A Paris court has convicted French-Cameroonian writer Charles Onana and his publisher, Damien Serieyx, for denying the 1994 genocide in Rwanda. It is believed to be the first judgment under French law for Rwandan genocide denial and establishes important legal precedent in the effort to combat genocide denial.
The conviction comes after Onana wrote in the book Rwanda, the Truth About Operation Turquoise — When the Archives Speak that there had not been any genocide of the Tutsi people, as well as France's involvement in the events. In its decision, the court fined the author and publisher nearly US$15,000 and ordered them to pay over US$11,000 to three human rights groups that brought the lawsuit. Both the author and publisher have filed an appeal.
The Court’s Decision
It referred to 19 passages of the book written by Onana and said it had broken a 2017 amendment to France's press laws criminalizing the denial of an officially recognized genocide. He characterized widely acknowledged facts of the genocide as a "conspiracy theory", while referring to accusations about the Hutu-led government-led genocide as "one of the greatest hoaxes of the 20th century". In those regards, his writings constitute "public refutation of the existence of a crime against humanity," according to the court's reasoning.
Human rights groups welcomed the court's judgment: "It is indispensable", said Patrick Baudoin, a lawyer and honorary president of the International Federation for Human Rights. The sentence sends an unequivocal message: "You can't falsify history with impunity, and you can't have contempt for the victims."
History
In the space of four months in 1994, approximately 800,000 Tutsis and moderate Hutus were massacred in what is considered one of the worst genocides of the 20th century. While a French military intervention authorized by the United Nations called Operation Turquoise did try to put a stop to the violence, it has remained highly controversial. In 2021, for the first time, French President Emmanuel Macron recognized France's "crushing responsibility" in these events, marking a notable about-face for the country to come to terms with its dark colonial and post-colonial history. Despite all the overwhelming evidence and recognition from the international community of the genocide, the book by Onana attempts to rewrite history: He argues that both sides killed each other and the massacre does not qualify to be called genocide.
A Landmark Precedent
The ruling by the court adds to French law protection of denial similar to that for the Holocaust regarding Rwanda's genocide. It underscores the need to protect historical truths from denial and distortion.
Critics indeed have pointed out Onana's lack of neutrality as his research was heavily supported by interviews with French military officials along with members of Rwanda's pre-genocide government. Serge Dupuis, a specialist on Rwanda, described the methodology developed by Onana as "exclusively exculpatory" and "flagrantly biased.
The ruling is not just a legal milestone but also a moral one. As human rights lawyer Patrick Baudoin pointed out, the denial of the genocide is not only a distortion of history but an affront to the memory of the victims and survivors.
Implications for the Future
It constitutes a powerful precedent for trying denials of genocide and enforcing accountability for historical revisionism. As misinformation spreads more easily, with an ever-increasing audience across multiple platforms, judgments such as this remind us that protection of historical truth must continue to be safeguarded.
The decision of the Paris court is a reiteration of the commitment to justice and accountability, in memory of 800,000 Tutsi lives lost in 1994. It serves as a warning to all those who would rewrite history to suit their own narratives.
As the appeal process unfolds, the world will be watching to see how France continues to grapple with its own role in Rwanda's past and its broader responsibility to uphold truth and justice.