The Paris Court of Appeal overturned, on May 6, 2026, the dismissal of charges against Agathe Habyarimana in the investigation into her possible involvement in the 1994 genocide against the Tutsi in Rwanda. While her lawyer announced on Wednesday, May 13, that he would appeal to the Court of Cassation, RFI has reviewed the Court of Appeal's ruling. The court determined that the investigation must continue before a determination can be made regarding the potential role played by the widow of the former Rwandan president. Document searches, hearings of new witnesses, investigations... We examine the reasons behind this reversal.

The Paris Court of Appeal did not uphold all the civil parties' requests. In particular, it refused, at this stage, to formally charge Agathe Habyarimana. However, it instructed the judges to continue the investigations. For example, it requested that the Rwandan justice system provide the transcripts of hearings of certain witnesses already questioned in other proceedings against the former First Lady.

The court also recommends hearing from new witnesses, such as Dieudonné Niyitegeka, a former Interahamwe militia leader now living in exile in Canada, who has never been prosecuted. According to the judges, he may possess information about "Agathe Habyarimana's role with the Interahamwe," the militias responsible for numerous massacres during the genocide, as well as her potential "influence" over them.

Read also

Genocide of the Tutsis in Rwanda: Agathe Habyarimana decides to appeal to the Supreme Court

New witnesses and research on a letter addressed to Bill Clinton

The judges are also requesting investigations in the United States regarding a letter that Agathe Habyarimana allegedly sent to US President Bill Clinton in 1994. This document, "mentioned in a diplomatic note dated May 25, 1994," could, according to the court, shed light on the level of "political influence" wielded by the former First Lady during the genocide. However, her lawyer, Philippe Meilhac, argues that the reasonable timeframe for the investigation has been significantly exceeded.

“These actions could have been requested a long time ago. The prosecutor’s office waited almost 15 years, until the investigation was closed in 2022, to start taking an interest in this case, to request investigative actions,” denounces lawyer Philippe Meilhac. “And besides, we don’t even know if we’ll be able to carry them out. Because it involves verifying the existence of a letter. It involves potentially locating people who have been known for years but for whom no location has been established. These are actions that could have been requested 15 or 20 years ago.”

Towards adding documents to the file?

On the side of the civil parties, the lawyer for the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH), Mr. Baudouin, regrets that the appeals judges refused to immediately indict Agathe Habyarimana. He is pleased, however, to see the 2025 ruling overturned, which he considered "outrageously favorable" to the former First Lady. For him, the argument of exceeding the legal time limits is inadmissible.

Follow all the international news by downloading the RFI app

“It’s true that, in my view, the justice system bears some responsibility. But that doesn’t change the fact that 19 years have passed, meaning that certain actions necessary to uncover the truth can no longer be carried out. And if the investigating judges hadn’t been so resistant to our requests, these actions would already have been completed,” he believes. “So the investigating chamber is setting the record straight, so to speak. Ultimately, the Court is somewhat dismissing that aspect; otherwise, it wouldn’t have ordered the case to be returned to the investigating judges.”

Reopening the investigation would also allow for the addition to the file of a letter revealed by Le Monde last week. Written in 1994 by a Rwandan officer, it cites Agathe Habyarimana for her role within the Akazu, the inner circle of Hutu power that allegedly orchestrated the genocide. The former First Lady's lawyer considers the document "irrelevant."

Since 2016, Agathe Habyarimana, now 83, has held the status of "assisted witness," an intermediate status between simple witness and formal charge. The case has been open for nearly 20 years, but the Court of Appeal believes it is too soon to close it definitively.