Commentators’ perspectives on alleviating problems concerning overcrowded prisons
While much of the Rwandan population focuses on the pragmatic concerns motivating the decrease of the prison population, most comÂmentators, especially non-Rwandan observers, emphasise - in a manÂner consistent with the dominant discourse on gacaca as an institution focused primarily on facilitating formal, deterrent justice - the moral importance of processing the enormous caseload of uncharged, untried genocide suspects.
Many commentators who focus on the judicial comÂponent of decreasing the prison population are often the same commenÂtators who previously highlighted the inadequacies of the national court system and argued that reforms were necessary to uphold the legal rights of genocide suspects.[405] [406] These sources often tentatively advocate gacaca as a remedy to both the denial of prompt judicial hearings and the inhuÂmane conditions in which detainees live. Erin Daly, for example, argues, â€?[t]he gacaca project has much to recommend it. It could very well help the obscene backlog of cases piling up in the conventional courts.' [407] Such commentators emphasise the human-rights violations committed by the Rwandan government in imprisoning so many suspects for so long in harsh conditions. A common argument by many human-rights organisaÂtions such as AI is that â€?justice delayed is justice denied.' [408] Therefore, they argue that the Rwandan government should defend the human rights of genocide suspects by affording them speedier trials, though not at the cost of due process.