The Necessity For Regulation Of Faith-Based Organizations In Rwanda

How to cite this journal: Author, Date of the post, WMO Conflict Insight, Title of the post, ISSN: 2628 6998, https://worldmediation.org/journal/

EDITORIAL NOTE *

The author of this article works at the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees; the views expressed here are his own and do not reflect the official position, past, present or future, of the United Nations or of UNHCR. The article defends state regulation of religious organisations in a particular national context; the assessment of that policy reflects the author’s own perspective, and this journal’s editorial position is neutral.

ABSTRACT *

This article defends state regulation of faith based organisations in Rwanda as a justified exception to the separation of church and state. The author begins from the constitutional guarantee of religious freedom and the limitations placed on it, and then examines the role of the churches before and during the genocide committed against the Tutsi in 1994, alongside their subsequent contribution to reconstruction and reconciliation. The growth of prayer houses from ten recognised churches at independence to some fifteen thousand by 2018 is examined, together with the reasons for it, including disillusionment with the established churches and the search for support that smaller congregations offered. The law of 2018 is then set out in detail: the requirements for legal personality, the qualifications required of preachers, restrictions on political activity and on the content of preaching, financial supervision and its relation to money laundering, and the powers of the Rwanda Governance Board and local authorities to warn, suspend leadership and revoke legal personality. The author identifies gaps in the law, particularly concerning the collection of offerings and prophetic practice, and recommends review of the monitoring system.

KEYWORDS *

Rwanda, faith based organisations, religious freedom, regulation, genocide against the Tutsi, Rwanda Governance Board, separation of church and state, preacher qualifications, money laundering, prayer houses, public order, reconciliation

INTRODUCTION

A topic like the necessity of regulation of faith-based organizations in Rwanda can be a hot debate between the conservatives who perceive that regulation as a state’s interference with religious freedom and those who advocate for the state’s intervention to safeguard public security and maximize the interests of the public. The 19th century marked a significant separation between the Church and the state; the Church refrained from exercising the power of the state, and the principle of separation of state and Church was spread in different corners of the world. The Constitution of the Republic of Rwanda grants freedom of religion and worship in public. On the other side, the Church created a dark image in Rwandan history by playing a leading role in separating the Rwandans, creating hatred based on imagined and subjective ethnic classes, and creating and spreading the genocide ideology. The regrettable result was the genocide that ravaged the lives of more than a million Tutsi in less than a hundred days in 1994. After 1994, the government of Rwanda strived for the country’s reconstruction, promoting unity and reconciliation among Rwandans. Since then, many faith-based organizations have been established, more than 15,000 prayer houses by 2024, thus welcoming different followers.

The increase of these faith-based organizations has not been free from intra-church conflicts originating from mismanagement of resources, discrimination among the followers, favoritism, and robbery based on misinterpretation of the scriptures, to name a few. In 2018, a law empowered the Rwanda Governance Board to govern all faith-based organizations, from registration and issuing legal personality to monitoring their compliance with applicable laws and sanctioning accordingly. Since then, many churches have been closed for various reasons, including those mentioned above and the lack of adequate infrastructure and safety. Against this backdrop, I argue that the state’s intervention in institutional religion as an exception to the principle of separation of Church and state is necessary to ensure peace, security, and public order.

In doing so, I will briefly overview the historical development of religions in Rwanda, the necessity and scope of regulation of faith-based organizations, the challenges, and the way forward.

MAIN CORPUS

An overview of the historical development of religion in Rwanda

Before I discuss the necessity of regulation of faith-based organizations in depth, it is critical to give an overview of the history of religion in Rwanda. In this discussion, I reflect on the fundamental principles governing religious freedom and its role in the genocide perpetrated against the Tutsi in 1994 and in the post-genocide era.

Freedom of religion as a fundamental right under Rwandan law

The Constitution of the Republic of Rwanda is the supreme law in Rwanda; it establishes binding principles and fundamental rights entitled to people that other laws must implement. One is freedom of conscience and religion, granted to all Rwandans. Article 37 of Rwanda’s Constitution specifies that “Freedom of thought, conscience, religion, worship and public manifestation thereof is guaranteed by the State in accordance with the law.” However, Article 41 conditions and limits the way rights and freedoms are exercised. It reads: “In exercising rights and freedoms, everyone is subject only to limitations provided for by the law aimed at ensuring recognition of and respect for other people’s rights and freedom, as well as public morals and public order.”

Separation of politics and religion

Rwanda is a secular country that grants freedom of conscience and religion, as I discussed above, once legal requirements are fulfilled. Rwanda’s Constitution requires politics and religion to remain separate and warns against basing themselves on discrimination. The law governing faith-based organizations clarifies that no organization, umbrella, forum of umbrellas, or ministry is allowed to engage in political activities to gain political power, organize debates to support political organizations or candidates, register, or use any other means to support candidates for any public office. Conversely, Article 14 recognizes that an organization, an umbrella, a forum of umbrellas, or a ministry can partner for development with government institutions.

As I introduced earlier, I reiterate that these conditions and limitations in the Constitution suffice to recall the negative legacy that churches and political parties left in Rwanda. They created and spread hatred and discrimination among Rwandans as a long-term basis for the genocide that killed more than one million Tutsi in less than a hundred days in 1994. On a positive note, churches played another role in the country’s reconstruction, forgiveness, and promotion of unity and reconciliation among Rwandans after the genocide, as I will briefly discuss below. That catastrophic experience obligates Rwanda to take preventive measures in all aspects.

A double-sided role of religion in the genocide committed against the Tutsi in 1994

Religious teachings played a double-sided role in the genocide committed against the Tutsi in 1994: they played a lamentable role in the planning and executing of the genocide, and they contributed to the country’s reconstruction through different social and economic development programmes, promoting unity and reconciliation among Rwandans. I will briefly discuss these two sides of the coin in the sub-sections below.

The role of churches in the planning and execution of the genocide

Aside from Islam, which was also marginalized, churches played a lamentable role in the planning and execution of the genocide committed against the Tutsi in Rwanda in 1994. Churches had promoted the killing of innocent Rwandans by favoring some ethnic classes to the detriment of others, played ethnic politics themselves by placing leaders in the regime, creating and spreading hatred among Rwandans, and actively supported the commission of the genocide. In that process, sending a message of ethnic discrimination became a significant focus of church teaching, while the church leaders had close ties with the political leaders of the time. Pope Francis recognized the religious role in the planning and commission of the genocide when he asked forgiveness for acts of some Catholic priests and nuns who had surrendered to hatred and violence while participating in the genocide. I agree that his courage in asking forgiveness also expressed the desire to recognize the failings of that period, which unfortunately disfigured the face of the Church, and may contribute to a purification of memory and promote, in hope and renewed trust, a future of peace. It is worth noticing how some individual members of religious groups demonstrated courage to protect civilians, sometimes at significant risk to themselves. Conversely, I am convinced that what churches ought to do in societies, regardless of other factors, is to help heal and rebuild the broken hearts of the community and of Christians as a whole.

The contribution of faith-based organizations in Rwanda’s reconstruction post-genocide

When considering faith-based organizations’ contribution to Rwanda’s reconstruction and development post-genocide, I echo Nwazuni’s argument that religion is considered the oldest institution contributing to society’s well-being. Since religion gives followers hope where there appears to be none, it makes it possible for followers to have hope for the future because its teachings relieve the pains people encounter today. After the genocide committed against the Tutsi in 1994, religious groups and associations contributed to greater understanding and tolerance by participating in interfaith meetings, organizing activities under the auspices of religious umbrella organizations or interfaith groups, and collaborating on public awareness campaigns and community development projects. These teachings helped some perpetrators understand and ask for forgiveness and helped survivors to forgive. The positive result has been unity and reconciliation among Rwandans, which supported other social and developmental programmes.

I agree with Court that if the interests of both Church and state were inextricably bound up with one another as a factor that was to play a fateful role during the post-independence period when the Church supported Hutu ethno-nationalism, and Church and politics became intertwined in preparing and committing genocide against the Tutsi in 1994, it should play a corresponding role in repairing what was broken after the genocide. Court reiterates Denis’ view that interpreting Rwandan history through the lens of ethnicity was integral to the politics of the missionaries and the institutional Catholic Church, which, rather than challenging the ideology of Hutu ethno-nationalism, supported the leadership of the two Republics after independence.

A reflective discussion on the increasing number of prayer houses in Rwanda post-genocide

Since Rwandan independence in 1962, the number of recognized churches has increased from ten churches in 1962 to 350 churches in 2012 and 15,000 prayer houses when the law regulating faith-based organizations was enacted in 2018. I can associate this rapidly increasing number of prayer houses with different factors, but I will emphasize the following.

First, religion and prayer contain words of comfort for people like Rwandans who were affected by the genocide committed against the Tutsi in Rwanda in 1994. Kubai discussed post-genocide Rwanda and the changing religious landscape and asserted that one of the reasons why many Rwandans left their traditional churches for new ones is a feeling of betrayal and disillusionment with the official Church. Some have said that they left the mainline churches because those churches did not try to protect those in danger.

Second, Rwanda is developing economically at a rapid pace, which engenders inevitable challenges for many people, such as stress, anxiety and pressure. Therefore, religious preaching and prayer deliver messages of hope and strength during these difficult moments. Kubai recounts expressions of some genocide survivors who moved to the new churches because these churches address individual members’ problems. In the face of grinding poverty, some churches are said to support their members spiritually, socially, and materially. These encourage their members to participate in the national reconciliation and political process and preach forgiveness as a religious requirement.

Third, after the genocide committed against the Tutsi in 1994, many Rwandans who had been in exile for a long time returned to their motherland. Rwandan business policy, security, cooperation, and strategic diplomatic relations with countries around the globe opened doors for many investors, visitors, and residents. Religion is a substantial part of the cultural aspect of a country. In that way, these newcomers introduced different kinds of worship from their countries of origin, implying an increase in prayer houses.

I conclude the discussion on these factors by agreeing with Kubai that the fast growth of these smaller worship groups is due to their rhetoric of hope, healing, and reconciliation, and their being more readily available to individual members. These worship groups provide spiritual and emotional therapeutic support for genocide survivors more than the larger and more traditional churches.

The growth of worship groups post-genocide: a matter for legislation

In the sections above, I discussed the double-sided role of religion prior to, during, and after the genocide in Rwanda, and particularly the extreme increase in the number of worship groups post-genocide and the followers’ reasons for joining these groups. Without being cynical, I argue that this rapid increase was a concern and a matter for legislation in a country that has a negative experience of genocide. Therefore, if there is a concern, there must be ways to address it. More particularly, a critical thinker can question the messages delivered to followers in these worship groups, given the memory of genocide ideology propagated by churches, the capacity of religious leaders and preachers, and security for the followers and the public.

The necessity and scope of regulation of faith-based organizations in Rwanda

In this section, I will discuss the country’s intervention to address the concerns of the growth and operation of worship groups introduced above. Mainly, I will discuss the intervention in enacting a law governing faith-based organizations. I will limit my discussion to the requirements it imposes to register such an organization, requirements for being a preacher, limitations on religious activities, monitoring of the financial aspect, and conflict resolution. These are the main factors on which the Rwanda Governance Board and local administrative entities based their decisions when closing several prayer houses, and continue to do so.

Legal requirements for a faith-based organization

The Rwandan legislator did not make any exception as to the type of religion of the faith-based organizations concerned by the present law, nor did it define religion. Instead, it included in its list of concepts the followers of a faith-based organization as members who founded an organization and others who can join the organization after its establishment.

The current law sets the requirements and procedures for applying for legal personality or registering a faith-based organization. In this context, I must recall that religion as an institution must observe laws applicable to the country in which it operates. Additionally, it is a legal person whose existence depends on legal personality issued by the competent organ. That legal personality empowers it to enjoy legal rights like any other person, but also creates obligations. The entities concerned are the constituents of a faith-based organization, namely an organization, ministry, branch, umbrella, and forum of umbrellas.

The law governing faith-based organizations makes obtaining legal personality a sine qua non condition for an organization, an umbrella, a forum of umbrellas, or a ministry that intends to start activities. It empowers the Rwanda Governance Board to issue legal personality and monitor the functioning of these bodies. As I insisted above, the legal personality is a determining factor of the existence of that legal person. Articles 17 to 33 detail the requirements for application for legal personality, rights, and obligations, and emphasize the requirements for being a preacher.

The following are required documents for application for legal personality: an application letter addressed to the Board; notarized statutes governing its organization; the address of its head office and the names of its legal representative and deputy, their duties, complete address, and criminal records; a document certifying that the legal representative and deputy were appointed following its statutes; a brief notarized statement explaining its doctrine; a notarized declaration by the legal representatives of consent to the responsibilities assigned to them; notarized minutes of the general assembly that established the organization and approved its statutes. On this point, I must invoke Article Four of the same law, requiring that the statutes must not be inconsistent with the provisions of other laws. Other requirements include appointed members of its organs, a notarized document describing the organization’s annual action plan and source of funding, a document indicating that the building or meeting space meets the requirements for buildings in the area of operation, a letter issued by district authorities agreeing to collaborate with the organization, a partnership document issued by an umbrella organization of the organization’s choosing, and proof of payment of a non-refundable application fee.

Particular requirements for being a preacher

Article 22 of the law governing faith-based organizations in Rwanda details the requirements for being a preacher in Rwanda as follows: be of majority age, which in Rwandan law is 18 years; be a person of integrity; fulfil the requirements of an organization for being a preacher at that level; possess a statement testifying that an organization authorizes him or her to be a preacher; not have been definitively sentenced to a principal penalty of imprisonment equal to or exceeding six months which was never removed by amnesty or rehabilitation; and not have been definitively convicted of the crime of genocide, genocide ideology, discrimination or sectarianism. A further point of this Article conditions academic and religious qualification by requiring the preacher to possess a degree from a higher learning institution or another degree with a valid certificate in religious studies or related matters delivered by a recognized institution. The law states that persons required to hold an academic degree shall have five years from the date of the law’s enactment to comply with the requirement.

Concerning the place of sermons, Article 23 clarifies that religious sermons are delivered in designated facilities that meet the requirements of the law. It stresses that if an organization intends to organize a special public gathering, it seeks authorization from the competent authority. The Rwandan legislator has been sensitive about the content of preaching and prohibits an organization, an umbrella, a forum of umbrellas, or a ministry from jeopardizing, in its faith, practices, and preaching, the unity of Rwandans, peace, and security. The legislator prohibits them from jeopardizing public order, health, good morals, good conduct, freedom, and the fundamental rights of others, or causing noise pollution. However, I note that the Rwandan legislator has not addressed the issue of the abuse of sacrifices and tithes, the strategies of collecting sacrifices and contributions from believers, and messages about the imminent end of the world, or the non-fulfilment of civil obligations such as community service, taking the oath on the national flag, elections, or approaching catastrophic events. These messages cause anxiety and frustration among followers and make them resistant to developmental activities.

Monitoring the financial status of a faith-based organization

When discussing the power of the Board to monitor the financial status of a faith-based organization, I must first introduce the provisions of Article Four of the law, which grants them financial autonomy: “Without prejudice to provisions of other laws, every organization, umbrella, forum of umbrellas or ministry enjoys administrative and financial autonomy. However, when necessary, the Board can conduct financial and asset audits of any organization, umbrella, forum of umbrellas, or ministry.”

The regulation of lucrative activities

The current law allows faith-based organizations to engage in profit-generating activities but requires that revenues from those activities be used solely in activities related to the organization’s mission. On this point, I must recall that religious activities are exempt from taxes even though they generate profits. The concern here is determining how revenues are used solely in activities related to the mission: does it suffice if the competent organ within the organization approves? I have earlier raised the issue of mismanagement by these organs. In the same context, the Rwandan legislator empowered the Board, the province, and the district to be informed through annual reports about the annual plan of activities, budget, and budget execution. However, I observe that the Rwandan legislator left the role of these local administrative institutions unclear in respect of these reports. Therefore, the legislator should have clarified their power to approve, rectify, or reject them.

Strategic prevention of related financial crimes

First, I must recall that financial crime such as money laundering is a process by which a large amount of illegally obtained money, from drug trafficking, terrorist activity, or other serious crimes, is made to appear to have originated from a legitimate source. Experience with churches and money laundering in Nigeria suffices to alert any legislator to monitor the financial transactions of churches and worship groups. Some perpetrators of money laundering operated with some church leaders in Nigeria by using them as agents and partners in the illicit enterprise, and thus the churches became facilitating agents for asset concealment. In this process, the perpetrators purchased multiple houses using the names of friends and churches, gave assets to churches on secret trust agreements while proclaiming such assets to be anonymous donations and gifts, established private educational institutions in the name of unsuspecting business persons, or entered into anonymous joint ventures with others to establish some. The Rwandan legislator sought to prevent such illicit financial transactions by establishing a monitoring process for financial support, budget planning, and execution.

In doing so, the current law provides that any financial support is deposited into the account of an organization, umbrella, forum of umbrellas, or ministry opened at an accredited bank or financial institution in Rwanda. I can deduce that this system allows the monetary operator to monitor the source of financial support and the destination of any transaction. Equally, it prohibits an organization, an umbrella, a forum of umbrellas, or a ministry from receiving support from any individual or organization involved in terrorism or other criminal activities.

The necessity to address the issue of abuse of worship

Ngabonziza discussed the exaggerated increase in the number of churches in Rwanda, especially in Kigali City. He asserts that this increase resulted in abuse of the religious freedom provided for by the Constitution. What was more surprising was that some churches met in tents or houses that could not accommodate crowds, and noise pollution from night-time gatherings was a concern. As a solution, Article 23 of the law requires religious sermons to be delivered in designated facilities that meet the requirements of the law. If an organization intends to organize a special public gathering, it seeks authorization from the competent authority, particularly from the Board; this includes preaching through the media.

In another study, Gasana and Habamenshi raised the issue of increasing poverty among religious believers, while religious leaders promoted a culture of operating miracles and prophecies as Christians continued to sink deeper into debt than ever before. Regrettably, church leaders could gain profits from believers’ sacrifices, an act that the researchers qualified as an abuse of prophecy. They criticized these miracles as being used to prove that a particular brand of religion is trustworthy or that a particular religious leader is an authentic representative of God. Such practices consist of abuse of prophecy and misinterpretation of the scriptures associated with robbery through prophecies.

Preachers, who should help comfort believers’ emotions during difficult moments, instead sought to profit from them. Some of the methods they used consisted of imposing heavy offertories in the form of sacrifices, obligatory payment of a tenth of an advance of thanksgiving, or other sorts of gifts to the prophet to receive the prophetic message, the prophet being considered a messenger of God. I can infer that such practices would amount to a crisis in churches if the state did not intervene. Therefore, the intervention of Rwandan law governing faith-based organizations was conclusive in addressing these issues of abuse of worship and preventing exploitation exercised by religious leaders against their followers. The Rwandan Penal Code is clear in the punishment of such acts.

While recognizing that an organization, umbrella, forum of umbrellas, or ministry is free to determine the criteria for membership concerning its doctrine and practices, the law restricts it from using coercive or fraudulent means to recruit followers or members, and members have the right to leave.

Power of local administration and sanctions

The law on faith-based organizations empowers local administrative entities to enforce the law and make decisions accordingly. Through the decentralization and collaboration system, the district can request explanations from an organization, an umbrella, a forum of umbrellas, or a ministry operating in that district that did not fulfil its responsibilities. This district’s commitment to collaboration, a letter issued by district authorities agreeing to collaborate with the organization, is among the documents submitted to the Board when applying for legal personality. This power is ordinarily entrusted to the Rwanda Governance Board. If these explanations are unsatisfactory, if an organization fails to provide explanations, or if it commits the same mistakes about which it was warned, the Board can warn it in writing.

The sanctions to impose on defaulting organizations include suspension or dismissal of administration members, which the Board does when the organization’s own organs fail to take action, or revocation of legal personality. This punitive intervention is done in the interests of the organization. One leading example is the Board’s decision to dissolve the entire leadership of the Association des Églises de Pentecôte au Rwanda on 4 October 2020, after years of wrangling, infighting, and allegations of mismanaging the church’s funds. The concerned leadership included the general assembly, the board of directors, the executive committee, and the arbitration committee. The Board dissolved that leadership because these problems had been present for some time and the leadership had not taken steps to resolve them. Governance and functioning within the organization continued to be marred by divisionism, disturbing the members’ peace.

A severe sanction is when the Board revokes the legal personality of an organization, an umbrella, a forum of umbrellas, or a ministry. It happens if the entity no longer fulfils one or many of the requirements that served as a basis for being issued with legal personality. It can also happen when one or many provisions that served as a basis for issuing legal personality are found to be false. Revoking legal personality can amount to total closure.

Recently, an extreme decision to shut down more than 5,600 places of worship over failure to meet the conditions required by law signifies Rwandan rigour in regulating faith-based organizations and ensuring the enforcement of laws in place. Many of these had no address and, according to some claims, were prone to indoctrinating their followers and exploiting congregants.

Intervention in intra-religious conflict resolution

The law governing faith-based organizations empowers organizations to resolve internal conflicts, requiring that they have organs in charge of conflict resolution, and to seek support and intervention from immediately superior organs. The case is referred to the Board only if the claiming party is unsatisfied with the decision taken by the forum of umbrellas. Though an organization, an umbrella, a forum of umbrellas, or a ministry can be dissolved after approval by its supreme organ based on its statutes, the decision is communicated to the Board before implementation. I observe that the law has remained silent on the power of the Board over such a decision, or whether the Board can revoke it.

SUMMARY *

The article’s argument rests on a historical claim with a legal consequence. If religious institutions were among the instruments through which the genocide was prepared and carried out, then the state’s interest in what is preached within them is not an ordinary regulatory interest but a security one, and the general presumption against interference gives way. From this the author derives the case for the framework of 2018 and for its enforcement, including the closure of thousands of places of worship. The article is not uncritical of that framework: it identifies the tithe, the practice of prophecy and the collection of offerings as the areas where exploitation actually occurs and where the law is silent, and it notes the unresolved question of what powers local authorities hold over the reports submitted to them.

CONCLUSION

When discussing the necessity of regulating faith-based organizations in Rwanda, a straightforward view would conclude that every regulation potentially interferes with religious freedom. In contrast, a more objective view is that it is helpful to set limits on religious freedom to protect public security, morals, and order. While the primary goal of religion and religious teaching is to help believers prepare themselves for the ultimate goal through the love of God and the love of their neighbours, a few religious bodies that have existed in Rwanda since independence in 1962 moved in the opposite direction. Religion and politics were intertwined, while religious teaching became a means to create and spread hatred, discrimination, divisionism, genocide ideology, and its execution. The result was the genocide committed in 1994, which killed more than one million Tutsi in less than a hundred days. After 1994, religious groups and prayer houses increased as former Rwandan refugees returned home and different people moved to Rwanda for various purposes while contributing to the creation of new groups. Rwandans abandoned their former religions to join new ones or to belong to none. The main reasons were a sense of betrayal by former religious leaders or by their acts prior to and during the genocide. Others expected to receive emotional, psychological, and financial support from these religious groups.

Undoubtedly, that high increase of religious groups is not free from criticism: many religious groups lacked the infrastructure required to host their members, religious teachings were abused as some preachers and self-styled prophets used them as devices for financial gain from their poor followers, and conflicts within religious groups increased. This religious crisis necessitated the legislator’s intervention to set clear and binding guidelines for establishing, registering, operating, and managing faith-based organizations in 2018 and to empower the Rwanda Governance Board to implement the law. Since then, the organization and functioning of faith-based organizations have been harmonized and regular monitoring processes have been carried out, while many religious groups that did not fulfil legal requirements were closed and various religious leaders and preachers were suspended or removed. In the present paper, I supported the necessity for the state’s intervention in religious activities as an exception to the principle of separation of Church and state. I must emphasize that the state is responsible for the security of citizens and must use all possible means to fulfil that responsibility. Finally, I recommend reviewing the existing monitoring system to evaluate the content of the spiritual messages delivered to believers in different religious groups. While recognizing that this is a significant challenge in regulating faith-based organizations, I reiterate that religious teachings and spiritual messages should emphasize the love of God and the love of neighbours instead of the malpractices of some religious groups, leaders, and preachers, especially the abuse of the meaning and value of sacrifices and the tithe, of revelation and miracles, and the issue of night prayers in prayer houses.

POTENTIAL SOLUTION *

The article makes a serious case and it can be tested against the standard that governs this question in international law, which is more demanding than either side of the debate the author describes.

Freedom of religion has two components. The freedom to hold a belief is absolute and admits no limitation. The freedom to manifest it may be limited, but only where the limitation is prescribed by law, pursues one of the enumerated aims of public safety, order, health, morals or the rights of others, and is necessary and proportionate to that aim. Rwanda’s constitutional formulation reproduces this structure. The consequence is that the debate is not between regulation and freedom but about whether particular measures meet the test, and each measure has to be assessed separately rather than justified by the aim in general.

Applied that way, the measures the article describes fall into distinguishable groups. Requirements concerning building safety, capacity and noise are ordinary public safety regulation, apply to secular gatherings equally, and are unproblematic. The prohibition on preaching that incites ethnic hatred is not merely permitted but required, since the Genocide Convention obliges states to prevent incitement and the international tribunal’s judgments established that such speech preceded and enabled the killing. Financial transparency obligations likewise apply to associations generally.

The educational qualification for preachers is where the analysis becomes harder, and it is worth stating the difficulty plainly rather than assuming it away. A degree requirement bears unevenly on traditions with formal seminary structures and those without, and it can operate in practice to advantage established churches over newer congregations, which are precisely the ones the article identifies as having grown because people left the established churches. That does not make it unlawful; it means the justification has to be specific to the harm, and the harm the author actually documents concerns exploitation and dangerous teaching rather than the absence of a degree. The narrower measures that address the documented harm directly, and which the article rightly notes the law omits, are financial disclosure to congregations, a complaints route for members, and rules on the solicitation of offerings.

Two further observations. Prior authorisation as a condition of worship has been examined by human rights bodies in a number of jurisdictions, and the consistent finding is that registration is acceptable where it is declaratory and objection is possible only on defined grounds, and problematic where a discretionary authority decides which groups may exist. Where thousands of congregations are closed in a short period, the questions that determine which of these is happening are procedural: was notice given, was time allowed to comply, was there an appeal to an independent body, and were the criteria published in advance. The article does not address these, and they are what a defender of the policy would most usefully establish.

Finally, the article’s own conclusion contains the point at which caution is most warranted. Reviewing the content of spiritual messages is a substantially different undertaking from regulating buildings or accounts, and the state that acquires the power to assess doctrine has acquired something it will be asked to use again. The history the author recounts is precisely why this is difficult: the churches were captured by the politics of their day, and the remedy proposed places the assessment of religious teaching in the hands of the state. The safer route, and the one this journal would recommend, runs through the religious communities themselves: umbrella bodies with genuine authority to set standards, internal complaint mechanisms, and interfaith structures that address abuse from within, supported by the state and not administered by it. That preserves the protection while leaving the content of belief where the constitutional guarantee places it.

* Added by the WMO Editorial Team

REFERENCES

Balmer, Crispian. “Pope Francis Asks for Forgiveness for Church’s Role in Rwanda Genocide.” Reuters, March 20, 2017. https://www.reuters.com/article/world/pope-asks-forgiveness-for-church-role-in-rwanda-genocide-idUSKBN16R1DI/. Accessed 12 August 2024.

Court, Anthony. “Can the Rwandan Catholic Church Overcome Its History of Politicization? A Reply to Philippe Denis.” Journal for the Study of Religion 32, no. 2 (2019). http://dx.doi.org/10.17159/2413-3027/2019/v32n2a2.

Gasana, Sebastien, and Védaste Habamenshi. “The Problematic of Today’s Spectacular Counterfeit Miracles, Tongues, Healing and Prophecies Assimilated as Gifts of the Holy Spirit: Experience of Christian Churches in Rwanda.” Vol. 8, no. 4 (November 4, 2018): 59 to 81.

Kamanzi, Nicole M. “RGB Dissolves ADEPR Church Leadership.” Igihe, October 4, 2020. https://en.igihe.com/news/article/rgb-dissolves-adepr-church-leadership. Accessed 12 August 2024.

Kingston, Kato. “Concealment of Illegally Obtained Assets in Nigeria: Revisiting the Role of the Churches in Money Laundering.” African Journal of International and Comparative Law 28 (February 1, 2020): 106 to 121. https://doi.org/10.3366/ajicl.2020.0304.

Kubai, Anne. “Post-Genocide Rwanda: The Changing Religious Landscape.” Exchange 36, no. 2 (2007): 198 to 214. https://doi.org/10.1163/157254307X176606.

Kumar, Vandana Ajay. “Money Laundering: Concept, Significance and Its Impact.” European Journal of Business and Management 4, no. 2 (2012): 113 to 119.

Longman, Timothy. Christianity and Genocide in Rwanda. African Studies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511642043.

Ngabonziza, Dan. “New Law on Religious Institutions Due Next Week.” KT Press, July 15, 2018. https://www.ktpress.rw/2018/07/new-law-on-religious-institutions-due-next-week/. Accessed 13 August 2024.

Nwazuni, Osajie J. “Religious Leaders as Agents of Peace and Security for Sustainable Development in Nigeria.” UJAH 21, no. 4, Special Edition (2021): 260 to 273. http://dx.doi.org/10.4314/ujah.v21i4.15.

Nzwili, Patrick. “Rwanda Government Shuts More than 5,000 Churches over Code Violations.” Religion News Service, published in The Baptist Paper, August 9, 2024. https://thebaptistpaper.org/rwanda-government-shuts-more-than-5000-churches-over-code-violations/.

Official Gazette. Constitution of the Republic of Rwanda, as Revised in 2023, Special Issue of 04/08/2023 (2023).

Official Gazette. Law Determining Offences and Penalties in General, Special Issue of 27/09/2018 (2018).

Official Gazette. Law Determining the Organisation and Functioning of Faith-Based Organisations, no. 37 bis (2018).

Supplementary references added by the WMO Editorial Team

International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1966, Article 18, and General Comment No. 22 of the Human Rights Committee on freedom of thought, conscience and religion.

African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, 1981, Article 8.

Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, 1948, Articles I and III(c).

International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, Prosecutor v. Nahimana, Barayagwiza and Ngeze (Media Case), Judgment, 3 December 2003.

Organization for Security and Co operation in Europe and Venice Commission (2014). Guidelines on the Legal Personality of Religious or Belief Communities, Warsaw and Venice.

Reports of the United Nations Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief, in particular on registration requirements for religious communities.

Longman, T. (2010). Christianity and Genocide in Rwanda. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Denis, P. (2020). Church and State in Rwanda: A Contested History. Journal for the Study of Religion, 33(1).