[{"bbox": [96, 178, 1136, 551], "category": "Text", "text": "Access to formal justice structures is still impeded by a number of barriers, particularly for poor people, often living in rural areas and vulnerable women. The National Legal Aid Policy (NLAP) adopted by the government in 2014 represents a significant step forward, but is not sufficient. A standardized way to mediate conflicts still lacks and should come through the enactment of the Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) Policy, a core component for Access to Justice. Abunzi Committees and MAJ have registered impressive results in handling cases, reducing excessive costs and time required for litigation, arbitration and adjudication processes. But without binding standards on resolution/mediation practices and without proper monitoring of the Abunzi⁶, there is unfortunately room for uneven mediation/reconciliation practices, thus unresolved grievances, and the risk of injustices among potential justice seekers. In parallel, the coordination and referral mechanisms among Abunzi, MAJ, and other legal aid providers within civil society organizations and the Rwanda Bar Association are not yet established. Pro bono schemes for the vulnerable granted by the Rwandan Bar Association are currently developing. However, the imbalanced geographical and gender distribution of lawyers in the urban territories at the expense of rural zones is also critical. The lack of standardized legal aid practices should be addressed. Legal aid providers are unanimous about limited awareness/ignorance of citizens about their legal rights."}, {"bbox": [96, 576, 493, 603], "category": "Section-header", "text": "## Reconciliation, Rehabilitation and Unity"}, {"bbox": [96, 621, 1136, 1073], "category": "Text", "text": "Regarding the detention conditions, overcrowded prisons, limitations in detainees' rights, and lack of implementation of alternative sentences, such as community service penalty for minor offences remain a concern. In addition, the number of former genocidaires exiting prison and returning to communities without adequate structures for rehabilitation and reconciliation pose a challenge for the communities, and society as a whole. As far as social and economic rehabilitation of prisoners is concerned, the establishment of a TVET programme since July 2019 in 5 out of 13 prisons revealed to be a success. RCS confirms that 32%⁷ of ex-inmate prisoners have successfully reintegrated society, due to the technical and vocational skills gained from the programme. While it is now widely accepted that reconciliation can only be achieved through social and economic reintegration, a small proportion of prisoners (1236 inmates⁸ from which 211 women) out of the 80,937 prisoners including former Genocidaires have participated to the TVET programme in the last 3 years. Another limitation is the insufficient collaboration between RCS and CSOs on a coherent process involving trauma healing/reconciliation initiatives, and social and economic rehabilitation. The implementation of some initiatives undertaken by churches and CSOs are often the result of goodwill from prison authorities but would benefit from occurring in an established framework. The results of a recent mapping on social cohesion, trauma healing, and reintegration donors' programmes in Rwanda demonstrate that CSOs interventions are concentrated in the Southern and Western Provinces of the country with an emphasis on dialogue rather than justice, social and economic rehabilitation. Many of these programmes have been successful, albeit not at sufficient scale."}, {"bbox": [96, 1089, 347, 1117], "category": "Section-header", "text": "## Voice and Accountability"}, {"bbox": [96, 1133, 1136, 1241], "category": "Text", "text": "While there are apparent spaces for engagement between civil society and local authorities, very little demand for accountability takes place. Only a few CSOs are effectively involved in advocacy. In few occasions, especially in service delivery, CSOs are invited to decision-making platforms, such as the National Umushyikirano Council, and may use them to speak on behalf of the voiceless or attempt to shape policies."}, {"bbox": [96, 1256, 1136, 1365], "category": "Text", "text": "CSOs have not reached their full potential to question public policies and programmes. The citizenry itself is often disengaged, especially women and youth. CSO work is mainly concentrated in Kigali, while their presence in rural areas is sparse. This makes it difficult for CSOs to represent issues from a wider cross section. Consequently, CSOs work in isolation and do not benefit from synergies by networking and coalition building."}, {"bbox": [96, 1378, 678, 1405], "category": "Text", "text": "Identification of main stakeholders to be covered by the action:"}, {"bbox": [96, 1424, 273, 1450], "category": "Text", "text": "Ministry of Justice"}, {"bbox": [85, 1523, 1145, 1599], "category": "Footnote", "text": "⁶ The total number of Abunzi is 17,941 (55.67% of them are men while 44.33% are women). The total Mediation Committees is 2,563, with 416 at Sector level and 2,147 at Cell level. Law N° 020/2020 of 19/11/2020 amending Law No 37/2016 of 08/09/2016 determining Organization, Jurisdiction, Competence and Functioning of an Abunzi committee."}, {"bbox": [85, 1598, 471, 1622], "category": "Footnote", "text": "⁷ RCS information concept note, March 2022."}, {"bbox": [85, 1621, 360, 1644], "category": "Footnote", "text": "⁸ RCS information, March 2022."}, {"bbox": [1027, 1654, 1145, 1681], "category": "Page-footer", "text": "Page 7 of 25"}]