logo
Rwanda-backed rebels accused of ‘war crimes' in assault on eastern DRC

Rwanda-backed rebels accused of ‘war crimes' in assault on eastern DRC

Telegraph27-05-2025

The Rwanda-backed M23 rebels have been accused of killing, torturing and 'disappearing' civilians after seizing swathes of territory in the eastern Democratic Republic of Congo.
The group's actions 'violate international humanitarian law and may amount to war crimes,' Amnesty International said on Tuesday.
Amnesty investigators collected testimony from 18 men who were held by M23 fighters in a network of detention centres in Goma and Bukavu – the two major cities captured by the rebel group in its assault earlier this year.
One man described witnessing two of his fellow inmates being killed in captivity.
'The M23 [fighter] brought out a hammer and hit him in the ribs. He died on the spot,' he said. 'They took another person. He said he was a former member of the Republican Guard. They hit him with the hammer, but he didn't die immediately. In the morning, he was dead.'
Another man, who was detained in Goma, witnessed the rebels executing a fellow detainee.
'I saw one man who was assassinated,' he said. '[M23] were asking him where he kept the weapons and where is so and so. They shot him in the stomach and the right arm.'
At least nine of the former detainees said they were beaten with a range of implements including wooden rods, electric cables, and engine belts on areas including their genitalia and buttocks.
'I was beaten for five days,' said a former detainee who was held in a military compound in Goma. 'Everyone was hit. They said they were going to kill me. They said: 'We don't need you. We will take your wife, and we will impregnate her.''
Five of the detainees required hospital treatment following their release.
Many of the men interviewed by Amnesty said they were detained on suspicion of supporting the Congolese government and army.
Some were accused, without evidence, of hiding or possessing weapons, others of knowing the whereabouts of civil servants or government officials, while several were detained for speaking out against M23 abuses.
Survivors said hundreds of detainees were being held in 'overcrowded, unsanitary cells without sufficient food, water, sanitation facilities or healthcare,' Amnesty said.
Some were not told at all why they were being held and were denied access to lawyers or communication with their families.
Amnesty wrote to Rwanda's Ministry of Justice and Attorney General with its allegations earlier this month, but says it has not yet received a response.
More than 7,000 people have been killed and hundreds of thousands more displaced in the DRC since January in the latest escalation in conflict between the armed forces and the M23, which was formed in 2012 and has roots in the 1998 Rwandan genocide.
The United Nations maintains that Rwanda has 'de facto control of M23 operations,' and has detailed how M23 recruits are trained under Rwandan supervision and equipped with Rwandan weaponry – but Rwanda's leader, President Paul Kagame, has repeatedly denied any involvement in supporting the M23 rebels.
'M23's public statements about bringing order to eastern DRC mask their horrific treatment of detainees. They brutally punish those who they believe oppose them and intimidate others, so no one dares to challenge them,' said Tigere Chagutah, Amnesty International's Regional Director for East and Southern Africa. 'Regional and international actors must pressure Rwanda to cease its support for M23.'
In February, David Lammy, the Foreign Secretary, announced that Britain would suspend aid to Rwanda due to its support of M23.
The UK has also said it will impose other measures, including looking into potential sanctions and suspending 'future defence training assistance'.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

EXCLUSIVE Mother-of-four's warning to holidaymakers after husband is jailed for 10 YEARS after visiting popular tourist destination
EXCLUSIVE Mother-of-four's warning to holidaymakers after husband is jailed for 10 YEARS after visiting popular tourist destination

Daily Mail​

time4 hours ago

  • Daily Mail​

EXCLUSIVE Mother-of-four's warning to holidaymakers after husband is jailed for 10 YEARS after visiting popular tourist destination

The wife of a father jailed for 10 years over a 'tweet' has warned Brits to 'think hard about the risks' after her husband was 'abducted' at a popular tourist destination. Ahmed al-Doush, a senior business analyst at Bank of America, lived in Manchester before the day of his arrest when he was swooped on at an airport on August 31 last year as he prepared to fly home. The British citizen was held in a maximum security prison under strict anti-terrorism laws, on charges that included criticising the government on social media and associating with a London-based dissident. His distraught wife has spoken out to warn too many people are unaware of the 'dangers' of travelling to the country which hundreds of thousands of Brits frequent each year. Amaher Nour told MailOnline: 'For years my family and I have enjoyed travelling to Saudi Arabia for holidays and pilgrimage – that all changed in August 2024 when my husband was abducted at Riyadh airport. 'I would advise fellow Brits to think hard about whether it's worth the risk after my husband, a British citizen, was sentenced to 10 years in prison in Saudi Arabia for what we think might be a deleted tweet – but we're not sure which tweet, the evidence or the exact charges. 'The UK Government doesn't know the charges either and has refused to demand answers from Saudi Arabia. 'For as long as the UK Government fails to warn Britons of the dangers of travelling to Saudi Arabia, and fails stand up for its citizens arbitrarily detained abroad, other families like ours are at risk of being torn apart.' Mr al-Doush was put in solitary confinement for 33 days after his arrest and denied consular assistance as well as access to legal representation for more than two months. He was then jailed for a decade, with a state-appointed lawyer initially telling Ms Nour her husband had been convicted of an offence at a hearing but that he could not tell her what it was. The case was discussed by the UK foreign secretary David Lammy alongside his Saudi counterpart, Prince Faisal bin Farhan bin Abdullah, though details of their call were not disclosed. Mr al-Doush had not met his baby son Youssef, after missing the birth in December due to his detention. Ms Nour said: 'The authorities asked for his documents and we thought it was just a problem with his visa. He called me from security and told me to fly with the children on to Turkey, our transit stop, and said, "I'll be with you shortly".' It was only once the family touched down in Manchester that they received confirmation Mr al-Doush had been imprisoned. He was reportedly blocked from having any contact with his family until November 17 2024 - almost three months after he was first detained. Mr al-Doush is believed to have been imprisoned in relation to a deleted Tweet from 2018 about the war in Sudan, his homeland, which provided military support for Saudi Arabia in its ongoing conflict with Yemen. He has not posted about Saudi Arabia on his X account and only had 37 followers. Dan Dolan, Interim Deputy Executive Director of civil rights group Reprieve, has written to the UK Foreign Office urging the government to 'update its travel advice to Saudi Arabia' so British nationals are 'fully informed of risks to their safety'. Mr Dolan said: 'The Saudi authorities have announced that they are investing $800 billion to transform their tourism sector to attract more visitors. 'Hundreds of thousands of Britons already visit the Kingdom each year. 'Few will be aware that an old, deleted social media post could lead to them being abducted, charged with terrorism offences and potentially sentenced to death. 'Few will know that there are currently foreign nationals on death row, at imminent risk of execution, after being caught with cannabis for personal use. 'Hundreds more have been imprisoned for similar acts, including Reprieve clients Hassan al-Maliki and Salman al-Odah, two scholars detained since 2017 and at risk of the death penalty for peaceful expression of their opinions. 'The UN has repeatedly condemned Saudi Arabia's 2017 counterterrorism law for violating international human rights standards and criminalising protected speech and association.' Ms Nour previously said night time is 'hardest' for her when she is 'alone and it's quite'. She added: 'I keep asking myself "why, why, why has this happened", and I can't get to the bottom of it because it's not rational in any way. He has no political associations.' The Foreign Office said: 'We are supporting a British man who is detained in Saudia Arabia and are in contact with his family and the local authorities.'

Kilmar Abrego Garcia is returning to the US to face criminal charges, report says
Kilmar Abrego Garcia is returning to the US to face criminal charges, report says

The Independent

time7 hours ago

  • The Independent

Kilmar Abrego Garcia is returning to the US to face criminal charges, report says

More than two months after Donald Trump 's administration was ordered to 'facilitate' the return of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, the wrongfully deported Salvadoran father is reportedly on his way back to the United States. The government has spent weeks battling court orders for his return after admitting he was deported in error, but the 29-year-old Maryland father is now facing a federal grand jury indictment for allegedly illegally transporting undocumented immigrants, according to ABC News. A two-count indictment filed under seal in federal court in Tennessee reportedly accuses Abrego Garcia of participating in a conspiracy to traffic undocumented immigrants from Texas. Abrego Garcia fled El Salvador as a teenager in 2011 and was working as a sheet-metal apprentice in Maryland, where he has been living with his wife and 5-year-old child, both U.S. citizens. The couple is also raising two other children from a previous relationship. After a traffic stop in March, he was detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement and then deported to El Salvador's brutal Terrorism Confinement Center despite an immigration court judge's 2019 order withholding his removal from the country for humanitarian reasons. Abrego Garcia was later moved to another prison for non-gang members. He has been imprisoned in the country for nearly three months. Trump's allies and administration officials have repeatedly sought to justify his detention over allegations of criminal activity and MS-13 gang membership, which were raised only after he was summarily deported. Democrats and legal analysts have argued the administration could simply return Abrego Garcia and then use that alleged evidence against him in normal immigration court removal hearings. Instead, Justice Department lawyers and Trump administration officials clashed with federal judges and raised a 'state secrets' privilege to avoid answering a judge's questions about the government's relationship with El Salvador and conversations about his detention there.

Liberty loses bid to bring legal action against equalities body
Liberty loses bid to bring legal action against equalities body

The Independent

time9 hours ago

  • The Independent

Liberty loses bid to bring legal action against equalities body

Human rights group Liberty has lost a bid to bring legal action against the equalities watchdog over its consultation in the wake of the Supreme Court's ruling on gender. The UK's highest court ruled in April that the words 'woman' and 'sex' in the Equality Act 2010 refer to a biological woman and biological sex, after a challenge against the Scottish Government by campaign group For Women Scotland. The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) is consulting on proposed amendments to part of its guidance, after interim guidance was published last month related to trans people's use of certain spaces including toilets and participation in sports following the judgment. The commission increased the length of time for feedback from an original proposal of two weeks to six weeks, but campaign group Liberty said that it should be at least 12 weeks, claiming the current period would be 'wholly insufficient' and unlawful. Liberty made a bid to bring a legal challenge over the length of the consultation, but in a decision on Friday afternoon Mr Justice Swift said it was not arguable. In his ruling, Mr Justice Swift said: 'There is no 12-week rule. The requirements of fairness are measured in specifics and context is important.' 'I am not satisfied that it is arguable that the six-week consultation period that the EHRC has chosen to use is unfair,' he added. At the hearing on Friday, Sarah Hannett KC, for Liberty, said in written submissions that the Supreme Court's decision 'has altered the landscape radically and suddenly' and potentially changes the way trans people access single-sex spaces and services. The barrister said this included some businesses preventing trans women from using female toilets and trans men from using male toilets, as well as British Transport Police updating its policy on strip searches, which have caused 'understandable distress to trans people'. Ms Hannett said a six-week consultation period would be unlawful because the EHRC has not given 'sufficient time' for consultees to give 'intelligent consideration and an intelligent response'. She told the London court: 'There is a desire amongst the bigger trans organisations to assist the smaller trans organisations in responding… That is something that is going to take some time.' Later in her written submissions, the barrister described the trans community as 'particularly vulnerable and currently subject to intense scrutiny and frequent harassment'. Ms Hannett added: 'There is evidence of distrust of both consultation processes and the commission within the community.' Lawyers for the EHRC said the legal challenge should not go ahead and that six weeks was 'adequate'. James Goudie KC, for the commission, told the hearing there is 'no magic at all in 12 weeks'. He said in written submissions: 'Guidance consistent with the Supreme Court's decision has become urgently needed. The law as declared by the Supreme Court is not to come in at some future point. 'It applies now, and has been applying for some time.' The barrister later said that misinformation had been spreading about the judgment, adding that it was 'stoking what was already an often heated and divisive debate about gender in society'. He continued: 'The longer it takes for EHRC to issue final guidance in the form of the code, the greater the opportunity for misinformation and disinformation to take hold, to the detriment of persons with different protected characteristics.' Mr Goudie also said that there was a previous 12-week consultation on the guidance at large starting in October 2024. Following the ruling, EHRC chairwoman Baroness Kishwer Falkner said the commission's approach 'has been fair and appropriate throughout'. She continued: 'Our six-week consultation period represents a balance between gathering comprehensive stakeholder input and addressing the urgent need for clarity. We're particularly encouraged by the thousands of consultation responses already received and look forward to further meaningful engagement through the rest of the process. 'The current climate of legal uncertainty and widespread misinformation serves nobody – particularly those with protected characteristics who rightly expect clarity about their rights. A swift resolution to this uncertainty will benefit everyone, including trans people.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store