The Democratic Republic of Congo filed a legal case against Rwanda at the International Court of Justice on 26 June 2024. Congo accuses Rwanda of breaking international rules about preventing genocide, torture, and discrimination. Reuters and AP both reported on the filing.

This is actually Congo's second attempt at this. Congo tried to sue Rwanda at the International Court of Justice before, in 2002, but the court threw out that case in 2006 because it said it didn't have the authority to hear it. This new case is different. This time, Congo is arguing that Rwanda broke specific international treaties that both countries have signed. That legal move matters because it might convince the court that it does have the power to hear this case.

Why is a court case important here? The conflict in eastern Congo has killed hundreds of thousands of people and forced millions to flee their homes since the 1990s. Rwanda has supported a rebel group called M23 for years — Rwanda denies this, but United Nations investigators have documented it. Congo wants the world court to say that Rwanda broke international law by doing this.

Right now, the court is still deciding whether it has the power to hear the case at all. Oral arguments were scheduled for November 2024 at the Peace Palace in The Hague. Congo is also involved in another court case at the same institution around the same time.

There is something broader going on here. Countries around the world are increasingly bringing cases to the International Court of Justice. Some are about war crimes and genocide. Others are about other treaty violations. The court's decisions move slowly — a final ruling in Congo's case could take years. However, the court can order quick decisions too. If the court told Rwanda to stop certain actions, even without being able to enforce it directly, that order would damage Rwanda's reputation and diplomatic standing.

Rwanda has not yet filed its response. When it does, and when the court hears arguments about whether it has jurisdiction, that will determine whether Congo's case moves forward or fails the way the 2002 case did. This time, Congo's lawyers are using newer treaties and two decades of court precedent to make their argument stronger.