The Declert Report speaks of France’s overwhelming responsibilities in the 1994 genocide against the Tutsi and not of complicity in genocide. However, it could be used to establish the crime of complicity in genocide.
For Professor Vincent Declert, the report of the commission he chaired for 24 months remains a historians’ report. It establishes the historical truth and not the truth of the facts. “What we found in the archives, which we consulted, no document shows that French officials wanted the extermination of Tutsi, supported the genocidal will,” he said on the set of Rwandan Television.
The commission started from the historians’ definition of the words “complicity in genocide.” According to it, “complicity in genocide is when one intentionally associates oneself with the genocidal act, with the genocidal enterprise.”
Professor Jean Paul Kimonyo, a former member of the Mucyo Commission, recalls the existence of an ICTR decision in Arusha on the crime of complicity in genocide. “There can be complicity without genocidal intent. But rather there must be direct and substantial assistance,” he said. “In the body of the Declert report, there are a number of elements that point in that direction,” he added.
While showing that the Declert report leaves this question open, Dr Jean Paul Kimonyo appreciates the work done by the 13 members of the Declert Commission. “This is the first time that a French institution has clearly and strongly recognized France’s heavy responsibility during this period. And this is something that we must appreciate at its true value,” he said.
This report bears many similarities to that of the 2008 Mucyo Commission. It will remain very important politically because it could be used for the Franco-Rwandan reconciliation.
President Emmanuel Macron had given the Declert Commission the mission to analyze the role of France in Rwanda (1990-1994). It was to work from classified archives.
Gérard Rugambwa
