between prevail-

ing conflicts and poverty in Rwanda. In order to contribute to sustainable conflict reso-lution poverty needs to reduce drastically. Recommendation: Ibuka should consider how to link psychosocial accompaniment with poverty reduction strategies. This is particularly important regarding the APSS who work as volunteers without financial benefits. Against the backdrop of poverty Ibuka could e.g. encourage the formation of a national APSS association to provide them with more status and enable them to launch small income generating projects.

• The current project is closely linked to the last phase of Gacaca which is soon coming to an end. Recommendation: In order to continue that psychosocial counselling process Ibuka has set into motion, the NGO should consider how an intervention for a post-Gacaca accompaniment could be designed and propose this to zivik Funding Programme.

• Ibuka’s project is embedded in highly complex social relations who are prone to open conflicts. Recommendation: Ibuka should continue, if not extent, its conflict resolution aspect in order to address latent conflicts before they turn violent.

• The perception of Ibuka amongst non-survivors is of some concern and significance for the impact of the project.

36

Recommendation:: Ibuka should start a frank and open process of assessing whether it is committed to this kind of cross-group-identity work and how it can best gain the trust of non-survivor communities.

• Even though Ibuka mainly represents one section of Rwanda’s population it has been one of the few independent NGOs in the country. Recommendation: zivik Funding Programme, and others donors, should not shy away from funding Ibuka due to its political role but accept that a vibrant civil society in Rwanda needs some controversy and independence to reflect the position of various parts of the society.

37

Ibuka – Rutwaza 0. Introduction This evaluation of the project for the Psychosocial Support of Victims of Psychological Trauma during the Gacaca Trials, a project implemented by Ibuka asbl and financed by zivik Funding Programme, was carried out between September 23 and October 4, 2008. In line with its terms of reference, it aimed to evaluate the usefulness, methodology, inter-vention strategy and quality of the project in the context of Transitional Justice in Rwanda. The aim of the evaluation was to establish: (1) whether the project had been conducted in an efficient and effective manner and (2) the extent to which the specific methodology used and the intervention strategy had contributed to justice, reconciliation and truth in the context of Transitional Justice. The evaluation, which covers the period 2006 to 2008, was carried out by two independ-ent consultants and is divided into two parts: ‘The project’s contribution in the context of Transitional Justice’ and ‘Operation of the project’. The methodology employed primarily consisted of documentary analysis, interviews with the project coordination team and interviews and meetings with key players. This report concentrates on the operational aspects of the project and comprises the following sections: (1) Description of the Ibuka Association and of the project (2) Implementation (3) Networking and cooperation with other actors (4) Planning and future prospects and (5) Conclusions and recommendations. 1. Organisational Analysis Mandate and main objectives Ibuka, which literally means ‘remember’, is a collective (of nine associations and individual members) created in December 1995 to coordinate the various associations of survivors of the genocide of the Tutsis in Rwanda. The role of the Ibuka Association is partly to coordin-ate the activities of its member associations and partly to seek the achievement of fair jus-tice, which will ensure that the guilty do not go unpunished while at the same time pre-serving the memory of the genocide victims. The Association’s vision and mission The principal tasks which Ibuka has taken upon itself are to: (a) perpetuate the memory of the genocide, (b) provide psychosocial assistance to genocide survivors and (c) provide

38

legal and judicial assistance to the survivors of the genocide in their dealings with admin-istrative and judicial bodies. Organisational structure The Ibuka Association is established throughout the country and has offices abroad. The Association’s principal body is the (annual) National Congress. There are Administrative Boards at all administrative levels - national, district, sector, cell and abroad. The National Administrative Board is Ibuka’s management body, and is supported by five specialist committees. The Executive Secretariat is the body in charge of coordinating activities and monitoring the implementation of National Council decisions, overseen by the Adminis-trative Board. The Executive Secretariat has a permanent staff and an Executive Secretary who is in charge of a number of technical departments. Background of the project The project began in 2005 when, at the instigation of DED/ZFD, which was initially work-ing together with the KANYARWANDA Association (a human rights organisation), Ibuka joined this partnership. Between November 2005 and February 2006, funding from the GTZ (the German technical cooperation organisation) made it possible to provide 12 trau-ma counsellors. A reflection workshop organised during this time came to the conclusion that support for the victims of trauma in connection with the Gacaca trials was a priority. This was the context in which Ibuka-KANYARWANDA-DED/ZFD set up the project on the basis of previous experience. Administration and management of the project The project is administered by a three-person coordination team who have divided responsibilities between them. These are an expert from Germany (provided by DED/ZFD) and two local experts, one provided by DED/ZFD, the other by Ibuka. The project has a permanent staff of 30, of whom three form the coordination team, 19 are counsellors for psychosocial trauma (CPSTs) and eight are social workers (SWs). All are professionally well qualified and educated to university level. The CPSTs have also received specialist psychosocial training. The staff team is relatively stable and has gathered a wealth of experience in this area, with some of the CPSTs in post since 2005. The principal task of the coordination team is to manage the project overall and provide supervision and support to the CPSTs and SWs. The CPSTs train the psychosocial assistants (PSWs), while the recently recruited SWs are responsible for supporting the target groups in resolving social problems. At grassroots level, the implementation of the project currently rests with 360 PSWs who are volunteers recruited by the CPSTs (of whom around two-thirds are women) and who support the beneficiaries. The level of education of the PSWs varies, but

39

in general they have an acceptable level of basic training and have all undergone the additional training necessary to carry out their duties. Project funding and objectives Between 2006 and 2008 the project obtained funding from zivik Funding Programme […]. Funded by FARG, IBUKA pays the salaries of all CPSTs. The project aims to contribute to stabilising the peace through the Gacaca trials by reinforcing their positive effects. In brief, the prime objectives are to: build the capacities and skills of the CPSTs so that they can provide appropriate training for the PSWs (2006/2007); establish a network of NGOs to coordinate psychosocial support activities and thereby make them more efficient (2006/ 2007); provide the Gacaca judges (inyangamugayo) with assistance and advice (2006/ 2007); improve the supervision skills and professionalism of all key staff in the area of counselling, crisis intervention and conflict mediation (2008); provide eight social workers at district level to cooperate with the CPSTs and PSWs, aiming to deal with the complexity of the issues and contribute to the constructive management of conflict (2008); strength-en coordination in order to improve the development and organisation of the project and so guarantee the professionalism of psychosocial services (2008); and to establish a net-work with other partners in the field of psychosocial counselling at national and local level (2008). 2. Implementation of the project The achievements of the project In summary, the achievements of the project are as follows: (a) CPST training (training of all CPSTs in trauma and as trainers: 12 people trained in 2006 and 7 in 2007, training of all CPSTs to improve their supervision skills: 19 people trained in 2007; training of all 19 CPSTs as trainers in conflict management (2008); (b) recruitment and training of social workers (8 in 2008); (c) training of PSWs by CPSTs (training in a number of subjects relating to psychosocial trauma: 216 PSWs trained in 2006, 120 in 2007, 24 in 2008; training of 360 PSWs in conflict management in 2008); (d) psychosocial support of trauma victims by PSWs (before, during and after the Gacaca trials); (e) awareness-raising among the com-munity by PSWs (meetings organised during the Gacaca trials, advice for Gacaca judges); (f) supervision meetings and monitoring (meetings, visits by CPSTs to PSWs and by the coordination team to CPSTs); (g) internal project evaluation (a workshop organised every year); (h) development and publication of a brochure describing the project (published in December 2007); (i) drawing up of draft statutes governing the PSW association; (j) par-

40

ticipation in the international conference on the prospects for democracy and reconcilia-tion in the Great Lakes region (financed by ZFD) in Marburg (Germany). In all, the project is present in 19 of the 30 districts of the country, thus covering 63% of national territory. However, the project is confined to certain sectors and does not fully cover all districts within its zone of activity. Effectiveness and efficiency: Working methods and procedures The project operates at three levels of intervention (national, district and sector). Its work with the PSWs means that the project is decentralised to grassroots level and can thus provide local support. Use of a top-down training approach – training of trainers who in turn train others – has enabled training activities to multiply. The project is well-integrat-ed into Ibuka’s existing structures and has developed a variety of internal communication methods which facilitate implementation by means of regular meetings and supervision visits based on a pre-established schedule. Supervision and monitoring mechanisms ensure that the PSWs are genuinely operational. In general, the system of organisation appears sufficient to guarantee the project’s efficiency and effectiveness. Nevertheless, the performance of the project is hampered by a number of factors, particularly the fact that its zone of activity is too large in view of its current operational capacity (too few CPSTs, SWs and PSWs in relation to the sphere of activity, and the project lacking its own means of transport)17. Choice of participants and key actors The CPSTs and SWs assigned to the districts, along with the PSWs based in the sectors, are key players in the implementation and success of the project and their role is highly appre-ciated by the community. In this respect Ibuka has the merit of providing the services of a substantial number of psychosocial workers at the grassroots. These volunteers are gener-ally keen to continue to carry out their tasks, but are overworked because of the high demand for their services, particularly considering that most of them fulfil other functions in the community. The PSWs are local structures with a good chance of proving sustain-able. The project has begun to encourage the PSWs to join forces and in some of the zones visited by the evaluation team they are already organised into autonomous associations. The project has also initiated a process aiming to establish a national association of psy-chosocial workers to put the PSWs on a legal footing in the community.

17 Effective supervision by the project coordination team depends to a large extent on the availabil-ity of the German expert , who is the only person with transport. CPSTs and SWs receive expenses for travel (5,000 Frw/week) and communication (2,500 Frw/week). PSWs receive 1,000 Frw/week in travel expenses and 1,000 Frw/week on communication expenses. These expenses are considered to be insufficient in view of the volume of activities and the zone covered by the project.

41

The role of the project partners zivik Funding Programme is the project’s principal funder. Ibuka considers zivik to be a trustworthy partner and has always enjoyed a cordial relationship with it. The project coordination team would like zivik to play a more dynamic role in supporting and guiding the sound management and implementation of the project. This dynamism is apparently hampered by Ibuka’s poor communications, notably the fact that the project does not have internet access18. A representative of the German Embassy once paid a visit to the Ibuka Association and was interested in the project, but apparently the German Embassy does not play a major role in monitoring the project. The DED/ZFD plays a very active role in the implementation of the project by providing technical assistance – a German expert and a local expert – and additionally by funding individual activities for which there is no other sponsor. Initially the project’s target groups were mainly survivors of the genocide, but a number of family members of the accused, people who agreed to give evidence at the Gacaca trials,19 have gradually been integrated. The recent inclusion of the conflict mediation aspect is a good choice in this post-Gacaca period, but increases the already excessive workload of the PSWs. Mechanisms of planning, monitoring and evaluation The system of regular project meetings ensures regular monitoring of the progress of activities. An annual internal evaluation is carried out (usually in October) in an interactive workshop attended by the project’s key staff. However, this internal evaluation concen-trates mainly on technical and less on strategic aspects, which is where improvements are necessary. The various meetings and the annual evaluations are documented. The report-ing system is the project’s main institutional record. There are also individual reports by coordinators and monthly statistical report sheets on activities for the PSWs and CPSTs, which are then collated at coordination level. This data was not, however, contained in the activity reports inspected by the evaluation team. The activity progress reports are infor-mative, but provide no information on indicators relating to the impact of the project20. Overall, there is no systematic or comprehensive method for monitoring or regularly col-lating information on the project’s achievements and the extent to which it is meeting its targets.

18 The evaluation mission nevertheless finds that this reason is not completely convincing, as other possibilities could be used. 19 The evaluation mission has no information on the proportion in each category. 20 This omission is also linked to the poor planning of the project and a lack of knowledge about managing the project cycle.

42

Media coverage and public relations In general, media activities are poor, as they have not been planned for within the project. However, a brochure describing the project, drawn up to a professional standard, was published in December 2007, and this was the only occasion on which the press – whether public or private – was involved. Unfortunately there have been no publications by the private press. The project was presented at the international conference held in August 2008 in Marburg (Germany) on the prospects for democracy and reconciliation in the Great Lakes region. 3. Networking and cooperation with other actors In the wake of the genocide, a number of organisations of survivors (and of others work-ing for human rights, peace and justice) were established, with aims and activities similar to those of Ibuka. Other parties (donors and local NGOs) initiated projects with similar or complementary objectives, but each with its own specific features and target groups. Formally, Ibuka cooperates on the implementation of the project with KANYARWANDA (a human rights association). Ibuka is part of the mental health platform. Ibuka also collabo-rates from time to time with the Rwandan Association of Trauma Counsellors (ARCT–Ruhuka) in the training of CPSTs. Informally, the project’s key workers (CPSTs and PSWs) also work together on specific aspects with state bodies at grassroots level, particularly the local authorities, judges in the Gacaca courts and health centres. On the ground there are occasional discussions with PSWs from other organisations. In general, there is a great deal more informal networking activity with others working in this area during the nation-al week for commemoration of the genocide. 4. Planning and future prospects From its inception, the project has gradually evolved on the basis of past experience and this has allowed for a logical progression and continuity between the different phases. The problems associated with the Gacaca trials currently persist and provide justification for continuing the project. However, the lack of a medium-term planning strategy for the project – plans are short-term, for one year at the most – does not allow for a clear inter-vention strategy or for sound management of the process to bring about the desired changes. Regular monitoring of developments in the overall context is indispensable to the pro-ject’s success, since the political, legal and socio-economic situation has an impact on the

43

process of healing trauma. The success of the project also depends on the work of the PSWs, and yet the management of the volunteer PSWs represents a major challenge for the future. Problems arising from poverty can exacerbate trauma and represent another challenge for the project. Ibuka has always wished to achieve wide regional coverage (and has extended its zone of action every year) but this approach, if maintained, could lead to poor performance because of an imbalance between the area covered and the resources available. 5. Conclusions and recommendations Conclusions Overall, the project’s operations have been well established and its effectiveness in sup-porting trauma victims is obvious. The project is well integrated into the structures of Ibuka and the staff involved in implementation are professionally qualified. The PSWs, who work on a voluntary basis, are highly motivated in fulfilling their role. Thanks to the PSWs, who provide support on the ground and are supervised by the CPSTs, the project works at grassroots level and truly reaches the target groups. The project has gradually integrated into its target group a number of family members of the accused who agreed to give evidence at the Gacaca trials. The implementation mechanisms in place are gener-ally sufficient to guarantee the performance of the project, and many of the activities planned for each year have been carried out. The project has provided the practical know-ledge necessary for the support of victims of psychological trauma and uses this know-ledge for the benefit of the target groups. Ibuka’s contribution to funding the salaries of the CPSTs helps to improve the efficiency of the project, with the funds provided by zivik Funding Programme mainly used to finance project activities. Recommendations • In proportion to its operational capacity (human resources, equipment for supervision

etc), the project covers a huge area. For this reason the project should be concentrated in the areas already covered and should intensify its activities there, while also provid-ing the necessary resources for supervision.

• It is essential to continue building the capacities of the PSWs (in line with priority oper-ational requirements). The PSWs appear willing to continue their work in the com-munity even if the project were to be terminated, and the expertise they have gained (to be strengthened) is no doubt an asset in this respect. Nevertheless, encouraging the work of the PSWs will be essential in the next phases of the project (particularly through the provision of financial support for the commercial activities of the associa-

44

tions currently being established). Cooperation with other organisations active in this field will also prove necessary.

• Project monitoring mechanisms need to be improved so that the project can be ma-naged much more professionally. In this regard there is a need to strengthen the capa-bilities of project staff – especially the coordination team – in the professional ma-nagement of the project cycle. The annual evaluation workshops need to be improved by the inclusion of strategic considerations.

• The project has not sufficiently developed its media activities, and formal networking activities with others active at the grassroots has not progressed as planned. Regular media and networking activities should therefore be planned and budgeted for. IBUKA must make efforts to communicate with zivik Funding Programme on a more regular basis.

• Ibuka’s endeavours to set up a formal structure (an association) for the PSWs should be given encouragement in future, but any activities must be thoroughly prepared for and carried out with closer involvement of the various members of staff (PSWs and CPSTs) and partners (other organisations providing psychosocial support at the grass-roots). This activity should therefore be properly planned and budgeted for.

• Furthermore, to render activities more effective in future, a strategic vision for the pro-ject in the medium term (3 years, for example) should be drawn up, even if zivik Fund-ing Programme finding remains on an annual basis.

45

Bibliography

• AMI leaflet • Evaluation of the Campaign for Unity and Reconciliation on the subject ‘Icyo dupfana

kiruta kure icyo dupfa’ (‘What we have in common is much more important than what divides us’), December 18, 2007.

• Evaluation report on the Ibuka – Kanyarwanda project: ‘Psychosocial support for the victims of psychological trauma during the Gacaca trials, October 2007

• Financial plans for 2006 / 2007 / 2008 for the project ‘Psychosocial support for the victims of psychological trauma during the Gacaca trials’.

• Gacaca and Trauma: Psychosocial guidance for trauma victims in Rwanda, Kigali, December 2007

• IBUKA leaflet • Narrative report for 2007 on the project ‘Psychosocial support for victims of

psychological trauma during the Gacaca trials’ (01.02. – 31.12.2007), • Narrative report for the first six months of 2008 on the project ‘Psychosocial support

for the victims of psychological trauma during the Gacaca trials (01.03 – 30.06.2008) • Plan for monitoring the achievement of objectives of the project for the promotion of

unity and reconciliation in Huye District (2008). • Project document: Promotion of Unity and Reconciliation in Huye District: building

capacities acquired in the 1st phase, extension, and management of conflict in the post-Gacaca period.

• Report of the evaluation workshop on the project: ‘Psychosocial support for the victims of psychological trauma during the Gacaca trials, December 2006

• Report on the achievements from July to August 2008 of the Project for the Promotion of Unity and Reconciliation in Huye District: building capacities acquired in the 1st phase, extension, and management of conflict in the post-Gacaca period.

• Six-monthly report on the achievements from January to June 2008 of the Project for the Promotion of Unity and Reconciliation in Huye District: building capacities acquired in the 1st phase, extension, and management of conflict in the post-Gacaca period.

• Susanne Buckley-Zistel: Transitional Justice als Weg zu Frieden und Sicherheit. Mög-lichkeiten und Grenzen, SFB Governance Working Paper Series, Nr. 15, DFG-Sonderfor-schungsbereich 700, Berlin, Juli 2008.

• Ubuntu mu bihe bikomeye ‘Icyo dupfana kiruta kure icyo dupfa’ • Report on pilot phase activities (from January 1 to December 31, 2007) of the Project for

the Promotion of Unity and Reconciliation highlighting eyewitness statements on civilian acts of Ubuntu aimed at protecting and saving victims during the genocide of 1994, Huye (Buate), January 2008.