matter he had no knowledge of, would be unfair and we shall
dismiss the Applicant’s complaint in that regard.
(E)
WHETHER THE 2ND RESPONDENT’S ARREST AND DETENTION
OF LIEUTENANT COLONEL NGABO WAS IN VIOLATION OF THE
LAW OF RWANDA
33. It is admitted by the 2nd Respondent that for reasons said to be
of “national” security, the agents of the Republic of Rwanda
arrested and detained the Subject at a known facility within
Rwanda.
Were those actions a violation of the Laws of
Rwanda?
In his Affidavit, Lieutenant Rutayisire deponed partly as follows:
“That on 28th January 2011, the Military High Court
ruled that the detention of Lieutenant colonel
Ngabo from the date he was arrested until the date
his case was brought before the Court was irregular
and contravened the provisions of Articles 90 to 100
of the Rwandan Code of Criminal Procedure.
However, basing on strong reasons to suspect him
and the gravity of the crime against him, taking into
consideration the fact of preventing him from
interfering with the investigation and as insurance
against potential evasion of justice, the Military
High Court ruled on his preventive detention,
applying Article 89 of the Rwandan Code of Criminal
REFERENCE NO.8 OF 2010
Page 23