Women’s participation in the Rwandan genocide: mothers ormonsters?

The participation of women in the 1994 Rwandan genocide should be considered in the context of gender relations in pre-genocide Rwandan society. Many ‘ordinary’ women were involved in the genocide but, overall, committed significantly fewer acts of overt violence than men. Owing to the indirect nature of women’s crimes, combined with male ‘chivalry’, women may be under-represented among those pursued for genociderelated crimes, despite the broad conception of complicity in Rwanda’s Gacaca Law. Women in leadership positions played a particularly important role in the genocide, and gendered imagery, including of the ‘evil woman’ or ‘monster’, is often at play in their encounters with the law. ‘No women were involved in the killings ... They were mad people; no women were involved. All women were in their homes.’ Female genocide suspect, Miyove prison ‘I believe that women are just as guilty of this genocide as men.’ Female genocide suspect, Kigali Central Prison Volume 92 Number 877 March 2010 doi:10.1017/S1816383110000019 69 Women’s participation in the 1994 Rwandan genocide has been brought to light by several high profile trials of Rwandan women in international jurisdictions, notably before the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda. Almost 2000 women remain in Rwandan prisons, convicted of genocide-related offences. Ranging from illiterate farmers to former political, religious and military leaders, judges, journalists and teachers, their stories attest to the fact that women were not only victims of atrocities, but also committed them. While representing a relatively low proportion of genocide-related detainees compared with men (less than 6%), it is impossible to understand women’s diverse experiences of the genocide without exploring their participation in the violence. This article takes a small step in this direction. Based primarily on research conducted in Rwanda in 2001, including interviews with 71 detained female genocide suspects, it considers four central questions. First, what was the extent and nature of women’s participation in the genocide? Second, if the forms of women’s participation differed from men’s, what are the legal consequences of this distinction? Third, what may have motivated ‘ordinary’ women to participate in the violence? Fourth, what roles did women in leadership positions play during the genocide, and how much actual power did they wield? A fifth question permeates the text: how did gender influence women’s participation in the genocide, as well as their subsequent encounters with the law? This article notes that women participated in the genocide in a variety of ways but were rarely directly engaged in the killings. It contends that where women conformed to gender expectations and participated ‘indirectly’ in the genocide (in particular, by denouncing Tutsis to the killers), less moral blame is attributed to them, both by the women themselves and by those responsible for bringing them to justice. One possible effect is the differential treatment of women in the Rwandan courts, despite the formal requirements in Rwandan law. On the other hand, where women challenged gender and cultural stereotypes and played a more 1 Interview, respondent #29, 10 July 2001. As the author’s interviews with female genocide suspects were conducted under condition of confidentiality, their names are not cited in this paper (with the exception of Euphrasie Kamatamu, see below note 152). Rather, a number has been given to each interview respondent, from 1 to 71, reflecting the order in which interviews were held. 2 Interview, respondent #13, 3 July 2001. 3 Ligue Rwandaise Pour la Promotion et la Défense des Droits de l’Homme (LIPRODHOR), Rapport de Monitoring des Prisons au Rwanda. Période: 1er Trimestre 2008, p. 17 (showing 1738 women convicted of genocide-related offences and a further 395 still awaiting trial). Note that in addition to this number, many more would have been convicted of property offences – subject only to a penalty of civil damages or restitution and not a sentence of imprisonment. 4 As at February 2008, females represented 5.7% of people detained in relation to the genocide (2133 from a total of 37,213). Ibid. 5 This article focuses on trials of female genocide suspects through the national courts, and not through the complementary ‘traditional’ justice system called gacaca, whereby suspects are tried in the community before their peers, in thousands of local tribunals across the country. Gacaca trials commenced on 15 July 2006, after a 15-month pilot period, and are due to be wound up at the end of 2010. LIPRODHOR, Rwanda/génocide: La clôture des Juridictions Gacaca imminente, 27 July 2009, available at http://www.liprodhor.org.rw/Cloture%20Gacaca.html (last visited 15 October 2009). Hearings before the gacaca tribunals warrant a separate analysis, which is outside the scope of this paper. 70 N. Hogg – Women’s participation in the Rwandan genocide: mothers or monsters?