Dr Clark’s actions gave us strong reasons to believe that in relation to Rwanda he has went beyond academic expertise and became an important useful propaganda and apologist tool within Paul Kagame dictatorship apparatus. This put his academic credentials in dissension with academic ethics and put the academic profession in disrepute.

This is a paragraph of a letter that was seen by Inyenyeri News written by the Global Campaign for Rwandan’s Human Rights (GCRHR)  to the Head of Department of Politics and International Studies in School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS), University of London, raising awareness about concerns in relation to Dr Phil Clark ‘unethical academic’’ behaviour.

Dr Phil Clark is currently a Reader in Comparative and International Politic at SOAS.

I have read extensively all the writings of Dr Clark on Rwanda but all have one thing in common, they lack critical and academic analysis, and instead they rely on political praises of President Kagame and RPF. Thus the GCRHR did not come as a surprise to me.

In view of GCRHR evidences that are enumerated in their letter, Dr. Clark is behaving as spokesperson of the Rwanda government or a press secretary of President Kagame.

In their letter; the GCRHR shades light on how Dr. Clark is shooting in the foot of his academic colleagues who have managed to stand by their academic ethics while researching on Rwanda.

As the things unfold in Rwanda today, it’s an open secret that an independent and critical academic research is not only in tolerated but it’s unacceptable to report or publish something that is critical of the RPF system.

Despite the fact that Rwanda has received millions of Dollars in foreign Aid, the Rwandan government had yet to fully resolve the issue of freedom of speech and assembly in which the freedom of free research by academics fall. At Inyenyeri News we experienced first-hand and hard experience of that type of suppression of freedom when our own chief editor Charles Ingabire was assassinated in Kampala on 30th November 2010 for writing articles that criticise the Rwandan government various oppressive actions against its people.

Dr Clark has no right to blast his colleagues as wrong on Rwanda, since his findings do not have the best interests of academic progress research.

I fear, Dr. Clark is hiding other motives in the way he praises Rwanda. GCRHR does not accuse him of financially benefiting from his unethical actions but GCRHR stated that they are investigating if: ‘Dr. Clark has become one of paid Rwandan government image polishers, breaching academic values in the process’’

Dr. Clark should be honest and tell the world that the issue of the freedom of assembly or freedom of speech is far from being resolved. Indeed, we may be facing far more contentious problems in the coming years, based on the Kagame’s desire and appetite for illegally changing the Rwandan Constitution so that he can stand again for election after his constitutional mandate expires in 2017.

Additionally, we need to begin blessing for more political tsunami as the Rwandan president keeps sweeping the dirt under the carpet rather than addressing them with right diagnosis. Indeed, GCRHR’s letter to SOAS about Dr. Clark has reminded me of the former LSE director Howard Davies who resigned after allegations of inappropriate dealings with the Libyan regime as PR firm admitted errors over lobbying.

Sir Howard Davies career ended after fresh revelations that the institution he headed had been involved in a deal worth £2.2m to train hundreds of young Libyans to become part of the country’s future elite. In light of the above inappropriate behaviour an independent commission of Inquiry headed by Lord Woolf, a former lord chief justice, was instituted to examine the LSE’s relationship with Libya and with Muammar Gaddafi’s son Saif al-Islam. It was also tasked to establish guidelines for further international donations to the university.

In his resignation speech, Sir Davies said: “I have concluded that it would be right for me to step down even though I know that this will cause difficulty for the institution I have come to love. The short point is that I am responsible for the school’s reputation, and that has suffered.”

His resignation followed a US consultancy admitting mishandling a multimillion dollar contract with Libya to sanitise Gaddafi’s reputation in the west. Monitor Group, based in Cambridge, Massachusetts, organised for academics and policymakers from the US and UK to travel to Tripoli to meet the Libyan leader between 2006 and 2008, as part of a $3m (£1.8m) contract.

They included Francis Fukuyama, professor of international political economy at Johns Hopkins University and author of The End of History and The Last Man, as well as Richard Perle, who advised the Bush presidency on the Middle East.

In their letter; GCRHR informed SOAS that they have informed a relevant law enforcement agency to look into the matter and recommended Dr Clark should be referred to SOAS Ethics committee so that you can be able to undertake your own internal investigations.

It is unfortunate that Dr. Clark is still on the skin of the dead carcass, as the Kinyarwanda saying goes, history is not on the side of Dr Clark and might judge him harshly.

 

Inyenyeri News

Chief Editor