Abstract
Following the 1994 genocide, Rwanda established the Gacaca courts as a hybrid justice mechanism to address crimes of mass atrocity through a blend of traditional and formal legal practices. This study employs a qualitative case study approach, using document analysis to evaluate the courts’ role in justice, reconciliation, and peacebuilding. The findings show that the Gacaca system facilitated truth-telling, reduced prison overcrowding, and promoted community-level accountability. However, it also faced procedural inconsistencies, local biases, and risks of retraumatization. Notably, excluding crimes committed by the Rwandan Patriotic Front weakened its perceived impartiality. This paper argues that while culturally grounded justice mechanisms can support post-conflict reconciliation, their success depends on equitable legal standards and safeguards. The Rwandan case offers critical lessons for transitional justice and hybrid peacebuilding in post-conflict societies.