Why do we dispute this “historically marginalized population” term? In Rwanda, all ethnic groups have been marginalized in one or another way. For example, Hutu claimed that they have been marginalized by Tutsi for many years during the Tutsi Kingdom . By definition of the Rwandan government of “historically marginalized people”, Hutu may need emancipation. On the other hand, Tutsi claim that they have been marginalized by Hutu from 1962 during the Hutu Republics until 1994 when the country was liberated by Kagame . Thus, they also need emancipation! So who is not historically marginalized in Rwanda? We think that the use of the term “historically marginalized people” assimilates the Batwa to Hutu and Tutsi in that the government will address their concerns as it addresses the ones of Hutu and Tutsi, without taking into account the special …show more content…
They are forced to look like Hutu and Tutsi and thus, abandoning their traditional way of life as they cannot claim anything as “Batwa group”. We think that this way the Rwandan government treats Batwa is contrary to article 27 of the which states that “in those States in which ethnic, religious or linguistic minorities exist, persons belonging to such minorities shall not be denied the right, in community with the other members of their group, to enjoy their own culture, to profess and practise their own religion, or to use their own language”. For example, Governmental land policies disregard cultural mapping and ignore claims to designated sites, specifically the wetlands (as Batwa survive on pottery). Without these lands many Batwa have been forced into slavery and begging to make a living, often working the land of other Rwandans in exchange for food . Batwa of Rwanda should stand up and claim their rights in the example of Endorois of