The authors look at the traditional gacaca jurisdictions that have been reformed by the legislator of Rwanda to make them suitable for criminal pursuits relating to genocide. They examine the reasons that decided the governmental authorities to rely on this mode of customary justice for promoting national reconciliation and to invest in this proximity justice system. Also, they evaluate the substantial alterations made to these judicial institutions, borrowing their original operation from both the African palaver and western criminal law, to judge genocide and they wonder if gacaca jurisdictions, in their "new genocidal version", still can achieve the traditional goals of participative and restorative justice when tradition and culture have so overwhelmingly been transformed. At last, the authors reflect on the difficulties posed by genocide, a crime that cannot be punished nor pardoned, even less redressed, a crime that staggers any justice system. Although identifying some positive aspects of this quite imperfect and largely maladjusted proximity justice system, in their opinion, still, it remains difficult to translate and embody in a justice system, either traditional or modern, the will to put an end to impunity and fulfill general deterrence. In conclusion, the authors suggest that the gacaca jurisdictions embedded in the Rwanda culture, must, in any event, warrant free speech, openness and the reaching of a common truth on genocide, to allow both criminals and surviving victims to learn again the way to live together.