Rwanda-backed rebels killed over 140 civilians in eastern Congo, rights group says
Human Rights Watch said 141 people, predominantly Hutus, were feared dead or missing after the attacks near Virunga National Park in North Kivu province, citing local experts and witness accounts.
It said the killings appeared to be part of a military campaign by the M23 group, the most prominent of more than 100 armed groups fighting for control in eastern Congo, against the Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda (FDLR), a mostly Hutu armed group.
Nearly 2 million Hutus from Rwanda fled to Congo after the 1994 Rwandan genocide that killed 800,000 Tutsi, moderate Hutus and others. Rwandan authorities accused the Hutus who fled of participating in the genocide, alleging that the Congolese army protected them.
'The M23 armed group, which has Rwandan government backing, attacked over a dozen villages and farming areas in July and committed dozens of summary executions of primarily Hutu civilians,' said Clementine de Montjoye, senior researcher at Human Rights Watch.
Witnesses said M23 soldiers, accompanied by Rwandan soldiers who were identified by their accents, told them to 'immediately bury the bodies in the fields or leave them unburied, preventing families from organizing funerals,' the report said.
One woman described being marched in a group to a riverbank near the town of Kafuru. The group of around 70 people was lined up before the soldiers began shooting at them. 47 people, including children, who were killed were identified, the report added.
Willy Ngoma, military spokesperson for M23, called the report 'military propaganda.'
The report said the Rwandan military and the Rwanda Defense Force (RDF) were involved in the M23 operations, citing U.N. and military sources and witness accounts. There was no immediate comment from the Rwandan government.
The reported killings could escalate tensions in Congo's mineral-rich east where different partners have been racing to achieve a permanent ceasefire since fighting between the M23 and Congolese forces escalated in January.
The U.N. has called the conflict 'one of the most protracted, complex, serious humanitarian crises on Earth.'
M23 was previously accused of extrajudicial killings during their seizure of major cities in the eastern part of the country in May.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Times
3 hours ago
- Times
Met Police's use of facial recognition tech ‘breaches human rights'
Scotland Yard's plan to increase the use of live facial recognition technology is incompatible with human rights law, the equality watchdog has said. The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) said the Metropolitan Police's policies for deploying the technology 'fall short' and could have a 'chilling effect' on individuals' rights when used at protests. Privacy concerns about live facial recognition (LFR) intensified this week as the Met finalised plans to use it on the approaches to, but not within the boundaries of, the Notting Hill Carnival over the bank holiday weekend. LFR links cameras to a watch list of photos of wanted suspects. Biometric data from a person's face is extracted and compared against the list, and a positive match alerts officers who can seek and stop them.
BBC News
6 hours ago
- BBC News
Newshour DRC: Rights group alleges mass killings by armed group M23
A report by Human Right Watch alleges the M23 rebel group killed at least 140 people in eastern Democratic Republic of Congo last month in one of the worst atrocities committed since its insurgency in 2021. The overall number of victims could exceed 300. We hear from an eye witness and the DRC foreign minister, who says the alleged massacres violated a ceasefire agreement. Also in the programme: the Israeli Defence Force has called around 60,000 reservists in what is being seen as evidence of an imminent operation to take over Gaza City; and the scientific research giving hope to people who have lost their sense of smell. (Photo: a member of the M23 rebel group walks in eastern Democratic Republic of Congo, March 2025. Credit: Reuters / Z. Bensemra)
Telegraph
6 hours ago
- Telegraph
To Americans, Britain is no longer the free country we thought it was
Every year, the US Department of State releases a report on human rights practices in other countries (CRHRP). One of my first assignments as a political officer at the US embassy was to coordinate and edit one country report. Not surprisingly, certain governments sometimes take issue with how their policies are characterised in the CRHRP. For example, South Africa claimed a recent CRHRP was 'inaccurate and deeply flawed' in criticising them for failing to 'investigate, prosecute and punish officials who committed human rights abuses … or violence against racial minorities'. President Cyril Ramaphosa seemed bewildered in May when President Trump took him to task for the murders of white farmers. His government's defence seems to be that South Africa's horrific levels of crime afflict everyone, not just white people, and that the motives are not racist but merely criminal. That is unlikely to mollify a country impoverished under an incompetent succession of ANC leaders, nor will Ramaphosa's explanation that they haven't actually used their sweeping new Land Expropriation Act inspire commercial farmers who feed the country to invest in their farms. But I digress. China doesn't just reject US criticism, they've cheekily published their own report criticising the US for 'the chronic disease of racism,' and 'basic rights and freedoms being disregarded'. Usually, the governments taking the most criticism in the CRHRP are repressive or feckless regimes, from China to Zimbabwe, that suppress free speech, stifle religious expression, or oppress women, minority groups, and political dissidents. That doesn't sound like the England in which I was born over half a century ago. But this year, the Country Report on the UK flags Britain as a risky place to speak your mind. The CRHRP claims that 'the human rights situation worsened in the United Kingdom during the year,' citing 'credible reports of serious restrictions on freedom of expression, including enforcement of or threat of criminal or civil laws in order to limit expression; and crimes, violence, or threats of violence motivated by anti-Semitism'. The report notes restrictions on speech – even silent meditation – near abortion clinics, and the Online Safety Act's curtailment of internet speech, policed by Ofcom. It calls out government censorship of speech deemed misinformation or 'hate speech', including in relation to migrants and crimes committed by foreign nationals. It could have gone even further. In its section on Worker Rights, the CRHRP doesn't discuss the people who have been sacked or disciplined for refusing to accept the forced speech codes of gender ideology, like prison officer David Toshack or nurse Jennifer Melle; or for social media posters who have criticised government action, like teacher Simon Pearson. Like the proverbial frog in slowly heating water, perhaps Brits can't see what is happening to their freedoms. But looking from the outside, we can, and the State Department has called it out. In reaction, I expect the British Left to be as indignant and in denial as the establishment in Washington DC is about crime. Now Donald Trump has temporarily taken over local law enforcement in the city, the Leftist establishment and the national media are claiming that violent crime is lower than in recent years. This ignores some inconvenient realities. First, unreliable numbers. The city has reportedly just settled a lawsuit from a whistleblowing police officer who had alleged that her supervisors were re-classifying serious crimes as lesser offences, to flatter the city's crime statistics. Second, even the supposedly lower murder rate puts Washington among the most dangerous cities in the nation. Like the DC establishment, the British government and much of the media are happy to ignore Lucy Connolly, who is still in prison after she made an unwise online post (and then deleted it); Hamit Coskun, who was prosecuted after he burnt a book; and the thousands of ordinary Brits who have been accused of 'Non-Crime Hate Incidents,' which is at the very least an astonishing waste of police time. The Left likes to pretend that the real villains in the fight for free speech are people like Kathleen Stock, Maya Forstater, and JK Rowling, who courageously state objective truth, rather than the gender ideologues trying to force women to accept men in their changing rooms, prisons, and shelters. George Orwell, Aldous Huxley, and other writers of the early 20th century predicted a future where the populace was dumbed down, repressed, and fed information by an authoritarian state. In the dystopian futures they imagined in 1984 and Brave New World, independent, critical thinking was banned and speech violators were punished. That sounds like the logical destiny of Britain if it maintains its present course. There is already a semi-official dogma on gender ideology, immigration, and crime which it is costly to challenge. Censorship and group-think get worse if not disrupted. Instead of rejecting America's criticism in high dudgeon, I hope Britain will heed the warning of its Atlantic cousins and return to the people their right to speak their minds. For the land of Magna Carta to slowly sink into repression and state control would be a great injustice to Britain's present inhabitants, and an insult to our ancestors' work of centuries. 'The Ten Woke Commandments (You Must Not Obey)' from Academica Books.
