Bringing Rwandan Refugees ‘Home’: The Cessation Clause, Statelessness, and Forced Repatriation

Abstract

Rwanda and the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) contend that the genocidal violence and harsh repression that forced thousands of Rwandans to flee their country between 1959 and 1998 have ended, making Rwanda safe for return. The UNHCR-invoked cessation clause came into effect in 2013 as part of renewed attempts to bring refugees ‘home’ from neighbouring countries, despite reports of increasing State-sanctioned persecution in Rwanda and beyond. Although UNHCR has commended the government for its efforts to repatriate Rwandan nationals, critics argue that this process of bringing refugees ‘home’ includes forced repatriation and denationalization. Refugees who do not return to Rwanda risk the consequences of de facto statelessness (the inability to enjoy the benefits associated with legal nationality) outside their country of origin, while political dissidents abroad face de jure statelessness (lack of legal nationality in any country) as punishment for criticizing President Paul Kagame and the Rwandan Patriotic Front ruling political party. This article argues that human rights protection – including protecting the ‘right to a nationality’ and preventing statelessness – must be of central concern. It is imperative that the international community presses for the development of genuine respect for human rights and democracy in Rwanda, and also considers the complexities of refugee repatriation in the context of Rwandan identity- and nation-building.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 28 citations exist upstream.