Skip to main content

DRC: Mapping human rights violations 1993-2003

In the wake of the discovery of three mass graves in the eastern part of the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) in late 2005, the United Nations first announced its intention to send a human rights team to conduct a mapping exercise in DRC in a June 2006 report to the Security Council.
In May 2007, the UN Secretary-General approved the terms of reference of the mapping exercise following a series of consultations among relevant UN agencies and partners and with the Congolese government

The mapping exercise, led by the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) had three objectives:
• Conduct a mapping exercise of the most serious violations of human rights and international humanitarian law committed within the territory of the DRC between March 1993 and June 2003.
• Assess the existing capacities within the national justice system to deal appropriately with such human rights violations that may be uncovered.
• Formulate a series of options aimed at assisting the Government of the DRC in identifying appropriate transitional justice mechanisms to deal with the legacy of these violations, in terms of truth, justice, reparation and reform, taking into account ongoing efforts by the DRC authorities, as well as the support of the international community.

The mapping exercise began in July 2008. Between October 2008 and May 2009, a total of 33 staff worked on the project in the DRC (including Congolese and international human rights experts). Of these, some 20 human rights officers were deployed across the country, operating out of five field offices, to gather documents and information from witnesses to meet the three objectives defined in the terms of reference. The report was submitted to the High Commissioner for Human Rights in June 2009 for review, comments and finalisation.

The mapping team's 550-page report contains descriptions of 617 alleged violent incidents occurring in the DRC between March 1993 and June 2003. Each of these incidents points to the possible commission of gross violations of human rights and/or international humanitarian law. Each of the incidents listed is backed up by at least two independent sources identified in the report. As serious as they may be, uncorroborated incidents claimed by one single source are not included. Over 1,500 documents relating to human rights violations committed during this period were gathered and analysed with a view to establishing an initial chronology by region of the main violent incidents reported. Only incidents meeting a 'gravity threshold' set out in the methodology were considered. Field mapping teams met with over 1,280 witnesses to corroborate or invalidate the violations listed in the chronology. Information was also collected on previously undocumented crimes.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

OIF : Louise Mushikiwabo, une candidature embarrassante pour un troisième mandat de trop

C'était en novembre 2025, à Kigali. En marge de la 46e Conférence ministérielle de la Francophonie, Louise Mushikiwabo prenait la parole avec l'assurance de celle qui n'a rien à craindre : de nombreux pays, affirmait-elle, lui avaient demandé de se représenter. Spontanément. Naturellement. Unanimement presque. Sauf que les faits racontent une tout autre histoire. L'annonce qui ne devait pas avoir lieu si tôt Novembre 2025. Le Centre de Conventions de Kigali accueille plus de 400 délégués des 90 États membres de l'Organisation internationale de la Francophonie. Le thème officiel porte sur les femmes et l'égalité des genres, trente ans après Pékin. Mais en marge des séances plénières, c'est une autre affaire qui agite les couloirs : Louise Mushikiwabo vient d'annoncer qu'elle souhaite briguer un troisième mandat. L'annonce est prématurée. Délibérément. Les candidatures ne ferment qu'en avril 2026. Aucun autre pays n'a encore ...

Pourquoi les sanctions américaines ne fonctionnent pas contre le Rwanda

Pourquoi Paul Kagame a ignorĂ© les sanctions amĂ©ricaines et la RĂ©solution 2773 du Conseil de sĂ©curitĂ© de l'ONU Entre fĂ©vrier 2025 et mars 2026, le TrĂ©sor amĂ©ricain a imposĂ© deux sĂ©ries de sanctions ciblant directement la machine de guerre du Rwanda dans l'est du Congo : d'abord James Kabarebe, ministre d'État rwandais et principal intermĂ©diaire du rĂ©gime auprès du M23, puis les Forces de dĂ©fense rwandaises en tant qu'entitĂ©, ainsi que quatre de leurs hauts responsables. Chacun des individus sanctionnĂ©s est demeurĂ© en poste. Les FDR ne se sont pas retirĂ©es. Cette analyse examine pourquoi les mesures de Washington n'ont pas modifiĂ© la conduite du Rwanda — et pourquoi, selon les propres mots de Kagame, elles sont rejetĂ©es comme l'Ĺ“uvre des « simplement stupides ».     Introduction : des sanctions sans consĂ©quence La campagne de sanctions de Washington contre les opĂ©rations militaires du Rwanda dans l'est du Congo s'...

Paul Kagame: “We refuse to remove defensive measures"

Paul Kagame Refuses to Implement the Washington Accords and UN Security Council Resolution 2773: Analysis and Implications In an exclusive interview published on 3 April 2026, President Paul Kagame of Rwanda openly confirmed that Rwandan forces are deployed in eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo, rejected calls for their withdrawal, dismissed US sanctions as illegitimate, and signalled clear satisfaction with the current military status quo. This briefing examines what Kagame said, what his remarks mean for the Washington Accords, and what concrete steps the United States must now take if it wishes to restore credibility to its diplomacy in the Great Lakes region. Introduction: A Confession Wrapped in Grievance The interview, conducted by François Soudan and published in Jeune Afrique on 3 April 2026, is one of the most candid public statements Paul Kagame has made on Rwanda's military role in the DRC. Its significance does not lie in revealing something previously unknown. Th...

BBC News

Africanews

UNDP - Africa Job Vacancies

How We Made It In Africa – Insight into business in Africa

Migration Policy Institute