Rwanda: Kagame Was Served in Oklahoma

By David O’Brian
AfroAmerica Network
Monday, May 3, 2010

Following our comment arguing that the case African Widows (Mrs Habyarimana and Ntaryamira) v Kagame was justiciable in US Courts, we received plenty of messages, some praising our analysis, other cursing AfroAmerica Network, and yet others asking us whether Kagame was legally served. Those who asked this question wanted to know whether Paul Kagame was officially and legally notified by the Court of actions taken against him and his associates in the Court of Law of United States. We will try to answer their question.

Serving or “Process Serving” is one of the most important legal procedures in the US that ensure that everyone is given Due Process of Law. It requires that each party in a case should be notified if actions are taken against them in a court of law.

BBC, in their reporting on the event in their Sunday May 1, 2010 article, titled "Rwandan President Kagame snubs lawsuit during US visit" stated that "the lawyers who filed the lawsuit were unable to serve the legal papers during his visit." AfroAmerica Network also said in our article "Rwandan Dictator Sued in US for War Crimes", that the lawyers tried unsuccessfully to serve Paul Kagame.

Actually, both BBC and AfroAmerica may have rushed to report on what really happened. AfroAmerica Network reported on the event before getting all the facts surrounding the Process Serving to Paul Kagame. Now that AfroAmerica Network has most of the facts, we can say that Paul Kagame has been dully served according to the legal procedure in the US and the laws of the State of Oklahoma. We also said it was a subpoena when, as it appears, it may not be.

Following are the provisions of “Process Serving”, especially in Oklahoma. In Oklahoma -OKLAHOMA RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE § 12-2004 Process- and in most of the US jurisdictions, the person serving the court papers does not need to get a signature of the accused or even meet the accused or the representative. The sheriff or any approved process server notifies the people of actions against them or court procedures involving them through approved methods of delivery of legal documents such as summons, complaints, subpoenas, order to show cause, and writs. This legal process of notification is valid:

a) when the documents are left with an adult competent resident (15 years or more in Oklahoma, if less than 15 years it has to be delivered personally or by serving the adult who cares for the minor) of the named party at the target’s home, or

b) when the documents are left with a management level employee or assigned representative at their place of business or detention

c) by certified mail (need proof of receipt or return in the case the mail is refused).

In some states, if the named party in the documents cannot be found or is evasive, the court may allow process serving by publication in a newspaper or any other avenue the named party is exposed to, such as TV/Newspaper. To get a court approval in this case, the process server or the accusing party may be asked to prove to the court that a reasonable attempt was made to actually serve the defendant or the person named.

Hence, the fact that the court authorized “process server” in Oklahoma approached Paul Kagame and his security detail, left the copies of the notification with them or/and verbally told Mr. Paul Kagame and his entourage of the “process serving” is enough. Because it was a material knowledge that Paul Kagame was a guest of Oklahoma Christian University and had vested interests and business there- such as scholarships and other material interests, leaving copies of the court documents with an official of the School is a valid process serving.

Therefore, legally, officially the Rwandan dictator Paul Kagame and his co-accused have been served in the State of Oklahoma in the case of Rwandan and Burundian Widows v. Paul Kagame et al. The fact that Paul Kagame fled the scene, while his security guards tried to prevent the court-authorized process servers from approaching him during the “process serving” does not help him at all. Actually this may aggravate his case whenever he and his co-accused are tried.

Brief, the Rwandan Dictator Paul Kagame was served and given due process of the law of the Unites States and the State of Oklahoma. By serving Paul Kagame, the process servers consequently served Kagame’s co-accused as well.

This is what the lead Council on the case, Professor Peter Erlinder told the media:

"The U.S. Secret Service and University staff informed Kagame that we had a valid summons and complaint that we wished to serve upon him. We were instructed we could not approach Kagame for security reasons, with which we agreed, but Secret Service informed us that security requirements permitted service on any authorized person on his staff."

"Rather than accept service, members of his staff refused to accept documents and the University ordered process servers, and lawyers, to leave campus....which is 'interference with service of process,' a misdemeanor under Oklahoma law. Also, because the University has now involved itself in the conspiracy to cover-up Kagame's crimes, they have exposed themselves to liability. The president of the University has been served with a copy of the complaint and summons for Mr. Kagame."

As for what is going to happen next, see our earlier comment "Is Kagame’s case justiciable in the US courts".