Skip to content

Rank

35

New New this week

OtherGovernment power & public lawGovernment and public law

DRC v. Rwanda (ICJ)

Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide and Other Instruments (Democratic Republic of the Congo v. Rwanda)

DRC accuses Rwanda of genocide and rights abuses in eastern Congo

At stake
Unquantified
Score
75.0Out of 100
Latest event
Sep 7, 20263 weeks ago
Next step
Not scheduledNothing dated on the record yet
Commenced
Jun 26, 20263 mo ago
Court
International Court of JusticeGeneral List No. 202

Stage

Filed. The claim is filed. Pleadings and early motions come next. How cases are placed

  1. FiledNow
  2. Pre-trial
  3. Trial
  4. Decision
  5. Appeal
  6. Enforcement

The Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) alleges before the International Court of Justice (ICJ) that Rwanda violated the Genocide Convention and three other human rights treaties through abuses in eastern Congo since 1996. The DRC filed its application on June 26, 2026, and seeks findings of state responsibility and reparations. The DRC’s memorial is due October 4, 2027, and Rwanda’s counter-memorial is due December 4, 2028.

Latest development Sep 7, 2026

On September 7, 2026, published commentary anticipated that Rwanda will cite anti-Tutsi violence and the threat from the Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda (FDLR) in its defense. Rwanda has not yet filed a response. Its counter-memorial is due December 4, 2028.

Why it matters

The case will test whether the ICJ can hear the DRC’s claims under four human rights treaties after two earlier cases failed on jurisdiction. It concerns an active armed conflict in the Great Lakes region and follows a June 2025 peace agreement between the two states.

Background

The Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) and Rwanda have twice litigated responsibility for violence in eastern Congo before the International Court of Justice (ICJ). The DRC brought a first case in 1999 and a second, the “New Application,” on May 28, 2002. Both cases foundered on jurisdiction. On July 10, 2002, the court rejected the DRC’s request for provisional measures for lack of prima facie jurisdiction. In its February 3, 2006, judgment, the court held that it lacked jurisdiction over the merits because Rwanda had not accepted the relevant treaty clauses conferring jurisdiction on the court.

On June 26, 2026, the DRC filed a third application. It relies on four human rights treaties rather than on international humanitarian law. Three of them are the Genocide Convention, the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD), and the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW). The fourth, the Convention Against Torture, is invoked for the first time. The application concerns what the ICJ described as “abuses attributable to Rwanda over a period extending from 1996 to the present day.”

The application covers massacres, sexual violence, displacement, and other atrocities in the DRC’s east, which borders Rwanda. The DRC filed it despite a June 2025 peace agreement between the two states signed in Washington, and amid renewed fighting involving the Rwanda-backed M23 and Alliance Fleuve Congo movement. The DRC asks the court to find Rwanda internationally responsible and to order full reparations to the state and to victims. By an Order of August 4, 2026, the President of the court fixed October 4, 2027, as the time-limit for the DRC’s memorial. The same Order set December 4, 2028, for Rwanda’s counter-memorial.

Rwanda has not yet filed a response on the merits. Commentary published on September 7, 2026, anticipated that Rwanda will argue that the DRC has failed to honor the 2025 peace agreement. Commentators pointed in particular to a DRC pledge to neutralize the Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda (FDLR). They also expect Rwanda to cite anti-Tutsi violence and hate speech in the region as context for its conduct. No request for provisional measures or hearing on jurisdiction has yet been scheduled.

Timeline 7 events

  1. Other
    Commentators outline likely Rwandan defense arguments

    Legal analysis anticipated Rwanda would cite anti-Tutsi violence and the threat from the FDLR in defending against the DRC’s claims.

    A New Genocide Convention Case in the ICJ: DRC v Rwanda Version 3.0

  2. Order
    President fixes time-limits for memorial and counter-memorial

    The President of the court set October 4, 2027, for the DRC’s memorial and December 4, 2028, for Rwanda’s counter-memorial.

    Alleged Violations of Human Rights by Rwanda on the Territory of the Congo

  3. Filing
    DRC files third ICJ application against Rwanda

    The DRC instituted proceedings alleging genocide, racial discrimination, gender-based violence and torture over abuses attributable to Rwanda from 1996 to the present.

    The Democratic Republic of the Congo Institutes Proceedings against RwandaDRC files ICJ case against Rwanda over decades-long violence in Eastern Congo

  4. Other
    DRC and Rwanda sign Washington peace agreement

    The two states signed a peace agreement that included commitments on the demobilization of armed groups.

    Between Justice and Jurisdiction: The DRC's Case against Rwanda at the ICJ

  5. Judgment
    ICJ finds it lacks jurisdiction over 2002 case

    The court ruled it had no jurisdiction to entertain the DRC’s application on the merits, ending the second DRC-Rwanda case without a ruling on the underlying allegations.

    Summary of the Judgment of 3 February 2006

  6. Order
    Court rejects DRC’s request for provisional measures

    The ICJ held it lacked prima facie jurisdiction to indicate the provisional measures the DRC had requested against Rwanda.

    2002) (Democratic Republic of the Congo v. Rwanda)

  7. Filing
    DRC files second ICJ case, seeks provisional measures

    The DRC lodged a New Application against Rwanda and requested provisional measures the same day. The case was registered as General List No. 126.

    2002) (Democratic Republic of the Congo v. Rwanda)