Rusesabagina trial: the last card of the Belgian Defence

On August 21, Vincent Lurquin, the Belgian lawyer of Paul Rusesabagina, the Kigali hotelier made famous by Hollywood in the movie Hotel Rwanda, was deported by the Rwandan immigration services. Far from being a violation of the rights of the defence as the supporters of his client claim, it is a logical continuation of the hazardous attempt attempted by his Belgian defence which, obviously, opted for a rupture of defence. As we move towards the end of his trial, this strategy seems risky.

Judged since February 17, 2021 by the High Court of Kigali, Paul Rusesabagina was to be fixed on his fate on Friday August 20. He is on trial alongside 20 other defendants for, among other things, a series of attacks in southwestern of Rwanda carried out by the FLN [Front for National Liberation], for which he claimed responsibility. These attacks left nine dead and several injured in 2018, all civilians.

Principle of reciprocity

At the hearing, the announcement of the prorogation of the accused to September 20 almost went unnoticed in the media, swallowed up by the incident caused by the presence on the benches of the defence of Vincent Lurquin, lawyer at the Brussels Bar who does not have the right to practice in Rwanda. Indeed, this profession is one of the protected professions, both in Rwanda and in Belgium, and as in most countries of the world. This means that to exercise it, you must have a specific authorization issued in accordance with the law of each country. Consequently, a lawyer admitted to practice in one country cannot automatically practice in another, except for an exemption which often results from agreements between countries.

Vincent Lurquin, who has thirty-seven years of experience, could not ignore that he could not practice in Rwanda, independent of Belgium since 1962. He had also asked in October 2020 to the President Bar Association’s president for authorization to exercise in Rwanda in the Rusesabagina’s case. His request was replied in accordance with article 7 of the 2013 law establishing the Bar Association in Rwanda.

This provision allows lawyers registered with any bar in the world to practice before Rwandan courts on condition that they provide proof of reciprocity in their country of origin. In other words, they must demonstrate that the law of their country can give Rwandan lawyers the same advantage. It is the famous principle of reciprocity that is central in bilateral relations. It implies the right to equality and mutual respect between States and allows the application of the principle of the territoriality of laws to be reduced.

He entered Rwanda under cover of a tourist visa

Yet there is no reciprocity between Belgium and Rwanda in that matter. In fact, the article 439 of Belgian judicial code only allow registered lawyers in Belgium or in a European Union country

Yet there is no reciprocity between Belgium and Rwanda in this matter. Indeed, article 439 of the Belgian Judicial Code only allows lawyers registered in Belgium or in a country of the European Union to plead before the Belgian courts. Only an agreement between Belgium and another country makes it possible to derogate from this rule, but there is none in this sense with Rwanda.

The Council of the Brussels Bar is perfectly clear on this point. Thus, in its session of May 20, 2014, it recalled that "a non-European foreign lawyer cannot practice his profession in Belgium, the conditions of articles 428 and 428bis not being fulfilled" ... This position is moreover included in point 30-3 of the 2010 collection of professional rules of the Brussels Bar.

Vincent Lurquin's request thus collided with the law of his own country and therefore could not prosper. While he was informed since October 2020, he nevertheless decided to appear, as a lawyer, at the hearing of the High Court of Kigali when he had entered Rwanda under cover of a tourist visa. However, in Belgium as in Rwanda, the exercise without authorization of a protected profession is criminal. The same applies to the illegal work, that is to say, respectively, work which is not declared or which is carried out by a foreigner who does not have a work permit. It is therefore logical that Vincent Lurquin was subjected to an expulsion decision, sanction provided for by article 15 of the 2018 law on immigration in Rwanda - sanction which is also very common in Belgium for foreigners in the same situation.

"Speaking to the masses over the judge's head"

One may wonder why Vincent Lurquin acted like this when he could not ignore what he was facing. The answer is probably to be found in the theory of the "rupture of defense" once embodied by the famous Jacques Vergès although he was not the inventor. Rather, its authorship is attributed to Marcel Willard, a now unjustly forgotten Communist lawyer. This type of defense consists of attacking the court, not recognizing its legitimacy, creating incidents, making the trial a case by overriding the court, to call upon the public opinion and the media.

In the present case, Paul Rusesabagina, who decided to boycott his trial, refuses to recognize the legitimacy of his judges and his supporters continue to try to call upon the opinion and the media to witness, claiming that it is a political trial, carefully avoiding talking about the concrete facts for which he is being tried. The incident created by Vincent Lurquin is a thoughtful act that fits into this strategy. Everything suggests that this is the last card played before the verdict expected in less than a month.

Will this strategy pay off? The future will tell. It is not without interest to note, however, that in his book, La Défense accuse, Marcel Willard, the author of this strategy, recalls that its origin goes back to Lenin who, in 1905, had asked all Bolsheviks brought to justice "to defend the cause and not their persons by speaking to the masses over the judge’s heads".

Not sure that this strategy, which has proven itself in their country, can have the same result for Paul Rusesabagina, the Hollywood hero. Not sure either that this one is ready to sacrifice his person for his "cause", he who, as soon as he was caught by justice, was not afraid to maintain staunchly that he was not Rwandan but Belgian when his "cause" consisted in seizing power in Rwanda.

Source: www.jeuneafrique.com