Other programs have been implemented. These programs resulted in the victims playing a crucial role in bringing the community together. I will not hide the fact that these projects were submitted to CIDA in 1996-1997, but were rejected on the grounds that no scientist had shown the usefulness of something like that.
However, recent projects have shown the merits of working not only with victims, but rather with a group of women. The final project I am referring to was carried out by the Episcopal Commission for Justice and Peace of the Catholic Church in three territories. This project has been very successful. Women have not been cast aside; they have participated in education, literacy and economic activities.
I would like to go back to the first question you asked. In Congo, rape was not common practice before 1996. There was violence, but never of this magnitude. It was not pressure but the moral convictions of leaders and tradition that prevented it. In a village, there was no such thing as someone being raped.
Then the war came and the militia enlisted young people. They became armed and rich, and they defied the authority of the churches. They defied traditional authorities and mocked them. Everything fell apart.
As you have heard, the acts we are now talking about are not acts of sexual desire. When women are being raped in front of their husbands and their children, the goal is to break something. Unfortunately, it works very well.
In the Congo, there is now starting to be a new type of reaction. When there are mass rapes, like in Walikale in September when 300 women were raped in seven villages, the husbands, instead of sending their wives away, got together and said it was an attack against them as men with wives.
I think that's the type of approach we should take.