Kagame Got His Wish for African Solutions to African Problems. He Just Suffered a Pivotal Defeat at the African Court, For His atrocities in DR Congo
- Dr. David Himbara

- Jun 26, 2025
- 3 min read
It is important to recognize that this outcome is not merely a victory for the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC); it represents a significant step forward for the very essence of accountability across the African continent. This case marks a historic turning point, demonstrating the power of justice and the potential for meaningful change, demonstrating the trustworthiness of African institutions in managing intricate and politically charged cases.

On June 26, 2025, the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) secured a substantial early victory in its landmark legal dispute with Rwanda before the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights (ACHPR). This pivotal moment in Africa’s pursuit of justice and accountability was marked by the court’s ruling in favour of the DRC on preliminary objections raised by Rwanda, permitting the case to proceed to full hearings on the merits.
This is the first-ever inter-state case to be heard by the African Court. The centers on allegations that Rwanda violated the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights by supporting the M23 rebel group in eastern Congo. The DRC accuses Rwanda of backing the insurgents responsible for mass killings, forced displacement, destruction of infrastructure, and looting since 2021. The Kagame regime has consistently denied the allegations.
The court’s decision to dismiss Rwanda’s objections and advance the case is a significant milestone for African-led justice. This ruling establishes a strong precedent for African states, demonstrating that disputes can be effectively resolved through judicial mechanisms instead of resorting to military confrontations or enduring political impasses.
In August 2023, the DRC filed a compelling case that invokes the African Charter and other regional legal instruments. After several months of vigorous public hearings, the court delivered its ruling on the admissibility of the case, addressing critical issues such as jurisdiction, legal standing, and procedural compliance, with both sides presenting their arguments forcefully.

The case has drawn widespread attention across Africa and beyond, with human rights organizations, legal scholars, and regional blocs closely monitoring its progress. Many see it as a test of the African Union’s commitment to upholding the rule of law and protecting civilians in conflict zones.
The DRC government has welcomed the ruling, seeing it as a crucial step toward justice for the victims of violence in the Eastern region, currently under Rwandan military and M23 militia occupation. The Kagame regime hasn’t responded formally, but its officials have always argued that the case is politically motivated and lacks evidence. They claim they have no ties to M23 and accuse the DRC of failing to address internal governance and security issues.
As the case moves forward, the ACHPR will now begin examining the substantive claims, including whether Rwanda’s alleged actions constitute violations of the African Charter and other international obligations.
The court’s willingness to hear the case underscores that no African state is above the law and that victims of cross-border violence can seek legal redress. It also reinforces the African Court’s role as a credible forum for resolving political deadlocks. The next phase of hearings is expected later this year, drawing attention to Arusha as the continent watches this landmark case unfold.
For the people of Rwanda, the trial of Kagame and his regime at the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights represents a pivotal moment of hope. This is a regime that has operated above the law for far too long, evading accountability within Rwanda itself. Although this trial may be taking place outside the country, it is a significant and welcomed step toward justice. It is only a matter of time before the regime is held accountable under the rule of law in Rwanda—historically, dictators do not remain in power forever.



Comments