Yes, Rwandan elections are unfair, because the country is still in its infancy. Rwanda has been through revolutions, ethnic civil war, and uncertainty. There are no guarantees that elections in the country are nothing more than for show. Rwanda has a lot of work to do with public elections and private property rights before their elections will be fair.
Unfortunately, the Rwandan elections could easily be called unfair in many ways. Corruption in the country is fairly rampant, and the election system itself isn't that efficient. A person can easily get into office without popular opinion, which is a huge problem that must be dealt with sooner rather than later.
The Rwandan elections were held in an atmosphere of fear.
Grenades were thrown, and some of those that dared to come out to vote watched
their President vote amid guards and sniffer dogs. Under these circumstances,
it is hard to imagine voters making a truly free choice. The ruling party of
Paul Kagame gained an overwhelming victory and retained a majority in
Parliament, which may mean that the voters favored Kagame’s government as a
source of continuing stability. However, it may also mean that the fix was in.
Rwanda is moving towards democracy, but it is not there yet.
Rwandan elections are not unfair. However, the situation over there is not great, it could be much worse on the people then what it is currently. The threat of life and destruction could happen if it was not for the current election. I think it could be a lot more violence in the future.
Although poverty and the threat of past genocide may limit the voices of the Rwandan people, the 2013 parliamentary elections were generally successful. Although not perfect, at least the system elected a peaceful government without much violence this time as Paul Kagame's party won three-fourths of the vote across the nation.