Friday, December 19, 2014

Gahima: Inyenyeri News will never apologize for being a voice of everybody

Noble Marara
Editor -in -Chief

Inyenyeri News.

After the recent Article that appeared in the Inyenyeri news under the heading “ Is Gahima haunted by his Role  in the Rwanda Genocide?”   Theogene Rudasingwa a brother to Gahima responded on his facebook page by demanding an apology from inyenyeri news, in his words Rudasingwa stated that.
Theogene Rudasingwa defending his brother Gahima Gerald
”We are yet to reach a stage where we can disagree with civility. Instead of challenging Gahima’s arguments, the Inyenyeri News article said he is a thief. Now, being a thief and having ideas are different things. I say this not because Gahima is my brother, or a colleague leader in the RNC, but because I sense unfairness in the Inyenyeri attack. As for debate on BBC documentary, that is precisely its utility. To encourage debate. That means listening first, even if you do not agree.
Inyenyeri News has simply disgraced itself by parading the usual shameful Kigali-like hatred against Gahima. The honorable thing to do would be to apologise to Gahima, but as it often said, only those morally responsible can rise to that revolutionary challenge”.

Gahima Gerald who questioned untold story credibility

We have received different comments against and in support of the above article. However, the most astonishing behaviour by some people as those telling the Inyenyeri news to apologize for allowing the article to be published. This is like telling the African Chiefs that they should not apologize for allowing slavery of their Citizens a hundred years ago.

In unprecedented demand for accountability by some African civil rights defenders the Traditional African rulers were encouraged to apologize for the role they played in the slave trade.”We cannot continue to blame the white men, as Africans particularly the traditional rulers, are not blameless,” said the Civil Rights Congress.

Could we say that this human rights organization was not civilized because it demanded the accountability of the African Chiefs who helped, aided, assisted, the white man to capture many of their fellow countrymen and take them as slaves?

Should we tell the BBC that allowed this article to appear in its publications on 12, November 2009, to apologize? Who has the monopoly of civilizations when it comes to facts or opinions? The best way of showing civility when it comes to responding to issues in the free speech world forum, is to write and counter argue what you think is incorrect or biased as you might think.

What the Inyenyeri news did was to publish what the writer of the above article thought was a responsibility for the opposition figures to have the moral standing, indeed, to be part of any future constitutional arrangement in Rwanda; there are some historical issues for them to address.

As any prominent public figure, for instance Celebrities, politicians, high-ranking or powerful government officials, and others with power in society will always have a problem in drawing a line between what is personal or private or public.  Why should a public figure that is suspected of theft, become private or vendetta if it comes to accountability? Unless he/she comes with the facts that are contrary to what has been said against him or her. The scales of accountability when it comes to the Rwandan government and the opposition figures should be of the same standard.

As regards, the Inyenyeri news position, we shall never apologize for being fair, impartial, doing our job without fear or favor. Individuals who are considered to be limited-purpose public figures remain so as long as the public has an “independent” interest in the underlying controversy against them.

Unlike all-purpose public figures, it is relatively easy for a limited-purpose public figure to lose his status if the controversy in which he is involved has been largely forgotten. But most will still maintain their status even after they leave the public office. Therefore, those who have been in public eyes remain a target as long as there is reason by anyone to bring to life the old memories.

Related Story:


Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home