Gatumba to Kishishe: Muyaya Warns Rwanda Exploits Pain

Remembering the Gatumba Massacre 21 years on

On the night of 13 August 2004, armed fighters, many of them members of the Burundian National Liberation Front (FNL), surrounded the Gatumba refugee camp on the Burundi-DRC border. By dawn, at least 152 Congolese Banyamulenge were dead and more than 106 were wounded. Banyamulenge is the local name for Congolese Tutsi families who have lived in South Kivu for generations. The attack occurred inside Burundi, just a few hundred metres from army and United Nations positions, yet soldiers did not intervene. Witnesses say the assailants poured gasoline on plastic shelters and shot people who tried to escape, sparing refugees from other ethnic groups.

Twenty‑one years later, survivors and their families gathered in Kinshasa, Bukavu, and other cities to mark the massacre’s anniversary. Alexis Gisaro Muvuni, Congo’s Minister of Urban Planning and a member of the Banyamulenge community, told the crowd that their suffering should never be exploited by foreign powers. “As long as the truth is suppressed, as long as justice is not done, cycles of violence will return,” he said, pointedly mentioning Rwanda. “Our community needs peace; it refuses to allow the suffering it has endured to be instrumentalised or exploited by foreign powers such as Rwanda, or by politicians who justify war in the east of our country.”

Government spokesman Patrick Muyaya echoed the sentiment. “Every life lost in Gatumba or today as a result of Rwandan aggression constitutes a wound for the nation,” he told mourners. “From Gatumba to Kishishe, from Binza to countless martyred villages, it is the same blood of Congolese that flows.” Muyaya reaffirmed President Félix Tshisekedi’s commitment to protect all citizens and praised the Banyamulenge community for rejecting armed groups who claim to fight on their behalf.

Justice denied – Who protected the killers?

The search for justice began almost immediately after the massacre. Human Rights Watch reported in September 2004 that the FNL spokesman Pasteur Habimana publicly claimed responsibility for the attack; arrest warrants were issued for Habimana and FNL leader Agathon Rwasa, but neither was apprehended. Rwanda and Burundi each promised inquiries, and the UN Security Council called for an investigation, but no credible prosecutions followed. Burundian law allowed local courts to try genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes committed on its territory, yet “there have been several apparent war crimes and crimes against humanity committed in Burundi since the promulgation of the May 8 statute, but no prosecutions under this law”.

This impunity has persisted for two decades. A 2019 Human Rights Watch review noted that the criminal case opened in 2013 stalled the following year. Survivors still await justice and compensation. One of the FNL leaders, Rwasa, remains a prominent opposition politician; he argues that a 2006 ceasefire agreement grants him provisional immunity. The agreement does exclude crimes against humanity, but Burundian authorities have not tested the provision in court.

Survivors feel abandoned by national and international jurisdictions. At the 21st commemoration in August 2025, Jules Rutebuka of the Coordination des Mutualités Banyamulenge told Rwandan outlet IGIHE that repeated legal complaints have been ignored. “We filed cases in Burundi against those who admitted responsibility, including Agathon Rwasa and Pasteur Habimana, but they still walk free.

The survivors’ organisation Gatumba Refugees Survivors Foundation (GRSF) submitted files to courts in Burundi, Rwanda, and the International Criminal Court (ICC), but according to lawyer Innocent Nteziryayo, “no court has acted.” Many Banyamulenge believe political interests in Bujumbura and Kigali have shielded the perpetrators.

Exploiting suffering – Kigali’s Banyamulenge card

Beyond denial of justice, survivors are confronted with a cynical geopolitical narrative. Ever since the Congo wars of the late 1990s, the Rwandan government has portrayed interventions in eastern DRC as necessary to protect Congolese Tutsi/Banyamulenge from genocide. This argument resurfaced with the emergence of the March 23 Movement (M23), which seized Goma in 2012 and launched a new offensive in 2022. A January 2025 analysis by the Africa Center for Strategic Studies explains that the M23 was formed by ex‑members of the CNDP rebel group who claimed to defend the Banyamulenge. Rwanda’s campaigns in the DRC “recruited heavily from the Banyamulenge, tapping grievances around nationality and mobilizing kinship ties”.

These historical ties are why officials like Alexis Gisaro are alarmed when Kigali invokes Banyamulenge suffering to justify its military involvement. In the same Africa Center report, analysts noted that the M23 merged with other armed groups to form the Alliance Fleuve Congo (AFC) and broaden its ambitions. The group is now better armed, using surface‑to‑air missiles, combat drones, and heavy artillery, evidence of significant state backing. Rwanda denies supporting the rebels, but UN experts, the United States, and several European governments agree that Kigali provides logistical and military support.

Amnesty International’s 2023 report on the Kishishe massacre in North Kivu underscores the human cost of this proxy warfare. On 29 November 2022, M23 fighters, “which the UN says is backed by Rwanda,” attacked the village of Kishishe and its surroundings. Amnesty documented that the rebels systematically targeted men, women, and children, killing at least 20 men and raping at least 66 women and girls; UN estimates suggest as many as 170 people were killed. An Amnesty investigator wrote that survivors were hunted down in their homes and that the violence was “in retaliation for alleged support for the FDLR and other armed groups opposed to the M23.” This pattern of collective punishment mirrors the rhetoric used by Kigali when it accuses Kinshasa of sheltering the FDLR and of refusing to protect Congolese Tutsi.

From Gatumba to Kishishe – cycles of massacres

Patrick Muyaya’s remark that “ from Gatumba to Kishishe…it is the same blood of the Congolese that flows” encapsulates how unchecked impunity breeds repetition. After Gatumba, human rights advocates warned that failure to prosecute the FNL would embolden armed groups. Human Rights Watch noted that FNL spokesman Habimana linked the massacre to past killings that went unpunished, illustrating how “absence of criminal prosecutions…provides pretexts for those who wish to carry out killing on the other side.” Nearly two decades later, the M23 used similar justifications.

The Africa Center report describes how the rebels have appealed to Banyamulenge communities by invoking self-preservation, while simultaneously pursuing broader political goals. Amnesty International found that the Kishishe massacre involved retaliatory killings and rapes targeting civilians accused of supporting the FDLR. A UN human rights report revised the toll to 171 civilians executed by the M23 in Kishishe and nearby Bambo. The massacre provoked outrage in Congo and drew condemnation from UN, EU, and US officials. Yet, like Gatumba, prosecutions remain elusive. M23 denies responsibility, and Rwanda continues to blame Kinshasa for failing to reintegrate its fighters.

Memory versus political appropriation

Investigative journalists and scholars have documented how the Gatumba massacre was exploited by competing political narratives. In its 2004 briefing paper, Human Rights Watch observed that the attack came at the intersection of faltering peace processes in Burundi and the DRC and that contenders for power on both sides “ tried to appropriate the massacre for their own political ends”. Rwandan and Burundian politicians quickly cast the killings through ethnic lenses, fuelling fears of a regional conflict and distracting from the victims’ quest for justice.

This pattern continues today. A 2024 essay by the Center on International Cooperation critiques the “war of narratives” between Rwanda and the DRC. The piece describes how Congolese conspiracy theorist Charles Onana spreads the false claim that the Banyamulenge are recent immigrants with no rights in Congo, while Rwandan officials use references to the 1994 genocide to justify interventions and accuse Kinshasa of collaborating with Hutu genocidaires. Both sides overlook historical research showing that Banyamulenge communities have lived in the highlands of South Kivu since the nineteenth century and that multiple Congolese ethnic groups, not just Tutsi-commit abuses in the ongoing conflict.

The essay argues that Rwanda’s military intervention in support of M23 is a self‑fulfilling prophecy, exacerbating anti‑Tutsi sentiment and reigniting collaboration between the Congolese army and Hutu rebels.

Banyamulenge at a crossroads

Despite decades of victimisation, many Banyamulenge are rejecting both victimhood and Kigali’s appropriation of their pain. In Kinshasa, Alexis Gisaro praised his community for saying “no to those who think they can use its protection as a pretext to kill members of another community.”  This stance aligns with President Tshisekedi’s broader agenda of national cohesion, even as Rwanda accuses Kinshasa of neglecting its Tutsi citizens. Young Banyamulenge activists are increasingly engaging in civic and political life, promoting social cohesion and dialogue. Their rejection of M23’s narrative undercuts Kigali’s claim to be the sole protector of Congolese Tutsi.

International law and accountability

Under international law, both the Burundian state and the international community bear responsibility for investigating and prosecuting atrocities like Gatumba and Kishishe. Human Rights Watch’s 2004 report urged Burundi to seek assistance from the International Criminal Court; the May 8 law allows for ICC jurisdiction. Yet the Burundian government never completed its membership in the ICC, and no state party referred the case under Article 12(3). Fifteen years on, HRW urged Burundian authorities to guarantee judicial independence and deliver justice.

The United Nations and the African Union also share blame. UN peacekeepers in Gatumba were informed of the attack only after it ended, and the UN’s subsequent investigations led nowhere. In Kishishe, UN officials condemned the killings and revised the death toll, but they have not facilitated prosecutions. Regional bodies, including the East African Community and the International Conference on the Great Lakes Region, have issued statements but avoided confronting Rwanda for its support of M23.

International justice mechanisms could still act. As Amnesty International noted, the ICC opened a preliminary examination into North Kivu in June 2023. Survivors hope Gatumba can be included in a comprehensive case against regional actors. However, the court’s track record in Central Africa is mixed. An ICC warrant for FDLR military commander Sylvestre Mudacumura remains unexecuted, and the court has not pursued charges against Rwandan or Burundian officials.

Toward truth and reconciliation

The scars of Gatumba and Kishishe run deep. Survivors mourn loved ones who were burned, shot, or raped; children have grown up with memories of watching family members die. Impunity has allowed perpetrators to regroup under new banners, FNL, CNDP, M23, while regional leaders manipulate narratives of genocide, self‑defence, and sovereignty.

The Banyamulenge community and the broader Congolese public refuse to forget. Their annual commemorations keep the names of the victims alive and remind the world that justice delayed is justice denied.

For justice to prevail, Burundi must finish its accession to the Rome Statute, cooperate with the ICC, and prosecute the FNL leaders who confessed to the massacre. Rwanda must end its covert support for M23 and stop weaponising the Banyamulenge cause to justify incursions into the DRC.

The international community must sanction those who fuel violence and provide resources for impartial investigations. And Congo’s government must ensure that all communities, Banyamulenge, Hutu, Tutsi, Havu, Nande, and others, are protected and represented. As Alexis Gisaro said, acknowledging and healing the wounds of Gatumba is essential to breaking the cycle: “Our community needs peace; it refuses to allow the suffering it has endured to be instrumentalised or exploited.”

If justice is finally delivered for Gatumba, it may stem the tide of violence from Uvira to Kishishe. Until then, the blood of innocent Congolese continues to stain the soil of the Great Lakes.