Unearthing Ambiguities

This article examines Raoul Peck’s portrayal of post-genocide justice in Rwanda in his film Sometimes in April (2005). The film, which depicts the 1994 genocide against the Tutsi and its aftermath a decade later, resonates with the ICTR case Prosecutor v. Nahimana et al. with its focus on hate speech as genocide. The shared questions connect the two distinct narrative forms that are part of the global social discourse on Rwanda, allowing them to be analysed side by side. Building upon close readings, this article asks: Who is guilty and what counts as a crime? What kind of impact do justice mechanisms have? Whose interests does the ICTR serve? Extending interdisciplinary research on Rwanda across law and cultural studies, I argue that analysing Sometimes in April helps unearth ambiguities within and surrounding the ICTR. Peck’s film and the legal case together communicate a rounded understanding of post-genocide justice to outside audiences, as it is experienced or perceived from local and international perspectives

Art · Criminology · Economic Justice · Genocide · Literature · Narrative · Peck (Imperial · Political science · Sociology · Historical and Contemporary Political Dynamics · International Law and Human Rights · Law in Society and Culture · Law

• African Writers as Theorists

  Open Access•Anna Katila•Global Studies Quarterly•2026

  Add to list