Welcome to the United Nations 
OHCHR 
Press releases
Informal Note of the Press Conference by Mr. Paulo Sergio Pinheiro, Special Rapporteur on the Situation of Human Rights in Burundi
16 April 1998
Share
Location
Geneva
In introductory remarks, Mr Paulo Sergio Pinheiro, said his report dealt with his fourth and last mission in December 1997. It had taken one and a half years for the government to invite him to visit the country. Finally, after the meeting of the Third Committee of the General Assembly, the Government had sent him an invitation and he had gone immediately to Burundi where he stayed 15 days. Every report was a kind of snapshot, An account of what he had seen during his visit. When he referred to the improved conditions of security, he meant that security in a country in the midst of war was of course very relative.
He acknowledged, however, that something had been done. Circulation on the roads and access to Bujumbura were almost normal. Despite being a de facto Government and not a constitutional, democratic one, the ruling elite was making an effort. One of the most hopeful developments was the work of the Minister for Human Rights, but that did not mean that Mr. Pinheiro’s overall assessment had changed. Massacres, gross human rights violations, and executions under death penalty continued. Twice, he had addressed that issue with President Major Buyoa, trying to convince him that to carry out the six executions would be a mistake. He then expressed his concerns about impunity, detention without trial prisons conditions.
A correspondent asked what had been done in terms of national reconciliation. The Special Rapporteur said one aspect was the ongoing dialogue with the President of the National Assembly who was a Frodebu leader and a Hutu. A good sign was that the latter was now allowed to travel. During his visit, in spite of the decree suspending the Frodebu, which was not a very advisable initiative, he had observed a genuine dialogue with the opposition. An attempt was also under way to establish a commission with Frobredu, Uprona ( the other party) and the Government in order to travel around the country to discuss ways of implementing the Conference of Conciliation. The slightest progress in Burundi had to be acknowledged as something positive. There were no dramatic changes, but what was important was that they should continue to act. President Bagaza was no longer in assigned residence. The criminal charges against the President of the National Assembly had been suspended and he was no longer subjected to legal prosecution.
There were, however, bad signs such as the closing of the newspaper L’Aube de la démocratie and of the news agency NET Press. Last but not the least, there was the rebellion and the war. Discreet conversations were taking place since the interruption of the negotiations that had begun in Rome in March 1997 with the representatives of the Hutu rebellion and the National Council for the defence on democracy (CNDD).
A correspondent asked who had committed the massacres and gross violations of human rights in Burundi, the Government, the rebels or both? Who was most responsible? Mr. Pinheiro replied that it was difficult to answer this question, adding that the army was responsible, the rebels as well although he did not have any substantiation of the the latter’s involvement, as he had no contact with the CNDD. He was better to assess what the army was doing thanks to the reports of the human rights observers mission. It was difficult to say who had committed more gross violations of human rights. He believed the State had the main responsibility. The rebels recognized the human rights principles and those of the humanitarian law. The Government was not coordinating those violations, but elements of the armed forces and the police were in fact committing arbitrary actions and violations.
Asked to give some assess the country’s so-called “red zones”, he said it was difficult to evaluate this sort of “kaleidoscope”. The most difficult provinces were Cibitoke, Bubanza and Kayanza and in the south, Bururi and Makamba. Those parts of the country where UN personnel and convoys could not go were known as “red zones”. The situation was changing, of course, but there were also some difficult areas in the remote hills which were not accessible by car. He could go and walk in Bujumbura-rural with some risk but he could not go to the “red zones”, where the risks were very high. The human rights observers and the Office of the High Commissioner were doing an extraordinary job there, and it was sad that the international community seemed to prefer that democracy should be established before giving more aid. During the political transition process, international support must go to the lawyers of the judiciary programme, the human rights observers, and the technical programmes The Government was open and wanted more lawyers and observers; it was delighted with the programme of the High Commissioner’s Office. The 15 members of the Office had a very good relationship with both the population and the army.
Asked to spell out the human rights violations, Mr. Pinheiro said they were the traditional ones. The population had mixed feelings towards the rebels, who were not always perceived in a positive manner. When the army attacked the population, most of the victims were women, children and the elderly. There were also problems with pre-trial detention, with people being held for months or years without trial, and accounts of torture. It was not a case hundreds of people being massacred, but rather a succession of small, very numerous events with fewer victims, which amounted to the same thing.
Asked if the Government was seriously addressing the issue of impunity, he said he had his doubts. It was a difficult issue and the Government was making an effort. Some people were in prison for human rights violations, but to speak about accountability in a country like Burundi was a “joke”, because the judiciary was facing terrible difficulties. The international community should understand that if it wanted to have the rule of law and accountability it must support the existing judiciary. Of course there was a greater tutsi presence in the judiciary, but there were also some honest people who wanted to do a good job. The legal assistance programme enabled six international lawyers to work side by side their Burundi colleagues, providing them with a positive learning experience.
Asked how could the situation be improved, Mr. Pinheiro compared it to a chess game in which one had to play several games at once : to obtain a cease-fire, negotiate peace, improve existing structures, try to increase the representation of the Hutu in those structures, and most important, acknowledge the slightest progress.
The Minister for Human Rights had said in his statement to the Commission that all of the conditions which had originally been imposed on Burundi for ending the embargo had been met. Had those conditions been met and what sort of an impact was the embargo having on the people of Burundi? a journalist asked. Mr. Pinheiro replied that the effects were disastrous. The poor were paying. He believed there was a need for a mechanism to evaluate of the adverse effects of the embargo on the people of Burundi.The United Nations, and in particular the Security Council in connection with African leaders must examine the issue. Burundi’s ability to fulfill its obligations under the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural rights was weakened and should be examined anew.
He acknowledged, however, that something had been done. Circulation on the roads and access to Bujumbura were almost normal. Despite being a de facto Government and not a constitutional, democratic one, the ruling elite was making an effort. One of the most hopeful developments was the work of the Minister for Human Rights, but that did not mean that Mr. Pinheiro’s overall assessment had changed. Massacres, gross human rights violations, and executions under death penalty continued. Twice, he had addressed that issue with President Major Buyoa, trying to convince him that to carry out the six executions would be a mistake. He then expressed his concerns about impunity, detention without trial prisons conditions.
A correspondent asked what had been done in terms of national reconciliation. The Special Rapporteur said one aspect was the ongoing dialogue with the President of the National Assembly who was a Frodebu leader and a Hutu. A good sign was that the latter was now allowed to travel. During his visit, in spite of the decree suspending the Frodebu, which was not a very advisable initiative, he had observed a genuine dialogue with the opposition. An attempt was also under way to establish a commission with Frobredu, Uprona ( the other party) and the Government in order to travel around the country to discuss ways of implementing the Conference of Conciliation. The slightest progress in Burundi had to be acknowledged as something positive. There were no dramatic changes, but what was important was that they should continue to act. President Bagaza was no longer in assigned residence. The criminal charges against the President of the National Assembly had been suspended and he was no longer subjected to legal prosecution.
There were, however, bad signs such as the closing of the newspaper L’Aube de la démocratie and of the news agency NET Press. Last but not the least, there was the rebellion and the war. Discreet conversations were taking place since the interruption of the negotiations that had begun in Rome in March 1997 with the representatives of the Hutu rebellion and the National Council for the defence on democracy (CNDD).
A correspondent asked who had committed the massacres and gross violations of human rights in Burundi, the Government, the rebels or both? Who was most responsible? Mr. Pinheiro replied that it was difficult to answer this question, adding that the army was responsible, the rebels as well although he did not have any substantiation of the the latter’s involvement, as he had no contact with the CNDD. He was better to assess what the army was doing thanks to the reports of the human rights observers mission. It was difficult to say who had committed more gross violations of human rights. He believed the State had the main responsibility. The rebels recognized the human rights principles and those of the humanitarian law. The Government was not coordinating those violations, but elements of the armed forces and the police were in fact committing arbitrary actions and violations.
Asked to give some assess the country’s so-called “red zones”, he said it was difficult to evaluate this sort of “kaleidoscope”. The most difficult provinces were Cibitoke, Bubanza and Kayanza and in the south, Bururi and Makamba. Those parts of the country where UN personnel and convoys could not go were known as “red zones”. The situation was changing, of course, but there were also some difficult areas in the remote hills which were not accessible by car. He could go and walk in Bujumbura-rural with some risk but he could not go to the “red zones”, where the risks were very high. The human rights observers and the Office of the High Commissioner were doing an extraordinary job there, and it was sad that the international community seemed to prefer that democracy should be established before giving more aid. During the political transition process, international support must go to the lawyers of the judiciary programme, the human rights observers, and the technical programmes The Government was open and wanted more lawyers and observers; it was delighted with the programme of the High Commissioner’s Office. The 15 members of the Office had a very good relationship with both the population and the army.
Asked to spell out the human rights violations, Mr. Pinheiro said they were the traditional ones. The population had mixed feelings towards the rebels, who were not always perceived in a positive manner. When the army attacked the population, most of the victims were women, children and the elderly. There were also problems with pre-trial detention, with people being held for months or years without trial, and accounts of torture. It was not a case hundreds of people being massacred, but rather a succession of small, very numerous events with fewer victims, which amounted to the same thing.
Asked if the Government was seriously addressing the issue of impunity, he said he had his doubts. It was a difficult issue and the Government was making an effort. Some people were in prison for human rights violations, but to speak about accountability in a country like Burundi was a “joke”, because the judiciary was facing terrible difficulties. The international community should understand that if it wanted to have the rule of law and accountability it must support the existing judiciary. Of course there was a greater tutsi presence in the judiciary, but there were also some honest people who wanted to do a good job. The legal assistance programme enabled six international lawyers to work side by side their Burundi colleagues, providing them with a positive learning experience.
Asked how could the situation be improved, Mr. Pinheiro compared it to a chess game in which one had to play several games at once : to obtain a cease-fire, negotiate peace, improve existing structures, try to increase the representation of the Hutu in those structures, and most important, acknowledge the slightest progress.
The Minister for Human Rights had said in his statement to the Commission that all of the conditions which had originally been imposed on Burundi for ending the embargo had been met. Had those conditions been met and what sort of an impact was the embargo having on the people of Burundi? a journalist asked. Mr. Pinheiro replied that the effects were disastrous. The poor were paying. He believed there was a need for a mechanism to evaluate of the adverse effects of the embargo on the people of Burundi.The United Nations, and in particular the Security Council in connection with African leaders must examine the issue. Burundi’s ability to fulfill its obligations under the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural rights was weakened and should be examined anew.